Oh also Revelation 11:17 TR says who was, who is, and who is to come. Critical says who was and who is and leaves out who is to come
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Meat KJV onlyism?!
- Thread starter NickF
- Start date
Luke 4:4
Wow. That makes an enormous difference and has deep theological implications. Thankyou very much for this.
Is YLT from the TR? I knew it was good but didn't realise that, I thought KJV and WEB were the only ones that used it.
Incidentally, if anyone wants a version that uses the majority text that has more modern language than the KJV, check out the World English Bible. The translators of that have taken the ASV and edited it to match the majority text. So it's got a very sound base. It's also one of the very few translations that include the full apocrypha, so as to be universally usable by all branches of the Church.
World English Bible
World English Bible, Hebrew Names Version, World English Bible: Messianic Edition, World Messianic Bible, American Standard Version of the Holy Bible, Kahunapule Michael and Lori Johnson
worldenglish.bible
I use "MySword" on my Android phone. It is more fully-featured than any other bible app I have tried. It uses the free Sword project modules, so has massive numbers of translations and other resources available. It used to be in the Play store, but seems to no longer be there, you have to download it from their website now.
www.mysword.info
MySword - Free Android Bible
MySword is a free offline Bible study tool for Android, Bible study has never been this fun and easy; study the Bible, compare different translations, lookup Strong's Hebrew and Greek Lexicon, read commentaries, dictionaries, books, maps
YLT is TR. There are so many verbs mistranslated that when you get the correct understanding it starts helping everything make sense. I think of the verse that paraphrased says he who knocks it will opened but it says he who is knocking.
I read the ESV and NASB95. I took college level Greek classes and it helped me see most translations drop the ball in some way or another. Others moreso than some. The TR text has some off things in it, my favorite to point out is the Johannine Comma in 1 John 5:7, wasn't in the first editions of the TR and Erasmus didn't want it in there because there were no Greek texts with it and wouldn't add it unless he was presented one. Conveniently some guy "found" one and he kept his word and used it. There were only a handleful of manuscripts that contained it (like 9 maybe) and like 8 of them were from the after the 1100s, with the one early one coming around the 400s in the margins of an Old Latin manuscript. There's also a book (can't remember the title) that shows all kinds of scribal writings that were written on the manuscript margins, some of which snuck into the text. I believe the pericope adulterae is one of them too. Also had to write a big paper on the original ending of Mark and was very convinced at the end that the TR ending was falsified. My conclusion was that it being the shortest gospel it was the cheapest and easiest to reproduce yet it didn't have one of the most important aspects of Christianity so the scribes added it (I doubt it was purposefully deceptive). When comparing the arguements for the critical Greek text and the TR as honestly as possible I found the critical one to be vastly superior. A lot of the big TR advocates and ESPECIALLY the KJV Only ones seem to purposely misrepresent their cases, either by presenting half truths, purposely leaving out information or just straight up lying which leads to their listeners and readers repeating said things. I've watched debates with KJV Onlyists and it's eerily similar to debating cultists like JWs...unfortunately my lunch is over so I'll end this long post with this: one is still saved whether they read the NASB95, ESV or KJV, etc. and the church fathers did well with what they had available to them hundreds of years ago but I find it silly to spend something as important as Bible study with a vastly inferior text. It's kind of like using a horse and buggy versus a V8 Corvette.
PS I don't think the critical editions are perfect nor do I think the byzantine ones should be tossed out completely either
PS I don't think the critical editions are perfect nor do I think the byzantine ones should be tossed out completely either
I primarily read the ESV and NASB. I'll also read KJV or NKJV. I sometimes look at the NIV and New Living Bible, though these are both more paraphrased than I like. I grew up using the NIV.
To me, the only real argument for KJV relates to Textus Receptus. That is a factor.
I also find KJV easier to memorize.
KJV is used in Strong's.
I also look at the Greek and Hebrew interlinear Bible online.
To me, the only real argument for KJV relates to Textus Receptus. That is a factor.
I also find KJV easier to memorize.
KJV is used in Strong's.
I also look at the Greek and Hebrew interlinear Bible online.
I didn't realize that YLT or WEB were TR. I may have to look into them.
I was just thinking that I should get a WEB Bible, but then you mentioned that it includes the Apocrypha.
I think the Apocrypha is helpful, but not Divinely inspired like the Bible.
I do have an RSV Bible with Apocrypha from a class I took in college.
Does anyone have any thoughts on "The Scriptures" version? I picked one up from Bear Independent. This translation
seems popular in Torah observant circles. I haven't used it much, generally preferring ESV and NASB.
Check their website. They have Protestant, Catholic and everything versions, so you can pick the one you want including the books that you believe are appropriate. They're trying to be a universal resource for the entire Church rather than imposing a particular denominational view on which books they'll translate. I admire that.
Just like the KJV. There's a KJV apocrypha, always has been. Most printed copies exclude it as most customers don't want it, but it's certainly available for those who want it. Does its existance stop you using the KJV?
If that's what you prefer. Most precise, quite possibly, but best would be for different reasons. Do give it a go, though, it's worth looking into!
There's even an apocrypha for the Geneva Bible which everyone knows is better than the one authorized by homosexual King James.Check their website. They have Protestant, Catholic and everything versions, so you can pick the one you want including the books that you believe are appropriate. They're trying to be a universal resource for the entire Church rather than imposing a particular denominational view on which books they'll translate. I admire that.
Just like the KJV. There's a KJV apocrypha, always has been. Most printed copies exclude it as most customers don't want it, but it's certainly available for those who want it. Does its existance stop you using the KJV?
@Off-gridinwv, since you're really keen to discuss the KJV, please do that in this thread rather than trying to discuss it everywhere else. Firstly, it's an important topic, and it would be good to discuss it in a place where people will be able to find it - and this thread has the right title. Also, then we can stay on topic elsewhere rather than every other thread being distracted into this issue. Thanks.