A
- Status
J
James_Least
Guest
My take on Bible translations: God breathed on the writers of the ORIGINAL autographs–Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, etal. These originals were exactly God’s Word without interpretation using the abilities of the authors, making God the author–i.e. without error. The OT and the authors follow the same criteria.
Copies were made(probably not Xerox) and carried where ever the gospel was carried. Paul said to bring his coat, the books and parchments–especially the parchments–I reckon this means the Holy Writ. Sixty-six books bound? No, Jesus is in every book. One does not need them all to preach the Gospel. But the Bible is certainly a preponderance of evidence that God has spoken–we have no excuses.
The original autographs have not been discovered. There are hundreds of copies and copies of copies. These documents have been maintained in two streams so to speak: East and West. They can be found as such today, some fragmentary. All copies of scripture were not maintained in monastaries and abbeys. When one compares the East to the West, there are serious discrepancies. One stream is extremely polluted. Who has the best is still being debated in the hallowed halls of higher textual criticism. This disparity of source documents is why many of the translations into the English were burned along with the translators. This is an impasse which still exists, albeit somewhat covertly. Biases in the source documents show up as variations in the doctrine–which is the basic question: What does the Word of God teach? Not: What does the religion of man teach?
English translations: there is one called Geneva, based on the TR, Textus Receptus. It is translated from the Eastern Stream. The KJV of 1611 is probably an edited version of the Geneva at the behest of King James, an Anglican, who did not like some of the margin notes regarding monarchy. The KJV is also a TR based translation.
I am not KJVO. I have many translations–from both streams.
So-called modern English versions are from the Western stream.
Surf it. Cyberspace has removed the shroud. We have no excuse.
Now what?
Even so, come Lord Jesus.
Peace,
James Least
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
James,
I agree that Scripture is God-breathed; and I agree that we must ask, “What does the word of God teach.” (Answering this question involves more than reading Scripture–but that is a topic for another thread.)
I doubt anyone on this forum is unaware of the fact that we have no known autographs of the Biblical texts, or that we only have copies of copies of copies of those autographs—not “hundreds,” as you said, but thousands of copies. There more than 5,000 N.T. manuscripts alone–with more variants than words in the N.T. Most of the variants are clearly scribal errors; but some are clearly intentional and reveal a theological bias.
As for your reference to Paul taken from 2 Timothy 4: (13When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments); keep in mind that not all of the New Testament was written at the time of Paul’s letters. So, you are correct; there were not 66 Books “bound” or even written at that point.
You stated, on the Origin of the Baptist Church thread, that you believe in Sola Scriptura. Yet, you hold the Geneva Bible in high regard. This is rather contradictory, James, considering the fact that the Geneva Bible is known for its “Calvinistic” annotations. The moment you rely upon any commentary, you have abandoned Sola Scriptura. If all you need is Scripture; you don’t need anyone to explain it to you.
Some of those Geneva Bible annotations were clearly anti-Catholic, which does fit your obvious anti-Catholic sentiments posted on other threads (which I hope you have ceased posting.)
Peace,
Anna
J
James_Least
Guest
Commentary in the margins is different than footnotes filling nearly the whole page? Re: The New American Bible, 1991 CCD, Saint Jerome Press. Please explain. Why do you gloss the fact of the East and West streams of greek manuscripts? This fact is fundamental to all discussions regarding Christian doctrine. The two streams contradict each other in content and the subsequent translations thereof, and the doctrine derived. What is the need for so much catechesis?
You are right there are thousands of copies. Thankyou for helping my side.
God does not author confusion.
Peace,
James
P. S. Is it permissible to ask: How many infraction points does it take to get exiled? Who would have thought: an inquisition is cyberspace?
You are right there are thousands of copies. Thankyou for helping my side.
God does not author confusion.
Peace,
James
P. S. Is it permissible to ask: How many infraction points does it take to get exiled? Who would have thought: an inquisition is cyberspace?
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
James,
You are the one who brought up the Geneva Bible. So, I commented on the Geneva Bible. You ignored my comments and have now moved on to “The New American Bible, 1991 CCD, Saint Jerome Press.”
Once again, my comments on the Geneva Bible—Please pay close attention to the Sola Scriptura issue:
I haven’t glossed over anything. I didn’t get into the “East and West streams.” Please respond to what I actually posted.
James,
There are no sides in Christianity, except the side of our Lord.
Indeed, God does not author confusion.
James,
As I told you before, it is against forum rules to discuss moderator actions on the forum. If you post with respect and charity, you are in no danger of “being exiled.” Though I will say, you’ve been given a great deal of freedom—considering all the anti-Catholic comments you’re made–including your most recent comment about the “inquisition in cyberspace”—which I find very offensive.
We have participated on a number of the same threads. I will say your behavior is consistent: you avoid answering any direct questions; you offer no support for your claims; you refuse to respond to anything that proves your claims are false; you change the subject to avoid responding to specific issues–and when all else fails, you resort to insults and innuendos–actually some times you start with them.
I’ve tried to have a reasonable and honest discussion with you. Sadly, that seems to be impossible.
Peace and blessings to you on your journey,
Anna
J
James_Least
Guest
I am sorry for having offended anyone. That is not my intention. One has to have a tough skin to be able to survive the fiery darts.
The question on the floor is: What are the main differences between Bible translations? I have taken this question back to the first century. The basic answer to the question is: there are two streams Greek manuscripts, one of them corrupted. Is it possible to get a true/false to that statement?
Peaace,
James Least
The question on the floor is: What are the main differences between Bible translations? I have taken this question back to the first century. The basic answer to the question is: there are two streams Greek manuscripts, one of them corrupted. Is it possible to get a true/false to that statement?
Peaace,
James Least
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
It’s not about having a tough skin, James. It’s about entering into respectful discussion/debate. Insults and innuendos, like “Who would have thought: an inquisition is cyberspace,” do nothing to make a case for your claims.
You brought up the Geneva Bible and now have abandoned the discussion.
As for the “two streams” of Greek manuscripts; you haven’t quoted any source material, and I’m not going to do the work for you.
As I said before, you still haven’t provided support for your claims of Sola Scriptura or salvation by faith alone through grace alone on the Origin of the Baptist Church thread (forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=593809);
and you still haven’t responded to any of my comments, numerous passages of Scripture, or questions regarding your claims–even though you put the issues on the table.Since you continually refuse to engage in an actual discussion of the issues–even the issues you put on the table—or provide support for your claims/beliefs; there’s no reason for me to continue responding to your posts. Perhaps someone else will indulge you.
Peace,
Anna
S
SanAgustin
Guest
Whoa, never heard of this, infallibility by death!!!
Interesting way to interpret it …
A
AsTheDaysOfNoah
Guest
Here are some additional materials which relate to Bible versions, translations and their origins:
[Battle of the Bibles; Professor Walter J. Veith]
amazingdiscoveries.tv/media/125/213-232K/
[Changing the Word Parts 1 & 2; Professor Walter J. Veith]
amazingdiscoveries.tv/media/126/214ab-232K/
[Changing the Word Part 3; Professor Walter J. Veith]
amazingdiscoveries.tv/media/127/214c-232K/
**
[Our Authorized Bible Vindicated; Benjamin G. Wilkinson, Ph.D. Dean of Theology Washington Missionary College Takoma Park, D.C. Washington D.C. June 1930]**
sdadefend.com/MINDEX-Resource%20Library/Our%20Authorized%20Bible%20Vindicated.pdf
**
[Answers To Objections, A Reply to the “review” of my Book “Our Authorized Bible Vindicated”; Benjamin G. Wilkinson]**
sdadefend.com/MINDEX-Resource%20Library/ANSWERS%20TO%20OBJECTIONS.pdf
[The King James Bible and the Modern Versions; Vance Ferrell; Harvestime Books 2003]
sdadefend.com/MINDEX-Resource%20Library/The%20King%20James%20&%20Modern%20Versions.pdf
[False Citations 1 Timothy 3:16 examined, vindicated]
lamblion.net/EBooks/false_citations.pdf
[1 John 5:7 texts]
av1611.com/kjbp/ridiculous-kjv-bible-corrections/1-John-5-7-Scams.html
av1611.com/kjbp/faq/holland_1jo5_7.html
scionofzion.com/1_john_5_78.htm
[The Faithful Witness; Sharon Thomas Crews; 2003]
amazingfacts.org/FreeStuff/OnlineLibrary/tabid/106/ctl/ViewMedia/mid/447/IID/33/LNG/en/7/The-Faithful-Witness/SC/R/Default.aspx
A
AsTheDaysOfNoah
Guest
A
Anna_Scott
Guest
A
ajcstr
Guest
What is death but being called in for bedtime?Whoa, never heard of this, infallibility by death!!!
PS - It was Patrick Madrid that made the statement when discussing his Pope Fiction book, not me.
- Status