View Single Post
  #108  
Old 05-05-2008, 06:02 AM
Steven Avery Steven Avery is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 462
Default

Hi Folks,

A few more corrections on this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pshdsa
The only Bibles based on the Received Erasmus Text
hi pshdsa . the King James Bible was not based on the "Received Erasmus Text". The later Textus Receptus refinements of Stephanus and Bezae could be considered the base text, with some variants even from those. The work of Erasmus was at the base of the Reformation Bible however your expression gives the wrong impression that his text was being directly used by King James Bible and Geneva translators.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pshdsa
are the King James Version, the New King James Version, and Jay Green's Literal Translation Version.
And Young's Literal, all the KJ21/Millenium versions, other Jay Green versions, and an Orthodox Bible or two, and most importantly, all the historic Bibles like the Tyndale and Geneva.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pshdsa
No other version is based on the Majority Text.
As Brandon pointed out, none of these are "based on the Majority Text" which is a term used for a Greek-MSS based text only (thus it would not have Acts 8:37 and the Johannine Comma and Luke 17:36 and the phrase in 1 John 2:23 along with quite a number of other phrases). Although the term Majority Text is ill-defined, today it is never used in textual circles for the underlying Received Text.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pshdsa
All other versions are based on the Alexandrian Text of manuscripts that have substantial variants between them.
Except for the Peshitta translations and the Vulgate translations in English and the Majority texts of Hodges-Farsted and Robinson-Pierpont (not sure of English on those two).

Quote:
Originally Posted by pshdsa
The TNIV in John five says that Jesus learned that the man at the pool of Bethesda was infirm for 38 years. Even the NASV says knew instead of learned. So while I know that God reaches people even through the NIV, I simply don't trust it for myself.
Yet there tons of errors as bad and worse that are shared between the NIV and the NASV and the HCSB and the ESV and all the rest, like Jesus saying he was not going to the feast or the swine marathon from Gerash. None of the versions can be trusted. How could anybody use a Bible he does not trust, when he has access to God's pure word ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by pshdsa
I have to deal with that version because it is the most popular version out there.
Why not simply read and distribute the pure Bible, rather than what is deficient and corrupt ? God will honor such a step.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pshdsa
I wish there was a modern English translation based on the Majority Text. There are none.
You mean Received Text, as explained above. There are a few, they simply are not as beautiful and accurate and majestic as the King James Bible. There is no big market because folks sense the majesty and authority and accuracy of the King James Bible. It is kind of a niche market based on irrational King James Bible fears "do I have to use the King James Bible, my friends will look at me funny ?"

Shalom,
Steven