Liberty News Forum
Political News Forum - Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics. Not for wimps!
Political Opinion Page - Recent Posts - LNF Forums LNF in the Age of Empowerment! Algorithm free!
Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Entertainment - Sports Forum
Military - A1 News Page - Computers Tech - Financial News - Bunker - Rasmussen Presidential Tracking Poll
The House - Off the Wall News - Page 2 - Rasmussen Reports Polls - Chat Room
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HereChristian Forum › KJV All Over Again
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) KJV All Over Again (Read 10,585 times)
M_Paul
LNF Staffer3
**
Offline

I Love Liberty News Forum!

Posts: 78
Joined: Oct 26th, 2008
Re: KJV All Over Again
Reply #70 - Mar 27th, 2009 at 10:52am
Print Post  
Mercy,

You continue to ignore the positions I presented and use straw man arguments against me. Here is your latest. You say I assert that the sea of reeds is a liberal translation. What I said was that “sea of reeds” is one possible translation from many lexicographical choices, but some scholars, who are liberal, prefer it, and it may be that the newly suggested possibility of this choice, “sea of reeds,” arose from such a liberal bias.

You ignore entirely my setting out the other lexicographical choices for “suph,” which I have objected to again and again. And I have no doubt, that if I set them all out again, you will still respond to me as if that part of my posting never existed.

You want examples of divergent views being preached?!??? What is the thread about – two views being preached, one upholding the modern translations and the other the KJV. You absolutely refuse to respond to what my words say… only what you want them to mean, when you acknowledge they exist.

Your restatement of what I said on how equivalence should be used in translation is completely different than what I said.

Mercy, what this all boils down to is, that you are not going to acknowledge the lexicographical evidence I have presented and you are not going to respond to my positions as I have stated them. I do not see how it makes any difference to continue this conversation.

For anyone interested – I presented the lexicographical evidence in post #35. I noted in post #42 that the Gensenius dictionary also supported the possible meanings given in post #35. Gensenius is a very high level Hebrew scholar. Therefore, “suph” is not always translated “reed.” One choice that Gensenius seems to prefer is “seaweed,” (and thus, “sea of seaweed” could be upheld as one of the possible translations for the phrase). He notes the Red Sea is full of seaweed, and this ties into the link I gave at post #35, wherein the term “sea of suph” is reviewed as actually referring to the sea at the end of the world (the Red Sea is beside the Pacific Ocean). Note in the link the passages cited where anything but the “Red Sea” would be difficult as the intended meaning.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Mercy For All
LNF Moderator
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

Generally, generalizations
are always false.

Posts: 43,785
Joined: Aug 7th, 2004
Gender: Male
Re: KJV All Over Again
Reply #71 - Mar 27th, 2009 at 11:55am
Print Post  
M_Paul wrote on Mar 27th, 2009 at 10:52am:
Mercy,

You continue to ignore the positions I presented and use straw man arguments against me. Here is your latest. You say I assert that the sea of reeds is a liberal translation. What I said was that “sea of reeds” is one possible translation from many lexicographical choices, but some scholars, who are liberal, prefer it, and it may be that the newly suggested possibility of this choice, “sea of reeds,” arose from such a liberal bias.


No.  You didn't say that.

M_Paul wrote on Mar 15th, 2009 at 4:48pm:
I already explained how the sea of reeds position supports liberalism. And my explanation on this term was based on more than tradition, but the first response to me changed the focus in restatement, and even then, it made lexicographical tradition seem like translation tradition. The weight of my position was lexicographical, but also context of some passages.



Quote:
You want examples of divergent views being preached?!??? What is the thread about – two views being preached, one upholding the modern translations and the other the KJV. You absolutely refuse to respond to what my words say… only what you want them to mean, when you acknowledge they exist.


That's ridiculous.  When you complain about divergent views being preached you're complaining about translations?

Please tell me I'm misunderstanding that.

When you mentioned divergent views I understood that you meant unorthodox teachings were arising from inferior translations.

Quote:
Your restatement of what I said on how equivalence should be used in translation is completely different than what I said.


Actually, I was going back to your leche illustration.

Quote:
Mercy, what this all boils down to is, that you are not going to acknowledge the lexicographical evidence I have presented and you are not going to respond to my positions as I have stated them. I do not see how it makes any difference to continue this conversation.

For anyone interested – I presented the lexicographical evidence in post #35. I noted in post #42 that the Gensenius dictionary also supported the possible meanings given in post #35. Gensenius is a very high level Hebrew scholar. Therefore, “suph” is not always translated “reed.” One choice that Gensenius seems to prefer is “seaweed,” (and thus, “sea of seaweed” could be upheld as one of the possible translations for the phrase). He notes the Red Sea is full of seaweed, and this ties into the link I gave at post #35, wherein the term “sea of suph” is reviewed as actually referring to the sea at the end of the world (the Red Sea is beside the Pacific Ocean). Note in the link the passages cited where anything but the “Red Sea” would be difficult as the intended meaning.


Is it argumentative to point out that the Red Sea is not beside the Pacific Ocean?
  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JDD
LNF Majority Leader
***
Offline

I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 5,218
Location: Washington state
Joined: May 11th, 2006
Gender: Male
Re: KJV All Over Again
Reply #72 - Mar 27th, 2009 at 5:07pm
Print Post  
Quote:
I've always considered the KJV one of the best "word-for-word" translations, probably second only to the NASB.  The down-side in my mind has always been the lack of relevance of language.  Simply put, language changes and we just don't speak King James English anymore. Worse, the people around us don't speak it.


I agree with your original comments, especially the language aspect. Personally I'm like many christians and find the KJV a wonderful translation (poetic and such), but prefer the NASB which has been deemed a more up to date (beings certain older manuscripts hadn't been uncovered yet when the KJ was written) and a closer word for word translation than the revered KJV.

Unfortunately some believe in the KJ so much they'll break fellowship with brethren that prefer a modern english translation instead. I love em, but they're legalists and I feel sorry for their bondage  Undecided 

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JDD
LNF Majority Leader
***
Offline

I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 5,218
Location: Washington state
Joined: May 11th, 2006
Gender: Male
Re: KJV All Over Again
Reply #73 - Mar 27th, 2009 at 5:43pm
Print Post  
M_Paul wrote on Feb 23rd, 2009 at 5:17pm:
For the most part, the modern translations, I believe, have to be considered inferior... a lot inferior... but when they indicate a major difference from the KJV, that is an alert to look for what is going on in the original wording of the passage.  Smiley


There's a big difference between modern translations, but for certain ones there are reputed scholars that disagree with your position. BTW, I come from the position of believing as important as the Scriptures are very few christians owned a Bible until fairly recent in history and for most of that time frame the vast majority didn't even know how to read beings modern education for the masses is also a recent happening.

The gospel message had to be so simple as to speak to the heart (faith comes by hearing) of the uneducated down through the ages, yet complex enough that without the Holy Spirit it was baffling to the unregenerate.  Huh 



  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Mercy For All
LNF Moderator
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

Generally, generalizations
are always false.

Posts: 43,785
Joined: Aug 7th, 2004
Gender: Male
Re: KJV All Over Again
Reply #74 - Mar 27th, 2009 at 10:23pm
Print Post  
JDD wrote on Mar 27th, 2009 at 5:43pm:
There's a big difference between modern translations, but for certain ones there are reputed scholars that disagree with your position. BTW, I come from the position of believing as important as the Scriptures are very few christians owned a Bible until fairly recent in history and for most of that time frame the vast majority didn't even know how to read beings modern education for the masses is also a recent happening.


Besides which, the early, early Church had no written Scripture outside of the Old Testament.
  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
JDD
LNF Majority Leader
***
Offline

I love YaBB 1G - SP1!

Posts: 5,218
Location: Washington state
Joined: May 11th, 2006
Gender: Male
Re: KJV All Over Again
Reply #75 - Mar 28th, 2009 at 3:30pm
Print Post  
Quote:
Besides which, the early, early Church had no written Scripture outside of the Old Testament.


Yes, and it was on a big heavy scroll that few could read and was kept guarded in the Synagog. I guess "continuing in the Word" means something different than reading the Bible daily beings most christians didn't have a Bible and couldn't read until many centuries later. My guess is probably late 19th and early 20th century before Bible was found in large numbers. Shucks, today many professing christians have 3-5 different translations on their shelf and Biblical software in their puters, even wonderful talking Scripture in personal iPods (we're making up for all those centuries of lack)   
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
maximilian
LNF Senior Staffer1
**
Offline


Posts: 161
Joined: Apr 16th, 2009
Gender: Male
Re: KJV All Over Again
Reply #76 - Apr 17th, 2009 at 7:06pm
Print Post  
Quote:
Besides which, the early, early Church had no written Scripture outside of the Old Testament.


The earliest manuscripts still in existence of the OT books are actually more recent, possibly by a century or two, than the oldest manuscripts of the NT books. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Solars Toy
Ex Member


Re: KJV All Over Again
Reply #77 - Apr 17th, 2009 at 9:15pm
Print Post  
JDD wrote on Mar 28th, 2009 at 3:30pm:
Yes, and it was on a big heavy scroll that few could read and was kept guarded in the Synagog. I guess "continuing in the Word" means something different than reading the Bible daily beings most christians didn't have a Bible and couldn't read until many centuries later. My guess is probably late 19th and early 20th century before Bible was found in large numbers. Shucks, today many professing christians have 3-5 different translations on their shelf and Biblical software in their puters, even wonderful talking Scripture in personal iPods (we're making up for all those centuries of lack)      


I think I have 4 different translations and will usually refer to at least two of them when researching scripture.  For general reading I do best with my NRSV study Bible. 

I also agree with Mercy that there are some versus that will always sound better in KJV.

BTW I found this thread very interesting to read - thank you for new insights. Smiley
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
LadyBug
Ex Member


Re: KJV All Over Again
Reply #78 - Apr 17th, 2009 at 9:31pm
Print Post  
I have a parallel Bible to which I sometimes refer to compare various versions side by side. It includes KJV, Modern Language, The Living Bible, and RSV.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Mercy For All
LNF Moderator
The Writer's Croft
LNF Bunker
*****
Offline

Generally, generalizations
are always false.

Posts: 43,785
Joined: Aug 7th, 2004
Gender: Male
Re: KJV All Over Again
Reply #79 - Apr 17th, 2009 at 9:33pm
Print Post  
Quote:
I have a parallel Bible to which I sometimes refer to compare various versions side by side. It includes KJV, Modern Language, The Living Bible, and RSV.


That's a great way to do it.
  

Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 
Send TopicPrint
 
Liberty News ForumLNF Forums HereChristian Forum › KJV All Over Again

LNF Home - Political Opinion Page
LNF Forums

Christian Forum - Religion Forum - Sports Forum - Entertainment - House
Military, History - Cooking and Crafts - Creative Writing
Off the Wall News - Science Forum - Tech Gadgets - Financial News - Humor
Bunker - Page 2 - Page 3 - Page 4 - Chat Room





Drudge Report - News Max - Rush Limbaugh - FrontpageMag
Advertise on the LNF - Twitter LNF - LNF Archive - LNF News
LNF Blog
News and Political Links
Political Blogs
Add your website or blog
Political Columnists
Political Humor
A1 News Page
David Limbaugh
Political Frog
Conservatives Directory
President Trump Approval Poll
Presidential Party Election Poll
News forum posting, privacy policy and member rules