King James Bible ONLY? Or NOT?

[Stephen63]

What should the title of bishop be called?

overseer/elder

1Tim 3
New International Version
Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task.

New Living Translation
This is a trustworthy saying: "If someone aspires to be an elder, he desires an honorable position."

English Standard Version
The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task.

Berean Study Bible
This is a trustworthy saying: If anyone aspires to be an overseer, he desires a noble task.

Berean Literal Bible
Trustworthy is the saying: If anyone aspires to overseership, he is desirous of a good work.

New American Standard Bible
It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do.

 

[KJV1611]

overseer/elder

1Tim 3
New International Version
Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task.

New Living Translation
This is a trustworthy saying: "If someone aspires to be an elder, he desires an honorable position."

English Standard Version
The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task.

Berean Study Bible
This is a trustworthy saying: If anyone aspires to be an overseer, he desires a noble task.

Berean Literal Bible
Trustworthy is the saying: If anyone aspires to overseership, he is desirous of a good work.

New American Standard Bible
It is a trustworthy statement: if any man aspires to the office of overseer, it is a fine work he desires to do.

I've never heard of a position in a church called "overseer" have you?

 

[Stephen63]

Yep, it's an old name.

 

[KJV1611]

Yep, it's an old name.

What church uses that title overseer?

 

[Rockrz]

What church uses that title overseer?

Curry Blake uses that title and his ministry has a church in the Dallas area

 

[KJV1611]

I did find overseer in a Baptist Church but it looks like it's just a change of terminology... they used to call the position bishop. I guess they changed the name to follow the newer translations.

General Overseer, FGBCIF
Pastor, Elizabeth Baptist Church - Atlanta, GA
Full Gospel Baptist Church Fellowship International recently announced the appointment of its newest roster of leaders. Among those appointed, Dr. Craig Oliver, pastor of Elizabeth Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, will fill the role of General Overseer of The Pastors Fellowship. Formerly known as the Bishop of Senior Pastors, this position was filled by Bishop Joseph W. Walker III before he was elevated to Presiding Bishop.

 

[KJV1611]

Curry Blake uses that title and his ministry has a church in the Dallas area

I think the term overseer is coming into play because of the newer translations... seems like it anyway.

 

[Rockrz]

Bishop - Strongs G1985
a superintendent, i.e. Christian officer in genitive case charge of a (or the) church (literally or figuratively): KJV -- bishop, overseer.

 

[KJV1611]

Bishop - Strongs G1985
a superintendent, i.e. Christian officer in genitive case charge of a (or the) church (literally or figuratively): KJV -- bishop, overseer.

Or more commonly known as a bishop lol.

 

[trofimus]

Maybe I used the wrong word... I was talking about the text the KJV Old Testament was based on. Also, do you know if there is a revision history for the LXX?

KJV OT was based on some middle ages edition of the Masoretic text, I do not know exactly which one, I would have to google it

There is a traditional edition of the LXX used in the East, mostly in the Greek orthodox Church and there is also a critical edition, based on the oldest manuscripts from the 4th century. The situation is practically the same as with the New Testament (there is also a traditional majority text and the critical edition).

But I am not sure what are you looking for, Peter is quite clearly using the variant of the quotation not found in the Masoretic text, which is my point

 

[RedeemedGift]

The KJV is based on the Ben Chayyim tradition of the Masoretic Hebrew, from the 16th century, so way later than the middle ages even. The Aleppo and Leningrad codices are older, and there are a few differences between them and the Ben Chayyim the KJV OT is based on.

The KJV's Textus Receptus when quoting the OT uses the LXX, which has far bigger differences between itself and the oldest Hebrew OTs we have. The oldest of the Dead Sea scrolls dated to the first century BC agree with the LXX over any Masoretic text.

 

[trofimus]

The KJV is based on the Ben Chayyim tradition of the Masoretic Hebrew, from the 16th century, so way later than the middle ages even. The Aleppo and Leningrad codices are older, and there are a few differences between them and the Ben Chayyim the KJV OT is based on.

The KJV's Textus Receptus when quoting the OT uses the LXX, which has far bigger differences between itself and the oldest Hebrew OTs we have. The oldest of the Dead Sea scrolls dated to the first century BC agree with the LXX over any Masoretic text.

Agreed. Only a small thing. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that there were several lines of text in the 1st century. One of the LXX line, one of the massoretic line and many others. Jews (because of anti-Christian bias) later chose the line not agreeing with the line used by Christianity.


And the reformation translations in the 16/17th century made a mistake, threw out the text used in the Church for thousand years and used the Jewish line just because of a simple reason - it is in the original language.

The result - inconsistent Bible with many differences between the OT and NT.

 

[KJV1611]

KJV OT was based on some middle ages edition of the Masoretic text, I do not know exactly which one, I would have to google it

There is a traditional edition of the LXX used in the East, mostly in the Greek orthodox Church and there is also a critical edition, based on the oldest manuscripts from the 4th century. The situation is practically the same as with the New Testament (there is also a traditional majority text and the critical edition).

But I am not sure what are you looking for, Peter is quite clearly using the variant of the quotation not found in the Masoretic text, which is my point

I'm looking for when the LXX your using was written because it seems it may have been written or updated after the new testament was written.

 

[Dai3234]

I see the Jordan codices video is flying around again. Anyone have a real clue if they're still fake, not fake, or what they even say?

 

[trofimus]

I'm looking for when the LXX your using was written because it seems it may have been written or updated after the new testament was written.

Well, conspiracy theories can exist. But do you trust Jews more than the Church?

If Church could "update" the OT to be similar to the NT, why Jews could not "update" the OT to be different from the NT?

 

[RedeemedGift]

Agreed. Only a small thing. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that there were several lines of text in the 1st century. One of the LXX line, one of the massoretic line and many others. Jews (because of anti-Christian bias) later chose the line not agreeing with the line used by Christianity.


And the reformation translations in the 16/17th century made a mistake, threw out the text used in the Church for thousand years and used the Jewish line just because of a simple reason - it is in the original language.

The result - inconsistent Bible with many differences between the OT and NT.

That's exactly right. I'm saddened that pretty much all English translations use the Masoretic over the Septuagint despite these facts.

 

[KJV1611]

Well, conspiracy theories can exist. But do you trust Jews more than the Church?

If Church could "update" the OT to be similar to the NT, why Jews could not "update" the OT to be different from the NT?

I'm not suggesting a conspiracy, I would think there are records of revisions on the text. I'm just saying that they match so well that it seems they may have been written after the New Testament. I will google tonight, I thought maybe you might know for sure.... save me some work.

 

[KJV1611]

That's exactly right. I'm saddened that pretty much all English translations use the Masoretic over the Septuagint despite these facts.

Do you think English speakers have been reading corrupted texts for all these years?

 

[RedeemedGift]

I'm looking for when the LXX your using was written because it seems it may have been written or updated after the new testament was written.

Compare Psalm 40:6

King James Version - "Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required."

LXX - "Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not; but a body thou hast prepared me: whole-burnt-offering and sacrifice for sin thou didst not require."

Which does the KJV in Hebrews 10:5-6 represent of these two? And what century was the New Testament written?

 

[KJV1611]

Compare Psalm 40:6

King James Version - "Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required."

LXX - "Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not; but a body thou hast prepared me: whole-burnt-offering and sacrifice for sin thou didst not require."

Which does the KJV in Hebrews 10:5-6 represent of these two? And what century was the New Testament written?

I don't disagree that LXX matches better, that's why I'm interested in the LXX revisions.