a genuine Bible discussion

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Willie-T

Willie-T

Banned
#61
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
#61
Most Bibles actually say that if we do not HATE our families (Luke 14:26) we cannot be disciples.

The GW says: 26 "If people come to me and are not ready to abandon their fathers, mothers, wives, children, brothers, and sisters, as well as their own lives, they cannot be my disciples.

THAT is the way I want the Bible to communicate with me.......... Instead of me having to hunt all over the place to figure out why I am being told to HATE all my family....... when the verse never meant that in the first place.
 
oldhermit

oldhermit

Senior Member
#62
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
614
113
70
Alabama
#62
Willie-T said:
Most Bibles actually say that if we do not HATE our families (Luke 14:26) we cannot be disciples.

The GW says: 26 "If people come to me and are not ready to abandon their fathers, mothers, wives, children, brothers, and sisters, as well as their own lives, they cannot be my disciples.

THAT is the way I want the Bible to communicate with me.......... Instead of me having to hunt all over the place to figure out why I am being told to HATE all my family....... when the verse never meant that in the first place.
Click to expand...
This is a perfect example of a very bad rendering. μισέω dose not mean to abandon or anything even close to it. Contextually, it means to prefer less, i.e, one must love the Lord more than they love their families.
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#63
#63
hornetguy said:
Yes, I believe that... all the scholars I trust have convinced me that is not possible. It is said that the translators took the best, or most likely translation of the Greek word, and used that word throughout the whole document.

I can see how that could create some difficulty, if there was "nuance" involved in the Greek. I'm not sure how much of that was possible in Koine.

I believe that once the words were established, they used a computer to do the translating.

This is from their website..... it seems to be an interesting concept in scriptural accuracy.
Click to expand...
My understanding of communications.

There is no such thing as unbiased communication. If you write, even if it's something as minor as a shopping list, there will be bias. (I want ground turkey, not ground beef.) If we try for unbiased, that's the best we can do... to try.

So, is this a good translation? No idea. The question is what was the bias of the theologians that translated? (King James wanted a new version to say The King is Law, instead of the Law is King. Although the scholars tried for unbiased, their very lives hung in the balance, if they dared not to listen to James at all. The NIV scholars tried for earliest mss and to translate it so the average American could understand. So they had their own bias even there.)

Find out the purpose of that version, and you will find out what the bias is. If it is a harmless bias, (and personally, I see no harm in KJV, because I know the bias), why not get it?

According to that blurb you included, I suspect a hidden agenda. Either that or they got an idiot to write their marketing blurb. Either is possible.
 
G

garee

Banned
#64
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
#64
Willie-T said:
Most Bibles actually say that if we do not HATE our families (Luke 14:26) we cannot be disciples.

The GW says: 26 "If people come to me and are not ready to abandon their fathers, mothers, wives, children, brothers, and sisters, as well as their own lives, they cannot be my disciples.

THAT is the way I want the Bible to communicate with me.......... Instead of me having to hunt all over the place to figure out why I am being told to HATE all my family....... when the verse never meant that in the first place.
Click to expand...
Looks like a good translation. The word hate according to my understanding is to not bless. We bless God as He blesses us.
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#65
#65
Willie-T said:
This was so massive, my computer wouldn't even copy it all.

Just take a look at all the meanings of the word, "run" in English. And this is not even from an unabridged dictionary...... THAT would possibly double what is found here.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/run
Click to expand...
Yeah but it's computer programmed, so it can catch on to the word in context, just as you can figure out which meaning of run is used in context.

(Bulls did not "race" in Manassas, VA, for example.)
 
Willie-T

Willie-T

Banned
#66
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
#66
oldhermit said:
This is a perfect example of a very bad rendering. μισέω dose not mean to abandon or anything even close to it. Contextually, it means to prefer less, i.e, one must love the Lord more than they love their families.
Click to expand...
So, simply by saying that, you show us that most translations got it wrong. But you are saying that the particular words the GW used (though expressing exactly the way we should view God vs Family) is somehow a worse rendering than them saying we must HATE our families?
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#67
#67
Locutus said:
I'm still waiting for the New Universal Translation to come out.
Click to expand...
1001100010110001?

(Just in case, the joke is lost. It goes well with the old joke, "There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who don't.")
 
Bogadile

Bogadile

Banned
#68
May 11, 2014
936
39
0
#68
Depleted said:
1001100010110001?

(Just in case, the joke is lost. It goes well with the old joke, "There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who don't.")
Click to expand...
I am curious. What do the numbers mean? Is that a tech joke?
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#69
#69
trofimus said:
There are two main approaches of how to decide which manuscript readings are the closest to original.

One group (protestants and catholics) believes the oldest ones generally bear the most authentic text.

Other group (eastern orthodox and kjvonly/TR only) believes that the majority of Greek manuscripts generally bear the most authentic text.

What I am saying is that the KJV reading of 1J 5 has no basis in either group. Its non-existent in Greek generally. No group will help you.
Click to expand...
Yay! You just answered a question I had about John's gospel. (Disappearing verse.)

But which group uses "Majority Text, Byzantine?" (I've got no idea about the names of earliest mss other than the famous/infamous Vulgate.)
 
oldhermit

oldhermit

Senior Member
#70
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
614
113
70
Alabama
#70
Willie-T said:
So, simply by saying that, you show us that most translations got it wrong. But you are saying that the particular words the GW used (though expressing exactly the way we should view God vs Family) is somehow a worse rendering than them saying we must HATE our families?
Click to expand...
No. Every other translation has it right. The most basic definition of μισέω is to hate, sometimes even with bitterness but, this is not the only definition. The word also means to love less usually in the context of a comparison or contrast as in Luke 14. The word NEVER means to abandon or even anything related to it. The GW version has missed it terribly. It does not even give an approximate meaning of the word.
 
Bogadile

Bogadile

Banned
#71
May 11, 2014
936
39
0
#71
The truth is that no matter what manuscripts we use, the main message is there in every bible.

NIV or KJV both teach the same things, sure some verses have different readings or are missing in the NIV but you can teach all the necessary doctrines from the NIV with ease.
 
trofimus

trofimus

Senior Member
#72
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
#72
Depleted said:
Yay! You just answered a question I had about John's gospel. (Disappearing verse.)

But which group uses "Majority Text, Byzantine?" (I've got no idea about the names of earliest mss other than the famous/infamous Vulgate.)
Click to expand...
Well, the majority byzantine texts is mostly used by the orthodox church.

But I feel your question was about something else... not sure about what, though :)
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#73
#73
trofimus said:
You can use biblehub.com and see which English translation gives you the most, before you buy one.
Click to expand...
... or Bible Gateway.

(I'm partial to ESV, but I'm old, and too lazy to keep up with the more and more modern translations.)
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#75
#75
Bogadile said:
The truth is that no matter what manuscripts we use, the main message is there in every bible.

NIV or KJV both teach the same things, sure some verses have different readings or are missing in the NIV but you can teach all the necessary doctrines from the NIV with ease.
Click to expand...
Someone actually did a study on English-speaking Bible versions. (Versions vs. paraphrases.... and nope, not getting into Hermit and Willie's argument. Too dumb, too lazy, and I don't care enough to learn.) Less than 1% of the words differ to the point of being inaccurate. Words like "bird," "rabbit," and "pillow." And a much smaller group of words that we just don't know what they really meant back then. (The famous Nephilim/giant debate, unicorns, and leviathans.)

IF we simply removed all those words and put a blank at those places, sure enough, the gospel is still complete. Our knowledge of what God wants us to know is all accurate and complete. (Understanding it completely is a different matter. He's perfect. We ain't.)

So, thoroughly agreed -- it doesn't matter which version we read. It is authentically and completely God's word in tact!
 
D

Depleted

Guest
#76
#76
trofimus said:
Well, the majority byzantine texts is mostly used by the orthodox church.

But I feel your question was about something else... not sure about what, though :)
Click to expand...
Nope. You answered my question. I really only know of the Vulgate. (Raised RCC, so almost a given.) Because of that when folks bring up other mss, I feel like a dunce hanging around a college class. It seemed you knew this stuff, and didn't mind teaching, so just the dunce asking the teacher a question to learn. :eek:

I have another prejudice now -- Presbyterian, so I'm more into using one translation to come up with a Bible. But I know that's a prejudice of mine, and I couldn't do it, so I'm always impressed with anyone who can translate -- one source or multiple sources. :)
 
trofimus

trofimus

Senior Member
#77
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
#77
Depleted said:
Nope. You answered my question. I really only know of the Vulgate. (Raised RCC, so almost a given.) Because of that when folks bring up other mss, I feel like a dunce hanging around a college class. It seemed you knew this stuff, and didn't mind teaching, so just the dunce asking the teacher a question to learn. :eek:

I have another prejudice now -- Presbyterian, so I'm more into using one translation to come up with a Bible. But I know that's a prejudice of mine, and I couldn't do it, so I'm always impressed with anyone who can translate -- one source or multiple sources. :)
Click to expand...
I am not a teacher, I just chat :) Teachers will get more strict judgement and I do not want that.

Its estimated that the differences between various textual variants of Greek are between 2-7%.

So 98% of time you will be using the same text, no matter which one you will choose. So its more about a translation than the base text for the New Testament. Translation can change a lot.
 
RickyZ

RickyZ

Senior Member
#78
Sep 20, 2012
9,635
787
113
#78
All this talk about various translations and no mention of the MRV ;)?
 
oldhermit

oldhermit

Senior Member
#79
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
614
113
70
Alabama
#79
trofimus said:
I am not a teacher, I just chat :) Teachers will get more strict judgement and I do not want that.

Its estimated that the differences between various textual variants of Greek are between 2-7%.

So 98% of time you will be using the same text, no matter which one you will choose. So its more about a translation than the base text for the New Testament. Translation can change a lot.
Click to expand...
The issue is that of upholding and maintaining the integrity of the original language text. This is why translation is such a serious matter. Paraphrased versions do not do this no matter what claims they may make.
 
trofimus

trofimus

Senior Member
#80
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
#80
oldhermit said:
The issue is that of upholding and maintaining the integrity of the original language text. This is why translation is such a serious matter. Paraphrased versions do not do this no matter what claims they may make.
Click to expand...
Do you mean integrity of used words (one word translated in the same way throughout a Bible) or integrity of doctrines?

I think the second one is possible with a paraphrase, but I do not use any , so I just guess theoretically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.