Originally posted by josephwGaining a reliable reading of God's Word seems to be a lifelong search, for many. Do you have a favorite, or do you compare and contrast among a few sources?
Not to deflect from your point, but the translation issue is another topic. Having said that, to answer the question, some translations are obviously better than others. The fact is we have at our fingertips all the most reliable manuscript evidence necessary to identify what God's Word is.
And much much more. The problem with skeptics is they only under ...[text shortened]... even bring themselves to acknowledge that fact much less have an objective discussion about it.
1 edit
Originally posted by JS357Thanks for your post here. I contemplated an answer for hours, which is always a pleasure to do. The more complex the issue the better. Manuscript evidence is worth exploring and thinking about.
Gaining a reliable reading of God's Word seems to be a lifelong search, for many. Do you have a favorite, or do you compare and contrast among a few sources?
"Gaining a reliable reading of God's Word seems to be a lifelong search, for many."
There's much to consider. The original autographs are non-existent of course, so how to determine what copies are most reliable takes time and study. I am far from qualified to speak with any authority on the subject of manuscript evidence, but I have read a little by those who I think are.
The particular aspect of this thing concerning the reliability of translations that most interests me is not about what the evidence is, but how it came to be. Meaning, how copies were made, and by whom.
I don't have time to get into it here, nor do I want to post 92 paragraphs doing it. Suffice it to say that reliability is best found in the understanding of where and how the generations of copies of copies were transmitted down through the ages with the idea of preservation in mind.
"Do you have a favorite, or do you compare and contrast among a few sources?"
I read and study out of the KJV, but I own a dozen different translations as well as a variety of concordances and other study helps. I've compared hundreds if not thousands of verses and passages between several translations.
Some translations are better than others at conveying the meaning and intent of the text, but after years of bible study I am convinced that there's more to understanding the scriptures than finding the exact word that fits in bringing out the truth of any particular verse or passage.
There's something much greater at stake than a squabble over the translation issue.
Originally posted by josephwSo, is your interpretation of the Bible the correct one then?
I read and study out of the KJV, but I own a dozen different translations as well as a variety of concordances and other study helps. I've compared hundreds if not thousands of verses and passages between several translations.
Originally posted by JS357Here's an example.
Gaining a reliable reading of God's Word seems to be a lifelong search, for many. Do you have a favorite, or do you compare and contrast among a few sources?
1 Timothy6:10a
KJV
For the love of money is the root of all evil:
ESV
For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils.
The difference is the ESV removes one word and adds three others, and makes the word evil plural. Changes the meaning.
Which translation is correct?
1 edit
Originally posted by josephwSo, is your interpretation of the Bible ~ among Christian humans ~ the correct one then, in your estimation, because there is great diversity and there are significant disagreements among the world's 2.2 billion Christians?
The Word of God interprets itself.
Originally posted by josephwPrivate, or personal interpretation means the one doing the interpreting will project his own meaning into the text. The text speaks for itself. One can study the text, learn from the text and be influenced by the text, but one cannot apply meaning to the text. The scripture speaks for itself.
You have it wrong. God's Word isn't interpreted by man. When it is disagreements arise.
Private, or personal interpretation means the one doing the interpreting will project his own meaning into the text. The text speaks for itself. One can study the text, learn from the text and be influenced by the text, but one cannot apply meaning to the text. The scripture speaks for itself.
As I recall, we once had a discussion about John 8:31-36 - specifically about the meaning of the following three verses:
34Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin."
31 ...If you continue in My word, then you are truly disciples of Mine; 32and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.
You kept insisting that it meant that true disciples would be made free from "the penalty of sin" even though Jesus explicitly states that they would be made free from "committing sin".
Is this an example of how you don't "project [your] own meaning into the text" and allow "the text [to speak] for itself?
It's remarkable that you wrote the above with us having had that discussion - with me repeatedly pointing out that the text speaks of being freed from "committing sin" and you insisting that was referring to the "penalty of sin".
Originally posted by apathist“The real power of a wolf isn't in its fearsome jaws, which can clench with fifteen hundred pounds of pressure per square inch. The real power of a wolf is having that strength, and knowing when not to use it.”
How weak are the omni gods? It is like they aren't here.
Jodi Picoult
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeEvery few years, Lifetime cable network puts out a movie of one of her books, but the last one was in 2011. I'm surprised you know of her.
“The real power of a wolf isn't in its fearsome jaws, which can clench with fifteen hundred pounds of pressure per square inch. The real power of a wolf is having that strength, and knowing when not to use it.”
Jodi Picoult