Howdy Y'all,
When I asked Jesus Christ to be my Lord and Savior on September 23 of last year I didn't even own a Bible. Part of my obsessive compulsive nature is to research every aspect of something before making a decision to buy, or before deciding follow a certain path. I did this with choosing a Bible, as well as determining what Christian denomination, if any, I would most likely receive the truth of the Bible from. After all, our Christian walk is a quest for truth, and that truth comes from the Word of God. Therefore I decided to attend Independent Fundamental Baptist churches, and Non-denominational churches based in the general Baptist beliefs, based of course on my (sometimes errant) presuppositions, and my ever-present conservative world view. For me this was a good choice. I'm not saying others are wrong, though some denominations are in some respects, but rather that for me the Baptist faith most closely aligns with my beliefs and relies solely on the Bible for its authority, teaching directly from the Word of God, which for me is my source of truth.
Unfortunately I did not do enough in-depth research into choosing a Bible. After two weeks of research in trying to decide which translation to get, I finally broke down and bought a $5 New King James Version from Wal-Mart just so I had a Bible to read. (Now are you beginning to understand the kind of crazy person my wonderful wife puts up with?) After about another two weeks I finally decided the NASB was the "best" translation, based on what I had read. True, it is the best translation....of the worst texts. I'll explain that statement below.
I also decided I was not going to limit myself to just one Bible, so I picked up, and still have:
King James Version (KJV)
Thompson Chain Reference
Thomas Nelson Study Bible
World Publishing (Thomas Nelson) Commentary Bible
Nave's Topical Bible
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Zondervan Study Bible
Ryrie Study Bible
New King James Version (NKJV)
English Standard Version (ESV)
Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)
Recovery Version (New Testament only)
New International Version (NIV)
New Living Translation (NLT)
Now, I should say I was aware of the KJVO debate, but did not look into it much for a few reasons. For one, I didn't care for the "archaic" language, so I was biased towards the easier to read newer versions prior to my investigation. Also, I thought the KJVO position was just a crock of dung, made up by hardcore fundamentalsits. I mistakenly thought that the Textus Receptus, that the KJV is based off of, was handed down by the Catholics, so it must be corrupt. That was a major erroneous presumption on my part. However, the tipping point was that fact that I read that somewhere that the NASB is the most accurate and readable word-for word translation. It just goes to show you can't always believe everything you read.
Now, I do not want to go into too many details because it will be best for you to go to the website listed below and read the booklet, or better yet print it off and read it. However I will give a very basic premise and the reason why I really needed to find this booklet.
I had read on blogs, in pamphlets and heard from other people that the KJV is not corrupt, whereas all other versions are corrupt. No one really ever explained it to me, and everything I had read claimed this, but offered little proof. Then, of course, you get into technical terms, such as Alexandrian Text, Uncials, Byzantine Text, Textus Receptus (TR), Majority Text, Minority Text, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and ad nauseum. What I was running into was too much information, at too high a level, for me to grasp without at least some explanation included. Then I found the website at the bottom of this post. Thanks be to God!!!
Basically there are two lines of text that all Bibles (NT) come from. One is the TR or Byzantine Text, which the KJV is based off of, and the Alexandrian Text: Uncials (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) which are corrupt Egyptian texts that Wescott and Hort used to pervert the Word of God. Wescott and Hort's work is what ALL newer versions of the Bible are based on, by way of Rudolph Kittel's use of their work for his Biblia Hebraica and the BH Stuttgartensia. The OT texts also vary, but you'll see that in the booklet. It breaks everything down for you, giving you the history and making it understandable, even to an extreme novice like me.
This all started with a comment by, and conversation with, my pastor. After talking with the pastor from another Baptist church I attend, I decided to research it myself. After searching and reading for hours every day for about two weeks, I have decided that the KJO crowd definitely makes sense now. This does not mean I will get rid of my Bibles, as my NASB, HCSB and Recovery Versions do have some value in that they do at least provide the missing verses within the text, and can provide a present-age language reference (as well as their commentaries) for my studies in the KJV, but the KJV will be my Bible for study, be it doctrinal or general study. This is a personal choice, one some may not agree with, but I'm OK with that. I do plan to get rid of the ESV, NIV and NLT, as they are pieces of garbage that are not fit to be on my bookshelf. Look up Matthew 17:21 in one of these. Then look up Acts 8:37. Where are these verses? At the bottom of the page, that's where. They claim the these verses do not belong there, although the majority of texts have them (about 5000), the two main corrupt texts (and maybe only 50 total) don't, so therefore these verses don't belong in their Bible. Hogwash!! Additionally numerous changes, be it references to Christ's deity, or verses related to major doctrines, have been watered down or taken out completely. Can you trust a Bible like that? I can't. Read the booklet, do other research, and decide for yourself.
Here's the website. At the top of the page there's a link you can click to download the entire booklet as one file. Otherwise, you can just click on "Introduction" under "Part One" and read through it online. If you print it up (without references) it's about 52 pages for all 3 parts, or 43 pages for just part one, which is where the majority of pertinent information is.
http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/SBS777/vital/kjv/index.html
God Bless,
Brian
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
hey brother
i need to slowly read that blog and carefully digest all the info you gave there. I tend to like the NRSV and NIV however i was raised baptist on the big red print KJV and that is how i memorized (what i have memorized) so it is a translation i do love.
Hope all is well with you
if you get time give my recent blog a read-i would love your comments.
I don't think one version is "better" than the other. It is good to have more than one so that you can compare and get a better feel for what is being said.
But when it comes to studying the bible and which version is better I always come back to this question:
What's the point of any of it if I'm not going to go do what it says to do?
Tadd,
I have read your blog over the last few weeks, but just haven't commented. No particular reason for not commenting, other than just being busy. I'll get over and re-read and leave a comment or two. {:~)
Roxanne,
That's what I used to think: that they were all the same, just with different wording. However, that is not the case. Sure, much of it reads almost the same, but when verses are left out, or changes are made that relate to doctrinal issues, one has to seriously consider if they are the same. Do not believe the lie that older is better. We want what is closest to what the original writer wrote. We want accuracy, not antiquity.
Given the fact that the newer versions are based off of texts that have 3000 differences just in the 4 gospels alone, and that it came from an area that was not truly sold on Christianity, and was influenced by paganism, you need to question it's accuracy. Not to mention the fact that they were tampered with, and both found in pristine condition due to not being trusted as accurate.
The fact that the KJV is based on overwhelming texts (about 5000) that agree with each other, my choice is KJV. The KJV translators had access to the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, but chose not to use them, as they were apparently corrupt.
Who would you believe: 5000 witnesses who all say the same thing, or 2 that can't even get their story straight? If you are using instructions to put something together, which would you prefer: the one missing words, or whole steps, or that puts some of the steps in down the footnotes, vs. the complete accurate instructions?
This is an age-old debate, and there's plenty of information online slanted to either side of the debate. I thought the KJVO was nonsense, until I really looked into it. Now I understand why people are KJVO, or KJV preferred, as I have now chosen to be for the sake of having the most accurate version of the Word of God. It's a choice one needs to make for themselves.
Below is an extensive list of some changes and deletions in the NIV, as compared to the KJV. Some versions, such as the NASB, leave them in, but bracket them and put a note saying the "oldest" or "best" manuscripts leave them out. The link on the original post really spells out the history of the Bible, the translators, and the texts, so it is definitely worth a read.
http://rockymoore.com/ChristianLife/archive/2006/04/12/694.aspx
God Bless,
Brian
hey brother
yeah toss me your thoughts
how did you set up your blog for the music
i love it
keep the faith
peace
ps as you might suspect i am voting for obama-as usual we are seperated by a vast ocean on politics but still brothers in faith-isn't that great
Tadd,
The player is Project Playlist:
www.playlist.com
Go to the site, set up an account (free), select the songs for your play list, and then just add another element in your blog set-up. IIRC you just copy and paste the code into the added element. I hope this makes sense.
Sorry to hear that (voting for Obama). I can't, with good conscience, vote for a pro-abortion candidate. That's why I pretty much align with the Republicans, but I vote values, not party. That's just me.
God Bless You Brother,
Brian
i set up the account for the music and all but when i set up the area in my blog it asked for the label or something like that
i tried to copy and paste it from the playlist site but it never worked HELP
Tadd,
You have to do it by adding an "HTML/Java Script" gadget. Go to settings, click add a gadget, click on the HTML/Java Script, and then copy and paste the code in. I'm pretty sure that's how I did it.
By the way, I did post a comment on your blog, but it was on an older post. I'm not really into poetry, so that's why I didn't comment on any of those posts.
I am the one who set up your blog & its HTML. Give credit where credit is due.
Sorry dear. I could've swore I was the one who put the playlist on the blog, after you initially set the blog up, but that was quite a while ago. You have a better memory than I, so I'm sure you're right. I didn't mean to take credit for something you did.
People should read this.
Wow this was a great post.. I' m enjoying it.. good resource
Post a Comment