Results 1 - 2 of 2
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | What is the morning star here? | Rev 2:28 | Biblebeliever | 80719 | ||
You probably know what I'm gonna say.Anyhow,the Textus Receptus (or Majority text)has always been the Protestant text used to translate OUR bibles with.The Vaticanus and Siniaticus are the manuscripts used by the Catholic Church for translating bibles. The A.V.,also known as the King James Bible was translated strictly from the protestant text.I'm a protestant.So I stick with this book.All other translations use the Catholic texts or are at least half translated from them. This is a 10 year course in manuscript evidence in one paragraph.God bless. | ||||||
2 | What is the morning star here? | Rev 2:28 | Hank | 80732 | ||
Biblebeliever: It happens that I share your enthusiasm for the King James Bible but for different reasons. My admiration for the Authorized Version rests mainly upon its well-deserved reputation as a literary masterpiece, which has little to do with the question of its textual superiority. Textus Receptus, or so-called Received Text, versus a more eclectic textual basis is a subject that is freighted with a good deal of controversy and disagreement even among well-seasoned scholars and translators, and I fear that that water is far too deep for me to dare to wade into. Suffice it to say that since there exists a general consensus among qualified experts in the field of biblical texts that the differences between the various texts are fairly minimal, that no essential Christian doctrine is compromised by these differences, and that they are of concern mainly to the most exacting scholar and have little practical value to the lay Christian, I therefore submit that the fuss about texts is largely unwarranted. Of greater concern is the degree of fidelity to the biblical text which the translators of any given version have exercised in order to meet their responsibility to be as transparent as possible to whatever biblical text they used. For example, two groups of translators using identical manuscript texts can produce two versions of the Scriptures that are very different, if one group follows a fairly rigid word-for-word philosophy of translation and the other subscribes to the liberties available through paraphrasing..... Well, at all events, I must express my awe at your ability to provide us with a 10-year course in manuscript evidence in one paragraph. This is no small feat. It is highly doubtful that even Calvin Coolidge, who was as frugal with words as Scrooge was with money, could have accomplished that :-) --Hank | ||||||