DCHindley

It may be "out of date" but in its day it was the pinnacle of biblical scholarship, based on the Hebrew and Greek (as opposed to the Vulgate Latin translation), and was translated rather more accurately than you are giving it credit for.

You are blaming the translators (who were influenced by previous English translations from Latin, etc.) for the ways in which various Christian groups, particularly those we call fundamentalists here in the US, have put it to use.

Actually, trying to piece together how the documents came to be in their preserved form and then how they influenced the various factions within the evolving Christian movement, is what attracts me to them. It's like solving a puzzle. Of course, some folks prefer Sodoku or Scrabble ...

If one doesn't like the message the texts contain (personally I am neutral towards them) then one will never find a translation that is "good" enough.

DCH

Iskander

The KJB “is filled with bias”?? Who is the judge of that?


Could a very ancient text written in some sort of primitive language now known to us as Biblical Hebrew be translated into any contemporary language without errors?

aa5874

In the Pauline Corpus it is claimed that it is found in the Scriptures that Jesus died for OUR Sins--See 1 Cor.15.3

Well, such a claim is NOT found in Hebrew Scriptures.

Such a claim would be considered Blasphemy by Jews.

Examine gMark 1, in 25 versions, it was Blasphemy to claim Jesus could Forgive Sins.

Mark 2:7 KJVMark 2:7 NAS The Pauline Corpus is a compilation of Blasphemies and contrary to Hebrew Scriptures.

Paul, if he was a Hebrew of Hebrews, was guilty of death.

Paul, if he was a Hebrew of Hebrews, broke Jewish Laws.

1 Cor.15.3 is Blasphemy according to the JEWS in 25 versions of gMark.

Why does the Pauline writer speak such Blasphemies?

Exodus 34:14

Clivedurdle

Might not a serious error about atoning sacrifice be evidence that we are not looking at Jewish documents?

Iskander

Which error?

Duvduv

It is interesting to note that according to those who believe Judaism developed in the first century and thereafter, it would seem hardly likely that anything relating to dying for sins could even yet be considered "heretical" by Jews until a later time when it would have been doctrinally clear that this was not a Jewish teaching.

However, to be TECHNICAL about all this, it makes as much as sense saying that Jesus died for sins is "heretical against Judaism" as it would to say that achieving the status of a Boddisatva was heretical, since neither case has anything to do with Judaism to be heretical against it.

Is it heretical against Judaism technically to say that God revealed the Quran to Mohammed, or heretical against Judaism technically to say that Krishna was reincarnated in India, or for that matter, is it "heretical" against Judaism to say that the Vedas or Sutras are the path to perfection?

Davka

:hysterical:

Wow. You're actually ignorant enough to defend the KJV?

Tell us about Job 22:30, please. It's one of my favorite verses in the KJV.

aa5874

So, why did you make this post?

What were you looking at? The story of the Flight from Egypt and Jonah in the whale are found in Jewish documents.

Davka

Without errors? I suppose it depends of what you think of an an "error." There is a school of thought which considers any translation to be inherently fallacious, because all languages contain words and phrases which simply have no accurate corollary in other languages. In this sense, no translation can ever be error-free.

However, if the goal is to convey, as closely as possible, the original meaning of the text, then I would say that a parallel Hebrew-English NASB with copious footnotes is probably as close to error-free as I've seen. The KJV has blatant translation errors (as in completely mis-reading the original and using unambiguously wrong words in English), along with later textual additions which are not footnoted, and what certainly appear to be doctrinal positions inserted into the text.

Davka

I'm not convinced that a "correct" metaphor exists. The Sin Offering, as outlined in Leviticus, is certainly nowhere near the correct metaphor, since it is applicable only to those sins which were committed by accident, without the knowledge of the sinner. In fact, there is no OT Biblical atonement for deliberate sin. The penalty for deliberately sinning is usually death. If you're lucky, it's simple banishment.