Its amazing how we got the KJB but the modern versions, not so much. You mentioned Westcott and Hort and their "sketchy" past, should be researched. What I understand is most or if not all modern versions are founded on their Greek New Testament text. The Nestle Aland text should be concerning to a believer seeing how its constantly evolving and in its 28th edition. I understand it to be the basis of all modern versions also. Lord bless you brother Johnny
I addressed the history of the KJV last tuesday night I will talk about the modern translations this Tuesday night. As to Westcot and Hort, there are many aligations ironicly they are of the same sort made against Erasmus and King James himself. I would rather look at the veracity of their work than perpetuate the aligations of their detractors.
@@chickenjohnny3308 Yes Sir, we shouldn't perpetuate accusations. When it comes to bible HISTORY, we honestly don't know with CERTAINTY what is true. No "REAL" research has been done by most "bible scholars." What is true and I have seen, are wicked religious atheists with multiple degrees. They have been educating themselves. They have one purpose in mind and been at it for a long time. I don't see "veracity" in the results of the works of Westcot and Hort. I have a plum tree in the yard...I know its a plum because it produces plums. Spiritual warfare should be the topic. Let's stay with what is pure and proven to be true. Please pray for me that I will reflect His grace in teaching. Grace be with you Bro. Johnny
@@chickenjohnny3308 Yes Sir, we shouldn't perpetuate accusations. When it comes to bible HISTORY, we honestly don't know with CERTAINTY what is true. No "REAL " research has been done by most "bible scholars." What I have seen are wicked religious atheists with multiple degrees. They have been educating themselves. They have one purpose in mind and been at it for a long time. I don't see "veracity" in the results of the works of Westcot and Hort. I have a plum tree in the yard. I know it is a plum because it produces plums. Spiritual warfare should be the topic. Let's stay with what is pure and proven to be true. Please pray for me that I will reflect His grace in teaching. Grace be with you Brother Johnny
There have been great works of research. Books have been written on the history of the Canon of scripture. If you do no more than a simple search on TH-cam, you will find hours of lectures, debates and teachings.
@chickenjohnny3308 51 minutes ago I have heard of a dynamic equivalent. I have not been able to find anything on dynamic equivalent synergy. Please help me out or explain it. Dynamic Equivalent simply means that words are arainged in the order in which the language of the intended user would understand it. The KJV uses this method throughout. Please ooint me in the right direction to find a definition for dynamic equivalent synergy. Thank you in advance, Duke.
First you should realize the KJB is a literal or "formal equivalent" translation. They didn't use the "dynamic equivalent" method. Translators would "fill in" words when the literal translation would not make sense in the English language. 2. The intent of some modern versions is to translate "messages or meanings of text" and so they use the "dynamic equivalents" method. That is, they would do more interpreting or paraphrasing than translating literally. 3. Synergy, from the Greek word Synergia, means cooperation, or working together. In the case of modern versions, they use men from different denominations and beliefs. When that happens, we are more likely to see inaccuracies in the message or meaning of the texts because of "dynamic equivalent synergy." CO-OP :)
I was taught that it meant the translators could do a variety of translationally equivalent things. For example, rearrange the order of words to match the grammar of the new language. They could also take an idiom from the original language and use an equivelent idion from the language intended reader. The King James translators, according to their preamble, did both of these. One additional question: Would you consider yourself a Rukmanit? Im just curious.
@@chickenjohnny3308 No, but I know who he is. I'm not so much KJ only as I am against the perversion of God's Word. Surely you can see where all this is headed?
@RuffCut I do not see that The NASB is a perversion. It is also very close to a word for word translation. King James is also close, a word for word translation would be impossible. There are bad traslations some are even perverse. Thay are fairly obvious. Duke your a brother in Christ, why call other brothers haratics ? Teach the word use the KJV. Why devide the church over one translation, a man made translation just like the rest. Use the internal perfection of the scripture it self. Found in the NES the NASB even the NIV. I appreciate your heart Luke.
Its amazing how we got the KJB but the modern versions, not so much. You mentioned Westcott and Hort and their "sketchy" past, should be researched. What I understand is most or if not all modern versions are founded on their Greek New Testament text.
The Nestle Aland text should be concerning to a believer seeing how its constantly evolving and in its 28th edition. I understand it to be the basis of all modern versions also.
Lord bless you brother Johnny
I addressed the history of the KJV last tuesday night I will talk about the modern translations this Tuesday night. As to Westcot and Hort, there are many aligations ironicly they are of the same sort made against Erasmus and King James himself. I would rather look at the veracity of their work than perpetuate the aligations of their detractors.
@@chickenjohnny3308
Yes Sir, we shouldn't perpetuate accusations. When it comes to bible HISTORY, we honestly don't know with CERTAINTY what is true. No "REAL" research has been done by most "bible scholars."
What is true and I have seen, are wicked religious atheists with multiple degrees. They have been educating themselves. They have one purpose in mind and been at it for a long time.
I don't see "veracity" in the results of the works of Westcot and Hort. I have a plum tree in the yard...I know its a plum because it produces plums.
Spiritual warfare should be the topic. Let's stay with what is pure and proven to be true.
Please pray for me that I will reflect His grace in teaching.
Grace be with you Bro. Johnny
BTW I would like to hear from you about the "constant evolving" of the scriptures.
@@chickenjohnny3308 Yes Sir, we shouldn't perpetuate accusations. When it comes to bible HISTORY, we honestly don't know with CERTAINTY what is true. No "REAL " research has been done by most "bible scholars."
What I have seen are wicked religious atheists with multiple degrees. They have been educating themselves. They have one purpose in mind and been at it for a long time.
I don't see "veracity" in the results of the works of Westcot and Hort. I have a plum tree in the yard. I know it is a plum because it produces plums.
Spiritual warfare should be the topic. Let's stay with what is pure and proven to be true.
Please pray for me that I will reflect His grace in teaching.
Grace be with you Brother Johnny
There have been great works of research. Books have been written on the history of the Canon of scripture. If you do no more than a simple search on TH-cam, you will find hours of lectures, debates and teachings.
@chickenjohnny3308
51 minutes ago
I have heard of a dynamic equivalent. I have not been able to find anything on dynamic equivalent synergy. Please help me out or explain it. Dynamic Equivalent simply means that words are arainged in the order in which the language of the intended user would understand it. The KJV uses this method throughout. Please ooint me in the right direction to find a definition for dynamic equivalent synergy. Thank you in advance, Duke.
First you should realize the KJB is a literal or "formal equivalent" translation. They didn't use the "dynamic equivalent" method. Translators would "fill in" words when the literal translation would not make sense in the English language.
2. The intent of some modern versions is to translate "messages or meanings of text" and so they use the "dynamic equivalents" method. That is, they would do more interpreting or paraphrasing than translating literally.
3. Synergy, from the Greek word Synergia, means cooperation, or working together. In the case of modern versions, they use men from different denominations and beliefs. When that happens, we are more likely to see inaccuracies in the message or meaning of the texts because of "dynamic equivalent synergy." CO-OP :)
That is interesting. Thank you. Your definition of dinamic equivalence is different than I was taught
I was taught that it meant the translators could do a variety of translationally equivalent things. For example, rearrange the order of words to match the grammar of the new language. They could also take an idiom from the original language and use an equivelent idion from the language intended reader. The King James translators, according to their preamble, did both of these. One additional question: Would you consider yourself a Rukmanit? Im just curious.
@@chickenjohnny3308 No, but I know who he is. I'm not so much KJ only as I am against the perversion of God's Word. Surely you can see where all this is headed?
@RuffCut I do not see that The NASB is a perversion. It is also very close to a word for word translation. King James is also close, a word for word translation would be impossible. There are bad traslations some are even perverse. Thay are fairly obvious. Duke your a brother in Christ, why call other brothers haratics ? Teach the word use the KJV. Why devide the church over one translation, a man made translation just like the rest. Use the internal perfection of the scripture it self. Found in the NES the NASB even the NIV. I appreciate your heart Luke.