tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post5476668944210593892..comments2024-03-28T14:13:51.996+00:00Comments on Evangelical Textual Criticism: The New Christian Standard Bible and the NA28P.J. Williamshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04388225485348300613noreply@blogger.comBlogger63125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-60669310603409990482023-02-25T12:04:30.727+00:002023-02-25T12:04:30.727+00:00Except that Jehovah is Germanic, and the J is pron...Except that Jehovah is Germanic, and the J is pronounced Y as in English "yay". So indeed YHVH or YHWH could sound like Yehovah, Yahovah, Yahweh, YahvehAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-14506505319252723532022-01-02T02:04:48.586+00:002022-01-02T02:04:48.586+00:00Renderings and readings will always change, which ...Renderings and readings will always change, which Greek text, or which MS one prefers also change. Nevertheless, each public translation requires scrutiny, which itself involves doctrinal biases. There is always room for improvement, but most of all a translator should be a true Spirit-filled person, submitting as best he/she can to that still small inner voice. However one renders the Greek of John 1:18, one should KNOW that Jesus Christ is God (YHWH). period.Gary Dykeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12431172547767286417noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-59157156244231369242021-10-18T03:16:48.050+01:002021-10-18T03:16:48.050+01:00The CSB is another Westcott and Hort foundation. L...The CSB is another Westcott and Hort foundation. Look at Daniel 3:25 in the KJV and then in the CSB, 2 obvious different views- Hope you can see how Satan is attacking the KJV, which he has for years now, with all the "new" versions. The JW's will like the CSB view of this verse. I am a KJV man, My studies have taken me to Masters degree, Masters in Ministry ( 1985), I'm not a Greek or Hebrew scholar, but I have had 2 yrs. of Greek / 1 Hebrew, since 1985 when I received my degree, I have continued to study God's Word, and the different "garbage translations", we are not to be ignorant of Satan's devices. He has been attacking God's Word since Adam and Eve. See also Deu. 4:2 in the CSB "..not add or take away... it does what God says not to do !ED -M MIN.https://www.blogger.com/profile/18025439182566591678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-750853496285475402020-08-13T23:11:13.930+01:002020-08-13T23:11:13.930+01:00ESV. Most faithful to the original languages witho...ESV. Most faithful to the original languages without interpretive bias.Humble Friarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17698642999608028338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-64501222154994887632020-08-13T20:28:54.987+01:002020-08-13T20:28:54.987+01:00I don't know what's wrong with you guys. ...I don't know what's wrong with you guys. I read the 1599. All y'all need to take it back a few more years and come hang out with me and John Owen. <br /><br />In all seriousness, God has given us so many fantastic resources today, in 2020, to employ to His glory. Lets use them all in our study and preaching and let God bring the growth.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11313771597323058695noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-22991972784917774742020-07-08T01:21:30.926+01:002020-07-08T01:21:30.926+01:00Do you guys know that the CSB counts for only two ...Do you guys know that the CSB counts for only two or three percentage points among the Bible’s preferred by Bible readers both in the US and also in the UK?Alexander Thomsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09425013355019644838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-81561752826251207932020-07-02T14:16:59.242+01:002020-07-02T14:16:59.242+01:00...and which TR are you referring to? There are mu......and which TR are you referring to? There are multiple versions of the TR out there.Humble Friarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17698642999608028338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-69622541632452496142020-01-18T13:52:28.776+00:002020-01-18T13:52:28.776+00:00Interesting. I guess I'll stick to reading KJ...Interesting. I guess I'll stick to reading KJV, ASV, and NKJV for English; Chinese Union for Chinese (but I don't have much choice there). OT a little, but is the NA 3d edition still acceptable if I wish to do more formal study in old age? Mine's a little ragged at the edges and rebound, but still useable.Kephahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00999385775493831638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-45369275733071707742019-10-23T14:49:01.155+01:002019-10-23T14:49:01.155+01:00I thought it was how many angels can dance on the ...I thought it was how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. If that is so, it depends on the dance. Viennese waltz takes a lot of space, whereas Argentine Tango does not.ajredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10379323128488520676noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-1352400077900557292019-10-23T14:46:21.455+01:002019-10-23T14:46:21.455+01:00Actually, "Anthropos" can mean just men,...Actually, "Anthropos" can mean just men, but mostly means all people. Same udea with "adelphos," which more than often included sisters as well as brothers. Neither mean specifically male unless there is another word there to explain it, or you can tell from the context. Most translations now realize that we do not use the word "men" as an inclusive in modern language. Therefore an attempt is being made to be more accurate to the meaning and not just limiting things to word as it used to be used. Your new translation of Philadelphia is just silly. A better translation would be City of Family Love!! ajredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10379323128488520676noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-73249426771877383782019-10-23T00:31:44.762+01:002019-10-23T00:31:44.762+01:00Indeed. Properly, μονογενής is not "only bego...Indeed. Properly, μονογενής is not "only begotten," but fundamentally something more like the Latin "sui generis," so "one and only" isn't a bad attempt.<br /><br />And whether θεός or υἱός, the phrase μονογενὴς [___] ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρὸς is strictly bound up with that noun. All speculation that μονογενής should be a substantive by itself flies in the face of the language used, in which it is attributive and not merely apposite. Whether God or Son, that noun is described as both "sui generis" and also "enfolded by the Father."<br /><br />One would have to do as Dr. Robinson shows, syntactically separating the noun from μονογενὴς by association exclusively with ὁ ὢν κτλ., to place them in opposition and not in attribution.Matthew Frosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10232613079168523464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-6799315772978032632019-10-21T22:49:19.496+01:002019-10-21T22:49:19.496+01:00Well said. It should also be noted that the KJV tr...Well said. It should also be noted that the KJV translators themselves did not regard their work as perfect, above critical inspection, or the final standard of Bible translation. This is all set forth in the preface "From the Translators to the Readers," which, unfortunately, is deleted from almost every contemporary edition of the KJV.<br />If people following the KJV-Only teachings would be intellectually honest enough read that preface, they would soon realize their veneration of that translation which borders on bibliolatry is not a tenable belief.David M. Deanhttps://www.dailymotion.com/dm_a2d2db73fd5a88514b9279ebd5ed26a2noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-14128865527079399962019-07-12T17:43:08.868+01:002019-07-12T17:43:08.868+01:00It is always interesting reading comment sections ...It is always interesting reading comment sections and trying to guess the intent of the specific comment (sincere/subject matter expert, sincere/learner, sincere/ignorant(but expert in own mind), disingenuous, or just making sport of poking the bear or stirring the pot). In the short comment section above, I think there may be all of these represented. For those of you are interested in the intent of the translators or think translators have a politically correct agenda, the following article may be of interest. <br />I think this Q&A gives insight into the translators' intent (regardless of whether you think they were successful).<br />https://www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2017/june/gender-hscb-csb-christian-standard-bible.htmlAndy Lhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01683585005895010900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-75023895905110256382019-06-06T16:28:56.970+01:002019-06-06T16:28:56.970+01:00Not me. ESV is rightly rendered.
Not me. ESV is rightly rendered.<br />Humble Friarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17698642999608028338noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-12721650489928276392018-09-19T12:25:22.431+01:002018-09-19T12:25:22.431+01:00William, Maurice, fellows, what's with the mid...William, Maurice, fellows, what's with the mid-word sigma appearing at the end of a word? Dear oh dear. It's e.g., υιός.Corpusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-82878990726004739122018-07-02T13:51:39.611+01:002018-07-02T13:51:39.611+01:00IMHO there is an alternative to the divine name kn...IMHO there is an alternative to the divine name known in English as YHWH or Yahweh or Jehovah. The actual Hebrew basis of the name speaks of "being" and the name is sometimes understood as "I Am" but that would be highly cumbersome in a translation. However, "Eternal" is a viable alternative, as in "Thus says the Eternal . . ." This would be close to the actual meaning of YHWH, and it at least conveys some of that meaning to the reader. I first encountered this usage in the Moffatt translation (which I do not otherwise recommend) and it immediately struck me as a powerful description of the Almighty.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-21899737662724545772018-06-29T03:30:08.741+01:002018-06-29T03:30:08.741+01:00Can someone explain which edition is meant when th...Can someone explain which edition is meant when the CSB reads 'Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia' 5th edition? Do they mean 'Biblia Hebraica Quinta' or is there actually a BHS 5 that I'm missing.Transnomadichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02634917211530110606noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-15871947340919937852018-06-23T00:54:15.894+01:002018-06-23T00:54:15.894+01:0040 years with the KJV And no "problem" y...40 years with the KJV And no "problem" yet with the:<br />"Harmonious Accuracy." JW's were rude and obnoxious<br />when i brought that up. :(GRACEambassadorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12694333745969306372noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-76431801822751029432018-06-14T18:24:06.423+01:002018-06-14T18:24:06.423+01:00I did. I did. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09290110245506344888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-91101317267664156612018-05-28T23:01:15.048+01:002018-05-28T23:01:15.048+01:00I just got a CSB and I am not happy about it at al...I just got a CSB and I am not happy about it at all. I am especially having difficulty with the parallel passages. Some of them just don't make sense. Ex: Mt 1:5 has parallel passages of 1 Sm 16:1 and 17:12??? Mt 3:6 has parallel passages of Mt 23:37 and Jn 15:22??? I think I will be looking for a new version. <br /><br />Does anyone have a suggestion of the most accurate translation?davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17713680755111510519noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-11397571430499964552018-03-07T16:26:30.402+00:002018-03-07T16:26:30.402+00:00The latest findings from the Bulletin of Underlini...The latest findings from the Bulletin of Underlining Assumptions 53.5 (2018):12-56 has the count at 100,000,516.2. Now, if we include the pseudopigraphal works 1 and 2 Opinions, then the number jumps significantly. (I think to the 10th power)Timothy N. Mitchellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10696299768205488795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-39792793886977018392018-02-26T16:15:10.871+00:002018-02-26T16:15:10.871+00:00I was must wondering if any of you guys have time ...I was must wondering if any of you guys have time to discuss how many angels one can get on the head of a needle?Pastor Richardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00247232851864913961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-42919990918959990222018-02-15T05:55:44.138+00:002018-02-15T05:55:44.138+00:00All translations are full of errors. Currently I a...All translations are full of errors. Currently I am using David Jeremiah's NIV Study Bible, and between that and the NKJV, I am happy with what I use, and I am not a KJV only either. Not impressed with CSB, and I am a strong Southern Baptist.<br /><br />In my opinion, a lot of verse's are so re-written, the meaning is gone. <br />Example: Ephesians 4:30 tells us "we are sealed by the Holy Spirit until the day of Redemption."<br /><br />The New Living Translation says "Guaranteeing that you will be saved on the day of Redemption" <br />Major difference. I've been sealed by Christ after I received salvation.<br />Don't fix what's not broken.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-80591730130651146462018-02-05T15:08:20.809+00:002018-02-05T15:08:20.809+00:00Although not as much a text critical observation, ...Although not as much a text critical observation, in my preview/ gift copy that I received from "Pastor Resources" there is an error in a footnote in 1 John 2. It is supposed to say "C 2:2 Or the propitiation" (they translated ιλασμος as "the atoning sacrifice"), but instead it reads "C 2:10 Or the propitiation." <br /><br />The online edition does not have this issue, but their free copy does. Ben Murrayhttp://deeplygrateful.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17859011.post-26035811874590047622018-01-18T20:49:32.316+00:002018-01-18T20:49:32.316+00:00The KJV is neither first nor free of errors. I me...The KJV is neither first nor free of errors. I mean this kindly and specifically: to make such statements shows ignorance. No translation will ever be perfect, and most of them have done very well. Careful comparisons among translations by responsible readers will often result in new insights. One insight that I would commend to Anonymous, Yeoberry, and T.D. Hale is that words most often have ranges of meaning, not single meanings. Context must be carefully considered when translating, and well-meaning translators may rightly make different contextual decisions. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15453357286821448131noreply@blogger.com