> General Discussions
RAY'S DEFAULT BIBLE
Wonone:
After being disabused of some of A E Knoch's notions, my questions continue:
Did Ray have a default Bible? Did he have a 'preferred' Bible?
I need to settle onto a Bible as a starting point and as the reference point.
My journey so far: KJV to RSV to NIV to NASB to ESV and most recently CLV (Concordant Literal), with a sprinkling of various paraphrases anywhere in between. I know Ray did not hesitate to delve into Hebrew and Greek, but it appears he settled onto KJV as 'default'!? In general would like to probe the pros and cons of various translations.
PS Did he anywhere discuss the original manuscripts that underlie the various translations?
PPS I suspect the answers are there in various posts, but it is more fun and may be quicker, interacting with the Forum!
Rhys 🕊:
Here is some stuff I found that might be useful:
From Ray’s article - WHICH BIBLE TRANSLATION IS BEST?
However, not all English Versions perverted and corrupted the words having reference to time into words that now stand for eternity, but have nothing to do with time at all. Here are a few. I use the first three quite regularly, but, I am not recommending you buy any of them.
Rotherham Emphasized Bible, 1959
Concordant Literal New Testament, 1983 http://concordant.org/catalog/orderblank/index.html
The Emphatic Diaglott, 1912 edition (Greek/English Interlinear)
The Holy Bible in Modern English (Fenton), 1903)
The New Covenant, 1884
The New Testament in Modern Speech, 1910
The Restoration of Original Sacred Name Bible, 1976
The New Testament of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Anointed, 1958
The New Testament a Translation, 1938
The Companion Bible, 1990 A King James Reference Bible
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,14489.msg128192.html#msg128192
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,3558.msg26610.html#msg26610
Dear Kevin:
I use a Nelson #1755 King James Bible for study and teaching.
I also recommend: The Concordant Literal Translation, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible,
and The Emphatic Diaglott.
Get e-Sword for you computer, and/or Strong's Expanded Exhaustive Concordance,
and Wigram's The Englishman's Hebrew and Greek Concordances.
And maybe a good Bible Dictionary. (I don't know of a good one, so just buy one).
That's all you need.
God be with you,
Ray
I use e-sword quite a lot and have recently got Rotherham and the concordant on it and find it quite useful especially to compare various versions. I quite like reading at the moment from Rotherdam and Young's literal translation. Don't like reading the ones that mention hell as most of them do.
Rhys
Gina:
Wonone,
Ray, in his study on "How We Got the Bible"
--- Quote ---
Side note about Ray's Bible ---- King James, Nelson Bible
If you are looking to get a new Bible, I would recommend the one I’ve got here. It’s cheap, I only paid 29 bucks for this. It’s leather, red letter edition, so it has the words of Christ in red, it has headings on all the different things, like ‘The Triumph Entry Into Jerusalem.’ It has a heading, so you don’t need to read twenty verses to find it, because there it is. Here it says, ‘The Cleansing Of The Temple,’ in Luke’s account, then it tells you where to find the same thing in Matthew account - 21 and you find it in Mark - 11. It has that right above it and that’s really handy.
It has this center reference column. There it gives you hundreds and hundreds of scriptures, where it will talk about cleansing the Temple. It has a little a, b or c in the verse, then you look over to the margin for the a, b, or c and it will say, see Jer. 6:4. You go to Jer. and you will read something about God cleansing the Temple. This way you can do a whole Bible study just using the center references. But when you buy this book you get it free. That’s the work of theologians over 2 thousand years. For 2 thousand years theologians would say, ‘wait I read something like that in Jer. or Isaiah.’ So they would go back and start reading maybe 6 chapters to find it again and they would put a little notation in their Bible, see Isaiah 6:64. Well he spent 5 hours to find that. You have hundreds and hundreds and hundreds at your fingertips and you don’t need to spend 2 minutes looking for them. These are marvelous aids.
This Book I have also has a small concordance in the back and one version has maps. There are lots of other things that make it so handy. It’s something like 1200 pages of fine paper, it’s gold leafed and leather. It’s got all these little extra things. In Revelation if you want to find the church of Laodicea it has them all numbered. It has big headings that is so easy and quick to find. It’s great. It has this little margin, I can put all the notes I want in just this little margin here, so it’s big enough. This is good, the Bible I use to use cost right at $200 and to me I would sooner have this one.
--- End quote ---
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,5815.msg47182.html#msg47182
Rhys 🕊:
--- Quote from: Wonone on January 13, 2013, 09:55:59 PM ---PS Did he anywhere discuss the original manuscripts that underlie the various translations?
--- End quote ---
From one of Ray's email also found this:
Ray Hello,
Are you reading the Received Text or another Greek version. How about the Old Testament?
How do we know the translators are translating correctly. I if you have a chance please call me
At .................. I have many more questions that I would like to ask you.
By His Grace,
Albert
Dear Albert:
There is no giant difference in most texts. Most translations from the oldest manuscripts compare all the best manuscripts in their Versions. I consult a dozen or more versions in my study, however, truth is not found in the "most perfect manuscript." The spiritual teaching is found in all manuscripts. The only really GIANT problem with most modern Versions is one of interpretation, not translation. There is no equivalent in either the Hebrew or Greek manuscripts to justify the use of such words as "for ever and ever," "everlasting/evermore," and "eternal." That's it! Translate olam/aion/aionios properly, and ALL translations will contain the truths of God regardless as to whether some are better or more accurate than others.
For myself versions that mention hell and eternal including those above have given me a false sense of who God really is. We need to grasp the truth that Ray mentions here and I find it best to stay away from certain versions but they still make interesting reading that's why I like e-sword to compare and it's free which fits my price range just nicely.
Rhys
Gina:
We only have copies of the originals manuscripts, so he couldn't discuss that topic. But he does talk about How we got the bible, and that's a great study on audio and then someone (Kat, I think) transcribed it. It's an awesome piece of work. I highly recommend that.
Here is something I found that I agree with:
Hi Kenny,
It is an error in logic to assume that the earliest manuscripts are more correct than manuscripts of a later date.
We do not have the original scriptures. We have manuscripts that are copies of the originals. Even the earliest manuscripts that we have were copied centuries after the originals were written.
Now the earliest manuscripts may be correct, that is, if they were accurately copied from copies of the originals. On the other hand, the earliest copies could be in error if they were copied from copies that contained errors. No human knows for sure.
No major truths can be affected by any differences in the manuscripts because it is the Spirit of God that leads us into all truths.
John [from Kentucky]
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,11396.msg98582.html#msg98582
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version