Thankfulness, humility and the Bible

[farouk]

When talking about the Bible, it seems that a spirit of thankfulness and humility are very desirable among those who profess to have been changed by its message of redemption through the precious blood of the Lord Jesus.

I love and use the King James, yet it can be usefully remembered that there are born again believers in Quebec and Mexico and elsewhere who don't use the King James, but believe pretty much what we would generally believe. Indeed, they use French and Spanish Bibles. English, French and Spanish are world languages spoken by hundreds of millions of people and there are sound Bible versions in these various languages with their own separate histories, under the providence of God.

So there can't be any room for cultural imperialism or for manifestations of language-driven self-righteousness, when discussing the Bible.

Instead, thankfulness and humility should be the hallmarks of such discussion. Eternal gratitude that we have been included in receiving the Gospel message in a Bible edition that we understand.

A case in point is Brazil, with its 190 million Portuguese-speaking people, among whom there has been phenomenal growth in evangelical and fundamentalist churches in recent decades, and for whom a sound and accessible Portuguese Bible can be part of their experience.

(Just some thoughs...)

Edited July 21, 2011 by farouk

[HappyChristian]

No-one would argue this, farouk. OB is a KJB board - the KJB being, in our belief, the preserved Word of God for English speaking people. That would, of necessity, exclude those who don't speak English. =)

[farouk]

No-one would argue this, farouk. OB is a KJB board - the KJB being, in our belief, the preserved Word of God for English speaking people. That would, of necessity, exclude those who don't speak English. =)

Happy Christian:

Could you guys expand a bit on this, please? Like, if someone came to your church and asked the question, what does this mean? what would you tell them?

Ty. Edited July 21, 2011 by farouk

[Pastor Matt]

Happy Christian:

Could you guys expand a bit on this, please? Like, if someone came to your church and asked the question, what does this mean? what would you tell them?

Ty.

In other words, how can someone understand the KJV that does not understand English. Depending on the language, I try and direct them to Bible that was properly translated from the TR and Masoretic Hebrew Text, not one that was translated from the KJV.

[farouk]

In other words, how can someone understand the KJV that does not understand English. Depending on the language, I try and direct them to Bible that was properly translated from the TR and Masoretic Hebrew Text, not one that was translated from the KJV.

BroMatt:

Ty.

Yes, this is the sort of reply that I was thinking about; because of the qualities of the translation, for example, from an equivalence perspective: formal (rather than dynamic or paraphrastic) and based on sound texts.

I guess someone in 1610 could have asked a similar question about sound Bible translations, even before the King James was printed. Again, already the sourced used by the King James's translators were available, and other editions were already circulated.

Interestingly, sometimes an appeal to the authority of the English king is made when ppl try to defend the King James; I don't think this is particularly sound; under the authority of the same king that sponsored the King James, the puritans on the Mayflower were persecuted, prompting them to sail to Plymouth, New England, in the first place. In fact, the men of the Mayflower probably felt more affinity with many Christians in Holland, of a similar persuasion, who had their own Dutch Bible, than with the Anglican associations of the English state in the early 17th century.


Personally I think the King James is pretty well unsurpassed in English, from a practical point of view.

Ty for the response; this was generally the sort of response I was seeking. (I'm not in the US; I'm not ind. baptist; but these would be my thoughts.)

Blessings.

[Invicta]

My wife attended a course for teachers in Paris for a year in the 1960s. Since then she has always read the bible in French and has used the Louis Segond version as the only one available here. In the last three or four years when on holiday in France we have attended the Eglise Biblique Baptiste in Laon. (Bible Baptist Church.) This year, the pastor gave her a 1996 revision of the Ostervald Bible. This in turn was a revision of the original French bible by Olivetan of 1535. Olivetan was the translator of the first non Catholic French bible. His cousin, Jean Calvin wrote the original preface.

In a preface to the new edition, it says that since 1535 till the beginning of the 20th century, nothing was left out of the bible,

There is a download of the Ostervald for mobile devices on Olive Tree Software. Pastor Baughman said he gave the text to Olive Tree. I am not sure if the text is his revised or an earlier revision. However some time ago, my wife was given a New Testament by a retired missionary to France which is a parallel Ostervald and KJV (N Y 1854) While I have not compared the two versions, I have noticed one difference: 1 John 2:1 "MY Little children." 1854 edition: "MES petits enfans." Olive tree has the modern spelling. "MES petits enfants."

Edited July 22, 2011 by Invicta

[farouk]

I:

'enfans' is just old French.

I guess it's in the 'superfuity of naughtiness' category.....