Would reading the original manuscripts be just as good?

[Guest Guest]

Hi everyone. Would reading the original manuscripts (the ones that the KJV was translated from) be just as good as reading the KJV itself or would it be better to read the KJV? Please explain the reasoning for your answer.

[Psalms18_28]

if you can find it

or even find the original manuscript to KJV: http://www.datchet.com/users/history/Ro ... barker.htm

Everything relating to God was destroyed or missing. All you have left is faith.

[Anon]

I think if you are fluent in Greek and Hebrew (extremely rare in our age) and you had a full copy of the TR, that it would be just as good...has to be, since its where we got our KJV. But its rather a moot point since both conditions are nearly impossible to meet.

[kevinmiller]

I pretty much agree with Suzy. The original languages can be helpful for study or reference but unless you are fluent in Greek and Hebrew, reading from them won't do you much good. Otherwise, if you are fluent in Greek and have purchased the text, sure, it would be as good.

[IM4given]

I believe that Tyndale and other translators who gave us the KJV were blessed by God when they translated the scriptures - even under much suffering and pain of death they maintained the true and accurate account of the "originals."

[lettheredeemedsayso]

No one alive has ever seen the original manuscripts

[IM4given]

The "originals" have long since turned to dust - the only thing we have that bears that distinction are the Dead Sea Scrolls, and even they are not the originals - just the oldest known copies that we know about.

[kevinmiller]

No one alive has ever seen the original manuscripts

I agree. No one alive has seen the original KJV either. :wink

[Calvary]

I believe that the OP question was referring to the actual texts that underly the KJB NT, not the "originals" per se.

Again, what would you do when you read a verse in the "TR" that does not agree with what you read in the KJB?

I mean go get yourself a copy of the Teddy Beza's Greek New Testment, and a couple of the editions put out by Robert Stephanus, and try to collate then to agree with the KJB and you're on your way!

But what happens when we examine what Beza was working from? Gasp! What's this? He had in his possesion the famous Codex Bezae, which is listed in the apparatus as "D"?? Will that bode well for us KJB only "sects"? In addition he had variant reading that he got from Robert Stephanus, he had a Syriac version that was put out by a converted jew named Tremellius and somehwere I read that he had an Arabian New Testament. Beza also said he had a mss that he found in a monestary.

In spite of all this material he had available Doctor Reuss states that he only departed from Stephanus 38 times.

Doctor Hills uses this implication to demonstrate what a remarkable hold the "common" faith had on the minds of the universal priesthood.

Looks like the run of the mill believer determined and still determines what is the word of God and what is not.

A Greek New Testament will not do much good in America where so precious few actually could read the text and understand it.

I look at the examples of folks who can and of folks who think they can and all I can ever see is confusion. My God is not the author of that.

So, IMHO, it would be a waste of time since you can obviously read English, and the Lord has already given you a perfect, error free Bible that needs no improvement or scholarship to prove it's authenticity.

Ain't God good!?

God bless,

Calvary

[UrbanChristian]

So, IMHO, it would be a waste of time since you can obviously read English, and the Lord has already given you a perfect, error free Bible that needs no improvement or scholarship to prove it's authenticity.

Here here... There is also the fact that even if you did take the years it would take to learn Greek fluently enough to read the new testament through in Greek, you would still be missing the nuances of the language that come from knowing the language natively. And then there is the old testament. I won't even go into the time it would take to learn Hebrew fluently. I have a hard enough time with English sometimes.

The Greek and Hebrew can provide meaning to the English words in that the meanings of some of the words have changed over time. Using a Strong's Concordance can help you find out what the words meant when they were written, but the Greek is not better than the KJB. God had the Old Testament written in Hebrew for it's time, He had the New Testament written in Greek for it's time, and then he had them both translated into English for our time.

We have to remember, God in his foreknowledge already knew that the predominant language of our day would be English :wink

[Guest Guest]

First of all, we don't have the "original" manuscripts. And secondly, reading the TR would not be as good because some of the versions of the TR we have today were backtranslated from the KJV.

Katy-Anne

[Guest Guest]

If we had the original originals (not just the copies of the TR we have today), yes, it'd be just as good IF you can read it. :lol

It wouldn't be in one complete book though. It'd be in a bunch of scrolls, books, lectionaries (sp?), etc. You'd have a lot of fun trying to fit all of the manuscripts together in the right order first, like a puzzle, and then reading it would be extremely difficult.

It's funny how people place so much value on the "originals", and the people who had the "originals" in the first place probably dreamed of having the Bible in one complete book like we do!

[kevinmiller]

People don't place so much importance on the originals because we feel like we have to read them to truly read God's Word. It's because it is important to understand where the KJV derives its authority from.

[Guest Guest]

Yes, it's good and important to know where the KJV came from. The KJV's authority came from God.

The problem with people putting too much emphasis on the Greek and Hebrew is that we don't have the originals! We can't compare the KJV with something that isn't there. Besides, the KJV has already proven itself to be the pure, inerrant, inspired word of God in the English language, what more could you want?

[kevinmiller]

Yes, it's good and important to know where the KJV came from. The KJV's authority came from God.

The problem with people putting too much emphasis on the Greek and Hebrew is that we don't have the originals! We can't compare the KJV with something that isn't there. Besides, the KJV has already proven itself to be the pure, inerrant, inspired word of God in the English language, what more could you want?

But if we don't have the originals, where are modern Bible versions(in foreign languages) coming from? And not necessarily the original originals, but copies of them. And where is the proof that the KJV has given us? What more I could want is proof. I believe the KJV is the best because it is a tranlsation of the inspired Word of God. What evidence do we have that has come from the KJV alone that has suddenly made it better than what it was translated from?

I have heard a lot of claims, but nothing with which to back them up. The KJV starting revivals or being translated at the height of the English language is not enough to base an argument on.