Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: kosta50

Does the EO recommend the King James (1611) english version of the bible for those that do not read Greek? Is the KJV also riddled with errors in your opinion?


3,027 posted on 08/19/2007 6:22:20 AM PDT by suzyjaruki (Why?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3006 | View Replies ]


To: suzyjaruki

THE KJV was translated under strict orders not to contradict the anglican church. Further ascribing grammatic properties of English words to words translated into English from other languages is naive.

folks looking to insist on a literalist interpretation of scripture should learn the literal langauge used in writing it.


3,032 posted on 08/19/2007 7:30:30 AM PDT by kawaii (Orthodox Christianity -- Proclaiming the Truth Since 33 A.D.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3027 | View Replies ]

To: suzyjaruki
Do the EO recommend the King James (1611) English version of the Bible for those that do not read Greek? Is the KJV also riddled with errors in your opinion?

Yes and yes. The EO (usually the Greeks, for reasons too complicated to go into here) have used and recommend the KJV. The errors contained in the KJV are corrected against patristic teachings and early Church documents. The Church put the Christian canon together and therefore reserves the right to its correct interpretation. You cannot accept the Bible, which is the product of the Church, and deny church's authority when it comes to the Bible.

The KJV is particularly riddled with errors because (1) it was tailored for political reasons to Protestant bias; this included necessary alterations in the text on which it is based, (2) its foundation is in Textus Receptus, which is a product of (a) two latter-day Greek sources of Alexandrian-type text (known to contain redactions and changes relative to older versions), (b) a private retro-translations from Latin into (poor) Greek by William Tyndale,  (c) sections derived from unreliable Latin Vulgate, and (d) translational errors.

Also, KJV is written in archaic English which you may think you understand. Many of the same sounding words words as those in modern English found in KJV are of archaic meaning which is different from the contemporary meaning. Unless you are well versed in Shakespearean English, chances are you will misconstrue may be a verse in KJV simply for that reason alone.

As far as the Orthodox Church goes, each particular Orthodox Church will use a specific Christian canon, whether it is KJV, NAB, NIV, etc. because it is the Church that ultimately applies the correct concepts, as they have been understood and used since the beginning, and certainly since the time when the Church put together the Bible.

3,138 posted on 08/19/2007 8:43:55 PM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3027 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson