....yes love the KJV and others its wise to have a Org Greek to English translation. Could have done better by saying
"Use the Word of GOD to Determine Sexual Ethics". As if God and His word.. yeah that there is huge.. His word as if all the others are ..well kinda of Him .. He looked at it but mans hands are all over it. Lol.. yes my brother its been awhile.
But thinking I'm 64 walked with Him for ever 50+ years and He gave me verse I never read before and He quoted His word....just saying never once told me what translation to stay away from.. or only read. Yeah its odd how HE GOD can get around this. For me when He quotes something He said? Never once did I have to wonder what bible is that from? haha sorry I believe the OP means well
Blade, I agree with what you say, and even the KJV translators in the "To the Readers" state:
“…the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the King's speech, which he uttereth in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King's speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere.”
Yet, we have to use caution when translations become so influenced by culture. In 1946, the RSV was the first English translation to merge “malakos” and “arsenokoites” into one word or concept, that being homosexuality. The RSV Rev Ed removed the word “homosexuals” and those of the NCC have not used that word or concept since. Yet, the evangelical translations have continued to read the modern concept of homosexuality into the words “malakos” and “arsenokoite”.
There is another example of modern culture changing a translation of a verse other than 1 Cor. 6:9, and I’ll give an example from the NASB.
Exodus 21:22 NASB 1977 –
“And
if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a
miscarriage, yet there is no
further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges
decide.”
https://biblehub.com/nasb77/exodus/21.htm
Exodus 21:22 NASB 1995 –
“If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she
gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges
decide.”
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ex. 21:22&version=NASB1995
When the NASB translators saw Ex. 21:22 in light of the “right to life” battle since Roe vs Wade, they changed the reading from “miscarriage” to “gives birth prematurely”. It is not just the conservative side that does this to translations. The RSV changed “virgin” in Isa. 7:14 to “young woman”. The RSV also changed an important verse on the Deity of Jesus Christ from the OT –
“And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of compassion and supplication, so that,
when they look on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a first-born.” (Zech 12:10, RSV)
“And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and
they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.” (Zech 12:10, KJV)
I’m not picking on the Christian conservatives or the Christian liberals, but it is important to know that both of those persuasions will let culture battles influence the translation. YES, when you read the KJV “Translators to the Readers”, they admit to certain approaches used in the translation that can be questioned, but they tell you. Should the translation read "church" or "assembly"?
