From: Jerrel Sturdy (muskogeean44@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Aug 22 2001 - 18:29:29 EDT
<x-flowed>
>From: "Jerrel Sturdy" <muskogeean44@hotmail.com>
>To: muskogeean44@hotmail.com
>Subject: TEXTS, TRANSMISSION, TRANSLATIONS, ETC.--Keep
>Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:27:34 +0000
>
>
>
>
>From: "Jerrel Sturdy" <muskogeean44@hotmail.com>
>To: muskogeean44@hotmail.com
>Subject: TEXTS, TRANSMISSION, TRANSLATIONS, ETC.--Keep
>Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 22:10:30 +0000
>
>Even though the translation list is designed for translation
>matters, I wish to share these codes for anybody who would like to
>use them.  First, I want to list two sources that I have on printed
>paper.  Not off Internet at all.
>
>      Modern Textual Criticism and the Revival of the Textus
>Receptus. Gordon D. Fee.  Gordon D. Fee is associate professor of
>New Testament at Gordon-Cornwell Theological Seminary in South
>Hamilton, Massachusetts.  (He was when I received this work from my
>friend Wayne Jackson, preacher for East Main Street church of Christ
>in Stockton, California, in the early 1980s.  He may not be there
>now.)  I could copy that for someone on a limited-time basis if one
>would want to pay the cost of copying and postage.)
>
>      Matter of fact, the date was March 1978 and possibly was from
>the Journal of Biblical Literature.
>
>_____________________
>
>
>
>      Debate on KJV.  From Facts for Faith, Volume III, Number 10,
>October 1972.  Gordon Wilson, editor, now perhaps extant.  The
>proposition was:  "Is the King James Version nearest to the original
>autographs?"   David Otis Fuller, now deceased if memory serves me
>right affirmed it is.  My preacher friend Daniel King Sr. of
>Tennessee denied that.  It is printed and it has 11 pages.  I can
>copy it if somebody wants to pay for the cost of copying and
>postage.  Brother King undeniably showed that the KJV is not the
>best nor is the Textus Receptus the best.  Fuller did not even try
>to retort it.
>
>
>_____________________
>
>
>
>      I would like to quote from Page 103, "The Accuracy of the
>NIV,"  by Kenneth L. Barker.  Baker Book House Company, Grand
>Rapids, Michigan 49516.
>
>
>      "The writer heartily commends to today's minister a ministry
>of the word of God.
>
>
>      Study it diligently.
>
>      Believe it implicitly.
>
>
>      Obey it completely.
>
>
>      Expound it faithfully.
>
>
>      I would add now:  Translate it correctly, that is, with the
>best BALANCE between faithfulness to the original languages and
>faithfulness to the English language.  Such a balanced approach is
>the surest path to accuracy in translation." Amen.
>
>
>      What Mr. Barker wrote needs some consideration.  (J. S.)
>
>
>_________________
>
>
>      Now I would like to give some codes for some sources:
>
>
>
>      NIV. Translation comparison chart.
>
>      http://www.zondervan.com/NIVinfo.htm
>
>      The New International Version (NIV) Bible Fact Sheet.
>
>      http://www.zondervan.com/nivfact1.htm
>
>      History of the New International (NIV) Bible
>
>      http://www.zondervan.com/nivhist.htm
>
>      NIV Contributors.
>
>      http://www.zondervan.com/nivcont.htm
>
>      Were KJV Translators Inspired?  King James Version (KJV) ONLY?
>
>      http://www.bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm
>
>      (That one is extremely good.  J. S.)
>
>
>      Why Dean Burgon Would NOT Join "The Dean Burgon Society" by
>Gary R. Hudson.
>
>
>      http://members.aol.com/pilgrimpub/burgon.htm
>
>      (That is an very good one, too.  Get it!!!  J. S.)
>
>
>      Statement DK115.  Is Your Modern Translation Corrupt?
>Answering the Allegations of KJV Only Advocates.  By James R. White.
>  (Good one, too.  J. S.)
>
>
>      http://www.equip.org/free/DK115.htm
>
>      Probe Ministries.  The Debate Over the King James Version by
>Rick Wade.
>
>
>      http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/kjvdebat.html
>
>
>      IF ONE WANTS A MIGHTY FINE TRANSLATION, TRY THIS:
>
>
>      The Sacred Writings of the Apostles and Evangelists of Jesus
>Christ.  Commonly styled the New Testament Translated from the
>Original Greek by doctors George Campbell, James MacKnight and
>Philip Doddridge with Prefaces, Various Emandations and an Appendix.
>  Published under Alexander Campbell's leadership.  Fourth Edition.
>Bethany, Brooke County, Virginia.   (A very excellent work.  These
>guys took out all the ecclesiastical words as best they could.)
>
>
>
>http://www.mun.ca/rels/restmov/texts/acampbell/tlo4?TLO400A.HTM
>
>
>      This goes along with Living Oracles, the translation from
>above.  Table XIV.  Apostolic Words and Phrases.  Which have been
>subjects of controversy; alphabetically arranged and defined from
>their current acceptation in the "Christian" scriptures.
>
>
>
>http://www.mun.ca/rels/restnov/texts/acampbell/tlo4/TLO400LF.HTM
>
>      7Q5:  The Earliest NT Papyrus?  By Daniel B. Wallace PhD.
>Professor of New Testament Studies. Dallas Theological Seminary.
>Review of Carsten Peter Thiede, The Earliest Gospel Manuscript?
>
>
>      http://www.bible.org/docs/soapbox/7q5.htm
>
>      The Conspiracy Behind the New Bible Translations.  By Daniel
>B. Wallace, noted above.
>
>
>      http://www.bible.org/docs/soapbox/conspire.htm
>
>
>      The Majority Text and the Original Text:  Are They Identical?
>By Daniel B. Wallace, noted above.
>
>
>      http://www.bible.org/docs/soapbox/91b2.htm
>
>
>      Another Bible, Another Gospel. By Robert Barker.
>
>
>      http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/another.htm
>
>
>      Significant Textual Variants.  TR vs. MT.  By Gary F. Zoella.
>
>
>      http://www.org/versions/book/variants-tr-mt.htm
>
>      Errors in the Greek Text Behind Modern Translations?  The
>cases of Matthew 1:7, 10 and Luke 23:45.
>
>      http://www.bible.org/docs/soapbox/errors.htm
>
>      That one is by Daniel Wallace, too, noted above.
>
>
>      Errors and Mistranslations in the KJV.  Written by Richard
>Nickels.  "Why are there errors in the King James Version?"
>
>
>      http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/graphic1designer/errors.html
>
>
>      John 5:44.
>
>      http://www.genesisnetwork.net/business/consider/john544.htm
>
>      "Is the claim correct that many early translations and
>writings of the church fathers show they are in support of the
>Byzantine text?"  No author that I see.
>
>
>      wallace@bible.org/docs/q&a/q&a-151.htm">http://wallace@bible.org/docs/q&a/q&a-151.htm
>
>
>      (Must be Daniel Wallace.  J. S.)
>
>
>       The New American Standard Version!   Is this the Word of God?
>  (Must be by a KJV-only writer.  J. S.)
>
>
>      http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/sbs777/vital/kjv/nasv.html
>
>      The New International Version!   Is this the word of God?
>
>
>      http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk/sbs777/vital/kjv/niv.html
>
>
>      THE UPDATED NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE(c).   "The most
>literal is now more readable."  The Lockman Foundation.
>
>
>      http://www.gospelcom.net/lockman/trans/trans.htm
>
>
>
>
>      I have other sources of material on texts and translations,
>but these are on Internet or else I will copy two of them.  Sent in
>hope of edification only.  J. S.
>
>
>The APOSTOLIC WORD CODE DID NOT WORK, BUT THAT MAY BE IN WITH THE LIVING 
>ORACLES TRANSLATION AND THAT CODE DID WORK.  J. S.
>
>
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
###################################################################
Post messages to Bible-Translation@kastanet.org or Reply to any list message.
To unsubscribe, e-mail to Bible-Translation-unsubscribe@kastanet.org
For all other list options, including Digest, Index, or Null, e-mail to 
  Bible-Translation-confirm@kastanet.org and read the instructions 
  at the bottom of the message you receive.
List FAQ: http://www.geocities.com/bible_translation/files/btranfaq.txt
Message archives: https://mail.kastanet.org/Lists/Bible-Translation/List.html
Discussion list Files: http://www.geocities.com/bible_translation/files/list.htm
</x-flowed>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Feb 11 2002 - 18:40:37 EST