Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
RE: What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?
March 4, 2018 at 1:28 pm
I think Huggy is fast asleep too. It's not a matter of "going back to the original Greek" when discussing the correctness of one manuscript over another. All the manuscripts are in Greek.
From what I gathered from the Got Questions article, translators used a certain Greek manuscript to make all different versions until very recently. They omitted the verses because archaeologists found an earlier, more credible manuscripts with the verses omitted. Because the KJV is an older translation, naturally, it is not going to be updated according to newly-found manuscripts.
Huggy, the online Greek version you are using could simply be from the less credible manuscripts.
RE: What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?
March 4, 2018 at 1:29 pm
Hey, I've been losing weight. The only interest the bible has for me is its age and curiosity surrounding its popularity. It is a relic but only useful for sleep and as door prop.
RE: What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?
March 4, 2018 at 1:41 pm
(March 4, 2018 at 1:28 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: I think Huggy is fast asleep too. It's not a matter of "going back to the original Greek" when discussing the correctness of one manuscript over another. All the manuscripts are in Greek.
From what I gathered from the Got Questions article, translators used a certain Greek manuscript to make all different versions until very recently. They omitted the verses because archaeologists found an earlier, more credible manuscripts with the verses omitted. Because the KJV is an older translation, naturally, it is not going to be updated according to newly-found manuscripts.
Huggy, the online Greek version you are using could simply be from the less credible manuscripts.
That's speculation as far as I'm concerned, I'll need to see evidence of the above.
It's my opinion that the translation of the NIV has less to do with manuscripts and more to do with copyrights.
RE: What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?
March 4, 2018 at 1:48 pm
(March 4, 2018 at 1:41 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: It's my opinion that the translation of the NIV has less to do with manuscripts and more to do with copyrights.
Could you elaborate? I don't have the vaguest idea what you mean.
RE: What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?
March 4, 2018 at 2:05 pm (This post was last modified: March 4, 2018 at 2:06 pm by Huggy Bear.)
(March 4, 2018 at 1:48 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote:
(March 4, 2018 at 1:41 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: It's my opinion that the translation of the NIV has less to do with manuscripts and more to do with copyrights.
Could you elaborate? I don't have the vaguest idea what you mean.
The KJV as well as others are under copyright, in order to copyright a new version of the bible it must be a unique translation...
RE: What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?
March 4, 2018 at 2:31 pm (This post was last modified: March 4, 2018 at 2:32 pm by vulcanlogician.)
(March 4, 2018 at 2:05 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:
(March 4, 2018 at 1:48 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: Could you elaborate? I don't have the vaguest idea what you mean.
The KJV as well as others are under copyright, in order to copyright a new version of the bible it must be a unique translation...
AFAIK, the KJV is not under copyright. After all, books written by people in the 19th century are all in the public domain. Seeing how the KJV was first drafted in 1611, it follows that anyone is free to reproduce the material.
Quote:For works published after 1977, the copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. However, if the work is a work for hire (that is, the work is done in the course of employment or has been specifically commissioned) or is published anonymously or under a pseudonym, the copyright lasts between 95 and 120 years, depending on the date the work is published.
All works published in the United States before 1923 are in the public domain. Works published after 1922, but before 1978 are protected for 95 years from the date of publication. If the work was created, but not published, before 1978, the copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. However, even if the author died over 70 years ago, the copyright in an unpublished work lasts until December 31, 2002. And if such a work is published before December 31, 2002, the copyright will last until December 31, 2047.
For relatively newer translations, copyrights may apply, but I would assume that any restrictions associated with the NIV or other translations would be waived by the publisher. It's the Bible after all. Copyright has nothing to do with this issue. I am certain of that.
The Got Questions article claims that the verses were removed were removed due to better manuscripts being found. I learned more about it here:
It looks like it is a matter of new manuscripts being found. Since we've ruled out copyrights, and the verses are too trivial to suggest that the conspiracy website I found was correct about the omissions, we can safely assume that the "better manuscript" explanation is plausible.
RE: What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?
March 4, 2018 at 2:35 pm
(March 4, 2018 at 2:31 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote:
(March 4, 2018 at 2:05 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The KJV as well as others are under copyright, in order to copyright a new version of the bible it must be a unique translation...
AFAIK, the KJV is not under copyright. After all, books written by people in the 19th century are all in the public domain. Seeing how the KJV was first drafted in 1611, it follows that anyone is free to reproduce the material.
Quote:For works published after 1977, the copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. However, if the work is a work for hire (that is, the work is done in the course of employment or has been specifically commissioned) or is published anonymously or under a pseudonym, the copyright lasts between 95 and 120 years, depending on the date the work is published.
All works published in the United States before 1923 are in the public domain. Works published after 1922, but before 1978 are protected for 95 years from the date of publication. If the work was created, but not published, before 1978, the copyright lasts for the life of the author plus 70 years. However, even if the author died over 70 years ago, the copyright in an unpublished work lasts until December 31, 2002. And if such a work is published before December 31, 2002, the copyright will last until December 31, 2047.
For relatively newer translations, copyrights may apply, but I would assume that any restrictions associated with the NIV or other translations would be waived by the publisher. It's the Bible after all. Copyright has nothing to do with this issue. I am certain of that.
The Got Questions article claims that the verses were removed were removed due to better manuscripts being found. I learned more about it here:
It looks like it is a matter of new manuscripts being found. Since we've ruled out copyrights, and the verses are too trivial to suggest that the conspiracy website I found was correct about the omissions, we can safely assume that the "better manuscript" explanation is plausible.
As always you live up to user name
Seek strength, not to be greater than my brother, but to fight my greatest enemy -- myself.
RE: What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?
March 4, 2018 at 2:41 pm (This post was last modified: March 4, 2018 at 2:44 pm by drfuzzy.)
(March 4, 2018 at 2:05 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:
(March 4, 2018 at 1:48 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote: Could you elaborate? I don't have the vaguest idea what you mean.
The KJV as well as others are under copyright, in order to copyright a new version of the bible it must be a unique translation...
I have studied copyright but never looked into the copyrights of various Bibles - never thought of it. But I did have to confirm this one - how can a book created by committee over 7 years, written in Elizabethan English, published in 1611 is still under copyright? But yes, the UK holds the copyright. That's pretty smart. Usually this would be impossible but I found a number of claims that it is under some sort of Royal Copyright. http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/kutilek_king_james_copy.htm Can anyone confirm/deny? I'm curious.
But there have been LOTS of new translations since the KJV. Wikipedia has an enormous list of partial and complete Bibles. A new translation from the Aramaic seemed like it might be fun to flip through, but that led to all sorts of sites debunking the Aramaic Primacy theory - the Aramaic texts do not pre-date the Greek ones. So thanks for sending me on a research run, that was fun.
"The family that prays together...is brainwashing their children."- Albert Einstein
RE: What beliefs would we consider reasonable for a self proclaimed Christian to hold?
March 4, 2018 at 2:46 pm (This post was last modified: March 4, 2018 at 3:29 pm by vulcanlogician.)
(March 4, 2018 at 2:41 pm)drfuzzy Wrote: I have studied copyright but never looked into the copyrights of various Bibles - never thought of it. But I did have to confirm this one - how can a book created by committee over 7 years, written in Elizabethan English, published in 1611 is still under copyright? But yes, the UK holds the copyright. That's pretty smart.
Wow, I stand corrected. Thanks, Fuzz.
Still, copyright has nothing to do with this, and, as all sources indicate, the omitted verses are still included in footnotes.
