Well some things came up and I finally got the time to read through all the links. Thanks for posting.
Tyndale: He was killed because he pissed off Henry the 8th. Looking at this through modern eyes I don't think this invalidates his translations. I would assume that what would invalidate anything is the accuracy of the scriptures he translated from and his own ability to translate.
As for the KJV as a whole it looks like it can't be as accurate as many modern translations because of the limited number of texts and more specifically the limited number of old texts available at the time of the translation of the KJV. Oh, and political pressure....
Political Pressure: I agree that translating with the threat of royal disproval (and all the implications thereof) could skew things a bit. Thanks for pointing that out.
All in all, it looks like that modern translations could be more accurate but the inaccuracies for all translations leave serious room for doubt.
Bart Ehrman. What do you think of him? The wikipedia link was not very favorable. I read his book "forged" and thought it sounded ok, but this is not my field of expertise. Many Christians have jumped down his throat and supposedly won debates with him.
The wikipedia link said quote: But from where I sit, it seems that Bart’s black and white mentality as a fundamentalist has hardly been affected as he slogged through the years and trials of life and learning, even when he came out on the other side of the theological spectrum. He still sees things without sufficient nuancing, he overstates his case, and he is entrenched in the security that his own views are right. Bart Ehrman is one of the most brilliant and creative textual critics I’ve ever known, and yet his biases are so strong that, at times, he cannot even acknowledge them."
Is Bart Ehrman a scholar to be trusted or is there any validity to these accusations?
Tyndale: He was killed because he pissed off Henry the 8th. Looking at this through modern eyes I don't think this invalidates his translations. I would assume that what would invalidate anything is the accuracy of the scriptures he translated from and his own ability to translate.
As for the KJV as a whole it looks like it can't be as accurate as many modern translations because of the limited number of texts and more specifically the limited number of old texts available at the time of the translation of the KJV. Oh, and political pressure....
Political Pressure: I agree that translating with the threat of royal disproval (and all the implications thereof) could skew things a bit. Thanks for pointing that out.
All in all, it looks like that modern translations could be more accurate but the inaccuracies for all translations leave serious room for doubt.
Bart Ehrman. What do you think of him? The wikipedia link was not very favorable. I read his book "forged" and thought it sounded ok, but this is not my field of expertise. Many Christians have jumped down his throat and supposedly won debates with him.
The wikipedia link said quote: But from where I sit, it seems that Bart’s black and white mentality as a fundamentalist has hardly been affected as he slogged through the years and trials of life and learning, even when he came out on the other side of the theological spectrum. He still sees things without sufficient nuancing, he overstates his case, and he is entrenched in the security that his own views are right. Bart Ehrman is one of the most brilliant and creative textual critics I’ve ever known, and yet his biases are so strong that, at times, he cannot even acknowledge them."
Is Bart Ehrman a scholar to be trusted or is there any validity to these accusations?
I have studied the Bible and the theology behind Christianity for many years. I have been to many churches. I have walked the depth and the breadth of the religion and, as a result of this, I have a lot of bullshit to scrape off the bottom of my shoes. ~Ziploc Surprise
