Wants list of Bible translation changes

[Christian Mormon]

I would like to find a website that has a list of the changes in the Bible translations. I would like to compare the changes to the doctrine in the New Testament

[Robert F. Smith]

On 6/30/2016 at 6:55 PM, Christian Mormon said:

I would like to find a website that has a list of the changes in the Bible translations. I would like to compare the changes to the doctrine in the New Testament

Not sure what you are requesting here.  Are you referring to the thousands of editorial changes in the KJV since it first came out in 1611, or are you referring to the variant readings in the Hebrew and Greek texts of the Bible?  Or are you referring to the changes found in the JST from the standard 1828 KJV which Joseph and Sidney used?  Or are you referring to the vast differences in the various English translations of the Bible in modern times? 

Edited July 4, 2016 by Robert F. Smith

[The Nehor]

People get doctorates in biblical studies without reading every variant version of the Bible. Good luck.

[theplains]

16 hours ago, Christian Mormon said:

I would like to find a website that has a list of the changes in the Bible translations. I would like to compare the changes to the doctrine in the New Testament

I would suggest you study the Greek manuscripts.  Its as close as you can get to the originals. 
Joseph Smith possibly saw the need to avoid another Kinderhook scandal, so the golden plates
were conveniently lost taken back to heaven.

Jim

[canard78]

4 minutes ago, theplains said:

I would suggest you study the Greek manuscripts.  Its as close as you can get to the originals. 
Joseph Smith possibly saw the need to avoid another Kinderhook scandal, so the golden plates
were conveniently lost taken back to heaven.

Jim

Fairly sure you've got your chronology mixed up Jim

[thesometimesaint]

On 7/1/2016 at 10:30 AM, canard78 said:

Fairly sure you've got your chronology mixed up Jim

By quite a few years.

[Freedom]

Not to mention the fact the these fake plates were never translated. Why is it that you have a need to fabricate problems with the restored gospel? Does it eat away at you so much that the church is true but you do not want to be a part of it? 

Back to the original post, there are numerous sites that compare various english translations of the bible. 

http://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-versions/

 

[ERMD]

I think you can google that which you seek.

 

[Brant Gardner]

On 6/30/2016 at 6:55 PM, Christian Mormon said:

I would like to find a website that has a list of the changes in the Bible translations. I would like to compare the changes to the doctrine in the New Testament

You might try Bart Ehrman. His The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture is the more scholarly, in depth study. His Misquoting Jesus is the same topic directed to a more general audience.

[cinepro]

On 6/30/2016 at 5:55 PM, Christian Mormon said:

I would like to find a website that has a list of the changes in the Bible translations. I would like to compare the changes to the doctrine in the New Testament

Are you thinking of something like this?

 

http://www.biblestudytools.com/compare-translations/

 

Here's Genesis 1:1:

http://www.biblestudytools.com/genesis/1-1-compare.html

 

 

[cinepro]

On 6/30/2016 at 5:55 PM, Christian Mormon said:

I would like to find a website that has a list of the changes in the Bible translations. I would like to compare the changes to the doctrine in the New Testament

But if you're looking for the changes that were made chronologically through the centuries as the Bible was transmitted from copy to copy, I don't know how many different versions there are to compare.  And from what I understand, the "changes" aren't nearly as drastic or supportive of LDS doctrine as some LDS claims might lead you to believe.  And many of the "changes" were actually additions that are commonly accepted by LDS today.

Most changes are inconsequential, the result of mere copying errors, or the replacement of a less common word for a more common word.

But others are more important. They meant something.

For example, the famous tale in John’s Gospel in which Jesus challenges a mob about to stone a woman accused of adultery — “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her” — is a variant that copyists began inserting into John at least 300 years after that Gospel first appeared.

In the conclusion to Mark, the description of Jesus appearing to various disciples after his resurrection does not appear in the earliest manuscripts.

And in Luke, the crucified Jesus’ plea that his executioners be forgiven “for they know not what they are doing” likewise does not appear in the earliest versions of his Gospel.

What’s at work here, Warren said, is that even after the 4th century church definitively settled on the books it accepted as divinely inspired accounts of the Christian vision, some of the texts within those books were still subject to slight changes — and some had already seen changes since being first published.

 

http://www.nola.com/religion/index.ssf/2011/03/changes_to_the_bible_through_the_ages_are_being_studied_by_new_orleans_scholars.html

 

Edited July 3, 2016 by cinepro

[maklelan]

On 6/30/2016 at 6:55 PM, Christian Mormon said:

I would like to find a website that has a list of the changes in the Bible translations. I would like to compare the changes to the doctrine in the New Testament

This won't work for a few different reasons. First, we don't have an original manuscript of any text of the Bible, and we're not even sure that there were any original manuscripts for many books of the Bible. What we have are literally tens of thousands of texts that have different versions of all the texts of the Bible, and we either pick one that's complete and agree we'll just go with what it says, or we try to cobble together what we believe are the earliest versions of each text. Old Testament manuscripts generally follow the former methodology, while New Testament manuscripts follow the latter. So if you're comparing the Dead Sea Scrolls to the Leningrad Codex, not only will you find thousands of variants between the different manuscripts of the same books within the Dead Sea Scroll collections, but you'll find thousands more between those manuscripts and the Leningrad Codex. The situation with New Testament manuscripts is similar, although the time separating the original composition of those texts and the earliest manuscripts we have of them is much shorter than that of the Old Testament. The various translations of those manuscripts use vastly disparate translation philosophies and make different choices about which manuscript to follow in places where the source text may be confusing or obviously mistaken, so it's not a question of "changes," but of different approaches to interpretation and translation. Next, once we decide on a source text, translators have to interpret it, and this leads invariably to numerous, numerous differences in understanding. We are separated from the language, culture, worldviews, and literary contexts of the original authors of the biblical texts by thousands of years. We can't understand what they meant precisely the way their contemporaries could. We can only hope to guess at an approximation. Additionally, "doctrine" is an interpretive lens we impose on the text, not something inherent to the text. If you try your absolute best to approximate the intended meaning of each individual author, editor, and redactor of the biblical texts (once you've figured out how to separate out their contributions), you're going to be left with numerous different ideological points of view in the texts that are aiming at numerous different rhetorical goals. Trying to extrapolate doctrine from that pluriform and often contradictory collection of viewpoints will do nothing but cause headaches. Doctrine does not come from scriptures, it comes from the ongoing negotiation of the sacred past with the exigencies of the present. Scripture is just the authority upon which that doctrine is asserted. 

[Calm]

8 hours ago, maklelan said:

Doctrine does not come from scriptures, it comes from the ongoing negotiation of the sacred past with the exigencies of the present. Scripture is just the authority upon which that doctrine is asserted. 

You reallyneed to post more. 

You have a very effective way of explaining things with touches of beauty.