8
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 105:
Line 105: + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Conservative Bible Project (view source)
Revision as of 05:47, March 10, 2010
, 05:47, March 10, 2010→Why use KJV?: new section
I'm nearly done with Ecclesiastes but haven't gotten anyone to take a look at it, could someone go tell me what they think? --[[User:SamF|SamF]] 17:43, 20 January 2010 (EST)
I'm nearly done with Ecclesiastes but haven't gotten anyone to take a look at it, could someone go tell me what they think? --[[User:SamF|SamF]] 17:43, 20 January 2010 (EST)
:I'll be glad to. --[[User:ChrisY|ChrisY]] 17:57, 20 January 2010 (EST)
:I'll be glad to. --[[User:ChrisY|ChrisY]] 17:57, 20 January 2010 (EST)
== Why use KJV? ==
Im sure this was an earlier discussion, however why is it being on using the KJV as the baseline or comparator?
It seems that using a more literally accurate version as the baseline would be better, NASB for example.
And why not have charts comparing the most common versus between the most common versions to see the supposed liberal bias, exp. KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, CBP?
Also, what I am not clear on is why when it stated that original translation did not include a verse (exp. Father, forgive them, they no not what they do), why is the original translation not listed. And besides if some of these were true and in the oldest texts didn't include the stories or the verses then most translation would now have them bracketed (exp of Ethoiopian eunich being taken into the water to be baptized).