Jump to content

John 5:4 and other verses missing from certain Translations


jhancock61

Recommended Posts

I know that there are about 20 verses that are missing from many of the modern translations. What is the reasoning for this? To leave out a verse completely seems to alter the Word of God. I am interested in getting all the Accordance Bible Scholars reasoning for these omissions. To my surprise, when I checked the KJV within Accordance, I found many of these same verses missing. I have been very vigilant in trying to use different translations to get different perspectives on certain verses in the Scriptures. It does concern me that verses have been completely left out. If any of you can enlighten me on this issue, it will be much appreciated.

 

Thanks a bunch!

Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what you're seeing is somewhat of a longstanding misunderstanding on how Accordance displays parallel versions. The key here is to identify which text is your "search text." (see the Help article here on selecting the Search Text; if on Windows search or navigate in the help to "Perform a Basic Search")

 

If the KJV is your search text it will indeed display John 5.4 in the KJV pane below. If the ESV is your search text, it will not display John 5.4 in the KJV when it is open in a parallel pane because it is designed only to display verses that are in parallel. See these shots

 

post-5629-0-77303200-1405686416_thumb.png

 

post-5629-0-76579300-1405686426_thumb.png

 

Let me know if this helps explain what you're experiencing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh! Makes sense. The verses displayed in Accordance is dictated by whether I initiate a stand alone Bible text or I initiate a parallel work space with the initial version for example ESV does not contain John 5:4. In this case all other versions added to this parallel will not display John 5:4 since the ESV does not, and was the first version displayed. If I first open a translation that does contain this verse, all versions added to the parallel work space will display the verse, provided it contains the verse. I hope that is clear as mud.

 

Thanks for the explanation!

Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that there are about 20 verses that are missing from many of the modern translations. What is the reasoning for this? To leave out a verse completely seems to alter the Word of God. I am interested in getting all the Accordance Bible Scholars reasoning for these omissions.

 

I'm not a scholar, but this is a discussion I'm familiar with having grown up in KJV-only circles. Those who are most familiar with the KJV sometimes ask why modern versions leave the verses out, but that's only one perspective. The other possibility is that the older versions ADDED the verses. The real question is whether or not these verses were originally part of the Bible in the first place, and this is the realm of textual criticism. "Textual criticism" doesn't mean that the people studying this issue are liberal or critical of the Bible; it means that they carefully evaluate all of the evidence, such as the number and age of the Greek/Hebrew manuscripts, the tendencies of the scribes who had the job of copying the manuscripts, and the possible reasons for where the differences came from. There are numerous places you can find discussions of that question, some more civil than others. One very helpful resource that I found when studying this question was James White's book "The KJV-Only Controversy". http://www.amazon.com/The-King-James-Only-Controversy/dp/0764206052

 

A shorter discussion of the subject can be found here https://bible.org/article/why-i-do-not-think-king-james-bible-best-translation-available-today, an article by Daniel Wallace, who studies this subject and is leading an effort to digitally preserve the old Greek manuscripts.

 

I hope this helps. If I've misunderstood your question, please feel free to say so.

Edited by JonathanHuber
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Jonathan for the very informative answer and resources! Exactly what I was looking for concerning this issue. I have long struggled to explain this issue with others. Rick also clarified what was going on within Accordance because I was puzzled as to why Accordance was not displaying certain verses I knew were in some of the different texts. Being a fairly new user, it hadn't registered with me that if I would just bring them up as separate texts instead of parallel, it would solve my problem. I will take a look at the resources you provided.

 

Thanks again!

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm not a scholar, but this is a discussion I'm familiar with having grown up in KJV-only circles. Those who are most familiar with the KJV sometimes ask why modern versions leave the verses out, but that's only one perspective. The other possibility is that the older versions ADDED the verses. The real question is whether or not these verses were originally part of the Bible in the first place, and this is the realm of textual criticism. "Textual criticism" doesn't mean that the people studying this issue are liberal or critical of the Bible; it means that they carefully evaluate all of the evidence, such as the number and age of the Greek/Hebrew manuscripts, the tendencies of the scribes who had the job of copying the manuscripts, and the possible reasons for where the differences came from. There are numerous places you can find discussions of that question, some more civil than others. One very helpful resource that I found when studying this question was James White's book "The KJV-Only Controversy". http://www.amazon.com/The-King-James-Only-Controversy/dp/0764206052

 

A shorter discussion of the subject can be found here https://bible.org/article/why-i-do-not-think-king-james-bible-best-translation-available-today, an article by Daniel Wallace, who studies this subject and is leading an effort to digitally preserve the old Greek manuscripts.

 

I hope this helps. If I've misunderstood your question, please feel free to say so.

 

For the NT I suggest strongly this book available in Accordance: http://www.accordancebible.com/store/details/?pid=Comfort+Text+Commentary

OUTSTANDING

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jonathan,

 

Thank you so much for the helpful synopsis from bible.org. I suspect it will prove valuable to me to pass on to others who are looking for a brief introduction to the subject.

 

Thanks,

John

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a suggestion.

 

I brought this same issue previously. I do understand the why that Accordance chooses to display it the way it is. But, if I may suggest a different way that helps those of us that do not have the seminary background and are not up to date on all the translation details.

 

For example, using John 5:3-5 as an example where verse 4 is omitted in some translations.

 

If I choose ESVS as the search Bible and display John 5:3-5 it won't have verse 4 which is fine. But if I add KJV as a parallel Bible it won't show 5:4 although it has. The KJV does have 5:4 and should be display.

 

Yes, I do understand this is the way Accordance have chosen to do it and I know you have your reasons for it. I know that what is displaying is a comparison of the text is common to the Bibles in Parallel. I have no problem with that.

 

May I suggest an alternative? What about giving me options? I am not saying the Accordance way is bad. I think is fine. I just would like options.

 

I would like to have the option to see it as image #1 (in addition to the accepted Accordance way). This allows me to see and read what is not included by the other translations. In the Accordance only way I would have to open a different zone with that Bible to see how the Bible that includes the verse says.

 

Also, implementing something like in image #2 would be great too to graphically and quickly see the differences.

 

To be honest, when I do parallel comparison between Bibles I switch to Logos just for this reason. I would love having options so I do not have to go someplace else.

post-32482-0-00097800-1405699926_thumb.jpg

post-32482-0-78776300-1405699928_thumb.jpg

Edited by davidmedina
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

One very helpful resource that I found when studying this question was James White's book "The KJV-Only Controversy". http://www.amazon.com/The-King-James-Only-Controversy/dp/0764206052

 

 

I'd like to second Jonathan's recommendation. I read the first edition of Dr. White's book nearly 20 years ago. I just finished reading the 2nd edition, checking out what he says in the various Greek apparatus and texts, and adding the info to my Accordance User Notes as I went along. His book is very well-written. I particularly appreciate his tone. He doesn't bash anyone or anything. He presents the facts and does do in a very organized and easy to understand fashion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adding to Juli and Jonathan recommendations, Dr. J recommended to me the Comfort Text commentary which has a great a great discussion too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer Carson's "The King James Version debate". A lively read, and well argued (as most of Don's stuff is).

Available as a Kindle book as well

 

Carson, D A. The King James Version Debate : A Plea for Realism. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979 ISBN:9780801024276

 

Available on amazon at http://www.amazon.com/The-King-James-Version-Debate/dp/0801024277/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1405827744&sr=8-1&keywords=Carson+King+James

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Ken for the recommendation. I am reading Carson now and it is very interesting. I knew of the debate but never clearly understood it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glad you're finding it interesting David, I found it fascinating the first time I read it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To bring a little balance of reading material, personally my favorite is Dr. D. A. Waite on the subject of Textual History and NT texts. http://www.theoldpathspublications.com/Pages/Authors/Waite.htm#Defend You can find several of his books there. He is a modern day scholar in languages. He has a lot of information on his web site as well: http://www.biblefortoday.org/variants_letter.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To bring a little balance of reading material, personally my favorite is Dr. D. A. Waite on the subject of Textual History and NT texts. http://www.theoldpathspublications.com/Pages/Authors/Waite.htm#Defend You can find several of his books there. He is a modern day scholar in languages. He has a lot of information on his web site as well: http://www.biblefortoday.org/variants_letter.htm

 

If by "balance" you mean someone who will argue for KJV-onlyism, then you're right that James White and Don Carson both disagree with that position. However, neither of these men or their books could be criticized as being unfair. Both of these men work very hard to make sure they understand the other side and represent it accurately and fairly. They do not attack straw men. They also rightly give the KJV the credit it deserves for its important place in the history of english translations. In fact, their presentations are much kinder, fairer and more balanced than any of the KJV-only arguments I have ever encountered.

Edited by JonathanHuber
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just finished D A. Carson book "The King James Version Debate : A Plea for Realism".

 

Great book, well explained and argued. Like Jonathan said, he was very fair and respectful of all position. In no way he demean the KJV but praises the accomplishment that it is.

 

I learned quite a bit about the translation process and I have even greater respect for translators and great appreciation for all the translations we currently have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amen David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...