Genesis 1 and 2: The Difference Between Created and Formed

While there are people who insist that the KJV is special (beyond any claims to literary merit), such a view really can't be rationally justified. It's not as if God is restricted to especially blessing one particular translation. As I understand it, technically, the KJV is not the best of translations, more modern translations had access to ancient texts discovered since the KJV was written - and are easier to understand because they are written in more modern English.I agree with the people here who say that using an English translation for the particular analysis you chooose is highly questionable. What if the choice were an arbitrary or stylistic choice made by the translator or translators ? Or if the Hebrew used more than two words ? The difference you are trying to find is to subtle to be reliably detected in translations.

The KJV had an influence, but that's purely literary. The fact is that there are no rational grounds for considering the KJV more accurate than the best modern translations (the NASB is the one I usually refer to). The fact that the language is sometimes difficult to understand makes it an even worse choice.

Why can't I say that the more modern translations can be at least as accurate and easier to understand than the KJV ?And can you explain why we should be using a translation for this discussion when we are talking about subtle differences that cannot be reliably discerned in even the best possible translation ?

quote:

---

What I said was, that if you think that you're English version is accurate, and it was influenced by the KJV, then you have to take the KJV as accurate also.

---

That doesn't have anything to do with what I said and it isn't true. Just because a translation follows the KJV at one point (say, because of the literary influence) doesn't mean that it can't be more accurate at another point.As for the idea that all translations are inerrant I guess you haven't seen any of the rants by the KJV-only crowd.

quote:

---

I haven't seen any language but English on this site anyway, so any complaints about using a Bible in our language are silly.

---

Most discussions don't try to look at such subtle differences. Generally the differences aren't important enough that we need to do the extra work (although there is considerable reference to Hebrew and even Greek in discussion of Isaiah 7:14). In this case it is silly not to at least refer to the Hebrew.

quote:

---

People ARE using subtle differences

---

Remember that we are talking about subtle differences in word choice. Something that has to be checked against the original language, to tell if it is the choice of the original author or the choice of the translator.

quote:

---

The whole concept that Gen. 1 and 2 are contradictory is based on the subtle difference that in the second chapter, when it overlaps the creation story, it changes the order in which it mentions man and beast.

---

That's neither subtle nor the sort of difference that actually requires referring to the original language. The only reason you'd need to refer to the original language in that case is if you were alleging an error in translation.