Putting to Test the Recovery Version

[JJ]

Originally Posted by testallthings

Mat. 3:2 “And Saying, Repent for the kingdom of the heavens has drawn near.” (RcV)

It is very interesting that John the Baptist didn't have to explain what the kingdom of the heavens was. That means that every Jew understood what he meant. The Lord Jesus was the son of David, the King of the Jews (2:2; “THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS.” 27:37; “...and the Lord God will give to Him the throne of David His father. And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.” Luke 1:32-33). The Lord Jesus came to establish the Messianic kingdom promised to David, of which every Jew knew very well.

Let's come to footnote 2.2 and 2.3. In the first one the RcV says that the kingdom of the heavens is different from the Messianic kingdom. In the second, that according to Mat. 16:18-19 “the terms church and kingdom of the heavens are used interchangeably.” If these things were true, than we should expect John the Baptist, the Lord Jesus, and the apostles to clearly tell the Jews that their were mistaken in expecting a literal kingdom to be established according to what God promised in the O.T.. Concerning the word church it should be noticed that in the O.T. there was a church. Act 7:38 “This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us” (K.J.V.) Why the RcV doesn't use the word church in this verse?

The RcV draws a parallel between church and kingdom of the heavens because the two terms happen to be in the same context. Let's see how the same interprets these two verses. Mat 19:23: "Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." (K.J.V.) It is actually here there the two terms are interchangeable and not in Mat. 16:18-19! Footnote 24.2 makes a distinction between these two terms, but its position is not defensible. Why the double standard in finding synonyms, we might ask?

But, let's assume for a moment that church and kingdom of the heavens mean the same thing and read Mat. 3:2 again: “And Saying, Repent for the church has drawn near.” How does this verse sounds now? The church is coming! Therefore repent! This doesn't sound very scary. After all isn't the church, as the Body of Christ, living in the age of grace? This is absurd. John was telling the Jews that the wrath was coming! The axe was laid at the root of the trees. That Messiah would thoroughly cleanse His threshing floor and burn the chaff with unquenchable fire. (Mat. 3:7-12). That's why he was urging the people to repent and be baptized.

Witness Lee didn't equate the term "the Kingdom of the Heavens" to just to the church (see his chart after Matthew 5:4 in Recovery Version), it includes the church and the Millennium age with the Messianic Kingdom within it.

[testallthings]

Originally Posted by JJ

Witness Lee didn't equate the term "the Kingdom of the Heavens" to just to the church (see his chart after Matthew 5:4 in Recovery Version), it includes the church and the Millennium age with the Messianic Kingdom within it.

Sure. I was limiting my comment only on footnotes 2.2 and 2.3 of Mat. 3:2.

[testallthings]

If anyone is interested in the history of English Bible Translation here is a nice site. If you have time try to find in the preface of so many Bible one that come close to the claims of the RcV.

http://www.bible-researcher.com/versions.html

About Darby and his translation the author of the website writes,

"Darby did not feel such a need for a new translation in English, because he considered the King James Version to be adequate for most purposes, and he encouraged his followers to continue to use it. But, he decided to produce a highly literal English version of the New Testament for study purposes."

http://www.bible-researcher.com/darby.html

[testallthings]

"Much is said in favour of a literal translation. But in many cases this makes no sense whatever, and would sometimes make nonsense. What is wanted is an idiomatic version: i.e., the exact reproduction, not of the words, but of the thought and meaning of the phrase. It is in this that the difference is seen between the Authorized Version and the Revised. The former is a Version, while the latter is a translation. Hence the A.V. [Note: The Authorized Version, or current Text of our English Bible, 1611.] is English, while the RV; often is not.

This refers to words as well as to phrases. To bring the matter home, imagine an Englishman and an American translating from the French:-Gare, the one would render "Station," and the other "Depôt": Wagon de marchandises would be in English "Goods-Truck"; and in America, "Freight Car": Bureau (de billets) would be "Booking Office" and "Ticket Office" respectively; En Voiture would be, in English, "Take your seats": and in America, "All aboard."" E.W.Bullinger

http://www.studylight.org/lexicons/fos/view.cgi?n=123


Dr. Bullinger Figures of Speech Used in the Bible can be downloaded from this site, which both I highly recommend. It is number 42.

http://www.charleswelch.net/books.htm