Version Smursions?!

[LightTheWay]

Hello everybody! So glad to be here and have the freedom to express my mind!

i intend not to offend anybody at all but to just share my viewpoint on versions of the bible and share how i have come to my stance on it now. I am still learning and open and eager to hear what Ya'll have to say so please feel free to voice your opinion too!


I guess i will just share a little story that happened recently. So, one day at school, my extremely intellectual teacher (with a good heart but disbelief in God) says hey audrey, i was cleaning my old bookshelf the other day and found a book and thought of you... and how much that book would offend you. So i asked why it would have offended me and he said it was basically a guy who talks about all the translations of the bible and how it lost its credibility and meaning than its original intent. I kinda just had to giggle and say that it doesnt offend me at all and that i agree that the translations from hebrew to greek has definitely watered down the meaning because of the language differences but i still believe that the word of God will speak. i find it silly to think that God will cease to speak to us over mere translations. However i do respectully agree that we must discern and test all things. I am not exactly sure where in the word it warns that the sacred texts will be altered but that is not my point. my point of view on all these translations is that i believe the word is living and will speak for itself if it is truly the word of God. And that we know it is the word of God if it does not contradict Gods character and the discernment from the Holy Spirit.

Two years ago i was 15 and trying to learn more in my faith. i had then gotten the mind set the only credible bible to read from was the King James Version. My decision on this spurred off of a youtube video and friend with the same mindset (this friend also holds the mindset that all churches lead christians astray and therefore does not go to church for felllowship or the message/ i do not pose this view on church though and attend and grow at church but anyways..) i somehow gotten lost in the legalisticality of it all. But i just started reading my NIV version because it was easier to understand. God still spoke to me and gave me revelation when i wasnt reading from the KJV but i began to look up the hebrew meanings and reading the word with more historical background and cultural stances to better understand them. even reading with a westernized biased led to some profound revelation. the important thing was that i was seeking Gods face and hearing his voice through the Holy Spirit.

What is the right version? To me, the right version is the version that speaks the truth to your heart. with discernment of course, but i guess what i am saying is it does not matter what version what matters is are you being fed the word of God? are you hearing from Him? are you growing closer to Him? we get so caught up in the miniscule details that what we lose the sight of the thing that maters most which is our relationship and growing with God.

I hear they are making a pigeon version of the gospel where they refer to people in the slang of the language.. i may still be indifferent about this because supposedly they refer to God as the Brothah Man upstairs?? and to most that may be disrespectful to call God that, but i see that if somebody who speaks pigeon can find God because of this version and give his life to serve God, then praise be to God! God uses all evil for good right.

I know many friends who read the KJV and even the NIV and stop reading the word because its just too hard for them to understand and to some its like wow how do you not understand that? but thats wrong to judge and so if they need another version to speak to them then i do not see why it is so bad..

I do wish we could all grasp the truest deepest meaning of all the parables and words but to me in this world what speaks God into your life and produces fruit is what matters.

So keep reading and keep discerning/testing and Seeking Gods Face! HIs voice is not to just be heard but obeyed.


respectfully, Feed yourselves the Living Word! Do not starve

 

[Born_Again]

Wow, so that is interesting....... I personally read the NIV. I was raised on it. Looking between the KJV and the NIV what I feel you need to understand is that is was about when they were translated. Obviously the KJ was translated for their time. So the NIV, which teaches all the same things, is just broke down more to plain English. I would recommend for you the NLT version which came out in the last 10 years. The important thing is to study the Word. I would recommend reading more than one version. Study, study, study. Then pick which one is the best for you. Clear as mud????

 

[Johnlove]

[SIZE=16pt](1 John 2: 27) “But you have not lost the anointing that he gave you, and you do not need anyone to teach you; the anointing he gave teaches you everything: you are anointed with truth, not with a lie, and as it has taught you, so you must stay in him.” [/SIZE]

[SIZE=16pt]Only believe what is written in one’s version of the Christian Bible, if the Holy Spirit tells you it is right.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=16pt]There is only one way to come to the truth. Only God can teach him or her to know God.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=16pt]For me I believe what Jesus told me. Jesus told me that the Christian bible is his written Word. So for me what is written is what God wanted people to read.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=16pt]I also believe one can come to a true understanding of God’s Word, only if he or she allows God to bring him or her to that understanding.[/SIZE]

 

[Wormwood]

I disagree that modern translations are "watered down" versions of the Greek and Hebrew. Language is communication. If your assertion is that modern translations communicate the Greek in Hebrew in a way that loses emphasis or the significance of words, I would say you are mistaken. Of course, there is no 1 to 1 exact way to communicate a Greek or Hebrew word or phrase into an English word or phrase. However, translators work to make sure that the message that was being portrayed in the Greek or Hebrew is accurately communicated in the English. Some translations do this more through a word to word type translations, while others employ more of a phrase by phrase translation. Some, are really loose translations that are not very good at communicating what was being depicted in the original. Others, are problematic because they are trying to address gender issues and egalitarianism in their translations (which was not a concern for the authors of the Bible). Some translations use the best manuscript evidence available while others do not use as reliable of manuscript evidence.

I suggest that if someone is looking for a translation that most closely reflects a word-for-word translation of the Greek NT, the ESV or NASV would be the best choices. The KJV is a good translation, was not developed with very good manuscript evidence, as well as the ancient English can be confusing to modern readers. I would not recommend the newer NIV (NIV84 is good) translations as they are tainted with an egalitarian bent in the translation.

 

[LightTheWay]

Wow, so that is interesting....... I personally read the NIV. I was raised on it. Looking between the KJV and the NIV what I feel you need to understand is that is was about when they were translated. Obviously the KJ was translated for their time. So the NIV, which teaches all the same things, is just broke down more to plain English. I would recommend for you the NLT version which came out in the last 10 years. The important thing is to study the Word. I would recommend reading more than one version. Study, study, study. Then pick which one is the best for you. Clear as mud????

Born_Again, thank you for your input! i too recomend reading more than one version. I like the amplified version though i mostly read from NIV and KJV.

[SIZE=16pt](1 John 2: 27) “But you have not lost the anointing that he gave you, and you do not need anyone to teach you; the anointing he gave teaches you everything: you are anointed with truth, not with a lie, and as it has taught you, so you must stay in him.” [/SIZE]

[SIZE=16pt]Only believe what is written in one’s version of the Christian Bible, if the Holy Spirit tells you it is right.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=16pt]There is only one way to come to the truth. Only God can teach him or her to know God.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=16pt]For me I believe what Jesus told me. Jesus told me that the Christian bible is his written Word. So for me what is written is what God wanted people to read.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=16pt]I also believe one can come to a true understanding of God’s Word, only if he or she allows God to bring him or her to that understanding.[/SIZE]

JohnLove, thank you for that scripture! Yes it is very important that the revalation and understand come from God.

I find knowledge and understanding so great. i feel that i can understand certain things without necessarily knowing all the details.. if that makes any sense.

I disagree that modern translations are "watered down" versions of the Greek and Hebrew. Language is communication. If your assertion is that modern translations communicate the Greek in Hebrew in a way that loses emphasis or the significance of words, I would say you are mistaken. Of course, there is no 1 to 1 exact way to communicate a Greek or Hebrew word or phrase into an English word or phrase. However, translators work to make sure that the message that was being portrayed in the Greek or Hebrew is accurately communicated in the English. Some translations do this more through a word to word type translations, while others employ more of a phrase by phrase translation. Some, are really loose translations that are not very good at communicating what was being depicted in the original. Others, are problematic because they are trying to address gender issues and egalitarianism in their translations (which was not a concern for the authors of the Bible). Some translations use the best manuscript evidence available while others do not use as reliable of manuscript evidence.

I suggest that if someone is looking for a translation that most closely reflects a word-for-word translation of the Greek NT, the ESV or NASV would be the best choices. The KJV is a good translation, was not developed with very good manuscript evidence, as well as the ancient English can be confusing to modern readers. I would not recommend the newer NIV (NIV84 is good) translations as they are tainted with an egalitarian bent in the translation.

Hi Wormwood, thank you for replying. Um i dont mean that they loose their significance in the means of the words translated, but in the means of which the words are percieved without knowledge and understanding of the culture and meanings of the Hebrew language. But thank you for addressing the gender issues and egalitarianism that may hinder some from reading the translations that do emphasize that.

 

[Wormwood]

Yes, I agree that we should understand the early culture and setting of the writing to properly interpret the verses we are considering. This is why I think Johnlove continually misuses 1 John 2:27. This verse is NOT suggesting that teachers are unnecessary and it is no support for Western individualistic spirituality that divorces itself from the local church and accountability. The context of this letter is dealing with false teachers who were likely teaching early forms of Gnosticism. Gnostics claimed they had special knowledge (gnosis) by which they could enter heaven. They claimed that the Christ came to give them special knowledge and the only way to receive that knowledge was joining them. John is saying that you do not need special knowledge or hidden information that these false teachers claimed they had. We have the Holy Spirit and our belonging is because of His presence in our lives and not the result of insider knowledge.

God has given some the gift to be teachers and it is essential to be part of a functional local church body to serve, grow and learn from others. This verse is not justification to be a spiritual Rambo who has no accountability or needs no help from others. To argue as much puts this verse in conflict with many other verses that make clear that God gives the church teachers for the sake of building up the body and that we are baptized into a body and should not give up meeting together.

 

[FHII]

I've expressed this point of view MANY times before when the subject of "which version" comes up, and will do so again. I really think it's important enough to do so.

I'm KJV through and through. It's the only version I stick with and quote from unless I'm dealing with someone who is using another version in a debate. Then, I might go to their version just so I can make the points needed without starting a side argument on Bible versions. For the record, I'm not in any way intimitated by the "ancient" english of the KJV and I often wonder if this truly is a legitimate arguement against the KJV.

However, to me its not only picking the right version (there are some I absolutely refuse to follow), but it is also sticking with it when things get rough for you (or me) when it comes to doctrine. I don't want to debate Bible versions here, but rather speak about the importance of chosing ONE and staying with it. In other words, if you start with the KJV, then stick with it to the end. If you start with the NIV, stick with it to the end. If it's too much, then switch, but switch totally.

What I don't like is people who switch versions frequently, and more to the point: when their chosen version contradicts their doctrine. We should make our doctrine line up with the Bible (whatever version it may be) and not try to construct a Bible that lines up with our doctrine. Believe it or not, I've seen this MANY times! People will love the KJV until they read a verse they don't agree with. Then, they'll search high and low to find a Bible that words it slightly different and makes it agreeable to their beliefs. Now, somewhere down the line, they'll again dump their newfound love (newfound Bible version) when IT doesn't line up with their beliefs.

I call this practice "Bible jumping" and I detest it. It ultimately leads to people picking and chosing which scripture they want to believe, and if they don't like it.... they go elsewhere. Hey, do you like the Apostle Paul? Then sit under him! That guy will get you saved! Or do you like Peter? Well, he's different from Paul and he'll get you saved too! But don't leave Paul when he starts preaching something you don't like and then run to Peter. Only to return to Paul when Peter ticks you off too! See my point?

I absolutely don't mind looking at other versions to see what they say. I do it too. My point is don't throw off on a Bible version simply because you don't like what it says. Reason being, your new found version with agees with you on a point is going to offend your flesh later. So you'll go to and fro in Bible versions until you come up with a version that fits YOUR beliefs. That ain't learning. That's manipulating the Word.

 

[Wormwood]

FHII,

I would disagree with your comment on "Bible jumping." I think it is wise to have multiple versions. Multiple versions can be helpful in understanding a range of ways various translations approach a text. Moreover, in some places I like how the NIV84 translates a passage, while in other places I think the ESV or another version I find to be more accurate. Also, the fact of the matter is that some translations are bent toward a particular theological construct. If it seems to me that the translators are allowing their presuppositions that I disagree with to shape a translation, then I think it is appropriate to refer to a translation that translates the passage more in accordance with the reader's understanding. I see no issue with this as long as someone is not rejecting a clear and straight-forward translation of a passage.

 

[LightTheWay]

I've expressed this point of view MANY times before when the subject of "which version" comes up, and will do so again. I really think it's important enough to do so.

I'm KJV through and through. It's the only version I stick with and quote from unless I'm dealing with someone who is using another version in a debate. Then, I might go to their version just so I can make the points needed without starting a side argument on Bible versions. For the record, I'm not in any way intimitated by the "ancient" english of the KJV and I often wonder if this truly is a legitimate arguement against the KJV.

However, to me its not only picking the right version (there are some I absolutely refuse to follow), but it is also sticking with it when things get rough for you (or me) when it comes to doctrine. I don't want to debate Bible versions here, but rather speak about the importance of chosing ONE and staying with it. In other words, if you start with the KJV, then stick with it to the end. If you start with the NIV, stick with it to the end. If it's too much, then switch, but switch totally.

What I don't like is people who switch versions frequently, and more to the point: when their chosen version contradicts their doctrine. We should make our doctrine line up with the Bible (whatever version it may be) and not try to construct a Bible that lines up with our doctrine. Believe it or not, I've seen this MANY times! People will love the KJV until they read a verse they don't agree with. Then, they'll search high and low to find a Bible that words it slightly different and makes it agreeable to their beliefs. Now, somewhere down the line, they'll again dump their newfound love (newfound Bible version) when IT doesn't line up with their beliefs.

I call this practice "Bible jumping" and I detest it. It ultimately leads to people picking and chosing which scripture they want to believe, and if they don't like it.... they go elsewhere. Hey, do you like the Apostle Paul? Then sit under him! That guy will get you saved! Or do you like Peter? Well, he's different from Paul and he'll get you saved too! But don't leave Paul when he starts preaching something you don't like and then run to Peter. Only to return to Paul when Peter ticks you off too! See my point?

I absolutely don't mind looking at other versions to see what they say. I do it too. My point is don't throw off on a Bible version simply because you don't like what it says. Reason being, your new found version with agees with you on a point is going to offend your flesh later. So you'll go to and fro in Bible versions until you come up with a version that fits YOUR beliefs. That ain't learning. That's manipulating the Word.

Hi FHII, Thank you for sharing your opinion! I do see what you mean with the Peter and Paul example and it reminds me of Church hoping and how people hop from church to church when a pastor or church member offends them. However I would have to agree with Wormwoods reply above. To me, i do not stick to a particular version, i stick to God's Word. The amazing thing is that God's Word is the Living Word and it will speak to me in ways that blow my mind. Some verses may say something to me this moment and speak to me again in a different light. Im not talking about historical stuff, but things that God could speak to my heart that im dealing with at the current moment. Anyways I find it helpful to grow my understanding of the word when i look at it in different versions and interpretations to discern and see how they portray it. I believe we shouldnt even ever be looking to the word to justify our agenda, so if somebody is looking to versions to go along with that they like as you stated above, i do too believe that is wrong. Overall i think thats not the point because to me that goes under ones motives for even going to the word in the first place. In my view, if you want to seek God, then seek Him and whatever version speaks to you clearly go ahead and make that be the one you go to first but it does not hurt to look at others. As long as you discern and follow the leading of the Holy Spirit. I think the most important thing is that people grow closer to God and that he use them, but how can they grow closer if they dont understand what theyre reading. I know that is not your point, your point i percieve is that you should not look to versions to justify your beliefs. However i would point out that youre not wrong to look at multiple versions. Like you mentioned above, Paul is great and will get you saved and though Paul is different, he will get you saved too. God Bless!

 

[Born_Again]

Hi FHII, Thank you for sharing your opinion! I do see what you mean with the Peter and Paul example and it reminds me of Church hoping and how people hop from church to church when a pastor or church member offends them. However I would have to agree with Wormwoods reply above. To me, i do not stick to a particular version, i stick to God's Word. The amazing thing is that God's Word is the Living Word and it will speak to me in ways that blow my mind. Some verses may say something to me this moment and speak to me again in a different light. Im not talking about historical stuff, but things that God could speak to my heart that im dealing with at the current moment. Anyways I find it helpful to grow my understanding of the word when i look at it in different versions and interpretations to discern and see how they portray it. I believe we shouldnt even ever be looking to the word to justify our agenda, so if somebody is looking to versions to go along with that they like as you stated above, i do too believe that is wrong. Overall i think thats not the point because to me that goes under ones motives for even going to the word in the first place. In my view, if you want to seek God, then seek Him and whatever version speaks to you clearly go ahead and make that be the one you go to first but it does not hurt to look at others. As long as you discern and follow the leading of the Holy Spirit. I think the most important thing is that people grow closer to God and that he use them, but how can they grow closer if they dont understand what theyre reading. I know that is not your point, your point i percieve is that you should not look to versions to justify your beliefs. However i would point out that youre not wrong to look at multiple versions. Like you mentioned above, Paul is great and will get you saved and though Paul is different, he will get you saved too. God Bless!

I have multiple versions of the Bible. It is interesting to sit down with them sided by side and see where the differences are. I was raised with the NIV. One of my most interesting comparisons is the KJV to the NLT. I personally do not like the NLT because I feel it's too dumbed down and I fully expect it say "Jesus rode in on his skateboard, pulled triple 180 and the crowd cheered for He is bodacious. That is strictly my opinion. I fear that the more we simply the Bible the further from the Word it will be. That is why it is important to study all aspects of the Word and know it!!

 

[HammerStone]

There is a ton that goes into all of this, but just a couple quick points.

I get myself into trouble a bit here, but let me remark that I number the NLT, NRSV and RSV among my core 6-7 translations I refer to when I am trying to study the Bible. In fact, I like the NRSV for the most part as what the ESV could have been. The NLT will grate on my nerves sometimes with phrases like "personal assistant" in place of armor bearer, but I do understand the purpose behind the choice. I feel like I say this way too much, but just let me state that I am an English major, and I learned a good deal about linguistics and how language changes in college.

I know some of the key passages get a little muddled, but start listening to how we deal with 2nd person plurals on a daily basis and you will quickly hear that most use they/they're in this role. I think sometimes the gender issue is overdone on both sides, as promises of the Bible do include women and our modern audience is keyed to understand man as gender specific. (I'm thinking Austin Powers: "She's a man, baby!" - we don't stop to ponder if Austin meant she was of the human race or whether she had certain male features, do we?)

My biggest rub is Isaiah 7:14 - but on the same token, I am not sure we've thought through the idea of having two virgin births in the Bible! I believe it was understood in the OT as "young maiden/woman" and then understood in ultimate fulfillment as Jesus Christ, son of the Virgin Mary.

Regardless, there are only a few bad translations out there like the one done by the Jehovah's Witnesses. Modern versions are not watered down, they are simply going where the language is going. Yes, we have lost some forms of expression, but we've also gained others. The level of Greek, for instance, in the NT was probably somewhere in between the formality of the KJV and the more conversant nature of say the NIV, HCSB or NLT. The KJV is a watershed translation and was well done for the time, but we've learned some things since then. In reality, doctrine changes very little to almost not at all between any major version. Most of the hit pieces and hate sites are one verse Charlies who like to refer to removing a key term in one passage, but neglect to mention the other 86 times the word is used.

With that said, Dr. Scot McKnight has a great blog on the subject that I really recommend:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2014/10/01/the-politics-of-bible-translations/

 

[LightTheWay]

I have multiple versions of the Bible. It is interesting to sit down with them sided by side and see where the differences are. I was raised with the NIV. One of my most interesting comparisons is the KJV to the NLT. I personally do not like the NLT because I feel it's too dumbed down and I fully expect it say "Jesus rode in on his skateboard, pulled triple 180 and the crowd cheered for He is bodacious. That is strictly my opinion. I fear that the more we simply the Bible the further from the Word it will be. That is why it is important to study all aspects of the Word and know it!!

I understand where you are coming from. I wish that this generation would study the word and dig deeper and compare versions and do whatever it takes for them to understand. Unfortunately, we live in a fallen world with too many distractions that prevent this from happening. Satan has been around a long time and has such a haze over our eyes. To me, the watered down simplier versions are troublesome if they prevent people who are sound in God's word from growing. Like somebody who has a good grasp of who God is in their lives and they are knowledgable and have a good understanding of the bible and has great potential to recieve more revelation and connections if they eat more than just millk. They should be fed the best nutrition appropriate for them at that time. However for those who do not know, i dont see a problem with them getting the milk first. In other words, if they need it simplier to understand then let it be and may they work their way up to some solid food. I just want them to be fed. Just because one has the most preferred delicacy does not mean they will eat it. Its like how i want to understand science completely, but they have all these big scientific words that look like another language... I found its so much effective in my understanding when i go to science for kids websites get familar wiith the foundations and then the more i read scholarly information of science i am able to comprehend in a level that i wasnt able to proir to my basic understanding of science. In all, yes it is so important to study all aspects but to some they simplhy are prevented from doing so and its okay not to know everything at this moment, but be sure to seek God more and more and be led by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Born_Again]

There is a ton that goes into all of this, but just a couple quick points.

I get myself into trouble a bit here, but let me remark that I number the NLT, NRSV and RSV among my core 6-7 translations I refer to when I am trying to study the Bible. In fact, I like the NRSV for the most part as what the ESV could have been. The NLT will grate on my nerves sometimes with phrases like "personal assistant" in place of armor bearer, but I do understand the purpose behind the choice. I feel like I say this way too much, but just let me state that I am an English major, and I learned a good deal about linguistics and how language changes in college.

I know some of the key passages get a little muddled, but start listening to how we deal with 2nd person plurals on a daily basis and you will quickly hear that most use they/they're in this role. I think sometimes the gender issue is overdone on both sides, as promises of the Bible do include women and our modern audience is keyed to understand man as gender specific. (I'm thinking Austin Powers: "She's a man, baby!" - we don't stop to ponder if Austin meant she was of the human race or whether she had certain male features, do we?)

My biggest rub is Isaiah 7:14 - but on the same token, I am not sure we've thought through the idea of having two virgin births in the Bible! I believe it was understood in the OT as "young maiden/woman" and then understood in ultimate fulfillment as Jesus Christ, son of the Virgin Mary.

Regardless, there are only a few bad translations out there like the one done by the Jehovah's Witnesses. Modern versions are not watered down, they are simply going where the language is going. Yes, we have lost some forms of expression, but we've also gained others. The level of Greek, for instance, in the NT was probably somewhere in between the formality of the KJV and the more conversant nature of say the NIV, HCSB or NLT. The KJV is a watershed translation and was well done for the time, but we've learned some things since then. In reality, doctrine changes very little to almost not at all between any major version. Most of the hit pieces and hate sites are one verse Charlies who like to refer to removing a key term in one passage, but neglect to mention the other 86 times the word is used.

With that said, Dr. Scot McKnight has a great blog on the subject that I really recommend:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2014/10/01/the-politics-of-bible-translations/

I completely agree. As you mentioned with the NLT, I think sometimes the true "power" of the words are taken away and watered down. You don't get the full experience of the Word.

 

[HammerStone]

I completely agree. As you mentioned with the NLT, I think sometimes the true "power" of the words are taken away and watered down. You don't get the full experience of the Word.

Definitely can be the case. I have put the NLT down a time or two in disgust because I feel a bit unfulfilled in the particular diction (word choice). However, I generally pick it up again because it says some things wonderfully simply and that can be its own reward as well.

At the end of the day, my recommendation is to always have old faithful as your main translation. Old faithful can be almost any of the translations sans those like the JW's New World Translation. It's just the translation that you yourself will read an understand, be it KJV, NIV, HCSB, ESV, NRSV, CEB, whatever. In addition to a core Bible that you'll read, I recommend at least two other translations, one leaning towards the more formal spectrum and one leaning towards the more dynamic. It's too easy to pick a particular version's slant and go with it, which is why you see things like KJVO and even what I sometimes call ESVO or NRSVO.

For instance, I find myself using either the HCSB, ESV or NIV. I compare it with either the NRSV or RSV and then generally with the NLT. Often, I'll even go to the KJV or NKJV as well. They all do some things well, and then they all do other things quite poorly. At the end of the day, though, none of them irreparably corrupt any doctrine, even with the naysayers hard at work out there.

I think the reason that versions like the KJV still appeal is that there was a study done that concluded reading Shakespeare arguably made you smarter (can Google it), in the sense that your brain had to go to work to decrypt the words. I still can commit a KJV passage to memory much quicker than the NIV or HCSB. I think much of this is a function that we do aim for a least common denominator in modern writing. It's heavily influenced by business and journalism which seek out a 3rd to 5th grade level of reading to satisfy the average Joe.

 

[FHII]

Folks, I stand by what I have said. I've read your opinions, arguements and such, (as you did mine) and I disagree and don't understand how you don't see where this practice can lead to making the Bible fit your personal beliefs. And like I hope I got across, I'm not immune to it either. THis is why I stick to one version. No, I'm not afraid to look at other versions and I do consider them. But this is one way I stay humble to the Word. I don't go looking for a second opinion. It works to your benefit as well if we are in a debate, I might add. If you can nail me with my own version, by my creed, I will submit!

At this point all I can do is warn you... Switching Bible version because you deem them to be more accurate (by what criteria, I haven't even asked) doesn't seem to be submitting yourselves to God's Word. And personally, I think when you are talking about God's Word, there is no "more accurate". It's either right or there is error. More descriptive, I can handle. But more accurate? No.

 

[LightTheWay]

Folks, I stand by what I have said. I've read your opinions, arguements and such, (as you did mine) and I disagree and don't understand how you don't see where this practice can lead to making the Bible fit your personal beliefs. And like I hope I got across, I'm not immune to it either. THis is why I stick to one version. No, I'm not afraid to look at other versions and I do consider them. But this is one way I stay humble to the Word. I don't go looking for a second opinion. It works to your benefit as well if we are in a debate, I might add. If you can nail me with my own version, by my creed, I will submit!

At this point all I can do is warn you... Switching Bible version because you deem them to be more accurate (by what criteria, I haven't even asked) doesn't seem to be submitting yourselves to God's Word. And personally, I think when you are talking about God's Word, there is no "more accurate". It's either right or there is error. More descriptive, I can handle. But more accurate? No.

Thank you for making this point. In my opinion it is about your motives of looking to other versions. Do it not to justify your beliefs, but to understand God's Word even more. If you want more understanding and feel that looking at other versions to help you out then go ahead but discern with the Holy Spirit.

 

[HearGod]

Hello everybody! So glad to be here and have the freedom to express my mind!

i intend not to offend anybody at all but to just share my viewpoint on versions of the bible and share how i have come to my stance on it now. I am still learning and open and eager to hear what Ya'll have to say so please feel free to voice your opinion too!


I guess i will just share a little story that happened recently. So, one day at school, my extremely intellectual teacher (with a good heart but disbelief in God) says hey audrey, i was cleaning my old bookshelf the other day and found a book and thought of you... and how much that book would offend you. So i asked why it would have offended me and he said it was basically a guy who talks about all the translations of the bible and how it lost its credibility and meaning than its original intent. I kinda just had to giggle and say that it doesnt offend me at all and that i agree that the translations from hebrew to greek has definitely watered down the meaning because of the language differences but i still believe that the word of God will speak. i find it silly to think that God will cease to speak to us over mere translations. However i do respectully agree that we must discern and test all things. I am not exactly sure where in the word it warns that the sacred texts will be altered but that is not my point. my point of view on all these translations is that i believe the word is living and will speak for itself if it is truly the word of God. And that we know it is the word of God if it does not contradict Gods character and the discernment from the Holy Spirit.

Two years ago i was 15 and trying to learn more in my faith. i had then gotten the mind set the only credible bible to read from was the King James Version. My decision on this spurred off of a youtube video and friend with the same mindset (this friend also holds the mindset that all churches lead christians astray and therefore does not go to church for felllowship or the message/ i do not pose this view on church though and attend and grow at church but anyways..) i somehow gotten lost in the legalisticality of it all. But i just started reading my NIV version because it was easier to understand. God still spoke to me and gave me revelation when i wasnt reading from the KJV but i began to look up the hebrew meanings and reading the word with more historical background and cultural stances to better understand them. even reading with a westernized biased led to some profound revelation. the important thing was that i was seeking Gods face and hearing his voice through the Holy Spirit.

What is the right version? To me, the right version is the version that speaks the truth to your heart. with discernment of course, but i guess what i am saying is it does not matter what version what matters is are you being fed the word of God? are you hearing from Him? are you growing closer to Him? we get so caught up in the miniscule details that what we lose the sight of the thing that maters most which is our relationship and growing with God.

I hear they are making a pigeon version of the gospel where they refer to people in the slang of the language.. i may still be indifferent about this because supposedly they refer to God as the Brothah Man upstairs?? and to most that may be disrespectful to call God that, but i see that if somebody who speaks pigeon can find God because of this version and give his life to serve God, then praise be to God! God uses all evil for good right.

I know many friends who read the KJV and even the NIV and stop reading the word because its just too hard for them to understand and to some its like wow how do you not understand that? but thats wrong to judge and so if they need another version to speak to them then i do not see why it is so bad..

I do wish we could all grasp the truest deepest meaning of all the parables and words but to me in this world what speaks God into your life and produces fruit is what matters.

So keep reading and keep discerning/testing and Seeking Gods Face! HIs voice is not to just be heard but obeyed.


respectfully, Feed yourselves the Living Word! Do not starve

At 17, I doubt you have heard of this saying of old:

If hospitals are the devil's biggest playground, then the *bibles must be the devil's greatest tool.

*Romanized/Babylonian babbles.

Not all is lost though, we might be sharing something in common: the hope of glory. Cheerio!

Folks, I stand by what I have said. I've read your opinions, arguements and such, (as you did mine) and I disagree and don't understand how you don't see where this practice can lead to making the Bible fit your personal beliefs. And like I hope I got across, I'm not immune to it either. THis is why I stick to one version. No, I'm not afraid to look at other versions and I do consider them. But this is one way I stay humble to the Word. I don't go looking for a second opinion. It works to your benefit as well if we are in a debate, I might add. If you can nail me with my own version, by my creed, I will submit!

At this point all I can do is warn you... Switching Bible version because you deem them to be more accurate (by what criteria, I haven't even asked) doesn't seem to be submitting yourselves to God's Word. And personally, I think when you are talking about God's Word, there is no "more accurate". It's either right or there is error. More descriptive, I can handle. But more accurate? No.

1) What is your personal ONLY version?

2) Kindly share with us with a couple of verses that there is error in another (or any other) version/s.

3) And how do you determine/justify that your personal ONLY version is right?

I understand where you are coming from. I wish that this generation would study the word and dig deeper and compare versions and do whatever it takes for them to understand. Unfortunately, we live in a fallen world with too many distractions that prevent this from happening. Satan has been around a long time and has such a haze over our eyes. To me, the watered down simplier versions are troublesome if they prevent people who are sound in God's word from growing. Like somebody who has a good grasp of who God is in their lives and they are knowledgable and have a good understanding of the bible and has great potential to recieve more revelation and connections if they eat more than just millk. They should be fed the best nutrition appropriate for them at that time. However for those who do not know, i dont see a problem with them getting the milk first. In other words, if they need it simplier to understand then let it be and may they work their way up to some solid food. I just want them to be fed. Just because one has the most preferred delicacy does not mean they will eat it. Its like how i want to understand science completely, but they have all these big scientific words that look like another language... I found its so much effective in my understanding when i go to science for kids websites get familar wiith the foundations and then the more i read scholarly information of science i am able to comprehend in a level that i wasnt able to proir to my basic understanding of science. In all, yes it is so important to study all aspects but to some they simplhy are prevented from doing so and its okay not to know everything at this moment, but be sure to seek God more and more and be led by the Holy Spirit.

Well said. Yes Lord, light the way. Amen!

I disagree that modern translations are "watered down" versions of the Greek and Hebrew. Language is communication. If your assertion is that modern translations communicate the Greek in Hebrew in a way that loses emphasis or the significance of words, I would say you are mistaken. Of course, there is no 1 to 1 exact way to communicate a Greek or Hebrew word or phrase into an English word or phrase. However, translators work to make sure that the message that was being portrayed in the Greek or Hebrew is accurately communicated in the English. Some translations do this more through a word to word type translations, while others employ more of a phrase by phrase translation. Some, are really loose translations that are not very good at communicating what was being depicted in the original. Others, are problematic because they are trying to address gender issues and egalitarianism in their translations (which was not a concern for the authors of the Bible). Some translations use the best manuscript evidence available while others do not use as reliable of manuscript evidence.

Others, are problematic because they are trying to address gender issues and egalitarianism in their translations (which was not a concern for the authors of the Bible)??????

Could anyone else here (beside Wormwood) kindly share your understandings of this commentary by Wormwood?

@ Wormwood
Please provide a couple of instances of these (Others, are) problematic versions/verses.

I suggest that if someone is looking for a translation that most closely reflects a word-for-word translation of the Greek NT, the ESV or NASV would be the best choices. The KJV is a good translation, was not developed with very good manuscript evidence, as well as the ancient English can be confusing to modern readers. I would not recommend the newer NIV (NIV84 is good) translations as they are tainted with an egalitarian bent in the translation.

a translation that most closely reflects a word-for-word translation of the Greek NT, the ESV or NASV?????

It's your move (if you haven't shot yourself in the foot).

 

[HammerStone]

Folks, I stand by what I have said. I've read your opinions, arguements and such, (as you did mine) and I disagree and don't understand how you don't see where this practice can lead to making the Bible fit your personal beliefs. And like I hope I got across, I'm not immune to it either. THis is why I stick to one version. No, I'm not afraid to look at other versions and I do consider them. But this is one way I stay humble to the Word. I don't go looking for a second opinion. It works to your benefit as well if we are in a debate, I might add. If you can nail me with my own version, by my creed, I will submit!

Even choosing one version alone is not going to ensure fealty to the ultimate intent. I just mentally ran through a number of opposed groups who use one particular version on their trumpet issues. The response I would give you to this thought is simply that all versions do have some level of error or ambiguity in translation that can be seized upon just as easily as going from version to version. At the end of the day, the Bible can be made what you want it to say regardless of using one version or fifty.

Letting the Bible work on you is the point, but we do have the Holy Spirit for that!

At this point all I can do is warn you... Switching Bible version because you deem them to be more accurate (by what criteria, I haven't even asked) doesn't seem to be submitting yourselves to God's Word. And personally, I think when you are talking about God's Word, there is no "more accurate". It's either right or there is error. More descriptive, I can handle. But more accurate? No.

That's a problem, though. I mean I honestly could throw the question right back on you, because locking into a particular translation locks you into that set of translators particular choices, which is why folks like the KJVO crowd resort to some form of special inspiration. This becomes flawed because what became the KJV was heavily influenced and preserved by both the Eastern Orthodox (aka Byzantine) Church and then again by sundry scholars of Rome (Roman Catholic persuasion).

The problem with translation in general is that there are never words that match exactly from language to language. It's why we have issues between the Hebrew and Septuagint, and it's why there can be multiple versions out there. In the same way, it's why I can choose a certain word to convey a connotation as opposed to just its denotation (definition). I might use pudgy to describe a person with a little extra weight (or me when I eat a little better) or I might describe myself as fat when I get into the habit of eating too much and gain extra weight. Both mean similar, but they convey different degrees and even other detail. One word has a lighter tone, and another word has a more negative meaning.

This is why we get quotes in the NT that sometimes don't pair exactly with the OT passage they're quoting from. Like the KJV using Noah and Noe. Is it less accurate to simply use Noah or should we use the Greek-influenced transliteration of Noe because that's what the manuscript said?

 

[Enquirer]

I use the ESV as the main source of my Bible flavour along with the English - Greek Reverse Interlinear New Testament (ESV).
I'm teaching myself Greek and am steadily getting the hang of the grammar ... what an experience it is to read a verse in the Greek
... it's mind blowing.
Reading the NT exclusively in English has been totally ruined for me.
I have most of the translations including the Moffat's Translation ... which I find off the wall with his decision to shift verses around.
To each his own I suppose.

God can use anything to reach a person.

 

[FHII]

Even choosing one version alone is not going to ensure fealty to the ultimate intent. I just mentally ran through a number of opposed groups who use one particular version on their trumpet issues. The response I would give you to this thought is simply that all versions do have some level of error or ambiguity in translation that can be seized upon just as easily as going from version to version. At the end of the day, the Bible can be made what you want it to say regardless of using one version or fifty.

Letting the Bible work on you is the point, but we do have the Holy Spirit for that!

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here, HammerStone. It its what I think you are getting at, sure. Sticking to one version doesn't automatically make you correct. It does, however, ensure that you aren't simply looking for a second "opinion" simply because you didn't like what the first said. Furthermore, stating that all versions have some level of error is not a correct way of looking at it, neither is stating that the Bible can be made to say what you want it to.

The Bible says what it says. A person can choose what verses he wants and leave out those verses that go against him; they can take a verse out of context, or they can mix a verse with traditions of men or their personal opinion. But it you do the Bible justice and look at all available and relevant verses, it's pretty straight forward on most issues.

That's a problem, though. I mean I honestly could throw the question right back on you, because locking into a particular translation locks you into that set of translators particular choices, which is why folks like the KJVO crowd resort to some form of special inspiration. This becomes flawed because what became the KJV was heavily influenced and preserved by both the Eastern Orthodox (aka Byzantine) Church and then again by sundry scholars of Rome (Roman Catholic persuasion).

This might happen if you develop an idea THEN look to the Bible for support and choose your version that bests suits your position, but that's the wrong way to go about it. The correct thing to do is read the Bible and it form your doctrine.