Versions Of Bible

[good times]

what are everyones opinions on the different versions of the bible in relation to different interpretations perverting the original message? eg. NIV, KGV, NLT, ect.personally i think that the translations from different languages and different interpretations that are meant to make scriptures easier for cultures to understand have changed the meaning of some passages and ultimately the whole message. my grounds for believing so:Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.when any book is translated from one language to another certain words have to be either left out or guessed as to the meaning since there is no way to express in words what your not familiar with. example (not biblical but certainly conceptual):http://www.mail-archive.com/africanlanguag...m/msg00594.html

 

[shutin45]

QUOTE (good times @ Apr 7 2009, 01:49 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=72023
what are everyones opinions on the different versions of the bible in relation to different interpretations perverting the original message? eg. NIV, KGV, NLT, ect.personally i think that the translations from different languages and different interpretations that are meant to make scriptures easier for cultures to understand have changed the meaning of some passages and ultimately the whole message. my grounds for believing so:Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.when any book is translated from one language to another certain words have to be either left out or guessed as to the meaning since there is no way to express in words what your not familiar with. example (not biblical but certainly conceptual):http://www.mail-archive.com/africanlanguag...m/msg00594.html
Hi Good Times

I agree with your concern about changes potentially (or have!!) effecting the message.I noticed YEARS ago, but can't recall exactly what Scriptures, that some important Verses regarding Doctrine - not minutiae - in newer versions changed what was said enough to make me wonder/conclude exactly what you have.I use the King James Version and refer back to Hebrew and Greek - SOMETIMES - when I'm trying to REALLY be sure about/understand something.Take care and God Bless!!Jim

 

[Jordan]

QUOTE (good times @ Apr 7 2009, 01:49 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=72023
what are everyones opinions on the different versions of the bible in relation to different interpretations perverting the original message? eg. NIV, KGV, NLT, ect.personally i think that the translations from different languages and different interpretations that are meant to make scriptures easier for cultures to understand have changed the meaning of some passages and ultimately the whole message. my grounds for believing so:Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.when any book is translated from one language to another certain words have to be either left out or guessed as to the meaning since there is no way to express in words what your not familiar with. example (not biblical but certainly conceptual):http://www.mail-archive.com/africanlanguag...m/msg00594.html
I don't like the modern versions due to omitting 16 whole verses (NIV, NLT, ESV etc) and numbers of omitting words in part of the verses which may or may not change in the meaning... In my study, usually it does change the meaning. I stick with the KJV as my English Bible, and look at some Hebrew and Greek to know the real Word of God...I will admit, in some places where the modern version is better translated than the KJV. So what I'm getting at is, don't trust the translation of the translator, but rather God and His wisdom.

 

[Christina]

This site recommends KJV with a Strongs concordance for study purposesbut all versions have their good and bad points some are worse than others. I think NIV is good beginner bible. But it lacks in some areas when doing in depth study... NKJV and even some later editions of the KJV include the Words of the translators as part of the scriptures Where as older versions put these added Words in Parentheses so you know they were added. Some versions leave out verses some change Words that change the meanings ... Some translate a few verses here and there closer to the original manuscripts... Some have changed a few verse to make them down right blasphemous IMHO. So each to his own ...

 

[bethog]

xxx

 

[WhiteKnuckle]

Ain't got a Strongs yet, but plan to. I believe the KJV to be accurate, but I find it insufferable trying to decipher the language of the time. I read primarily the NIV, and cross reference with the KJV. You're right, there's a loss in translation, as some phrases in one language are not the same in the other and even more still, some languages have absolutely no phrase for certain things. I'm certian if you stay away from PC type bibles or others, you'll be fine.

 

[shutin45]

QUOTE (WhiteKnuckle @ Apr 7 2009, 05:33 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=72039
Ain't got a Strongs yet, but plan to. I believe the KJV to be accurate, but I find it insufferable trying to decipher the language of the time. I read primarily the NIV, and cross reference with the KJV. You're right, there's a loss in translation, as some phrases in one language are not the same in the other and even more still, some languages have absolutely no phrase for certain things. I'm certian if you stay away from PC type bibles or others, you'll be fine.
Hi WhiteKnuckle.I'm NOT disagreeing with you, but just wanted to mention e-Sword since you mentioned pc Bibles. It's AWESOME and free!!I now plan on getting a Strongs too.Bless Y'all

Jim

 

[WhiteKnuckle]

Thanks Jim.By PC I meant, Politicaly Correct bibles, like the one they called God He/She and what not.

 

[HammerStone]

To be honest, I'm not a fan of a lot of the newest versions which focus on summarizing. I do not believe you can always summarize the Word of God because words really can change the meaning. Having an English Literature background, I can firmly attest to this.That being said, we do "recommend" as a site the KJV w/ Strong's. However, we are by no means a KJV-only group as I do understand the difficulty of the archaic language. I don't claim for the KJV to be perfect either, but the mistakes are generally minuscule ones at that. The PC Bibles do bother me to an extent, reading the Bible for what it is should inform anyone that God loves both men and women.Regardless, I think you're best served using a couple versions to give you different perspectives. Keep yourself grounded and go back to the original Greek, Hebrew, etc. as best you are able.This is partially why we had the Apostle Paul refer to milk and meat. As you grow, you learn/explore/etc. the Word at deeper levels.

 

[kiwimac]

The best version is the one you USE. Having said that the more modern versions are considerably better than the KJV.

 

[Jordan]

QUOTE (kiwimac @ Apr 8 2009, 12:14 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=72076
The best version is the one you USE. Having said that the more modern versions are considerably better than the KJV.
Well it's your choice to pick which version you want to use, but I honestly believe that the above statement is pure nonsense.

 

[BenTobijah]

Personally, I prefer using the Hebrew and Greek texts. The KJV with a Strongs Concordance can be very helpful to get a general translation of a word but it will not help when a student needs to know the part of speech of a particular word. What type of verb are you looking at, what kind of noun are you looking at? Verb tense is very important in both Hebrew and Greek, just as it is in English. But not all Greek verb tenses translate properly into English. Case in point, one verse I have seen used a number of times on this forum is Luke 10: 18; Luk 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. Luk 10:18 Εἶπε δὲ αὐτοῖς· ἐθεώρουν τὸν Σατανᾶν ὡς ἀστραπὴν ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ πεσόντα. Strongs give the translation in a generic form: “fall” G4098πίπτω, πέτωpiptō petōpip'-to, pet'-oThe first is a reduplicated and contracted form of the second (which occurs only as an alternate in certain tenses); probably akin to G4072 through the idea of alighting; to fall (literally of figuratively): - fail, fall (down), light on.But our verb is “πεσόντα” and it is the second aorist active passive - accusative singular masculine form of the verb. Meaning: Lit., having fallen. A very helpful tool for the English student, in many cases, is the KJV Companion Bible by E. W. Bullinger. In the side column on page 1464, Bullinger correctly identifies this verb.

 

[For Life]

I use the NKJV because I find it easier to read than the KJV. But I use the KJV and New World Translation to sometimes help me better understand a verse. I would like to get a Strongs concordance too but I haven't yet. I don't like the modern versions of the bible because it seems to be dumbing it down to me. Like Cliff Notes except worse.