Translations

Dor · 03-29-2005, 07:51 PM

Just out of curiosity...What bible translations does everyone use and why?
Also which do you tend to avoid and why?

didymus · 03-29-2005, 09:26 PM

I have three translations of the Bible, I refer to them to get a broader interpretation of the verse. I have NIV Study Bible, NKJV and a spanish bible.

I know the King James version came out in about 1600, I'm not sure of the NIV. I will say that there are times that the two vary considerably in their interpretations, enough to give very different meanings.

Bandit · 03-29-2005, 09:34 PM

KJV. it is the closest to the original and most widely accepted. I compare everything to that and wont do a deep, personal topic study any other way.

Dor, I have a bookmark somewhere that will floor you when you see what they have done to some the newer translations. Some of them are geared strictly for the newage type of religions. i will post it as soon as i find the bookmark.

Dor · 03-29-2005, 09:55 PM

Bandit, I have a few differences Id love to show...frankly Im a KJV all the way type. Me and Faithful have even had a few discussions about her NKJV but I always back off it. Most of the new translations I tend to avoid cause of the changes in meanings of some verses and the complete deletions of some verses.

Bandit · 03-29-2005, 09:57 PM

hee hee. i thought this was kind of cute

the newer versions are actually harder for me to get because i think i have so much of it memorized now. but also the Holy Ghost teaches, so i would think any bible would be a good bible at least to get the big picture.

Bandit · 03-29-2005, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dor

Bandit, I have a few differences Id love to show...frankly Im a KJV all the way type. Me and Faithful have even had a few discussions about her NKJV but I always back off it. Most of the new translations I tend to avoid cause of the changes in meanings of some verses and the complete deletions of some verses.

YES! they completely delete verses Dor.

there are some real good conversion charts out there, that really show the truth about how they have changed it to meet certain needs of certain newer religions. i mean...there are like 20 versions in the lsat 20 years

people say KJV is hard to understand, but it has never been hard for me even when doing memory verses for sunday school.

didymus · 03-30-2005, 02:37 AM

Bandit/Dor-- what has been deleted and what has been modified to suit newer religions. Can you give verses? thanks

Bandit · 03-30-2005, 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by didymus

Bandit/Dor-- what has been deleted and what has been modified to suit newer religions. Can you give verses? thanks

i cannot give you verse for verse for every translation. But as soon as i come across that website that gives comparisons, i promise to put it up. It is a huge chart that someone took the time to point out how it has been changed.

Basstian · 03-30-2005, 04:18 AM

I use a KJV rainbow study bible tho the rainbow colors often only serve to help me remember what page or column the verse is in.

And several different versions on my computer. That and a strongs makes for easy in depth study.

One of the greatest things about my Bible is the use of italics on words that have changed from the original KJV or might have different meanings in Greek or Chalde translations.

One of the nicest things about a strongs is to trace root words in greek alot of times you might find concepts that you would have missed otherwise.

Our view of the NIV. I wonder if readers of greek or latin view the KJV as a loose translation????

Dor · 03-30-2005, 05:04 AM

The NIV just updates the archaic words and makes it easier to understand. Nothing is really changed? FACT: The NIV denys the deity of Jesus Christ; the virgin birth; removes 17 complete verses and 64,576 words!

verses:
Matthew 12:47 -- removed in the footnotes.
Matthew 17:21 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Matthew 18:11 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Matthew 21:44 -- removed in the footnotes.
Matthew 23:14 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Mark 7:16 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Mark 9:44 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Mark 9:46 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Mark 11:26 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Mark 15:28 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Mark 16:9-20 (all 12 verses) -- There is a line separating the last 12 verses of Mark from the main text. Right under the line it says: [The two most reliable early manuscripts do not have Mark 16:9-20] (NIV, 1978 ed.) The Jehovah's Witness "Bible" also places the last 12 verses of Mark as an appendix of sorts.
Luke 17:36 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Luke 22:44 -- removed in the footnotes
Luke 22:43 -- removed in the footnotes
Luke 23:17 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
John 5:4 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. What are you NIV readers missing?
John 7:53-8:11 -- removed in the footnotes
Acts 8:37 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"]. It's deletion makes one think that people can be baptized and saved without believing on the Lord Jesus Christ.
Acts 15:34 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Acts 24:7 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Acts 28:29 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
Romans 16:24 -- COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].
I John 5:7 -- Vitally important phrase COMPLETELY removed [also deleted from the Jehovah's Witness "Bible"].

There are a few verses to start with Did!!

Dor · 03-30-2005, 05:11 AM

Yes Basstian I find myself using my computer one as much as my actual book one. My computer has 5 different translations as well as the Hebrew OT and Greek TR-NT.

Bandit · 03-30-2005, 07:50 AM

i cant find the site with the charts but this site gives a few of them.
it is quite interesting how ONE WORD like 'THE or A' can change the entire context.

i dont agree with all of them but most of them I do find quite disturbing.

http://members.citynet.net/morton/newage.htm

didymus · 03-30-2005, 02:11 PM

Dor, I haven't checked out all those verses yet but will soon. How do you figure that NIV denies the deity of Christ and the virgin birth. Where did you get that info?

Dor · 03-30-2005, 05:20 PM

In Luke 2:33 The KJV correctly says implies Joseph was not Jesus' biological father, but yet the NIV changes the verse to imply Joseph was the biological parent!
Luke 2:33 (KJV) "And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him."
Luke 2:33 (NIV) "The child's father and mother marveled at what was said about him."
In Luke 2:34 "Joseph and his mother" are replaced with "his parents"
Luke 1:34 (KJV) teaches that Mary was a virgin when she was pregnant with Jesus because she said, "How can this be seeing I know not a man?" The NIV reads, "How can this be, since I have no husband?"

There is a big difference between not knowing a man and not having a husband.

I will get to the deity soon.

Didymus I am in no way saying no one should read the NIV because God can touch anyone using anything he wants to use. I would consider using an older translation to study and check verses against though. I personally use KJV(for reading and studying) but I also cross refrence it against a few other translations.

didymus · 03-30-2005, 10:59 PM

Does anyone know what the Greek says in the verses listed above by Dor?