Posted on 10/25/2014 9:29:35 PM PDT by do the dhue
The NIV is the Bible of Mystery Babylon.
It will continue to become more and more corrupt as we move into the final days of the governments of men. They remove all that will be an impediment to Antichrist from the text.
.
>> “For wordier paraphrases, the Amplified Bible is very good.” <<
.
Absolutely, the original Amplified Bible from 1965/1966 is the most completely edifying text that has ever been prepared.
Later versions have become weakened though, as is the trend across the board.
.
The Old Testament generally has been preserved with far more letter accuracy than the New.
If you look at some of these old New Testament manuscripts you will begin to wonder how they could get close to this kind of accuracy. There are lots of abbreviations, for one thing. It’s like getting the message out, even in a sort of shorthand, mattered a lot more than its letter details. If the Old Testament could be said to have gone out on byte-perfect CD, the New Testament was blogged and tweeted and facebooked.
Part of the reason could be that it was assumed everybody had the Old Testament, and the New was understood to be a promised riff off of it. Gentile Christendom has virtually lost that perspective. This error has been countered somewhat in modern Baptist and Seventh Day Adventist circles (among denominational churches).
Part of the reason could be that people were expecting the Lord to come back Real Soon Now. They didn’t make records that they expected to last for millennia.
Part of this is scribal glosses. Scribes sometimes figured that something important was missing (maybe they had gotten it through an oral tradition) and they put it in. It might actually be valid information.
Everything happens with a purpose. God didn’t throw dice with His methods of preserving scripture. But we have to get it clear that this is God’s plan, not ours.
Nonsense.
It was done with an Arminian slant in some places, and I can understand why your special enthusiasm. I take such places with a grain of salt.
That is not the issue for me, it is the exploration of the fullest meaning of the text in so many places.
Nonsense to an unbeliever or new ager such as yourself, but full of sense to a well studied believer.
.
Well this is certainly something in the KJV that is annoyingly mistranslated. It should be Holy Spirit.
After reading the referenced site, and looking at its contents, I am curious as to why you asked this question of others.
If you scrutinized the site from which this topic was taken, you should not have needed to ask your question. So what is your opinion of why there are gross differences between the KJV and modern versions, both in content, and in translation style?
And, in general, what is your purpose in bringing this topic up, if you already knew the answer at the outset?
Cuz U Kant spiel?
It is broad, and it is wide, and allows for a lot of misinterpretation. Precise it is not, and therefore IMHO it is the basis for weak exposition.
The Old Testament generally has been copied with far more letter accuracy than the New.
God's preservation is perfect for both, if you can find either. In the original languages, that is, of course.
Is a ghost of spirit or is it material? If a human dies physically, what separates from his/her body? Do we refer to him/her as a spirit or a ghost?
Just now, I tried to go to sleep. Prayed a little and was reminded that we will be known as followers of Christ by the love in our heart. I didn't feel that from you. As a matter of fact, I felt broadsided by you. I forgive it and have big shoulders. So, don't worry about it. But frankly, I don't care what you say, because I don't answer to you.
If you found my question to be offensive, I apologize once again.
May the Lord bless you, keep you, make His face shine upon you, be gracious towards you and may the Lord give you his peace.
I’m not in court. I’m just trying to learn and I think I am from others here.
I am honestly sorry I brought this up. I was hoping to learn something here.
I think you need to step back and take a broader view. Scribal variations are quite common in New Testament manuscripts. We were not present back then to hear all the sermons that were preached, whether entirely accurate or not, about Christ. Those would influence scribes passing on the news. And Christ was new, important news. Suddenly the God that had been hidden behind the veil could be in everyone’s heart if they believed. This depended on spirit, and scripture was held to illuminate, not to be a fundamental support, of this new development.
This is not a NIV issue. (Some folks like to make that a whipping boy for other reasons and they are distracting here. For one thing, a “gay” translator wormed into the process, and got excluded prior to publication, with their contributions, when this translator’s output proved sufficiently eccentric on other verses, not just homosexuality verses.) This is a Textus Receptus vs. eclectic text (and lower criticism) issue.
That's what he gets for asking in the form of a yes/no question, I guess.
The hard part is that you asked a question with an extremely complex, involved answer that requires a fair bit of learning to even be aware of the issues involved. A full answer to your question would be a book-length treatment. So some posters (including me, to an extent) reply with fairly glib replies in an attempt to be witty, or in some cases to sound smart or whatever.
Wikipedia actually has a couple of articles that make a decent primer on the subject:
English translations of the Bible
A good explanation of some of your specific questions, including 1 John 5:7-8 is here: Why I do not think the KJV is the best translation available today.
The bottom line for that passage: the "Father, Word, and Holy Spirit" passage is not in the original manuscripts; it appears to have been a 16th Century fabrication.
The KJV vs. NIV comprehensively treated
"If the Foundations Be Destroyed" - by Chick Salliby - Chick Publications (click here)
"Is your Bible missing important verses and doctrines? If it is an New International Version there's a lot missing! Author Chick Salliby documents the sad truth of how much is left out of this popular modern Bible. If you or someone you care about is using it, you really need to read this book!
For example, did you know that there is only one verse in the whole Bible that tells us we need to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ before we are baptized? That verse is Acts 8:37. Why is it missing from the text in the NIV? (Look for yourself).
Or what about Colossians 1:14, where it says "In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins." Why has "through his blood" been removed from the NIV? Do you really believe that you can be saved without the shed blood of Jesus Christ?
The author gives us 155 clear instances of changes and omissions from the Bible, things that should be in the NIV but are not. The NIV weakens the deity of Christ, and removes doctrinally important teachings. Verse comparisions between the King James and the NIV cover a wide range of topics, . . ."
(About $6)
= = = = = = =
The "Two Streams" discussion of the textual foundations and the doctrine of separation:
"Touch Not The Unclean Thing" - by David Sorenson - Northstar Ministries (click here)
"Touch Not the Unclean Thing is a strong defence of the traditional Received Text of the New Testament and by extension, the King James Version of the Bible. The author provides extensive historical and factual documentation for his assertions, with more than 450 citations and a bibliography of 150 historical sources.
Dr. Sorenson connects the biblical principle of separation from apostasy to the Bible text issue. Historically documenting the fact that almost all editors of the modern Critical Text have direct associations with theological liberalism or apostasy.
In fact, there is documented proof that the two principal architects thereof were both involved with occult activities throughout the time they were producing their version of the Critical Text.
Dr. Sorenson also clearly exposes how the person of Christ has been diminished and major doctrines diluted in modern translations of the Bible based upon the Critical Text. Specifically, he documents the diminution of the person of Jesus Christ in the NIV and NASB."
(from $0.38 to $14 at Amazon)
= = = = = = = =
In these matters, I abree with Pastors Salliby and Sorenson. They ore factual and concise in their treatments of these intertwined issues. I believe that the only reliable English translation of the entire Bible is the Authorized Version.
I also be;ieve that the only other trustworthy companion English text to the AV is "A Precise Translation" by Fred Wittman, of which the first part "The Gospels" is freely available at the Happy Heralds, Inc. web site:
on the home page.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.