Comments on: Which translation of the Bible should I use? http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/ Jeremiah 20:9 speaks of God's Word being like a fire within me yearning to come out ... it must come out! Sun, 08 Nov 2009 10:17:02 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Dan O http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-5374 Dan O Wed, 13 Aug 2008 16:14:16 +0000 http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-5374 Great topic. I read a little book years ago, believe it was called "How we got the bible". Helped me to realize the incredible amount of time and effort to preserve the scriptures. But that was as far as I took it. I like the pdf resources. Thanks. http://macksfield.wordpress.com/ Great topic. I read a little book years ago, believe it was called “How we got the bible”. Helped me to realize the incredible amount of time and effort to preserve the scriptures. But that was as far as I took it.

I like the pdf resources. Thanks.
http://macksfield.wordpress.com/

]]> By: Donald B http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-4784 Donald B Mon, 03 Sep 2007 12:53:03 +0000 http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-4784 I have decided to delete a few comments from this post because they go in a direction that I never intended this blog to go. While I love discussion and debate, I do not want anything on this blog to influence people in the wrong way. And the wrong way - for the sake of this blog - are things that get far out of the purview of what I think is right. Does that mean that I am the all supreme on knowing what is right and wrong. No. But this is my blog. ;-) The commenter basically believes that the NIV has removed many verses from the Bible, and he compares the NIV Bible with the Jehovah's Witness Bible. His claims are based on the following verses. Matthew 12:47; Matthew 17:21; Matthew 18:11; Matthew 21:44; Matthew 23:14; Mark 7:16; Mark 9:44; Mark 9:46; Mark 11:26; Mark 15:28; Mark 16:9-20; Luke 17:36; Luke 22:44; Luke 22:43; Luke 23:17; John 5:4; John 7:53-8:11; Acts 8:37; Acts 15:34; Acts 24:7; Acts 28:29; Romans 16:24; I John 5:7 Now, I challenge you to look these up in the NIV. For that matter, look them up in the English Standard Version (ESV), the New Living Translation (NLT) or the New American Standard Bible (NASB). Because they all either remove these verses or make a comment in the notes that the verse was not in the <em>earliest manuscript</em>. The commenter made a couple of points that I think are misleading. 1 - The NIV Bible is comparable to the Jehovah's Witness Bible. 2 - The NIV Bible REMOVED verses from the Word of God. The first point is simply foolish talk. The Jehovah's Witness religion is a cult. Their bible has been modified to reflect their beliefs. Therefore, what they have done to the Bible is sinful and what we are warned not to do in the Bible. The second point is what needs to be discussed. There a few things to understand about making this accusation: 1 - The NIV, NLT, ESV and NASB pretty much agree on all the verses above. 2 - This point is simply an incorrect view of what really happened. Rather than these modern translations REMOVING ... the KJV ADDED. Now, do I believe the KJV translators were sinful people by adding to the text. No. They were translators. And they were translating from the best manuscripts in existence AT THAT TIME! The reason the NIV, NLT, ESV and NASB make footnotes in the Bible is because the verses above DID show up in some manuscripts - BUT NOT ALL MANUSCRIPTS! Even more ... not even in MOST OF the manuscripts! And even more ... not in the EARLIEST MANUSCRIPTS!!! This is very important when trying to understand translations. If you have a Biblical manuscript, the thousands of manuscripts that were copied within 200 years of the originals are much more important and trustworthy than those copied 1000 - 1500 years later. What I would encourage you to do is to read the preface of each of these translations. They tell you what processes they went through to develop the translation. They explain why things are footnoted or removed. Most of them even give you a list of the translators. It's not just 1 or 2 people. The better translations usually have a group of scholars working on the translation. That's enough about this topic I believe. Go with God, Donald B I have decided to delete a few comments from this post because they go in a direction that I never intended this blog to go. While I love discussion and debate, I do not want anything on this blog to influence people in the wrong way. And the wrong way – for the sake of this blog – are things that get far out of the purview of what I think is right. Does that mean that I am the all supreme on knowing what is right and wrong. No. But this is my blog. ;-)

The commenter basically believes that the NIV has removed many verses from the Bible, and he compares the NIV Bible with the Jehovah’s Witness Bible. His claims are based on the following verses.

Matthew 12:47; Matthew 17:21; Matthew 18:11; Matthew 21:44; Matthew 23:14; Mark 7:16; Mark 9:44; Mark 9:46; Mark 11:26; Mark 15:28; Mark 16:9-20; Luke 17:36; Luke 22:44; Luke 22:43; Luke 23:17; John 5:4; John 7:53-8:11; Acts 8:37; Acts 15:34; Acts 24:7; Acts 28:29; Romans 16:24; I John 5:7

Now, I challenge you to look these up in the NIV. For that matter, look them up in the English Standard Version (ESV), the New Living Translation (NLT) or the New American Standard Bible (NASB). Because they all either remove these verses or make a comment in the notes that the verse was not in the earliest manuscript.

The commenter made a couple of points that I think are misleading.

1 – The NIV Bible is comparable to the Jehovah’s Witness Bible.
2 – The NIV Bible REMOVED verses from the Word of God.

The first point is simply foolish talk. The Jehovah’s Witness religion is a cult. Their bible has been modified to reflect their beliefs. Therefore, what they have done to the Bible is sinful and what we are warned not to do in the Bible.

The second point is what needs to be discussed. There a few things to understand about making this accusation:
1 – The NIV, NLT, ESV and NASB pretty much agree on all the verses above.
2 – This point is simply an incorrect view of what really happened. Rather than these modern translations REMOVING … the KJV ADDED.

Now, do I believe the KJV translators were sinful people by adding to the text. No. They were translators. And they were translating from the best manuscripts in existence AT THAT TIME! The reason the NIV, NLT, ESV and NASB make footnotes in the Bible is because the verses above DID show up in some manuscripts – BUT NOT ALL MANUSCRIPTS! Even more … not even in MOST OF the manuscripts! And even more … not in the EARLIEST MANUSCRIPTS!!! This is very important when trying to understand translations.

If you have a Biblical manuscript, the thousands of manuscripts that were copied within 200 years of the originals are much more important and trustworthy than those copied 1000 – 1500 years later.

What I would encourage you to do is to read the preface of each of these translations. They tell you what processes they went through to develop the translation. They explain why things are footnoted or removed. Most of them even give you a list of the translators. It’s not just 1 or 2 people. The better translations usually have a group of scholars working on the translation.

That’s enough about this topic I believe.

Go with God,
Donald B

]]> By: Donald B http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-3015 Donald B Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:22:09 +0000 http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-3015 They come from a book entitle <a href="http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product?item_no=3484X&netp_id=215140&event=ESRCN&item_code=WW#curr" rel="nofollow"><b><i>Essential Guide to Bible Versions</i></b></a>. Go with God, Donald B They come from a book entitle Essential Guide to Bible Versions.

Go with God,
Donald B

]]> By: Daniel (Boo) W http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-3014 Daniel (Boo) W Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:17:21 +0000 http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-3014 What book(s) do the three links above come from. I would like to look into buying these books for my library and would like to know title and author please. Thanks. What book(s) do the three links above come from. I would like to look into buying these books for my library and would like to know title and author please. Thanks.

]]> By: Donald B http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-23 Donald B Tue, 13 Feb 2007 02:06:25 +0000 http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-23 Thanks for the comment! Although I was a little negative in my post about the KJV ... the one thing I've learned is not to condemn or belittle those who do use it. Some of my spiritual mentors are fond of the KJV and continue to use it. And I love the way you explained why you read the paraphrases. They are great for experiencing a closeness to the Lord through His word. The real issue is that we - as Christians - should not divide ourselves based upon translations. If we do, then we are allowing satan to win a battle that should not even be fought. ;-) Go with God, Donald B Thanks for the comment! Although I was a little negative in my post about the KJV … the one thing I’ve learned is not to condemn or belittle those who do use it. Some of my spiritual mentors are fond of the KJV and continue to use it.

And I love the way you explained why you read the paraphrases. They are great for experiencing a closeness to the Lord through His word.

The real issue is that we – as Christians – should not divide ourselves based upon translations. If we do, then we are allowing satan to win a battle that should not even be fought. ;-)

Go with God,
Donald B

]]> By: cumby http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-22 cumby Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:34:27 +0000 http://donaldb.wordpress.com/2007/02/12/which-translation-of-the-bible-should-i-use/#comment-22 For years I read nothing but the Living Bible. I took some abuse from a few who thought that was childish. What they didn't realize is that it fed my hunger for the Lord and put the scriptures into easy-to-understand language. I still have that translation and several copies of the Message Bible which I read when I'm not studying but just want to feel the closeness of the Lord through His word. I use the KJV and New KJV for preparing sermons and studying. I've never gotten used to the Amplified although there's a copy here. Thanks for the post and the links! For years I read nothing but the Living Bible. I took some abuse from a few who thought that was childish. What they didn’t realize is that it fed my hunger for the Lord and put the scriptures into easy-to-understand language.

I still have that translation and several copies of the Message Bible which I read when I’m not studying but just want to feel the closeness of the Lord through His word.

I use the KJV and New KJV for preparing sermons and studying. I’ve never gotten used to the Amplified although there’s a copy here.

Thanks for the post and the links!

]]>