the living bible translation

[Justin Adams]

Aramaic Bible in Plain English

1In the origin The Word had been existing and That Word had been existing with God and That Word was himself God. 2This One himself was at the origin with God. 3Everything was in his hand, and without him not even one thing existed of the things that existed. 4In him was The Life and The Life is The Light of men. 5And The Light is shining in the darkness, and the darkness did not overtake it.

6There was a man sent from God; his name was Yohannan. 7He came for a witness, to testify about The Light, that everyone by him would believe. 8He was not The Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.

9For That One was The Light of Truth, which enlightens every person that comes into the world. 10He was in the world, and the world existed by his hand, and the world knew him not.11He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12But those that received him, to them he gave authority to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his Name, 13Those who had not been born of blood, nor of the desire of the flesh, nor of the desire of a man, but of God.

14And The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of The Only Begotten of The Father, full of grace and truth.

Above is a description of THE WORD, Yeshua, THE LIGHT, THE ONE. Mere earthen 'words' are not to be confused with THE WORD, but are used by many to administer and communicate the gospel.
The Bible, whichever one we have, is used by THE WORD or THE LIGHT (Yeshua) to speak to the hearts of men and women.
A friend working with Wycliffe translated a New Testament for Mali's local population.
Took him years living in a grass hut with dirt floors. We gave him a solar panel for his laptop.

I doubt his work would pass the scrutiny of all scholars, however that did not limit THE LIGHT from speaking to those people. As such, I would call that Mali NT work a "Real Bible".

[Sower]

7 hours ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

16 hours ago, ayin jade said:

In a discussion, a phrase came up and I noted that it was not in the bible. Someone then showed me it was in the living bible translation. When I later looked it up in other translations, I noticed that it matched none of the other translations. It was even further astray than the message bible, and thats saying a lot.

Im curious what yall think of the living bible translation.

sux

Forty years ago, my wife and I used the living bible when we heard we needed to be born again, and saved, from a baptist preacher. We thought all bibles were bibles, so we used what God provided. Anyone that reads English can receive all that's needed from the living bible. It was for us, as baby Christians, just what we needed. Years later, studying,  when I would read John 15, the true vine, and now us the branches grafted on, one verse states in the King James version that the Father, the vine dresser, "purges" branches that "do" produce fruit. I never understood why fruit producing believers (branches) would be purged. Sounded sorta harsh. Till I was reading through my old living bible and read that branches producing fruit are "pruned" to produce more fruit. DUH! The light bulb came on, as I could understand a vine branch being pruned of "unnecessary or harmful parts on the vine, cut off to allow more fruit, and less vine (me). I occasionally use the living bible to help me read a difficult passage to give me a ballpark understanding, a head's up, to have an idea of what it's about. Then I pull out the King James, Greek/English interlinear and concordance etc.  It works for me. The scriptural police need to chill out. 

Edited October 6, 2017 by Gary Lee

[TheMatrixHasU71]

15 hours ago, Gary Lee said:

when I would read John 15, the true vine, and now us the branches grafted on, one verse states in the King James version that the Father, the vine dresser, "purges" branches that "do" produce fruit. I never understood why fruit producing believers (branches) would be purged. Sounded sorta harsh. Till I was reading through my old living bible and read that branches producing fruit are "pruned" to produce more fruit

When one reads the passage in its proper context though its easy to see that purge and prune mean the same thing. Because its purging it from anything that would choke it out. And all you need is a Strong's concordance to see that pruning is just what was intended.

to cleanse, of filth impurity, etc

to prune trees and vines from useless shoots

metaph. from guilt, to expiate

John 15:2 

Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.

 

 

 

 

[TheMatrixHasU71]

15 hours ago, Gary Lee said:

The scriptural police need to chill out. 

That is being a little harsh. Just because we believe that the KJV is the best (because it doesnt water down or eliminate scripture as others do) doesnt make us "scriptural police". 

Reading only certain bibles doesnt save you, and one who is truly strong in the spirit can read any bible without being nagged by the persistent doubts that often plague people who are new or weak in the spirit that are caused by bad translations that often weaken or drop altogether passages regarding the divinity of Christ. But that doesnt change the fact that there are truly bad translations out there and they have caused havoc among the faith of many.

You have read the NIV? In the beginning I did too. Because as a newbie I often had the same complaint that many who dont truly understand the KJV do, that I couldnt get past all the thee's thine's and thou's. 

(But even in the 1600's few people talked that way, but the translators recognised that there were places where one had to make a distinction between the singular thee/thine/thou "you" and the plural "ye". Now obviously modern English doesnt do that but the archaic does.

You notice how certain versions have these annoying little footnotes saying the "most ancient and reliable" texts do not contain such-and such a verse -especially with regards to verses regarding Jesus' divinity? first of all that is a complete lie. Secondly that is a great tool of Satan to cause doubts in people about the authenticity of Scripture. As a new christian I started to have doubts too. Until I found the KJV and then later did some reading up on versions like the NIV and how the NIV uses texts from Westcott and Hort (KNOWN OCCULTISTS) and how their version of the 'most ancient and reliable' are actually neither.

Some people have a problem with the KJV's use of "unicorns". But remember too that in the early 17th century when stories were just beginning to trickle out of Africa to Europe about exotic African animals (like the rhinoceros which is what the 'unicorn' was) its perfectly natural for the translators to interpret the word in the only way they knew how. 

But I am babbling here. 

[Sower]

4 hours ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

20 hours ago, Gary Lee said:

The scriptural police need to chill out. 

That is being a little harsh. Just because we believe that the KJV is the best (because it doesnt water down or eliminate scripture as others do) doesnt make us "scriptural police". 

Perhaps your right, and if you were offended, my apologies. I suppose I should have cooled down before responding.  You see Matrix, when I see the bible, the living bible,  that gave my wife and I all of God's word needed, to plant in our hearts and come alive, to draw us to Christ, and see someone say it "sux", well that sorta pulled my chain. If you notice, I informed anyone completely reading my reply that I use the KJV to study, along with many other sources of material, and use the expanded a lot when witnessing, then give it to them, as it is easy for one seeking to read. I still have and use my thirty five year old  Criswell KJV bible, rebound twice, so far. For study KJV and I use most any other bible, and other material, sometimes, even a forum poster.......

[Guest shiloh357]

On 10/6/2017 at 12:01 AM, ayin jade said:

In a discussion, a phrase came up and I noted that it was not in the bible. Someone then showed me it was in the living bible translation. When I later looked it up in other translations, I noticed that it matched none of the other translations. It was even further astray than the message bible, and thats saying a lot.

Im curious what yall think of the living bible translation.

The Living Bible is a paraphrase not a translation.  It was written by a man who put the Bible in his own words for his children.  It was later published as  a "Bible,"  but is not a true Bible.  

[TheMatrixHasU71]

On 10/7/2017 at 3:27 PM, Gary Lee said:

Perhaps your right, and if you were offended, my apologies. I suppose I should have cooled down before responding.  You see Matrix, when I see the bible, the living bible,  that gave my wife and I all of God's word needed, to plant in our hearts and come alive, to draw us to Christ, and see someone say it "sux", well that sorta pulled my chain. If you notice, I informed anyone completely reading my reply that I use the KJV to study, along with many other sources of material, and use the expanded a lot when witnessing, then give it to them, as it is easy for one seeking to read. I still have and use my thirty five year old  Criswell KJV bible, rebound twice, so far. For study KJV and I use most any other bible, and other material, sometimes, even a forum poster.......

No no you didnt offend me.

Man, your KJV is only 35 years old and you already had it rebound twice? Man you must have beaten the heck out of it with all the reading lol. 

I have a two volume 170 year old Cottage bible with wood boards that I have had to tape up a bit but they arent in too bad shape for their age

[Psalms37:4]

On 10/5/2017 at 10:01 PM, ayin jade said:

Im curious what yall think of the living bible translation.

 

On 10/5/2017 at 10:07 PM, ayin jade said:

Here is the verse. From proverbs 16:27

the living bible translation

Idle hands are the devil’s workshop; idle lips are his mouthpiece.

KJV

An ungodly man diggeth up evil: and in his lips there is as a burning fire.

NKJV

An ungodly man digs up evil,
And it is on his lips like a burning fire.

NASB

A worthless man digs up evil,
While his words are like scorching fire.

NIV

A scoundrel plots evil,
    and on their lips it is like a scorching fire.

the message

Mean people spread mean gossip;
    their words smart and burn.

I looked up Proverbs 16:27 and also read the surrounding verses in many other translations and this is how I interpret what the verse could potentially be saying from my perspective.

"An ungodly person devises destructive gossip that spreads like a wildfire"

A combination of two translations: The New Living and the Easy-to-Read version translations helped me form this interpretation.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=proverbs+16%3A27&version=NKJV;TLB;ERV;NLT

http://www.biblestudytools.com/proverbs/16-27-compare.html

http://biblehub.com/proverbs/16-27.htm

I'm no scholar so don't take what I "think" it's saying over creditable sources like the NKJV and the KJV. Just trying to make it easier to understand "if" my interpretation is correct.

But idle hands and idle lips? Safe to say the Living Bible is off base on Proverbs 16:27.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ghtan]

On 10/6/2017 at 1:07 PM, ayin jade said:

Here is the verse. From proverbs 16:27

 

the living bible translation

Idle hands are the devil’s workshop; idle lips are his mouthpiece.

KJV

An ungodly man diggeth up evil: and in his lips there is as a burning fire.

NKJV

An ungodly man digs up evil,
And it is on his lips like a burning fire.

NASB

A worthless man digs up evil,
While his words are like scorching fire.

NIV

A scoundrel plots evil,
    and on their lips it is like a scorching fire.

the message

Mean people spread mean gossip;
    their words smart and burn.

 

Thanks for pointing out LB’s unique rendering of Pr 16:27. It led me to ask why it is so. My guess is that LB sees the same type of person in v 28-30 due “dishonest” in both v 28 and 30 (ESV). V 27 talks instead about a “worthless” person i.e. possibly a different type.

Question is, how is this person worthless? LB probably thinks v 27 serves instead as a contrast to v 26. Nothing impossible about that. Now since v 26 talks about the importance of work, it could mean the person in v 27 is worthless because he/she is idle. Hence LB’s paraphrase of v 27 actually has more thought put into it than do the literal translations.

LB was my first bible and I grew up loving it. Working through Pr 16:27 reminded me why - it is so refreshing to read. So while the LB does have some strange reading, I would recommend it to any new believer.