niv or kjv- which is right

[RGR]

Maestroh,

I am adding this post to the end of a very lengthy thread on the subject of Bible versions to bring it to the top for your consideration. Was there any clear winner? I guess it depends on how you define victory. If it means changing minds, I would imagine the answer is no. If it means people sharing their views and allowing others to read and decide, maybe so. The question I would be interested in getting an answer to is did anyone change their mind on this subject through the debates? Was there someone that wholeheartedly loved new translations that is now KJV only or was there someone that was KJV only that now embraces new translations? If someone did change their mind through a debate at Worthy Chat, I would be interested in knowing what the argument was that changed their mind?

Anyway, once again, welcome to the Worthy Boards Maestroh.

[SavedSinner]

Well the NIV certainly deserves criticism...but then again, so does any other translation. We have to constantly be searching the manuscripts we have to make sure that the translations are adequate. Even the KJV fails on certain levels.

As for myself, I'm a big fan of the NASB.

I agree, I like the NASB best, but the docrine of inerrancy only applies to the original manuscripts

Amen!!!

I also like the NASB and the NKJV...Both are good reads.

Personally though,I haven't read a bible yet that didn't

bring me closer to God.

[tah]

Lately I have been reading the KJV and the ESV..

I have a few other translations but the funny thing is for me is when I am reading the KJV is when the Lord allows the scripture to "leap out at me"..

I love the KJV as I have grown up with it and am familiar with it and perhaps that is part of the reason I do love it..

I like the ESV because it seems to capture the meaning of the KJV without changing it...

I do not read the NIV much...

so I guess my answer to the original question would be the KJV..

[Guest jckduboise]

you will also notice how the niv completely leaves out many verses. Watch the numbering, it will somtimes say go from 34 to 39 with nothing inbetween. Alot of this is due to the writers of the NIV holding certain views.

One big one is they do not beleive in Christs divinity. They changed most every verse they could about this except for the ones that were so painfully obvious they couldnt do anything about it.

Which ones?

[ajesuschrist_mathetes]

you will also notice how the niv completely leaves out many verses. Watch the numbering, it will somtimes say go from 34 to 39 with nothing inbetween. Alot of this is due to the writers of the NIV holding certain views.

One big one is they do not beleive in Christs divinity. They changed most every verse they could about this except for the ones that were so painfully obvious they couldnt do anything about it.

Which ones?

For anyone who has not seen the following series and/or read the transcript, I wholeheartedly recommend doing so.

http://www.johnankerberg.org/catalog/bible.html

I got the above link by clicking on their Search feature and requested "which translation"[w/o the quote marks], then selected/copied/ and pasted it below:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Which English Translation of the Bible is Best for Christians to Use Today?

Guests: Dr. Kenneth Barker, Dr. Don Wilkins, Dr. Dan Wallace, Dr. James White, Dr. Samuel Gipp, Dr. Thomas Strouse, Dr. Joseph Chambers

Are today

[Guest Cephas]

(deadman1204 @ Feb 22 2006, 09:15 PM)

you will also notice how the niv completely leaves out many verses. Watch the numbering, it will somtimes say go from 34 to 39 with nothing inbetween. Alot of this is due to the writers of the NIV holding certain views.

One big one is they do not beleive in Christs divinity. They changed most every verse they could about this except for the ones that were so painfully obvious they couldnt do anything about it.

The NIV didn't leave out certain verses. The Greek Manuscripts they chose to base their translation on didn't contain them, and, even so, they put footnotes and supplemental notes referring to them so you would know about them anyway. This is an old argument and needs to be lost. Also, the different versions aren't for copyright reasons, they are style and language reasons. The ERV was a translation aimed at British English, the ASV, which became the NASB, was translated for American English. both are literal translations based on texts different than the TR that the KJV used. Then NIV is a transliteral reading, a cross between a paraphrase and a literal interpretation and was also translated with universal English in mind, ie anyone speaking English should be able to understand it and they removed as much culture specific English as they could. The NLT is a corrected update of the old Living Bible and is a paraphrase.

Most modern translations view the fact that many manuscripts have been discovered since the Erasmus texts that the KJV were based on. (At the time of Erasmus I believe there were less than 30, and now there are over 5000) So, they use a Majority Text view for which ones to translate from. But, MOST of them also make notes to refer to the other available texts. The only real argument would be about which Original Manuscripts you accept as valid. Most KJV only people believe that Textus Receptus (TR or Erasmus Texts) are the only true Manuscripts. Most modern Translators don't agree.

Personally, I agree with the Modern Translators, but honor the views of the KJV only crowd, as long as they behave and don't bash others for believing otherwise. To do a more complete study, one should look up the reasons each side uses their Original Manuscripts, not some conspiracy theory Hogwash about NewAge devil worshipping hoodoo. The differences are minimal and in no way affect the Core Teachings of the Word. If you wish to know more, this thread provides some good background links and you can do some internet research as well. One should approach it with Prayer and a true desire to know the truth of God. He will reveal it to you, but leave out the extremists, they are all off base and error filled. Find the Facts, and make an informed, prayer lead decision that fits what the Holy Spirit reveals to you.

In Jesus Name. God Bless you all

[Mark777]

For you Greek lovers and KJVO people - look at John 1:18.

[Guest Daave]

Hey Mark777,

Daave here, I'm a JKVO man, here it is:

John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

Now that I've looked it up, what am I looking for?

Daave

[Maestroh]

Maestroh,

I am adding this post to the end of a very lengthy thread on the subject of Bible versions to bring it to the top for your consideration. Was there any clear winner? I guess it depends on how you define victory. If it means changing minds, I would imagine the answer is no. If it means people sharing their views and allowing others to read and decide, maybe so. The question I would be interested in getting an answer to is did anyone change their mind on this subject through the debates? Was there someone that wholeheartedly loved new translations that is now KJV only or was there someone that was KJV only that now embraces new translations? If someone did change their mind through a debate at Worthy Chat, I would be interested in knowing what the argument was that changed their mind?

Anyway, once again, welcome to the Worthy Boards Maestroh.

Butero,

Regarding your inquiry, I am aware of people who changed minds in both directions actually. Here has been my basic experience: people who get all troubled about CERTAINTY in apposition to TRUTH tend to go the KJVO route. Those who are persuaded by evidence MAY go one of a number of directions. For example, if majority rules in one's mind, the KJV tends to be the tradition they defend even if they are not truly KJVO. On ther other hand, if older is better, they run more towards the newer conservative standard versions such as NIV or NASV.

[Mark777]

Daave,

Sorry, for not answering before. I have been busy painting murals.

Do you know Koine Greek?

The Byzantine text has the verse this way:

No one at any time has seen God but the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the father, that one has explained Him*.

The KJV has "son" instead of "only begotten God".

A lesser variant and one that , to me, takes away from the diety of Christ.

The Byzantine reading has the highest manuscript rating based on older texts.

* The New Testament in the Original Greek: According to the Byzantine/Majority Textform.

By Robinson & Pierpont.

Edited May 23, 2006 by Mark777