Defending the NIV

[OneLight]

Keep in mind that the KJV added to scripture, trying to explain better what the original scripture means. Is this the right thing to do? When in doubt, go back to the original copies to find the meaning as it was first presented. This will take a little work, for they did not talk like we talk.

Also keep in mind that what we read are translations from the original and no more.

[Massorite]

Keep in mind that the KJV added to scripture, trying to explain better what the original scripture means. Is this the right thing to do? When in doubt, go back to the original copies to find the meaning as it was first presented. This will take a little work, for they did not talk like we talk.

Also keep in mind that what we read are translations from the original and no more.

Yes I agree and this is why I have bible that show both the Greek and the Hebrew side by side with the English. My studies have showm me that even the King James has been changed and just as you have said it was changed to with the idea of helping people to better understand the bible. But compared to what is out there today. The KJV is the best that can be found. We must grab hold of something because if we do nothing but think that all versions are corrupted what do we believe? Which one is correct? That is why I hang with the KJV because it has been (as imperfect as it might be) the number one best selling book in the world for 400 years and that would not have happened without the blessings of God and God would never have given that kind of blessing unless it was exceptable in his eyes.

[OneLight]

The versions I use the most in my studies are the following, but not in order of preference:

American Standard Version

New American Standard Version

King James Version

New King James Version

When I need to find where scripture quoted is from, I search all versions available and then return to the versions I use most to see how the verse is read within them.

When I come upon a question, or what seems to be a conflict between versions, I always rely on the Interlinear software that allows me to read it in the original languages to see how they meant it to be. I do hope to soon be able to read the Interlinear bible as easy as I do the other versions, but that is hard because they just did not talk as we do today and the meanings behind their words, more often then not, are different then the meanings we hold today for the same words.

[lekh l'kha]

Keep in mind that the KJV added to scripture, trying to explain better what the original scripture means. Is this the right thing to do? When in doubt, go back to the original copies to find the meaning as it was first presented. This will take a little work, for they did not talk like we talk.

Also keep in mind that what we read are translations from the original and no more.

Yes I agree and this is why I have bible that show both the Greek and the Hebrew side by side with the English. My studies have showm me that even the King James has been changed and just as you have said it was changed to with the idea of helping people to better understand the bible. But compared to what is out there today. The KJV is the best that can be found. We must grab hold of something because if we do nothing but think that all versions are corrupted what do we believe? Which one is correct? That is why I hang with the KJV because it has been (as imperfect as it might be) the number one best selling book in the world for 400 years and that would not have happened without the blessings of God and God would never have given that kind of blessing unless it was exceptable in his eyes.

What's your view of the New King James, Massorite? Have you seen it? I've been using the New King James for many years, alongside the Complete Jewish Bible and the New Living Translation and other versions. I've found it good, but I don't know if there is error through using different words. I agree that words are very important and can carry vastly different meanings, like "bear your iniquity" not being the same as "suffer for your sins".

Another example is Rev2: 22 "Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds."

The N.I.V says "I will cause you to suffer intensely (or something like that), yet the words "great tribulation" are from the Greek words "megas thlipsis" and it's only the King James and New King James which translate those words directly each time they are found in the New Testament - therefore only the KJV and NKJV reflect the fact that "great tribulation" (as opposed to "tribulation") is spoken of only 3 times in the N.T - each time by Jesus Himself:

1) In the Olivet Discourse mention of the great tribulation (Mat.24: 21-22).

2) In the warning to the Thyatira Christians that He Himself would throw them into great tribulation if they did not repent of following the doctrines of a false prophetess, aptly named Jezebel.

3) In John's mention of the multitude of saints who had come out from the great tribulation and had washed their robes and were seen in heaven by John (Rev.7: 14).

Because they're careful to translate the words as literally as possible, it's only the KJV and the NKJV which reflect the fact that great tribulation was mentioned only 3 times - each time by Jesus.

I do like reading other translations as well, and although I'm fully aware of the many flaws of the New Living Translation, I like to compare it's translation of Old Testament passages with the KJV's translation of the same passages, because the New Living Translation does a lot to bring out the meaning of archaic idioms etc which you would otherwise need a commentary to bring out.

I also think the KJV is the best. But I find the New KJV much easier to read, because it does away with the thee's and thou's and a lot of other archaic language, using the modern words instead, without paraphrasing. I'd like to know what you and others think of the New KJV though.

Lekh.

[Isaiah 6:8]

Keep in mind that the KJV added to scripture, trying to explain better what the original scripture means. Is this the right thing to do? When in doubt, go back to the original copies to find the meaning as it was first presented. This will take a little work, for they did not talk like we talk.

Also keep in mind that what we read are translations from the original and no more.

Yes I agree and this is why I have bible that show both the Greek and the Hebrew side by side with the English. My studies have showm me that even the King James has been changed and just as you have said it was changed to with the idea of helping people to better understand the bible. But compared to what is out there today. The KJV is the best that can be found. We must grab hold of something because if we do nothing but think that all versions are corrupted what do we believe? Which one is correct? That is why I hang with the KJV because it has been (as imperfect as it might be) the number one best selling book in the world for 400 years and that would not have happened without the blessings of God and God would never have given that kind of blessing unless it was exceptable in his eyes.

Hey Massorite since you came into this discussion late, please see my post on the subject.

http://www.worthychristianforums.com/index...t&p=1496015

I hope it helps.

[Massorite]

Keep in mind that the KJV added to scripture, trying to explain better what the original scripture means. Is this the right thing to do? When in doubt, go back to the original copies to find the meaning as it was first presented. This will take a little work, for they did not talk like we talk.

Also keep in mind that what we read are translations from the original and no more.

Yes I agree and this is why I have bible that show both the Greek and the Hebrew side by side with the English. My studies have showm me that even the King James has been changed and just as you have said it was changed to with the idea of helping people to better understand the bible. But compared to what is out there today. The KJV is the best that can be found. We must grab hold of something because if we do nothing but think that all versions are corrupted what do we believe? Which one is correct? That is why I hang with the KJV because it has been (as imperfect as it might be) the number one best selling book in the world for 400 years and that would not have happened without the blessings of God and God would never have given that kind of blessing unless it was exceptable in his eyes.

What's your view of the New King James, Massorite? Have you seen it? I've been using the New King James for many years, alongside the Complete Jewish Bible and the New Living Translation and other versions. I've found it good, but I don't know if there is error through using different words. I agree that words are very important and can carry vastly different meanings, like "bear your iniquity" not being the same as "suffer for your sins".

Another example is Rev2: 22 "Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds."

The N.I.V says "I will cause you to suffer intensely (or something like that), yet the words "great tribulation" are from the Greek words "megas thlipsis" and it's only the King James and New King James which translate those words directly each time they are found in the New Testament - therefore only the KJV and NKJV reflect the fact that "great tribulation" (as opposed to "tribulation") is spoken of only 3 times in the N.T - each time by Jesus Himself:

1) In the Olivet Discourse mention of the great tribulation (Mat.24: 21-22).

2) In the warning to the Thyatira Christians that He Himself would throw them into great tribulation if they did not repent of following the doctrines of a false prophetess, aptly named Jezebel.

3) In John's mention of the multitude of saints who had come out from the great tribulation and had washed their robes and were seen in heaven by John (Rev.7: 14).

Because they're careful to translate the words as literally as possible, it's only the KJV and the NKJV which reflect the fact that great tribulation was mentioned only 3 times - each time by Jesus.

I do like reading other translations as well, and although I'm fully aware of the many flaws of the New Living Translation, I like to compare it's translation of Old Testament passages with the KJV's translation of the same passages, because the New Living Translation does a lot to bring out the meaning of archaic idioms etc which you would otherwise need a commentary to bring out.

I also think the KJV is the best. But I find the New KJV much easier to read, because it does away with the thee's and thou's and a lot of other archaic language, using the modern words instead, without paraphrasing. I'd like to know what you and others think of the New KJV though.

Lekh.

The new KJV is the bible I recammand for those who do not want to mess with the thee's and thou's. I have read parts of it but I haven't researched it like I have other versions. But I have read enough of it to consider it a good rendering.

[Massorite]

Keep in mind that the KJV added to scripture, trying to explain better what the original scripture means. Is this the right thing to do? When in doubt, go back to the original copies to find the meaning as it was first presented. This will take a little work, for they did not talk like we talk.

Also keep in mind that what we read are translations from the original and no more.

Yes I agree and this is why I have bible that show both the Greek and the Hebrew side by side with the English. My studies have shown me that even the King James has been changed and just as you have said it was changed to with the idea of helping people to better understand the bible. But compared to what is out there today. The KJV is the best that can be found. We must grab hold of something because if we do nothing but think that all versions are corrupted what do we believe? Which one is correct? That is why I hang with the KJV because it has been (as imperfect as it might be) the number one best selling book in the world for 400 years and that would not have happened without the blessings of God and God would never have given that kind of blessing unless it was acceptable in his eyes.

Hey Massorite since you came into this discussion late, please see my post on the subject.

http://www.worthychristianforums.com/index...t&p=1496015

I hope it helps.

Actually I got into this in the beginning and if you go back to the beginning (as Ken Ham would say) you will see me there. I have been working on my new book called "A Message to Muslims and a Guild for Christians" and I have been doing much research on Islam and reading the Quran.

I read your post and I agree with you for the most part but I think you are leaving out God's abilities to make sure that His word is preserved. I do believe that almost all bible versions contain the basics that can lead the reader to Christ but for hard core study only a couple will do. Even the Muslims claim that the Quran has never been changed but the first 6 copies were brought together to make one just as the bible was by King James and then those 6 copies of the Quran were burnt so in reality there is no way to prove the purity of the Quran. God did not give us his word just so we could mess it up. He has made sure that his word has been preserved and I believe that God has been preserved and that at least for the English version He used the King James version to do that and even though there are changes that have been made in the KJV from the manuscripts King James used God has made sure that the resources are there for ua to use to discover what is missing or changes. From what I can see it is my opinion that the newer the versions the more changes and inaccuracies there are thanks to mans best intentions or not.

The KJV bible I use is the Companion Bible of 1611 and it actually tells or points out what many of the changes are. My name Massorite (Massorite or Massorah) is actually the name of a group of scribes how found the bible after the return from Babylon (books of Ezra and Nehemiah). They were the authorized custodians put in charge of putting the text in order and it took 110 years to do it. The little writing you see in many bibles in the center or in the side margins is called the "Massorah Parva" or Small Massorah. God has had his hand on his word from the get go.