Bible versions....which one and why?

[Agape4Robin]

I have several different bible translations, KJV,NKJV, NIV and a NCV. Other than the differences in wording, am I right to use each of them to help in my bible study?

What version do you like and use?

[Knight]

Nkjv.

[Caledvwlch]

Nasb, but I do like the raw attitude of the KJV.

[Emo]

NKJV, Scofield

[Lovejoy]

NIV suffers from some defects, but is sometimes useful. Generally I will use NASB, ASV, NKJV, and a few others. I have at least 15 different versions in the house, but only have concordances for the NASB, NIV, and KJV.

[Nineveh]

I have several different bible translations, KJV,NKJV, NIV and a NCV. Other than the differences in wording, am I right to use each of them to help in my bible study?

I don't think you are wrong for using more than one :)

I don't know what an NCV is, but the other three plus an NASB are the ones I use most. When an idea is expressed that I don't quite understand fully, it helps a great deal to read the others to get a better idea :)

[SOTK]

My favorite is the NKJV.

[Agape4Robin]

I don't think you are wrong for using more than one :)

I don't know what an NCV is, but the other three plus an NASB are the ones I use most. When an idea is expressed that I don't quite understand fully, it helps a great deal to read the others to get a better idea :)
NCV is New Century Version. It's a "everyday" english language version. I think along the lines of The Message. I agree, but I was once told that anything other than the KJV was inaccurate and wrong. That confused and upset me, so I prayed about it and I opened the bible and the first passage I read was that God's Word will not return.....void. That sealed it for me, as long as I was reading and studying His Word, He would bless it and enrich my life with it.
Praise God!

[Justin (Wiccan)]

NIV suffers from some defects, but is sometimes useful.

Defects? I had not heard anything about such--the NIV is usually viewed as one of the best, if not the best, "word-for-word" translation.

(And no--I'm not looking for debate: this is an inquiry for information.)

Justin

[Christine]

Defects? I had not heard anything about such--the NIV is usually viewed as one of the best, if not the best, "word-for-word" translation.

(And no--I'm not looking for debate: this is an inquiry for information.)

Justin
Justin, I've never heard anyone claim NIV was one of the best "word-for-word" translations. Overall, it is better than most modern Bibles, but that does not excuse the fact that the translators made some blatant mistakes in translating.

[Nineveh]

Justin, I've never heard anyone claim NIV was one of the best "word-for-word" translations.


I have heard that claim for NASB, but never NIV.

[Lovejoy]

Defects? I had not heard anything about such--the NIV is usually viewed as one of the best, if not the best, "word-for-word" translation.

(And no--I'm not looking for debate: this is an inquiry for information.)

Justin
Ask Turbo about it. There was a thread about it some time ago, and he made several good points about the NIV. I agreed with them, but they are his points to present (I hate repeating great info as if it were my own).

[Poly]

NKJV, Scofield

Same here.

[Justin (Wiccan)]

Ask Turbo about it. There was a thread about it some time ago, and he made several good points about the NIV. I agreed with them, but they are his points to present (I hate repeating great info as if it were my own).

Will do, and thanks.

Thanks to Ninevah and Christine as well.

Justin

[Mr. Coffee]

Holman Christian Standard Bible.

[julie21]

NIV and the NKJV...though mainly the NIV. I love reading the wording and phrasing of the old KJV.
Here in Oz, NIV seems to be the one used most widely.

[godrulz]

NIV (dynamic equivalence vs word for word) and NASB (more grammatically literal, but less readable). Try adding a Greek interlinear to your other translations. No one version is perfect or without some bias.

[swanca99]

I read from the KJV, but use the NKJV when I study. I use the other translations for comparative purposes.

The NKJV has the added feature of putting Majority Text and Critical Text variants in the margins. The main text is the Textus Receptus. To the best of my knowledge, the other major versions use the Critical Text.

Between the NIV and the NASB, the NIV is more of a conceptual translation, the NASB more word-for-word. They are both based on the Critical Text (I lean toward the Majority Text personally).

[42ndgen]

I have not found one translation that does not differ from the original languages of the bible in some way. Some differ greatly and others differ slightly. But all translations differ some way. If you have the time and want to learn the original languages than it would be highly beneficil to do it. It will help see where the differences in the original languages and the translations really are.

Grace and Peace Patrick

[ebenz47037]

I have the KJV/NIV parallel Bible. I prefer KJV for the way it flows along as you read it.

[godrulz]

I have the KJV/NIV parallel Bible. I prefer KJV for the way it flows along as you read it.

Archaic English adds another interpretation step.

e.g. 'cute' meant bow-legged in archaic English. Today it means pretty.

[Agape4Robin]

I have not found one translation that does not differ from the original languages of the bible in some way. Some differ greatly and others differ slightly. But all translations differ some way. If you have the time and want to learn the original languages than it would be highly beneficil to do it. It will help see where the differences in the original languages and the translations really are.

Grace and Peace Patrick
I have a strong's exhaustive concordance and it has proven to be a very valuable tool. Any other suggestions for study aids?

[Mr. 5020]

I have a strong's exhaustive concordance and it has proven to be a very valuable tool. Any other suggestions for study aids?
Halley's Bible Handbook is good. There was also a book my pastor has about the Jewish culture during the time of Christ, OT, etc. It was awesomely helpful - just makes it easier to understand some verses (ie. heaping coals on their head).

[SOTK]

NIV and the NKJV...though mainly the NIV. I love reading the wording and phrasing of the old KJV.
Here in Oz, NIV seems to be the one used most widely.

Not as a general rule, but I've noticed that Protestant Christians use the NIV far more than any other version. I wonder why this is? In my quest to find a home church, I noticed that most of the Baptist and Non-Denom churches I attended used the NIV. Again, I wonder why?

[Agape4Robin]

Not as a general rule, but I've noticed that Protestant Christians use the NIV far more than any other version. I wonder why this is? In my quest to find a home church, I noticed that most of the Baptist and Non-Denom churches I attended used the NIV. Again, I wonder why?
I'm southern baptist and my church regulary uses KJV and swear by it. But I like to use other translations for study.....I have a hard time with kings english. :think:

[Ninjashadow]

I have a friend who is a somewhat new believer (about two years or so, I think) and what he did seems like a pretty decent idea. He started with the Message, then went to NIV, then he went to on to other versions. The Message is not by any means a great version to study, but I think it's good for new believers to start with, simply because it speaks in a language that is easy to understand.

[Agape4Robin]

I have a friend who is a somewhat new believer (about two years or so, I think) and what he did seems like a pretty decent idea. He started with the Message, then went to NIV, then he went to on to other versions. The Message is not by any means a great version to study, but I think it's good for new believers to start with, simply because it speaks in a language that is easy to understand.
I don't have that one, but I have read excerpts and I'd like to add it to my collection. :thumb:

[SOTK]

I have a friend who is a somewhat new believer (about two years or so, I think) and what he did seems like a pretty decent idea. He started with the Message, then went to NIV, then he went to on to other versions. The Message is not by any means a great version to study, but I think it's good for new believers to start with, simply because it speaks in a language that is easy to understand.

It's funny, but I just recently found out about the Message, and I've been a Christian for about 7 years now I think. One of my Pastors had it in his library and I asked him about it. Would it be worth reading for someone like me who has been in the Bible for quite some time already?

[Agape4Robin]

It's funny, but I just recently found out about the Message, and I've been a Christian for about 7 years now I think. One of my Pastors had it in his library and I asked him about it. Would it be worth reading for someone like me who has been in the Bible for quite some time already?
I would think so! :D

[Ninjashadow]

It's funny, but I just recently found out about the Message, and I've been a Christian for about 7 years now I think. One of my Pastors had it in his library and I asked him about it. Would it be worth reading for someone like me who has been in the Bible for quite some time already?

Couldn't hurt. It's set up slightly different than the average bible, but it's easy to read. The best thing about it is that it's in modern laguage, so it reads like you are talking to someone you know, if you understand what I mean.

BTW, did anyone know that you can get a bible that is translated into Ebonics?

[Ninjashadow]

I don't have that one, but I have read excerpts and I'd like to add it to my collection. :thumb:

I think you may be able to get it at Wal-Mart for about 20 bucks or at Barnes and Noble or Borders for about $30.

[SOTK]

BTW, did anyone know that you can get a bible that is translated into Ebonics?

:dunce:

[Ninjashadow]

Are you calling me dumb because I didn't know that?

[SOTK]

Are you calling me dumb because I didn't know that?

Not at all. I think a person who would get an ebonics Bible is a :dunce:

[42ndgen]

Hi Agape4Robin:

Strong's Concordance is a good start. I own a very good interliner new and old testament called The Complete Word Study New Testament that not only shows what word is translated in the Greek but it also shows parts of speech for each greek word. And The Complete Word Study Old Testament for the Hebrew.

There is an excellent bible program on the internet that is free to down load called the Interliner Scripture Analyzer

http://www.scripture4all.org/

If You want to get a beginning understanding of Greek Basic Greek In 30 Minutes a Day by Jim Found Is a good book.But if you are a little more serious than Basics of Biblical Greek by William D. Mounce is the book for you.

[Agape4Robin]

:mock: Ebonics....... :darwinsm:

[Agape4Robin]

Hi Agape4Robin:

Strong's Concordance is a good start. I own a very good interliner new and old testament called The Complete Word Study New Testament that not only shows what word is translated in the Greek but it also shows parts of speech for each greek word. And The Complete Word Study Old Testament for the Hebrew.

There is an excellent bible program on the internet that is free to down load called the Interliner Scripture Analyzer

http://www.scripture4all.org/

If You want to get a beginning understanding of Greek Basic Greek In 30 Minutes a Day by Jim Found Is a good book.But if you are a little more serious than Basics of Biblical Greek by William D. Mounce is the book for you.
Hey! Thanks 42ndgen! :LoJo:

[Ninjashadow]

Not at all. I think a person who would get an ebonics Bible is a :dunce:

;) I knew what you meant. Before long they'll have a Pig Latin Bible.

[Ninjashadow]

Hi Agape4Robin:

Strong's Concordance is a good start. I own a very good interliner new and old testament called The Complete Word Study New Testament that not only shows what word is translated in the Greek but it also shows parts of speech for each greek word. And The Complete Word Study Old Testament for the Hebrew.

There is an excellent bible program on the internet that is free to down load called the Interliner Scripture Analyzer

http://www.scripture4all.org/

If You want to get a beginning understanding of Greek Basic Greek In 30 Minutes a Day by Jim Found Is a good book.But if you are a little more serious than Basics of Biblical Greek by William D. Mounce is the book for you.

Hey, that looks like a good cite. I'll check it out, thanks.

[SOTK]

;) I knew what you meant. Before long they'll have a Pig Latin Bible.

:chuckle:

[Agape4Robin]

Did ya'll hear about the PC bible where they are changing all the male references to he/she. God is mother/father? :shocked:

[SOTK]

Did ya'll hear about the PC bible where they are changing all the male references to he/she. God is mother/father? :shocked:

:down: :nono:

I'm sure it won't be long before all kinds of verses are ripped out and people put their own words in God's mouth! :rolleyes:

:sozo2:

[Agape4Robin]

:down: :nono:

I'm sure it won't be long before all kinds of verses are ripped out and people put their own words in God's mouth! :rolleyes:

:sozo2:
:cry: :rain:

[Lovejoy]

;) I knew what you meant. Before long they'll have a Pig Latin Bible.
They have bibles in pigeon English for the Islanders. My wife can understand it (she was raised on Oahu), but I don't get it at all.

[Lovejoy]

:down: :nono:

I'm sure it won't be long before all kinds of verses are ripped out and people put their own words in God's mouth! :rolleyes:

:sozo2:
Before long? You and I see that everyday here.

[Agape4Robin]

Before long? You and I see that everyday here.
:LoJo:

[Lovejoy]

:LoJo:
Its funny, and its true! Double threat!

[Ninjashadow]

Anyone familiar with the NLT?

[SOTK]

Before long? You and I see that everyday here.

This is very true, unfortunately. :(

[Agape4Robin]

Anyone familiar with the NLT?
Isn't that a literal translation?

[Lovejoy]

Anyone familiar with the NLT?
I use it to read to my wife. It is an understandable and gentle translation. I can't speak to its overall accuracy, but then I do not use it as my primary source.

[Lovejoy]

Isn't that a literal translation?
Nope. The New Living Translation is a bit more of a narrative.

[Agape4Robin]

Nope. The New Living Translation is a bit more of a narrative.
Aaaaaahhhhhhhhhh.................... ;)

[Ninjashadow]

I think it's a good study bible. NIV or NKJV are probably better for straight reading, but I like NLT for studying. Just my two cents.

[SOTK]

I've never had much use for the NLT, personally. I read the NKJV the most and sometimes the NIV. :)

[Agape4Robin]

I read my NIV the most. You can tell because it is full of highlighted scriptures!
I also have my mom's bible.....it's NKJV Spirit Filled Bible....it's my treasure and no amount of money could ever replace it.

[SOTK]

That's cool, Robin! I treasure my first Bible as well and it's also a NKJV! :cool:

[justchristian]

Mabye I missed mention of this earlier but any thoughts out there on the Message? I think only one guy wrote it, i see a lot of people reading in church from - seems scetchy.

[Ninjashadow]

Mabye I missed mention of this earlier but any thoughts out there on the Message? I think only one guy wrote it, i see a lot of people reading in church from - seems scetchy.

The Message is good for new Christians because of it's easy language and its setup. However, I do not think it should be used alone to teach from in church. As I said, it's main purpose is ease of use for new Christians.

[logos_x]

1912 Weymouth NT
1898 Youngs Literal Translation
Concordant Translation

And thanks 42ndgen! That program is awesome!

[Agape4Robin]

The Message is good for new Christians because of it's easy language and its setup. However, I do not think it should be used alone to teach from in church. As I said, it's main purpose is ease of use for new Christians.
:BRAVO:

[Frank Ernest]

KJV (Crown Reference, 1610), NIV, Latin Vulgate, Douay-Rheims (1611 and 1898), Analytical-Literal, Young's Literal, Greek New Testament, Hebrew Old Testament, Companion Bible.
I have a comprehensive concordance, Strong's concordance, copies of the apocrypha, Enoch and Jasher, Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.

For general reading I prefer the KJV Crown Reference. For study, that and the Companion Bible. Everything else is used for research and comparison.

[Delmar]

Defects? I had not heard anything about such--the NIV is usually viewed as one of the best, if not the best, "word-for-word" translation.

(And no--I'm not looking for debate: this is an inquiry for information.)

Justin JC Wenger who was a big shot Theologian in the Mennonite Church used to advocate strongly for the NIV. He used to say it was suitable for memorization and daily Bible study but it's main advantage was literary style. What ever that means.

The NIV leaves things out that are included in most other versions,but when it does so it includes the omited phrase in the footnotes.

[godrulz]

JC Wenger who was a big shot Theologian in the Mennonite Church used to advocate strongly for the NIV. He used to say it was suitable for memorization and daily Bible study but it's main advantage was literary style. What ever that means.

The NIV leaves things out that are included in most other versions,but when it does so it includes the omited phrase in the footnotes.

Most exclusions are based on the best and oldest MSS. It is not a conspiracy to water down the Word.

[Turbo]

Most exclusions are based on the best and oldest MSS. It is not a conspiracy to water down the Word.
It's a common misconception that oldest automatically means best.

[Turbo]

Anyone familiar with the NLT?
Yes. Like NIV, NLT mistranslates Deuteronomy 22 to say that God wants rape victims to marry their attackers. :down: :down:

[godrulz]

It's a common misconception that oldest automatically means best.

Correct. Each MSS must be weighed on its own merits. Textual criticism is an art and a science.

[godrulz]

Yes. Like NIV, NLT mistranslates Deuteronomy 22 to say that God wants rape victims to marry their attackers. :down: :down:


Verse? I would not be surprised if this is a misunderstanding on your part.

[Poly]

It's a common misconception that oldest automatically means best.

True. Take Knight for instance. He's old but not necessarily the be.....er.....nevermind. :o

[Turbo]

Verse? I would not be surprised if this is a misunderstanding on your part.
Deuteronomy 22:28-29

[Lighthouse]

Currently I use the KJV. I would like to get somethign with a little more common English, but the only concordance I have is for the KJV.

[Turbo]

Defects? I had not heard anything about such--the NIV is usually viewed as one of the best, if not the best, "word-for-word" translation.

(And no--I'm not looking for debate: this is an inquiry for information.)

JustinFirst of all, the NIV doesn't claim to be a "word-for-word" tranlation, but rather a dynamic equivalence.

That said, sometimes the baked-in interpretations of the translators is quite dubious, as in the passage from Deuteronomy 22 that are mistranslated in NIV (and NLT) to say that God wants single rape victims to marry their attackers.

This following is reposted from NIV Bible Quiz (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=614423#post614423).

First compare these verses to Exodus 22:16-17. Even NIV and NLT do not pervert the translation:

(NIV)
If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride-price, and she shall be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he must still pay the bride-price for virgins.

(NLT)
If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged to anyone and sleeps with her, he must pay the customary dowry and accept her as his wife. But if her father refuses to let her marry him, the man must still pay the money for her dowry.

Now, lets look at Deuteronomy 22:

(NKJV)
22"If a man is found lying with a woman married to a husband, then both of them shall die--the man that lay with the woman, and the woman; so you shall put away the evil from Israel.
23"If a young woman who is a virgin is betrothed to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her, 24then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry out in the city, and the man because he humbled his neighbor's wife; so you shall put away the evil from among you.

(NIV)
22 If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.
23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death-the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife. You must purge the evil from among you.
Verse 22 says that adultery is a capital crime. Verses 23-24 explain that someone who is engaged/betrothed should be regarded the same way as a married person. The betrothed woman in this scenario is clearly not raped; it is specified that she "did not scream for help."

(NKJV)
25"But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. 26But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter. 27For he found her in the countryside, and the betrothed young woman cried out, but there was no one to save her.

(NIV)
25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the girl; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders his neighbor, 27 for the man found the girl out in the country, and though the betrothed girl screamed, there was no one to rescue her.
In this scenario, the betrothed woman did cry out for help. The crime is likened to a murder. NKJV says the man "forces her and lies with her."? The NIV says the man "rapes her."? It's not as much a word-for-word translation as other versions, but the meaning is the same.

(NKJV)
28"If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, 29then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.

(NIV)
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. Here's we have some problems. The phrase translates as "rapes her"? is not the same phrase as in the previous scenario (v. 25). The phrase is not "forces her" as before. It's something like our figure of speech, "sweeps her off her feet."? It doesn't literally mean he knocked her to the gound, though a translator who is sloppy and/or has an agenda might try to say so.

There is no mention of the woman screaming for help.

The previous case emphasized that the woman was not guilty; only the man was to be punished. This one says that "they are discovered/found out." If the man is caught raping a woman, it doesn't make sense to say that they are found out as if they are both guilty.

Then there is the matter of common sense. Why would God punish rape victims by forcing them to marry their attackers? What would stop any sleaze from raping any young woman he wants, so long as she isn't engaged or married? And then he gets to marry her? Come on!

[godrulz]

I agree with your conclusions. I am sure the translators were not that stupid. A word and contextual study would clarify things. The translators may have chosen a word that carries the weight of Hebrew, but is misunderstood with our Western mindset?

The Bible Knowledge Commentary, based on the NIV (Deere):

"A man who raped an unbethrothed virgin was forced to marry her (after paying the bride-price to the father) and had to forfeit the right of divorce. This protected, to a degree, the girl's honor and assured her (and her child if she became pregnant from the rape) permanent support. This stipulation may also have served as a deterrent against rape since the man would have to live with that woman for the rest of his life."

OT laws can seem strange to modern, NT believers. We are not under these laws. In their historical, cultural context, it is possible this was the case. One would have to ascertain what the best translation is, interpret it, and then apply it.

Other commentators also concur that the laws relate to rape and adultery. The man pays damages to the father, while the woman and potential child are also protected. In our culture and NT times, this would be unreasonable to force marriage. The law would still punish the rapist, and the victim may or may not be compensated (usually the latter).

I do not think the word and context about rape/adultery/incest/marriage is disputable, as harsh as the law seems to us. The NKJV is also taking translation/interpretation liberty. The context also has various scenarios, so we must interpret carefully.

[Turbo]

I agree with your conclusions.
Is this a typo? :confused:

[Lovejoy]

Thanks, Turbo. I rather assumed it was best to let you step up on the NIV issue. I had forgotten that it was in the Quiz thread that this issue was handled.

[Ninjashadow]

Deuteronomy 22:28-29

In my NLT, it says, "if a man has intercourse with a virgin..." It doesn't use the word "rape." However, my NIV does use the word rape.

[Lovejoy]

In my NLT, it says, "if a man has intercourse with a virgin..." It doesn't use the word "rape." However, my NIV does use the word rape.
Will the Ebonics bible say "if he gets his freak on"?

[Agape4Robin]

Will the Ebonics bible say "if he gets his freak on"?
:darwinsm:

[aikido7]

Nothing beats the Old World cadences of the KJV. Parallel Bibles are great for textual comparisons. I use an NIV bottom line. Some time ago I ran into a translation called "The Cottonpatch Bible" (I think!). Anyway, the guy that translated it had Galilee in Atlanta or someplace and the Pharisees were Baptist deacons and the Sadducees were Methodists... Something like that.

In Jesus' "Be ye therefore perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect" was actually translated as "Be ye therefore mature...." which I found out years later is a meaning closer to the original word in Greek. My interpretation is that mature Christians are more inclusive and accepting of others--more like the maturity of the Lord as envisioned by Jesus....

[Turbo]

In my NLT, it says, "if a man has intercourse with a virgin..." It doesn't use the word "rape." However, my NIV does use the word rape.
:think: What year was it published?

The quote from my post was from 1996 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy%2022:28-29;&version=51;), but we got a copy as a wedding present two years ago that said the same thing.

[Lovejoy]

:darwinsm:
I actually cannot find an ebonics bible, and I have looked. I have found prayers translated into it, and even the Ten Commandments, and they really were along the lines of what I posted. But hey, whatever gets the message across.

[Lovejoy]

:think: What year was it published?

The quote from my post was from 1996 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy%2022:28-29;&version=51;), but we got a copy as a wedding present two years ago that said the same thing.
My NLT says "rape."

[Crow]

Will the Ebonics bible say "if he gets his freak on"?

I have to spread some reputation around first. :mad:

[SOTK]

First of all, the NIV doesn't claim to be a "word-for-word" tranlation, but rather a dynamic equivalence.

That said, sometimes the baked-in interpretations of the translators is quite dubious, as in the passage from Deuteronomy 22 that are mistranslated in NIV (and NLT) to say that God wants single rape victims to marry their attackers.

This following is reposted from NIV Bible Quiz (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=614423#post614423).

First compare these verses to Exodus 22:16-17. Even NIV and NLT do not pervert the translation:

(NIV)
If a man seduces a virgin who is not pledged to be married and sleeps with her, he must pay the bride-price, and she shall be his wife. If her father absolutely refuses to give her to him, he must still pay the bride-price for virgins.

(NLT)
If a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged to anyone and sleeps with her, he must pay the customary dowry and accept her as his wife. But if her father refuses to let her marry him, the man must still pay the money for her dowry.

Now, lets look at Deuteronomy 22:

(NKJV)
22"If a man is found lying with a woman married to a husband, then both of them shall die--the man that lay with the woman, and the woman; so you shall put away the evil from Israel.
23"If a young woman who is a virgin is betrothed to a husband, and a man finds her in the city and lies with her, 24then you shall bring them both out to the gate of that city, and you shall stone them to death with stones, the young woman because she did not cry out in the city, and the man because he humbled his neighbor's wife; so you shall put away the evil from among you.

(NIV)
22 If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel.
23 If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death-the girl because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man's wife. You must purge the evil from among you.
Verse 22 says that adultery is a capital crime. Verses 23-24 explain that someone who is engaged/betrothed should be regarded the same way as a married person. The betrothed woman in this scenario is clearly not raped; it is specified that she "did not scream for help."

(NKJV)
25"But if a man finds a betrothed young woman in the countryside, and the man forces her and lies with her, then only the man who lay with her shall die. 26But you shall do nothing to the young woman; there is in the young woman no sin deserving of death, for just as when a man rises against his neighbor and kills him, even so is this matter. 27For he found her in the countryside, and the betrothed young woman cried out, but there was no one to save her.

(NIV)
25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the girl; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders his neighbor, 27 for the man found the girl out in the country, and though the betrothed girl screamed, there was no one to rescue her.
In this scenario, the betrothed woman did cry out for help. The crime is likened to a murder. NKJV says the man "forces her and lies with her."? The NIV says the man "rapes her."? It's not as much a word-for-word translation as other versions, but the meaning is the same.

(NKJV)
28"If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, 29then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days.

(NIV)
28 If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, 29 he shall pay the girl's father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. Here's we have some problems. The phrase translates as "rapes her"? is not the same phrase as in the previous scenario (v. 25). The phrase is not "forces her" as before. It's something like our figure of speech, "sweeps her off her feet."? It doesn't literally mean he knocked her to the gound, though a translator who is sloppy and/or has an agenda might try to say so.

There is no mention of the woman screaming for help.

The previous case emphasized that the woman was not guilty; only the man was to be punished. This one says that "they are discovered/found out." If the man is caught raping a woman, it doesn't make sense to say that they are found out as if they are both guilty.

Then there is the matter of common sense. Why would God punish rape victims by forcing them to marry their attackers? What would stop any sleaze from raping any young woman he wants, so long as she isn't engaged or married? And then he gets to marry her? Come on!

Good work, Turbo! :up: This is why I use the NKJV!

[Mr. Coffee]

Nothing beats the Old World cadences of the KJV. The translators read their drafts out loud to one another. They wanted a Bible that would be read in churches, and it had to "make sense" that way. Plus it was produced in the greatest century for English prose. We'll never have anything like it.

At the farthest end of the spectrum is the English Standard Version (ESV). I think it's the only bad translation out there in terms of style. The NIV is written in perfect American English--every single sentence would have been approved by Strunk & White. The NASB is slightly clumsy but it's the most dignified modern translation we have. The Holman CSB is at least as smooth as the NIV, and it's very pithy--it's a good version for Scripture memory.

[Lighthouse]

The Holman CSB is at least as smooth as the NIV, and it's very pithy--it's a good version for Scripture memory.
Unless you want to memorize Matthew 17:21.

[godrulz]

Is this a typo? :confused:

You are a smart cookie. Obviously, in our culture and times, it would be absurd to make a rapist marry his victim. The Middle Eastern culture and times was different. A brother would have to marry his brother's widow, etc. The Bible was not written in the 21 st century by North Americans. We must not read our ideas back into it. I have not looked at this passage carefully. It must be translated and interpreted properly in light of other verses. We may not agree with some cultural issues. There was a time God allowed 'incest' to start the human race. I do not believe we can make an application that modern rapists must marry their victims. It is possible that this was the intent when written due to other cultural issues. There are many OT issues that seem absurd to us now.

[godrulz]

In my NLT, it says, "if a man has intercourse with a virgin..." It doesn't use the word "rape." However, my NIV does use the word rape.

I imagine the same Hebrew word is correctly translated rape elsewhere.

[godrulz]

Nothing beats the Old World cadences of the KJV. Parallel Bibles are great for textual comparisons. I use an NIV bottom line. Some time ago I ran into a translation called "The Cottonpatch Bible" (I think!). Anyway, the guy that translated it had Galilee in Atlanta or someplace and the Pharisees were Baptist deacons and the Sadducees were Methodists... Something like that.

In Jesus' "Be ye therefore perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect" was actually translated as "Be ye therefore mature...." which I found out years later is a meaning closer to the original word in Greek. My interpretation is that mature Christians are more inclusive and accepting of others--more like the maturity of the Lord as envisioned by Jesus....

Many Greek words have shades of meaning depending on the context. Mature is a possible translation. The context also supports perfect. We are to be perfect, like the Father, in our love for others. It does not mean absolute, literal perfection in all things, including math.

[godrulz]

Good work, Turbo! :up: This is why I use the NKJV!


A few verses you do not agree with are not a reflection on the whole Bible. I am sure we can find many problems in KJV and some in NKJV. No one translation is perfect on every verse. Some verses are debatable due to MSS differences or difficulty in translation and textual criticism.

[Turbo]

Obviously, in our culture and times, it would be absurd to make a rapist marry his victim.
Obviously, in any culture or time, it would be exceedingly cruel and wicked to make a rape victim marry her attacker.

[aikido7]

There is no question that there is no translator who can produce a version completely faithful to the original. Even the Bible with its power, poetry, and its unique structures, vocabularies and theologies, is beyond being captured in another tongue.

For scholars, writers and translators a dissatisfaction with available translations often provides the impetus for a new version of a work.

That's why there are so many different gospels--those in the canon and those not included. Every gospel writer had a different agenda.

[Inquisitor]

I have several different bible translations, KJV,NKJV, NIV and a NCV. Other than the differences in wording, am I right to use each of them to help in my bible study?

What version do you like and use?

Douay-Rheims and Clementine Vulgate.

[Inquisitor]

There is no question that there is no translator who can produce a version completely faithful to the original...

Hence the need for an infallible Church guided by the Holy Ghost.

[godrulz]

Hence the need for an infallible Church guided by the Holy Ghost.

Your infallible Church has had contradictory ideas through the centuries. It has evolved teachings late in Church history that do not have biblical or apostolic roots. We need the Word properly translated and illuminated by the Holy Spirit.

[Inquisitor]

We need the Word properly translated and illuminated by the Holy Spirit.

Oh, really? Well, what did Christians do before they had the scriptures?

[Mr. Coffee]

Unless you want to memorize Matthew 17:21.CSB:

19 Then the disciples approached Jesus privately and said, "Why couldn't we drive it out?"

20"Because of your little faith," He told them. "For I assure you: If you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will tell this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you. [ 21However, this kind does not come out except by prayer and fasting.]"

[godrulz]

Oh, really? Well, what did Christians do before they had the scriptures?


The letters of Paul were circulated among the churches before Bible Societies published the Scriptures in book form centuries later. MSS were available early in church history.

[godrulz]

"If the KJV Bible was good enough for Paul, it is good enough for me." :think:

[Freak]

NIV
NKJV
KJV
JB

[God_Is_Truth]

i started with NIV, then switched to NASB when i lost my NIV. i also have read some of the NLT, but don't care for the style. i would like to read some NKJV and The Message down the road.

[Frank Ernest]

True. Take Knight for instance. He's old but not necessarily the be.....er.....nevermind. :o
:darwinsm:

[Ninjashadow]

:think: What year was it published?

The quote from my post was from 1996 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy%2022:28-29;&version=51;), but we got a copy as a wedding present two years ago that said the same thing.

My bible is the NLT Life Application Study Bible published in 2004. The intro to the book said that after the 1996 bible, they realized they needed to fix somethings and add extra study help, which took 8 years. Pretty decent study bible, really.

[Ninjashadow]

My NLT says "rape."

I'm guessing yours is a '96 NLT and the one I have is an '04. I think that they changed the translation between the two.

[Turbo]

I'm guessing yours is a '96 NLT and the one I have is an '04. I think that they changed the translation between the two.
:cool: That's encouraging! :up:

[Nineveh]

NIV
NKJV
KJV
JB


JB?

[godrulz]

JB?

Jerusalem Bible (strong Catholic bias). WW II era study Bible from a French version.

[Nineveh]

Ah, ok, thank you godrulz :)

[logos_x]

Matthew 25:46
And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.
KJV

"And these shall go away into the Punishment of the Ages, but the righteous into the Life of the Ages."
Weymouth NT

And these shall go away to punishment age-during, but the righteous to life age-during.'
Youngs Literal Translation

Original:

[Mr. Coffee]

The New Jerusalem Bible is the only modern version that I would call beautiful. But it follows the liberal trend of using the word "expiation" where "propitiation" is correct. In extra-Biblical literature, the hilasmos word-group always refers to the appeasement of anger.

[42ndgen]

Hey Logos:

Glad you found the site I posted a blessing I knew that you would. I see that you have already found one of it's interesting abilities.

Grace and Peace Patrick

[Mr. Coffee]

Hi Agape4Robin:

Strong's Concordance is a good start. I own a very good interliner new and old testament called The Complete Word Study New Testament that not only shows what word is translated in the Greek but it also shows parts of speech for each greek word. And The Complete Word Study Old Testament for the Hebrew.

There is an excellent bible program on the internet that is free to down load called the Interliner Scripture Analyzer

http://www.scripture4all.org/

If You want to get a beginning understanding of Greek Basic Greek In 30 Minutes a Day by Jim Found Is a good book.But if you are a little more serious than Basics of Biblical Greek by William D. Mounce is the book for you.
BUYER BEWARE.

The "translation" on that website is by A. E. Knoch, a Universalist. He twists Scriptures to fit heresy.

http://www.1john57.com/literalerror.htm

http://www.1john57.com/knoch.htm

[42ndgen]

Hi ilyatur:

You do know that everything posted at those two sites can be completely contridicted by the greek. Now neither site actually quotes what universalits believe but they build straw men of what they suppose they say and attempt to tear down what they assume universalists believe. Now if you are truly interested in what they actually say you can check out these sites and compare it to your two sites listed. And you will be able to tell Just how much they are straw man arguments.


L.Ray Smith
http://bible-truths.com/

J Preston Eby Saviour of the World series
http://sigler.org/eby/savior_of_the_word_series.htm

Gary Amirault
http://www.tentmaker.org/

Finally the Bible program I listed uses the Wescott Hort Greek, Nestle Aland 26-27, and has the Strong's concordance, with the KJV. The Young's literal plus the Concordant can be downloaded seperately if you desire to have them. But they do not come with the original down load.

[logos_x]

Hey Logos:

Glad you found the site I posted a blessing I knew that you would. I see that you have already found one of it's interesting abilities.

Grace and Peace Patrick

It is an awesome resource.

And isn't it funny how, when confronted with the original languages, the partialist will accuse you of twisting scripture?

BUYER BEWARE.

The "translation" on that website is by A. E. Knoch, a Universalist. He twists Scriptures to fit heresy.

READER BEWARE.
When someone that is a partialist feels they have to warn you about something that was developed by a universalist, and their argument is that universalist's twist scripture...they only do so because it isn't what they believe and therefore they conclude it must be heresy...and are afraid that if you read or use something from a universalist you will see the partialist errors and become a universalist yourself.

[Frank Ernest]

READER BEWARE.
When someone that is a partialist feels they have to warn you about something that was developed by a universalist, and their argument is that universalist's twist scripture...they only do so because it isn't what they believe and therefore they conclude it must be heresy...and are afraid that if you read or use something from a universalist you will see the partialist errors and become a universalist yourself.
:darwinsm: BLOTD!

[logos_x]

:darwinsm: BLOTD!

:bow:

Seriously though, look at the arguement:

BUYER BEWARE.

The "translation" on that website is by A. E. Knoch, a Universalist. He twists Scriptures to fit heresy.

What I should have said is that the presentations on the website cited by Ily are by Don C. Hewey, a partialist. He twists scripture to fit eternal torment.

Universal salvation was declared heresy very late in the game...5 to 6 centuries later...and then by eternal tormentors.

The Bible speaks of at least 5 "aions" and perhaps many more. If there were "aions" in the past. This must mean that each one of them have ended for they are now past! The New Testament writers spoke of "the present wicked aion" which ended during that very generation. Obviously, it was followed by another "aion"-- the "aion" in which we presently live. If there are "aions" to come, it must mean that this one we live in will also end.

There is a verse which says "the consummation of the aions" showing that each "aion" ends. So how can they be eternal?

There is "the coming eon" (Matt.10:30, Luke 18:30
There is "the present wicked eon" (Gal.1:4)
There is "the oncoming eons (future)(Eph.2:7)
There is "the conclusion of the eon (present) (Mt.13:39,40)
There is "the secret concealed from the eons (past) (Eph.3:9)

Plainly, the Greek word "aion" transliterated "eon" cannot mean "eternal." A study into the Greek of the Biblical period and before will bear this out.

"Aionion" is the adjective of the noun "aion."

Since grammar rules mandate an adjective CANNOT take on a greater force than its noun form, it is evident that "aionion" in any of its adjective forms (ios, ou, on) CANNOT possible mean "everlasting" or anything remotely indicating eternity or unending time.

For example, "hourly" cannot mean "pertaining to days, weeks, months, or years. The word MUST mean "pertaining to an hour." Therefore, "aionion," the adjective form of the noun "aion" which clearly means a period of indeterminate TIME, CANNOT mean, "forever and ever, eternal, everlasting, eternity, etc) or other words which connote timelessness or unending ages.

Therefore, those many Bibles which do NOT contain the teaching of everlasting punishment or Hell are true to the original languages of Greek and Hebrew and those which teach everlasting punishment or Hell are false. Scholars are just as easily subjected to the "traditions of the elders" as the rest of us. It's time to let the original Greek and Hebrew languages of the Bible break down the traditions of men.

[logos_x]

Questions without answers (http://www.tentmaker.org/contending.htm)

Between Universalists and Don Hewey

[42ndgen]

:drum:

Twisting, Twisting, Twisting;
Keep those scriptures twisting Rawhide :guitar:

Too bad there is not a smily cracking a whip. :banana:

It is amazing that partialists contributed the Greek text to the program and also contributed the grammer tags in that program- Grammar-Tags Adapted from Robinsons (Westcott/Hort 1881 | Nestle 27/UBS 4 version) but when they are both put together by someone that does not believe the way they do It is nothing but heresy.

Grace and peace Patrick

[Sold Out]

Hi Agape4Robin:

Strong's Concordance is a good start. I own a very good interliner new and old testament called The Complete Word Study New Testament that not only shows what word is translated in the Greek but it also shows parts of speech for each greek word. And The Complete Word Study Old Testament for the Hebrew.

There is an excellent bible program on the internet that is free to down load called the Interliner Scripture Analyzer

http://www.scripture4all.org/

If You want to get a beginning understanding of Greek Basic Greek In 30 Minutes a Day by Jim Found Is a good book.But if you are a little more serious than Basics of Biblical Greek by William D. Mounce is the book for you.

There is a really good website out there - www.e-sword.com - you can download all kinds of free bible translations, plus ones with the strongs concordance out beside each word. You just click on the number and it gives you the hebrew/greek definition. It's all entirely free. Go check it out.

[42ndgen]

I agree with you Sold out that E-sword is an excellent program also. I have it also and have spent many hours using it. :BRAVO:

So if the one program I suggested earlier is too controversial than most assuredly check out this site also. But take the time to download all that is available, for there are lots of material there to get for free and some very good material for a minimal price.

I suggest getting both for comparison sake.

Grace and Peace Patrick
.

[logos_x]

There is a really good website out there - www.e-sword.com - you can download all kinds of free bible translations, plus ones with the strongs concordance out beside each word. You just click on the number and it gives you the hebrew/greek definition. It's all entirely free. Go check it out.

This is the one I use. It is a terrific program that in many ways compares to Bible programs that cost a good chunk of change,,,and all for free. I highly recommend e.sword.

You can download many different translations and run comparisons, Its referenced for Strong's and gives you the Strong's concordence,,,there are great commentaries and dictionaries.

I recommend downloading the 1912 Weymouth NT and the Young's Literal Translation, and also KJV+Tense, Voice, and Mood (TVM) right off the bat...but all those things and many more can be dowloaded separately for free.

What I like about the scripture analyzer 42ndgen cited is you can look at the transliterated
scripture, strong's references, and closest translation from Greek to English with structure intact and grammer points all at once.
It's brilliant!

[HisLight]

I agree about e-sword. I wanted to add that you do have to pay a licensing fee for some translations. Don't forget to pull down some of the other materials there as well. There are good maps, a collection of hymns, daily devotions. The tools to keep verse lists and study notes are pretty good too. I agree with logos-x, e-swoard is BRILLIANT!!!

I personally read NASB and NKJV versions most.

I appreciate the discussion about NIV. It is the version my church uses, but I have never felt comfortable with it.

[logos_x]

If you are going to go with the KJV, the best (by far) that I have found is The COMPANION BIBLE (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/082542237X/qid=1115991744/sr=2-2/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_2/104-2326708-2680724) by E.W. Bullinger.
Each page is split in two, one side containing the KJV text and the other side containing E.W. Bullinger's notes. There is also an impressive set of appendices that cover almost any topic you could ask about. The appendices included are small essays and charts explaining everything from Greek grammar, to Hebrew customs and figures of speech. You simply cannot understand any bible unless you fully read and understand what Bullinger includes in his appendices.
It is old though...so there is some things concerning prophecy and fullfillment that the author did not know about (It was first published in the late 1800 and early 1900's.) I found it fascinating to read his comments, though, and see how they saw things then.
This one just can't be beat.

[godrulz]

If you are going to go with the KJV, the best (by far) that I have found is The COMPANION BIBLE (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/082542237X/qid=1115991744/sr=2-2/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_2/104-2326708-2680724) by E.W. Bullinger.
You simply cannot understand any bible unless you fully read and understand what Bullinger includes in his appendices.
I

This sounds like the JW Watchtower's claim to needing extrabiblical writings to understand the Bible. No one man or organization has the corner on truth, nor is necessary to understand the Bible. We need sound scholarship and the illumination of the Holy Spirit.

I do not agree with much of this link. It is interesting that he links Enyart and Bullinger:

http://withchrist.org/bullinger.htm

[logos_x]

This sounds like the JW Watchtower's claim to needing extrabiblical writings to understand the Bible. No one man or organization has the corner on truth, nor is necessary to understand the Bible. We need sound scholarship and the illumination of the Holy Spirit.

I do not agree with much of this link. It is interesting that he links Enyart and Bullinger:

http://withchrist.org/bullinger.htm

That isn't what I was saying.
What I'm saying is that of all the KJV bibles out there...this one is the best.

And don't tell me that you got all your theological view from only the Bible...you have teachers like everyone else.

How the hell you can compare what I said with JW claims is beyond all reason.
And maybe Enyard likes this Bible , too.

Which Bible do you use? Whos notes, who's commentary, who's take on the scriptures?

Can't even make a recommendation around here without someone showing a Pharisaic attitude.
Are you affraid someone might actually read this Bible at my recommendation?

Love ya' anyway.

[logos_x]

Meet E.W.Bullinger (http://www.gracebeliever.com/articles/bookworm/meetbullinger.htm)

[godrulz]

If you are going to go with the KJV, the best (by far) that I have found is The COMPANION BIBLE (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/082542237X/qid=1115991744/sr=2-2/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_2/104-2326708-2680724) by E.W. Bullinger.
You simply cannot understand any bible unless you fully read and understand what Bullinger includes in his appendices.
This one just can't be beat.


Is this a falsehood or a hyperbole?

Yes, we all have our influences and preconceived ideas.