Reading the Bible

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Seek on November 6, 2015 at 4:14am

I get devotions from a friend and she used different versions throughout. This one had the verses in the amplified. I decided to compare. While subtle, there are differences. But if there are a lot of subtle changes, doesn't that take away from the Word?

Make me understand the way of Your precepts, So that I will meditate (focus my thoughts) on Your wonderful works. Psalm 119:27 (AMP)

Make me to understand the way of thy precepts: so shall I talk (just one word changes it from spreading the Gospel to keeping it to yourself) of thy wondrous works.

Let us run with endurance and active persistence the race that is set before us,[looking away from all that will distract us and] focusing our eyes on Jesus, who is the Author and Perfecter of faith [the first incentive for our belief and the One who brings our faith to maturity], Hebrews 12:1,2 (AMP)

Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses (where did the witnesses go?), let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God. (where is mention of what Jesus did?)

Permalink Reply by Leonard T on November 9, 2015 at 6:51pm

Seek,

Look at the whole verse in the KJV. Let's break it into four parts:

Isa 9:3 KJV

1) Thou hast multiplied the nation,

2) and not increased the joy:

3) they joy before thee according to the joy in harvest,

4) and as men rejoice when they divide the spoil.

1, 3 and 4 all reflect a positive joy while 2 describes a negative response. 2 does not seem to fit. In the NIV and NASB all four points align with a sense of joy.

Permalink Reply by Seek on November 10, 2015 at 3:38am

In a sense they're talking about joy as a whole but like you said "2 does not seem to fit". It doesn't at all. I compare the 4 verses together and they seem to say the same thing...except that "not".

The article I linked gives a lot of examples of missing verses and verses that subtly bring on a different meaning and in light of not taking from the Word, if verses are left out, haven't they been taken from the Word? They also give footnotes where they are stated elsewhere as the explanation but if renewing the mind is to keep reading the truth, maybe that missing reiteration of those passages should be there to be read repeatedly. And even removing repeats, isn't it still taking away?

I've compared verses before that didn't always seem to say the same and thought it was maybe just that I didn't understand the context of it. But how many others wouldn't understand the context and get a wrong message?

I'm out of time right now but there's quite a list on that site and it just seems to make sense. I've always used KJV and NIV interchangeably so I get a better perspective but I mostly read NIV and lately I've been listening to KJV in the car. So I'll see how it goes. But I'm just not sure at the moment if other translations are accurate. It takes years of study for scholars and I'm no scholar.

Permalink Reply by Seek on November 10, 2015 at 5:16am

Here's another example given:

Luke 11:2-4 KJV
Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil.

Father, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come
3 Give us each day our daily bread.
4 Forgive us our sins,
for we also forgive everyone who sins against us.
And lead us not into temptation.

The NIV leaves out references to God being in heaven, to His will and to the presence of evil.

All subtle but subtle enough times can make a difference.

Permalink Reply by Leonard T on November 10, 2015 at 6:08pm

Seek,

Let's take another angle. If we start with the understanding that no doctrine rises or falls on one verse, but rather is dependent upon the totality of Scripture we can move from an anomaly between versions and ask a deeper question. That question is as follows, what doctrine in Scripture is altered from one version to the next, especially if we stay within KJV, NIV, ESV and NASB? Do all teach that Jesus is the Son of God, the Living Savior? Do all teach that salvation is by grace through faith ... an not by works? Do all teach that the shedding of blood, specifically the blood of Jesus is required for the remission of sin? Do all teach the message of the cross and resurrection. The list goes on ... Thus, what doctrine is altered when we compare versions? I am not asking whether there are variances, but even in the variances do we find doctrine of Scripture as  a whole altered between the four versions I listed? 

To go a step further we know that we do not have the original manuscripts, but a plethora of copies that all say the same basic thing with minor variations, but no alteration to doctrine. The Dead Sea Scrolls substantiated how well the Word has been preserved down through the ages. We also know that when one translates such a large amount of text from one language to another there will be some nuances due to the variations in language as well as an inability to give always an exact representation of what was said in the original. With that said we again find that the subtle variations do not alter doctrine found in Scripture. We can acknowledge that the KJV is translated from one set/type of manuscripts and the NIV from another that is believed to be older than the ones used for the KJV. Thus we find that there is some variation between the two versions, but in the end they teach the same fundamental doctrines.

I will close with this. I would be concerned if the difference in Isaiah 9:3 altered a doctrine or even changed the context of the passage, but I am not concerned over one word that has no affect outside of the single verse it is found in.

Hope that helps a little to add some perspective to the issue.

Lord Bless,

LT

Permalink Reply by Seek on November 10, 2015 at 6:56pm

But don't those differences fall under wolves in sheep's clothing and false prophets who disguise themselves as apostles of Christ? Aren't small changes here and there how larger changes are made? I think we can just look at some of the laws being passed today. They started with small concessions and progressed. We didn't just open up transgender bathrooms in 1950 because we had to slowly allow this to sneak into the "norm" in people's minds first.

It's just enough that's left me reconsidering using other versions. The only other 2 I use are NIV (mostly) and NLT. I haven't compared NLT. I rarely use it anyway.

Permalink Reply by Leonard T on November 10, 2015 at 7:16pm

Only if the changes are intentional. Many of the translators are seeking to translate the text as accurately as possible. Again they have two sets of manuscripts as mentioned before. You also have the translators using various translation methods (i.e. dynamic equivalent, word for word, etc). Many do not like reading the NASB because it is a word for word with adjustments only as required. The KJV is written in a poetic style that brings a certain flow to it that makes it easy to memorize. 

Again, I have no concern over variation unless it changes doctrine. When the core doctrine remains the same there is little reason to debate whether a number is 77 or 70 x 7. No translation is without error (that is not the same as saying God's Word is in error, we just don't have the original, but have enough to know that the doctrine of Scripture is sound). For instance in the KJV you will find the word "Easter." It is translated from the Greek word Pasuche (Without looking up the exact spelling). In every other verse in the KJV this word is translated as Passover. Why did they insert Easter? That is pretty obvious, but in the end did it change any doctrine? The answer is no.

To your point about the laws changing I would agree and yes we need to refute and refrain from using versions that have intentionally been altered to align with a societal shift or seek to propagate a lie. I like the 1984 NIV, but will not use a newer version of it. I have major concerns with the newer editions and thus rarely recommend the NIV, but when I do i will at some point clarify that I am talking about the 1984 version. In fact I have a very limited number I will read from ... pretty much listed them all earlier in this thread.

Permalink Reply by Seek on November 11, 2015 at 3:42am

I didn't know there was a difference in the NIV year. I need to take a look at the ones I have. I have a women's study Bible that may be NIV and 2 others, one NIV and not sure of the other. But I hardly use them anymore and use the YouVersion app, biblegateway and biblestudytools on my phone. Not sure how to find what year they use.

I've never read NASB and didn't know it was word for word. If you mean it's like an interlinear translation then I might just give it a try. I use online interlinear translations sometimes when I'm trying to understand certain scriptures better. I usually use biblegateways Mounce reverse translation which also shows every instance of the original word in scripture and gives an in-depth definition of it.

I don't always come away with any better knowledge of the subject but I have for a long time been concerned about truth and I often go just to verify the translation with the actual translated words so I'm not just blindly accepting what's been brought over from the original words. To go any further, I'd need to learn ancient Hebrew and Greek. Yeah right. LOL In this instance I'll have to leave it to those who have learned those languages.

Permalink Reply by Tammy on November 12, 2015 at 4:38pm

I didn't know there was a difference. I use NKJV but use to read the NIV. Had I never discovered the NIV, I probably wouldn't have ever picked up the book.

Permalink Reply by Tammy on November 12, 2015 at 4:41pm

I think The Message is more of an intentional changing of the Word.

Permalink Reply by Leonard T on November 12, 2015 at 4:52pm

The Message is a paraphrase and not a translation. One, if they like it, could use it for reading, but should not consider it as a study Bible. This is true of all paraphrases.

Permalink Reply by Tammy on November 12, 2015 at 4:55pm

So what is the difference?

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• …
• 11
• Next ›
• Page