Translation Trouble

The NIV revisers claim a, “Concern for clear and natural English…contemporary but not dated.”

Here’s a partial list of NIV’s “clear and contemporary” words and then AV’s “dated” archaic words.

Gen 6.4   “The Nephilim were on the earth…”   “There were giants in the earth…”

1Ch 29.19 “…build the palatial structure…” “…build the palace…”

Ezr 8.36   “…to the royal –satraps…”   “…unto the king’s lieutenants…”

Psa 122.7 “…citadels…” “…palaces…”

Some other “common” words found in the NIV are; clerestory, dirge, festal, festooned, filigree, etc.

Read Full Post »

Translation Trouble – “bad” king does NOT = bad Bible

 

 

Some anti-KJV people have tried to tie the alleged sinful life

of King James with the Classic Bible he authorized (he did

no translation).  I am not agreeing that James was as wicked

as theorized.  But if he were, look at two (history may have

many) examples of good coming from the wicked.  In the Bible

– Caesar ordered taxation but it was good in that it brought

Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem.  In Germany – Hitler was

w-i-c-k-e-d but a project he backed became the VW, a fine

little car with millions of drivers.  It’s illogical to say the

KJV is faulty because James authorized It.

- eab, 5/10/13

Read Full Post »

Translation Trouble – 2 Streams

Defenders of modern mistranslations (of diverse sorts) – do you

realize there are two streams from which all Bibles flow? 

There is the Alexandrian line (variously given, 45-60 manuscripts)

and the traditional line (variously given, 5210-5700 manuscripts).

Until you recognize this, to say the “Greek says” is only partially

true – which Greek?  I would gladly agree with a general statement

“the majority is not always right.”  Having said that I ask, “Is the

minority always right?”  The shear number of Antiochian

manuscripts vs. the fraction of Alexandrian ones, is reason for

the reasonable man to take an honest look at the Antiochian

or traditional ones.  There are more and weightier reasons, but

this would be a start. – eab

Read Full Post »

Translation Trouble – 2Pe 2.17

 

Translation Trouble – 2Pe 2.17

AV “These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.”

 

NIV – These men are springs without water and mists driven by a storm. Blackest darkness is reserved for them.

 

Why does the NIV here leave out “for ever.’  “Pure scholarship – flat and simple.”  Don’t be too sure.  Could it be because some religious system has a fictional “purgatory” among its teachings.  If “for ever” were allowed to remain here it would oppose the theory about “purgatory.”  By leaving it out the money making idea of “purgatory” can remain.  Reader – learn to look for reasons other than what the left tells you.

Read Full Post »

Translation Trouble – Why opponents to KJV?

Just sixty years ago almost all evangelicals and holiness men were users/backers of the KJV.  (I personally remember stands being taken against the RSV.)  That has changed.  Every thinking person should be wise enough to ask WHY?  Is it because the KJV changed?  Is it because we got smarter?  (Many called “doctor” are not scholarly.)  Or IS it because the opponents of the Classic King James were able to get “their men” into professorships at Bible colleges, the students from which are now in our pulpits?  “Listen, KJV backers, it’s all about scholarship.”  No, DO NOT BELIEVE THAT.  The agents of change have a “reason” for a gullible public and they have their REAL REASON.  Be intelligent enough to search out that reason.  – eab

Read Full Post »

Translation Trouble – Multiple “BibleS”?

 

Translation Trouble – Multiple “BibleS”?

 

There are issues of history, issues of possible forgery, issues of men

who do not believe orthodox truths “handling” books they call “Bibles.”

But there is also the issue of philosophy.  As soon as one accepts the

possibility that there are two Bible translations equally valid as the

“word of God,” he becomes the judge of what is and what is not

God’s Word.  Why not accept the 3^rd version and the 33 ^rd ones? 

Almost everyone (who accepts some modern version) rejects one

or more of the other modern impostors – they draw a line somewhere.

This makes man the Judge of God’s Word instead of God’s Word

judging man.  This may be one of the worst issues of all for this

generation, diluted with modern “versions.”

Read Full Post »

Translation Trouble – Joh 16.16

 

AV “A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again

a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.”

 

NIV  In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me _________________________.

 

 

NIV readers, Sadly, are not “allowed”

to see where Jesus went.  

Read Full Post »

Translation Trouble – Mark 16.9-20 (all 12 verses)

 

Translation Trouble – Mark 16.9-20 (all 12 verses)

AV has them all, as It should – see John William

Burgon’s (born in Smyrna, 1813) book, The Last

Twelve Verses of the Gospel of Mark (400 pages),

where he proves this section WAS in the original

manuscripts.   

NIV has a line separating these last 12 verses from

the text.  Under this line it reads: “[The two most

reliable early manuscripts do not have Mark 16:9-20.]”

NIV readers, Do you know that The Jehovah’s

Witness “Bible” ALSO places these verses in an

appendix of sorts.  Similarity with a cult?

Read Full Post »

Translation Trouble – Mar 11.26

 

AV   “But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.”

NIV   This entire verse omitted.

 

Why read a misshaped “Bible”? 

Worse – why defend a misshaped “Bible”? 

Read Full Post »

Translation Trouble – Mat 18.11

 

AV  “For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.”

 

 

The NIV leaves out the entire verse –

 

it omits this wonderful truth, the

 

reason Christ came, to be our Savior.

 

This is sad and should be alarming to

 

NIV readers.  What else is missing? ! ?

Read Full Post »