KJV vs Living Bible as a study guide?

KJV vs Living Bible as a study guide?
Posted by in Facebook's Pentecostal Theology Group View the Original Post

A.J. Bible I completely agree with Rev. Finis Dake. I’m 27 and I still today read, study, and teach from the KJV. The majority of our church members use the KJV. It’s the most trusted version. People make excuses as to why they don’t like/understand the KJV but it’s only for lack of committing time. That and many new translations change not just the old English words but doctrinal words that do not need to be changed but rather understood.
Marc Jackson You own and read an actual 1611 KJV Bible ???
A.J. Bible You and I both know the King James version 1611 has been cleaned up and made available for the Modern English reader. While yes I do own an actual 1611 King James version what I read, study, and  teach from is an authorized King James version though not the 1611. Nice try though. 😀
A.J. Bible
Marc Jackson so why is it that in your little chart Tyndale did not use Erasmus NT? Does it call for latin sources or old English? very very strange if you ask me
Marc Jackson oh WOW I only know a few people who own an actual 1611 KJV Bible and they dont even use it. It just stays in their collections. Is your actual 1611 a first or second edition?
A.J. Bible Oh I see what you’re saying. No it’s a reproduction.
Marc Jackson Well thats a given, but which edition? The app and website have different printed versions of 1611 https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/
Louise Cummings I like their comments and references. They make good points. But as for the Bible reading itself. I can understand and get more out of the King James Version. But my study Bible in the King James Version. Gives great points also.
Joseph D. Absher I know a very good pastor that uses the NIV. He brings people to Jesus with it too. I think you know how I feel about it though. It’s not the Bible you read it’s the Bible you live. That’s what matters!
David Sloan http://www.av1611.org/niv.html
Joseph D. Absher I’m not following you off on some redirect. Just say what you mean.
Marc Jackson David Sloan is your post about KJV or NIV? http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/announcing-probible-com/
David Sloan It’s about the NIV or as the article describes it as the New International Perversion. It is a very informative article about the dangers of reading and teaching from the NIV, a very dangerous bible.
Marc Jackson well we’ve discussed here before that some online NIV have changed in recent years and do not fully represent the older printed on paper NIV Bibles. Just an interesting observation
Marc Jackson A.J. Bible to your first comment under OP – no one really completely agrees with DAKE 🙂 Ricky Grimsley doesnt
A.J. Bible Lol. I trying to think of what I don’t agree with Dake on… Don’t hold your breath though!
Marc Jackson denial of eternal Sonship of Christ for one http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/the-church-fathers-on…/
A.J. Bible Eternal Sonship is not biblical. For Christ to be eternally the son means he has a beginning, a conception. The Word became flesh. John 1.
Ricky Grimsley Dake was wrong on some stuff but for your money and space there is no better combination of bible, commentary, charts, maps and concordance. IMO
Ed Brewer you mean the Ken Taylor commentary?
Marc Jackson in the English language only that is Ricky Grimsley We know for a fact DAKE is unmistaken on prophecy. For some other stuff, after all he knew not greek and hebrew and had no college education or any degree in theology For a simple AoG then CoG pastor and evangelist to gather all this knowledge systematically on his own and without a computer it is extraordinary life accomplishment and one cannot but respectIF AoG/CoG stop trolling fb forums and start researching the Bible may be just may be they can compile the same by the end of their life and preach better sermons to their members than the minutiae they are offering from the pulpit nowadays
Ricky Grimsley He might have been more respected if he hadn’t went to jail for messing with that under age girl.
Marc Jackson allegedly – never proven no jail time just arrest OR did you mean the AoG/CoG pastor trolling forums
Ricky Grimsley He went to jail. He served 9 months I think. Let me look. He plead guilty.
Ricky Grimsley He did 6 months in Milwaukee. He plead guilty
Marc Jackson They said sentenced to six months because the charges were federal across state line but it was made up Trial took place in MLWK btw Joseph D. Absher Judge was a show off Ricky Grimsley The Mann act originated in Chicago for which reason was so enforced as human trafficing You dont really believe Dake was a human trafficant do you?
Ricky Grimsley No but he isn’t the first preacher to try to have an affair in a different town. Why else was he traveling with a young girl and using a fake name?
Joseph D. Absher for Milwaukee I often use MKE. Life in the city lol
Jerome Herrick Weymouth Folks today think they have a 1611 but they don’t the have a more modern KJV with spelling and grammar corrected..Still KJB  though……source the King James Bible store. Go on line and read for your selves. Then you’ll see for yourself.
Marc Jackson Well NIV too used the KJV as a source. So did NLT
Louise Cummings I like to read the King James
Jerome Herrick Weymouth I got a Dake’s in the KJV.
Pentecostal Theology Like Cadillac only in V8 Dake comes only in KJV
Joseph D. Absher I got the notice admin is now the page for Pentecostal Theolgy. Is this a real person or artificial intelligence
Marc Jackson Correct DAKE Bible dont come in any other Bible
Leon Bible Actually… now the Dake Bible comes in the NKJV as well, and in Spanish! http://www.dakebible.com/
Joseph D. Absher Are you related to A.J. Bible?
Leon Bible Joseph D. Absher Yeah – he is my son!
Joseph D. Absher Did you change your name when you came from the old country
Leon Bible Joseph D. Absher No, born with it for sure. My Grandfather 5 generations back came from Germany.
Joseph D. Absher Let me guess Gutenberg
Joseph D. Absher Seriously I think it’s great
Joseph D. Absher Do people ask ok Mr Bible “what do you say?”
Leon Bible This is the honest truth…  Their names were Adam and Eve!
Joseph D. Absher I love you.
Joseph D. Absher I got two grandsons Isaiah & Elijah. My daughter is Sarah with a “H” for the breath of God. Does Eve get the blame for everything or Adam
Joseph D. Absher No more jokes sorry I’ll delete them
Joseph D. Absher A.J. is one of the good guys. I think he loves God. Calls on Jesus. Reads his Bible lol
Joseph D. Absher I guess if you got a name like Bible you should know what’s in there
Leon Bible Well Biblically of course Eve sinned but it was really Adam who sinned as well and bore the responsibility of the fall – 1 Tim 2:14 “And Adam was NOT deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” ADam knew full well what he was doing – Eve did not!
Joseph D. Absher There’s plenty of blame to go around.
Joseph D. Absher Oh she knew
Leon Bible Jokes are fine – no problem! Know what is in the Bible? Well I have devoted my life to it BUT still seems like I know very little and discover new things and fresh manna every day!
Joseph D. Absher Like that
Joseph D. Absher Can you tell me a little bit about Jesus
Joseph D. Absher He’s great
Leon Bible If Eve knew then deception does not make sense! The fact of deception shows her to be fooled and deluded.
Joseph D. Absher She knew she wanted it. She knew it was wrong. Ok she was deceived in a measure. Like some maybe even happily deceived.
Leon Bible Jesus? It is all summed up in the reality that He is my BEST Friend.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IOE5yaiffc
Joseph D. Absher A truer friend never lived.  Nice to meet you Mr Bible
Joseph D. Absher They got Bibles in heaven. Real nice!
Leon Bible Nice meeting you as well my new friend!
Marc Jackson not the REAL Dake Bible His family has made changes in the comments on some of the more racially alluded spots No need to spam the post
Joseph D. Absher Whose family are you talking about? What “racially alluded” apparently I missed something. My apologies. I’ll leave you to your work. God bless
Nate Ridgeway My dad showed me a picture this week of my grandfather, my great grandfather, and Brother Dakes hanging out together. They were close friends, and spent a great deal of time together. I appreciate brother Dakes’ contribution to the body of Christ. However, I feel he has tunnel vision concerning prophecy with his Dispensational Truth.I’m a big fan of NASB and ESV as far as translations go.
Leon Bible Dake along with Larkin and Scofield all were right in line with one another for the most part. Very sound, basic and Biblical Where do you see him having tunnel vision?
Marc Jackson Now we are talking
Nate Ridgeway If you are a Dispensationalist, then you won’t have any problems with that whole school of thought. (And by the way, I consider all of them great Christian men; I’m just not Dispensational in my Eschatological view).Dr Hollis Gause did Pentecostals everywhere, as well as the Church of God denomination, a large favor when he stepped out and wrote his work on Revelation (title of his book is also Revelation), stepping aside from Dispensational thought and offering to we Pentecostals a more provocative and deeper assessment of the Apocalypse.The tunnel vision to which I loosely attributed that title concerns the overarching concept of Dispensationalism itself. Since that period of time, significant work among Pentecostals has been done to better shape our eschatological perspective and theology.
Leon Bible Nate Ridgeway Want to give a specific??? How about a point from Scripture rather than the ideas of men.
Marc Jackson Now we are talking Nate Ridgeway
Nate Ridgeway I also highly recommend Richard Bauckham’s commentary on the Apocalypse…for those who dare
Marc Jackson Bauckham – very text critical 🙂
Joseph D. Absher I heard Dake doesn’t see the new testament church in the O.T.
Marc Jackson Too much CNN? Joseph D. Absher Ricky Grimsley
Joseph D. Absher I don’t know what you mean.
Marc Jackson Ricky Grimsley knows and may tell you later 🙂
Joseph D. Absher Jesus keep me all day. Big time.
Joseph D. Absher Men not so much
Marc Jackson Jesus keeps us all or we wouldnt be here Jn 6:44
Joseph D. Absher I had tell my little girl. Honey not everybody is your friend. I may have tell to you one day.
Marc Jackson Nate Ridgeway cant be pentecostal and dispensational @ the same time Kills the pneumatology of the Bible
Ricky Grimsley Dake was messed up on the Godhead and pretrib rapture but for 60 years it’s been the best reference bible imo
Joseph D. Absher I like the “God’s plan for man.” It’s like a bible encyclopedia.
Leon Bible Hey Ricky Grimsley  What specifically are you talking about concerning Dake and the Godhead? It is easy to say I don;t agree here or there – BUT what specific passage of Scripture do you feel that Dake is in error about? Let’s talk Scripture.
Ricky Grimsley He believed that each person of the trinity had a body, soul and spirit
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley They do. Why (Scripturally) would you doubt that?
Ricky Grimsley Because I believe that every time god was visually seen it was Jesus. Just ask Isaiah and John
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley OK – Do you have Scripture for the belief that every time God was visually seen it was Jesus?
Ricky Grimsley Isaiah 6:1 KJVS[1] In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple.John 12:41 KJVS[41] These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him.
Ricky Grimsley Hebrews 1:3 KJVS[3] Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Ricky Grimsley Colossians 2:9 KJVS[9] For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley Where in any of those passages does it say: “Every time God was visually seen it was Jesus?”
Ricky Grimsley Who did anyone see when they saw God. John 1:18 KJVS[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.
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley Do you have an answer? Where in any of those passages does it say: “Every time God was visually seen it was Jesus?”
Ricky Grimsley Jesus said no man has seen god ever except Jesus. So…….when people saw God they saw Jesus. Remember Philip said “show us the father?  Jesus if you seen me you saw the father? Its pretty clear
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley so you don’t believe in the Trinity?
Ricky Grimsley I believe that there is one body, one soul, and one spirit of God. I believe they have three distinct wills. So, I’m not oneness but I’m not orthodox trinitarian either. I don’t believe Jesus was a son in eternal past. However, he forever will reign as the man Christ Jesus son of god
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley if there is only one body, soul and spirit of God how do you come up with “they” ?   what is left to be a “they” ?
Ricky Grimsley “They” are three omniscient, omnipotent wills in unity with one another.
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley So all of these three wills are stuck in the same soul, spirit and body! If each will is in unity with the other wills then how can’t be three wills since there is no distinction of the wills by being in unity! Ricky what have you been smoking?
Ricky Grimsley You have three wills in your body soul and spirit
Ricky Grimsley I m just looking at what has to be true. Does the Holy Spirit have a body?
Ricky Grimsley We see God bodily several times only to find it was Jesus.
Leon Bible When ? What passage of Scripture do we see God bodily and then find out it was Jesus. Just a Scripture that states that would give us something to discuss.
Ricky Grimsley Isaiah 6
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley What verse in Isaiah 6 says that The Lord was God bodily? And then states it really wasn’t God the Father but God the Son? Please point out the verse that states that.
Ricky Grimsley He is sitting on a throne. Is it imaginary?
Ricky Grimsley John says Isaiah saw the lord. Not a vision
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley Who is sitting on a throne? God the Father, God the Son or God The Holy Ghost? Where in the text do you know which one?
Ricky Grimsley John says it was Jesus that Isaiah saw in John 12.
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley What verse in John 12 says that it was Jesus sitting on the throne in Isaiah 6?
Ricky Grimsley The whole chapter
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley in order to discuss this you are going to have to sober up!
Ricky Grimsley Everyone on the planet knows that Jesus was Isaiah saw. Apparently you are the only one who doesn’t know.
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley One verse is all it will take and I will agree. But you cannot produce the verse. Very sad that you choose to base your beliefs on imaginations that can’t be substantiated with Scripture.
Ricky Grimsley Here is the verse that John says Isaiah saw Jesus. John 12:41 KJVS[41] These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him. Him being Jesus. Since the whole chapter is about Jesus.
Ricky Grimsley I hope you are just messing with me. Otherwise your flock is in trouble.
Leon Bible Good answer – NOW What kind of body did Jesus have at that time?  …a flesh body or a spiritual body?
Ricky Grimsley Obviously a spiritual one. The only body of the Godhead. Now Jesus has a glorified body.
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley OK… so then why can’t God the Father have appeared in the OLD Testament – Why do you say it ALWAYS had to be Jesus?
Ricky Grimsley Because Jesus is the body. He is what you see. He is what does. He made the heavens and Adam because he has hands to mold the clay. I sent my word and healed your diseases. Our god is a man of war and on and on.
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley OK what Scripture says Jesus is the ONLY one with a body and is always what you see? Why can’t God the Father have hands?
Ricky Grimsley Colossians 2:9 KJVS[9] For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Ricky Grimsley Sounds like all the fullness is in one body?
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley So are you saying that there is NOTHING left to be with the Father or the Spirit since it is ALL in Jesus! Are you Jesus only?
Ricky Grimsley No there is a body soul and a spirit
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley If Jesus the body gets it ALL… what do the soul and spirit get?
Ricky Grimsley They all have god’s attributes
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley I thought you said Jesus had it ALL?
Ricky Grimsley Bodily
Ricky Grimsley They are omnipresent
Leon Bible So being omnipresent then they have nothing?
Ricky Grimsley They are all powerful and all knowing as well.
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley I thought you said Jesus had it ALL! So are you saying that all THREE members of the Trinity are equal in every way?
Ricky Grimsley In the same way I function as a person. Body, soul spirit. Except God’s spirit is every where and has all knowledge and power. It’s not complicated. When he appears….it’s Jesus.
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley How do you know that it is always Jesus that makes the appearances?
Ricky Grimsley Notice The word invisible here. Case closed. Colossians 1:15 KJVS[15] Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley Well New York is invisible to me! Some things are invisible because they are so far away…  It does not mean that they can’t be seen. But that be as it may HOW was Jesus seen in the Old Testament BEFORE he received his flesh body?
Ricky Grimsley As captain of the lords host. And on and on.
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley No not what I was asking for…   Let me try again. HOW was Jesus seen in the OT since at that time he did NOT have a flesh body?
Ricky Grimsley The same way angels do.
Ricky Grimsley Flesh but no blood
Ricky Grimsley Genesis 6 style?
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley Where and How did Jesus get the “flesh” body BEFORE he was born of a virgin?
Ricky Grimsley The same way the angels got them
Leon Bible OK so you are saying Jesus was flesh so how did he BECOME flesh in the manger of Bethlehem if HE was already flesh?
Ricky Grimsley Jesus had a spirit body but could be flesh if he wanted…..to wrestle, fight, eat, sit on thrones,  have hands, feet, etc.
Leon Bible I have never read that in the Bible! The Bible teaches John 1:14  And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,…  You have this happening many times when the Bible only teaches it happened once! Do you have any Scripture that states that Jesus was in and out of the flesh at will in the OT days?
Ricky Grimsley He was human flesh in John 1:14 but he obviously had some kinda body when he was killing people
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley You know I was looking at a Biblical discussion here and it seems that is not gong to happen. I would encourage you to get into the Word of God and allow your mind to be renewed with sound doctrine. God bless.
Ricky Grimsley You remind me of Troy day. Lol. How many scriptures do I have to quote?
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley Just one that says that Jesus BECAME flesh more than once!
Ricky Grimsley Well it wasn’t human flesh. If the angels could take on flesh a procreate with humans why couldn’t God when he met with Abraham and others and even ate food
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley the question is NOT IF God can… but if you make a statement of your beliefs then for others to believe it  – it must have Scriptural support.   That is what we call sound doctrine! Where is your Scripture for Jesus taking on flesh BEFORE the incarnation?
Ricky Grimsley Soooooo when God are with Abraham then he put physical food in a spiritual body?  I made my case with dozens of scriptures so far. It’s not implicit. It is implied.  You know like the trinity. You don’t have a scripture that proves the trinity either but we believe that because that is the case the Bible makes over 66 books.
Ricky Grimsley You can’t prove that infants go to heaven when they die but I bet you preach it…..why?…because when you reason it all together you know what the truth is.  If you look at all the scriptures that is.
Leon Bible When you have a Scripture that says that Jesus BECAME flesh more than once… Just let me know! Would be delighted to read it. Until then you have a fruit loops doctrine!
Ricky Grimsley Ok I guess you think Jesus was just a mist until he was incarnated?
Ricky Grimsley What did God eat with……his invisible spirit body? Genesis 18:8 KJVS[8] And he took butter, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat.
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley You have made the false assumption that spirit bodies cannot eat food. Do you have a Scripture that tells us that a spirit body cannot eat food?
Ricky Grimsley It is a spirit but it’s solid. Never said it wasn’t spirit. However, again God is invisible. So this is Jesus.
Leon Bible In Genesis 18:1 what is the Hebrew definition of LORD?
Marc Jackson DAKE Bible is right on pre-Trib rapture – explicitly correct to the dot. What was his stand on Trinity? I dont think he uses the term godhead – where are you reading Ricky Grimsley
Ricky Grimsley He believed all parts of the trinity had a body soul and spirit. Basically 9 part trinity
Marc Jackson Please provide chapter verse note in a separate thread for that so we can check it out though it has been long debunked  https://www.dake.com/single-post/2017/12/18/The-Trinity  Now wait just one minute is that you on Dake.com Leon Bible https://www.dake.com/blog/author/Leon-Bible
Ricky Grimsley I know it’s debunked. I don’t believe the trinity has nine parts
Ricky Grimsley I never did
Marc Jackson The claim that Dake believed 9 parts is debunked http://dakereader.proboards.com/thread/18/trinity
Ricky Grimsley He may not have said nine parts but he believed that each person had a body, soul and spirit
Marc Jackson where do you read that in Dake’s Bible ?
Leon Bible Ricky Grimsley Yes Ricky Grimsley each member of the Godhead does have their own individual Spirit, Soul and body NOT physical but “spirit body.” But this does NOT mean that there are 9 members to the Godhead as Benny Hinn wrongly understood. Just like you. You are spirit, soul and body but we do NOT say there are 3 of you – Just one.
Marc Jackson aha I now see Leon Bible represent Dake’s publishers in disguise in this group I always knew we had Christian celebrities in this group and the dont all live in Dunn 🙂
Ricky Grimsley I’m at work. Give me a few to find it.
Ricky Grimsley Leon Bible but there are three different wills in me. The flesh wars against the spirit…..and all that
Marc Jackson And here where you need to read the Church Fathers Ricky Grimsley You lack basic understanding of the Trinity in your theological explanation
Ricky Grimsley I’m not making any arguments Troy. I’m talking about dake.
Ricky Grimsley I lack no understanding of the Godhead more than any other guy here.
Marc Jackson Do you understand the perichorea? Do tell!
Ricky Grimsley Troy Day page 280 column 2
Ricky Grimsley Again his best argument for pretrib was “after these things” meant after the churches. All based on opinion.
Marc Jackson yeah Ricky Grimsley even you have to admit it – one trick pony. OP here is Living Bible and DAKE is making an excellent case against it to which  all of us have to agree IMO
Jeffry Woolston The “Living Bible”  is NOT a translation it IS a paraphrase written by a father who wanted to encourage his children to read the bible.
Marc Jackson WOW Jeffry LT which is now NLT claims translating from the best original Greek sources out there What are we missing?
Jeffry Woolston https://www.gotquestions.org/The-Living-Bible-TLB.html
Marc Jackson mhm 1901 ASV @ its best – The New Living Translation (NLT) is a translation of the Bible into modern English. Originally starting out as an effort to revise The Living Bible, the project evolved into a new English translation from Hebrew and Greek texts. Jeffry Woolston got to be careful when your knowledge comes from the internets
Jeffry Woolston Living Bible and NEW Living Bible are two DIFFERENT Bibles.
Marc Jackson I showed the connection above
Jeffry Woolston Troy Day Lay them side by side and read for yourself. I won both and they are VERY different.
Marc Jackson It better be.  The New Living Translation (NLT) is a translation of the Bible into modern English. Originally starting out as an effort to revise The Living Bible, the project evolved into a new English translation from Hebrew and Greek texts. Meaning TLB was irreversibly broken. They found so much error that just gave up on revising it
Jeffry Woolston The Living Bible is Kenneth Taylor’s interpretive paraphrase of the Bible. Taylor created this paraphrase as a help for those who wanted to read the Bible to children without having to stop and explain many things. In a 1979 interview published in Christianity Today he explained that the version began in the context of his efforts to explain the biblical text to his own children during family devotions.
Marc Jackson Jeffry Woolston so now that you clarified that What is your opinion about the living Bible as a study guide?
Louise Cummings I like the foot notes on most of it. But I’m a King James Version of the Bible. And getting Stronger in it all the time.
Marc Jackson We may need to ask Leon Bible but I dont think Dake regarded LT as a Bible
Leon Bible Dake’s notes were all based on the KJV of course. BUT he did use a number of other translations and paraphrase Bibles. In Dake’s Day he used the Berkeley Bible which would be close to the Living Bible which didn’t come out until 1971.
Marc Jackson Well this recording is obviously pass the 70s? Why I remember that most of them old timers used Mofat’s translation which was close to ASV and later in the 50-60s the Amplified Bible

26 Comments

  • Reply September 26, 2019

    RichardAnna Boyce

    Here is how the seven modern translations score on test passages with an overall rating that takes other considerations into account:
    Test Passages Rating
    MEV 5/5 9.5
    AMP 4/5 8
    NRSV 4/5 8
    NAB 2/5 6
    NLT 2/5 5
    MSG 2/5 2
    NCV 1/5 3
    and older versions:- Rating Test Passages
    KJV 9.5 5 for 5
    NKJV 9.5 5 for 5
    HCSB 8 3 for 5
    ESV 8 3 for 5
    NASB 7 2 for 5
    NIV 5 1 for 5
    NET 3 0 for 5

    • Reply September 27, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce how does this makes any sense to you in relation to OP

    • Reply September 27, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      kjv and nkjv are top of traditional translations in accuracy on key Bible passages; new living translation is near bottom of modern translations on same key Bible passages. NIV is near bottom which is the most interesting point.

    • Reply September 27, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce did you see my post on digital NIV vs printed

  • Reply September 27, 2019

    Varnel Watson

    RichardAnna Boyce are you KJV only?

    • Reply September 27, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      no i prefer NKJV, but don’t like NIV.

    • Reply September 27, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      NIV is missing a lot nowadays – the digital NIV is even worse http://www.pentecostaltheology.com/digital-vs-printed-niv-versions/

    • Reply September 29, 2019

      Michael Ellis Carter Jr.

      Troy Day I have two issues here personally. Any test that has the NASB or ESV for that matter rated below KJV is suspicious and makes me skeptical of the data. No one except a person interested in making KJV the preferred bible would remotely do so. The test passage has to be a u I’ve really accepted original passage, I would be interest in what the test passage was. The NIV argument is always interesting I’m curious to which digital outlets are not including proper footnotes because most of the time that’s the issue we fail to read the note so we think something has changed. Great discussion on this topic

    • Reply September 29, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      Michael Ellis Carter Jr. so you are KJV Like RichardAnna Boyce ?

    • Reply September 29, 2019

      Michael Ellis Carter Jr.

      Troy Day absolutely not… I prefer a bible without unaddressed translation issues or at least egregious ones

    • Reply September 29, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      Troy Day i told you i am NOT KJV, but PREFER NKJV

  • Reply September 29, 2019

    RichardAnna Boyce

    JAMES 2:14 Note how our five translations handle this verse, and pay special attention to the different ways they translate the last part of this verse, the question dealing with the connection between faith and salvation/deliverance. KJV “What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him?” NKJV “What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him?” NASB “What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but has no works? Can that faith save him?” NIV “What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him?” NET “What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but does not have works? Can this kind of faith save him?” The NIV, NASB, and NET qualify faith the second time it appears in the verse: “such faith,” “that faith,” or “this kind of faith,” respectively. The KJV and NKJV do not supply the qualifiers. The Greek merely refers to “the faith” (he„ pistis). The definite article is also used with pistis in the nominative case in vv 16, 17, 20, and 22. Yet in none of these other places do the NIV, NASB, or NET translate the expression as that faith, such faith, or this kind of faith. The translators are making an interpretive decision for the readers here. KJV and NKJV more accurately represent the Greek, with no pejorative description of the faith in question. In addition, the NIV and NET also seem to be interpreting for the reader when they translate ean lege„ tis (literally “if someone says”) as “if a man claims” or “if someone claims.” Yet this destroys the verbal tie here with v 12. There the same verb, lego„, is used and clearly it refers to speaking, not claiming, there. Note even the NIV and NET translations of v 12: “Speak and act as those who are going to [or will] be judged by the [or a] law that gives freedom.” The issue in James 1:21–2:26 is that we are to be doers and not speakers.

  • Reply September 29, 2019

    RichardAnna Boyce

    1 John 3:16-18. The issue in v 12 is saying versus doing, not claiming versus doing. Claiming has a pejorative tone. Why wasn’t v 12 translated that way then: “Claim and act as those who are going to be judged…”? The reason is obvious. That isn’t the point in v 12. The NASB is on target as are the KJV and NKJV on this point. The Free Grace person using the NIV or NET is doubly handicapped on this verse. The NASB user is also handicapped, but not quite as much. The KJV and NKJV are friendly to the Free Grace position in this verse. This passage serves to illustrate how translators sometimes find it difficult to set aside their theological convictions when translating. If the goal were simply to convey what the original language says as clearly as possible in English, then they would not resort to this sort of interpretive rendering of the text.

  • Reply September 29, 2019

    RichardAnna Boyce

    ANYONE NAMED BROTHER: 1 CORINTHIANS 5:11 The key question here is how the various translations handle the Greek words tis adelphos onomazomenos. I have italicized the portion of the translations below that handle those words. KJV “But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater…” NKJV “But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater…” NASB “But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any socalled brother if he should be an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater…” Bible Translations 9 NIV “But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, or an idolater…” NET “But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who calls himself a Christian who is sexually immoral, or greedy, or an idolater…” In this passage Paul is telling the believers in the church of Corinth that they are to judge those who are inside, not those outside, the church (vv 10, 12). If one takes the view that those inside the church are believers, then Paul is telling the believers in Corinth to separate from immoral or covetous or idolatrous believers in the church. If, however, one believes that those inside the church include both believers and unbelievers [or false professors], then Paul is telling the believers in Corinth to separate from immoral or covetous or idolatrous unbelievers in the church. If the job of the translator is to translate and not interpret, the translator should seek to make his translation of this passage as vague as the original. In this case the first two translations, the KJV and NKJV, fill the bill. A Greek participle, onomazomenos, has a literal meaning of “anyone bearing the name.” The NKJV gets it just right and the KJV is close. The other three, the NASB, NIV, and NET, all interpret this phrase for the reader rather than translate it. There is nothing in the Greek that suggests the phrase “so-called brother.” Indeed, the context strongly suggests that this is a genuine believer (compare vv 10 and 12). There is also nothing in the text about what the person calls himself. The Greek verb to call is not found in this verse. Nor is the word himself. The last three translations reflect an interpretive bias which springs from Reformed theology. If there is no such thing as a believer who is immoral or covetous or an idolater, then Paul isn’t warning about believers here. But note well that even if I was convinced this passage was warning about false professors, I still would translate it “anyone who bears the name brother” or “anyone named brother.”

  • Reply September 29, 2019

    RichardAnna Boyce

    LET HIM BE ACCURSED: GALATIANS 1:8D (AND 1:9D) KJV “…let him be accursed.” NKJV “…let him be accursed.” NASB “…let him be accursed.” NIV “…let him be eternally condemned!” NET “…let him be condemned to hell!” Three translations have “let him be accursed.” This is a literal rendering of the Greek (anathema esto„). It is ambiguous and could refer to a curse in this life, or in the life to come, or both. The last two translations, the NIV and NET, are not really translations at all. They are interpretations. The word condemned is not found here. Nor are the words eternally or hell. The translators have allowed their theology to color their translation. Evidently they believe that there is no such thing as a regenerate person who at some later point actually promotes a false gospel. I would say that there is a lot of evidence in Paul’s writings and even in Galatians (see 2:14!) that some genuine believers fall doctrinally and actually preach false theology and even a false gospel. Additionally, practically speaking, how would a believer in one of the cities in Galatia let someone be eternally condemned or let them be condemned to hell? Would this mean that they weren’t to witness to them? Or would it mean the opposite—that they were to treat them as someone who is hell bound and thus witness to them? If we leave the translation as vague as the original, then the practical application is simple: treat these people as those who are cursed. Do not support their ministry financially, prayerfully, or with your time and talents. People who are proclaiming a false gospel, which in Galatians is any gospel other than justification by faith alone (Gal 2:15-16), whether they are Christians who have fallen or unbelievers who never knew the truth, are ones we are not to aid in any way.

  • Reply September 29, 2019

    RichardAnna Boyce

    THERE IS THEREFORE NOW NO CONDEMNATION: ROMANS 8:1 This example deals not so much with differences in how the verse was translated, but in which words were translated. Two of these versions contain an additional phrase at the end of the verse that potentially totally changes the way it is to be understood. KJV “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” NKJV “There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.” NASB “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” NIV “Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” Bible Translations 11 NET “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” The reason the KJV and NKJV have a longer reading is because the majority of manuscripts of this verse contain the longer reading. The NET has a footnote here that is instructive as to why it excluded the longer reading: The earliest and best witnesses of the Alexandrian and Western texts have no additional words for v 1…Later scribes… added the words…“who do not walk according to the flesh,” while even later ones…added…“but [who do walk] according to the Spirit.” Both the external and internal evidence are completely compelling for the shortest reading. The scribes were obviously motivated to add such qualifications (interpolated from v 4), for otherwise Paul’s gospel was characterized by too much grace. The KJV follows the longest reading found in Byz.11 I’ve always found these types of arguments to be extremely subjective. Might it be that those who adopt the shorter reading have misread the text? After all, if the same idea is found in v 4, why is it so antithetical to the context to have it in v 1 as well? The key word in this verse is the one translated condemnation in all five translations. It is the Greek word katakrima. According to Moulton and Milligan it means “penal servitude,”12 that is, slavery to sin. Might not Paul’s point in v 1 be that those who walk according to the Spirit do not experience slavery to sin? After all, this verse is part of Paul’s sanctification section in Romans. The verses which follow clearly deal with sanctification and not justification. Paul spent much of chapter 6 showing that believers are no longer slaves to sin and challenging them to no longer live in their experience as slaves to sin. In chapter 7 he shows that a legalistic mindset will not free the believer from sin’s bondage, but will increase it. The very last verse in Romans 7, the one immediately preceding this one, alludes to slavery to sin! It says, “I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh [I serve] the law of sin” (emphasis added). Does it not make sense that the next verse would build on this idea of serving God or serving sin based on whether we live according to the Spirit or the flesh? Then in chapter 8 Paul shows how it is the Spirit of God that enables us to live in our experience as we are in our position: as those free from slavery to sin. Regardless of how you understand Rom 8:1, it is vital that you are looking at what Paul actually wrote. Readers of English translations should realize that the issue is not merely how the translators handled the Hebrew and Greek text, but also which text they translated.

  • Reply September 30, 2019

    Varnel Watson

    RichardAnna Boyce whats the point of your major copy paste flooding? proofs nothing

  • Reply September 30, 2019

    RichardAnna Boyce

    gets Biblical scholars thinking

  • Reply September 30, 2019

    Varnel Watson

    RichardAnna Boyce I did not see you citing any scholars I would like to see WHO do you regard as scholarly first But at the same time I am very interested in discussion on versions if you got any

    • Reply October 1, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      sorry, the comments come from Dr. Bob Wilkin (ThM, PhD, Dallas Theological Seminary) has served as an evangelist on the staff of Campus Crusade for Christ, a hospital chaplain, a pastor, and a college professor of Greek and Bible. He is the founder and Executive Director of Grace Evangelical Society (GES).

    • Reply October 1, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      Troy Day, this was his introduction to compare how each translation handles the selected key passages. “There are a little over 5000 manuscripts of the NT. For any given book, there are between 100 and 1000 manuscripts. The Critical Text is a collation of Greek manuscripts that assumes the correct reading, the original reading, is typically the one which is found in the majority of 3 6 Davids, “Three Recent Bible Translations,” 532. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 6 Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society Spring 2004 early manuscripts (Aleph, A, and B) which it regards as relatively pure and untainted by scribes. If 2 of these 3 agree, the NASB, NIV, and NET usually call that the correct reading.9 The Majority Text essentially suggests that the correct reading is the one which is found in the majority of all existing manuscripts, not simply the majority of 3 manuscripts Bible Translations 7 1657, the Cambridge Revision of 1762, and the Oxford Revision of 1769.10 What we now call the New King James Version is really the 6th revision of the KJV. My good friend, the late Dr. Art Farstad, was the general editor of the revision and he personally explained to me how they took great pains to merely update the language common in 1769 to that of the latter part of the twentieth century. With this as a brief background, let’s compare how each translation handles the selected key passages.”

    • Reply October 1, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce Your last comment lacks any scholarly backing but we can take it from this point on – DTS is a pretty liberal school as anyone will be fast to tell you

    • Reply October 1, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      DTS has changed since the likes of Chafer, Bing, Hodges, Wilkins etc etc were professors, who formed Free Grace; whose primary mission is to expose the false Lordship Salvation of MaCarthur, Piper etc. Possibly DTS is giving in to LS now, as most of Christianity has unfortunately 🙁

    • Reply October 1, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce I do not wish to bring baptist topics in this Pentecostal group DTS is NOT any of our focus What about this % stats you posted on NIV that have no resources?

    • Reply October 1, 2019

      RichardAnna Boyce

      The research was done by Free Grace, not Baptist. I admit that the Bible verses FG used to score the accuracy of the different versions, maybe challenging to Pentecostals theologically; hence you trying to shoot the messenger and avoiding the theology 🙂

    • Reply October 1, 2019

      Varnel Watson

      RichardAnna Boyce So tell us more about this research and what does it claim Is it NIV related? Does it indicate printed VS digital NIV versions out there ?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.