Contrasting The Csb with the Niv 2011

[Rippon]

I appreciate the time you have taken with all this, but I'm afraid it is irrelevant for reasons I've already pointed out.

I deal in the realm of facts. You don't. The point of this thread is to contrast the CSB with the NIV. I have been giving many examples of comparison with a number of different versions on key words dealing with issues that are pertinent to your endless putdowns of the NIV. False aspersions galore, I must say. So I have brought you face to face with reality and it rubs you the wrong way. Too bad so sad.

However, if you enjoy statistics,don't let me stop you compiling them.

You bet you can't stop me from pointing out facts instead of the constant incendiary remarks flowing from every pore of your being against the NIV and its translators.

The stats and the words from the various translations are real --not fictional. When it comes to the subject of the NIV your fevered nastiness needs to come to grips with the actual NIV text.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

From your own post quoting CBMW, explaining the different possible meanings of assume:

Well at least you're looking in the right place now. So go away and have a think and spot the difference between 'usurp' and 'assume.'

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I deal in the realm of facts.

The point of this thread is to contrast the CSB with the NIV. I have been giving many examples of comparison with a number of different versions on key words dealing with issues that are pertinent to your endless putdowns of the NIV. False aspersions galore, I must say. So I have brought you face to face with reality and it rubs you the wrong way. Too bad so sad.

Well I'm sorry to confront you with reality, but the CBMW had no issue with large portions of the NIV. They had problems specifically with 1 Timothy 2:12 and Proverbs 15:5, and saying that in dozens of other places the NIV is correct is so much verbiage because it is precisely in those verses that it is wrong, and the CBMW takes time to show why it is wrong.

But my main purpose in citing the CBMW was to show that Y1 was not unsupported and that he had linked precisely to those websites that supported his views. I am pleased that the mods have deleted those of your posts that were particularly unworthy of you, and hope that you will not repeat them.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

According to Merriam Webster usurp is a transitive verb which means to seize or exercise authority or possession wrongfully.
And per MW assume is also a transitive verb meaning to seize, usurp, to assume control.

I'm pleased to see that you have finally figured out the difference between 'usurp' and 'assume.'
To 'usurp' is always something that is done 'wrongfully.' To 'assume' ( in the sense of which we are speaking) means to 'undertake an office or duty' (Oxford Concise Dictionary). It is not necessarily or usually done wrongfully.

 

[Jerome]

[Sigh]
Again, what you already posted:

"...'assume authority' could be understood in two different ways: a negative way (meaning “wrongly assume authority on one’s own initiative”) or a positive way (meaning “begin to use authority in a rightful way”)"

 

[Martin Marprelate]

[Sigh]
Again, what you already posted:

Yep! And?

 

[Rippon]

ha

But my main purpose in citing the CBMW was to show that Y1 was not unsupported and that he had linked precisely to those websites that supported his views.

Y1 has been making utter falsehoods about the NIV and its translators for eight years.

To repeat for the umpteenth time: there is no blurring of gender distinctions in the NIV. Those charges cannot be supported by any text in the NIV.


There are no passages in the NIV which advocates women as :

heads of households
elders in the church
pastors in the church

Those are complete lies. And if anyone makes those lies they are violating the rules of the BB forum. Although nobody has done a lick about it. The lies continue unabated.

More serious is not that folks are violating the rules of the forum --Christians are supposed to be posting here. Truth should be extolled --not thrown down in the streets.

I have made it perfectly clear that the NIV is not above criticism. I have made it abundantly clear that I have made and will continue to make suggestions for improvements.

But any fair-minded person will not allow utter lies to be said about the NIV when those charges are completely unsupported by the text itself. Let's just be reasonable and Christian about this. For you to support him in this is reprehensible.

I have asked y1 literally hundreds of times to demonstrate from the text of the NIV to back up his wild accusations. He has never produced anything of his own --he runs away. He avoids direct questions. Would an honest person do that for 8 years?

I have given passages from the NT that directly deal with the roles of men and women and leadership in the church. He has made absolutely no comment. Would an honest person do that?

 

[Rippon]

Yep! And?

You are as hardheaded as they come. Just admit you have been wrong and move along.

 

[Rippon]

The HCSB and CSB both have the same rendering for Psalm 46:10:

Stop your fighting, and know that I am God...

Most of the remainder of the translations (such as NIV,NLT,ESV,NRSV, WEB,LEB and NKJV) on Bible Gateway have:

Be still and know that I am God...

 

[Rippon]

In Genesis 1:26,27 the CSB has 'man' in the text, but 'human beings' in the footnotes. And we know that after a while the footnotes sometimes end up being in the text.

The NIV has 'mankind' in those verses.

For 2:18 the HCSB it has "as his complement" while the CSB has the unique phrase corresponding to him. That is awkward.

I like the GNT here -- "suitable companion."
The NIV has "a helper suitable for him."

 

[Martin Marprelate]

ha
Y1 has been making utter falsehoods about the NIV and its translators for eight years.

To repeat for the umpteenth time: there is no blurring of gender distinctions in the NIV. Those charges cannot be supported by any text in the NIV.


There are no passages in the NIV which advocates women as :

heads of households
elders in the church
pastors in the church

Those are complete lies. And if anyone makes those lies they are violating the rules of the BB forum. Although nobody has done a lick about it. The lies continue unabated.

More serious is not that folks are violating the rules of the forum --Christians are supposed to be posting here. Truth should be extolled --not thrown down in the streets.

I have made it perfectly clear that the NIV is not above criticism. I have made it abundantly clear that I have made and will continue to make suggestions for improvements.

But any fair-minded person will not allow utter lies to be said about the NIV when those charges are completely unsupported by the text itself. Let's just be reasonable and Christian about this. For you to support him in this is reprehensible.

I have asked y1 literally hundreds of times to demonstrate from the text of the NIV to back up his wild accusations. He has never produced anything of his own --he runs away. He avoids direct questions. Would an honest person do that for 8 years?

I have given passages from the NT that directly deal with the roles of men and women and leadership in the church. He has made absolutely no comment. Would an honest person do that?

The one who is violating the rules of the B.B. is you with your continual allegations of lying.
I just refer you to my post #45 again. You are just as bad as Y1 in that you won't deal with the points that are brought up to you.
The NIV committee are what Lenin termed 'useful idiots.' They have taken the most popular Bible translation and made it 'gender inclusive' to satisfy the feminist lobby which will never be satisfied until every reference to God as Father and Christ as the Son is removed. Although you may not see it out in China, the feminist and transgender juggernaut is still rolling forward relentlessly in the UK and USA and Christians must stand firm against it instead of pandering to it. Once again, I urge readers not to buy 'gender inclusive' Bibles. The NIV copyright is owned ultimately by a secular organization which will bow to public pressure.

 

[Jerome]

The NIV copyright is owned ultimately by a secular organization

The NIV Bible

"the copyright to the NIV is owned by Biblica....“Biblica”...was previously named the “International Bible Society”. This nonprofit Bible ministry believes that the Bible is God’s inspired Word, and in everything they do, they seek to honor the Lord Jesus Christ. Since 1978, they have been using NIV royalties to translate the Bible into the world’s top 100 major-spoken languages, reaching up to 5.2 billion people with God’s Word. Biblica’s international ministry began in 1810 with its sponsorship of William Carey’s Bible translation work in India. Since that time, Biblica has provided more than 650 million Scripture pieces around the world in its over-200-year history."

 

[Rippon]

your continual allegations of lying.

Yet the following are indeed lies -- that the NIV text :
Promotes a blurring of gender roles
Promotes women as heads of households
Promotes women as elders
Promotes women as pastors

There's no way around it. Those are complete and malicious falsehoods. You cannot pretend to stand for truth by claiming the above or standing with those who do.

They have taken the most popular Bible translation and made it 'gender inclusive' to satisfy the feminist lobby which will never be satisfied until every reference to God as Father and Christ as the Son is removed.

The above is utter, contemptible foolishness having nothing whatsoever to do with the NIV. Shame on you for continuing your disgraceful charade.

The feminist lobby, feminist plot, agenda etc. has nothing to do with the NIV text whatsoever. For you to say that the NIV has anything to with your crazy KJVO-type rantings is unadulterated bunk. Why go into the sewer MM?

Although you may not see it out in China, the feminist and transgender juggernaut is still rolling forward relentlessly in the UK and USA and Christians must stand firm against it instead of pandering to it.

The NIV is not pandering to any of the above. You have lost it big time. Return to sanity. You are unhinged.

 

[Rippon]

Genesis 17:18

CSB : If only Ishmael were acceptable to you!
NIV : If only Ishmael might live under your blessing!
NLT : May Ishmael live under your special blessing!

Most translations have something along the lines of : If only Ishmael might live before you!

 

[Rippon]

Genesis 18:5

CSB : a bit of bread
I suppose that's better than the quaint 'a morsel of bread' as the NKJV and ESV still render it.
Most translations still use the word 'bread' for this verse.

The NIV has 'something to eat.'
NLT : 'some food.'
NET : 'a bit of food.'

Genesis 18:12
HCSB : After I have become shriveled up and my lord is old, will I have delight?
CSB : After I am worn out and my lord is old, will I have delight?

The language is too dated in the last phrase of both.

NIV : After I am worn out and my lord is old, will I now have this pleasure?

I like the wording of the NIrV : I'm worn out and my husband is old. Can I really know the joy of having a baby?

Genesis 9:2

CSB: under your authority
NIV : are given into your hands

I have no problem with the CSB's wording here, it's just that it's not as 'literal' as the NIV wording, as the CSB's footnotes indicate.

 

[Rippon]

Genesis 19
Verse 9

CSB --this one came here as an alien...
NIV This fellow came here as a foreigner

Modern translations use the word foreigner such as the NET, WEB, LEB, ISV and, are you ready? The HCSB.
Using the word alien is just too distracting.

The end of verse 12 and the start of verse 13:

CSB : Get them out of this place, for we are about to destroy this place...
NIV : Get them out of here, because we are going to destroy this place...

Repeating the word place in such a short interval (the same sentence) is jarring. Here and place work better.

Verse 31

CSB : as is the custom of all the land
NIV : as is the custom all over the world

The NIV rendering makes sense. Using of all the land is unclear.

 

[Rippon]

Mention has been made of an article by the CBMB called An Evaluation of Gender Language In The 2011 Edition of the NIV Bible.

I will cite the biblical references and occasionally give phrases from various versions on the following twenty texts,

Joshua 19:47. It reads just about the same as the CSB. I didn't check other versions.
2 Samuel 23:8. The CSB NLT and CEB all read about the same --mighty warriors.
Proverbs 27:17. It reads about the same as the CSB.
Romans 4:8. It reads just about the same as the CSB.

So according to that CBMB report the CSB falls under their condemnation. Not that that has any weight. Just sayin'.

Proverbs 13:24. The CEB, NABRE, NRSV, and NLT all agree with the rendering of the NIV.
1 Kings 9:5. The CEB, GW, NABRE, NET and NLT agree with the NIV wording.
Luke 17:3. The CEB, NRSV and NLT are read about the same as the NIV.
Proverbs 28:19. The CEB, NRSV, NABRE, EXB and NLT have the same kind of wording as the NIV.
John 6:40. The CEB, EXB, NRSV and NLT all join hands with the NIV here. Ever heard of making mountains out of molehills?
John 15:6 : The CEB, EXB, GW, NABRE, NRSV and NLT read about the same as the NIV.
Proverbs 5:21 :The CEB, EXB, LEB, NABRE, NET and NRSV have similar wording as the NIV.
Romans 16:1 : The ISV, NRSV and NLT are of one mind here.
Philippians 1:1 : The ISV, EXB and NLT are kind of identical here. The CEB has "God's people."
Romans 16:7 : The NIV has "outstanding among the apostles" as does the NASB! Darby : "who are of note among the apostles." WEB "notable among the apostles." NIV footnote: Or are esteemed by. The CSB's footnote : They are noteworthy among the apostles.
1 Corinthians 14:33-34 : NIV : the congregations of the Lord's people.
CEB : churches of God's people.
EXB and NABRE : churches of the holy ones
NLT : meetings of God's holy people
Proverbs 15:5 : The NRSV and NLT have about the same rendering as the NIV.
John 14:23 : The CEB, EXB, NRSV and NLT read just about the same as the NIV.
Matthew 10:24 : The CEB, NRSV and NLT have the same kind of reading as the NIV.
Matthew 18:15 : The CEB, EXB, NRSV and NLT have the same kind of reading.
Nahum 3:13 : The meaning is helpless or weak. But I found no other version that is similar to the NIV rendering.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
So what can be said of the above 20 examples? Four are virtually identical to the wording of the CSB. Fifteen have a common bond with other worthy Bible translations. Only one verse has no commonality with any other English version.

The NLT usually has stood hand in hand with the NIV in these passages.

There were a number of other versions that the report made comment upon. But these 20 should be representative.

Conclusion: The CBMW is a shallow and transparently absurd "report" that seeks to demean a very good translation.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

The NIV Bible

"the copyright to the NIV is owned by Biblica....“Biblica”...was previously named the “International Bible Society”. This nonprofit Bible ministry believes that the Bible is God’s inspired Word, and in everything they do, they seek to honor the Lord Jesus Christ. Since 1978, they have been using NIV royalties to translate the Bible into the world’s top 100 major-spoken languages, reaching up to 5.2 billion people with God’s Word. Biblica’s international ministry began in 1810 with its sponsorship of William Carey’s Bible translation work in India. Since that time, Biblica has provided more than 650 million Scripture pieces around the world in its over-200-year history."

My apologies. I should have said that the NIV is published in the USA by Zondervan which is owned by Harpercollins, which is owned in turn by Rupert Murdoch's Newscorp.
This from Wikipedia:

The NIV is published by Zondervan in the United States and Hodder & Stoughton in the UK..........In 1989, Collins was bought by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation, and the publisher was combined with Harper & Row, which NewsCorp had acquired two years earlier. In addition to the simplified and merged name, the logo for HarperCollins was derived from the torch logo for Harper and Row, and the fountain logo for Collins, which were combined into a stylized set of flames atop waves.

FYI, Hodder & Stoughton is owned by Hachette, a secular French publisher.
I'm sorry to have given incorrect information, but my point still stands. Newscorp and Hachette are secular commercial companies that will respond to customer demand. Don't buy the new NIV and they will change it to make it more attractive to serious Christians.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Yet the following are indeed lies -- that the NIV text :
Promotes a blurring of gender roles
Promotes women as heads of households
Promotes women as elders
Promotes women as pastors

They are not lies; they are the beliefs of Y1. You have not attempted to prove that he does not really believe them, so it is you who are lying by claiming that he is doing so.
IMO there are certainly texts in the NIV which allow for a blurring of gender roles, and there are certainly texts which feminists will take as promoting women as elders and pastors.

 

[Rippon]

IMO there are certainly texts in the NIV which allow for a blurring of gender roles,

Don't take after y1. Don't just accuse. Document. Spell it out by showing the texts from the NIV like an honest person.

and there are certainly texts which feminists will take as promoting women as elders and pastors.

Certainly not. Please document by quoting from the text of the NIV.

To say that the NKJV promotes a blurring of gender roles is a lie.
To say that the NJKV promotes women as heads of households is a lie.
To say that the NKJV promotes women as elders is a lie.
To say that that the NKJV promotes women as pastors is a lie.

To say any of those same charges against the NASB, CSB, ESV, NLT etc.is a lie.

To say that you are an American is a lie.

To say that I am British is a lie.

To say that King James was straight is a lie.

To say that the BBC, CNN and the NY Times are actual news outlets is a lie.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
See, truth is black and white. There is not a fine distinction. There is not a gray area. Truth is clearly discerned and known
even to the heart of those whose lips twist it. Scripture indicates that in the last days things would be inverted. Well many these days are turning truth on its head. Christians should be different, have to be different.

No matter which version or versions of the Bible one may prefer, you can't advance your cause by besmirching other translations. Lies come back and bite you.