Search results

Between the two I prefer the NRSV because it's more accurate. It doesn't make outrageous claims in its Preface as the ESV does. The language of the 1971 RSV has been updated in more places than the ESV; and I am not only speaking of inclusive language. I had a thread in the past that went...

You are hanging by a 'trerad' Y-1.

You are simply amazing at not answering direct questions.

Well, that's your opinion, not fact.

You are not so naive to believe the Chinese numbers; are you? The regime has consistently lied from its inception. I tutor a Chinese woman who says that all the time. Plus, I lived there for five years. The real numbers are considerably more.

This is now the third time I have asked the question above that Y-1 is studiously avoiding.

No, you are wrong again. The NKJV makes the extreme claim that their translational philosophy is called 'complete equivalence.' That's a tad less than 'exact equivalence.' [sarcasm off]

Amazingly poor grammar and spelling is evidenced above.

It's just as formal.

A variety of translations is best.

That is not a factor of superiority.

In New York City there is a high density of people per square mile. In a tightly compacted area such as that, it would be reasonable to assume that at least 25% of those 8 million would be infected. Within two months hospitals might collapse. They won't be able to handle the extreme volume.

Well, this was an unexpected development. Thank you Alex.

The global death rate is 5.7% --that's 57 times higher than the season flu. John Hopkins has said that when 1 million Americans get infected 50,000 will die. NY city has 8 million people, with an estimated 2.5 million infected. As of now 59 Americans have died from COVID-19. But by April 4th...

It is a term that is used as a translational philosophy. However, it's merely a blend of functional and formal equivalence. It's nothing new. It's not a magical formulation.

Why didn't you answer my question? Why haven't you made up any fairy tales about the NRSV in which it advocates female pastors and heads of homes along with all the other junk you attributed to the NIV?

And so? Is that news? By the way, since it uses more inclusive language than the NIV or the TNIV and NLT --why haven't you made up any fairy tales about it extolling female pastors and heads of homes and all the other junk you attribute to the NIV?

It's just as much jibber jabber as the slogan 'essential literal.'

If you get it and recover you will have no immunity to it should you acquire it again. In addition, your lungs will be compromised for life.

That's just a marketing slogan like 'optimal equivalence.' At least no translation marketing team has used the phrase 'exact equivalence.'