Search results

To reiterate what you were clearly not comprehending.

I was emphasizing the principle that nearly all translations have these alternatives in the footnotes. I wasn't referencing one particular translation, or one particular passage.

I'm sure 1 Cor. 1:18 has been brought to your attention before, however, here it is again : "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." (NIV) That very unbeliever in 2:14 who regards spiritual matters as...

"The natural man ….has not received the Holy Spirit....lacking the Spirit of God he cannot apprehend spiritual truths." (The First Epistle To The Corinthians by C.K. Barrett p.77)

NIV: The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. NET : The unbeliever does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are...

Why would a more formally equivalent translation be more in keeping with the doctrine of verbal inspiration? You are absolutely correct here. And that, my friends, is a rarity. Please tell me what you think the "worst source texts" are?

"Hater [sic] by Him. Are you speaking of God?

On any given thread a wide variety of things are brought up. So anyone participated has to keep up. Perhaps you are lagging behind? But normally the phrase of "being all over the place" means vacillating on a particular issue. I have been consistent, so I think you are confused. You had said...

As Rob said, the word 'brethren' was "an English gender-inclusive term with a masculine derivation." It did not refer to exclusively adult male believers.

No, it was its predecessor --the HCSB. At no point did the CSB start out to be MT-based.

Myself 1) CSB : 125 2) NLT : 127 3) NET : 149 4) NASB : 151 5) NIV : 153 6) NRSV : 178 7) CEB : 191 8) LEB : 254

Yourselves 1) NLT : 186 2) CEB : 190 3) NET : 197 4) CSB : 199 5) NIV : 210 6) LEB : 222 7) NASB : 223 8) NRSV : 234

Self 1) NLT : 30 2) NASB : 32 3) NIV : 45 4) NET, CSB : 50 5) LEB, NRSV : 63 6) CEB : 74

Yourself 1) NIV : 178 2) NET : 181 3) NLT : 187 4) CSB : 206 5) NASB : 283 6) CEB : 284 7) NRSV 299 8) LEB : 322

I was obviously speaking of the many occurrences within translations of these kind of footnotes. But there is indeed a footnote for that reference in the NET Bible.

Peoples Now this word is a hard one to classify. Does a greater usage of the word imply a proclivity to inclusive language, or something else? I'll just rank them from greater to lesser usage. 1) NRSV : 252 ) ESV: 229 3) NASB : 216 4) CSB : 197 5) LEB : 177 6) CEB : 162 7) NIV : 155 8) NET ...

Only to 'people' from parts of Georgia and Alabama. :-)

Believers 1) NASB : 11 2) LEB & CSB : 18 3) NET : 18 4) NIV : 49 5) CEB : 53 6) NRSV : 59 7) NLT : 149 The NIV is again right in the middle statistically.

Himself 1) LEB & NASB : 526 2) ESV : 457 3) NRSV : 426 4) CSB : 393 5) NET : 390 6) NIV : 346 7) CEB : 331 8) NLT : 323 The difference between #4 (CSB) and #8 (NLT) is 70. But the difference between #1 and #4 is 133.

His 1) NASB : 5724 2) ESV : 5699 3) NRSV : 5673 4) LEB : 5653 5) CSB : 5391 6) NET : 5256 7) CEB : 5171 8) NIV : 4672 9) NLT : 4642