Calvinistic Bible Translations

Speaking as someone usually outside the fray,

I don’t see how the simple use of “sovereignty” can be considered Calvinistic.

If God isn’t sovereign, who is he?

Rob

 

No they couldn't. By your own warped standards you should be accusing yourself of lying. If you take a little time and effort you will find out why the NIV uses 'sovereign' so much, and it has nothing to do with Calvinism.

 

I just have to chuckle at the opening post. Why in the world wasn't the Calvinists' precious 'Geneva Bible' included in your computations?

 

So what words do the other translations most commonly use instead of sovereign?

 

Nice strawman you built there.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

The whole thing is simply a translational decision as to how to render adonai YHWH. Traditionally the two words have been translated 'Lord GOD,' but the NIV (and, I suspect, the NLT and NET) have 'Sovereign LORD.' in several places.

So we have, Ezekiel 2:4, KJV, 'Thus says the Lord GOD......' and NIV (1984), 'This is what the Sovereign LORD says.' Whether one is better than the other I leave to the reader, but it accounts for the greatly increased usage of 'sovereign' and has absolutely nothing to do with Calvinism one way or the other.

I also believe (but haven't checked) that 'sovereign' was not used as an adjective ('sovereign LORD,' 'sovereign decision') in the 17th Century, but only as a noun, being a synonym for 'king' or 'emperor.' That will account for the lack of appearance in the KJV and, I suspect, the Geneva.

 

sovereign - O. E. D.

sovereign (adj.) early 14c., "great, superior, supreme," from Old French soverain "highest, supreme, chief," from Vulgar Latin *superanus "chief, principal"

 

Except that the esv is the version that has become commonly known and seen as being the Bible for Calvinists!

 

Sigh....

Calvin Theological Seminary Celebrates 50th Anniversary of NIV Commissioning

"Right from the start, the Christian Reformed Church and scholars from Calvin Theological Seminary have played a key role in creating — and continuing to work on — the New International Version of the Bible, says Michael Williams, a professor of Old Testament at the seminary."

"'The NIV arose out of the CRC and the CRC has been deeply involved in working on it,' says Williams, secretary of the committee that meets every year to consider updates to the NIV....Calvin Seminary will be marking the 50th anniversary of the commissioning of the NIV with events on Oct. 8 and 9....Williams will....[be] focusing in his talk on the ongoing involvement of seminary professors in the NIV, he will discuss the significance of the NIV....He will also offer some history, going back to 1955 when Howard Long, a CRC layman from Seattle, Wash., first brought the idea of a new translation in contemporary English to his pastor."

 

The Niv used to be the version used by manyCalvinists, but not so much when Esv came out, and really not since 2011 revision!

 

I don't.....

 

*Chuckle*

Because it isn't Calvinistic.

Plain and simple there bro.

And yes, it is very precious, and very accurate to Baptist doctrine, unlike a lot of the versions you list.

In 1998 I purchased my first Geneva Bible (a 1599 Tomson revision) but I have been using the 1560 edition, the original edition, since it came out in 2008.

I am not a "calvinist".
More properly - I am not a "bezaite".

Because ol' Theodore Beza was the originator of most "calvinist" teaching that Baptists abhor doctrinally.

Like predestination. The non-biblical definition that is.

 

Hmm. . . . ESV in Revelation 13:8 translated απο meaning "from" as "before!" Yet they do translate απο as "from" in Revelation 17:8.

 

Mayne

Maybe it depends on which Greek manuscript you use?

 

No. The Greek text has no issue with those last three words in that phrase (. . . απο καταβολης κοσμου) Revelation 13:8.