Does it really matter?

Everytime my church gets a new pastor (i've been
there since 1973, that is 32 years, 5 pastors)
we check to see which version he preaches from
most. There are some NIVs about 2 to a pew
that somebody bought years ago (they don't get
much wear )

As long as the paster uses doesn't use something wierd
like th eAmplified Bible /all the time/ or
the Reader's Digest Bible, then we will call
him.

 

Ours uses a NIV .But often will read the verse or verses over in the NASB .

 

Craigbythesea said:

Does it really matter which translation of the Bible a pastor of a church preaches from on a regular basis?

As long as the translation is a good mainstream one, and he faithfully explains the sense, and doesn't jump from translation to translation arbitrarily just because one happens to support the point he is trying to make, not really.

 

It is not the translation that he uses that might bother me, but what he might think about it.

I don't worry about what he uses, since I use my own bible. But if he moves outside of scripture with his choice or teachings...well, there will be trouble.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

Which version(s) would you like to use for preaching? A believing version or an unbelieving version?

 

Versions don't believe/unbelieve. People believe/unbelieve.

 

I'm having de javu all over again

When we try to explain to Askjo about
believing versions and unbelieving versions,
he gets mad and leaves.

 

I can see how it MIGHT be aproblem in some cases.
For example, if the church is predominantly NIV and the pastor preaches primarily from the NASB then there might be "confusion" when reading from the pulpit. Same as any version in comparison to another.
OTOH, WHY would a church call a man who uses a version very different than they?

JMO;

In HIS service;
Jim

 

My pastor uses the NKJV 95% of the time. In the church we use the NIV, KJV, and NASB. There is no confusion because we understand that all English bibles are translations.

Now I would have a problem if the pastor used something like the Message etc...

As long as it is a faithful translation I don't have a problem.

 

av1611jim said:

For example, if the church is predominantly NIV and the pastor preaches primarily from the NASB then there might be "confusion" when reading from the pulpit.

I've never seen it happen. Looks to me like you're projecting KJV-only problems on everyone else.

 

Some members in church were confused when they read any passages what I gave them because they asked me why their bible did not match with my Bible. I had to explain to them the differences between the KJV and modern versions.

Faithful translations? Not modern versions.

 

Versions don't believe/unbelieve. People believe/unbelieve. </font>[/QUOTE]You misunderstand what I mean. You seem to be

 

And we can also provide just as much anecdotal evidence that show the opposite is true. I.E., people can read different English translations and not be confused.

Your opinion unsubstantiated by facts.

 

Ransom
2,000 Posts Club
Member # 423

posted March 08, 2005 01:51 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
av1611jim said:

For example, if the church is predominantly NIV and the pastor preaches primarily from the NASB then there might be "confusion" when reading from the pulpit.

I've never seen it happen. Looks to me like you're projecting KJV-only problems on everyone else.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 2948 | From: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada | Registered: Oct 2000 | IP: Logged |

__________________________________________________

Ransom? Did you miss THIS?;

"JMO;

In HIS service;
Jim "

OR this?;

"I can see how it MIGHT be aproblem in some cases."

Your reply demonstrates that perhaps you did. You pull one comment out of the MIDDLE of my post and reply as if that was the entirety of my view. How very telling of a mindset gone hay-wire! Or perhaps you are just being obtuse for the fun of it.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

Some members in church were confused when they read any passages what I gave them because they asked me why their bible did not match with my Bible. I had to explain to them the differences between the KJV and modern versions. askjo

Listen here troll you do not go to my church therefore you can not know anything about my church. So don’t quote me and post something trying to make me sound dishonest.

The only reason that I'm talking to you now is because of your arrogance and dihonesty about MV's causing confusion.

Faithful translations? Not modern version askjo

These unfounded attacks on the Word of the Most High as found in anything other than the KJV is old.

/ignored askjo

Now when you correct yourself about the W&H quotes I will consider talking to you in the future. I don’t have time to debate dishonest people.

 

Neither you.

Ignore the Bible saying, God is not the author of confusion.. (See 1 Cor 14:33 KJV)

Me - attack MV? Well, do MVs reverence Jesus' name when they omitted Jesus' name in the New Testament 200 times? MVs attack Jesus's name. Massive manuscripts gone back to 2nd Century had Jesus' name.

 

When you sign in the dark behind our backs,
we might not 'get' the message.