-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
is it true the 2011 Niv Eliminated Theological terms?
- Thread starter DaChaser1
- Start date
Go look it up for yourself. It isn't that difficult. Go to Blueletterbible.org or Biblegateway.com...do your own homework and then come tell us what you find.
I wish you would: use proper English, proper spelling and more common sense.
The term "sacrifice of atonement" was used by the MLB before the NIV. Many Bible readers are not christians and come from non-church backgrounds. Also the NIV is really international. A non-native English speaker/reader would understand sacrifice of atonement better than propitiation.
Those that really want to get a background would do well to consult Leon Morris on the subject.
The current NIV,the TNIV and the 84 all have major theological words such as righteousness,justification,calling,predestination etc.
Your gossip-rag posts need to stop. Investigate before saying the kinds of things you normally do.
Thank you.
First, do yourself a favor and research the term in question.
is it JUST me, or is the NIV 2011 starting to get a "near" KJVO status here by some on the BB?
was just asking why we would want to have a Bible that would choose to "water down" some terms that a multitude of saints grew up reading and knowing, thats all!
And we're saying go do your own research. Then come back and discuss your conclusions with us.
I don't think the issue is some illusory NIVO, just us being tired of your constant questions on topics that should be researched before their asked.
I don't think the issue is some illusory NIVO, just us being tired of your constant questions on topics that should be researched before their asked.
Is it propitiation or expiation?
franklinmonroe
Active Member
Respectfully, may I add that I would appreciate that DaChaser1 (and others) would cease replying by 'quoting' an entire lengthy post when they are only responding to one small point or short portion. If necessary, a reader can always look back at the original post for context.
There are several practical reasons for my request: First, it will help readers associate your response more directly with the relevant part from the pulled quote (and it will reduce the amount of scrolling need to get down to your response); Second, it will accommodate more replies per 'page' (thus, it will prevent unnecessarily accelerating the total 'page' count in the thread). Thank you!
Last edited by a moderator:
the first term, at least per conservative Christians rendering for that term....
thanks, will make sure to do that!
Do you actually know the meaning of those words?
yes, and also know that the use of the secondary term was instituted mainly under CH Dodd, was editor of the NEB, and could not "stomach" having the term translated as a propiatition, as to him it was "horrifying" that God wreath had to be appeased by death on Christ on the Cross!
lol....and we see why editting our comments is important. God's wreath would be a fascinating study for theologians anywhere...
Just giving you are hard time JesusFan...:tongue3:
lol....and we see why editting our comments is important. God's wreath would be a fascinating study for theologians anywhere...
Just giving you are hard time JesusFan...:tongue3:
Hey, was in my christmas mode! wreath here, wrath there!
was the part about Mr dodd correct?
I believe that Christ extends past both propitiation or expiation.
Shouldn't either of those terms be ONLY way to translate the Greek term then?
I do not think one is adequate.