-
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 the New American Standard Bible as "wooden" as some claim that it is?
- Thread starter alexander284
- Start date
Now you are a mind reader, telling me what my opinion is? Good grief.
But I agree that the NIV alters the text which sometimes changes the message to conform to the translators doctrine. The NIV, ESV and NLT all contain altered messages due to Calvinist bias.
Just_Ahead
Active Member
Even the ole Kjv translators did that, as they wanted to uphold their Anglican views in regards to water baptism and how they viewed Bishops!
Huh?
Please explain this. Baptism?
they should have just translated it as immersion, but that would go against infant baptism!
What in the world are you talking about?
Anglican baptism in 1611 was by immersion.
It was the Westminster Divines' Directory for Public Worship (1645) that dumped immersion, dropping the word dip and inserting the irregular sprinkle.
Put the blame where it belongs, an error they brought back from Geneva!
Last edited:
Did not know that, still wished would have translated as immersion!
Some folks believe two wrongs make a right, but scripture does not support that view.
I guess this is one of the tricks of revised and new translations.
I was referring to word additions that alter the message such as "rich in faith" being changed to "to be rich in faith" thus existent faith is removed as the basis of election. James 2:5
alexander284
Well-Known Member
In 1549 affusion (pouring) was an allowed practice on infants.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
All translations do. Almost as much as the greek.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
I am unaware of bias in the NKJV, WEB, LEB or NASB. I am aware of multiple verses in the NIV, ESV and NLT that alter the text in accordance with Calvinist doctrine.
alexander284
Well-Known Member
I am a one point Calvinist (OSAS) and a two point Arminian (Christ died for all mankind, and God's election for salvation is based on faith.) I disagree with both on Total Spiritual Inability, I believe we start with limited spiritual ability (able to understand spiritual milk) but we can lose that ability through God's hardening or our practice of sin. Thus neither irresistible grace or prevenient grace is valid.
You are welcome to your opinion, as bogus as it may be.