Most accurate English Translation

[TCGreek]

That is quite a statement to make! I am no brilliant scholar by any means but I do know one thing, things that are different are not the same! Let us not take the KJVO stand for a moment... let us consider though, that the varying versions contradict one another. How is that the KJV, the NIV, and the NASB (etc,) can all be "the word of God" in English if they not only say different things at some points, but say completely different things at certain points, to the degree of contridicting one another? How can two things (or 3,4,5,6, etc in the case of versions) be the same if they are different?

I am going to see countless redeemed of all peoples in the new heaven and the new earth who never used the KJV but some other version that is the Word of God.

IMO, in light of eternity, we are wasting our time with this KJVO or any other Onlyist position on a bible version. William Tyndale was burned at the stake for putting the bible in the common language of the day and among things with which he disagreed with Rome. That is all these MVs are doing.

One question I will ask: Would I be asked before I enter the pearly gates what version I used?

 

[Bro. Williams]

Double post - deleted.

 

[Bro. Williams]

TC:

You digress, that was not my point at all. In fact, you know so little about what I am trying to say and about who I am and my history, that you had no idea that I was saved at a time when I regularly used the NIV! There are individuals in my camp who would say that those who are saved under a different version are not saved at all. But there are extremes to every point and doctrine, no? I would dare say bring a man to me that says such and prove to me that I am not saved. I am not cultured enough to stop myself from getting rowdy on the point. There are three people who know for sure I am saved, the Lord, the devil, and me.
But don't digress, it isn't becoming.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Amen, Jim! But just as the various and differing KJVs do not just contain the word of God but are the word of God in English, it is also true the NKJV does not merely contain the word of God, it IS the word of God in English. Ditto the HCSB, the NIV, the NASB, etc. When you deny the veracity of the MVs you deny the veracity of what God has graciously provided for us. God didn't stop preserving His word in 1611 as you would have us believe, Jim. God actively continues the inerrant preservation of His word today. Praise God for his continuing work of preservation!

Amen, Brother Keith M -- Preach it! :thumbs:

That is quite a statement to make! I am no brilliant scholar by any means but I do know one thing, things that are different are not the same! Let us not take the KJVO stand for a moment... let us consider though, that the varying versions contradict one another. How is that the KJV, the NIV, and the NASB (etc,) can all be "the word of God" in English if they not only say different things at some points, but say completely different things at certain points, to the degree of contridicting one another? How can two things (or 3,4,5,6, etc in the case of versions) be the same if they are different?

I have two different KJVs (both electronic & paper)
that I use daily for private and
public devotions, Sunday School teaching, public & private
reading out loud, etc.

1. the KJV1611 Edition
2. the KJV1769 Edition

Additionally I have a KJV1873 Edition that I only use on
a weekly basis.
Additionally I have a KJV1850 Edition (American Bible
Society) that belonged to my maternal grandmother
that is so frail it is unusable.

I post from the KJV1611 Edition here frequently:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=31304&page=13

I consider this axiomatic:

God uses a multitude of versions in English to preserve
His Inerrant Holy Written Word. The Holy Spirit
uses multiple versions as
a way to increase one's uderstanding of the Bible and
to increase one's service to Christ (AKA: Messiah Jesus).

I consider it the purpose of this Versions/Translations
Forum of the BB (Baptist Board) to encourage one
another in sharing how the Holy Spirit has taught
us to understand all the great Scripture passages
from a mulitude of worthy English Translations
(and original languages as well).

 

[Bro. Williams]

amazingly (not really) that still doesn't answer my question. see original post. How can two things that are different be the same?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Matthew 19:26 (Geneva Bible, 1587 Edition):
And Iesus behelde them,
and sayde vnto them,
With men this is vnpossible,
but with God all things are possible.

Matthew 19:26 (KJV1611 Edition):
But Iesus beheld them,
and said vnto them,
With men this is vnpossible,
but with God al things are possible.

Matthew 19:26 (KJV1769 Edition):
But Jesus beheld them,
and said unto them,
With men this is impossible;
but with God all things are possible.

Notice that 'unpossible' changed to 'impossible.
How are things that are different the same?
God makes things that are different the same
when God, in God's Divine Providence,
Supranaturally Preserves His Holy Written Word
in a multitude of valid English Versions
and even a multitude of valid King James Versions.

The word 'unpossible' is NOT in my
1978 Dictionary. I can't contact the
Webster's 1828 Dictionary right now to check it.

BTW, the most accurate English Translation is the
HCSB = Christian Standard Bible /Holman, 2003/
for the year 2007 in the USofA.
(I use it daily also).

 

[rbell]

amazingly (not really) that still doesn't answer my question. see original post. How can two things that are different be the same?

1611 and 1769 editions are identical?

 

[Ed Edwards]

1611 and 1769 editions are identical?

That is impossible (or should that be 'unpossible'?) :godisgood:

 

[tinytim]

amazingly (not really) that still doesn't answer my question. see original post. How can two things that are different be the same?

Look at the Trinity...All different, but yet the same...
Why can't God do the same with his word..

BTW, where does a MV contradict a KJV?
They may say something different, but they don't contradict each other...

They may use different source documents to translate from, but who decides which one is the closest to the originials...

This is the real question.
Do you hold that older is better, or do you hold more is better?
In my way of thinking, the closer the document is in time to the original, the less mistakes it will have....

But you may say, "well God has preserved his word perfectly, word for word"... well, where is it? all underlying documents have differences...
What makes one the only perfect one... how can we know?

If I say 'Gracias" or "Thank you", it is the same thing..
If I say "What's up" , or "What are you doing" it is the same thing...

In language, different words can mean the same thing.

God inspired the originals and they were perfect...
Now we have preserved copies that disagree...

Did God goof, or did Man?

 

[Amy.G]

Tiny Tim, you know what your problem is?

You just make too much sense! :laugh:

:wavey:

 

[Amy.G]

Something else that's different yet the same is the gospel accounts.

 

[TCGreek]

TC:

You digress, that was not my point at all. In fact, you know so little about what I am trying to say and about who I am and my history, that you had no idea that I was saved at a time when I regularly used the NIV! There are individuals in my camp who would say that those who are saved under a different version are not saved at all. But there are extremes to every point and doctrine, no? I would dare say bring a man to me that says such and prove to me that I am not saved. I am not cultured enough to stop myself from getting rowdy on the point. There are three people who know for sure I am saved, the Lord, the devil, and me.
But don't digress, it isn't becoming.

If you read my post, I have not, in any way, question whether you are saved or not. Please, reread my post. I just think this version issue is a waste of precious time. That is all!

 

[franklinmonroe]

...Now I would like some input about which translation is most accurate in today's language...

Interestingly, I have not seen any one question: "accurate" as compared to what?

We cannot compare our Bibles with the autographs (the prophet's and apostle's originals). Because of the "in today's language" statement it seems that the OP was not interested in discussing the 'accuracy' of the transmission of ancient documents, but that 'accuracy' should be a determination of how well the translators rendered out contemporary English from the particular version's underlying texts.

 

[Ehud]

IFB Mole Truth.

IFB Mole, look are you realy looking for truth or stiring up trouble. I know two Threds started wanting to know the truth. TCassidy and other men Logically and intellegently answerd your questions

1. "Most accurate English Translation" Started 6-26-07
2. " Greek text" 6-27-07

The truth is they are one and the same.:BangHead:

The best english translation, based upon the best scholorship, the best times, the best Manuscripts is, put your fingers in your ears, the KJV

:tear: Get ready to Shut down another thred. Lets go whine and kick and screem.
Call a committy :1_grouphug: the Gustapo or what ever together and shut it down.

The Absoulte 100% truth, there is only one in English.KJV

Ehud "Just a plough boy"

 

[Ed Edwards]

Which KJV?

the KJV1611?
the KJV1769?
the KJV1850?
the KJV1873?

 

[npetreley]

Which KJV?

the KJV1611?
the KJV1769?
the KJV1850?
the KJV1873?

Didn't you know that the changes to the KJV are additional revelations from God?

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Sorry guys.