My Wish List For The Top Eleven ...

[Conan]

*

There are textual variants which are not the word of God. The question needs to be asked which variants are original and which of them are the corruptions.

True! Very true.
But "guilt by association fallacy" (thank you Logos1560) should not be used in determining the outcome. An untruth of "onlyist" should not be used in the highly important task.

 

[George Antonios]

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say the JW's nwt reads like the NIV, ESV, NASB. Remember, the Jehovah's Witnesses used to use the KJV and probably still do. Because the JW's use it does not make the KJV or any other bad.

Right, same problem if the NWT reads like the others.

Right, and the JWs had to FORSAKE the KJB.

 

[George Antonios]

Would use of the guilt by association fallacy be strong proof of your inconsistent reasoning?
This same fallacy was used against the Lord Jesus Christ when some attempted to associate Him with publicans and sinners.

You would not condemn the KJV for reading like the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament even when the Church of England makers of the KJV actually borrowed renderings from it.

Watch the video first.

 

[Logos1560]

Watch the video first.

Why waste time watching it? You fail to demonstrate that any worthwhile, convincing evidence is presented in the video that is different from the typical inconsistent and unjust allegations in 150 KJV-only books and in hundreds of KJV-only posts. You could repeat and present any claimed proof supposedly in the video so it could be evaluated and tested.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

Unfortunately what they did to the 2011 was horrifying, and outright putting things into the text that don't exist IS an [an horrific word was deleted]

I have a great dislike for the 2011 update as they did some very terrible things to the text. the edits that were made, and items inserted that are in no other bible translation are the [the disgraceful word has been deleted]part.

What exactly are the "things into the text that don't exist"? That is a mystifying remark that demands an explanation.

What specifically are the "very terrible things to the text that are in no other Bible translation" you are rattling on about?

Anyone can throw mud, as you are doing. However, it's time to put up or shut up. Start a thread and prove your absurd contentions. Validate by citing texts and giving your explanations.

 

[5 point Gillinist]

What exactly are the "things into the text that don't exist"? That is a mystifying remark that demands an explanation.

What specifically are the "very terrible things to the text that are in no other Bible translation" you are rattling on about?

Anyone can throw mud, as you are doing. However, it's time to put up or shut up. Start a thread and prove your absurd contentions. Validate by citing texts and giving your explanations.

I don't know why you've wrapped up your pride in defending the 2011 NIV, I explained to you over messenger that my disdain is for the CHANGES made in the 2011, but you refuse to just accept that. I made one comment in passing, of which you can't let go of. You are more than aware of the controversy surrounding it and the TNIV, I'm sure you can figure out why I dislike them, and I have no intention of going into all the details as I really don't care enough to - I hope you can find it within yourself to move on soon.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

I don't know why you've wrapped up your pride in defending the NIV, I explained to you over messenger that my disdain is for the changes made in the 2011, but you refuse to listen. I made one comment in passing, of which you can't let go of. You are more than aware of the controversy surrounding it and the TNIV, I'm sure you can figure out why I dislike them, and I have no intention of going into all the details as I really don't care enough to - I hope you can find it within yourself to move on soon.

I will defend any Bible translation (with the exception of Joseph Smith's Inspired Translation and others of that ilk) when opponents besmirch it with such vile language.

It's not a matter of pride at all. How can the Word of God be allowed to be thrown into the garbage? I will not stand idly by.

You have yet to explain anything specific about the NIV. You have only let mud fly with no mention of specifics. You have the temerity to say you don't want to go into details because you don't care enough to do so. That's what a sniper does. You just want to say horrible things and expect that will be enough and just drive on to your next target and not engage. I sincerely doubt that you would stand by if a loved one was defamed or anything you hold dear was dishonored. Don't be a hypocrite.

You even call the current NIV the TNIV which proves your ignorance of the subject matter. You have been to too many KJVO websites which are the equivalent of gossip rags. Time for you to do your own homework.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

I forgot all about two more translations that haven't made any best selling lists, but deserve credit.

The New English Bible (NET)
The Lexham English Bible (LEB)

Aside from the CSB, the NET translation is quite similar to the NIV.

 

[McCree79]

I forgot all about two more translations that haven't made any best selling lists, but deserve credit.

The New English Bible (NET)
The Lexham English Bible (LEB)

Aside from the CSB, the NET translation is quite similar to the NIV.

Agreed. The NET and LEB are both extremely under appreciated.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[Conan]

I forgot all about two more translations that haven't made any best selling lists, but deserve credit.

The New English Bible (NET)
The Lexham English Bible (LEB)

Aside from the CSB, the NET translation is quite similar to the NIV.

I had thought it was "New English Translation", not the British Bible.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

I had thought it was "New English Translation", not the British Bible.

You're right.

 

[RipponRedeaux]

I'm deviating from my own OP here. I think the 2nd edition of the Phillips translation is worthwhile to consult now and then. I had a copy, but in my travels and lost packages of lost books I no longer have it. I do have the 1958 edition though. The 1972 edition is not as wild as The Message or the Cotton Patch Gospel; nor is it as free as the original Living Bible in my estimation.

The Norlie New Testament In Plain English is a rare find. I got my copy in South Korea. Olaf Norlie started his work in the 1940s publishing the Gospel of John. Some time in the 1950s he published the New Testament. My copy is from a 1993 edition courtesy of Spear Publishing.

An American translation by Edgar Goodspeed is a companion of mine. I have the 1948 edition printed in 1951. Goodspeed was known as a theological liberal, but his new Testament is pretty good, with flaws here and there.

I checked and both the Norlie translation and Goodspeed's N.T. used mainstay theological words such as atonement, sanctification, justification and predestination and their cognates.

Richard Latimore's New Testament, published in 1982 is a worthy version. He wasn't a Bible scholar, but he was a Greek scholar. I made a thread dedicated to his work years ago under my first handle as Rippon.

One can gain an appreciation by reviewing these versions from time to time. It's a refreshing exercise.