The NIV In Comparison to the ESV. Part 3

[Rippon2]

The OP is regarding the ESV, in comparison to the NIV.

Perhaps you'd like to start a new thread? The NKJV vs. the NIV?

I agree, but sometimes you have to humor the old boy. He's doing the least he can.

 

[Rippon2]

Romans 1:18 (NKJV). 'For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men. The ESV is similar.
Romans 1:18 (NIV). 'The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people.'

Well, this may surprise you, but wickedness = unrighteousness.

ISV : For God's wrath is being revealed from heaven against all the ungodliness and wickedness of those who in their wickedness suppress the truth.
NRSV : For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all sinful wicked people who suppress the truth by their wickedness.

Even the good ole' WYC has 'wickedness' here.

 

[Rippon2]

If I had to choose the one most important quality in a Bible translator, it would not be intelligence or scholarship or knowledge of the original languages, vital as all these are. It would be humility. Anyone setting himself to translate the Bible is handling the very word of the living God and he should be aware of that, and do the work, metaphorically at least, on his knees. If ministers and Bible teachers will be judged more severely by God (James 3:1), how much more strictly again will translators of God’s word be judged, seeing that they have the power to lead or mislead tens of thousands of Christians as they do the work well or badly.

The above is a typical example of grandstanding garbage. More disgraceful charges against godly translators who do the opposite of what you accuse them of. The older one gets they should also get wisdom. But in your case that apparently doesn't apply, at least in this particular besetting weakness of yours.

 

[Rippon2]

the K.J.V. translation of 2 Cor. 6:12; “Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels,” it made perfect sense in the 17th Century, and still makes sense to those who are prepared to make an effort. However, it is not the texts that are difficult to understand that are the most dangerous. If someone doesn’t understand something he can go to a dictionary or a concordance, or ask his minister.

The above is utter nonsense. It is foolish to have to translate a translation. As I have repeatedly told you :Your views on Bible translation contradict the principles of William Tyndale and the Gideons. You claim to be proud to be a part of the Gideons, yet you have eagerly told us that you would like to throw the CSB and NLT in the waste basket. That's how much you value God's Word.
[/quote]

2 Cor. 6:12 (NKJV). 'You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted by your own affections.'
2 Cor. 6:12 (NIV). 'We are not withholding our affections from you, but you are withholding yours from us.'

The NIV translation is pure paraphrase, and does not convey what the original says. The NKJV tidies up the KJV translation a bit (though 'bowels' is actually what the text says!) but conveys what Paul is saying.
[/quote]
You will be shocked to realize that the CSB and Mounce translate the verse exactly the way the NIV does. And you are aware that Greek is Mounce's speciality, are you not?

NET : Our affection for you is not restricted, but you are restricted in your affections for us.
NRSV : There is no restriction in our affections, but only in yours.

As far as your incorrect use of the word paraphrase, I will allow the insights of Fee and Strauss set you straight.

"People will say, 'Isn't that just a paraphrase?' and mean 'That is not a real translation ---it's too free.' The problem with this definition is that it starts with the incorrect assumption that an accurate translation is necessarily a literal one, and thus an idiomatic one is inaccurate.

"....An accurate translation is one that reproduces the meaning of the text, regardless of whether it follows the form...All translations paraphrase to one degree or another, since all change Hebrew and Greek words into English ones to make the text understandable. The important question then becomes not whether the text paraphrases, but whether it gets the meaning right." (Taken from How To Choose A Translation For All Its Worth, page 32.)

 

[alexander284]

It's amazing how far KJV or KJV/NKJV only supporters will go to disparage all other Bible translations.

 

[Salty]

six hour notice
due to length - this thread shall be closed no sooner than 430 am EDT / 130 am PDT

 

[Rippon2]

MM is just begging me to do another of my NKJV Vs. NIV threads.

The whole canon was published in 1982. My question is : How long can it be considered 'new'? Come on, 20 years maybe. But approaching 40, no way.

 

[alexander284]

MM is just begging me to do another of my NKJV Vs. NIV threads.

The whole canon was published in 1982. My question is : How long can it be considered 'new'? Come on, 20 years maybe. But approaching 40, no way.

I doubt there are any serious, conscientious translators/scholars who would be interested in taking on the task of revising the NKJV, at this point.

 

[alexander284]

I'd prefer to see a CSB vs. NIV, myself.

 

[Salty]

six hour notice
due to length - this thread shall be closed no sooner than 430 am EDT / 130 am PDT

This thread is closed

Feel free to open up a new thread on this subject