Saved-By-Grace
Well-Known Member
Everything is better than the NIV.
not really, the 1984 NIV is quite good. And the Message is probably the worst
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!
Everything is better than the NIV.
not really, the 1984 NIV is quite good. And the Message is probably the worst
I disagree on the NIV simply because it is dynamic equivalent. I do not like nor trust that method.
I want nothing to do with it and warn all my church members against it.
wow, are you NKJV, KJV?
No I am currently using the ESV.
The KJVO group those has neither of them for their position!there are experts, and then there are EXPERTS, if you get my drift
I am not qualified to make that type of judgement though, are you?very LIBERAL though, and some of his judgements on textual decisions are way off. Even the textual evidence given in the UBS NT, in places is incomplete and wrong!
The KJVO group those has neither of them for their position!
Wrong based upon what though?ESV has the wrong readings for 1 Timothy 3:16 and 1 John 5:7, NKJV is far better IMHO
Either experts/experts in textual criticism.who are they?
Do you think the 2011 edition improved the Niv then?not for all passages, though. In Philippians 2:6-8, they use the correct English phrase for μορφῇ, which is "very nature", which removes any confusion with "form", which some argue is "external" (Thayer), and others, "internal" (Gifford).
Wrong based upon what though?
Do you think the 2011 edition improved the Niv then?
Either experts/experts in textual criticism.
Not a textual decision, but last year I read Bruce Metzger claim that the pericope adulterae was not referenced by any church father prior to the 12th century (A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Hendrickson Publishers, 2005, 188) -- when even I, who doesn't claim to be an expert at anything, could discover that was wrong.very LIBERAL though, and some of his judgements on textual decisions are way off. Even the textual evidence given in the UBS NT, in places is incomplete and wrong!
TRKJVlover, I see this is your second post, so...Will from my username no surprise I would recommend the NKJV for sure.
Not a textual decision, but last year I read Bruce Metzger claim that the pericope adulterae was not referenced by any church father prior to the 12th century (A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Hendrickson Publishers, 2005, 188) -- when even I, who doesn't claim to be an expert at anything, could discover that was wrong.
Who was an excellent, if a bit caustic, textual critic.he seems to be stuck on the patron saint of textual criticism, John Burgeon.