Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | John 17:3 "This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | John 17:3 "Now this is eternal life: that they may know You, the only true [supreme and sovereign] God, and [in the same manner know] Jesus [as the] Christ whom You have sent. |
Bible Question:
I purchased a TNIV and have spent much time reading it so I can speak with some first hand knowledge. Several of us in this forum previewed the TNIV NT before it was put into print and circulation. I personally find the TNIV unacceptable, but interesting to see where liberal teaching is headed. The bad press the TNIV has received is justified. However, why have the New Living Translation and the Message also received equal the negative reviews? Gender Nutral translations are sneeking in, with the aid of good recognizable Christian's of noterity. Just as there are versions which have hidden motives, there are versions that place the male form of words when it is not correct to do so. Dr. James Dobson recently had a 2 part teaching about the TNIV, and in Vol 28 No 3 and 4 of 2005 of the CHRISTIAN RESEARCH JOURNAL Dr. James White has a two part article "BIBLE VERSIONS: THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY". Once again I ask how many English Versions of the Bible do we need? On the James Dobsom program the guest who helped translate the ESV said the only versions he reccomended were the ESV, NASB, NKJV, and teh KJV. I was concerned that the NIV was not even considered as one to use. However in a large percentage of churches the NIV is widely used as their churches Bible of choice. Is the TNIV a wolf in sheeps clothing? what should we as Christians do to show our concern about translations who alter the text to reflect gender nutral or other attempts to bring a bias out in twisted scripture? Justme |
Bible Answer: "What good is readability if a translation does not accurately render what the Bible actually says?" --Leland Ryker, author of "The Word of God in English: Criteria for Excellence in Bible Translation" ____________________ John MacArthur: '...I believe anything other than a literal translation of the Bible is a serious breach — serious breach — of God’s intention for how we handle His word. I think it’s a violation. Now, there are some that are worse than others. But, I believe that we need to remember that a translation is a translation. 'Anytime you open a Bible and it says, “A translation for our times,” “a translation for modern times,” “a translation for people to understand,” you have a problem. “Modern times” has no right to determine what God said. Translation is translation. Interpretation is interpretation. Paraphrase is paraphrase. But when you blend those, you have very serious issues. We would say, perhaps, that the NIV is maybe the least troublesome of dynamic equivalency translations, but it’s the old slippery slope issue again. 'And it just goes from there—and watch where the NIV has gone! From the NIV now to the TNIV and who knows where else it’s going to go, because once you have taken the step to say, “We have the right to change the original text so that people can understand it better,” you have just stepped away from what is the Word of God. That is why I always land on the NASB, the New King James or the ESV, which is also formal equivalency and an excellent translation as such. 'This thing is running amok—it’s running amok. There are people in churches, as you were saying, all over the place, who have never heard the Word of God read — never heard it read. People are reading the Message to them or the Living Bible or whatever else variations of that.' ____________________ Added to Bible Bulletin Board's "MacArthur's Questions and Answers" by: Tony Capoccia Bible Bulletin Board Our websites: www.biblebb.com and www.gospelgems.com |