Why non-Catholics like New International Version Bible

[Izdaari]

So the 1611 and Septuagint would be part of any AG home? Your defense is not rational. The way the information reads is prejudiced towards the reformation bringing some greater good and in fact slanders. I will provide you evidence if you ask, after you read it and do not understand. Your request for evidence will be based on your failure to see what I see. Others will see when I show them. Read and let me know.

AG is very decentralized, much like the SBC, and imposes very little in the way of requirements on affiliated churches.

Of course, if what you’re saying is that AG is pro-Reformation, why, yes, it surely is.

 

[CopticChristian]

AG is very decentralized, much like the SBC, and imposes very little in the way of requirements on affiliated churches.

Of course, if what you’re saying is that AG is pro-Reformation, why, yes, it surely is.

enough said.

 

[ltwin]

So the 1611 and Septuagint would be part of any AG home? Your defense is not rational. The way the information reads is prejudiced towards the reformation bringing some greater good and in fact slanders. I will provide you evidence if you ask, after you read it and do not understand. Your request for evidence will be based on your failure to see what I see. Others will see when I show them. Read and let me know.

I don’t know what Bibles an AG church would use. There are like 12,000 all over the U.S. It would be a big job and we would find a lot of variety. But it said “homes and churches”. I’m sure there are at least some AG “homes” that have the translations you mentioned. To put it this way, so you can understand - NO ONE IS BEING KICKED OUT OF AN AG CHURCH BECAUSE THEY POSSESS A CATHOLIC BIBLE. There. It just doesn’t happen.

CopticChristian, what you need to understand is that the AG is part of that pro-Reformation traditions that believes in the “priesthood of all Believers” and is part of the Pentecostal tradition which believes in the “Prophethood of all Believers”. Therefore in matters such as Bible translations, the AG headquarters might have a preference, but it has no right or authority (and claims none) to tell a Christian what translation to read. Pentecostals are pragmatic people. If you like reading the Douay–Rheims Bible and you get more out of it then reading the KJV or the NIV or the ESV or whatever, then Pentecostals will be like ok good for you. Protestants are not big on pushing particular Bible translations on their members in general.

 

[Publisher]

So the 1611 and Septuagint would be part of any AG home? Your defense is not rational. The way the information reads is prejudiced towards the reformation bringing some greater good and in fact slanders. I will provide you evidence if you ask, after you read it and do not understand. Your request for evidence will be based on your failure to see what I see. Others will see when I show them. Read and let me know.

Question…is the Septuagint part of every Catholic home?

 

[CopticChristian]

Question…is the Septuagint part of every Catholic home?

It is impossible to speak for all. For all those that have a bible, it is more likely than not that whatever translation they have, it is based on the septuagint, and when you consider that there is no original scripture, that is all we have is translations. If fact you bring up a good point…The Assembly of God USA honestly states this as so in their statement of the innerancy of Scripture.

We believe the Bible is the Word of God written; it is the revelation of the truths of God
conveyed by inspiration through His servants to us. As such, it is infallible and without
error.
IMPLICATIONS OF STATEMENT

1. We refer to original autographs. While the science of textual criticism assures
   us of a trustworthy text, inerrancy can be claimed only for the original writings

Therefore, no one has any original scripture in their home. For the Catholic this is not an issue, for the Protestant the best they can offer is Sola Translation, and for the Quaker, in my understanding it does not matter.

Good question, glad you brought it up so I could elaborate. Please ask me more so I can continually fill in the blanks.

 

[Izdaari]

I don’t know what Bibles an AG church would use. There are like 12,000 all over the U.S. It would be a big job and we would find a lot of variety. But it said “homes and churches”. I’m sure there are at least some AG “homes” that have the translations you mentioned. To put it this way, so you can understand - NO ONE IS BEING KICKED OUT OF AN AG CHURCH BECAUSE THEY POSSESS A CATHOLIC BIBLE. There. It just doesn’t happen.

CopticChristian, what you need to understand is that the AG is part of that pro-Reformation traditions that believes in the “priesthood of all Believers” and is part of the Pentecostal tradition which believes in the “Prophethood of all Believers”. Therefore in matters such as Bible translations, the AG headquarters might have a preference, but it has no right or authority (and claims none) to tell a Christian what translation to read. Pentecostals are pragmatic people. If you like reading the Douay–Rheims Bible and you get more out of it then reading the KJV or the NIV or the ESV or whatever, then Pentecostals will be like ok good for you. Protestants are not big on pushing particular Bible translations on their members in general.

I can personally attest to that, as I’ve not only carried a Douay-Rheims to my (AG) church, I’ve read from it in Bible studies, and told them what translation I was reading from. No one had a problem with it.

(That’s not my favorite translation, but I have many and might carry any of them on a given Sunday.)

 

[ltwin]

I can personally attest to that, as I’ve not only carried a Douay-Rheims to my (AG) church, I’ve read from it in Bible studies, and told them what translation I was reading from. No one had a problem with it.

(That’s not my favorite translation, but I have many and might carry any of them on a given Sunday.)

I looked at the Douay-Rheims on BibleGateway.com. It didn’t grab me. I’m really not impressed with the NIV either.

My favorite translation is the ESV. It flows so well, is understandable, and the language remains beautiful at the same time. Some people were looking through my Bible at church and really like the translation so they went and bought ESVs too!

 

[Publisher]

It is impossible to speak for all. For all those that have a bible, it is more likely than not that whatever translation they have, it is based on the septuagint, and when you consider that there is no original scripture, that is all we have is translations. If fact you bring up a good point…The Assembly of God USA honestly states this as so in their statement of the innerancy of Scripture.

Therefore, no one has any original scripture in their home. For the Catholic this is not an issue, for the Protestant the best they can offer is Sola Translation, and for the Quaker, in my understanding it does not matter.

Good question, glad you brought it up so I could elaborate. Please ask me more so I can continually fill in the blanks.

Having a translation “based” on the LXX is not the same as having the LXX in the original languages…you didn’t make that distinction when you asked the Pentacostal friend if the LXX is found in his meeting…and yes you are correct…it does not matter among Friends.

As far as inerrancy…you are correct…the “inerrant” claim can only be made concerning the original autographs…none of which are in existence…only copies of copies with thousands of variations between them.

 

[CopticChristian]

Having a translation “based” on the LXX is not the same as having the LXX in the original languages…you didn’t make that distinction when you asked the Pentacostal friend if the LXX is found in his meeting…and yes you are correct…it does not matter among Friends.

As far as inerrancy…you are correct…the “inerrant” claim can only be made concerning the original autographs…none of which are in existence…only copies of copies with thousands of variations between them.

This is why we dialogue for clarification. We are now clear and there is no argument.

 

[Izdaari]

I looked at the Douay-Rheims on BibleGateway.com. It didn’t grab me. I’m really not impressed with the NIV either.

My favorite translation is the ESV. It flows so well, is understandable, and the language remains beautiful at the same time. Some people were looking through my Bible at church and really like the translation so they went and bought ESVs too!

Those are some of the reasons I love the ESV too!

Another is that it comes in some really excellent editions, including the ESV Study Bible, and the handy coat pocket and purse sized Cambridge ESV Pitt Minion.

 

[wwolverine]

What passages are you talking about it missing?

And what do you mean about it using manuscripts (I assume that’s what you meant) that are less reliable? It uses as its base the critical texts that are pretty standard.

As a Catholic residing presently (due to work) in Saudi Arabia, i use this site to read the Holy Bible from the Net

easterbrooks.com/cgi-bin/Cathcal.cgi
And i also use NIV study bible which was gifted to me by one friend. So on this particular day, the reading was from Daniel chapter 14 i think, so when I opened the Holy Bible to read, it ended at Chapter 12. I was lost, wondering how to read chapter 12 when My bible has only chapter 12? I went online and checked Jerusalem bible, and yes, it had chapter 14.

That made me wonder, why two chapters are missing in NIV?

Same thing happened with another book Esther C12, etc, dont know wht it is and would be grateful if someone clarified.

 

[Publisher]

As a Catholic residing presently (due to work) in Saudi Arabia, i use this site to read the Holy Bible from the Net

easterbrooks.com/cgi-bin/Cathcal.cgi
And i also use NIV study bible which was gifted to me by one friend. So on this particular day, the reading was from Daniel chapter 14 i think, so when I opened the Holy Bible to read, it ended at Chapter 12. I was lost, wondering how to read chapter 12 when My bible has only chapter 12? I went online and checked Jerusalem bible, and yes, it had chapter 14.

That made me wonder, why two chapters are missing in NIV?

Same thing happened with another book Esther C12, etc, dont know wht it is and would be grateful if someone clarified.

The last chapters of Daniel and Esther in Catholic and Orthodox scriptues are not found in the Hebrew Jewish scriptures but were included in the Greek LXX of the Diaspora…Bel and the Dragon is appended to Daniel and since Esther in the Hebrew version never mentions God…a pious Jew decided “God” should be mentioned…so the last chapters of Esther were added as they DO mention God…that is a “simplistic” answer of course.

 

[CopticChristian]

As a Catholic residing presently (due to work) in Saudi Arabia, i use this site to read the Holy Bible from the Net

easterbrooks.com/cgi-bin/Cathcal.cgi
And i also use NIV study bible which was gifted to me by one friend. So on this particular day, the reading was from Daniel chapter 14 i think, so when I opened the Holy Bible to read, it ended at Chapter 12. I was lost, wondering how to read chapter 12 when My bible has only chapter 12? I went online and checked Jerusalem bible, and yes, it had chapter 14.

That made me wonder, why two chapters are missing in NIV?

Same thing happened with another book Esther C12, etc, dont know wht it is and would be grateful if someone clarified.

Sola Scriptura, Sola Translation. Luther added words, deuterocanonicals removed, you can only imagine.

 

[Publisher]

Sola Scriptura, Sola Translation. Luther added words, deuterocanonicals removed, you can only imagine.

Did Luther add words to the Greek or did he translate the Greek into German and to get the sense of the Greek text use German words to achieve that…kind of like what Catholic translators do when translating into English…since the Greek cannot always be translated word for word to have a nice flowing English translation do not Catholic translators “add” words as well…as does every translator?

Did Luther remove the DC from his translation?

 

[Izdaari]

Btw, the NIV we’ve been discussing is the 1984 edition, which is now standard. There is a major revision of the NIV dated 2011. It incorporates some but not all of the TNIV stuff. I hope it will be an improvement, but I haven’t really had a chance to check it out yet.

 

[CopticChristian]

Did Luther add words to the Greek or did he translate the Greek into German and to get the sense of the Greek text use German words to achieve that…kind of like what Catholic translators do when translating into English…since the Greek cannot always be translated word for word to have a nice flowing English translation do not Catholic translators “add” words as well…as does every translator?

Did Luther remove the DC from his translation?

The statement names Luther and is applied to Protestant thought in general. You ask a question that you know the answer to. You accuse. This discussion bears no further discussion other than focus on the word “imagine”.

I imagine that you will not reply or answer. Either way you asked a question.

 

[Publisher]

The statement names Luther and is applied to Protestant thought in general. You ask a question that you know the answer to. You accuse. This discussion bears no further discussion other than focus on the word “imagine”.

“Accuse”? So clarification to your previous statement is now “accusation”?

Perhaps you are right…no further discussion concerning your previous statement is necessary.
Peace to you friend.

 

[Jim27290]

When I am studying the Bible I don’t just use one particular type, instead choosing three or four versions. Protestants know that the Bible can be translated in different ways, with some Bibles being word for word translations of the original languages and yet other Bibles being a “thought for thought” translation of the writers intentions.

So if you want to get a good overall view of what a text is trying to say it is always best to use at least three Bibles… one from the “Word for Word” end of the translation scale (ESV, KJV are at this end), one from the “Thought for Thought” end of the scale (e.g. “The message”) and then one from the middle of the scale (like the NIV).

That;s if your going “in depth” in your studies but most just like to be able to read a text and have a good understanding of its meaning quickly and easily and for them a Bible like the NIV that makes the best of both sides of the scale is the best option.

Here’s a good site with graphs showing what I’m talking about.
apbrown2.net/web/TranslationComparisonChart.htm

 

[Tyuiop411]

Btw, the NIV we’ve been discussing is the 1984 edition, which is now standard. There is a major revision of the NIV dated 2011. It incorporates some but not all of the TNIV stuff. I hope it will be an improvement, but I haven’t really had a chance to check it out yet.

I’ve been getting familiar with the NIV 2011 since I bought the revised edition of the NIV Student Bible (Which I like because it just gives historical background and a little bit of moral preaching from the articles). So far it seems pretty much the same apart from the fact that it has been made more gender-neutral and the use of contractions has increased. They’ve also improved some renderings that were awkward to most people.

But it’s still less gender-neutral the the NAB, NJB, and NRSV. Basically it was just a minor revision kinda like the ESV was to the RSV.

So if you have a NIV 1984 I wouldn’t be in any hurry to rush out and buy a new NIV 2011.

 

[Izdaari]

I’ve been getting familiar with the NIV 2011 since I bought the revised edition of the NIV Student Bible (Which I like because it just gives historical background and a little bit of moral preaching from the articles). So far it seems pretty much the same apart from the fact that it has been made more gender-neutral and the use of contractions has increased. They’ve also improved some renderings that were awkward to most people.

But it’s still less gender-neutral the the NAB, NJB, and NRSV. Basically it was just a minor revision kinda like the ESV was to the RSV.

So if you have a NIV 1984 I wouldn’t be in any hurry to rush out and buy a new NIV 2011.

Thanks for the review.

I actually prefer the TNIV over the NIV, and I’m hoping the NIV 2011 will be a worthy replacement since they won’t be publishing the TNIV anymore.