Posts: 3,464
Joined: September 2003
|
|
|
|
Forums31
Topics8,355
Posts56,551
Members992
| |
Most Online4,295 May 22nd, 2026
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,030 Likes: 275
Head Honcho
|
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,030 Likes: 275 |
Tom said: I do not necessarily agree that it is a heart problem with those who use a dynamic equivalence over a more literal translation. Actually, that is not what I wrote. Here are my exact words: In short, the "difficulty" experienced by most is not that the language, grammar and/or style of the translation is archaic, stilted or too literal but rather the "difficulty" is a heart problem.
My comment was intended and directly toward those who are of the opinion that translations such as the KJV, ASV and for some even the NKJV and NASB are incomprehensible due to the "difficult" language used. What I find almost amusing is that these Formal Equivalent translations use proper English rather than slang or modern colloquialisms. And more often than not, their objections revolve around the "terminology" of those versions, e.g., "propitiation", "justification", "redemption" etc.  I have to wonder if for them the dictionary is something they have relegated to the archives of ancient history as well?  Additionally, modern churches are to be found guilty of foisting these inferior "translations" upon the body of Christ as well by providing them in the pews, having cast off the more accurate and God-honoring translations which have been used for centuries. And, as I also mentioned Pastors/Elders have aggravated the situation by not preaching on the great doctrinal themes of the Bible which are based upon those comprehensive terms. Sorry, but I find no acceptable excuse for using any translation that is based upon the Dynamic Equivalence translation of God's sacred Word. Ironically, with all the myriad translations that are on the shelves, never before in the history of the Church has there been such an embarrassing number of biblically illiterate professing Christians. Thus my conclusion that the problem is not one of language but of the heart. In His grace,
simul iustus et peccator
|
|
|
|
|
Entire Thread
|
Why do so many use the NIV?
|
Reformation Monk
|
Sun Jan 15, 2006 5:26 PM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
Pilgrim
|
Sun Jan 15, 2006 7:03 PM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
Tom
|
Mon Jan 16, 2006 1:03 AM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
Pilgrim
|
Mon Jan 16, 2006 3:24 AM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
Tom
|
Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:45 AM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
Pilgrim
|
Mon Jan 16, 2006 3:10 PM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
Tom
|
Tue Jan 17, 2006 12:47 AM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
doulos
|
Tue Jan 17, 2006 2:00 PM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
Adopted
|
Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:13 PM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
Reformation Monk
|
Wed Jan 18, 2006 5:28 AM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
doulos
|
Wed Jan 18, 2006 3:17 PM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
Adopted
|
Wed Jan 18, 2006 4:29 PM
|
Re: Why do so many use the NIV?
|
Adopted
|
Mon Jan 16, 2006 4:18 PM
|
Gates vs Jobs
|
John_C
|
Sun Jan 15, 2006 8:36 PM
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
138
guests, and
12
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
|