[Elsie]

In actuality, though for verse 10 the NIV supplies words not found in the Greek nor necessary to it (a translational no-no),

I'm glad the KJV doesn't do this.

[imardmd1]

imardmd1: In actuality, though for verse 10 the NIV supplies words not found in the Greek nor necessary to it (a translational no-no), (Post #218)

Elsie: I'm glad the KJV doesn't do this. (Post #220)

In translating verse 10 the KJV does not do this, nor for verse 9, either.

For a deeper understanding of the complexities attendant in comparing translational philosophies of the formal equivalency (KJV, ASV) versus "dynamic" equivalency (NIV, TEV) kinds, I commend to you the paperback "ACCURACY OF TRANSLATION: The Primary Criterion in Evaluating Bible Versions with special reference to the New international Version" by Robert P. Martin (Banner of Truth Trust, Carlisle, PA), 89 pages still available for less than $10 at Christian book stores or online at, say, Amazon (click here). In it, the author analyzes the dynamic elements introduced and aggravated by version like the NIV:

1. The elimination of complex grammatical structures
2. The addition of words in translation 4. The erosion of the Bible's technical terminology
5. The leveling of cultural distinctives
6. The presentation of the interpretation of Scripture as though it were Scripture
7. The paraphrasing of the biblical text

This is one of the books I have read from cover to cover in my study for several years of this debate. The Amazon site includes three reader evaluations a the botttom of the page. Read them.