Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Top-selling Bible in North America to be revised...
Yahoo News ^ | September 2nd, 2009

Posted on 09/02/2009 9:37:35 AM PDT by TaraP

The top-selling Bible in North America will undergo its first revision in 25 years, modernizing the language in some sections and promising to reopen a contentious debate about changing gender terms in the sacred text. The New International Version, the Bible of choice for conservative evangelicals, will be revised to reflect changes in English usage and advances in Biblical scholarship, it was announced Tuesday. The revision is scheduled to be completed late next year and published in 2011.

"We want to reach English speakers across the globe with a Bible that is accurate, accessible and that speaks to its readers in a language they can understand," said Keith Danby, global president and CEO of Biblica, a Colorado Springs, Colo.-based Christian ministry that holds the NIV copyright.

But past attempts to remake the NIV for contemporary audiences in different editions have been plagued by controversies about gender language that have pitted theological conservatives against each other.

The changes did not make all men "people" or remove male references to God, but instead involved dropping gender-specific terms when translators judged that the original text didn't intend it. So in some verses, references to "sons of God" became "children of God," for example.

Supporters say gender-inclusive changes are more accurate and make the Bible more accessible, but critics contend they twist meaning or smack of political correctness.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Philosophy; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: bibles; niv; pc; publishing
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

1 posted on 09/02/2009 9:37:35 AM PDT by TaraP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Quix; Joya; Star Traveler; F15Eagle; All

Revelation 22:18-19 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words ... IF you add to the Scriptures or take away from them God will remove you ...


2 posted on 09/02/2009 9:39:59 AM PDT by TaraP (*Religion* is Man trying to reach GOD.Christ is GOD reaching out to Man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

The only two bibles I ever purchase are King James and New King James.


3 posted on 09/02/2009 9:42:44 AM PDT by benjibrowder (For Neda. May God bless those fighting for freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
great because "He saved me because He liked me." sounds SOOOOO much better than "He rescued me because He delighted in me." Psalm 18 v 19
4 posted on 09/02/2009 9:42:49 AM PDT by bravo whiskey (If the little things really bother you, maybe it's because the big things are going well.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
Ditto that, it is an abomination/heresy
5 posted on 09/02/2009 9:44:18 AM PDT by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: benjibrowder

I was taught the Gospel with the NIV; this dosen’t sound good to me...


6 posted on 09/02/2009 9:46:27 AM PDT by Dansong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

A translation is a translation. Yes, there can be variations of the way a word is translated, but these variations do not change the innate meaning of the text. Anything that goes beyond that is either a perversion or a paraphrase. Only an accurate translation can be trusted.


7 posted on 09/02/2009 9:48:43 AM PDT by DennisR (Look around - God gives countless, indisputable, and unambiguous clues that He does, indeed, exist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
Have Bill Clinton and Mark Sanford been able to push through their "Nine Commandments" version?
8 posted on 09/02/2009 9:49:30 AM PDT by KarlInOhio ("I can run wild for six months ...after that, I have no expectation of success" - Admiral Obama-moto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: benjibrowder

The New King James version is a much better translation than the “old” KJV. The NKJV is about my favorite.


9 posted on 09/02/2009 9:49:38 AM PDT by DennisR (Look around - God gives countless, indisputable, and unambiguous clues that He does, indeed, exist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

I guess we should expect to start seeing terms: He-She, Transsexual, etc. in Luke, Romans, Matthew, etc. I wonder if they will add in the Book of Revelations that the transgendered and like pluck harps and ascend to Heaven?


10 posted on 09/02/2009 9:50:57 AM PDT by fujimoh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

Having trouble with the old KJV? Then get a dictionary and learn the language

I dislike the NIV for oh so many reasons


11 posted on 09/02/2009 9:51:13 AM PDT by the long march
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
Revelation 22:18-19 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words ... IF you add to the Scriptures or take away from them God will remove you ...

You *do* realize the difference between adding or subtracting from the holy, infallible, and innerant Word of God and revising and/or correcting your translation thereof, right?

12 posted on 09/02/2009 9:52:27 AM PDT by Terabitten (Vets wrote a blank check, payable to the Constitution, for an amount up to and including their life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: fujimoh

I am sure that’s next..We will hear the Apostles were Gay and John the Baptist is a transexual etc..

I say this: Satan and his minions are if *Full-Force* here on earth...

People many caught up in the *Delusion*


13 posted on 09/02/2009 9:52:55 AM PDT by TaraP (*Religion* is Man trying to reach GOD.Christ is GOD reaching out to Man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten

Yes I do and they are adding and removing from the holy text.


14 posted on 09/02/2009 9:53:49 AM PDT by TaraP (*Religion* is Man trying to reach GOD.Christ is GOD reaching out to Man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten
revising and/or correcting your translation thereof

Why is revising/correcting needed?
15 posted on 09/02/2009 9:56:39 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
The NIV was revised and published as the TNIV in 2002, but did poorly due to anemic publisher support and (allegedly) a bad-mouthing campaign by those with a financial interest in the ESV. I'm guessing the NIV 2011 will keep most of the TNIV readings, but this time the all-important NIV branding and a serious push by the publisher will lead to greater success.
16 posted on 09/02/2009 9:59:55 AM PDT by Caesar Soze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
they are adding and removing from the holy text.

What, exactly, are they adding or subtracting from the text (the ORIGINAL text, not the KJV or whatever other translation?)

17 posted on 09/02/2009 10:00:20 AM PDT by Terabitten (Vets wrote a blank check, payable to the Constitution, for an amount up to and including their life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

Thanks.


18 posted on 09/02/2009 10:03:59 AM PDT by Quix (POL Ldrs quotes fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
Why is revising/correcting needed?

Because they made some mistakes in translation previously. They're correcting their earlier mistakes.

From the article:

The changes did not make all men "people" or remove male references to God, but instead involved dropping gender-specific terms when translators judged that the original text didn't intend it. So in some verses, references to "sons of God" became "children of God," for example. (emphasis mine)

19 posted on 09/02/2009 10:04:08 AM PDT by Terabitten (Vets wrote a blank check, payable to the Constitution, for an amount up to and including their life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
"Why is revising/correcting needed?"

Gay clergy, same-sex marriage, and feminists I'm guessing.

Needless to say, it's unBiblical.

20 posted on 09/02/2009 10:04:39 AM PDT by 444Flyer (Never give up, never give out, never give in.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Caesar Soze
The NIV was revised and published as the TNIV in 2002, but did poorly due to anemic publisher support and (allegedly) a bad-mouthing campaign by those with a financial interest in the ESV.

Interesting. I prefer the ESV, personally, but I used the NIV for years and the KJV before that. I never knew there was a 'issue' between the TNIV and the ESV folks.

21 posted on 09/02/2009 10:05:33 AM PDT by Terabitten (Vets wrote a blank check, payable to the Constitution, for an amount up to and including their life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DennisR
The NKJV is about my favorite.

Ditto. Running a close second (for me) is the NAS.

22 posted on 09/02/2009 10:10:09 AM PDT by opus86
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
"Why is revising/correcting needed?" Man thinks he can improve on God's original intent and message. NEVER a good idea...going all the way back to the Garden.
23 posted on 09/02/2009 10:10:37 AM PDT by 444Flyer (Never give up, never give out, never give in.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

I have taught the Bible as literature a number of times, and I’ve looked at many of these translations. Most of the new ones are dreadful—inaccurate and clunky.

I still prefer the King James version. Of the modernized texts, I preferred the Revised Standard Version. Unfortunately, that was updated by the New RSV, which is another piece of politically correct nonsense.

You can still find the RSV, but it’s not commonly used any more, unfortunately. So, I recommend the KJV. It’s not that hard to deal with “thee” and “thou,” it’s generally pretty accurate, and it’s magnificent prose.


24 posted on 09/02/2009 10:15:04 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name
Why is revising/correcting needed?

Short answer:

  1. Changes in the text. Since 1984, more ancient copies of Biblical texts have been discovered, helping us establish a more faithful base text for translation. These changes have been incremental, and (IIRC) there have been no changes to the text of Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia or Novum Testamentum Graece, but changes to the apparati and the published fascicles of the Editio Critica Maior will inform the Committee on Biblical Translation and help them select the best readings. There has been a major revision of the Septuaginta, and I think another edition or two of the Stuttgart Vulgate, and those will help especially where the Hebrew is unclear.
  2. New understanding of ancient languages. Scholars have made strides in the understanding of Hebrew with recent archaelogical discoveries and the study of cognate langauges.
  3. Changes in English usage. The generic masculine pronoun is falling out of favor, especially among academe and the young. This is probably the most important impetus for a revision of the NIV.

More complete and specific justifications for translation or revision can be found in the preface of most Bibles.

25 posted on 09/02/2009 10:15:40 AM PDT by Caesar Soze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten
The changes did not make all men "people" or remove male references to God, but instead involved dropping gender-specific terms when translators judged that the original text didn't intend it. So in some verses, references to "sons of God" became "children of God," for example.

If true, I have no problem with that. Certainly the biases of past translators could have crept in, distorting the original meaning just as much as today's political correctness can. Except that past distortions were generally unconcious, not intentional.

26 posted on 09/02/2009 10:15:49 AM PDT by Sherman Logan ("The price of freedom is the toleration of imperfections." Thomas Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

So you believe the the Bible, in it’s entirety originated in English in the current form? Basic biblical scholarship shows the profound changes and even errors introduced via translations over the years. I’m convinced God intends for us to read, absorb, contemplate, and act upon the MEANING of the words in Bible instead of focusing on the literal words. I know many fellow Christians who can tell me what the words ARE but not what they MEAN.


27 posted on 09/02/2009 10:19:42 AM PDT by PaForBush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

So we should be reading the Bible in Greek and Hebrew?


28 posted on 09/02/2009 10:22:19 AM PDT by BJClinton (One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PaForBush

That’s not the point....If the original text was in Aramaic or Greek then the translation would be accurate. I do not believe they are trying to correct the translations to the original.


29 posted on 09/02/2009 10:23:25 AM PDT by TaraP (*Religion* is Man trying to reach GOD.Christ is GOD reaching out to Man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: the long march

**Having trouble with the old KJV? Then get a dictionary and learn the language***

Some of the newer KJV have a bible dictionary in the back. I have two published in England (Oxford and Cambridge) that have them.


30 posted on 09/02/2009 10:23:31 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Tar and feather the sons of dirty dogs! Ride them out of town on a rail!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: PaForBush

Ugh, inclusive language. I had a NIV, but now I won’t and I’ll probably go over wholeheartedly to the Douay-Rheims.

Any other alternatives? I used to use the NIV for standard citations outside of the apocrypha, but now I won’t anymore, which is a real shame. :(


31 posted on 09/02/2009 10:24:26 AM PDT by BenKenobi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton

If you understand the language....


32 posted on 09/02/2009 10:28:00 AM PDT by TaraP (*Religion* is Man trying to reach GOD.Christ is GOD reaching out to Man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Caesar Soze

And let’s see what does GOD say about His Word and Who will instruct us in understanding.

The Holy Spirit will be the one to transmit the knowledge of God direct to us.

1. “But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.” (1 Corinthians 2:10)

2. “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, HE WILL TEACH YOU ALL THINGS, and bring to your remembrance all things that I have said to you.” (John 14:26)

3. “However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, HE WILL GUIDE YOU INTO ALL TRUTH ...” (JOHN 16:13)


33 posted on 09/02/2009 10:28:43 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
I do not believe they are trying to correct the translations to the original.

I agree. Deception wrapped up in some truth to look appealing. Our country is infested with that ploy already.
34 posted on 09/02/2009 10:31:55 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: 444Flyer

Your right! And needless to say, it’s PC which is void of TRUTH!


35 posted on 09/02/2009 10:33:44 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.


36 posted on 09/02/2009 10:39:41 AM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
http://livingwaters.com/ on the right panel, listen to "Hell's Best Kept Secret" and "True and False Conversion" Two of the best sermons I have ever heard in my life. Every person should listen.
37 posted on 09/02/2009 10:42:40 AM PDT by dubie (The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

“The New International Version, the Bible of choice for conservative evangelicals...”

HUH?

The author of this Yahoo story is clueless, and writes out of stupifying ignorance. The Bible choice for conservative evanglicals is the 1611 King James Version. Second choice is the New King James Version. The NIV is dumbed-down, but not as dumbed-down at the Yahoo author’s miss-representation.


38 posted on 09/02/2009 10:45:23 AM PDT by pattern-of-freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

Exactly my friend! GOD’s prophecy is happening in full swing!
Let’s those who have ears to hear...hear as Jesus said....

GOD Bless...


39 posted on 09/02/2009 10:47:01 AM PDT by TaraP (*Religion* is Man trying to reach GOD.Christ is GOD reaching out to Man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten
Interesting. I prefer the ESV, personally, but I used the NIV for years and the KJV before that. I never knew there was a 'issue' between the TNIV and the ESV folks.

I think the issue was blown out of proportion by both factions, but it did exist. There were several points of contention:

  1. Complementarianism vs. egalitarianism. The complementarians adopted the ESV, and the egalitarians adopted the TNIV. This was spurred by the "inclusive" language of the TNIV, and the Colorado Springs Guidelines on gender translation. But the translations themselves ended up being surprisingly similar with respect to gender: The TNIV placed inclusive renderings in the text, and the ESV would often place the same renderings in the footnotes.
  2. Sacred language vs. natural language. The ESV translators sought to maintain the style and cadence of the KJV, the TNIV reads more like real people write and speak. Many people like the "Biblish" of the ESV, considering it an element of continuity with earlier Christians, appropriate for a sacred book, and beautiful in its own right. Many others reject it as artificial and see it as an impediment to witnessing, reading, and preaching.
  3. Formal vs. functional translation. Or "literal vs. dynamic." The ESV was marketed as an "essentially literal" translation. The NIV is a more dynamic translation. Neither is at the extreme end of the spectrum, but to some people "literal" and "dynamic" are trigger words. There are more literal translations out there, and more dynamic translations, but the ESV and the TNIV were at the right place at the right time to become, briefly, the standards held by certain vocal proponents of each method.

I haven't read extensively from either the TNIV or the ESV, but it seems both have their place. (Or had, in TNIV's case.) I appreciate the need for a Bible in the contemporary vernacular, but I am also glad there are so many preserving the Tyndale line. Tyndale was strangled and burned in the sixteenth century, but his translation formed the base of the KJV, (N)RSV, and ESV--not too shabby. Of course, he was executed because he was rendering the Bible into the common tongue--so in that sense, the (T)NIV may be the true heir to the Tyndale Bible!

40 posted on 09/02/2009 10:49:28 AM PDT by Caesar Soze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton

You mean you don’t? Is netbible.org blocked by your ISP for some reason?


41 posted on 09/02/2009 10:56:18 AM PDT by naturalized
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

What ever happened to the King James version I grew up with? It seemed OK to me.


42 posted on 09/02/2009 11:01:23 AM PDT by Uncle Hal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
I do not believe they are trying to correct the translations to the original.

If you read the article, that's exactly what is happening.

43 posted on 09/02/2009 11:07:38 AM PDT by Terabitten (Vets wrote a blank check, payable to the Constitution, for an amount up to and including their life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Caesar Soze

Interesting. I tend to prefer ‘more literal’ over ‘more readable,’ but that’s just me.

Heck, I’m still trying to find one that uses the proper names of God rather than the “The Lord, the Lord Almighty” silliness.


44 posted on 09/02/2009 11:11:00 AM PDT by Terabitten (Vets wrote a blank check, payable to the Constitution, for an amount up to and including their life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: presently no screen name

And let’s see what does GOD say about His Word and Who will instruct us in understanding.

The Holy Spirit will be the one to transmit the knowledge of God direct to us.

1. “But God has revealed them to us through His Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God.” (1 Corinthians 2:10)

2. “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, HE WILL TEACH YOU ALL THINGS, and bring to your remembrance all things that I have said to you.” (John 14:26)

3. “However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, HE WILL GUIDE YOU INTO ALL TRUTH ...” (JOHN 16:13)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I’m sure you know the old story:

A devout Christian heard a flood was coming. A man drove up to his house and said “Get in, I will drive you to safety.” The devout man said “No need, God will save me.” After the waters started to rise a man in a boat came by and said “Get in, I will take you to safety.” The devout man again refused help. The water continuted to rise and the devout man was sitting on the top of his house. A helicopter came by and offered to fly him to safety. The devout man again refused saying “God will save me.” The waters continuted to rise and the man drowned. In Heaven the devout man asked God “Why didn’t you save me?” God replied “I sent a car, a boat, and a helicopter.”

I read a story by at one very fundamentalist preacher that for years felt the same way you do. He avoided dictionaries, concondances, and commentaries because he believed he didn’t need them, only the Holy Spirit. Then he realized that God had provided those things for his use understanding the scriptures. The Holy Spirit had gifted men with the ability to teach scripture for his benefit.

Taken to the extreme, you stance would indicate that we don’t need any translations at all. We should just give people Greek & Hebrew copies of the text and let the Holy Spirit guide them.

When the Bible says the Holy Spirit will guide you in all truth, maybe part of that is guiding you to the right teacher, commentary, or even Bible translation that will help you understand.

God has alwasy shown a strong propensity to work through men. Don’t turn up your nose at help that comes from another man. For all you know, the Holy Spirit is working through that man to help enlighten you.


45 posted on 09/02/2009 11:31:54 AM PDT by Brookhaven (http://theconservativehand.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten
Heck, I’m still trying to find one that uses the proper names of God rather than the “The Lord, the Lord Almighty” silliness.

The Holman Christian Standard Bible transliterates the tetragrammaton occasionally. It was translated at the behest of the Southern Baptist Convention, but it is not explicitly a Baptist translation. It is a fairly new translation, and tends to favor the generic masculine pronoun over gender inclusive language. (It follows the Colorado Springs Guidelines.) The reading level and "flavor" seem to be on par with the NIV, which it was intended to replace in SBC publications.

The New Jerusalem Bible transliterates the name at every occurrence, and also transliterates El-Shaddai. It's a Catholic translation, so includes the Deuterocanon. It's quite readable, but it may go for literary over literal. It's available in a text edition and a study edition with historical-critical notes. The earlier Jerusalem Bible also transliterates the Tetragrammaton, but I have not read from it and cannot comment on it.

Rotherham's Emphasized Bible also transliterates the tetragrammaton, and uses different typefaces to indicate El, Eloah, and Elohim. It's a very literal, one-man translation that uses several curious typographical techniques to indicate which clauses Rotherham thought should be granted emphasis due to untranslatable elements of the original languages. It is only available in a largish, hardcover facsimile. The text is freely available online, but it lacks the typographical emphasis cues. It was translated in the 19th century, so it benefits from scholarship of Westcott and Hort, but predates the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

The World English Bible is a one-man revision of the American Standard Version, with Apocryphal books based on the KJV. It transliterates the tetragrammton consistently. It's in the public domain, freely downloadable, and the Psalms+NT are available in hardcopy. I haven't really read it, but the website is informative.

If you consider Jehovah an acceptable transliteration of the tetragrammaton, you might like the American Standard Version. It's the American version of the British Revised Version, a late 19th/early 20th century revision of the KJV. It is literal to a fault, "better at Greek than English." It never really caught on, and the next revision (the RSV) dropped Jehovah and put a greater emphasis on readability. I haven't read it, but it's public domain now if you want to sample it.

46 posted on 09/02/2009 11:49:27 AM PDT by Caesar Soze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten

Addendum: The World English Bible uses the Majority Text of the NT, which of itself may be interesting to some people. The others I listed use whichever critical text was current at the time of translation.


47 posted on 09/02/2009 11:54:11 AM PDT by Caesar Soze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: naturalized

Never heard of it, thanks for the info!


48 posted on 09/02/2009 11:59:20 AM PDT by BJClinton (One Big Ass Mistake America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: opus86

Yep.


49 posted on 09/02/2009 1:16:27 PM PDT by DennisR (Look around - God gives countless, indisputable, and unambiguous clues that He does, indeed, exist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Brookhaven
I'll take God's Word who is my TEACHER when it comes to interpretation and understanding of HIS Word - along w/the secrets HE reveals.

I know God uses man, of course He does - He has used me many times and others for me in many many areas.

But God doesn't contradict His Word and you already see what He says who our TEACHER for His Word is. God says 'test everything' - even if it comes from a pastor - test what they say w/scripture.

1 Thessalonians 5 Do not quench the Spirit, Do not despise prophetic utterances, Test everything; retain what is good, Refrain from every kind of evil.

you stance would indicate that we don’t need any translations at all.

I never said translation is not necessary!! One studies and uses resources that they feel are trustworthy and when help is needed - the Holy Spirit is right there! Sometimes it takes awhile and it will come when you aren't even meditating on that scripture but another one - and He makes it all click. In Bible Study we discuss Scripture and someone will bring up what the Holy Spirit shown them - and then my Spirit within bears witness to what is said. Only being filled with the Holy Spirit will you understand this.

Bottom line - Test everything - because DECEPTION is rampant.

“No need, God will save me.” And He's right, God sent someone to help him. Any fool could see that and it's a real stupid made up story w/the little addition of a 'devout Christian'. A truly devote Christian has wisdom and discernment. And those are gifts from the Holy Spirit.

Whoever made up that story obviously doesn't know what it means to be a devout Christian - and it's meant more as a slur to Christianity. Why would you use that story and still want to be believed as credible?
50 posted on 09/02/2009 2:18:42 PM PDT by presently no screen name
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson