Lutherans Latest to Reject New NIV Bible Over Gender Language
The updated NIV Bible has gained another critic: the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod. In a recent report, a panel of Lutherans cautioned against use of the new NIV over gender-related issues.
"The use of inclusive language in NIV 2011 creates the potential for minimizing the particularity of biblical revelation and, more seriously, at times undermines the saving revelation of Christ as the promised Savior of humankind," the Commission on Theology and Church Relations Executive Staff stated in an August report.
"Pastors and congregations of the LCMS should be aware of this serious weakness. In our judgment this makes it inappropriate for NIV 2011 to be used as a lectionary Bible or as a Bible to be generally recommended to the laity of our church."...
Jim Lincoln wrote: Well, God certainly didn't ordain the AV--unless your talking about the god of this earth?
Why Jim. Your surely not that blind are you? The KING JAMES VERSION of the Word of God was the ONLY Bible around during these last four centuries - So GOD must have ordained it for use in HIS Church.
GOD builds His Church and teaches His people. The Word of God is functional without exception to the continuence and building of God's house and witness on earth. Indeed it is the very sword of the Holy Spirit of God.
So the KING JAMES BIBLE was authorised for use by GOD HIMSELF in 1611 and HE used it to proclaim JESUS CHRIST unto this world. Halleluia. Amen.
GOD would and did not leave His disciples without HIS truth and doctrines.
And GOD and Christ still proclaim this same glorious message today.
The god of this world has come along in recent times of apostasy with the help of Liberal Anglican heretics to confuse and confound this witness by publishing the modern versions to plagiarise the true Word.
But, yes, even a third-rate Bible as the KJV contains God's Word, imperfectly of course, but if used diligently it can serve a Christian, especially if you have a Comparative Study Bible, then you can see what the KJV said and then see some good Bible versions to see what God actually said.
KJV English speaking-Onlyist wrote: Yes I know, I got to learn how read the comment and think with one train of thought. But it also helps in showing me that I do got a English Bible that God ordained for everyone who speaks it, from the time it was first printed.
The aforementioned critique was probably about your posting style KJVO. I too think you should try to minimize grammatical errors, for your own benefit and ours.
btw-While we havent always agreed, and some days I think you should read the entire Bible 10 more times before being exposed to the heretical ideas often on this board, I do find myself glad that one as young as yourself shares your candid opinions with us.
wrote: KJV you need to step back and learn English before you start berating others. Half the time you make no sense at all.
Yes I know, I got to learn how read the comment and think with one train of thought. But it also helps in showing me that I do got a English Bible that God ordained for everyone who speaks it, from the time it was first printed.
Elizabethan is not English, nor should a person have to have the 13 vol. Oxford English Dictionary on hand to read the Bible, which he has to have to read the AV, unless he happens to have a copy of the The Ryrie KJV Study Bible Hardback-Red Letter, or perhaps the New King James Version or an electronic version of the AV, with the Strong's concordance.
Oh, the recommended English Bible of the Lutherans--Missouri Synod. The ESV. Their Commission on Theology and Church Relations concerning the accuracy of various Bible translations. said,
â€śOn theological and linguistic grounds, the English Standard Version, the New American Standard Bible, and the New King James Version are preferable to the New International Version.â€ť
Next thing you know Jim will maybe start telling us his is the same jesus Stewart Custer believes, "To picture the Lord Jesus Christ as rude and uncouth is a false and unbibical portrait" and "There is never a particle of unkindness in the words of the Lord Jesus Christ" I say we a Sitting Bull for BJU.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Why John UK, I have often pointed out, the errors of the AV, blaspheming the Holy Spirit, by referring to Him, as "itself,"
Jim. You must take time out sometime, to learn how to use the english language properly. Not only 17th century but also todays grammar and vocabulary too. This will help you to make correct sense and comprehend the words accurately of which ever version you choose to try and read.
I wonder why the word "hell" is found in over sixty verses in the KJV, yet only thirteen or fourteen verses in the NIV and NASB.
Maybe if a future "Bible" reduces it to naught, then no-one will believe in its existence as a place of punishment for sinners without a Saviour.
I recommend all who are unconvinced of what I say, to get a hold of an online concordance and keep checking out the modern versions as they come out. Check for instances of "blood", "hell", "heaven", Saviour", "propitiation", "justification by faith", "everlasting", "punishment" etc.
1 Corinthians 6 9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God.---NASB.
The KJV has a sloppy interpretation, as usual for verse I Corinthians 6:9 even the NKJV does a better job of it than the KJV but then the New King James Version is a better translation than the KJV and it follows the Textus Receptus better than the KJV.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Why John UK, I have often pointed out,
And Jim, I have often pointed out what is going to happen in the future concerning the degradation of successive Bibles. I do not need to argue this point with you, because history will reveal it, even to you. How you can ignore what is happening is beyond me, but that is your prerogative. I'm just trying to assist you out of causing the wrath of God to come down on your head for the way you speak about his word.
Why John UK, I have often pointed out, the errors of the AV, blaspheming the Holy Spirit, by referring to Him, as "itself," e.g., Romans 8:16 just like the Jehovah Witnesses do! Restating the Obvious about Bible Translation. The AV is also the homosexuals Bible since it was sanctioned by one King James I. The jingoism of the British supporters for it can be missed.
But John U.K., the biggest nonsense that the new versions are money makers, not for the publishers, these publishers like the ignorant who keep buying the AV! It is pure profit! There is no royalties to pay!
Oh, many of the good New versions you can for computer use for little or no cost. The best one is even free. New American Standard Bible, q.v., The Lockman Foundation -- Free Downloads. The ESV is free in many Bible programs such as e-Sword, something that SA recommends, the program not necessarily that version of the Bible. But it is an excellent Bible, far superior in accuracy to the AV.
Jim Lincoln wrote: What have I always pointed out?
I have always pointed out that the modern version phenomenon does not have as its motivation the edification of saints but filthy lucre + the gradual changing of the sacred text over many years until orthodox Christian doctrine is completely removed, thereby allowing the secular society to embrace the new "holy book" alongside other "holy books", neither of which contain THE GOSPEL.
Jim, I hope you are seeing the stepping stone effect. The distances between the stones are decreasing. It will not be long now. Already you are censuring the most modern NIV - first the TNIV and now this latest one. Do you see now what Westcott and Hort were doing? How they were minor pawns in the devil's strategy, to be eclipsed by modern critical "scholars" who were certainly unsaved but respected by too many pastors and teachers who ought to know better.