All Categories |

Bible & Theology Issues Cast your vote to see the results of this survey | 68 user comments  ( edit survey )

Do you think having so many modern translations of the English Bible has had a positive or negative affect? Created: 8/22/2008 | Last Vote: 3 hours ago | Comment: 1 month ago

Disclaimer: These surveys are created by PLUS or FULL Members of the site and, unless specified, are not created by the SermonAudio staff nor do they necessarily reflect the site's position on any topic.    The effect has been very negative.    There has been both positive and negative effects.    The effect has been very positive.    There has been little if any effect at all.    I don't know.    No answer. Skip this survey, I do not care to vote on this topic.

99 votes  |   Will you take the H1N1 vaccine? • 1 month ago    66 votes  |   Do you currently feel more or less safe than you did a year ago... • 2 months ago    162 votes  |   If someone preaches the death, burial and resurrection of Christ... • 2 months ago    180 votes  |   Does the Roman Catholic Church falsely worship a different Jesus? • 3 months ago    168 votes  |   Who is the Twelfth Apostle? • 3 months ago BROWSE SURVEY CATEGORIES | MORE..

774 votes  |   Do you think having so many modern translations of the English... • 3 hours ago    1,238 votes  |   To which confession of faith do you subscribe? • 4 hours ago    382 votes  |   Sin: How Do You Define It (1 John 3:4)? • 4 hours ago    5,852 votes  |   Do you think the Pope went to heaven? • 4 hours ago    808 votes  |   How much tip do you leave at restaurants? • 7 hours ago BROWSE SURVEY CATEGORIES | MORE..

9,463 votes  |   What version of the Bible do you use? • 5586 comments    5,984 votes  |   What is your view of women pastors? • 870 comments    5,852 votes  |   Do you think the Pope went to heaven? • 1484 comments    5,253 votes  |   Are you Presbyterian, Methodist, or Baptist? • 443 comments    4,486 votes  |   How old are you? To determine the SermonAudio age groups... • 111 comments BROWSE SURVEY CATEGORIES | MORE..

FORUMS | USER COMMENTS | add new

Sorting Order:   Sort by newest firstSort by oldest first

· Page 1 ·  Found: 68 user comment(s)

10/1/09 2:38 PM Jim Lincoln  | Nebraska    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Why So Many Versions? really did start after the controversy over the RSV, but really people were really becoming restless over the obvious faults of the KJV, Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible Is the Best Translation Available Today even in the 19th century. I think such articles as, Comparing Bible Translations will help you find the right Bible version(s) for you. 7/24/09 11:04 PM Alan H  | Washington State    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Mike wrote: That is likely the intent. My answer is somewhat silly, for I purposely read it more literally than the questioner meant. Yet it is true that all of us think so many translations has has a positive or negative effect, right? I for one can't think of any real positive benefit of having so many versions. What may "seem" like a good thing may in reality be very damaging in the long run. A forsaking of God's truth is always wicked and the consequences are plainly evident by the current state of our society. It is simply confusion at its worst and the masterpiece effort of that old Serpent. It reminds me of someone else, who pulls all the strings, but doesn't get blamed when things go bad. It will and it has! Ultimately though, I think the fault really lies in the fact that people don't want the truth. They'd rather believe a lie... It's always been that way. It's the broad way... 7/17/09 9:05 AM Mike  | New York    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Alan H wrote: Mike, Positive? Negative? Or Both? That question seems to ask for either the one or the other. That is likely the intent. My answer is somewhat silly, for I purposely read it more literally than the questioner meant. Yet it is true that all of us think so many translations has has a positive or negative effect, right? 7/16/09 10:34 PM Alan H  | Washington State    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Mike wrote: I was just answering the survey question: "Do you think having so many modern translations of the English Bible has had a positive or negative effect?" Mike, Positive? Negative? Or Both? That question seems to ask for either the one or the other. 7/16/09 11:03 AM Mike  | New York    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Alan H wrote: Yes, you do what? I was just answering the survey question: "Do you think having so many modern translations of the English Bible has had a positive or negative effect?" 7/15/09 10:23 PM Alan H  | Washington State    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Mike wrote: Yes I do. Yes, you do what? 7/15/09 12:35 PM Mike  | New York    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Yes I do. 7/8/09 11:04 PM Paul S.  | NZ    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Sounds like 'Pastor Jim' is one of those Bible correctors that hasn't done his homework. The AV is taken from the Majority Text i.e. 95-98% of all manuscripts ever found. It agrees with the Pershitta (AD 150) of which 350 copies exist. These far out date the so-called "oldest manuscripts" which you think are the most reliable, namely the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus which are so corrupt and unreliable that John W Burgon (who has studied these documents in person, said "the Codex B(Vatican) leaves out words and whole clauses no less than 1491 times" and "it bears traces of careless transcriptions on every page.." The Sinaticus is "covered with such alterations ... brought in by at least ten different revisers". These are the manuscripts that underlie the New Versions and Pastor Jim ignorantly put his faith in. The Devil is having a field day at the Christian's expense. 5/21/09 12:24 PM Nathan  | Australia    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Pastor Jim you are correct. The whole "BIBLE" has never been discovered complete. What you have failed to completely reveal though is that your assumption that oldest is more reliable is equally dishonest as any dishonesty which you claim resides in some of the posts. (Maybe you can be more specific and list which quotes are dishonest? Maybe you have seen something I have not.) Oldest does not mean most reliable, or at least in any dictionary I know of. It means oldest. You neglect to ask vital questions like, when was it written, where did it originate, who penned it, are there corrections and why, and the big one, why does it still exsist if it was reliable? It is not so simple as finding the oldest and there you have the correct rendering. That was Tichendorff's incorrect assumption. This is also Westcott and Horts thinking. Two occultists who would do anything to take the church back to Rome. You also claim the AV/KJV was translated into archaic english which no one speaks anymore. I am bemuzed. I know people who have english as their non native language and have no trouble reading and understand the AV/KJV. What are you trying to say? Please be more specific unless of course this is just subterfuge? 5/10/09 9:14 PM Pastor Jim  | Metro Detroit    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments [/Apparently many don't get it. There are no whole manuscripts of the Bible that were laying around an excavation site or in a library somewhere. The fragments have been reassambled with the oldest, therefore most reliable,fragments to make a transcript. The AV/ KJV is translated from very late, therefore less reliable, transcripts that were put together in Medievel times, rather than including the ancient manuscripts that date within 100 years of the originals. Then they were translated, not inspired, into English; archaic English, which no one speaks anymore. Some of these posts also have intentional misquotes of the translations. How honest is that?] 2/22/09 9:23 AM Jim spannagel  | New Hampton, New York    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments With so many "Versions" and the adding and subtracting of words and verses, I guess we should concede there can be versions of truth? It seems we ignore Rev. 22:18,19 and then state we have an "inerrant word" How foolish! If the word "versions" or "translations" themselves, regarding the truth of scripture, isn't negative I don't know what is. 11/2/08 12:05 AM Nathan  | Australia    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Hi Jessica, you will also find the messages rendering of Matthew 6:7 Our Father in heaven, Reveal who you are. Set the world right; Do what's best— AS ABOVE, SO BELOW. Keep us alive with three square meals. Keep us forgiven with you and forgiving others. Keep us safe from ourselves and the Devil. You're in charge! You can do anything you want! You're ablaze in beauty! Yes. Yes. Yes. This is the most atrocious translation of any passage I have come across apart from the NIV making Jesus Christ Lucifer. This AS ABOVE SO BELOW is a total witchcraft concept and a direct quote. If you wanted an image you would have an upright triangle and an upside down triangle. Does this not look like the star of David? That is how as above so below is presented. This is a very dangerous inclusion in scripture. Very devilish and it is not accident, this is design. 11/1/08 2:22 PM Jessica Dawson  | Canada    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Luke 10:27 NKJV So he answered and said, “ ‘You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,’ and ‘your neighbor as yourself. Luke 10:27 KJV And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. Luke 10:27 NIV He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' Luke 10:27 (The Message) He said, "That you love the Lord your God with all your passion and prayer and muscle and intelligence—and that you love your neighbor as well as you do yourself." Hmmm, maybe the last one does seem a bit strange to me? May those who are truly seeking God with their whole heart, be led in paths of righteousness. Even if a person has a proper translation and they are not "doers" of God's Word, they shall be "beaten with many stripes". Luke 12:47 And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. "Seek and ye shall find" 11/1/08 8:17 AM Nathan  | Australia    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Yes they are both very dangerous ideas and false ones at that. It is interesting you brought Ruckman up. I sometimes wonder if some of those high profile "extremists" are merely well paid, or loyal members of the "lets make a confusion of the real issue here" club. I mean his views are so unreasonable I find the only reasonable conclusion is he is either mentally ill or he is sponsored by those who have vested interests in the Modern translations succeeding over the AV and over the texts it was translated from. Be it money related namely corporate interests, or more likely religious interests, namely the Vatican. I think they know they are handling the Word of God thus the vitriol in their hammering the Word of God to a more conformed shape of their liking. 10/29/08 7:45 PM Alan H  | Washington Statae    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Nathan wrote: I hate to say it but if any mocking is done it is by fringe elements who say that the AV(KJV) can correct the Hebrew and the Greek, which is madness. I know that there are those who are of that persuasion, but I haven't seen any expressing those views on these threads. I don't know how they could possibly defend such an outlandish idea. Admittedly, perhaps I have missed them; I am somewhat limited as to how much time I can spend reading these threads. That idea, which you brought up, is an extremely dangerous one, but it is no more dangerous than the mind-set of Westcott and Hort, who changed that Greek text which they used for their "first" translation (the Revised Version), which was supposed to be an improvement of the KJV. I say their first translation because those changes which they made are still being carried over into the majority of the modern translations, by use of that same corrupt text. Perhaps some of those who question "Ruckmanitism," which opinion I vehemently oppose as error, ought to answer the question as to who gave Westcott and Hort the authority to change that Greek text which they embraced. They evidently did not believe they were handling God's Word or they simply didn't care. 10/29/08 7:17 AM Nathan  | Australia    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments I hate to say it but if any mocking is done it is by fringe elements who say that the AV(KJV) can correct the Hebrew and the Greek, which is madness. I mock no one for their informed or uninformed choice to read scripture. On the contrary. When I first became a Christian at 15 I was given an NIV. This served me better than absolutely nothing at all, and with my study I discovered that there was something wrong with it. This lead me to where I am now 20 years later. Actually those who support all other Modern translations state themselves that "All modern translations tend to disagree against the KJV" to quote Dr Gordon Fee in How to Read the Bible for All its Worth. This is because of the sources from which they all derive, verses the sources from which the AV derives. Please do not allow mockers to distract you from investigating this intelligently instead of emotionally. I know there are KJVO's out there but if you placed all the Greek and Hebrew Manuscripts in front of me I would point out the ONLY ones which are reliable. If there is an only it is in regards to that. And if a modern English translation was constructed from the same material the Av was constructed and from trustworthy honourable translators I would devour it 10/28/08 8:52 PM Alan H  | Washington State    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Amen, Nathan! Mike, your assertion that it is "the KJVO's who do most of the mocking" isn't borne out by those who post on Sermon Audio, who oppose the KJV. 10/28/08 8:21 PM Mike  | New York    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Nathan wrote: When I was younger I had the very nuts and bolts of my being mocked by "Christians" because I read the AV (KJV). Interestingly enough they all read different Modern Translation and NEVER made fun of their choices. There was a spirit operating there, and there is a spirit operating through these new translations, towards a final ecumenism and syncratism. Interestingly enough today it is the KJVO's who do most of the mocking. Guess there's enough to go around. 10/28/08 6:36 PM Faithful Remnant    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments Good points, Nathan, about sticking to the KJV. 10/28/08 6:31 PM Nathan  | Australia    • Add new comment • Reply to comment • Report abuse • Groups | Comments I completely agree with GC Grimes saying that the division of the scriptures into verses is a terrible idea. Certainly though with some bible software the divisions have or can be removed at will so this is already possible. I cannot disagree more though on your comment saying there is more potential for good than harm. I work with many Musilms, and the no 1 attack on scripture is this very fact, that there are so many English translations, and I concur. I explain to them the reasons behind this and it opens doors into speaking about the corruption in their religion too and the hand behind Islam and "Christianity". You say you want 1 more English translation. We have over 300 do you think people will even notice 1 more on the market that it would become the standard? And that's the whole point, to drown out the gains of the reformation. When I was younger I had the very nuts and bolts of my being mocked by "Christians" because I read the AV (KJV). Interestingly enough they all read different Modern Translation and NEVER made fun of their choices. There was a spirit operating there, and there is a spirit operating through these new translations, towards a final ecumenism and syncratism.

There are a total of 68 user comments displayed | add new comment |