i currently used NIV bible bec. masklaro cya ug masdali ra masabtan sa atong kapanahonan karon. sometimesi tried to used KJV bible, but maglisod jud ko ky laglom kaayo ang pinulongan...
hi..thnks for the replies..since brothers your using niv..do you believe that in our present times..there is a perfect word of God available?in other words ..perfect bible..hehe..btaw ask lang ko..if you want to ask then i wld say ..yes there is a perfect bible today..and thats the kjv bible...if its not the kjv..then wat is it?if its niv..can you prove it?..
btaw im hapi dat u r one of those people who really share and have love to discuss lyk this stuff becoz most of d yp doesnt even care how valuable the word of God is..
About the perfect bible, I think la man guro ..but I dont know about what others think about it,. and thats a nice question,. we can say na ang mga bible scoLarz na nag translate ani version-to-version kay guided by the hoLy spirit while they translate the bible,.... but even naa nimo ang pina ka perfect na bible but d ka kahibaw mo meditate sa wrod of God, la gihapon kwenta......... coz God will give u knowledge and wisdom about what u read..
Hi bro, apil ko discussion nyo abt Bible translation. I go with the line of argument that there's no perfect translation. There are translations however we can say better than others depending on where we base our argument. people who are more on theological study will probably apreciate more KJV or NASV; others who wants to read the Bible devotionally will probably appreciate more NIV or NLT; others who wants to read the Bible just like the language of novels or modern language may prefer the paraphrase versions. At any rate each translation has their own strenghts and weaknesses as well.
Generally translations are categonized into 3: the literal, dynamic equivalence and paraphrase. KJV belongs to the literal. Most of the Baptist churches use KJV with the convicton that it is the closest translation from the Greek manuscript available after the reformation. KJV was first published in 1611. Other Christians however saw the necesity of coming up with a dynamic translation due to the fact that human language is also dynamic. There were old idioms that can't just be interpreted literally, e.g. "apple of God's eyes". Thus ushering the dynamic equivalence translation. Others, though subject to their own biases came up with paraphrase versions, which is closely similar to commentary form of tranlations. This is like explaining or reinstating the passage as the author undertood its meaning.
If we are really serious in the study of God's Word I think it is always good to have three references: one literal, one dynamic and one paraphrase. For our personal devotional use maybe NKJV and NIV are good suggestions. Please take note that each camp who are loyal to a translation will always have millions of reasons against the translation they don't use: e.g. KJV users may say NIV has many omissions e.i. Matt 17:21. But as per NIV tranlators principle any word or verse not found in most of the reliable and older manuscripts, they either retain it with a heading note or they put it at the footnote. Pls check passages e.i.Matt.18:16, Mk.16:9ff, Jn 8:1-11, etc. On the hand people who don't use KJV can have millions of reasons to say against it especially scholars who study the old Greek finding a lot of problems even with the Greek Bible itself. I think we have to acknowledge that the perfect Bible is not just available in the planet for God chose to use imperfect vessel for His perfect Word. The perfectness of the Word is not on the literal letter or paper of the Bible, but it is with breath of the Holy Spirit in His Word. The "inerrant Word" is inerrant touching the fact that it is complete and perfect Word of God, even if the grammars and way of writing are not perfect.
Yes we have to be serious in our study of the Word, being careful of new translations coming up with infusions of spirits not consistent with His Word itself. We got warning of translations like "The Message" with some "new age" ideas manifesting in its pages. It gives us warning to be analytical and be conscious of the Holy Spirit's voice at all times. When we read let's read it with heart to hear God. Let's read the Bible not just for the sake of reading, but let's seek the face of God and be committed to seek his will. The passion, the hungring and thirsting in our heart will always be filled with overflowing understanding and insights because He promised that if we will seek Him with all our hearts we will find Him. Amen!
bitaw..i do reli respect ur decision..cant change ur stand 360 degrees because thats yours..hheheh..
ako pud ky im using kjv because of these...at least 10 lang hehehe.. ..........btaw ganahan man jud ko nay dscussions bcoz we can learn in various ways..
1. God promised to preserve His words (Psa. 12:6-7; Mat. 24:35). There has to be a preserved copy of God's pure words somewhere. If it isn't the KJV, then what is it?
2. It has no copyright. The text of the KJV may be reproduced by anyone for there is no copyright forbidding it's duplication. This is not true with the modern perversions.
3. The KJV produces good fruit (Mat. 7:17-20). No modern translation can compare to the KJV when it comes to producing good fruit. For nearly four hundred years, God has used the preaching and teaching of the KJV to bring hundreds of millions to Christ. Laodicean Christians might favor the new versions, but the Holy Spirit doesn't.
4. The KJV was translated during the Philadelphia church period (Rev. 3:7-13). The modern versions begin to appear rather late on the scene as the lukewarm Laodicean period gets underway (Rev. 3:14-22), but the KJV was produced way back in 1611, just in time for the many great revivals (1700-1900). The Philadelphia church was the only church that did not receive a rebuke from the Lord Jesus Christ, and it was the only church that "kept" God's word (Rev. 3:8).
5. The KJV translators were honest in their work. When the translators had to add certain words, largely due to idiom changes, they placed the added words in italics so we'd know the difference. This is not the case with many new translations.
6. All new translations compare themselves to the KJV. Isn't it strange that the new versions never compare themselves to one another? For some strange reason they all line up against one Book--the A.V. 1611. I wonder why? Try Matthew 12:26.
7. The KJV translators believed they were handling the very words of God (I Ths. 2:13). Just read the King James Dedicatory and compare it to the prefaces in the modern versions. Immediately, you will see a world of difference in the approach and attitude of the translators. Which group would YOU pick for translating a book?
8. The KJV is supported by far more evidence. Of over 5,300 pieces of manuscript evidence, ninety-five percent supports the King James Bible! The changes in the new versions are based on the remaining five percent of manuscripts, most of which are from Alexandria, Egypt. (There are only two lines of Bibles: the Devil's line from Alexandria, and the Lord's line from Antioch. We'll deal with this later.)
9. No one has ever proven that the KJV is not God's word. The 1611 should be considered innocent until proven guilty with a significant amount of genuine manuscript evidence.
10. The KJV exalts the Lord Jesus Christ. The true scriptures should testify of Jesus Christ (John 5:39). There is no book on this planet which exalts Christ higher than the King James Bible. In numerous places the new perversions attack the Deity of Christ, the Blood Atonement, the Resurrection, salvation by grace through faith, and the Second Coming. The true scriptures will TESTIFY of Jesus Christ, not ATTACK Him!
Hi Bro. Roel, I like your level of seriousness about the study of the Word. I also like your attitude of "respect" and acceptance of others even if they are not within your line of thinking. For me, that's very Christian. That's what we are called for here sa YKR. We can't agree in all issues, but we can still unite in the Lord for His lordship over us. The more we focus on the Lord Jesus Christ the more our differences fade. The 10 statements you quoted are fairly strong and are held by many of our brethren. However, just like you said, we also need to respect people who use another translations and regard them as equally serious as we are. As we know God looks at our heart and our motives, but we have no capacity to do that. Only God. So we leave it to Him for as what His Word says, "If you seek me and seek me with all your heart you will find me". I believe we are rated there rather than the translation we read. If we are really passionate in seeking His Word and His will God has his own way of using even the poorest translation we think of to reveal himself. Yes, because even the Bible indicates that there are even people who has no access to the Bible yet He reveals himself to them (Rom.2:14-15). I, for one, do not necessarily agree some of the 10 items expressed above, but i regard them with great respect. I am equally serious in studying the Word just any of our brethren who regard those views. Not to brag about it, but I, just like them (people who held the 10views) have even learned to read and analyze the Greek Bible and owns one. I have been familiar of most of the earliest manuscripts and have considered translations throughout history that God has used in transforming many. After all it's not really the translation that transforms but God's Word. About the statement #1, I agree with that statement but won't absolutize that it is the KJV. Because even before 1611, when Martin Luther was just referring from the Latin Vulgate, he discovered the truth of God's Word. Maybe what we need more is to look for more people who are seekers of the Word, the Truth, because God will absolutely not disappoint that kind of heart. He will reveal Himself even if KJV is not available. But with this is my greatest admiration of men and women of God who sacrificed and put their lives on the line just for us to have the greatest translation of all from 1611 onward, the KJV. A quote from Augustine: "In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, diversity; in everything, charity."
pde maki join? karon rako karealize nga gamit pud gyud ang KJV, yes lisud cya sabtun but mao cyay closet translation from Hebrew and Greek, ang uban man gud layo nakaayog meaning inig translate... but dont get me wrong... i use KJV, NIV, NLT and Hebrew and Greek dictionary kng magstudy para mas nice.. pero amazing jud kng naay e-impress ang Holy Spirit nimo about sa word kay matingala lngka you came up with something very new and fresh even from a very simple and balik2x nga verse that you did not come across before... mao lng to ako share....
hmm..for me murag i go for the kjv ky mao mna ako Bible..hehehe but i read also other versions pero mas close nko ang kjv ky since pgkabata mao na ang akong namat-an...kjv...sa christian school nga akong gi-attenan mao sad kjv ang amo gamit...but seriously,any bible will do..as long as dili pangRC or whatever nga gichange ang truth.
Hi thanks everyone for joining..its gud to have discussions lyk this..nyways just as wat i said ..i humbly respect ur opinions rgardng bible trnslations..
Ahhm..btaw one thing that made me amazed with bible translations is that there are some verses in the bible which contradicts with each other..please try to read 2 Samule 21:19..di ba ang nagpatay ni Goliath ky si David?How come in other versions ky si Elhanan?Ahehe..
New pko nka register diri. Apil ko gamay sa inyo topic..The Bible has a different translations but the same ideas, inspirations, wisdom and knowledge of the Word of God. But the apostles warned us ahead that someone will change some of the context in the bible. I forgot what verse sa bible nga nagremind cla about ana.
