Favourite Bible Translations
- Thread starter true_believer
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I'm glad you recognize this, as it applies to all translations.
Translators are not authors & they don't claim to be. Learn the difference.
The clear reading of the text as you call it isn't always obvious. With an ancient work this is not a surprise.
It's more surprising that it doesn't happen far more often than it does.
It's a bad sign that you are prepared to defend your cult more than you are prepared to defend the integrity of the Bible.
AGAIN. All the bibles I've seen have notes explaining the translation difficulties there. All but the one you worship.
NET below having the most detailed explanation.
The Hebrew text as it stands reads, “Elhanan son of Jaare-Oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite.” Who killed Goliath the Gittite? According to 1 Sam 17:4-58 it was David who killed Goliath, but according to the MT of 2 Sam 21:19 it was Elhanan who killed him. Many scholars believe that the two passages are hopelessly at variance with one another. Others have proposed various solutions to the difficulty, such as identifying David with Elhanan or positing the existence of two Goliaths. But in all likelihood the problem is the result of difficulties in the textual transmission of the Samuel passage. The parallel passage in 1 Chr 20:5 reads, “Elhanan son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath.” Both versions are textually suspect. The Chronicles text appears to have misread “Bethlehemite” (בֵּית הַלַּחְמִי, bet hallakhmi) as the accusative sign followed by a proper name אֶת לַחְמִי (ʾet lakhmi). (See the note at 1 Chr 20:5.) The Samuel text appears to have misread the word for “brother” (אַח, ʾakh) as the accusative sign (אֵת, ʾet), thereby giving the impression that Elhanan, not David, killed Goliath. Thus in all probability the original text read, “Elhanan son of Jair the Bethlehemite killed the brother of Goliath.”
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
Nope it does not have the same message, if it did it would not be a different gospel. That’s why Paul said whoever teaches it, let them literally be damned,
the KJV seriously got it wrong here,
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
Which is why he said they should be dammed
john here is watering down pauls words, which means the kjv must be watering down pauls words.
see the irony
It doesn't surprise me that the new version got it wrong since they are in league with the RCC which perverts the gospel of Christ.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
Yet the KJV got it wrong this time, even the NKJV had a better translation, because it corrected the kjv’s mistake
Thanks for sharing that link! It's very informative and clearly identifies the issues behind differences between NIV and KJV wording.
The irony is that before I became a Christian, I did a lot of research in regards to Bible translations.
This was one of the sites I came across.
The ever changing, gender neutered “new” 2011 NIV has changed about 40% of the verses from the way they read in the 1984 NIV, and they often change or add to the underlying Greek and Hebrew texts they previously followed. You can see for yourself the changes they have now made at this site here -
http://www.biblewebapp.com/niv2011-changes/#summary
At this site you will see that the new 2011 NIV has changed the wording of 40% of the verses from the way they were written in the 1984 NIV. They have removed 32,863 words and added 34,469 different words. They often change or add to the Hebrew text that they previously used and they have changed the underlying Greek text numerous times in their New Testament.
In some very few places, they have made it right. BUT for the most part, the new NIV 2011 has gotten a lot worse than even their 1984 NIV edition was. I will show you several examples in this study.
...Continuation on Another Gospel
Heteros as defined by Thayer where the primary meaning is another as used in Galatian 1:6 which is defined also as “different” being used by Homer .
2. to quality; another i. e. one not of the same nature, form, class, kind; different (so in Greek writings from Homer down): Romans 7:23; 1 Corinthians 14:21; 1 Corinthians 15:40; 2 Corinthians 11:4; Galatians 1:6; Hebrews 7:11, 13, 15; James 2:25; Jude 1:7. (Synonym: see ἄλλος.)
James Strong has again a primary usage of “another” or the meaning of “other” or others put it “the other”
Strong's Concordance
heteros: other
Original Word: ἕτερος, α, ον
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: heteros
Phonetic Spelling: (het'-er-os)
Definition: other
Usage: (a) of two: another, a second, (b) other, different, (c) one's neighbor
Hanbook of Greek Synonyms by Alexandre Pillon pp.57 Heteros means “of two”, other, another while Allos is different.
The KJV “an other” is contracted which is the same as another. The context in the book of Galatian is being introduce to believing the “faith + works” salvation. The gospel message is to be receive by faith, the problem is that Judaizers have introduce “an other” gospel which is not another but a mixture, corrupting the true gospel by adding a work based salvation or the Law on the already established faith of the Galatian believer's and that is the problem. It is not "different gospel" in the sense that it does not involved faith so that this will introduce another one of different kind i.e. salvation is by Law or works only, but rather it is Grace + Law that was introduce to the Galatian believers.
Heteros as defined by Thayer where the primary meaning is another as used in Galatian 1:6 which is defined also as “different” being used by Homer .
2. to quality; another i. e. one not of the same nature, form, class, kind; different (so in Greek writings from Homer down): Romans 7:23; 1 Corinthians 14:21; 1 Corinthians 15:40; 2 Corinthians 11:4; Galatians 1:6; Hebrews 7:11, 13, 15; James 2:25; Jude 1:7. (Synonym: see ἄλλος.)
James Strong has again a primary usage of “another” or the meaning of “other” or others put it “the other”
Strong's Concordance
heteros: other
Original Word: ἕτερος, α, ον
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: heteros
Phonetic Spelling: (het'-er-os)
Definition: other
Usage: (a) of two: another, a second, (b) other, different, (c) one's neighbor
Hanbook of Greek Synonyms by Alexandre Pillon pp.57 Heteros means “of two”, other, another while Allos is different.
The KJV “an other” is contracted which is the same as another. The context in the book of Galatian is being introduce to believing the “faith + works” salvation. The gospel message is to be receive by faith, the problem is that Judaizers have introduce “an other” gospel which is not another but a mixture, corrupting the true gospel by adding a work based salvation or the Law on the already established faith of the Galatian believer's and that is the problem. It is not "different gospel" in the sense that it does not involved faith so that this will introduce another one of different kind i.e. salvation is by Law or works only, but rather it is Grace + Law that was introduce to the Galatian believers.
I found a copy of a 1984 NIV on Amazon. I used it extensively in 2018 and 2019. It fell apart and I'm trying to find another.
E
eternally-gratefull
Guest
Again, a more accurate translation would be that these Jews were teaching a different gospel, which is not another
saying another gospel which is not another (KJV) is
1. contradictory. (It is another but it is not another, which one is it? )
2. confusing
3. not exact In accordance with the text.
as you can see, both another and different are proper words, but in context, different is a better fit
It's not in print anymore because they changed it trying to correct an update it.