What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Which Bible is the true Bible?

I've shared similar information before but perhaps it bears repeating. A simple internet search and here is what I found about these four popular translations.

​

NKJV - A 130-person team, including Greek, Hebrew, and English scholars, editors, church leaders, and Christian laity, was commissioned to work on the project. https://www.thomasnelsonbibles.com/nkjv/scholar-team/

NIV - A 15-person team including men and women University and Theological professors from the US, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, and India. https://www.biblica.com/niv-bible/niv-bible-translators/

NRSV - The ecumenical NRSV Bible Translation Committee consists of thirty men and women who are among the top scholars in America today. They come from Protestant denominations, the Roman Catholic church, and the Greek Orthodox Church. The committee also includes a Jewish scholar. https://www.biblegateway.com/versions/New-Revised-Standard-Version-NRSV-Bible/

NLT - A 93-person team of Bible scholars and stylists involved in this work are Christians who accept the Bible as the inspired Word of God. Most of the translators are professors in seminaries or universities. https://www.tyndale.com/about-the-nlt and https://wpmu.azurewebsites.net/nlt/meet-the-team/
 
NET -
The NET Bible (New English Translation) is a completely new translation of the Bible with 60,932 translators’ notes! It was completed by more than 25 scholars – experts in the original biblical languages – who worked directly from the best currently available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. Turn the pages and see the breadth of the translators’ notes, documenting their decisions and choices as they worked.

The translators’ notes make the original languages far more accessible, allowing you to look over the translator’s shoulder at the very process of translation. This level of documentation is a first for a Bible translation, making transparent the textual basis and the rationale for key renderings (including major interpretive options and alternative translations).

netbible.com
 
I would advise that before accepting the NET Bible, one should google 'is the Net Bible a good translation', and read up on it.

Quantrill
 
Quantrill said:
I would advise that before accepting the NET Bible, one should google 'is the Net Bible a good translation', and read up on it.

Quantrill
Click to expand...

Here is the result of the (verbatim) Google inquiry: The NET bible An excellent translation of the bible with hundreds of translation notes that shed a great deal of light on the original texts. This is a completely new translation that doesn't follow in the King James tradition and uses the latest Greek and Hebrew texts and research." The top critical review expresses dissatisfaction with the Kindle version, not the NET itself. He gives the NET itself a 5-star rating.

Again, you are attacking me with no justification. If you have something personal against me, what is it?
 
All are free to purchase the Bible of your choice. Again, I would just advise before accepting the NET Bible, that you google 'is the NET Bible a good translation' and read up on it.

Quantrill
 
Quantrill said:
I would advise that before accepting the NET Bible, one should google 'is the Net Bible a good translation', and read up on it.

Quantrill
Click to expand...

Quantrill,

I followed your advice and this is what I found:

Dr Ben Witherington, a historical Jesus scholar, has provided this review of the NET Bible:

I personally prefer neither broad paraphrases (which add too much yeast to the dough, and too much interpretation into the very translation), nor woodenly literal translations (which do the opposite, ignoring the considerable differences in grammar, syntax, vocabulary between Greek or Hebrew and English). Good idiomatic sense translations that strive to get the meaning of words, phrases, sentences exactly right and render them into intelligible English are the best all purpose translations. And one such recent translation is the NET BIBLE (not to be confused with the Nets translation of the LXX). This translation has been worked on now for a quarter of a century and more, and has now resulted in a first rate study Bible The NET Bible full notes edition.​
While this Bible doesn’t have the sort of excellent illustrations laced through the text that say the ESV study bible does, and so is not as visually alluring, it more than makes up for it by having very copious and excellent notes— text critical notes, grammar notes, notes on the meaning of difficult phrases and indeed on all important phrases. And the translation itself is very good indeed, even going with the faithfulness of Christ rendering of ‘pistis Christou’ in Gal.2 for instance. It is evident that the translators have paid attention to the trajectory of recent scholarly discussions about the meaning of even debated phrases and verses. Furthermore, the translators have sought to use inclusive language (humankind rather than mankind) where appropriate.

Of course no translation is perfect (I’m not happy with the rendering of Heb. 12.1-3– particularly the translation ‘the pioneer and perfector of OUR faith’ when the word ‘our’ is not in any Greek manuscript and Christ is being presented as the ultimate example of one who trusted God and was faithful even unto death on the cross, ‘despising the shame’. He’s the climax of the hall of faith). But overall, this is a very helpful translation with many, many helpful notes to aid our comprehension (and prevent misuse and misunderstanding of a passage), and those who worked hard on this Bible are to be highly commended. Add this one to your collection of Bibles during this Christmas season, and read away, including reading the notes. There will be considerable enlightenment (The Net Bible– a Helpful Recent Translation: Patheos).
Click to expand...

Oz
 
Last edited:
OzSpen said:
Quantrill,

I followed your advice and this is what I found:

Dr Ben Witherington, a historical Jesus scholar, has provided this review of the NET Bible:

I personally prefer neither broad paraphrases (which add too much yeast to the dough, and too much interpretation into the very translation), nor woodenly literal translations (which do the opposite, ignoring the considerable differences in grammar, syntax, vocabulary between Greek or Hebrew and English). Good idiomatic sense translations that strive to get the meaning of words, phrases, sentences exactly right and render them into intelligible English are the best all purpose translations. And one such recent translation is the NET BIBLE (not to be confused with the Nets translation of the LXX). This translation has been worked on now for a quarter of a century and more, and has now resulted in a first rate study Bible The NET Bible full notes edition.​


Oz
Click to expand...

As I said, do your research and chose the Bible of your choice.

Check out bible-researcher.com concerning the NET Bible by W. Hall Harris

Quantrill
 
jmt356 said:
Which Bible is the true Bible?
Click to expand...

How did the early Church function and live the Christian life before a formal “Bible” was compiled and printed?


When was the first Bible printed?


You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life. John 5:39-40




JLB
 
JLB said:
How did the early Church function and live the Christian life before a formal “Bible” was compiled and printed?


When was the first Bible printed?


You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life. John 5:39-40




JLB
Click to expand...

I don't understand the question. The early Church had the complete Old Testament, either as Hebrew scrolls in the synagogues or as the Septuagint. Obviously, there was no New Testament until the various gospels, epistles, etc. were compiled into a single work. The epistles, of course, were sent throughout the Mediterranean region separately.

The first printed Bible was the Gutenberg Bible of 1455.
 
Last edited:
jaybo said:
I don't understand the question. The early Church had the complete Old Testament, either as Hebrew scrolls in the synagogues or as the Septuagint. Obviously, there was no New Testament until the various gospels, epistles, etc. were compiled into a single work. The epistles, of course, were sent throughout the Mediterranean region separately.

The first printed Bible was the Gutenberg Bible of 1455.
Click to expand...

Yes exactly, so how did the Church in the first Century function without a Bible?


Obviously they were operating under the New Covenant, so the Old Testament scriptures which were oblivious to the Gentiles were of no use.


JLB
 
JLB said:
Yes exactly, so how did the Church in the first Century function without a Bible?


Obviously they were operating under the New Covenant, so the Old Testament scriptures which were oblivious to the Gentiles were of no use.


JLB
Click to expand...

I have no idea what you're saying. Of course the first century church had a Bible: the Septuagint version of the Old Testament. Their Bibles (actually separate scrolls of the "books") were as much use to them as ours are today.
 
jaybo said:
Their Bibles (actually separate scrolls of the "books") were as much use to them as ours are today.
Click to expand...

How were the Old Testament writings as much use to unlearned Gentiles in how to live under the New Covenant?

If the Old Testament writings were sufficient for life in the New Covenant, then why would there need to be the New Testament writings?



JLB
 
JLB said:
How were the Old Testament writings as much use to unlearned Gentiles in how to live under the New Covenant?

If the Old Testament writings were sufficient for life in the New Covenant, then why would there need to be the New Testament writings?



JLB
Click to expand...

The same way that they are of use today. The writers of the Gospels, including Paul, used the Old Testament -- all they had then -- to teach the Gentiles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top