61 | Bible Translations -- Chuck Knows Church

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 29 жов 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 15

  • @damarrbrown4915
    @damarrbrown4915 3 роки тому

    I love the different translations

  • @EmilyElliottMusic
    @EmilyElliottMusic 10 років тому +1

    I didn't hear the Common English Bible mentioned. As a former Cokesbury employee I know that one is gaining popularity in the United Methodist Church and worth a read. I still read my NLT that has my named engraved and was a gift from my mother on my 16th birthday.

  • @anthonywade1849
    @anthonywade1849 4 роки тому

    My Favorite Kjv Nkjv Niv.

  • @tanyagrimes5726
    @tanyagrimes5726 10 років тому +1

    I feel it does matter which one we get. The more authentic the better. Just because it sells more doesn't mean it's the best quality.

    • @News2urearsBlogspot
      @News2urearsBlogspot 10 років тому

      True. It's good to dip our toes into the field of Textual Criticism, as well. That deals with the web of original language manuscripts and understanding the data concerning variants. I got my introduction to that topic online from educators like J. Warner Wallace and James White.

  • @peterjhamm
    @peterjhamm 10 років тому

    NET is my fave. but I really like the NLT, too.

  • @MAMoreno
    @MAMoreno 10 років тому

    For my money, the RSV trilogy is the best: RSV-CE, NRSV, and ESV. Then again, the Tyndale-KJV tradition in general is pretty solid (can't go wrong with the ASV, NASB, or NKJV), and the REB isn't too shabby, either.

  • @bobmngr
    @bobmngr 10 років тому +1

    I think anyone serious about learning the scriptures should have several translations close at hand. For myself writings like the Psalms, Song of Solomon, etc. should be read in the language of Shakespeare-anything else leaves me flat. The NT letters and epistles don't work well in these modern times as lyric poetry. For the most part they're business letters-the nuts and bolts of building and keeping their newfound faith relevant and on point-and need to be read in plain language; easy to understand.

  • @BBC600
    @BBC600 2 роки тому

    I think it should have been explained some are more literal than others.

  • @tayevaughnwilliams431
    @tayevaughnwilliams431 5 років тому

    Versions I read:
    NIV
    NRSV
    NKJV
    NABRE
    ESV

  • @fnjesusfreak
    @fnjesusfreak Рік тому

    I still stick to the KJV, although I actually prefer the style of the RSV. The NRSV would be good if it were a little less paraphrastic.
    I have serious problems with the use of paraphrastic renderings as a _primary_ version, and there's some seriously flawed versions produced by people who claim to be "recovering" or "restoring" the Bible (e.g., Joseph Smith's "Inspired Version", Brian Simmons' "Passion Translation", the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society's "New World Translation"). Any time you hear language suggesting new revelation, run fast.

  • @noahinson
    @noahinson 6 років тому

    NASB or ESV are probably the most accurate. The KJV added in verses from the eleventh century text, whereas the newer MSS don't have those verses. This is why many Bibles have footnotes talking about the reliability of a certain verse. Non of these verses take away or add any real doctrine to Christian teaching.

  • @kerrybart2683
    @kerrybart2683 10 років тому +1

    I hoped for a little more substance. This felt like a smattering of statistics.

  • @tayevaughnwilliams431
    @tayevaughnwilliams431 25 днів тому

    Don’t read The Message! That translation is trash

  • @generationybother3207
    @generationybother3207 9 років тому

    Nearly 300 English versions of the Bible since 1881? God is not the author of confusion. He was either able to preserve his words for us today or he seriously dropped the ball and we wound up with "the earliest and most reliable" manuscripts.
    Personally, I believe that if God is able to preserve our souls, he can preserve His word for us. But that may be lost on many of you Methodists, who don't believe in eternal security anyway.