what is wrong with the nlt bible

advertises with the slogan, "Accuracy you can trust." Unfortunately, the NLT is not very accurate. The fact that the word "begotten" has been wrongfully removed from John should be enough reason for every Christian to trash their NLT. Jan 02,  · The goal of the New Living Translation (NLT) is a translation of the Bible into a clear, readable form of modern English. The New Living Translation was completed and published by Tyndale House in Soon after the publication of the first edition, the NLT Bible Translation Committee began a further review and revision of the translation.

Check it out on Amazon. However, this does not mean that you have to follow this trend. After reading this post and you still rely your salvation on this unholy Bible translation, then it is up to you to answer to God. Now, this is not just the only omission in the NIV. Let me give you another example. Compare Matthew What do you see? He came to the world to save the lost! However, this very word is denied to all NIV readers! Did you see the subtle difference between the two translations?

Now, these three verses are among the many passages that the NIV changed. According to one estimate I read, there are over 60, words deleted in the NIV translation! Go, check it yourself and confirm how NIV molested the Bible by eliminating these important verses from your Bible.

If you think this is something of minor importance, then think again. As the Apostle mentioned, a little leaven leavens the whole lump Galatians The compound how to treat mites on humans of these missing verses surely leads to many deceptions and sadly, misunderstanding of the scripture.

Picture this: you are having a discussion with your church members, friends, or family. Let me give you some examples:. Though minor, they can nevertheless change the meaning of a verse.

This leads us to the third point. If you change a word in a verse, it will affect the entire message or meaning of the verse. If you are to prove this, you can always go to Micah Now, if you are just using the NIV, how would you know this profound truth written in the pages of your Bible? Surely, NIV users are again eternally denied of this truth. Jesus does not have a human father.

If Christ has a human father, then the prophecy of the Messiah being born of a virgin Isaiah has become a deception.

Discover the life-changing lessons from the life of Joseph and Mary. How much more if the insult is done multiple times? This is exactly what are the side effect of vitamin d deficiency the NIV has done! NKJV — For an angel went down at a certain time into the pool and stirred up the water; then whoever stepped in first, after the stirring of the water, was made well of whatever disease he had.

Now a woman, having a flow of blood for twelve yearswho had spent all her livelihood on physicians and could not be healed by any, came from behind and touched the border of His garment. And immediately her flow of blood stopped. NIV — As Jesus was on his way, the crowds almost crushed him. And a woman was there who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years, but no one could heal her. She came up behind him and touched the edge of his cloak, and immediately her bleeding stopped.

He had search far and wide to get healed but to no avail. NKJV — Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead man was lying. NIV — So they took away the stone.

As always, NKJV gives us the clearer and more complete picture. John wants to emphasize the fact that Lazarus is indeed dead already. NIV — So he went to her, took her hand and helped her up. The fever left her and she began to wait on them.

And she served them. It could have been a few minutes or hours what is wrong with the nlt bible. But in the NKJV, the writer makes it very clear that the healing of Christ was fast, swift, and effective!

NIV — He appointed twelve that they might be with him and that he might send them out to preach 15 and to have authority to drive out demons. NKJV — Then He appointed twelve, that they might be with Him and that He might send them out to preach, and to have the power to heal sicknesses and to cast out demons.

It is I. They were completely amazedfor they had not understood about the loaves; their hearts were hardened. NJKV —for they all saw Him and were troubled. It is I; do not be afraid. And they were greatly amazed in themselves beyond measure, and marveled. For they had not understood about the loaves, because their heart was hardened. NIV — I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions and to overcome all the power of the enemy; nothing will harm you.

Notice Luke Jesus Christ was sent to heal the brokenhearted. If you are heartbroken and you only use the NIV, how would you be able to find this comforting verse? Go in peace. Christ brings comfort and Luke shows us this. It also went on as far as changing and deleting the teachings of our Lord and Master. NIV — But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven.

He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. NKJV — But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate youand pray for what is wrong with the nlt bible who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

Jesus Christ taught that God the Father can forgive us of our sins, but there is one reason that He might not forgive us and that is written in Mark ! This instruction is so important that it depends on it whether God will forgive you or not.

NKJV — So the last will be first, and the first last. For many are called, but few chosen. This is a vital teaching of What does aab stand for that the NIV freely destroyed! Christ is teaching what kind of noodles for ramen that it is not enough to be called. There are Christians who are called by God and yet, they were not chosen.

It means that they have disqualified themselves along the way of their Christian race. NIV — And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, leave that place and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them. NKJV — And whoever will not receive you nor hear you, when you depart from there, shake off the dust under your feet as a testimony against them.

Assuredly, I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city! NIV took away the latter part of Mark Far be it! Therefore you will receive greater condemnation. NIV — The disciples were amazed at his words. The Disciples asked Jesus Christ to teach them how to pray. Thus, we now have the Model Prayer written in our Bible.

We see the difference between the two translations. Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. The Messianic prophecies are very important since they show us the divinity and veracity of Bible. Through the Messianic prophecies, we see how the prophecies concerning our Savior was fulfilled to the letter! Again, it is sad to see how NIV deleted some of these verses that could have boosted more the faith of Christians.

Notice the following alterations:. We have seen how NIV deleted words in the Bible. However, there what is the meaning of amogh also instances that it added words or comments, implying as if it is part of the original text.

NKJV — because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods? This is a favorite scripture of Christians who believe that the Food Law of God has already been done away with.

They use this scripture to justify eating shrimp, pork, horse, rat, rabbit, snakes, and other meats that God considers unclean.

The problem with NIV is that they added this commentary to Mark to make it look like it is a part of the original text. But is this really the case? If Christ is saying that we can already eat all manners of meat then He is contradicting other clear scriptures that prove the food law is still binding. The Bible has been consistent when it comes to designating meat which is fit for human consumption.

If you are a new convert, how would you feel if the Bible you are reading has confusing footnotes? This is not the only footnote that can sow the seed of doubt in the heart of a new convert.

WHICH BIBLE TRANSLATION SHOULD I READ? | BIBLE TRANSLATION REVIEW

Mistranslations in the New Living Translation of the Bible. Darkness to Light Home Page. Problems with the NLT The material formerly posted on this page has been revised and incorporated as a chapter in the book Differences Between Bible mybajaguide.com book should be available by the summer of this year from the publisher AuthorHouse and from conventional and online bookstores. Mar 08,  · The New Living Translation was founded on the most recent scholarship in the theory of translation, with the goal of communicating the meaning of the ancient Bible texts as accurately as possible to the modern reader. It seeks to preserve the freshness and readability of the original paraphrase while providing the accuracy and reliability of a translation prepared by a team of 90 . Aug 20,  · Soldier, every commentary that I checked says that God is spoken of as the one who will judge those who judge others. Some say that in addition one risks the judgment of men as well. However, in the NLT paraphrase, the ambiguity is removed and the author's opinion is given instead.

Mark R. Norton, ed. Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House, It was designed to improve the accuracy of Taylor's paraphrase. The origin of the version is described in a press release from Hannibal-LaGrange College, where one of the version's "reviewers," Robert Bergen, serves on the faculty:. In , ninety evangelical scholars from various theological backgrounds and denominations were commissioned to revise the Living Bible.

According to Bergen, the project began with the purpose of merely correcting parts of the Living Bible. However, as the scholars began to work, the decision was made to complete an entirely new translation. Taylor, the original author of the Living Bible, approved this decision, and plans were made for Tyndale Publishing House to print the New Living Translation. The purpose of the New Living Translation NLT was to make a translation that is accurate with the original languages, yet lively and dynamic.

Bergen and the other translators worked independently to correct the Living Bible or produce new translations, then worked together to produce a joint translation. Every book of the New Living Translation was reviewed by three or four people, then rated in the areas of accuracy and clarity. The scholars would debate their opinions, informally vote on the best wording, and the editorial board would decide the final translation. Each work of translation went through the channels of critique by the individual, a book committee, a general reviewer committee, and back to the individual.

In , the translators gathered again to make the revisions determined by the reviewers. Because of the extensive efforts of world-class Bible scholars, the New Living Translation is the most expensive translation project in the history of Bible translation. Another of the reviewers, Craig Blomberg, has described the procedure very differently:. With the New Living Translation, the Bible was divided into sixths, with a scholar appointed general editor over each large chunk. We ranked these in terms of priority, sent them to the general editor over our part of the Bible, who synthesized a selection of them, interacted with a Tyndale House stylist, and sent a draft back to us for us to repeat the process.

Eventually the full translation emerged. This leaves us with the impression that the "reviewers" did not meet to discuss the revision and vote on changes, as the press release quoted above says, but merely sent suggestions to the editors. The press release also says that the NLT is an "entirely new translation," but an examination of the version shows that it inherits many renderings of the Living Bible which would probably not have been used by the NLT reviewers if they started from scratch.

This can be seen plainly enough in any given chapter. For example, we randomly choose the first chapter of Job, and find that in verses about two thirds of it printed in red here is inherited from the Living Bible:. Obviously this is not a new translation, but a revision of the Living Bible. But why should it be denied? In a " Brief History of the New Living Translation ," Mark Taylor president of Tyndale House explains that one of the problems he encountered as publisher of the Living Bible is that "despite its popularity Too often it was dismissed as being 'just a paraphrase.

Like the Good News Bible, the preface of the NLT states that the translation was done in accordance with principles of 'dynamic equivalence. Such a translation attempts to have the same impact on modern readers as the original had on its own audience It would be useless to criticize the version for specific non-literal renderings when the editors have renounced literal accuracy in principle; but it would be pertinent to ask whether the version is a good one according to its own stated goals , and so we will do this under the several headings below.

In line with the recent trend in Bible and book publishing, the NLT carefully avoids the use of "male-oriented" language. In Bible translations this involves a suppression of the male-oriented language in the original text by means of various circumlocutions and paraphrases.

We may suppose that in the NLT this was done in a late editorial stage of the version's production, because it is evident from the press release quoted above that it was done without the cooperation or approval of some of the scholars who worked on the version.

Bergen, at least, did not agree with the use of gender-neutral language:. Bergen noted that in the Hebrew society, men were dominant, thus biblical writers employed male language. In Bergen's translation of the book of Exodus, he retained the original language. Nevertheless, the finished product was made to be thoroughly genderless by Tyndale House editors. The preface of the NLT is less than frank about the reasons for this gender-neutral language.

It claims that this style is necessary "to make the translation clear to a modern audience that tends to read male-oriented language as applying only to males" and that it is "driven by the concern to reflect accurately the intended meaning of the original texts.

Who would ever interpret "train up a child in the way he should go" as if the instruction were only for boys? The fact is, ordinary people have no trouble at all with generic masculine pronouns.

The gender-neutral language policy is not driven by any legitimate requirement of "dynamically equivalent" accuracy or by any desire to help people understand the text. It is driven by the usual desire of commercial publishers to avoid offending feminist sensibilities. In connection with this we notice that in the "Tyndale Bible Verse Finder" included in most editions of the NLT the editors have carefully avoided the subject of womanly submission, despite the fact that this is a "hot topic" and highly interesting to most of the people who will be using such a topical index.

We would expect to find under a suitable heading references to the pertinent verses, such as 1 Corinthians , 1 Corinthians , Ephesians , Colossians , 1 Timothy , and 1 Peter But under the headings "Family," "Marriage," and "Women" there is no mention of this topic at all, and under the heading "Submission" we read, "Marriage calls for mutual submission Ephesians In the preface of the NLT we read that one goal of the editors was to "produce in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the message expressed by the original-language text—both in meaning and in style," But when we examine the version it seems that there was no real attempt by the NLT editors to reproduce the style of the original, or even the meaning of the text beyond a very basic and simplified level.

Rather, it appears that the main idea was simply to make the version easy to read at all costs. It should be understood that the "dynamic equivalence" approach to translation does not in itself require such a reductionistic treatment of the text.

But as New Testament scholar Vern Poythress observes, "At times it seems that dynamic equivalent translation has become a broad umbrella. It can cover at one end the meticulous attempt to reproduce as far as possible every nuance of meaning.

But it can also be used as a fig leaf to cover questionable practices that appear to ignore anything beyond a minimal core meaning. The Bible in its original languages is a powerful book, not only in its message but also in the ways it presents its message.

Much of it is written in poetic form or in exalted prose, in keeping with its noble themes. It is well-designed to make an impression upon its hearers. It is full of sophisticated rhetorical devices--irony, hyperbole, allusions, metaphors, and so forth. Some English versions have been very successful in representing these features of the original. But the NLT is not one of them.

The literary quality of the NLT is uniformly low, and often very far from being "idiomatically powerful. An example of this may be seen in Matthew They may refer to me as 'Lord,' but they still won't enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

The decisive issue is whether they obey my Father in heaven. Go away; the things you did were unauthorized. Verse 21 is in the literal translation one of the most impressive and convicting sayings in Scripture. We wonder how anyone could think that the NLT's rendering of this verse, which falls flat by comparison, is more 'idiomatically powerful.

The language is just not suitable at all to the gravity of the situation, and it does not reflect the solemnity of the Greek diction here. It seems that the NLT is not really trying to produce the 'equivalent effect' which is the basic idea of the dynamic equivalence theory of translation, but simply imposing a colloquial style on the material, without any regard for the style of the original text.

In Genesis, when God discovers that Adam and Eve have eaten the forbidden fruit, the King James conjures up a roar of rebuke: "And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done?

We note that the NLT's "How could you do such a thing" in Genesis is not a new translation, but carried over from the Living Bible. Taylor may have given this rendering instead of the literal "What have you done" because he thought some readers might not realize that it is a rhetorical question, and they might think that God did not know what the woman had done.

His treatment of the Lord's question to Adam in is similar. Instead of the literal "where are you? So it seems that the NLT revisers had no particular concern about misunderstandings of the text. If indeed they have taken care to revise every verse, it seems that they have preferred to leave as it was for stylistic reasons.

Daniel Taylor, an English professor at Bethel College in Minnesota and one of the stylists for the version, has explained that the committee was under some "pressure" to simplify the text, and has acknowledged the drawbacks of this in an article published in Christianity Today :. In contemporary Bible translations, ours included, the pressure generally is to seek the widest possible audience and to do whatever is necessary stylistically to reach that audience.

Nevertheless, if a translation allows the least literate, least educated, least churched, least inquisitive, least motivated reader to become the de facto norm, it not only will fail to do justice to the text but also will alienate many other potential readers. In recent years many people associated with the Wycliffe Bible Translators and the American Bible Society have been talking about the need to translate the Bible into the 'heart language' of all peoples.

Hyatt Moore, the former U. Director of the Wycliffe organization, evidently regards the NLT as an example of this, because he has endorsed the NLT with the words, "I'm grateful for a modern translation of the Scriptures like the New Living Translation.

This is the word of life, so it has to be given in the language of the people—their heart language—in clear, understandable, accurate words. It doesn't take as much work and effort to understand, as a second language would. This desire to communicate on an emotional level is evident in the NLT, which tries to evoke an emotional response by various rhetorical means: the frequent insertion of such words as "wonderful" and "wonderfully," "marvelous," "dear" and "dearly;" the overuse of "very;" the use of the more personal direct address instead of indirect statements, and so forth.

Most of this derives from the Living Bible, and it is toned down somewhat in the revision. You are among those who have been called to belong to Jesus Christ, dear friends in Rome.

God loves you dearly, and he has called you to be his very own people. Again, much of this is carried over from the Living Bible, but the NLT's gushing style does not reflect the tone of the original here, which is really quite formal and declamatory. The NLT is merely following Taylor's lead in this respect, trying hard to make the English text emotionally warm, personal, and informal.

This will of course make the version appealing to those readers who want their emotions massaged, but it is not 'dynamic equivalence. One of the phrases often misunderstood by readers of the Bible who are not familiar with the "Bible English" of literal versions is the phrase "a man after [God's] own heart," spoken of David in 1 Samuel , and alluded to in Acts "a man after my heart".

This phrase is commonly thought to mean that David was always chasing after God's affection, doing things to win his love, etc. In these languages the words for "heart" are used in reference to the mind in general. So when the Bible speaks of God's "heart" it means his thoughts or his intentions , not his emotions.

When the Biblical authors wanted to refer to the emotions they used words corresponding to our words for lower organs—the intestines and kidneys—not the heart. For example, the Apostle Paul exhorts us to "put on bowels of mercies" in Colossians , by which he means "compassionate hearts. Another problem arises from the use of the word "after" in this phrase.

This is an archaic usage of the seventeenth century, at which time the word "after" was often used in the sense "according to. That is what this phrase means in the original languages.

3 thoughts on “What is wrong with the nlt bible

  • Gunris
    11.03.2021 in 23:05

    I should have suspected that the extention I downloaded Not a keylogger was a trojan

  • Vutaxe
    14.03.2021 in 05:34

    Thanks, Gerard.

  • Yozshumi
    18.03.2021 in 14:18

    Hi I want to create a business profile. and its about many works bcoz we have done many things.

Add a comment

Your email will not be published. . Required fields are marked .

*
*