Bible Translations

[Richard Myers]

"We are not to set our stakes and then interpret everything to reach this set point. Here is where some of our great Reformers have failed, and this is the reason that many who today might be mighty champions for God and the truth are warring against the truth. . . . God designs we should be learners, first from the living oracles, and second from our associates. This is God’s order.

The Word of God is the great detector of error; to it we believe everything must be brought. The Bible must be our standard for every doctrine. We must study it reverentially. We are to receive no one’s opinion without comparing it with the Scriptures. Here is divine authority, which is supreme in matters of faith.

It is the Word of the living God that is to decide all controversies. It is when people mingle their own human smartness with God’s words of truth, in giving sharp thrusts to those who are in controversy with them, that they show that they have not a sacred reverence for God’s Inspired Word. They mix the human with the divine, the common with the sacred, and they belittle God’s Word. . .

The correct interpretation of the Scriptures is not all that God requires. He enjoins upon us that we should not only know the truth, but that we should practice the truth as it is in Jesus. We are to bring into our practice, in our association with others, the spirit of Him who gave us the truth. We must not only search for the truth as for hidden treasures, but it is a positive necessity, if we are laborers together with God, that we comply with the conditions laid down in His Word, and bring the spirit of Christ into our hearts, that our understanding may be strengthened and we become apt teachers to make known to others the truth revealed to us in His Word. . .

There is no assurance that our doctrine is right and free from all chaff and error unless we are daily doing the will of God. If we do His will, we shall know of the doctrine. We shall see the truth in its sacred beauty. We shall accept it with reverence and godly fear, and then we can present to others that which we know is truth. . . .

The soul that is in love with God and His work will be as candid as the day. There will be no quibbling, no evading the true bearing of Scripture. God’s Word is our foundation of all doctrine."—Letter 20, 1888 (The Ellen G. White 1888 Materials, vol. 1, pp. 42-44).

[asygo]

If I follow your reasoning than, since most of us are not Greek or Hebrew scholars, we should just leave it up to the whims and biases of the modern translators.

Your conclusion would only be valid if combined with the premise that all old translations are bad. Since I do not believe that premise, what you describe does not follow my reasoning at all. Your understanding of what I mean is seriously flawed.

Can you now see how easily misunderstandings can creep into a situation when hidden presuppositions are involved? And that's with 21st-century English, in which both of us are fluent. And fortunately, I am here to correct your erroneous understanding.

So how can you hope to cast judgment on a translation of 2000-year-old Greek and 4000-year-old Hebrew, in which you are not fluent? Combine that with the fact that none of the writers can correct any misunderstandings, and the prospect looks very bleak.

One easy way to tell of a translation is faulty is to see if it contradicts itself--something that Scripture cannot do, but which a biased translation, such as the NIV can and will do.  I know you will now try to show where the KJV appears to contradict itself.  Don't waste your time.  I'm aware of those, and they are all the result of one of several possibilities:  not enough information available about the situation when the passage was penned; mistranslation of a particular word.

Hmmmm.... The NIV has contradictions due to the translators' biases. The KJV also has contradictions, but those were due to reasons other than translator bias. And you have evidence that allows you to make this determination?

Is it possible that some NIV "contradictions" were due to lack of information, or plain mistranslation? Is it possible that the KJV translators had some biases, perhaps even some "suggestions" from King James himself?

One other sidelight:  to my knowledge there are only 2, possible 3 translations that translate Dan. 8:14 "shall be cleansed," which, as Cliff Goldstein has shown, is a good and proper rendering of the Hebrew.  The doctrine of the investigative judgment is not so easily arrived at if that text is muddied as it is in virtually all modern translations.

That may be so, but the ease with which we can prove our point is not the standard by which a translation should be judged. That was the criterion used by the JWs to make their translation. It is faulty, at best.

When translating, there should be only one concern: To accurately express the sentiments that God intends. Whether that makes our job easier or harder is irrelevant. We subject our beliefs to God's Word, not the other way around.

Again, I go back to the French and Spanish Bibles, both of which say "shall be cleansed."

Are those translated from the original languages? The Masoretic text? TR or Nestle/UBS? Or are they derived from an English version, like the Ang Biblia (Tagalog) Bible is?

You also implied that Wycliffe's translation was less biased that the KJV.  Not sure where you got that idea

I got that from your statement that biases were "more abundant than they were 400 years ago, due to the multiplication of heresies." If you back up another 300 years from the KJV, there should be less heresies, no? Or do you believe that, for whatever reason, the number of heresies dropped in the early 1600's?

the KJV developed out of Wycliffe's and Tyndale's translations, and the KJV was an improvement.  I've never said that the KJV was perfect--the word "Easter" should have never been put in there, for example, but it is, nevertheless, a good translation, minus the baggage of all the newer ones, starting with the RSV.

If the KJV is imperfect, is it impossible for God to arrange for a more perfect version to be made? I think He's resourceful enough to pull that off.

But if the standard by which you judge a translation's accuracy is its "faithfulness" to the KJV rendering, then any significant improvement would be suspected of being the result of an attempt to make it difficult for us to prove our doctrines. That method, and it is popular among the KJV-only crowd, contradicts the claim that the KJV is not perfect.

What I and many like me object to is the fact that the denomination, in most of its publications, seems to be promoting  (cramming down our unwilling throats?) the NIV very heavily, and has been for years.  If they wanted to promote a particular translation, they could have at least picked one that is closer to the original Greek and Hebrew.

Here we find agreement. A good translation is defined by how closely it sticks to the original Greek and Hebrew. So when we discuss the merits or demerits of a particular translation, we would do well to use that metric - faithfulness to the original languages - rather than how close is mimics the KJV.

[asygo]

Another interesting thing that confirms my blessing is the continual error I see in many who presume to teach the gospel. I see a lack of consistency in what they say and I often see a lack of fruit in their dealings with others who disagree with them. My testimony is that God's Word is not only true, it changes one's life when it is followed. The greatest miracle of God is to see the results when the Word of God is taken into the life.

I know what you mean. Unfortunately, some of the most unkind and judgmental people I have come across are in the KJV-only crowd. They seem to think that since they have the correct Bible, all who disagree with them are corrupted and/or are seeking to lead people into apostasy. They seem unable to comprehend the possibility that they could be wrong. It's a shame because the KJV is a good translation, and they give it a bad name by their bad spirit.

As for your hermeneutic to "correct" the KJV "errors," it's a little too subjective for me. My heart is deceitful and desperately wicked, and I don't trust it to lead me in the right direction, even when I'm hearing a voice telling me what's what. And to consider the Bible wrong on some point because I can't make it fit my other beliefs after years of studying? It makes me nervous just thinking about it.

[Wally]

[

Again, I go back to the French and Spanish Bibles, both of which say "shall be cleansed."

Are those translated from the original languages? The Masoretic text? TR or Nestle/UBS? Or are they derived from an English version, like the Ang Biblia (Tagalog) Bible is?

You also implied that Wycliffe's translation was less biased that the KJV.  Not sure where you got that idea

I got that from your statement that biases were "more abundant than they were 400 years ago, due to the multiplication of heresies." If you back up another 300 years from the KJV, there should be less heresies, no? Or do you believe that, for whatever reason, the number of heresies dropped in the early 1600's?

[

My point was not that there were fewer heresies in the 1600's, only that the opponents of truth weren't as well organized then.  I should have been clearer.  The devil and his accomplices have had nearly 400 years to fine tune their attacks on the truth, and make them more subtle.  We see that in the attacks on the Sabbath by Dale Ratzlaff, and others like him.  I believe that most of the modern translations reflect that subtlety and fine tuning.

The French and Spanish translations are not derived from any English Bible.  The go back to Greek and Hebrew manuscripts just like English translations do.

[Wally]

If the KJV is imperfect, is it impossible for God to arrange for a more perfect version to be made? I think He's resourceful enough to pull that off.

I agree, but, why, after over a century and a half of preaching the 3 Angels' Messages, hasn't He done so?  Maybe because we don't need one?  Maybe we already have what we need.  And if such a translation were needed, who would produce it?  Certainly not an Adventist--the world would reject such a translation for the same reasons we reject the one produced by Jehovah's Witnesses.  The "scholars" from the fallen churches of Babylon could not be trusted to produce such a translation--they're the ones producing the questionable translations we are getting now.

This why so many of us have accepted the KJV as the gold standard for the English-speaking world.  It comes to us with less baggage than the more recent translations.  And I think that is the bottom line:  not that the KJV is without problems, but that it has proven itself to be reliable for 400 years, and the few problems that exist are well-known and, for the most part, easily dealt with.  The ones that are not so easily dealt with don't affect core doctrines (i.e. those that affect our salvation).  The newer translations create more problems than they solve.

[asygo]

My point was not that there were fewer heresies in the 1600's, only that the opponents of truth weren't as well organized then.  I should have been clearer.  The devil and his accomplices have had nearly 400 years to fine tune their attacks on the truth, and make them more subtle.

That argument would make Wycliffe's better than the KJV, since it came about 300 years earlier. The bad guys would have been even less organized way back then, right? Even Tyndale's would be a little better than the KJV.

The French and Spanish translations are not derived from any English Bible.  The go back to Greek and Hebrew manuscripts just like English translations do.

Do you know which Greek manuscripts they use? What does Revelation 22:14 say?

[aerasmus]

If the KJV is imperfect, is it impossible for God to arrange for a more perfect version to be made? I think He's resourceful enough to pull that off.

I agree, but, why, after over a century and a half of preaching the 3 Angels' Messages, hasn't He done so?  Maybe because we don't need one?  Maybe we already have what we need.  And if such a translation were needed, who would produce it?  Certainly not an Adventist--the world would reject such a translation for the same reasons we reject the one produced by Jehovah's Witnesses.  The "scholars" from the fallen churches of Babylon could not be trusted to produce such a translation--they're the ones producing the questionable translations we are getting now.

This why so many of us have accepted the KJV as the gold standard for the English-speaking world.  It comes to us with less baggage than the more recent translations.  And I think that is the bottom line:  not that the KJV is without problems, but that it has proven itself to be reliable for 400 years, and the few problems that exist are well-known and, for the most part, easily dealt with.  The ones that are not so easily dealt with don't affect core doctrines (i.e. those that affect our salvation).  The newer translations create more problems than they solve.

I am in agreement that the KJV is a wonderful Bible, however, what I find to be quite sad; is that people attack other translations, without having sufficient understanding. Take for instance the reason why I got involved in the debate. A website was linked to tell us how 'evil' the KJV is. People quote differences between KJV and new sources, and citing such differences as heretical, deceitful etc.

The NKJV is quite true to the KJV, with updates to certain verses, I have shown the reasons for them wanting/needing to update some of these texts, but still there seems to be a minority in the church that are keeping the Word of God from the "common"persons understanding, by forcing such to read the KJV( Forcing might seem harsh, but who would want to be seen with an "evil Bible")

[Won Bae]

Mimi,

I have confirmed with a friend of mine who has a Korean Bible that what you have posted above are indeed factual.

Won

[asygo]

If the KJV is imperfect, is it impossible for God to arrange for a more perfect version to be made? I think He's resourceful enough to pull that off.

I agree, but, why, after over a century and a half of preaching the 3 Angels' Messages, hasn't He done so?

Maybe He did. But maybe you blew it off as a biased translation.

And if such a translation were needed, who would produce it?  Certainly not an Adventist--the world would reject such a translation for the same reasons we reject the one produced by Jehovah's Witnesses.

The same argument applies to Desire of Ages. Yet, God had that made by an Adventist anyway. Why? Because WE need it.

Before we worry about what the world does, we need to address the fact that God must fix US first. When that happens, regardless of what people say, God will be glorified by what they see.

The "scholars" from the fallen churches of Babylon could not be trusted to produce such a translation--they're the ones producing the questionable translations we are getting now.

That is just a form of ad hominem attack: Their work is bad because they are bad. BTW, the Church of England, which authorized the KJV, wasn't exactly the Remnant either.

it has proven itself to be reliable for 400 years

The same argument could have been made in 1700 to condemn the KJV and support Wycliffe's. And if we're still around in 400 years, the same could be said of the NIV.

Furthermore, the argument will be refuted by those who disagree with your doctrines. They'll say your messed up Bible leads you to messed up doctrines. Then you rebut that their doctrines are messed up because of their messed up Bible.

In the end, the "KJV is reliable" argument is an irrefutable opinion.

The ones that are not so easily dealt with don't affect core doctrines (i.e. those that affect our salvation).

That's how I see most of the problems in the modern translations. Issues in Dan 8:14 and Rev 22:14 tie some people into a knot, but I don't think they're insurmountable problems. The Bible is a big book, which teaches the same thing over and over. A messed up verse here and there doesn't affect our salvation.

Of course, this doesn't apply to interpretations and paraphrases.

[Wally]

Do you know which Greek manuscripts they use? What does Revelation 22:14 say?

Heurex ceux qui lavent leur robes, afin d'avoir droit a l'arbre de vie, et d'entrer par les portes dans la ville!

"Happy those who wash their robes, and thus to be able to have right to the tree of life, and to enter by the gates into the city!"

The Spanish also says "wash their robes."  "lavan sus ropas"

[Mimi]

Richard, you asked how the NKJV treats the sanctuary:

Hebrews 9:12 has "most holy" = "hagia hagien" = holy of holies

NKJV - "Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption."


KJV - "Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us."

The KJV is correct as Jesus first entered the heavenly sanctuary into the Holy place, the first apartment, moving into the most holy place in 1844.

[Mimi]

From this website are listed the following differences between the KJV and the NKJV. It is not an exhaustive list:

http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/reynolds-nkjv.html


Titus 3:10-KJV reads, "A man that is an heretick...reject." NKJV and NIV change "heretick" to "divisive man"; RSV and NASV to "factious" man.

Acts 4:27-KJV reads, "Thy holy child, Jesus." NKJV, NASV and RSV change "holy child" to "holy servant."

Acts 8:9-KJV reads, "bewitched the people." NKJV and NASV change "bewitched" to "astonished." NIV and RSV change "bewitched" to "amazed."

Romans 1:25-KJV reads, "changed the truth of God into a lie." NKJV, NASV and NIV read "exchanged the truth of God for the lie" or "a lie."

Romans 4:25-KJV reads, "Who was delivered for our offenses and was raised again for our justification." NKJV and NASV change "for" to "because of." (Even the NIV and RSV use the correct word, "for").

2 Corinthians 10:5-KJV reads, "Casting down imaginations." NKJV, NIV and RSV change "imaginations" to "arguments."

Colossians 3:2-KJV reads, "Set your affection on things above." NKJV, NASV, NIV and RSV change "affection" to "mind."

1 Thessalonians 5:22-KJV reads, "Abstain from all appearance of evil." NKJV, NASV and RSV change "appearance" to "form."

2 Timothy 2:15-KJV reads, "Study to shew thyself approved unto God." NKJV and NASV change "study" to "be diligent." NIV and RSV change "study" to "do your best."

Old Testament examples include:

Psalm 79:1-the word "heathen" in the KJV is changed to "nations" in the NKJV, NASV and NIV.

Isaiah 11:3-the entire phrase, "And shall make Him of quick understanding" in the KJV is eliminated in the NKJV, NASV, NIV and RSV.

Isaiah 66:5-the wonderful phrase, "But He shall appear to your joy" in the KJV disappears without explanation from NKJV, NASV, NIV and RSV.

Daniel 3:25-the fourth person who was in the fiery furnace with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, was identified as "the Son of God." The same identification is given in the text of the NKJV but a footnote reads "or, a son of the gods," and both NIV and NA SV actually have the latter reading in their texts.

In other Old Testament portions, the word "evil" in the KJV is replaced by several different words-doom, disaster, calamity, catastrophe, trouble, adversity, terrible, harm, wild. In four different places in 1 and 2 Kings, "sodomites" is changed to "perverted persons."


Additional examples of significant changes would include the following: Matthew 4:24; 6:13; 7:14; 20:20; Mark 4:19; John 14:2; Acts 17:29; Romans 1:18; Philippians 2:6; 1 Thessalonians 5:23; 1 Timothy 6:5, 10, 20; Hebrews 2:16; 10:14; James 1:15; 1 Peter 1:7.

[asygo]

Do you know which Greek manuscripts they use? What does Revelation 22:14 say?

Heurex ceux qui lavent leur robes, afin d'avoir droit a l'arbre de vie, et d'entrer par les portes dans la ville!

"Happy those who wash their robes, and thus to be able to have right to the tree of life, and to enter by the gates into the city!"

The Spanish also says "wash their robes."  "lavan sus ropas"

It looks like they use the Alexandrian texts, rather than the Byzantine.

[aerasmus]

(Here you need to have really studied greek,  or at least be willing to try or, the very least, use strongs  . Greek verbs and nouns take on Accusative, Genetive, Dative and nomanitive and Dative... please remember this with all Translations, then it also Might be male, female, or Neuter and then first person, 2nd person and 3rd person. singular or plural, oh and that excludes tenses) Thats why I still struggle with Greek :-)

Now I am going to address the NT first, as I dont have time to do all of the homework for the people on this site, as we all have to do the research. As I have stated before, don't just quote from a website, these guys have their own missgivings and some have some strange axe to grind.

It is easy to cut and paste, or link to a site... it is easy to think that these guys on the internet are actually all just telling the truth, but Bible study is not easy, it is something to be grappling with...

From this website are listed the following differences between the KJV and the NKJV. It is not an exhaustive list:

http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/reynolds-nkjv.html

Titus 3:10-KJV reads, "A man that is an heretick...reject." NKJV and NIV change "heretick" to "divisive man"; RSV and NASV to "factious" man.

What is a heretic, but a person that spreads a divisive gospel. as the Gospel is to unite

Acts 4:27-KJV reads, "Thy holy child, Jesus." NKJV, NASV and RSV change "holy child" to "holy servant."

child3816
- pais -Perhaps from G3817; a boy (as often beaten with impunity), or (by analogy) a girl, and (generally) a child; specifically a slave or servant (especially a minister to a king; and by eminence to God): - child, maid (-en), (man) servant, son, young man.

Acts 8:9-KJV reads, "bewitched the people." NKJV and NASV change "bewitched" to "astonished." NIV and RSV change "bewitched" to "amazed."

bewitched1839
From G1537 and G2476; to put (stand) out of wits, that is, astound, or (reflexively) become astounded, insane: - amaze, be (make) astonished, be beside self (selves), bewitch, wonder.

Romans 1:25-KJV reads, "changed the truth of God into a lie." NKJV, NASV and NIV read "exchanged the truth of God for the lie" or "a lie."

into1722
A primary preposition denoting (fixed) position (in place, time or state), and (by implication) instrumentality (medially or constructively), that is, a relation of rest (intermediate between G1519 and G1537); “in”, at, (up-) on, by, etc.: - about, after, against, + almost, X altogether, among, X as, at, before, between, (here-) by (+ all means), for (. . . sake of), + give self wholly to, (here-) in (-to, -wardly), X mightily, (because) of, (up-) on, [open-] ly, X outwardly, one, X quickly, X shortly, [speedi-] ly, X that, X there (-in, -on), through (-out), (un-) to(-ward), under, when, where (-with), while, with (-in)

Romans 4:25-KJV reads, "Who was delivered for our offenses and was raised again for our justification." NKJV and NASV change "for" to "because of." (Even the NIV and RSV use the correct word, "for").

for1223
A primary preposition denoting the channel of an act; through (in very wide applications, local, causal or occasional). In composition it retains the same general import: - after, always, among, at, to avoid, because of (that), briefly, by, for (cause) . . . fore, from, in, by occasion of, of, by reason of, for sake, that, thereby, therefore, X though, through (-out), to, wherefore, with (-in). In composition it retains the same general import.

2 Corinthians 10:5-KJV reads, "Casting down imaginations." NKJV, NIV and RSV change "imaginations" to "arguments."

imaginations,3053
From G3049; computation, that is, (figuratively) reasoning (conscience, conceit): - imagination, thought.
Colossians 3:2-KJV reads, "Set your affection on things above." NKJV, NASV, NIV and RSV change "affection" to "mind."

1 Thessalonians 5:22-KJV reads, "Abstain from all appearance of evil." NKJV, NASV and RSV change "appearance" to "form."

appearance1491
From G1492; a view, that is, form (literally or figuratively): - appearance, fashion, shape, sight.

2 Timothy 2:15-KJV reads, "Study to shew thyself approved unto God." NKJV and NASV change "study" to "be diligent." NIV and RSV change "study" to "do your best."

Study4704
From G4710; to use speed, that is, to make effort, be prompt or earnest: - do (give) diligence, be diligent (forward), endeavour, labour, study.

[aerasmus]

Old Testament examples include:

Psalm 79:1-the word "heathen" in the KJV is changed to "nations" in the NKJV, NASV and NIV.

heathen1471
Apparently from the same root as H1465 (in the sense of massing); a foreign nation; hence a Gentile; also (figuratively) a troop of animals, or a flight of locusts: - Gentile, heathen, nation, people.

Isaiah 11:3-the entire phrase, "And shall make Him of quick understanding" in the KJV is eliminated in the NKJV, NASV, NIV and RSV.

Its not in original 

Isaiah 66:5-the wonderful phrase, "But He shall appear to your joy" in the KJV disappears without explanation from NKJV, NASV, NIV and RSV.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah%2066:5&version=50 Yes it is, translated as, We shall see your joy...
He shall appear. Literally, “we shall see.” According to the Masoretic reading this clause forms a part of the taunt: “Let the Lord be glorified and we will see your joy.” The translation “he shall appear” requires a change in the Hebrew. However, Dead Sea scroll 1QIsa clearly reads, “he shall appear.
Nichol, Francis D.: The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary : The Holy Bible With Exegetical and Expository Comment. Washington, D.C. : Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1978 (Commentary Reference Series), S. Is 66:6

Daniel 3:25-the fourth person who was in the fiery furnace with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, was identified as "the Son of God." The same identification is given in the text of the NKJV but a footnote reads "or, a son of the gods," and both NIV and NA SV actually have the latter reading in their texts.

This is right, and wrong... I prefer KJV here..
25. Like the Son of God. Commentators have variously interpreted the exclamation of the astonished Nebuchadnezzar concerning the fourth individual in the fiery furnace. Jewish scholars have always identified him simply as an angel. This view is reflected in the LXX, which translates the phrase “like an angel of God.” Early Christian interpreters (Hippolytus, Chrysostom, and others), on the other hand, saw in this fourth personage the second person of the Godhead. The rendering of the KJV reflects this interpretation. The majority of conservative Christians hold to this view, although modern critical commentators have now generally discarded it, as is seen by the translations of the RV, ASV, RSV, and other modern versions, “like a son of the gods.”
The problem is one of Aramaic grammar and interpretation. The Aramaic ’elahin, “gods,” is the plural of ’elah, “god.” In some cases where ’elahin is used, reference is made to pagan gods (chs. 2:11, 47; 5:4, 23). However, there are two passages besides the one under discussion where ’elahin can be interpreted to refer to the true God of Daniel (ch. 5:11, 14; see RSV footnote). Hence the translation “God” for ’elahin is justifiable if it can be established that Nebuchadnezzar was employing the term as a proper name. Grammatically, both translations, “like the son of God,” and, “like a son of the gods,” are correct.
The context reveals that Nebuchadnezzar acknowledged the superiority of the most high God of Israel (see chs. 3:26, 28, 29; 4:2). In these statements the king was not referring to gods in general but to the God in particular. For this reason conservative interpreters prefer the translation of the KJV and can linguistically defend their preference (see PK 509; Problems in Bible Translation, pp. 170–173).

Nichol, Francis D.: The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary : The Holy Bible With Exegetical and Expository Comment. Washington, D.C. : Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1978 (Commentary Reference Series), S. Da 3:25

In other Old Testament portions, the word "evil" in the KJV is replaced by several different words-doom, disaster, calamity, catastrophe, trouble, adversity, terrible, harm, wild. In four different places in 1 and 2 Kings, "sodomites" is changed to "perverted persons."

Evil, in biblical terms, especially in KJV terms, could be all of the above.

Additional examples of significant changes would include the following: Matthew 4:24; 6:13; 7:14; 20:20; Mark 4:19; John 14:2; Acts 17:29; Romans 1:18; Philippians 2:6; 1 Thessalonians 5:23; 1 Timothy 6:5, 10, 20; Hebrews 2:16; 10:14; James 1:15; 1 Peter 1:7.

Please point to specific's after you have done own research, and I shall see whether I can assist research.

[Richard Myers]

If this is the worst of  the translation, then it does not appear to be greatly offensive. I have preferences, but that is not my concern and never was. I see no reason to change some words just to change them which apparently has taken place. But, that is not the issue. It can cause confusion and make consistency more of a problem, but the main concern I have is that the gospel truth be translated correctly. This has been the target of Satan to deceive. Of course there are other doctrinal matters that are important, but the greatest is the gospel message which has been perverted throughout Christianity. The power of God's grace has been destroyed in the minds of many by Satan working through the church.

[Mimi]

Matthew 4:24; 6:13; 7:14; 20:20; Mark 4:19; John 14:2; Acts 17:29; Romans 1:18; Philippians 2:6; 1 Thessalonians 5:23; 1 Timothy 6:5, 10, 20; Hebrews 2:16; 10:14; James 1:15; 1 Peter 1:7.

I will take these, Aerasmus.

[Mimi]

Matthew 4:24

KJV Mat 4:24  And his fame went throughout all Syria: and they brought unto him all sick people that were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those which were possessed with devils, and those which were lunatic, and those that had the palsy; and he healed them.

NIV Mat 4:24 News about him spread all over Syria, and people brought to him all who were ill with various diseases, those suffering severe pain, the demon-possessed, those having seizures, and the paralyzed, and he healed them.

NKJV Mat 4:24  Then His fame went throughout all Syria; and they brought to Him all sick people who were afflicted with various diseases and torments, and those who were demon-possessed, epileptics, and paralytics; and He healed them.

ASV Mat 4:24 And the report of him went forth into all Syria: and they brought unto him all that were sick, holden with divers diseases and torments, possessed with demons, and epileptic, and palsied; and he healed them.

KJ21 Mat 4:24 And His fame went throughout all Syria. And they brought unto Him all sick people who were taken with divers diseases and torments, and those who were possessed with devils, and those who were lunatic, and those who had the palsy; and He healed them.

NASB   Mat 4:24 The news about Him spread throughout all Syria; and they brought to Him all who were ill, those suffering with various diseases and pains, demoniacs, epileptics, paralytics; and He healed them.
 


KJV and KJ21 are virtually identical, changing only “who” in the KJ21 for “that” in the KJV

NIV adds “those suffering severe pain”

ASV and NKJV read virtually the same, except ASV switches “fame” for “report.”

[Mimi]

Matthew 6:13

KJV  Mat 6:13  And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen.

NIV Mat 6:13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.

   Matthew 6:13 Or from evil; some late manuscripts one, / for yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.

NKJV Mat 6:13 And do not lead us into temptation, But deliver us from the evil one.  For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.

     NU-Text omits For Yours through Amen.

ASV Mat 6:13 And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one.
     
     Text omits For Yours through Amen.

KJ21 Mat 6:13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For Thine is the Kingdom, and the power and the glory for ever. Amen.
   
NASB Mat 6:13 And do not lead us into temptation, but (A)deliver us from (B)evil. [For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.]'

[Mimi]

Matthew 7:14

KJV Mat 7:14  Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

NIV Mat 7:14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it

     Small vs. strait  Who is the Gate? Is He small or strait?

NKJV Mat 7:14  Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.
     
     NU-Text and M-Text read "How"

ASV Mat 7:14 For narrow is the gate, and straitened the way, that leadeth unto life, and few are they that find it.

     "straightened" replaces "narrow" - these have been reversed

KJ21 Mat 7:14  Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

NASB Mat 7:14 For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

     Small vs. strait