Getting a new bible and wanting you help.... Long post

Koontzy: //why is Mathews 18:11 missing? I know some
NIV study bible have the verse in the footnotes, but why?//

Actually 'NIV study bible have the verse in footnotes' shows
a lack of understanding of footnotes.
There are three basic types of footnotes:

1. Comentary footnoes
the kind that 'study bible's have a lot of
these comentaries are the opinion of the editor/writer of the Bible

2. Cross reference footnotes
these just list similar passages
these cross references are good when you study a Bible:
helping the Bible explaine the Bible

3. Translator Footnotes
These Translator Footnotes shows the variations
between the sources; and are a necessary part
of the translation
(by the way /BTW/, the following are frequently
plural terms that are usually used as singular:

1. KJVs (King James Versions)
2. TRs (Latin: Textus Receptus) English Received Texts
3. MTs (Majority Texts)


Here are some of the Margin Notes of the KJV1611 Edition
of the New Testament (NT)
showing that even the translators of the original KJV
had available multiple sources which varied):


KJV1611, Mt 1:11 "Iosias begate Iechonias"; footnote,
"Some read, Iosias begate Iakim, and Iakim begate Iechonias"

KJV1611, Mt 26:26 "and blessed it";
footnote, "Many Greeke copies haue, gave thanks"

KJV1611, Lk 10:22 "All things";
footnote, "Many ancient copies adde these words,
And turning to his Disciples he said."

KJV1611, Luke 17:36,
footnote: "This 36. verse is wanting in most of the Greek copies."

KJV1611, Ac 13:18 "suffered he their manners";
footnote, "Gr ETROPOFORRHSEN, perhaps, for ETROFOFORHSEN, as a nurse beareth or feedeth her childe, Deut 1.31, 2 macc 7.27. according to the Sept[uagint] and so Chrysost[om]"

KJV1611, Ac 25:6 "more then ten dayes";
footnote, "Or, as some copies reade, no more than eight or ten dayes"

KJV1611, 1Co 15:31 "your reioycing";
footnote, "Some read, our"

KJV1611, 1Cor 15:55 "O grave";
footnote, "Or, hell"

KJV1611, Eph 6:9 "that your master";
footnote: Some reade, both your and their master"

KJV1611, Jas 2:18 "without thy workes"
footnote: Some copies reade, by thy workes"

KJV1611, 1Pet 2:21 "suffered for us";
footnote: Some reade, for you"

KJV1611, 2Pet 2:2 "pernicious wayes";
footnote: "Or, Lascivious wayes, *as some copies reade*"

 

May I suggest a computer Bible, like the free one, e-sword.
You can download it at www.e-sword.net

You get many translations, commentaries, and dictionaries plus a lot of extras.

 

The Macarthur Study Bible available in NKJV and NASB, best study Bible available. In the NIV go for the NIV Study Bible by Zondervon.

 

Ryan,

Like yourself, some time ago I was in the market for a new Bible. I also grew up with the KJV. I suggest that you determine which translation is best for you before choosing the study notes.

As I started to research into the history of how we got our English Bibles, I found a startling fact that most Christians don't know or don't acknowledge: there is not a singular definitive Greek text (from which to translate into English). BYW, there are also multiple Hebrew texts in which to base an OT translation.

In terms of just the NT, all the scraps of ancient Greek manuscripts from all early centuries are compiled and compared (work done by the science of textual criticism). No two major manuscripts are exactly alike. Most of the variations are somewhat minor, but this the beginning of the answer to your question.

Consequently, incomplete Greek manuscripts that are similar are grouped together to form a complete text. There are two to four 'families' of similar Greek text (depending on how one makes distinctions). The names of two major Greek families are the Majority Text (aka Byzantine Text or Western Text) and the Critical Text (aka Minority Text). The Majority Text (MT) is so named because there are many more ancient examples of it in our possession. A subset of the Majority Text is the Textus Receptus (TR) which is the underlying Greek of the KJV. There is an entire debate ongoing about whether the TR is a good representative of the original Greek.

Some folks think that the MT is more reliable because there are more documentary witnesses to it. However, most of this proof still exists because it relatively not as ancient (6-10th centuries) and many more copies of Scripture were made. We have found fewer manuscripts supporting the Critical Text (CT) but that could be because they are older (3-5th centuries, much closer to the time of the apostle's original writing) and have been deteriorated. Most modern scholars think that the CT is better/more reliable because there had been less time for corruption/mistakes to creep into the copies. There is evidence that tends to indicate that the MT had verses and words added into the Greek text over time. Therefore, the CT is a shorter text than the MT. This is why most 'modern' versions do not have all the verses found in the KJVs.

Many study Bibles have footnotes alluding to important Greek variants other than the one they primarily base their translation upon. It is important to recognize that most good translators will reference multiple sources and occasionally use these in their version. Some versions put the textual variants within brackets within their text so as to not interrupt the traditional verse numbers. Even with all the differences in Greek texts no major doctrine is affected and God's word is preserved.

Another thing most people are unaware of is that there are at least three methods of approaching a translation from one language to another: there is 1) a literal, almost word-for-word method called 'formal equivalency'; 2) less literal, thought-for-thought method called 'dynamic' or 'functional equivalency'; 3) and the paraphrase.

The KJV and NASB are examples of fairly literal translations. It is important to recognize that even literal translations must make subjective decisions about the words they choose for the English text. The NIV is less literal, but most people agree that reading it is more natural and smoother. "The Message" is and example of a paraphrase which is tantamount to a commentary.

So, typically in a study Bible a more literal version is desired. Dynamic versions are great for daily reading and understanding difficult passages. Paraphrases are perhaps useful to get a broad overview, or for youth and other groups with limited understanding. Multiple versions in these different styles also gives a voracious reader some variety. Some other considerations: will you read this Bible aloud (maybe to children)? will you carry it to church (to follow a speaker)?

Clearly, I recommend having several translations. However, if you must limit yourself to one there are several translations that are generally suitable. The NASB, ESV and the NKJ are all in the 'KJV tradition' and will sound familiar (more literal and TR based). Other (mostly dynamic and CT based) versions you might consider: Holman Christian Standard (HCS), NET, AMP, NIV, NLV. Once you select the translation, then see what is offered in that one in a study Bible format with notes.

 

I would also like to say that it would all depend on what type of studying you are doing....
And it sounds as if you are very interested in translational issues.

If that is the case, then you may want to get a NET Bible. I got one a couple months ago, and it has all the translators notes, and why they translated the text the way they did.

For example here is what the NET Bible study notes write about the verse you used in the OP:

The most important mss (א B L* Θ* Ë1,13 33 892* pc e ff1 sys sa) do not include 18:11 “For the Son of Man came to save the lost.” The verse is included in D Lmg W Θc 078vid Ï lat syc,p,h, but is almost certainly not original, being borrowed, as it were, from the parallel in Luke 19:10. The present translation follows NA27 in omitting the verse number as well, a procedure also followed by a number of other modern translations.

Here is a link to the NET Bible, you can download it on your computer, or get one printed...I got mine off ebay, and paid $24 for it. http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=3086

 

I wouldn't be looking for only one translation, but a couple. Since you already have the KJV, I would suggest the HCSB, NLT2, ESV and NASB. I'm not crazy about the NIV, but I do have it. I feel the HCSB is similar and easier to read than the NIV. I believe the HCSB either comes in a study Bible now, or will in the near future.

I second the e-sword reccomendation! I downloaded 24 different translation for free from them, not to mention 16 commentaries...all free!

 

Amen, Sister Annsi -- you are so RIGHT ON! :thumbs:

 

And, going back to an earlier post, e-Sword on your computer is one of the best ways to get the widest variety of translations -- most of them free.

Great way for comparing, too. Study notes, and (yeah!) Josephus' Antiquities and Wars. Tons of information available.

Enjoy!

 

Thanks, Ann.

I didn't address the issue of Jesus being called Satan in the NIV. It so ridiculous!

Can any one imagine how long a Bible version would exist in stores if it actually did that? (Not to mention, it wouldn't be given the time to become a current high selling version?)

If I was gonna make up a lie to discredit a translation, I wouldn't even use this slander because it is so completely ludicrous!