Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Jesus is Lord, May 5, 2004.
Here is the article.
I once went to a church where the pastor used the NIV exclusively. I got the distinct impression that he (the pastor) couldn't understand any version with a higher reading level. (I'm serious.)
He had a PHD, but it was in "preparation for sermons" or some other such thing.
The NIV has been the best-selling bible for several years, surpassing the KJV by several million. The fact that it's the most used translation among pastors should be no surprise.
I frequently have seen KJVO's state that the NIV (and other MV's, for that matter) is actually written at a higher grade-level of comprehension than the KJV. You mean to say that isn't true?
I frequently have seen KJVO's state that the NIV (and other MV's, for that matter) is actually written at a higher grade-level of comprehension than the KJV. You mean to say that isn't true? </font>[/QUOTE]Great point LarryN. . .
I once read an article on the NIV written by the translation committee. I believe they were required to use a fifth grade maximum reading level in the translation process. Because this got out, some of the KJVo's grabbed that statement and said they were "dumbing down the Bible".
So, I guess in reality the KJVo groups will use whatever argument fits the question.
In all sincerity, using the scale that the NIV is on a fifth grade level, they claimed to use the same scale that the Reader's Digest is written on a 3 1/2 grade level. If this is all true, I seriously wonder where the KJV 1769 would fit?
Yeah, and now some KJVO's brag that the KJV is written at the fifth grade level. I haven' seen one yet. But, Riplinger et al. claim to have one.
There was an article released about 10 years ago which said that the KJV read at a 5-8th grade reading level. But that finding was based on the Fleish-Kincaid reading level test. The problem with Fleish-Kincaid is that it only looks at the length of words. Granted the KJV words are shorter than say NIV words, but when the words are not understood by 5-8th grade readers the test is rendered meaningless. For instance, "fet" is a very short word and would result in a very low Fleish-Kincaid reading level, but how may 5-8th graders know "fet" is the past tense of "fetch?"
The test, as it was conducted, is pretty meaningless.
I find it so sad that people who have been given the task of explaining God's word have stooped to use a commentary, errrrgggg, the NIV.
They should be using the thin line ESV.
The NIV is not a commentary, it is a fine translation that has lead many to follow the Lord. BTW, I prefer the ESV as well, but I won't stoop to the level of KJVO in calling the NIV a commentary.
When I first started preaching many in the congregation told me they could not understand the words I used. So I had to lower my vocabulary. The average reading level in most churches is about sixth to eighth grade and probably closer to sixth.
I agree with Skan. No one checked the COMPREHENSION level among those students. I asked a 4th-grader in my'hood what "conversation" meant. She thought a minute & said, "when people talk to each other". If she were reading a KJV, that's what "conversation" would mean to her, while in the KJV, it means, "lifestyle".
However, there's nothing wrong in introducing the KJV as a second Bible to children. I did that with my own sons, and today, like their mom & I, they use several different versions and have a wider understanding of Scripture than many others who are stuck with only one version.
The NIV is an excellent translation. There is no perfect translation, and the 100% "literal" translations are not very true to the meaning in many cases, because of intricacies in the grammar structure of other languages. I believe, in the passages I've seen, that you should look at multiple versions regularly.... I wish more "parallel" bibles were printed in nice leather covers, etc, because I think you have to recognize the reality of translation difficulties.
Versions I keep on hand (in the order of how much I use them):
-KJV/NIV "Parallel" Bible (side by side version)
-NIV Study Bible (Zondervan)
-NASB (for "literal" translation)
I agree that there should be more parallel bibles on the market. But, you have to admit, that their size and cost make them a luxury.
I have a parallel with:
I love to use it. But my primary bible is the MacArthur's Study bible (NKJV). I have not found one to beat it yet.
I have several parallels, some more useful than others.
Bagster's Hexapla. Wycliff, Tyndale, Cranmer, Geneva, Rheims, KJV.
Weigle's Octapla. Tyndale, Great Bible, Geneva, Bishop's, Rheims, KJV, RV, RSV.
Contemporary Parallel New Testament. KJV, NASB, New Century Version, CEV, NIV, NLT, NKJV, The Message.
KJV NKJV Parallel Reference Bible. KJV, NKJV.
I use the last one more than the others.
I think you all have talked me into buying a new parallel Bible. I haven't had a parallel Bible for years now, but I'd really love to have one to carry to Church that has, say, four or so versions in it. Any recommendations of what versions such a parallel should contain, or any specific parallels I can look for?
Thanks in advance for any help/ideas.
Actually, fet is short for field effect transistor. I know, I use them every day. I'm not holding my breath, though, you'll prove me wrong.
I think it is EXCELLENT to introduce your children to the KJV at an early age.
I would also recommend that in doing so the parents spend time "teaching" their children what they are reading. Both parent and child can probably learn a lot.
I grew up with a KJV and my understanding is probably higher than someone who didn't. It is still more difficult to read than a newer version, but I love the beautiful language. That is the reason I think it would be a great idea to introduce children to it.
It is well known that if you teach a child a second language, to do it when they are learning how to speak. Surprisingly, they will have very little difficulty keeping the languages seperate, and their comprehension of the language will grow quickly.
I feel that this is somewhat true when a child is learning how to read.
Just my thoughts.
I recommend an older parallel book. The New Layman's Parallel Bible ISBN 0-310-95025-2
If you will check at your local bookstore, there is a real good chance they will have it laying in the "old books for sale" bin. I bought mine for $3.95. No joke..... It contains the KJV, NIV, The Living Bible (paraphrase), and the RSV. It is a little hard to carry because it is hardback, but it is a GREAT book because each scripture is side-by-side. The longest text sets the length of the page.
If you can find it on the surplus shelf, get it, its worth it.
I'm sure there are much better modern parallels. I have another that has six translations including a Greek text, but it only covers the NT.
If you can handle reading on your computer, I highly suggest some Bible software. Try a couple of "free" ones such as online Bible or e-sword. E-Sword contains the Geneva and many older translations, I think you can even get the ESV free. The newer versions with copyrights like the NIV, NASB and others require a copyright fee, but most are reasonable. You can try the software with all the free stuff first. Besides that you get tons of commentaries and other stuff. Don't waste your money buying the real expensive Bible software advertised at Lifeway and places like that unless you have tried it and know that you really like it better than the free stuff. Most are not any better---only different marketing.
Those of us who are really "in the know" realize FET is an acronym for Future and Emerging Technologies.