Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by jeben, Jun 24, 2013.
Can one do a serious bible study using the NLTse study bible ?
From the New Living Translaion's Preface
New Living Translation web site [LINK]
You can study the NLT's translation of Scripture just as well as you can study any other.
Yes. I grew the most spiritually using an NLT.
I've been using the NLT lately and love it!
I don't have the study bible. Mine is plain text.
The plain text is the way to go!
A lot of KJV'ers and KJVO'ers could see things more clearly in the NLT. "Oh,so that's what that text means. And all along I had no idea. At last,something even grandkids can appreciate."
Folks,the NLT is going by the reasoning of William Tyndale. He wanted the plowboy to understand Holy Writ. Martin Luther wanted the Scripture to be in the common German tongue. It is no crime to put the Word of God in the vernacular. There is no virtue in struggling over a production centuries old (which made Tyndale's last revision more complicated).
I've kinda given up study bibles. I get tired of the notes messing up my reading.
And yes, I am getting a better understanding of a lot of things because of the NLT. The book of Romans in particular.
NLT has been extremely valuable for me, both personally and pastorally. While I think we would all agree that it is the Holy Spirit that is our teacher and illuminates the truth, having a readable translation that you enjoy reading can go along way.
I have settled on the ESV and NLT for most of personal study and ministry. The folks who have a difficult time reading Bibles that have a higher reading level have come to appreciate the clarity of the NLT.
the Nlt study bile quite good, but would say that for "serious" biblestudy, also pick up an dusesomething like nasb/Nkjv/Esv versions along with it!
I have an NLTse Study Bible and have found it to be quite useful. OTOH, I prefer my NLTse Life Application Bible a little better because its "helps" seem to challenge me more.
16 “For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. (NLT) Looking at John 3:16, I would say no you cannot do serious bible study using the NLT. The idea of "God so loved" is not the quantity of love, i.e. so much or a great amount, but God loved the world in this way, describing how the love was manifested, i.e. He gave His one of a kind Son.
I would say stick with the NASB95, NKJV, WEB, NET and HCSB for serious study. But certainly the NLT, the NIV and the ESV can be used for comparison, sometimes they make more clear the actual message of the more literal translations. If the underlying grammar is a concern, then hands down the NASB95 is your best bet. Anyway, that is my 2 cents worth.
The reading of one verse does not negate the quality of a given translation. I agree that the NET,HCSB,GW,NJB etc. have better renderings for that particular passage. But it is certainly not a deal breaker.
I have started to use the NLT more now for study.
From what little I read the NLT, I think it would be a good Bible for study. I've been using the KJV, ASV 1901 and the NASB for most of my study. I've use the KJV and the ASV 1901 so long I don't think I'll change but if I were I would look into the NLT. Many of our 25 to 30 group and younger seem to prefer the NLT where I attend church.
Here is a footnote from the NET bible on John 3:16:
"Or “this is how much”; or “in this way.” The Greek adverb οὕτως (Joutws) can refer (1) to the degree to which God loved the world, that is, to such an extent or so much that he gave his own Son (see R. E. Brown, John [AB], 1:133-34; D. A. Carson, John, 204) or (2) simply to the manner in which God loved the world, i.e., by sending his own son (see R. H. Gundry and R. W. Howell, “The Sense and Syntax of John 3:14-17 with Special Reference to the Use of Οὕτως…ὥστε in John 3:16,” NovT 41 : 24-39). Though the term more frequently refers to the manner in which something is done (see BDAG 741-42 s.v. οὕτω/οὕτως), the following clause involving ὥστε (Jwste) plus the indicative (which stresses actual, but [usually] unexpected result) emphasizes the greatness of the gift God has given. With this in mind, then, it is likely (3) that John is emphasizing both the degree to which God loved the world as well as the manner in which He chose to express that love. This is in keeping with John’s style of using double entendre or double meaning. Thus, the focus of the Greek construction here is on the nature of God's love, addressing its mode, intensity, and extent."
This level of serious bible study is also found in the HCSB footnotes:
John 3:16 The Gk word houtos, commonly translated in Jn 3:16 as “so” or “so much” occurs over 200 times in the NT. Almost without exception it is an adverb of manner, not degree (for example, see Mt 1:18). It only means “so much” when modifying an adjective (see Gl 3:3; Rv 16:18). Manner seems primarily in view in Jn 3:16, which explains the HCSB‘s rendering."
If you compare to the NLT, you will quickly see it is not in the same league.
"Serious study" implies (to me at least) that the individual is going to take the time and dig in. If you are not going to take the time to get the english word meaning from a translation such as the NKJV, but rather look to the NLT, then it is not likely the individual is really doing "serious study".
As others have said, sometimes you can get a perspective (from the NLT) on a passage that has been unclear to the reader in the past, this is a good thing. One of the negatives of the KJVO movement is that I believe that many don't really get the most out of their study time because the KJV is not clear to 21 century north American readers of the Bible.
OK, I will say it, the NLT is too dumbed down for me. When I read it I get this condescending feeling or attitude. Personally, I crave a challange in my studies. Others will disagree with me on this and that is their right. The study notes of the NLT SB are ok, typical reformed notes.
The NLT does better that many of its peers in the narrative sections of the Old and New Testaments.
I am not sure what a "serious" vs. "non-serious" Bible study is, but the NLT is one of four translations that i use on a regular basis (along with the NIV, KJV and NKJV). I get a lot out of it and really like it. I am not sure if this makes me a serious student of the Bible or not.
I agree with Van in this matter.
The NASB (I use the one online) is about the only truly accurate literal translation to the American English folk.
I do use the NKJV for daily reading.
All the others seem to conform to some lesser readability score as a standard and not literal accuracy.
The NET and HCSB as well as a number of other versions have the more correct rendering of John 3:16. But,one good reading does not make a whole translation. The NLT,NASBU,NKJV,ESV and NIV all fail to word that reference in a more suitable manner. But it does not negate their translations as a whole.
Literal does not necessarily = accurate.
"Lesser readibility score"? Do you mean the opposite of what you just said? Do you really mean that some other translations are more readable and hence,according to your view --are less accurate?
If readibilty is not factored in as a major component of accuracy a given translation --i.e. the NASBU may not be as "accurate" as you think. And,as has been pointed out in past threads --the NASBU is not as literal as many think.