[Fredoheaven]

Paraphrase (par'a fraz) noun: 1. a rewording of something spoken or written
2. an approximate rendering of a qoutation

Paraphase is a restatement of a text or passage, using other words. The term "paraphrase" derives via the Latin "paraphrasis" from the Greek para phrasein, meaning "additional manner of expression". It is a retelling of something in your own words. It is about what the author thinks the Bible says, not necessarily what the Bible says. Examples are The Message, The Living Bible, Contemporay English Version etc.

So is a paraphrase version really a bible? The answer is NO! It is merely an "opinion" of the writer on the verse or verses or the entire bible. In the CEV for example of John 1:14 states:

14. The Word became a human being and lived here with us. We saw his true glory, the glory of the only Son of the Father. From him all the kindness and all the truth of God have come down to us.

So what's wrong with this particular verse? Basically, it added words to the Word of God and the same time it deleted words from the Word of God. We all know for sure that adding, deleting or altering the words of God is the very dangerous thing. For study see Rev. 22:18-19.

In the example, one can note that it adds "human being" which is not to be found in the New Testament Greek. Eventually the Gk"sarx" which translated flesh is deleted on the text. Further, our Lord here refers as the only "begotten" of the Father. Again it has deleted the key word "begotten", a very vital truth of the Bible.

"Every word of is pure...Do not add to His words, lest he rebuke you, and you be found a liar" Prov. 30:5-6

[Tmonk]

The thing about a paraphrase is that your at the mercy of the translator/writer. His or her theological views can be mixed into the text. Also paraphrasing can totally ruin the intended message of a verse or entire chapters.

[MC1171611]

Originally Posted by Tmonk

The thing about a paraphrase is that your at the mercy of the translator/writer. His or her theological views can be mixed into the text. Also paraphrasing can totally ruin the intended message of a verse or entire chapters.

Not to mention that a paraphrase wouldn't be concerned in the least with the WORDS of God. Every WORD of God is pure, not just the message or meaning.

[kittn1]

Because every WORD of God is pure, and not just the message or meaning, to paraphrase God's words is to take what is holy and profane it, imo.

[Cody1611]

Originally Posted by kittn1

Because every WORD of God is pure, and not just the message or meaning, to paraphrase God's words is to take what is holy and profane it, imo.

Amen.

[Fredoheaven]

A very good site like this one. Thank you, I know i will learn a lot from them. Jude 25

[Kirandio]

Sigh...my first post here. Hopefully I will be welcomed to share my different point of view regarding this subject. I typed this up a couple of nights ago and gave it some thought before typing up more to it.

If these versions of the Bible which use phrases to help the reader understand God are "perversions" as people call them, then my level of understanding the Holy Spirit must be through the roof considering my experiences, since I have been able to successfully understand quite a bit about God using the CEV for a couple of years. I then was using the NIV Study Bible from Fall 2002 (when I bought it), and I still continue to use it to this day. I can honestly say that since encountering the idea that the KJV is the only Bible that God would want us to use, that my experiences do not reflect that idea as being legitimate.

Three days before I accepted Jesus into my heart, I was unsure what the right path was. I asked God in prayer to "help me to find you." The next day I received the flyer advertising my friend's church. I decided to go this time. This was important because I just completely wrote it off the last two times he handed out flyers. Before going to his church, I thought to myself that I went to a Methodist church.

I went to his church, and after receiving Jesus into my heart, I received a Bible, as I would call it anyways. It was not a KJV, an NIV, an NASB, or NKJV. It was...a CEV. So the question I now pose...if God really exclusively honors the KJV Bible; if the KJV Bible is the only good version of the Bible, why is it that in that experience I was handed a CEV Bible?

Allegedly, the KJV Bible that people use now is altered, even if it is ever so slightly. As someone who can relatively use computers fluently, I know that if you change just one letter, just one item on a document, that document becomes a different document. If the KJV Bible that people are using has just one letter that is different from the original, then it is not the exact same Bible as before.

Regarding translation, I think a person is already vulnerable to what the translator's interpretation is if they do not know the language that is being interpreted from. The only way to guarantee that their translation is accurate is to be fluent with both the language being translated from, and the language being translated to. If I only understand the language in which something is being translated to, I have to have trust that the person doing the translating is giving me the correct translation. Often times, the person receiving the translation does not know the language the item in question is being translated from. The person wants the translation so they are able to understand it. Understanding what is being said is important.

Something to consider when quoting verses is context. This is an example given to me from a professor at University of Texas at Austin:

"Time flies like an arrow."

How is this to be interpreted? There are 3 ways:

1. Time is treated as a noun. Flies is treated as a verb. Like an arrow is treated as a preposition. In this case, we understand the statement to be a simile in that time moves fast.

2. Time is treated as an adjective. Flies is treated as a plural noun. Like is treated as a verb. An is treated as an adjective. Arrow is treated as a noun. So here, there is a species of flies known as time flies. These flies like, as in wanting to have more relationship, with an arrow.

3. Time is treated as a command. Flies is treated as a plural noun. Like an arrow is treated as simile again. Basically here, a person is to use a stopwatch in associating with timing flies, and they are to do so like an arrow.

Which is the correct interpretation of the phrase "time flies like an arrow"? We receive the correct interpretation of the phrase depending on the context. Often times, it is to mean that time is going fast.

Taking words out of context can also ruin the intended message. If the above phrase really was referring to timing flies with a stopwatch, and one were to quote it in response to someone who wanted to time flies for some reason with a stopwatch, the person might continue with his endeavor with timing the flies with the stopwatch, even though the context might actually indicate that it really was a way of referring that time flies really fast.

I believe that there is advantage in choosing to use a phrase-by-phrase approach to translation as opposed to an exclusive word-for-word translation. I also agree that there is risk associated with translating via phrase-by-phrase. I also believe that the translators of the NIV knew what they were getting into, and I am pretty sure that they were aware of the risks associated with putting it all together. They probably spent countless hours praying over it, and they probably checked their work several times over.

After all this, I do ask an honest question. Am I allowed to pray for the people in the Prayer Request forum here? I ask the question honestly, because I use the NIV Study Bible as my main Bible, but I do not want people to think that I might be hindering them because I do not use the KJV regularly.

[Brother Tim]

Kirandio, your paragraph regarding the skills of the translators should be taken to heart in your search for an accurate copy of the Scriptures. It would do you well to examine the lives and skills of the translators of the KJB. You would have a new appreciation for the quality of the translation, if only from a human prospective. Add to that, the KJB carries with it a nearly four century history of its effectiveness. Without exception, every modern version dating back to the Revised Version of 1881 forward to the latest product to show up, none of these have the staying power (lacking the power of the Spirit), and will pass from the scene by lack of interest or by modernization by their publisher/owners (NIV -> TNIV -> ?NIV), (RSV -> NRSV -> ESV), (ASV -> NASB[##year] ), etc.

Did someone mention the NIV?

Why would you admire an NIV bible that removes the word "begotten" from John 3:16, says that Jesus couldn't grasp equality with God in Philippians 2:6, removes the name "Jesus" in 38 places, completely removes the word "Godhead" from the Bible, completely removes the word "sodomite" from the Bible, removes the word "hell" 40 times, and changes every mention of people "worshipping" Jesus to a mere "knelt"?

Kirandio, welcome to the forum!

Bro. Tim and Bro. George are giving you good advice and counsel here my friend. I can tell you from my own experience that shortly after I was saved I used to carry something called THE LIVING BIBLE. (my brethren here will get a chuckle out of this, but it's true). Eventually I prayed and asked God to lead me to a good Church and within a few weeks a young man knocked on my front door from an Independent Baptist Church.

I carried that Living Bible to church for several months, and I will tell you that aside from a few mild comments, no one was ever rude to me about it, even though the pastor only uses the KJV and mentioned several times from the pulpit why. Eventually a man by the name of Peter Ruckman came to our church, and my Living Bible was soon shifted to "shelf duty," where it remains to this day.

Ruckman challenged his audience to examine what they believed about God's Word. He offered no apology for his views and no quarter for any scholar. As I investigated his claims, I was SHOCKED about the corruption in modern versions! Maybe this was my pastor's way of exposing me to the truth without offending me personally, and we are all friends to this day. So let me challenge you today to examine EXACTLY what you think about God's Word and ask yourself, what is YOUR FINAL AUTHORITY ON SPIRITUAL MATTERS. I hope God will give you the courage to hit this front on---with an open mind my friend, and do study the links you were just given.

As I just mentioned to another member of this forum earlier today, look carefully at the leaven below, (this is the doctrine of the Bible correctors) and ask God which Bible really is the Word of God for your life today... I'm glad you accepted Jesus into your heart---we are praying for you brother!



THE CREED OF THE ALEXANDRIAN CULT

by Peter Ruckman


1. There is NO FINAL AUTHORITY but God.

2. Since God is a SPIRIT, there is NO FINAL AUTHORITY that can be seen, heard, read, felt or handled.

3. Since all books are MATERIAL, there is NO BOOK ON THIS EARTH THAT IS THE FINAL AND ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY on what is right and what is wrong; what constitutes TRUTH and what constitutes ERROR.

4. There WAS a series of writings one time which, IF they had all been put into a BOOK as soon as they were written the first time, WOULD HAVE constituted an infallible and final authority by which to judge truth and error.

5. However, this series of writings was LOST, and the God Who inspired them was UNABLE TO PRESERVE THEIR CONTENT through Bible-believing Christians at Antioch (Syria), where the first Bible teachers were (Acts 13:1), and where the first missionary trip originated (Acts 13:1-6), and where the word "CHRISTIAN" originated (Acts 11:26).

6. So, God chose to ALMOST preserve them through Gnostics and philosophers from Alexandria, Egypt, even though God called HIS SON OUT of Egypt (Mat. 2), JACOB OUT of Egypt (Gen. 49), ISRAEL OUT of Egypt (Exod. 15), and JOSEPH'S BONES OUT of Egypt (Exod. 13).

7. So, there are two streams of Bibles: the most accurate - though, of course, there is NO FINAL, ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY FOR DETERMINING TRUTH AND ERROR: it is a matter of "preference" - are the Egyptian translations from Alexandria, Egypt, which are "almost the originals," although NOT QUITE.

8. The most INACCURATE TRANSLATIONS were those that brought about the GERMAN REFORMATION (Luther, Zwingli, Boehler, Zinzendorf, Spener, etc.) and the worldwide MISSIONARY MOVEMENT of the English speaking people: the Bible that Sunday, Torrey, Moody, Finney, Spurgeon, Whitfield, Wesley, and Chapman used.

9. But we can "tolerate" these if those who believe in them will tolerate US. After all, since THERE IS NO ABSOLUTE AND FINAL AUTHORITY THAT ANYONE CAN READ, TEACH, PREACH, OR HANDLE, the whole thing is a matter of "PREFERENCE." You may prefer what you prefer, and we will prefer what WE prefer: let us live in peace, and if we cannot agree on anything or everything, let us all agree on one thing: THERE IS NO FINAL, ABSOLUTE, WRITTEN AUTHORITY OF GOD ANYWHERE ON THIS EARTH.

This is the creed of the Alexandrian Cult.

[Brother Jerry]

The carnal mind is my own enemy.

I read the King James Bible in spite of it.

If I let it have it's way, I'll convince myself I don't need any Bible and be like those who claim to be "spiritual" rather than "religious".

I'm neither.

I'm a Christian, like the Bible says I am.