[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

[Buck]

Fredoheaven;
You might like to look at this web sight
http://www.sacredsandwich.com/bible_versions.htm

[Fredoheaven]

Originally Posted by Buck

Fredoheaven;
You might like to look at this web sight
http://www.sacredsandwich.com/bible_versions.htm

it's a great site indeed.

Jude 25
http://www.fredsites.weebly.com

[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.