Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: ilw%chem@ucsd.edu (Ivy Blumberg) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Who do you say Christ is? (and other questions) Message-ID: Date: 17 Sep 89 17:22:03 GMT Organization: Chemistry Dept, UC San Diego Lines: 20 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu Although you may be right about the KJV being more accurate, try getting those who are just beginning to read the Bible to get excited about wading through all the thees, thous and shalts. I think we need translations that people can relate to and understand. I think the KJV loses the impact it can have on people's heart/mind by being difficult/tedious in it's presentation. My vote for general reading of the Bible is the NIV. If I'm worried about the meaning of a word, I look at the Greek word itself. [I agree with your preference for the NIV, however you should be aware that the NIV comes from the "liberal" end of the evangelical tradition. It seems to use modern textual criticism, and its translation is somewhat freer than the King James/Revised/RSV tradition, though certainly not as free as something like TEV (Good News Bible) or New English Bible. Those who prefer the KJV for ideological reasons (either because they do not accept the results of recent texual criticism or because they want a literal translation) may not find NIV acceptable. --clh]