Rating: Summary: Easy to Read, Improved Version of The Living Bible Review: The first Bible I read was the King James. In 1965 my mother gave me a copy of Living Letters [the first instalment of The Living Bible]. It opened up the Letters of Paul to me. Despite its Arminian bias, I was confronted with God's sovereignty when I got to Romans 9. At the same time I read Norman Vincent Peale's The Power of Positive Thinking. I found Paul appealing, and Peale appalling! The New Living Translation is a huge improvement of Ken Taylor's original, because it has been revised by bona fide Bible scholars,such as Don Carson, Craig Blomberg and Willem vanGemeren, some of whom also worked on versions such as the NIV, ESV, etc. The NLT is reliable and very readable. If you are serious about bible study you will also use versions such as the NIV and NRSV and ESV, because it is beneficial to use a variety of bible versions. If you are able, studying Greek, Hebrew and Aramiac is the best way to get close to the original bible. I recommend the NLT as a great place to start your reading of the bible, and a terrific version to use to read large chunks quickly.
Rating: Summary: The NLT is a very easy to read Bible version. Review: The much anticipated revision of the Living Bible (LB) was just recently released. The new revised Bible is being called the New Living Translation (NLT), advertised as the "publishing event of the decade." Many who have read and used the LB for personal Bible study loved its simple and easy-to-read language. However, the LB, while praised by many, both scholar and laymen alike, for its easy-to- understand prose, had to be checked against and compared with other more stricter or literal versions. The LB was noted for containing errros in certain texts. Kenneth Taylor had used the ASV to produce the highly readable LB. It is not a literal translation, based on the original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, but a paraphrase of the Scriptures and it tended to reflect some of the views of the paraphraser and not necessarily what the original writings said. The LB has become a successful and popular Bible version, with some 40 million copies printed by 1996. In order to produce a more accurate translation, based on the original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, a group of some 90 Bible scholars got together in 1989 to work on a revision of the LB. Their goal was to create a Bible translation that is accurate and yet reads like the LB, a paraphrase of the Bible. Did they achieve their goals? A comparison of the LB and the NLT will answer that question. The Tetragrammaton : One major difference between the LB and the NLT is the complete removal of the divine name from the NLT. The NLT says in its Introduction that it was decided to render the Tetragrammaton as "the LORD", following a custom that is practiced by most modern English versions of the Bible. The LB, in contrast, used the divine name, rendered as Jehovah, many times throughout the OT. The NLT, only contains the name in two footnotes in Exodus 3:16 and Exodus 6:3. The footnote reads "Hebrew Yahweh; traditionally rendered Jehovah." The name YHWH, translated in English as Yahweh or Jehovah, appears over 6,000 times in the original Hebrew Bible. However, the translators of the NLT decided to follow the custom of completely removing the Name from the Bible substituting it with the title "LORD", and confining the Name, which appeared over 6,000 times in the Hebrew text, to mere footnotes in Exodus 3:15 and Exodus 6:3. When it comes to the test of accuracy, this translation has failed by replacing YHWH (JHVH in latinized form) with a title instead of the name Yahweh or Jehovah. In that regards, the LB is more accurate than the NLT. Interpretative Verses and Footnotes Removed: The LB has been criticized for containing interpretative verses and footnotes for selected Bible texts. For instance, the LB paraphrases Psalms 115:17 as follows: "The dead cannot sing praises to Jehovah here on earth." A footnote to the text mentions that "here on earth" is implied. However a check with more literal translations gives a different view. The NLT gives a more accurate rendering. There it reads "The dead cannot sing praises to the LORD, for they have gone into the silence of the grave." Regarding Ecclesiastes 9:5 which reads according to the LB "For the living at least know that they will die! But the dead know nothing; they don't even have their memories." A footnote regarding that verse and verse 10 says: "These statements are Solomon's discouraged opinion, and do not reflect a knowledge of God's truth on these points!" The NLT translates Eccleciastes 9:5 as follows: "The living at least know they will die, but the dead know nothing. They have no further reward, nor are they remembered." (NLT). The revised version does not contain any footnote on that text. In Matthew 22:32, the LB reads "I am the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. So God is not the God of the dead but of the living." In a foonote Kenneth Taylor interprets that verse as if Abraham, Isaac and Moses were now alive in the presence of God. However, many hold a diffrent interpretation. Since the context is dealing with the issue of the resurrection, some hold that Jesus is emphasizing that they will certainly become alive again in the new age (compare parallel account in Luke 20:27-38 with a strict version ). The assurance that they will be alive again, explains why Jesus speaks of it as an actual event. (compare Romans 4:17). The NLT does not contain an interpretative footnote on Matthew 22:32, allowing the readers to interpret the Scriptures for themselves, and coming to a conclusion that is in harmony with the rest of the Scriptures. Some other interpretative verses of the LB include texts such as Psalms 9:17 - "The wicked shall be sent away to hell." There the NLT reads "The wicked will go down to the grave," with a footnote stating that the Hebrew word translated grave is Sheol. The LB says in Proverbs 9:18 "But they don't realize that her former guests are now citizens of hell."; there the NLT says "But the men don't realize that heer former guests are now in the grave." The LB paraphrases the last part of 1 Peter 3:18 regarding Jesus as "though his body died, his spirit lived on." The NLT paraphrases "more literally" as: "He suffered physical death, but he was raised to life in the Spirit, " with a footnote indicating that "Spirit" can be rendered with a lower case as "spirit." Its Language - Definately LB-Like As can be seen from the few samples just cited, the NLT has corrected some of the inaccuracies of the LB. It has also removed most, if not all, of the interpretative footnotes. However, it has retained the much loved easy-to-understand language of the LB. Let's read just one sample of this fast-paced, easy-to-understand version: Isaiah 65:17-25 "Look! I am creating new heavens, and a new earth-so wonderful that no will even think about the old ones anymore. Be glad; rejoice forever in my creation! And look! I will create Jerusalem as a place of happiness. Her people will be a source of joy. I will rejoice in Jerusalem and delight in my people. And the sound of weeping and cyring will be heard no more. No longer will babies die when only a few days old. No longer will adult die before they have lived a full life. No longer will people be considered old at one hundred! Only sinners will die that young! In those days people will build houses and eat of the fruit of their own vineyards.. ...." Actually, one can just open the NLT in any page and find the Word of God beautifully expressed. Conclusion: Its Improved in Some Respects The NLT is more reliable than the LB; it contains no interpretative footnotes like the LB; however, since NLT is still a paraphrase, some verses seem to reflect the translator(s) viewpoint (See for example Matthew 7:12 in both the LB and the NLT: both speak of the way to "hell", but in the original Greek, as noted in their footnotes, the word should read "destruction". Also, in the NLT, Romans 8:18-25, in particular verse 23, is apparently interpretative. ) The NLT, nevertheless, has fewer interpretative verses; and the translators to some extent have achieved their goal-maintaining the prose as simple as the LB and remaining as faithful as possible to the original Word of God. The major flaw, I believe, was the removal of a rendering of the Tetragrammaton as either Yahweh or Jehovah. If the name was retained it could have been a version with a very high standard of accuracy and faithfullness to the original text. Since there is no such thing as a perfect Bible version, the NLT can still be compare with other versions, especially the literal ones like the ASV or Darby's version.
Rating: Summary: The NLT is a very easy to read Bible version. Review: The much anticipated revision of the Living Bible (LB) was just recently released. The new revised Bible is being called the New Living Translation (NLT), advertised as the "publishing event of the decade." Many who have read and used the LB for personal Bible study loved its simple and easy-to-read language. However, the LB, while praised by many, both scholar and laymen alike, for its easy-to-
understand prose, had to be checked against and compared with other more stricter or literal versions. The LB was noted for containing errros in certain texts. Kenneth Taylor had used the ASV to produce the highly readable LB. It is not a literal translation, based on the original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, but a paraphrase of the Scriptures and it tended to reflect some of the views of the paraphraser and not necessarily what the original writings said.
The LB has become a successful and popular Bible version, with some 40 million copies printed by 1996. In order to produce a more accurate translation, based on the original Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, a group of some 90 Bible scholars got together in 1989 to work on a revision of the LB. Their goal was to create a Bible translation that is accurate and yet reads like the LB, a paraphrase of the Bible. Did they achieve their goals? A comparison of the LB and the NLT will answer that question.
The Tetragrammaton :
One major difference between the LB and the NLT is the complete removal of the divine name from the NLT. The NLT says in its Introduction that it was decided to render the Tetragrammaton as "the LORD", following a custom that is practiced by most modern English versions of the Bible. The LB, in contrast, used the divine name, rendered as Jehovah, many times throughout the OT. The NLT, only contains the name in two footnotes in Exodus 3:16 and Exodus 6:3. The footnote reads "Hebrew Yahweh; traditionally rendered Jehovah." The name YHWH, translated in English as Yahweh or Jehovah, appears over 6,000 times in the original Hebrew Bible. However, the translators of the NLT decided to follow the custom of completely removing the Name from the Bible substituting it with the title "LORD", and confining the Name, which appeared over 6,000 times in the Hebrew text, to mere footnotes in Exodus 3:15 and Exodus 6:3. When it comes to the test of accuracy, this translation has failed by replacing YHWH (JHVH in latinized form) with a title instead of the name Yahweh or Jehovah. In that regards, the LB is more accurate than the NLT. Interpretative Verses and Footnotes Removed:
The LB has been criticized for containing interpretative verses and footnotes for selected Bible texts. For instance, the LB paraphrases Psalms 115:17 as follows: "The dead cannot sing praises to Jehovah here on earth." A footnote to the text mentions that "here on earth" is implied. However a check with more literal translations gives a different view.
The NLT gives a more accurate rendering. There it reads "The dead cannot sing praises to the LORD, for they have gone into the silence of the grave." Regarding Ecclesiastes 9:5 which reads according to the LB "For the living at least know that they will die! But the dead know nothing; they don't even have their memories." A footnote regarding that verse and verse 10 says: "These statements are Solomon's discouraged opinion, and do not reflect a knowledge of God's truth on these points!" The NLT translates Eccleciastes 9:5 as follows: "The living at least know they will die, but the dead know nothing. They have no further reward, nor are they remembered." (NLT). The revised version does not contain any footnote on that text. In Matthew 22:32, the LB reads "I am the God of Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob. So God is not the God of the dead but of the living." In a foonote Kenneth Taylor interprets that verse as if Abraham, Isaac and Moses were now alive in the presence of God. However, many hold a diffrent interpretation. Since the context is dealing with the issue of the resurrection, some hold that Jesus is emphasizing that they will certainly become alive again in the new age (compare parallel account in Luke 20:27-38 with a strict version ). The assurance that they will be alive again, explains why Jesus speaks of it as an actual event. (compare Romans 4:17). The NLT does not contain an interpretative footnote on Matthew 22:32, allowing the readers to interpret the Scriptures for themselves, and coming to a conclusion that is in harmony with the rest of the Scriptures.
Some other interpretative verses of the LB include texts such as Psalms 9:17 - "The wicked shall be sent away to hell." There the NLT reads "The wicked will go down to the grave," with a footnote stating that the Hebrew word translated grave is Sheol. The LB says in Proverbs 9:18 "But they don't realize that her former guests are now citizens of hell."; there the NLT says "But the men don't realize that heer former guests are now in the grave." The LB paraphrases the last part of 1 Peter 3:18 regarding Jesus as "though his body died, his spirit lived on." The NLT paraphrases "more literally" as: "He suffered physical death, but he was raised to life in the Spirit,
" with a footnote indicating that "Spirit" can be rendered with a lower case as "spirit." Its Language - Definately LB-Like
As can be seen from the few samples just cited, the NLT has corrected some of the inaccuracies of the LB. It has also removed most, if not all, of the interpretative footnotes. However, it has retained the much loved easy-to-understand language of the LB. Let's read just one sample of this fast-paced, easy-to-understand version:
Isaiah 65:17-25 "Look! I am creating new heavens, and a new earth-so wonderful that no will even think about the old ones anymore. Be glad; rejoice forever in my creation! And look! I will create Jerusalem as a place of happiness. Her people will be a source of joy. I will rejoice in Jerusalem and delight in my people. And the sound of weeping and cyring will be heard no more. No longer will babies die when only a few days old. No longer will adult die before they have lived a full life. No longer will people be considered old at one hundred! Only sinners will die that young! In those days people will build houses and eat of the fruit of their own vineyards..
...." Actually, one can just open the NLT in any page and find the Word of God beautifully expressed.
Conclusion: Its Improved in Some Respects The NLT is more reliable than the LB; it contains no interpretative footnotes like the LB; however, since NLT is still a paraphrase, some verses seem to reflect the translator(s) viewpoint (See for example Matthew 7:12 in both the LB and the NLT: both speak of the way to "hell", but in the original Greek, as noted in their footnotes, the word should read "destruction". Also, in the NLT, Romans 8:18-25, in particular verse 23, is apparently interpretative.
) The NLT, nevertheless, has fewer interpretative verses; and the translators to some extent have achieved their goal-maintaining the prose as simple as the LB and remaining as faithful as possible to the original Word of God. The major flaw, I believe, was the removal of a rendering of the Tetragrammaton as either Yahweh or Jehovah. If the name was retained it could have been a version with a very high standard of accuracy and faithfullness to the original text. Since there is no such thing as a perfect Bible version, the NLT can still be compare with other versions, especially the literal ones like the ASV or Darby's version.
Rating: Summary: A Bible for Americans Review: The New Living Bible is a clean accurate attempt to put the Scriptures in "American." As a famous Musical Comedy stated "in some places English completely disappears, why in America they haven't spoken it for years." The translation was done by a reputable group of scholors. I only point this out to reply to the incorrect evaluation by one of the reviewers. The comparison they make is probably to the Jehovah's Witness translation which has been universally condemmed by every Greek Scholor who has reviewed it. It would be nice if they correctly reviewed the translation rather than preaching the questionable teachings of their sect; that HAS no reputable scholors!
Rating: Summary: The Holy Bible, NLT, Botts Illustrated edition Review: The New Living Bible is written in up-to-date language that makes it easy to read, and understand. The calligraphic illustrations by Timothy Botts are breathtakingly wonderful, and offer a new and different way to read and enjoy the Holy Scriptures. Each illustration adds an element of wonder and joy to the daily reading of the Bible.
Rating: Summary: Easy-to-read translation. Review: The New Living Translation is a very simplified, easy to read, modern translation that makes bible reading and studying interesting and useful.
Rating: Summary: After all is said and done... Review: The Word of God is to be consumed by His people and this translation satisfies the hungry 'child' in me. I grew up reading the "The Living Bible" but as the the need for a more precise study Bible presented itself, I left behind my 'childhood' friend in favour of more 'accurate transliterations'. To their credit, they served me well, however when attempting to relate intricate truths to others, I found myself sounding pious and scholarly...not a coat I wear comfortably. What a complete joy, then to read the sheer simplicity of His loving missive to me and still know that academics have not been forsaken. This will be the Bible I grow old with...
Rating: Summary: *The Perfect Bible for ALL Truth Seekers* Review: There is simply no other way to describe this particular translation of the Bible, other than to say that it is one of THE greatest blessings of my entire life. For years, I had attempted to read the Bible (most often KJV), and got absolutely NOTHING out of it, since that particular style of language and writing has been extinct forever and been irrelevant for just as long, and does nothing at all to convey anything of any real meaning or value to the average modern-day reader. What a blessing it was to pick up THIS Bible and actually have the words come alive for me like never before! Suddenly, it has become downright exhilarating -breathtaking even!- to read the Bible, and there's this inner-sense of absolute certainty that it is nothing less than divinely inspired of God, not just in the scriptural sense, but in the fact that this book was intended to be read and interpreted by EVERYBODY, and not just by a handful of elitist snobs who totally miss the point anyway. The only individuals I can imagine giving this Bible a bad review, are modern-day Pharisaical hypocrites who care more about mere superficialities and maintaining their own ignorance, instead of reaching peoples' hearts and filling their souls with the Living Word of God. In conclusion, if you are sincerely seeking answers to every question you've ever had about anything, I strongly advise and encourage you to obtain a copy for yourself; it will be one of the greatest blessings of your life.
Rating: Summary: A feast for the gullible Review: This book is a world-class monument to peoples gullibility. The myths and superstition contained in this so-called "holy book" would be laughable if not for the destruction and suffering it has caused through the ages. Bigotry, hate, superstition, murder, ignorance, etc. it's all in there, ready to instruct the naive and lead the sheep (one of the reasons religious leaders refer to followers as their "flock"). Book burning is a horrible thing, but an exception should be made for this compilation of nonsense.
Rating: Summary: Awesome! Review: This is the first bible that I have found that I am able to apply to everday life. The index allows a quick reference for verses which offer guidance for life's situations.
|