So right now Im in a situation where I have been praying a lot for God to guide me in the next chapter of my life. I have 2 alternatives and I told God, “put me where you want me, I don’t care.” But secretly (or not so secretly to God), I do care and I really hope God opens the door for my wife and I to move to Waukee.
This leads me to my point, if God does close the door on the move to Waukee right now, am I willing to hear his “No” or am I going to force my way through, regardless of God’s plan for my life. Praying for God’s wisdom and direction is only valuable if you are willing to follow it. If your own ambitions are going to lead you anyway, why bother asking for God’s advice. Just like when on Paul’s second missionary journey when he wanted to go to Ephesus, God told him “no” and led him north and eventually to Phillipi. Paul was willing to obey and eventually he made it to Ephesus and had a long, fruitful ministry there. On the contrary, I have seen situations where people pray for God’s guidance and then go and do what they planned to do all along. Everything goes wrong along they way, but they are confident that because they prayed about it, it is God’s will. I dont know how God was leading those people, but sometimes I wonder if their prayer went both ways – talking and listening, or if it was just a one-way request for God to do things “their way”.
When you pray for direction from God, are you willing to hear and obey his answer, regardless of if it is what the desire of your heart is? We will see how my current situation plays out and if I practice what I preach… stay tuned.
I recently went on a journey to identify the best Bible translations to use for my personal study, devotions, and bible memorization. So many different versions have come out in the past 15 years and I didn’t know the differences between them all. I learned way more information about all the versions than any person really needs to know, but I ended up picking a favorite translation that I didn’t even know existed a year ago.
King James Family of Translations
King James Version (KJV) was the only (authorized) version used for nearly 300 years, from 1611 until the early 20th century. In 1901 the American Standard Version (ASV) was produced as an update to the KJV and in the 1952 the Revised Standard Version (RSV) came out, supposedly being an update of the ASV. In 1982 the New King James Version (NKJV) was released as an update to the KJV. It removed the archaic language from the KJV but used the same manuscripts as the KJV as its basis. In 1990 the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) was released being an update of the RSV. Finally in 2001, the English Standard Version (ESV) was created to be an Evangelic update to the RSV.
Comments I have read about these versions are that the RSV and NRSV are too liberal and took a non-christian approach to interpreting old testament scriptures that are referenced in the new testament (they make cross references less clear). The NKJV, while being created 370 years after the KJV did not use any of the modern manuscript discoveries that correct errors in the KJV but instead chose to be based off the same manuscript and therefore contains the same errors that we now know are found in the KJV. The ESV maintains the flow used in the KJV (since it remains in the KJV family), but it uses the more accurate manuscripts discovered in the last 2 centuries and corrects the non-christian bias in the RSV. It is not quite a literal translation (ie, hard to understand) but it is literal enough that they were able to create a OT & NT Reverse Interlinear Bible from it.
Other Modern Translations
In 1971 the New American Standard Bible (NASB) was released as a word for word translation based on modern scholarship. That same year, the Living Bible (LB) was created as a very loose paraphrase in every day language. The New International Version (NIV) was introduced in 1984 and was a balance between the word for word NASB and the paraphrased LB. It quickly became the fastest growing Bible translation. Since 1990, the NASB has been updated, the LB was updated to be more balanced like the NIV under the name New Living Translation (NLT) which has also undergone an update, and the NIV was updated to Today’s New International Version (TNIV).
Additionally, many other versions have been created to meet a variety of needs. The Contemporary English Version (CEV) and New International Readers Version (NIrV) were both created for children or people for whom English is a second language. The Christian Standard Bible (CSB) was created by the Baptist community because they didn’t like what they believed to be a liberal movement in Bible translations and does not have the gender inclusiveness (“believers” in place of “brothers”) that is found in the NLT, TNIV, CEV, and other modern translations. Lastly, The Message Bible has become a very popular paraphrase version, even more liberal with language than the 1970’s Living Bible.
Translation Continuum
All Bible versions can be placed on a continuum from nearly a word for word translation (literal) to a thought for thought translation (paraphrase). In the center of the two extremes is the concept of dynamic equivalence which basically means that a word for word methodology is used unless it is unclear, and in those situations the translators shifted to the thought for thougth method. All versions lie somewhere on the continuum.
Literal <———————————————–> Paraphrase
NASB ESV KJV NIV NLT Message
CSB CEV LB
Summary of What I Like and Don’t Like and Why
The NIV has always been my tried and true version because it was introduced when I was very little and became the standard pew Bible at all the churches I attended growing up. It is accurate and fairly easy to read, but now it just feels old to me. The verses are hard to memorize because the phrases of a verse are in a different version than the KJV which was the version I always used for memorization as a child and unfortunately, it doesn’t have very good notes or cross references. The updated TNIV is a gender inclusive update that is slightly more modern sounding and has MUCH improved notes and cross references. I now prefer the TNIV to the NIV for studying purposes because of the notes.
I have always hated the KJV because I feel illiterate when I read it – I can read a whole paragraph and have no idea what I just read. For awhile I liked the NKJV because my dad had that version and I thought it was cool, but now that I know it does not include any of the corrections developed through the discovery of more accurate manuscripts, I feel like it is a poor choice of a study Bible and is still too archaic in language to be a devotional Bible.
I originally fell in love with the NLT because it was so much easier for me to read than the NIV and especially the KJV. Over time however, I found that its language is too loose and so it is hard to use for studying the words in a verse. Also, I found that its cross reference is weak and it is challanging to memorize verses for the same reason mentioned above. It is still a great devotional Bible due to its clarity and might be used in a sermon to make a verse more applicable to a non-christian audience.
My first thoughts on the Message Bible was that it was a great devotional Bible even though I knew it was a poor study Bible. As I dug into it, however, I realized that too much of Eugene Peterson’s beliefs permeated the wording to even call it a paraphrase; it is more of a verse by verse commentary by Peterson. I no longer think it has any place in study, devotions, or corporate reading. Its only value is as a commentary to give you a fresh idea on a verse.
I always heard that the NASB was the most accurate version and should be included in every scholar’s library, but I don’t really love the version very much. The language is very accurate, but it loses meaning sometimes becuase of the cultural difference across a 2000 year gap. One great value of the NASB is that it has exellent notes and cross references included, hence increasing its study value.
I recently came across two very new versions, the ESV and the CSB and I truly enjoy both of them. The CSB is very similar to the NIV as far as balance between literal translation and paraphrase and it comes with a great set of notes and cross references (significantly more detailed than almost all other versions). What I love about the ESV is that it maintains the same flow as the KJV, so memorization of verses in the ESV is way easier than any other version. It also has a solid set of notes and cross reference. Additionally a Reverse Interlinear of the ESV is produced and that is a fantastic study help (most interlinears are only in the KJV).
My Picks
The set of Bible versions I use when looking up a verse in multiple translations are ESV, NASB, CSB, TNIV, and NLT. I typically read the verse over and over in that order of versions so that I am moving from most literal to least literal. All of those versions are good and useful, but I can only pick one to be my favorite….
Due to the accuracy of the ESV, its notes, cross references, interlinear Bible, and clarity of language while maintaining a KJV flow, it is now my most prefered study and memorization version. While it is not hugely popular in stores yet, it is catching on, and if you are looking for the best translation, this would be my suggestion to you. Unfortunately, there are not many study Bibles using this translation yet, so I cannot suggest any specific Bible. Personally, I have Bible software (Logos) so I never turn pages anymore, I just click through chapters and click on words to see the notes or Greek or Hebrew word used.
I still like the NLT for personal devotions and for giving to kids and other people whom I think might have below average reading skills. It is very clear without sacrificing accuracy like the CEV and NIrV.
Reference: I found much of my information at bible-researcher.com
“I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.” (Rev 3:15-16, ESV)
As a kid I remembering hearing a pastor preach on this verse and I remember thinking, “God doesn’t want lukewarm Christian. Makes sense.” Then, about a years ago I read the book Driven by Eternity by John Bevere and in it he writes a section about this verse that brought it to life for me.
In this verse, Jesus is speaking to one of the churches in Asia (through John, the author or Revelation) who has lost the intensity of their faith. To summarize the verse, Jesus is saying, “hey church, be my friend or be my foe, but no more of this waffling back and forth.” It makes sense that Jesus would rather have a person be Hot for Jesus than lukewarm, but it surprises me that he would also rather have you be COLD than lukewarm! Why?!? Isn’t it better to be somewhat receptive to God’s directing in your life than to be an enemy of God? Wouldn’t God rather get to spend time with you on Christmas and Easter (the 2 days a year a C&E Christian goes to church) than never?
The answer in these verses is clearly NO! Lukewarm Christians are deceiving themselves and confusing other people who hear them say they love Jesus but act just like the world. They are actually causing damage to the Cause of Christ. Jesus would rather have you be a clear enemy, than be a fence-sitter who thinks they have done enough to get into Heaven but not too much to inconvenience their life. The truth is that the fence-sitter has the same eternal fate as the enemy, the only difference is that the person who is lukewarm for Christ will be totally shocked when they stand before Jesus on the day of judgment and are told “I never knew you.”
Personally, when I read this and let the full impact of the verses soak in, I realized that I needed to make a major shift in my life to put Jesus first in all things and to get off the fence. My waffling back and forth was just giving me a false sense of assurance and was confusing the message of the Gospel to those around me. I made a decision to change my life and I encourage you, if you are neither hot nor cold, to make a decision for or against the God of the Bible and then run that direction.
Joe goes to church every Sunday with his family, he helps with the youth group on Wednesday nights (partly to keep an eye on his son), and serves on the building committee, but his prayer life and Bible reading are restricted only to the time he is in the church building. Outside of the church, nobody at his work knows whether or not Joe is a Christian, they just know he is a funny guy who is just like them.
Cathy is a busy single mom and frequently works on Sundays, thereby missing church a lot. All of her co-workers know she is different, both because of her conduct and because of her frequent comments about her faith. She gives what she can to the church and she spends Saturday mornings at the food pantry showing her daughter what it means to serve the poor. She keeps mostly to herself as her time is very precious, but she always prays and reads the Bible before going to bed. She never lets the worries of the day seperate her from God and she is always thankful for what God has given to her.
From the fellow church-goers perspective, Joe appears to be a much stronger Christian than Cathy, but is that really the case? Does being a Christian mean that you adhere to the set of traditions popularized in America over the past 2 centuries or does it mean that in everything you do, you desire for your life to be a sweet aroma to God?
