✝️ Does not need Internet connection for its operation. ✝️ Mode Day and night for reading the Bible.
✝️ ️ Bible WHNU, 1881 Westcott-Hort New Testament (Greek) as default. (Among other versions of the Holy Bible of your interest). ️ ✝️ User-friendly interface and quick access to books, chapters and verses. You can download the Versions and use the text without the need to be connected to the Internet. It contains multiple versions of the Bible and in different languages. The word of God in your hands, without the need of an Internet connection. Holy Bible WHNU, 1881 Westcott-Hort New Testament (Greek) Free According to Google Play Bible WHNU, 1881 Westcott-Hort New Testament Greek achieved more than 144 installs. So from what little I know about the NWT, I wouldn't trust that it is the "most accurate" translation.Android application Bible WHNU, 1881 Westcott-Hort New Testament Greek developed by JReyes Developers is listed under category Lifestyle7. An argument could be made that it still carries the same sense of the Greek, but that's beside the point. The Greek read simply "all things." This apparently has something to do with Jehovah's Witness theology that I'm not informed about, but there is a perfectly good Greek word for "other/another" that simply isn't in the text, but the translators put it in. A more egregious example would be Colossians 1:16, where the NWT writes "god created all other things," whereas there is no "other" in the Greek. For example, in John 1:1 they translate "the word was a god" instead of the more common "the word was God." This isn't technically incorrect, but I've never in my life seen anyone translate that passage in that way, and I have some decent experience dealing with the Greek of that passage. The only thing I know about the NWT is they read the Greek in ways few scholars would, actively changing it in some ways. Most translations are going to have some kind of theological bias (like reading Jesus into the Old Testament in sneaky ways), but the NRSV limits this more than many (imo).
The NASB is more literal, but that poses its own problems. I'd recommend something like The Text of the New Testament by Kurt & Barbara Aland to get a good look behind the curtain on how we do it.Īs far as best translations go, I can only say that the NRSV is the academic standard, though obviously not perfect. I think it says something when even Philip Comfort, a relatively famous conservative apologist, endorses these kinds of critical editions. Their original texts weren't as good as what we have now, but the modern academic standard (Nestle-Aland 28) uses much the same methodological approach. Basically, it pioneered a new paradigm of NT criticism that has proven to be very fruitful. Without knowing much about the NWT (other than the surprisingly prevalent presence on reddit), I can say a few things about WH.
0 kommentar(er)
