Wondering Why the NIV, NRSV and NETS are the best translations? Now you know.

https://academic.logos.com/why-the-niv-nrsv-and-nets-bible-are-the-best-translations-available/#more-13422

This is just an advertisement for the FL academic blog. I thought it died but I was wrong. And the contributors are quite interesting as well.

This one caught my eye, mainly because I'd not seen NETS (Septuagint translation) mentioned along with the NIV (or NRSV for that matter). As it turns out NETS = NET (and maybe NET2).

What's also interesting, is the article has carefully laid out 'test verses'. I guess these are like political parties ... make sure your translation can come to the prayer meeting.

But (back to the advertisement), the articles are quite good. I'd like to say better than before, but that would imply 'before' was less than better.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dave Hooton

What's also interesting, is the article has carefully laid out 'test verses'.

In Witherington's test of Ro 3:22 "Abraham" does not appear "a little bit before this passage" (nor anywhere in chapters 1-3)!

In his test of Lk 2.7, the Lk 15 parable should be a Lk 10 different parable. "NIV correctly renders" is debatable when it is paraphrasing an awkward expression "no space in the guest room" (see the NET Bible Notes for its use of "inn").

And I question his literal rendering of Php 4:13.

But the John 3.16 argument is more credible.

Despite the ESV put down it does offer "the reality that there may be several viable translations of key phrase and terms" and it agrees with NET in many of the test verses. It also marks off the debatable John and Mark texts.

The article reflects Witherington's personal opinion but it is marred by inaccuracies.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1203763#Comment_1203763

In Witherington's test of Ro 3:22 "Abraham" does not appear "a little bit before this passage" (nor anywhere in chapters 1-3)!

It appears at Romans 4:16 i.e. a little after ..but the “pistis theou" is before i.e. Ro 3:3

Witherington said "(see Luke 15 and the parable of the prodigal son) " i.e. one chapter and one parable - two separate passages

but it is marred by inaccuracies.

as is, unfortunately, your critique is also marred by inaccuracies

My 2009 list of preferred Bibles for exegesis favored NRSV and (T)NIV and NET so his list did not surprise me.

[quote]

In Part One (chapters 1 and 2) Gorman discusses the task and text of exegesis. In chapter one he briefly defines exegesis before discussing the strengths and weaknesses of various ways in which exegesis has been done. He compares and contrasts the synchronic approach (focusing on the final form of the text as seen, for example, in narrative-critical, social-scientific, or socio-rhetorical readings) with the diachronic approach (the historical-critical method) and the existential approach (his name for readings which focus on hermeneutics, transformation, or theology, such as missional interpretation, sacred readings, postcolonial criticism, or liberationist exegesis). He argues for an eclectic approach in which synchronic exegesis is the first among equals. In chapter two Gorman focuses on the selection of an English translation for exegesis. He expresses a preference for formal-equivalence translations and divides translations into four categories:

1) preferred for exegesis (NRSV, NAB, TNIV, and NET),

2) useful for exegesis, with caution (RSV, NIV, NASB, REB, ESV, HCSB),

3) unacceptable for exegesis, but helpful in others ways (NLT, NJB, CEV, GNB, The Message), and

4) unacceptable for exegesis (KJV, NKJV, LB).

David Ames

What is the best translation starts with if you trust or hate two men of the late 1800s: Westcott, B. F and Hort, F. J. A..

And if you accept or reject two manuscripts of about 350 ad: Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1203767#Comment_1203767

In Witherington's test of Ro 3:22 "Abraham" does not appear "a little bit before this passage" (nor anywhere in chapters 1-3)!

It appears at Romans 4:16 i.e. a little after ..but the “pistis theou" is before i.e. Ro 3:3

Yes. But his "a little bit before" is not the same as "after".

If Ro 3.3 is what he meant by “pistis theou" then it is a clumsy approximation of "pistin tou theou".

Witherington said "(see Luke 15 and the parable of the prodigal son) " i.e. one chapter and one parable - two separate passages

The parable of the prodigal is told in Luke 15.

But show me where "pandeion" occurs anywhere. The NT word is "pandocheion" and it occurs only at Lk 10:34 (the parable of the good Samaritan).

but it is marred by inaccuracies.

as is, unfortunately, your critique is also marred by inaccuracies

I do my research carefully, Martha.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1203763#Comment_1203763

Despite the ESV put down

The first thing I do when an ESV arrives (often Accordance packages), is remove it. The problem isn't a bad translation; it's a have-to-check translation. Translations are generally preferred because they deliver the goods (theologies). Now, I say this smilingly, recognizing strictly an opinion. I will say, the Lexham (anything Lexham) translation usually gets checked, but rarely any issue.

Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1203788#Comment_1203788

What is the best translation starts with if you trust or hate two men of the late 1800s: Westcott, B. F and Hort, F. J. A..

And if you accept or reject two manuscripts of about 350 ad: Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus.

Thanks David - In my opinion, what you wrote is absolutely true and has significant consequences as to whether you accept a range of modern Bibles. While I use some of these modern Bibles mentioned in this thread for cross-checking purposes, personally I do not rely on them. Keep well Paul

Kathleen Marie

To decide what is "best", one must first decide the criteria that will be used for judging.

Too often the "best" does not judge what is best for the marginalized, the poor, minimalists, and those less connected.

The KJV is not copyrighted in the USA. The KJV had vast amounts of uncopyrighted resources. The KJV and those resources can be used to create inexpensive software that runs on older and underpowered devices. The text stays the same. Period. Scripture songs, memorization resources, and study notes don't need to be replaced and updated.

The NET 2.1 is able to be added to these less expensive softwares because it was edited to match up to Strong's concordance.

The NIrV is written at a 3rd grade level. The grammar choices are even more helpful than the vocabulary choices. It is the only translation that is fully understandable to some people.

What is "best" for whom? What is best for scholars is not always best for the church as a whole.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1203862#Comment_1203862

What is "best" for whom? What is best for scholars is not always best for the church as a whole.

While the absolute best may be a futile exercise, a rule of thumb best and a list of unacceptable for any purpose are reasonable judgments.

The text stays the same. Period

Well, almost ...

[quote]

21 And God created great whales, and euery liuing creature that moueth, which the waters brought forth aboundantly after their kinde, and euery winged foule after his kinde: and God saw that it was good.

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitfull, and multiply, and fill the waters in the Seas, and let foule multiply in the earth.22

23 And the euening and the morning were the fift day.

24 ¶ And God said, Let the earth bring forth the liuing creature after his kinde, cattell, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kinde: and it was so.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kinde, and cattell after their kinde, and euery thing that creepeth vpon the earth, after his kinde: and God saw that it was good.

26 ¶ And God said, Let vs make man in our Image, after our likenesse: and let them haue dominion ouer the fish of the sea, and ouer the foule of the aire, and ouer the cattell, and ouer all the earth, and ouer euery creeping thing that creepeth vpon the earth.26

27 So God created man in his owne Image, in the Image of God created hee him; male and female created hee them.27

28 And God blessed them, and God said vnto them, Be fruitfull, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it, and haue dominion ouer the fish of the sea, and ouer the foule of the aire, and ouer euery liuing thing that mooueth vpon the earth.28

29 ¶ And God said, Behold, I haue giuen you euery herbe bearing seede, which is vpon the face of all the earth, and euery tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yeelding seed, to you it shall be for meat:29

30 And to euery beast of the earth, and to euery foule of the aire, and to euery thing that creepeth vpon the earth, wherein there is life, I haue giuen euery greene herbe for meat: and it was so.30

31 And God saw euery thing that hee had made: and behold, it was very good. And the euening and the morning were the sixth day.31

Kathleen Marie

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1203865#Comment_1203865

The text stays the same. Period

Well, almost ...

[quote]

21 And God created great whales, and euery liuing creature that moueth, which the waters brought forth aboundantly after their kinde, and euery winged foule after his kinde: and God saw that it was good.

...

Those spelling and font changes were made over hundreds of years and long before I was born. What is the year of the default Logos KJV? The 1860's? Major updates after more than 150 years compared to major updates every 10-20 years is a criteria that I list under "best" instead of under "worst" when it comes to choosing a text to memorize.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1203897#Comment_1203897

Major updates after more than 150 years compared to major updates every 10-20 years is a criteria that I list under "best" instead of under "worst" when it comes to choosing a text to memorize

Well, now that's a good point.

Joseph George

https://academic.logos.com/why-the-niv-nrsv-and-nets-bible-are-the-best-translations-available/#more-13422

This is just an advertisement for the FL academic blog. I thought it died but I was wrong. And the contributors are quite interesting as well.

Can someone supply me rss/atom link so I can subscribe to this blog in my feedreader?

I like the NET too, not that much for it's translation but more for it's extensive notes. I prefer the translation of BSB. I am still a work in progress.

I am also on the lookout for a Bible translation with transliterated names. I think English names have been corrupted from the original Aramaic/Syriac, including His names. Most of those people probably wouldn't know who you are calling, if you call them by their current English pronunciation. The scriptures seem to place a lot of importance over the name.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1203897#Comment_1203897

Major updates after more than 150 years compared to major updates every 10-20 years is a criteria that I list under "best" instead of under "worst" when it comes to choosing a text to memorize.

While it varies by location, I am not use to frequent updates and am rather amused by the falderal surrounding new releases in the forums at the same time there is little pressure to add historically important older translations.

Kathleen Marie

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1203984#Comment_1203984

I have only been anxious for one new release in Logos: the Net 2.1. I use the NET 2.1 in other software that is based upon the KJV and Strong's, and I wanted the same translation in Logos when I am writing my papers.

I am assuming that we are never getting the updated NIrV from 2011. Sigh. I don't use that in my papers though, so it is not such a big deal. If I were creating Sunday School worksheets and lecture notes, it would be a bigger deal, though. There are schools and jails that use the NIrV 2011 as their primary hardcopy Bible, and it is a shame that the translation is not available to the teachers and preachers preparing their lessons in Logos.

Historically important translations must be important for paper writing, too.

Mattillo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1203999#Comment_1203999

what about the NCV for kids school?

https://www.logos.com/product/312/the-new-century-version-bible

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1203916#Comment_1203916

Can someone supply me rss/atom link so I can subscribe to this blog in my feedreader?

Its an option in the Explore section of the Home page of Logos - the academic blog

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204004#Comment_1204004

what about the NCV for kids school?

Not sure what you are asking ...

Mattillo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204006#Comment_1204006

I am assuming that we are never getting the updated NIrV from 2011. Sigh. I don't use that in my papers though, so it is not such a big deal. If I were creating Sunday School worksheets and lecture notes, it would be a bigger deal, though. There are schools and jails that use the NIrV 2011 as their primary hardcopy Bible, and it is a shame that the translation is not available to the teachers and preachers preparing their lessons in Logos.

Sorry my response about the NCV was regarding this

Kathleen Marie

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204004#Comment_1204004

what about the NCV for kids school?

https://www.logos.com/product/312/the-new-century-version-bible

Nope. The NCV is not even close to the NIrV. The NIrV has short sentences in active tense. The main verb always follows the subject. Pronouns are sometimes replaced with nouns. Names are standardized even if the original translation uses different names for the same people and places.

Anyone that has tutored ESL or people with reading disabilities can see the differences. But to people not alert to the needs of these populations, they will not see the differences.

When I took paralegal classes at my community college, many of my peers were lawyers from other countries that spoke a variety of languages. I was the only one that could interpret some things that the professors were saying to us. I spoke in English, but I spoke like the NIrV is written. The professors would try and study what I was doing, because they knew the foreign students went form bewilderment to understanding, but I could tell they were not figuring it out. They didn't have the time to ask me what I was doing, but would just stare at me, now the ones wearing the looks of bewilderment, while the students were all nodding.

The NIrV is a literary masterpiece. We can disagree about it as a Bible, but as a piece of English literature, there is nothing else to replace it.

What makes a Bible the "best"? The best Bible is the Bible that gets the job done. This is the Bible that is used in many jails. The 1st edition NIrV is just as easy to read as the 2011 NIrV, but it does not match the text in the hardcopy Bibles that so many children, ESL students, and prisoners are currently using. You can no longer purchase the 1st edition NIrV in hardcopy. During the transition, Zondervan sometimes replaced the old Bibles in the jails, rather than selling the jail more of the older version.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0310445965/ref=emc_b_5_t

Faithlife sells some NIrV 2011 ebooks and I bought one of those, but it is not the same as a Logos Bible.

Mattillo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204031#Comment_1204031

The 2014 is on prepub

https://www.logos.com/product/223087/new-international-readers-version-2014-ed

Mattillo

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204037#Comment_1204037

Kindle Sale today only as well

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004G5Z1HM/?tag=gospelebooks-20

David Ames

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204004#Comment_1204004

what about the NCV for kids school? https://www.logos.com/product/312/the-new-century-version-bible

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Century_Version for more information on that bible

We personally supplied our church school class with the International Children’s Bible (ICB) when we were teaching grades 1-4.

It was something that they could read. A bible that can not be read is useless regardless of how highly it is praised by the experts.

Kathleen Marie

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204037#Comment_1204037

The 2014 is on prepub

https://www.logos.com/product/223087/new-international-readers-version-2014-ed

Yes!!! I pre-ordered it!

Kathleen Marie

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204039#Comment_1204039

Kindle Sale today only as well

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004G5Z1HM/?tag=gospelebooks-20

That is the NIV, not the NIrV. This is the NIrV 2014. I made a mistake. It is the 2014 NIrV that is the current version printed in hardcopy. I think the NIrV 2014 must be the 3rd version, not the 2nd.

https://www.amazon.com/NIrV-Holy-Bible-eBook-Zondervan-ebook/dp/B00PFD5K02/ref=sr_1_1?crid=8XITT9UROLLU&keywords=nirv&qid=1650849272&s=digital-text&sprefix=nirv%2Cdigital-text%2C189&sr=1-1

Kathleen Marie

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204040#Comment_1204040

what about the NCV for kids school? https://www.logos.com/product/312/the-new-century-version-bible

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Century_Version for more information on that bible

We personally supplied our church school class with the International Children’s Bible (ICB) when we were teaching grades 1-4.

It was something that they could read. A bible that can not be read is useless regardless of how highly it is praised by the experts.

The NCV is a bit closer than some others, and MUCH easier to understand than the NRSV, but still not the NIrV. The NIrV is a low 3rd grade level or even lower. I think advertising experts decided that 3rd grade would sell better than 2nd grade. The sentence structure is closer to first grade than it is to third. The basic sentence structure is repetitive. Subject, main verb, direct object. Subject, main verb, direct object. All the fluff of a sentence is shaved off and turned into another sentence. All of the original author's style is gone. And anything that is implied is made explicit, obviously according to the publisher's bias.

Read Roman 1:1-7 side by side.

NIrV

1 I, Paul, am writing this letter. I serve Christ Jesus. I have been appointed to be an apostle. God set me apart to tell others his good news. 2 He promised the good news long ago. He announced it through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures. 3 The good news is about God’s Son. He was born into the family line of King David. 4 By the Holy Spirit, he was appointed to be the mighty Son of God. God did this by raising him from the dead. He is Jesus Christ our Lord. 5 We received grace because of what Jesus did. He made us apostles to the Gentiles. We must invite all of them to obey God by trusting in Jesus. We do this to bring glory to him. 6 You also are among those Gentiles who are appointed to belong to Jesus Christ.

7 I am sending this letter to all of you in Rome. You are loved by God and appointed to be his holy people.

May God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ give you grace and peace.

NCV

1 From Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus. God called me to be an apostle and chose me to tell the Good News.

2 God promised this Good News long ago through his prophets, as it is written in the Holy Scriptures. 3-4 The Good News is about God’s Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. As a man, he was born from the family of David. But through the Spirit of holiness he was declared to be God’s Son with great power by rising from the dead. 5 Through Christ, God gave me the special work of an apostle, which was to lead people of all nations to believe and obey. I do this work for him. 6 And you who are in Rome are also called to belong to Jesus Christ.

7 To all of you in Rome whom God loves and has called to be his holy people:

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

NRSV

1 Paul, a servant[a] of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2 which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, 3 the gospel concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh 4 and was declared to be Son of God with power according to the spirit[b] of holiness by resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, 5 through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for the sake of his name, 6 including yourselves who are called to belong to Jesus Christ,

7 To all God’s beloved in Rome, who are called to be saints:

Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204145#Comment_1204145

And to think my (great)grandparents' generation learned to read from the Bible as often as a primer ... and with English being a second language.

David Ames

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204146#Comment_1204146

And to think my (great)grandparents' generation learned to read from the Bible as often as a primer ... and with English being a second language.

Perhaps if we were informed as to what version your "(great)grandparents' generation learned to read from the Bible as often as a primer" from?

Many of us know that that version was widely used as a reading primer in the 1800s [if my guess is correct as to the version they used]

GaoLu

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204184#Comment_1204184

While that mystery version may have been Hebrew, Aramaic or even Greek, it could also have been the Se Wsi Finnish NT translated by 1543 by the Bishop of Turku, Mikael Agricola, and published in 1548--sixty-three full years before the also-suspect KJV.

Kathleen Marie

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204146#Comment_1204146

I am not going to discuss what children can and cannot do, but I am going to talk about adults that never learned to read and/or are learning English as a second language.

Reading disabilities are real. I have a step parent that never learned to read and I grew up reading for that parent as discreetly as possible. This started a curiosity for learning about remedial reading techniques. These people are often brilliant, but their brains don't take to reading, the same way some of us readers are not race car drivers or gymnasts or chess-players. Brains and bodies are unique, and if we work together as one body, as scripture teaches us, then we can do great things TOGETHER.

Some of my remedial students did learn to read from the KJV Bible, or at least to listen to it and memorize it. But the NIrV is written exactly how I used to translate my professor's words. My professors saw nothing significant in the changes that I made to their words, but they did see the increased understanding of my peers. The NIrV, when students trusted it, relieved me of the burden of restating the text, and empowered those students to read the Bible on their own.

People that speak rarer languages and dialects and creoles do better when they have a Bible written in their "heart language", even when they live in a country with an official language that is one of the major language. The same holds true for English speaking people that were reared in slums and without access to exposure to older and more advanced texts and speech. The body of Christ has the resources to empower these people so they can in turn empower the church with their strengths.

As for ESL students, it amazes me the high expectations that Americans have for immigrants to learn English, when Americans are so bad at learning languages themselves. Foreign language learning is HARD for me. I don't expect others to do something that I can't do.

Short simple sentences without extra clauses are easier to understand. Yes, there might be some editor bias that leads people astray, but that pales in comparison to the mistakes that some people will make trying to understand more complex sentences.

In general, I think we have too many translations and update them too often. But there are some translations that have been designed to do a very specific job, and succeed at their goal.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204253#Comment_1204253

Very simple "translations" often butcher the text by removing all the relationships between the clauses in order to make simple sentences. I prefer to minimize the use of children's and paraphrased Bibles.

As for my great grandparents, 2 would have used a Finnish Bible i.e. Biblia: Se on: Coco Pyhä Ramattu Suomexi, 2 would have used a German Bible - Martin Luther's. 3 would have used the Authorized Version aka KJV, and 1 Douay-Rheims.

scooter

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204253#Comment_1204253

Short simple sentences without extra clauses are easier to understand

I note the following people write like this. I love the ease of understanding this engenders.

John Frame. Thomas Schreiner.

My wife. She received an MBA in her 50s. I edited her papers, + she submitted them online. English is her second language.

We have family friends in their 30s. Both were born in China. The lady asked me to edit her assignments for a community college business writing course. English is her fourth language. Her writing style is exactly like Frame's.

Mark Barnes.

Kathleen Marie

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204260#Comment_1204260

Very simple "translations" often butcher the text by removing all the relationships between the clauses in order to make simple sentences. I prefer to minimize the use of children's and paraphrased Bibles.

I agree, but the people that most need these translations often fail to understand the relationship between the clauses. Not just for reading and English reasons, but sometimes because they fail to understand the relationships. In my tutoring, I had to spend a lot of time teaching the difference between "because" and "after". What people "should" understand and what they do understand can be radically different. "Because" and "after" are fairly advanced ideas.

Clauses require multitasking. Some people cannot multitask. Cursive requires even more multitaking than reading clauses. With cursive, you have to think about the next letter before you finish writing the one being written, so that you can choose the right connector.

It is critical that we meet people exactly where they are, and work up from there, step by step. These people are often easily discouraged and have not always been treated with dignity. They are often fragile in multiple ways. I was super careful not to let my tutoring students fail or think that my failure were their failures. I always told them that all failures were mine, and to give me time to pull back and try something else.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204624#Comment_1204624

It is critical that we meet people exactly where they are,

It is equally important that we don't underestimate their abilities and potential - a person may not be able to read & write enough to pay his bills and still be able to correctly price most collectible coins (a real example from personal experience).

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204624#Comment_1204624

It is critical that we meet people where they are, and work up from there, step by step. These people are easily discouraged and have not been treated with. They are fragile in multiple ways. I was super careful not to let my tutoring fail or think that my were their failures. I told them that all failures were mine, and to give me time to pull back and try something else.

Couldn't agree more Kathleen. I am learning the biblical languages because I have the aptitude to do so, and I want to be able to notice the nuisances that get lost in English translations because I have an curiosity to be aware of these things and want to understand them. But I don't see that makes someone who has different gifting to me, and for them an 'easy-English' version is at the right level for them to be able to ready confidently and their curiosity in life is directed at other things any less than me. They will be much better than me at other tasks I don't excel at performing because I have no natural inclination or curiosity about those things. The Body of Christ, the Church, is made up of a wide range of people. Sure, they miss some things between the lines, that I might notice because of their different readying ability but if they understand the gospel message, and have put their faith in God, they are equally a brother or sister in Christ. Our reading comprehension level has no bearing on our ability to be in relationship with God and receive is saving grace.

Kathleen Marie

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204629#Comment_1204629

It is critical that we meet people exactly where they are,

It is equally important that we don't underestimate their abilities and potential - a person may not be able to read & write enough to pay his bills and still be able to correctly price most collectible coins (a real example from personal experience).

I agree. I said in an earlier post how brilliant these people are, with their own special skills that the church needs. But starting at a person's current reading level and moving up step by step with a systematic plan is not underestimating people.

I am not looking down on these people. It is the opposite. These people have special gifts that are not as common in people with higher reading levels, and the church needs those gifts. We cannot afford to waste these people. They need to be at the center of things, not at the edges. A person is seldom at the center, or in a place of leadership without a complete Bible that they can understand. Some people will transition to another translation; some will not. The church body is made up of different parts and this is good as long as we work together and follow the directions in Scripture on how to do this.

The NIrV is a tool. No tool is the only tool. I am just glad that Logos will soon be adding this tool to our toolbox. I can stop using my screw drivers and wrenches as hammers. I really missed having a hammer.

SineNomine

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204699#Comment_1204699

It seems to me that MJ has been primarily writing in this thread about adults and children who do not have learning disabilities (but have varying levels of education), whereas Kathleen has been focusing on people who do have learning (and/or other relevant) disabilities, and that this difference is obscuring where their positions do and do not differ.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204864#Comment_1204864

You're close. There is also a difference on the importance of reading which causes me to me more concerned about patronizing and Kathleen to be more concerned about going over the head. But, yes, we basically agree but have differences in emphasis.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1204699#Comment_1204699

Today's ancient papyri shipped today, so I was happlily seeing what was included ... from 2,000+ years ago. I'm reluctant to use tiny samples to make broad generalizations. But the below quote was interesting ... language complexity can be reader-driven (who the intended was). I'd assume similarly the Text.

"In the simple construction of the sentences and the general absence of connecting particles, the letter is a good illustration of the epistolary style of the period."