Controversy Alert: NIV Upside Down Kingdom Bible
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ต.ค. 2024
- Oh boy…this one is going to press some buttons. While I think it does pretty good job handling some very difficult topics, I can already see this bible upsetting some people. Just get ready.
Tan Leathersoft:
amzn.to/40cA6if
Hardback:
amzn.to/3Y2QW0o
I like getting a dime's worth every now and then.
I especially like the emphasis on Mental Health. Very important.
I do think that is a neglected topic.
Not for me Pastor Tim. However, thank you for reviewing this Bible so we are aware of what is contained within it. Blessings …😊
Yes. His review saved me from wasting my money on it. For that I am thankful.
This is not needed IMO. Scholars should just get together and publish a book, but they know people wouldn’t buy it so they throw the best selling worldwide translation in there knowing these bibles will eventually be on clearance and people will buy them. Not a good plan or idea
Possibly. You make a fair point.
After 32 years in a charismatic persuasion, I’ve now been 8 years in an evangelical complementarian atmosphere. All that said, I DO enjoy researching both sides of various issues. I know I may struggle a bit with this particular Bible-but I’m going to fasten my seatbelt and order it. It’s really peaked my interest- and your “double nickels worth” was presented so well. Thank you!!👍🏼🙏🏼📖✝️
I wouldn't be interested in this kind of Bible but I am glad to see the single column format being used more.
When you said Preston Sprinkle, I knew everything I needed to know.
This has been a common comment.
Wow! We really need this Bible!! Thanks, Tim!!
Absolutely going to get one!!
Though I don't like the 2011.
Oh well, can't have everything.
I really appreciate your neutral presentation of this. My initial, uninformed opinion would be to stay far away from something like this, but your thoughtful review has me somewhat curious. Can't say I will act on that curiosity, but that's only because I have so much other stuff I am reading at this time.
Thank you for your review. Even if it is not our cup of tea, it does not hurt to be aware of different opinions about today's topics within Christianity and in secular circles rather to stay in an echo chamber.
This. I've learned a lot from people I disagree with. At the very least one can learn that other people can be sincere and come to a different place.
I sooooo LOVE that you encourage folks to always read the preface describing the translation!! Folks make a huge mistake when passing over this important information!! 👍🏼🙏🏼📖✝️
Thank you, Tim. Great review! I might be interested in getting this one. Hope I can see one in person to check it out more closely.
Netflix is really getting their money's worth out of the Stranger Things series! I believe Michael Heiser wrote a book with "Upside-down " in the title somewhere, and now this? I'm not a boundary pusher, other than some people who like to be argumentative about the timing of the Rapture of the church. I am at a place in my life where I merely want to grow closer to God, through Jesus Christ, by way of the Holy Spirit. My personal stance is "Nearer My God To Thee". God bless! :)
Amen. Same here.
Excellent review - thank you. I recently purchased this Bible but haven't had time to go through it yet. I do approach the scriptures from a conservative, evangelic viewpoint - but I'm also curious to see how the writers of the articles approach scripture - and then do my own study of those passages utilizing my Thompson Chain Reference Bible.
It's not too late to return it before the infection spreads
I lean towards a heavier-than-most supernatural reading of the Bible, though I am not ready to fight anyone that reads it differently. What I mean by that is I would say Genesis 6 is rebellious heavenly beings mating with human women. And then Genesis 19 being the reverse of that where human men want to have sex with heavenly beings, the angels sent to Lot. God judged and destroyed both cases of, or desires for, unclean man/"angelic" unions (the flood and S&G). I am also quite conservative, believing that God created man and woman for marriage, and Jesus and Paul both talk about that plenty in the NT where S&G doesn't need to only point to homosexual behavior.
Great comment!
I’m conservative too. Glad my wife bought me the 1984 version Zondervon Archaeology study bible NIV for $40 new at Costco. God bless
You raise a good point with the potential Gen 6 Gen 19 parallel. I had never considered that. However there is that passage at the end of Judges with the concubine that is almost a "shot for shot" retelling of the story of Gen 19 which would lend itself to being more human - human sexual violence. I'm going to consider what you said though.
I love Preston Sprinkle. Dang. Not a fan of the NIV but this looks like one worth getting, and I'm grateful that someone put together a Bible like this, for such a time as this.
People do get upset when their sacred cows are kicked. see comments.
And sometimes rightfully so.
The NIV is controversial in of itself without woke contributions to it.
I wouldn’t call these woke, but it is certainly not traditional.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews the contributors sure are woke. And it does cover social justice, wealth and poverty, (alphabet gang), migration, power, mental health, slavery, and trauma. All Key buzz words.
@@michaelclark2458Isn't John Bevere one of the contributors?
@@e.m.8094 yep
The NIV is awesome.
Looks like the perfect Bible for Australians 🇦🇺
Not sure what this means.
Australia is upside down on the globe 🙃
😂😂
@@anickelsworthbiblereviewsSomeone said that Australian toilets flush upside down 😬
@@thescarletandgrey2505 Only if you sit on them upside down...
Love the typesetting layout and most of the articles. However, I am not sure how an emphasis on dissecting and concentrating on social issues adds anything to separating ourselves from the world and becoming more Christ like.
To me, the concept just adds more potential for debate and argument between immature believers.
Maybe learn the ins and outs of your faith first and then work out how to apply your faith into your world view.
If one wants to understand the universe, I would encourage people to engage in material from all perspectives. The same goes for gender, politics, economics, history; and so on. The resources are endless; outside the covers of the bible.
But that is just my 5 cents worth… :)
Thanks, Tim. The title they gave to this version just _sounds_ too much like Isaiah 5: 20 and sets off alarm bells for me. IMHO, it’s the World that is upside down, NOT God's Kingdom nor His Scriptures and, while I _think_ I understand their point, it kind of warns me away. I tend to be pretty conservative but I also deeply understand that my knowledge, discernment and wisdom are far from perfect.
For me, study bibles, reference notes, even “life application” suggestions are greatly appreciated assets, but I agree with you, it is the scripture that is perfectly Holy Spirit inspired (at least in the original writings), NOT the opinions and suggested applications.
I treasure honest reviews that point out both good and (potentially) bad points. That aids decision making!!
I’m sure the title is taken from Acts 17:6 which says the Christians turned the world upside down.
@@tarheel1033 Thanks, you may be right. Satan's "Kingdom" is certainly upside down, inside out and backwards (Isaiah 5: 20) and so are accusations levied by ungodly men against Godly men, but I am not fond of _naming_ God's Holy Scriptures (ie: the Bible) "upside down" and plastering that on the cover of the Bible. ... But, perhaps I continue to misunderstand something. As I said, it sets of [edit: I meant "off" not "of"] warning bells but those are, at this point, _just_ warning bells.
@@randy-9842 I’m inclined to agree with you-both comments.
It's unclear to me who the target audience is for this publication. I cannot think of any traditional groups ever using this as a basis for teaching. The growing liberal groups (Methodist Church?) may find It of value.
It’s going to be interesting to see if it sells.
It’s a good question.
I’ve been following Preston for years from his podcast and I can attest he is as solid as they come. He has a heart for truth.
I like Preston. He seems sincere to me. I don't agree with some of his theology but he at least seems to be an honest broker. I don't mind listening to people I disagree with if they are honest.
Thanks again, Tim.
Very interesting, thank you.
Thank you, Brother Tim 🌹🌟🔥🌟🌹
I like Preston Sprinkle and appreciate his ministry even though I may not agree on everything. However, I do have concerns on some of the contributors to the Bible.
I’m good with my hard back NIV study Bible. I know you’re a NKJV fan but I grew up in a Nazarene church being taught from and reading from the 84 NIV text, and when I came back to the faith buying that bible was the first thing I did. I’ve gotten a lot out of it too, and the new text has not really thrown me off like I thought it would.
I love my 1984 NIV my wife got me from Costco for $40 new in 2010. My first was a Scofield reference bible, which I used with my dad before he was killed in a motorcycle accident. God bless you smart person!
I look forward to this. I don't know anything about it.
Thank you for sharing this bible review.
This will be coming to an Ollie's near you for $8.99 soon...
Maybe.
😂😂😂 no but fr i just found some awesome bible study material at ollie’s. good stuff cheap!
😂😂😂
Ollie's is awesome
Regarding the NIV itself being controversial. Recently watched a lecture by conservative bible scholar Dan Wallace where he claims the 2011 text is one of the best English translations ever and the scholarship behind it the best.
Every translation has that scholar that says it is the best. It is a matter of their opinion.
I read the work of several of the NIV scholars and have found them to be conservative, godly faithful men. One in particular, Bill Mounce, has gone on to start a free (pay what you want) online seminary featuring some fantastic conservative scholars.
When I encounter gripes about the NIV 11, I tend to "hear" them as fundamentalist gripes not far removed from KJV only type arguments.
All that said, I'll take the CSB over the NIV11. And Zondervan did themselves NO favors by taking the NIV84 out of print. That was one of the best translations ever, and handling it that way just serves to feed conspiracies about the publisher being in league with Baal, etc.
NO THANKS. I will stick with my Zondervon Archeological study bible 1984 NIV!
Totally understand.
One of my favorite study Bibles out of all the ones I own! It's a shame that it's out of print. Hoping to find another copy in large print one day.
That is a great study bible
@@e.m.8094 I was shocked to hear that these go for $200 in great condition. I have always keep the dust cover on, and the Bible looks brand new. Sadly it’s getting too heavy and the print is small as you noted. I had both cataracts done so can read again. I hope you get one at a good price. God bless.
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews Thanks Tim. May our Lord Jesus prosper this ministry. I prayed for you to go over 10k subs. Now I will ppray for 20 then 30k!
Well said on all points!
Tim, I wonder if those who don't think man's opinion belong in the Bible use study bibles?
I’d say no.
So it’s not liberal but it’s liberal hehe.
It’s not politically liberal, but there may be some hints of liberal theology. So yes.
Do you think which variation of Creationism a person holds is super important? Young Earth is touted as the standard conservative position, as least as far as Evangelicals go, nowadays. But at one point, it was Gap Creationism as the primary position. The way some talk, it is literally the difference between being a Christian and being no better than an atheist. What are your thoughts?
I don’t believe it is salvational, however, I do think it is a tightrope walk when you marry evolution and the Bible.
Genesis is the foundation of everything. To deny, or cast doubt on genesis, is to deny, and cast doubt on the rest of scripture. If you don’t believe Genesis is exactly as it says it is, then what’s the point of following the rest of it? This Bible is definitely a no go for me.
Flat out wrong. The idea that pre-scientific people could have been writing a science textbook is absolutely ludicrous.
Reading Genesis 1 as what it is: a THEOLOGICAL statement which is both a polemic against other ANE creation stories and a functional description of God creating the world as a temple makes it far richer and deeper than just a dry factual-literal description.
@byrondickens claiming the other commentor is "flat out wrong" without offering any evidence is quite the arrogant response (especially when a "literal" reading of Genesis 1-3 was basically unanimous among all Christians prior to 150 years ago). A few thoughts:
1. From the start, you're attacking a straw man by suggesting that those who take Genesis literally are claiming it is a "scientific textbook." Obviously, Genesis 1-3 is not written using the terminology of modern science. The question is whether it describes events that occurred in historical space time (even if they are described in literary rather than scientific terms).
2. You suggest Genesis is primary to be understood as a polemic against other near-eastern creation myths. But there are two separate issues here: a. whether Genesis tells it's story in a way that attacks other ancient near eastern beliefs or b. whether Genesis is "rewriting" particular near eastern myths purely to attack them. These days there aren't that many scholars who would argue for the latter (i.e., that Genesis is responding to specific near eastern texts like Atrahasis or Enki and Ninhursag), and the general trend is to see all these stories as reflecting a general mesopotamian millieu. Now I would agree with Gordon Wenham for instance that Genesis tells its stories in a way that responds to ancient paganism. But Wenham would reject the argument that Genesis was simply "appropriating" near eastern myths to advocate monotheism.
The real issue is that the author of Genesis (and the other Biblical authors) seem to treat Adam and Eve as historical individuals and the events of Genesis as historical incidents. Moreover, basically every orthodx Christian author prior to the 19th century read Genesis "literally." Augustine is often cited as a father who "allegorized" Genesis, but he's actually the exception that proves the rule. Because he was using a defective latin translation of Sirach 18.1 (which wrongly read "God created everything at the same time"), Augustine believed God created everything instantaneously rather than in 6 days. However, he still believed Adam was a historical individual who was the ancestor of all human beings (see City of God 15.8) and believed the world was only 6,000 years old (City of God 12.11). Again, it's quite arrogant to mock what has been the belief of most Christians in history.
3. Finally, I'd argue that the temple imagery in Genesis 1 is overstated
While there's certainly some there, much of the alleged temple imagery strikes me as eisegesis based on an assumption of priestly aithorship.
Regards
@byrondickens i typed a comment but I'm not sure it posted, so ive reposted below:
That's quite the arrogant response. A few thoughts: 1. From the start you're attacking a straw man by suggesting that those who take Genesis literally are claiming it is a "scientific textbook." Obviously Genesis is not written in scientific terms, the question is whether it describes events that occurred in historical space time.
2. You suggest Genesis is to be understood as a polemic against other near-eastern creation myths. But there are two separate issues here: a. Whether Genesis tells its story in a way that attacks ancient paganism or b. Whether Genesis is "rewriting" particular near eastern myths like Atrahasis or Enki and Ninhursag. Relatively few scholars would argue for the latter these days,and there's a tendency to see all these stories as emerging from a general mesopotamian millieu. For instance, Gordon Wenham would agree Genesis attacks other near eastern myths but would reject the idea that it is "rewriting" particular stories simply to advocate monotheism
:49 second in and alarm bells are blaring! Preston Sprinkle wholeheartedly supports the Alphabet Agenda. He has the organization, The Center for Faith, Sexuality & Gender. This includes a teaching series (for purchase) called Parenting LGBTQ Kids. It's confusing because in the FAQs they state some biblically correct positions on this issue. Yet if you watch the trailer you can see they have adopted the non-biblical view that this sin is an immutable identity or quality, something you're just born into or with, like eye color / skin tone or ethnic background. Even just labeling the series "LGBTQ Kids" promotes this idea. Again, don't listen to me. Go look it up yourself.
Please provide some links with evidence for me. What I have read, and through interviews, I have seen nothing of this nature, but I am always leery when I see certain buzzwords.
This is not true. He supports the people as human beings, but not same-sex acts.
Not to mention Tisby....
@@anickelsworthbiblereviews See? My whole comment is gone. Just look up the organization and title of the teaching series. It also has a video trailer.