Submitter
Follow @BibleSupport
SUPPORT TOPIC File Information
- Submitted: Jun 07 2018 10:38 AM
- Last Updated: Apr 14 2026 09:14 PM
- File Size: Unknown
- Views: 13509
- Downloads: 517
- Author: Greg Abrams
- e-Sword Version: 9.x - 10.x
- Tab Name: UPDV
Support BibleSupport.com
-
If our e-Sword and MySword modules have blessed you, please consider a small donation.
Your donation pays only for dedicated server hosting, bandwidth, software licenses, and capital equipment (scanners, OCR equipment, etc).
Other Modules By Same Author
e-Sword 9+ Module Download:
Download
UPDV Updated Bible Version (PC & Apple) Latest
1 Votes
Literal Apocrypha Old Testament New Testament Scripture
2
Author:
Greg Abrams
e-Sword Version:
9.x - 10.x
Tab Name:
UPDV
There is a Windows bblx file, Windows .exe installer, as well as Mac version file available to download.
Select updv-Windows.exe for the PC based Windows e-Sword (after downloading, click it to open the installer).
Select updv-Mac.bbli for Apple Macintosh Based e-Sword, iPhone, and iPad (after downloading, select 'Open in e-Sword' on iPhone or iPad, or on Mac OSx just double click the downloaded file).
For the MySword version to use with Android devices, click below for that format:
http://www.biblesupp...ersion-mysword/
PURPOSE:
To provide a modern version that retains accuracy.
To update archaic words and grammar.
To use new materials, such as manuscripts, to improve accuracy.
FEATURES:
Plurals Indicated:
Plus signs are used next to words such as you+ and your+ when they refer to a group of two or more. This is done to improve accuracy.
The Name of God:
The name "Yahweh" (a personal name for God) and "Yah" (a contracted form of Yahweh) are used instead of what is rendered in many versions as "LORD".
Bracketed Text:
Brackets [ ] are generally used to enclose words supplied in the translation that are not present in the original Bible text in order to make a passage more understandable.
Books of the Bible:
First Maccabees is included and reconstructed.
The Wisdom of Sirach is included.
The Epistle to the Greeks is included (Diognetus).
The Book of Acts is no longer included.
The order of the books places the New Testament before the Old Testament; and the book of John before Matthew.
The Book of John ends at 19:35.
The Book of Luke chapters one and two are not included.
The Book of Matthew and the ending of Luke were reconstructed.
Gender:
Gender has generally been translated literally. Words such as man, woman, son, daughter, he, she, him, and her are generally left in the same gender as they were in the original texts. There is no overall effort to remove such distinctions or to make this a gender inclusive translation.
Additional Information About This Translation:
https://www.updated.org/articles/
Copyright © 2003-2026 by Greg Abrams: www.updated.org.
What's New in Version Latest (See full changelog)
- This version has changed to a CI/CD pipeline where the latest version is updated nightly on the website at www.updated.org.
Screenshots
The probleem is not Word vs Speech because the Greek word "Logos" support both words.
You wrote Speech with a S in Joh 1:1 and Joh 1:14
Using my translation with (Speech) to make it clear:
Joh 1:1 In [the] beginning was the Word(Speech), and the Word(Speech) was with God, and the Word(Speech) was God.
Joh 1:14 And the Word(Speech) became flesh, and tabernacled among us,
(and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only-begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth.
__
The "Word became flesh" or the "Speech became flesh" and the "only-begotten Son of God" is a part of the Incarnation doctrine that that every Christian must accept against the doctrine of the antichrists: see my topic about Virgin Birth:
In other words: the Speech(Jesus) is born or begotten as Son of God (not by Adoptionism and Psilanthropism). Joseph is not the natural father of Jesus.
http://www.biblesupp...2-virgin-birth/
By writing "Joseph begot Jesus" do you also contradict:
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the World, that He gave His only-begotten Son,...
Joh 3:18 ...in the Name of the only-begotten Son of God.
1Jn 4:9 ... because that God has sent His only-begotten Son into the World,...
So the Virgin Birth doctrine is not only based on the parts that you deleted.
Marcion that you used as source for some of the edits was one of the worst heretics in the second century:
" And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and said, "Dost thou know me?" "I do know thee, the first-born of Satan."(Irenaeus. Adversus Haereses. Book III, Chapter 3, Verse 4. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. American Edition, 1885. Online Edition Copyright © 2004 by K. Knight).
Polycarp was the bishop of "Church in Smyrna" Rev 2:8-11 and the pupil of the Apostle John: so he has autority unlike the heretic Marcion.
More about the false teachings of Marcion.
http://www.christian...om/marcion.html
Do you understood how bad it is to follow statements and sources of Marcion or other heretics for deletion or change in your UPDV Updated Bible?
It is a fact that you not accept the "Virgin Birth doctrine" and therefore deleted Mat 1:18-25 and Luke 1 And you can't use autority of Bible believers to justify this deletion.
Don't come with the apostate Bart D. Ehrman who wrote the book "Forged" and other anti-christian books. (He worked before as textual critic with his mentor Bruce Metzger).
Do you understood that the term "Historical Jesus" is used by those who deny that Jesus is the Son of God and other Biblical doctrines.
I see that a part of the "Sermon on the Mount" is deleted.
I see that you have the shortish versions of the "Lord's Prayer" in Matthew and Luke
I see that a part of the parables in Matthew are deleted for "style" reasons.
I see that you have a problem with the "three days and three nights" chronology so you deleted it.
I see how much you deleted in Mat 28 Mar 16(Longer Ending) Luk 24 and the ending of John
Based on your "translation" was an Angel the only witness of the "Resurrection of Jesus" and the story ends with the women that are afraid, flee and telling nobody after hearing that the body was gone. The two earthquakes are also missing.
Bribe of the soldiers, The road to Emmaus, Thomas doubts, the death of Judas, Feed my Sheep, Catching hundred fifty three fishes, The Great Commission and Ascension of Jesus are all deleted.
"The Holy Spirit on Pentecost" also because you deny the Book "Acts of the Apostles".
What next? Deleting the other miracles like the Jefferson Bible?
Version 2.04 was better while it has the "Jesus Barabbas" corruption.
... Matthew, not only at the beginning, but also at the end, may be the creation of a later writer who was familiar with novels in his culture; rather than being the original work of a Hebrew author. Patterns of the Modified Text Although the above factors focus on the first two chapters, the modifications continue throughout Matthew. The first two chapters turn out to be just a symptom of a much more widespread problem. In reviewing Matthew, some patterns emerge when we find material that is not present in John, Mark, or Luke. In general terms, Matthew contains unparalleled materials that tend to: a) Sensationalize or exaggerate; b ) Support a misunderstood Scripture; c) Prematurely insert extra prophecies; and d) Over-emphasize certain phrases and topics. Context In many cases, passages were found that were not in their proper context. By presenting the material in a context which was not originally intended when the words were spoken, this was likely to result in misinterpretation. There were also cases of multiple sayings that were placed together even though they happened at different times and in different contexts. Reconstruction The UPDV has used the existing material in Matthew as a basis for reconstructing a replacement text which: a) Removes the unattested material; b ) Puts the events in a more chronological order; c) Places the text in its proper context; and d) Covers the same general subjects and events. ... https://www.updated.org/matthew.shtml
... Matthew, not only at the beginning, but also at the end, may be the creation of a later writer who was familiar with novels in his culture; rather than being the original work of a Hebrew author. Patterns of the Modified Text Although the above factors focus on the first two chapters, the modifications continue throughout Matthew. The first two chapters turn out to be just a symptom of a much more widespread problem....
Modern thinking tends to place criticism on the way ancient writers composed their material.
It definitely helps not to do so if one is to be objective.
On a slightly different note, there are marked differences in the LXX and the Hebrew yet I never read where Paul, John or our Lord Jesus in any way reprimanded "that evil greek translation".
You do know there were many "Gospels" that aren't extant, don't you?
Regardless I realize that we will never see eye to eye so however your work ends up is entirely up to you.
However, I do wonder about just what your aim is and what you are trying to prove.
Hey, I'm out of here, myself being an old time conservative bible believer..so don't worry about anymore replies from me.
Mr. Abrams, do you believe in the virgin birth of Jesus?
See my response above about the virgin birth.Mr. Abrams, do you believe in the virgin birth of Jesus?
My view is no different than that which is translated.
Mr. Abrams, I am kind of interested how you view the personage that Muslims call "Allah" - Do you see him as a satanic imposter, and Mohammad as a delusional demoniac...OR...do you see these two personages as another iteration of God the Father and His Messagner? To say the least, your translation far exceeds any strange tome I have seen that men call the 'Word of God'. I'm just wondering how you see these imposters.
Another question... Where did you learn to handle the ancient languages of Greek and Hebrew? Did you just wander into a public library one day and the Siran's of knowledge called for you to investigate the source of Bible translations...OR...did you receive instruction from a school or person? If so where and who blessed you with such insight?
Other files you may be interested in ..
- 8,328 Total Files
- 52 Total Categories
- 295 Total Contributors
- 6,406,014 Total Downloads
- Modern Literal Version 2026 Latest File
- iscnetwork Latest Submitter
user(s) are online (in the past 30 minutes)
members, guests, anonymous users
As to #1, see above.
#2, Regarding the Virgin Birth of Jesus, speaking mainly as an interpreter rather than a translator:
The UPDV translation does not support the virgin birth. But then again, Jesus does not need to be born of a virgin.
You can believe Jesus was God (son of God, God in the flesh, etc.) without necessarily believing Mary was a virgin.
Some think if you say no to being born of a virgin, you are also saying Jesus is just a man. That's not the case. It doesn't diminish anything.
The Old Testament doesn't require it (without discussing the many problems in Isaiah 7:14 - an issue in itself).
The New Testament doesn't require it or mention it either except for the questionable and isolated Gospel passages.
This is another area where it makes the Bible appear less credible by adding in or embellishing things that were not there originally.
See here for example for some points raised here:
https://en.wikipedia..._birth_of_Jesus
- The virgin birth is not one of the pillars that sustains the New Testament faith in Christ. The confession of faith in Jesus, the Son of God, the Lord, is independent of the virgin birth, and is not based on it.
- The apostle Paul makes three explicit references to Jesus' birth, and in each he assumes Jesus' full humanity and says nothing of the circumstances of the birth.
- If these two narratives were missing from the New Testament, "there would be no biblical mention of the virgin birth"
- The modern scholarly consensus is that the doctrine of the virgin birth rests on a very slim historical foundation.
Also consider that even if Mary was not a virgin, the birth could have been divinely conceived - that is, the translation doesn't prevent it.