Jump to content

Please read the Forum Rules before posting.

Photo

Bibles - UPDV Updated Bible Version (PC & Apple)


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 grams

grams

    PrayerRequest.com Admin

  • Members (T)
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts
  • LocationUS
Offline

Posted 07 June 2018 - 10:39 AM

File Name: UPDV Updated Bible Version (PC & Apple)

File Submitter: grams

File Submitted: 07 Jun 2018

File Category: Bibles

Author: Greg Abrams
e-Sword Version: 9.x - 10.x

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 (click here for more information).
The Wisdom of Sirach is included (click here for more information).
The Book of Acts is no longer included (click here for more information).
The order of the books places the New Testament before the Old Testament; and the book of John before Matthew (click here for more information).
The Book of John ends at 19:35 (see page 607 in the Appendix).
The Book of Luke chapters one and two are not included
(see page 607 in the Appendix).
The Book of Matthew and the ending of Luke were reconstructed (see pages 602 and 608 in the Appendix).

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:
The Speech in John 1:1
Book of Matthew
Complete Appendix

Copyright © 2003-2018 by Greg Abrams: www.updated.org.

Click here to download this file



#2 jmloy

jmloy

    e-Sword Addict

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 97 posts
  • LocationNaples, Florida 34120
Offline

Posted 16 June 2018 - 06:21 AM

I don't recommend this *version* whatsoever. This is worse than the publishers of the New World Translation bible


Berdine Mayes Th.M.

 


#3 grams

grams

    PrayerRequest.com Admin

  • Members (T)
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts
  • LocationUS
Offline

Posted 19 June 2018 - 01:19 AM

I don't recommend this *version* whatsoever. This is worse than the publishers of the New World Translation bible


That is an interesting comparison considering the deity of Christ is far more evident in the UPDV Bible than any other Bible that I am aware of.

Edited by grams, 19 June 2018 - 02:03 AM.


#4 Katoog

Katoog

    e-Sword Fanatic

  • Members (T)
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,283 posts
Offline

Posted 19 June 2018 - 01:05 PM

That is an interesting comparison considering the deity of Christ is far more evident in the UPDV Bible than any other Bible that I am aware of.

Really? Do you claim that there is more support for the "Deity of Christ" in the UPDV than in the ASV or the KJV or any other Bible translation?

 

https://bible.knowin...hrist,-Deity-Of

 

Heb 1:8 spelling.

 

*** 2:13 "Jesus Christ, our great God and Savior" you changed the Greek word order to follow the "Granville Sharp Rule" more than any other translation.

While "the great God and our Saviour, Jesus Christ" follow the Greek word order without denying the "Deity of Christ".

You can say that the ASV and KJV lacks a comma. (But that is rather interpretation).

But most modern translations follow the "Granville Sharp Rule" for doctrinal reasons. +1 (controversial) because it means that the God the Father and God the Son are the same person if the "Granville Sharp Rule" is correct.

(Rom 1:8-9 Rom 10:9 1Co 1:3 and *** 1:4 is about God(the Father) separated of Jesus).

 

The same for 2Pe 1:1 +1 (controversial)

In 2Pe 1:2 did you delete "of" thinking that it is about "God(the Son) and Jesus" as the same person instead of "God(the Father) and Jesus" as mediator between God and man thanks His dual nature (God and man).

This is the reason why God(the Father) and Jesus are separated in the letters of Paul.

 

1Jn 5:20 spelling.

 

Joh 20:28 you deleted the verse (Ending of John) -1

 

Col 2:9 you changed "Godhead" to "Deity"

 

Joh 1:1 you changed "Word" to "Speech"

 

Joh 5:23 grammar and spelling.

Joh 10:33 grammar

Mar 10:18 grammar and spelling.

In the Mathew version do you follow the TR and Byz that is better than the NA28 for the "Deity of Christ". +1 compared with the ASV.

 

Mark 2:5-10 grammar and spelling.

­__

 

Col 1:13-17 same words

 

Rom 9:5 "Christ as concerning the flesh. May God," this is less than the ASV and KJV because of the period. -1

 

You deleted Luk 1:32 and Luk 1:35 and Luk 2:49 (My Father) -3

 

The TR and Byz supporting more the "Deity of Christ" than the NA28 that you mostly use as source. Because the KJV is TR based do you lose there against any TR or Byz based translation.

 

1Ti 3:16 God(TR and Byz) vs He vs Who

Joh 9:35 Son of God(TR and Byz) vs Son of Man

 

---

While it clear that you support "Deity of Christ" is it also clear that you deny "Virgin Birth" while this is evidence for the "Deity of Christ" (being born as Son of God).

If you NOT accept the Incarnation doctrine then have you a big problem: see the "doctrine of the Antichrist": the Incarnation doctrine is evidence for both: the "Deity of Christ" and "Virgin Birth".


Edited by Katoog, 19 June 2018 - 02:55 PM.

Restored Holy Bible 17 and the Restored Textus Receptus

https://rhb.altervis...rg/homepage.htm


#5 grams

grams

    PrayerRequest.com Admin

  • Members (T)
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts
  • LocationUS
Offline

Posted 19 June 2018 - 03:03 PM

Really? Do you claim that there is more support for the "Deity of Christ" in the UPDV than in the ASV or the KJV or any other Bible translation?

 

 

Yes, far more than is easily counted. It goes way beyond picking a few verses in the New Testament.

 

You need to see the PDF format. Start with John 1:1, the related footnotes, appendix, and https://www.updated....elp/speech.html

 

ASV, KJV, etc. have no such bridge. Other translations have obscured this very important matter.


Edited by grams, 19 June 2018 - 03:09 PM.


#6 grams

grams

    PrayerRequest.com Admin

  • Members (T)
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts
  • LocationUS
Offline

Posted 19 June 2018 - 03:07 PM

While it clear that you support "Deity of Christ" is it also clear that you deny "Virgin Birth" while this is evidence for the "Deity of Christ" (being born as Son of God).

If you NOT accept the Incarnation doctrine then have you a big problem: see the "doctrine of the Antichrist": the Incarnation doctrine is evidence for both: the "Deity of Christ" and "Virgin Birth".

 

I've already spoken of this matter elsewhere. See the other topic. For the most part, there's nothing else I have to say beyond that.


Edited by grams, 19 June 2018 - 03:08 PM.


#7 jmloy

jmloy

    e-Sword Addict

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 97 posts
  • LocationNaples, Florida 34120
Offline

Posted 19 October 2018 - 06:52 PM

That is an interesting comparison considering the deity of Christ is far more evident in the UPDV Bible than any other Bible that I am aware of.

 

You are doing similar to what other unorthodox Christians have done over the years. The early church(s) compiled together what was accepted and believed to be of inspiration and as well as educational i.e. non-inspired. You are trying to reinvent the wheel and thus your work becomes at best a slightly more than a simple resource.
As for your claim to the Deity, the modern Modalist doctrine of the fullness of the Godhead dwelling in Jesus bodily is intensely set upon the point that Jesus is God but it nevertheless does not make the theology of it correct.

You would keep books that are known to be uninspired but remove a book and some chapters that have more substantial support for keeping. Wasn't it Origen who wanted to rid the book of Revelation even though there was overwhelming evidence for its acceptance? But even against the finest of critics, the Bible remains intact as it has for thousands of years. Your effort is just that, an effort.


Berdine Mayes Th.M.

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users




Similar Topics



Latest Blogs