What is the difference between NIV and NLT bible versions?

Answer 1

One is cheaper and looks cooler than the other. Both are still fiction though.

Answer 2

The NIV is a very readable and accurate modern day translation. It may be the most popular version out today. The NLT is a much more easy reader. The newer 2004 NLT version is also fairly accurate. I use both.

One would use the NLT for general reading and the NIV for more serious study-but both are close.

Answer 3

There are 13000 mss.. in existence. Some of them are little more than scraps, some are substantial parts of a book. There are three major primary sources, two Hebrew, one Greek. In those days, words were not spaced apart and punctuation did not exist. Differences developed.
NIV - which I use and NLT are different editors attempts to balance in their value systems:
a) Accuracy of translation
b) Meaning of the passage
c) Understandability of the reader.
In general NLT leans more toward c with NIV leaning toward a. Both are fine.

Answer 4

NIV is New Internation VERSION and NLT is the New Living TRANSLATION... mainly it means that the version has gone back to the original sources and translated it, where the NLT is a translation of a secondary source that has been translated to make it easier to read.

Answer 5

Not sure but the difference between most transaltions is the varying degrees to which they translate on a scale, from most literalt, word for word fidelity so that each engliwsh word you have represents a greek word for the most part, to what is called a thought for thought dynamic,not literal translation, where the transaltors translate by the sentence thought for thought rather than word for word, to paraphrase which is a very loose way of translating or explaing the bible rather than translating it.
Besides that there are two major texts underlying most bible translations today

Answer 6

NLT is a paraphrased Bible written in modern language.

Answer 7

NIV= is considered to be thought for thought(New International Version)

NLV= is considered to be functionally equivalent(New Living Version)

Hope I answered your question:)
Have a GREAT DAY!!!!!!

Answer 8

Both innacurate versions.

In my family we are KJ only... Because we have read & studied and found both to contradict KJ in important areas.

NIV & NLT are not gods word, because too much was taken or adjusted to where some verses now have the opposite meaning.

Answer 9

About 40 years.

Answer 10

The answer to your question involves the difference between "formal equivalence" and "dynamic equivalence", and the balance between the two. The Bible was primarily written in Koine Greek and Hebrew. No two languages match up exactly, and the choice of how to word something in readible, contemporary English when it was written in biblical language that is totally distinct from English is a tough call. Formal equivalent translations try to stick as close to the original as possible, even if the end product sounds awkward or unnatural in modern English, the idea being to keep the translation as true to the original and as free from subjective paraphrasing as possible. Dynamic (or "functional") equivalent translations take greater liberties with the exact meaning conveyed by the original. The goal is to create a readible translation that sounds more like modern English. Naturally, this means that more of the translators' own interpretation and their ideas about what the original author really meant are going to show through in these efforts. What you have to decide is how important is it to you to have one or the other. Are you willing to sacrifice readibility in order to have exact meanings that are as close as possible to the original? Or are you willing to accept the translators' interpretations and biases in order to have a Bible that reads like contemporary English? Another issue is vocabulary--do you mind using a dictionary from time to time, or do you want a translation that only uses very basic English, despite what the original may have said? I personally prefer a formal equivalent translation. The King James was written in beautifully poetic style by some of the most elite experts in both the English and classical languages of its day...but admittedly, the style and word useage take getting used to. The New American Standard Version is a good, formal equivalent translation that is more readible. The English Standard Version is excellent, and is considered by many to be the formal equivalent version that is most readible. If I were you, I'd choose one of these, but keep the other two on hand for comparison.