guide me please

I looked in my Hebrew-Greek NIV and NASB Bibles and the names  "Sovereign" and "Lord" appear to have to same meaning.

According to my Strong's, "Sovereign" does not appear in the KJV.

I'm certainly not an expert in this but I'm not seeing any real difference in meaning. Hope that helps.

there are many Hebrew word for different attributes of God. perhaps later translaters have found soverign to be closer to the origional meaning of the Hebrew word used

Yesterday at 04:24 PM kimjp said this in Post #1
I'm trying to figure out why NIV and NLT use the word Sovereign and KJV, NKJV & NAS don't seem to.  I only have an NIV exhaustive concordance so I can't be certain it doesn't appear somewhere in these other versions. I am using Gen 15:2 as a point of reference. How did they conclude that this word should be added our used instead of (what appears to me to be) the word God?

Click to expand...

When you see LORD God in the KJV, it is a direct translation of YHWH Elohim or Yahweh Elohim, Yahweh (Jehovah) being God's personal Name and Elohim meaning the triune Godhead [Father, Son, and Holy Spirit] since it is a plural word.

The reason the KJV translators made YHWH into small capitals LORD is because of the Jewish reverence for God's personal name, and their substitution of Adonai (Lord) for YHWH. The *o* and *a* of Adonai were placed between JHVH (=YHWH) to form Jehovah, but the correct form is Yahweh.

There is absolutely no excuse for changing that to *Sovereign* since kingship is not in view. God used various names at various times for specific doctrinal reasons, and no translator has the right to change one to the other. So it is (1) a mistranslation and (2) introduction to false doctrine, since God uses every word with a very specific purposes, and where He desires to be called King, it is written as *King* (Ps.44:4).  Take note that the NIV and NLT are PARAPHRASES, not strict word-for-word translations. They use the concept of "dynamic equivalence" to pervert God's Word. 

There is a strict commandment that no one is to tamper with the written Word (Rev. 22:18-19) which may appear to apply only to this book, but applies to all Scripture, since the same commandment is given in the Law of Moses. Most Christians do not see the seriousness of what has happened to the modern versions.

31st March 2003 at 11:32 PM Ezra said this in Post #5



...There is absolutely no excuse for changing that to *Sovereign* since kingship is not in view. God used various names at various times for specific doctrinal reasons, and no translator has the right to change one to the other. So it is (1) a mistranslation and (2) introduction to false doctrine, since God uses every word with a very specific purposes, and where He desires to be called King, it is written as *King* (Ps.44:4).  Take note that the NIV and NLT are PARAPHRASES, not strict word-for-word translations. They use the concept of "dynamic equivalence" to pervert God's Word.

There is a strict commandment that no one is to tamper with the written Word (Rev. 22:18-19) which may appear to apply only to this book, but applies to all Scripture, since the same commandment is given in the Law of Moses. Most Christians do not see the seriousness of what has happened to the modern versions.

Click to expand...

The last thing I want to do is get involved in a controversy, but your comments are simply not relevant to this passage and others like it. It is true that "LORD God" translates YHWH Elohim in many places throughout the Old Testament (the NIV uses this expression, just as the KJV does). But in Genesis 15:2 the term for God is Adonai YHWH, which (in KJV) is rendered "Lord GOD." As I pointed out above, the word Elohim is not found in this verse, so the NIV's rendering ("Sovereign LORD") is actually more accurate. There is no conspiracy on the part of either the KJV or the NIV. Either can safely be accepted as the Word of God.

Kimjp, I'm glad if I was of any help to you. I'm also not a big fan of the NLT, but I hope that whatever version you study the Lord will guide you into a deeper knowledge of Himself. 

This issue seems to be purely a translation preference. Between the terms Lord God, and Sovereign Lord, the former has a better ring to it only because we are used to hearing it that way, but I'm not going to throw out any of my Bibles because they may not have it translated that way. Using the term Sovereign Lord would make a good study on the Sovereignty of God. 

It is not a poor translation to render YHWEH as LORD. When the NT writers quote the OT, they frequently quote the Gk(Septuagint) version, which does not use the term YHWH. Instead, the word kurios is normally employed and acccurately rendered as Lord--cf. the passage in Heb.1:10 which quotes from Ps 102 which is addressed to YHWH in the Heb. and Phil.2:11, "and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord", a reference to Is.45:23, speaking to YHWH in the Heb.
The NIV is not a paraphrase, but an accurate translation, among many. There is no pt in this"my Bible is better than yours." With rare exception, all of the English versions are faithful expressions of the Prophets and Apostles and are just as inspired as the originals. God bless, Al