Favourite Bible Translations

[John146]

Totally unbelievable that you would call a subsequent translation of Scripture the original inspired Scripture

It just goes to show the irrational lengths you will go to, to defend your KJ-onlyism

Do you believe a translation can be inspired of God?

 

[Dino246]

What it proves is that it is possible with God to have his word translated into whatever language he sees fit and that translation would be the perfect pure word of God. Would you at least admit that’s possible?

No, what it proves is that Scripture contains translated passages. You're playing with sand grains and trying to convince me they are planets.

 

[fredoheaven]

On the Promise of Everlasting Life (Salvation)

Who got this right? Most of the Modern Versions says we need to obey the Son to have this kind of life. Isn’t this confusing by giving it by faith in the first part but condition on the works in the last part?

John 3:36 (NASB, ESV, NLT, .BLB, GNT,ISV, AFV,ABPE, NAS 1977, ASV, ERV, WNT, WEB)

New American Standard Bible
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

King James Bible (WEB)
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

 

[Dino246]

Do you believe a translation can be inspired of God?

@Magenta, I recommend that you don't play along with him. He's using a tactic that the JW's use: get you to agree to point 1, and then force points 2 through 100 down your throat.

 

[Dino246]

On the Promise of Everlasting Life (Salvation)

Who got this right? Most of the Modern Versions says we need to obey the Son to have this kind of life. Isn’t this confusing by giving it by faith in the first part but condition on the works in the last part?

John 3:36 (NASB, ESV, NLT, .BLB, GNT,ISV, AFV,ABPE, NAS 1977, ASV, ERV, WNT, WEB)

New American Standard Bible
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

King James Bible (WEB)
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Comparing two English versions will NEVER tell you which is correct. It is foolish to assume a whole lot of soteriology from a single verse; that's NOT how proper biblical interpretation is done.

 

[Rosemaryx]

There is a story of a young girl in France from the 1700 century , who was blind , and has a little book of Mark in brail...
She wore the tips of her fingers out and made them callous , so she cut her fingers thinking it would make her tips more sensitive , but she lost more feeling in them...
She picked up her little book and kissed it , thanking our Savior , and then she realized that her lips was so sensitive , she could carry on using her mouth to read...

What a wonderful God we serve...
Just thought I would pop this in here...
...xox...

 

[fredoheaven]

On the Promise of Everlasting Life (Salvation)

Who got this right? Most of the Modern Versions says we need to obey the Son to have this kind of life. Isn’t this confusing by giving it by faith in the first part but condition on the works in the last part?

John 3:36 (NASB, ESV, NLT, .BLB, GNT,ISV, AFV,ABPE, NAS 1977, ASV, ERV, WNT, WEB)

New American Standard Bible
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

King James Bible (WEB)
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Also to be noted that all of English Versions are products of the same reading in the Greek text for the Greek apeitheo

 

[Magenta]

@Magenta, I recommend that you don't play along with him. He's using a tactic that the JW's
use: get you to agree to point 1, and then force points 2 through 100 down your throat.

I am not sure who you quoted there to address me

I will assume it was John? Please excuse me if I am wrong

Do the JWs likewise assert that the NWT is the original inspired Word of God despite the
"New World Bible Translation Committee" not beginning to work on it until December 2, 1947?

Meanwhile, Scripture had already existed for thousands of years...

 

[Dino246]

I am not sure who you quoted there to address me

I will assume it was John? Please excuse me if I am wrong

Do the JWs likewise assert that the NWT is the original inspired Word of God despite the
"New World Bible Translation Committee" not beginning to work on it until December 2, 1947?

Meanwhile, Scripture had already existed for thousands of years...

Yes, I quoted John146, sorry.

The JW tactic is not about the book they use. In discussion, they will present something innocuous and invite your agreement. They'll do this three or four times, then toss in the odd heterodox idea, and invite your agreement. They keep that up, and if you're not careful, you're nodding along to blatant heresy. John146's tactic is to get you to agree that translation can be inspired. He'll string you along with examples, and then dump on you (whoever the reader is) his fantasy that God inspired the entire KJV in English.

 

[John146]

He'll string you along with examples, and then dump on you (whoever the reader is) his fantasy that God inspired the entire KJV in English.

And yet you cannot admit that it’s possible with God. Bible agnostics🤦‍♂️

 

[Blain]

I primarily use the NIV for study and daily reading because of its popularity. But I also use the ESV and NKJV because they are the translations of some very wonderful study Bibles
I am curious to know some favourite Bible translations of other Christians and why they chose them.

personally I don't really favor any one translation I have read several of them but I am currently more attracted to the kj verson but the way I see it whatever verson people want to use as long as God speaks though it to them should be comfortable using it

 

[Dino246]

And yet you cannot admit that it’s possible with God. Bible agnostics🤦‍♂️

Just another attempt to string along the reader with extra-biblical ideas.

What God could possibly do has never been the issue. What God has done is and always will be.

 

[KT88]

On the Promise of Everlasting Life (Salvation)

Who got this right? Most of the Modern Versions says we need to obey the Son to have this kind of life. Isn’t this confusing by giving it by faith in the first part but condition on the works in the last part?

John 3:36 (NASB, ESV, NLT, .BLB, GNT,ISV, AFV,ABPE, NAS 1977, ASV, ERV, WNT, WEB)

New American Standard Bible
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

King James Bible (WEB)
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

As Dino said comparing the two different renditions is not really valid as a approach to understanding biblical issues.

The KJV has variously translated the Greek word apeitheō

The KJV translates Strong's G544 in the following manner: believe not (8x), disobedient (4x), obey not (3x), unbelieving (1x)

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

What it proves is that it is possible with God to have his word translated into whatever language he sees fit and that translation would be the perfect pure word of God. Would you at least admit that’s possible?

I guess there are some who do not agree that it’s possible with God.

Whatever language he sees fit.
Including the correct English of this day. Actually most Christians do believe that.

1.5 billion people speak English in the world today — 20% of the Earth's population.
Most of those people aren't native English speakers.
About 360 million people speak English as their first language.

Almost none of those 1.5 billion people speak the Early Modern English of the KJB.

 

[fredoheaven]

As Dino said comparing the two different renditions is not really valid as a approach to understanding biblical issues.

The KJV has variously translated the Greek word apeitheō

The KJV translates Strong's G544 in the following manner: believe not (8x), disobedient (4x), obey not (3x), unbelieving (1x)

Hi, yet I,m not going to sit in the kid's table now.🖐️ God bless

 

[John146]

Just another attempt to string along the reader with extra-biblical ideas.

What God could possibly do has never been the issue. What God has done is and always will be.

It is what God has already done all throughout Scripture. The “idea” is biblical. You should at least recognize that truth even if you don’t believe God has preserved his word today in a translation.

 

[John146]

Whatever language he sees fit.
Including the correct English of this day. Actually most Christians do believe that.

1.5 billion people speak English in the world today — 20% of the Earth's population.
Most of those people aren't native English speakers.
About 360 million people speak English as their first language.

Almost none of those 1.5 billion people speak the Early Modern English of the KJB.

If it’s already in English then no updating is necessary, just study. The English language is getting watered down let’s not include Gods word.

 

[Magenta]

... even if you don’t believe God has preserved his word today in a translation.

You mean a single translation As in, one and only one.

Problem for you is, many acknowledge God's Written Word preserved across multiple languages and translations.

 

[Dino246]

It is what God has already done all throughout Scripture. The “idea” is biblical. You should at least recognize that truth even if you don’t believe God has preserved his word today in a translation.

Your last sentence reveals that you can't hear anything contrary to your closed-minded view. Instead you invent the beliefs of others in your own mind to suit your agenda. I find it increasingly difficult to take anything you say seriously, because so much of what you do say is so heavily infected with cultic ideas.

 

[true_believer]

Your last sentence reveals that you can't hear anything contrary to your closed-minded view. Instead you invent the beliefs of others in your own mind to suit your agenda. I find it increasingly difficult to take anything you say seriously, because so much of what you do say is so heavily infected with cultic ideas.

All KjV onlysists seem to be obtuse by nature.