Bible versions-Is there only one?

[Aerials1978]

But you think it is funny to expose the lies of the corrupt NIV (a joke of a translation)? Which means you do not really want to truth.

I take it your not a fan of the NIV? I heard many who take issue with it. I personally have always liked using it.

 

[Roughsoul1991]

It is evident from your post that you have not really delved into this issue in-depth. And since you use the NIV, it is a further confirmation that you are not really aware of the issues or what is at stake. So let's look at the original Preface of the NIV to see that what has been given to you is a corrupt Bible.

Preface [The Committee on Bible Translation June 1978 (Revised August 1983)]

FALSE CLAIM: THE MOST CORRUPT TEXTS WERE USED
The New International Version is a completely new translation of the Holy Bible made by over a hundred scholars working directly from the best available Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek texts.

FALSE CLAIM: THE NIV IS NOT AN ACCURATE TRANSLATION
From the beginning of the project, the Committee on Bible Translation held to certain goals for the New International Version: that it would be an accurate translation and one that would have clarity and literary quality...

FALSE CLAIM: DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE IS NOT A TRANSLATION BUT A PARAPHRASE
... At the same time, they have striven for more than a word-for-word translation. Because thought patterns and syntax differ from language to language, faithful communication of the meaning of the writers of the Bible demands frequent modifications in sentence structure and constant regard for the contextual meaning of words. [Note: that describes Dynamic Equivalence]

BOTH OLD ENGLISH AND GERMAN USE SPECIAL PRONOUNS
Neither Hebrew, Aramaic nor Greek uses special pronouns for the persons of the Godhead. A present translation is not enhanced by forms that in the time of the King James version were used in everyday speech, whether referring to God or man.

FALSE CLAIM: BIBLIA HEBRAICA IS A CORRUPTED MASORETIC TEXT
...For the Old Testament the standard Hebrew text, the Masoretic Text as published in the latest editions of Biblia Hebraica, was used throughout...

FALSE CLAIM: THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH IS A CORRUPTED TORAH
...The Dead Sea Scrolls contain material bearing on an earlier stage of the Hebrew Text. They were consulted, as were the Samarian Pentateuch and the ancient scribal traditions relating to textual changes...

FALSE CLAIM: THE SEPTUAGINT, IS A CORRUPTED HEBREW BIBLE
FALSE CLAIM: AQUILA, SYMMACHUS, THEODOTION WERE HERETICS
FALSE CLAIM: THE LATIN VULGATE IS BIASED TO SUPPORT CATHOLICISM
FALSE CLAIM: CONJECTURAL EMENDATION IS NOT ACCEPTABLE
...The translators also consulted the more important early versions—the Septuagint; Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion; the Vulgate; the Syriac Peshitta; the Targums; and for the Psalms the Juxta Hebraica of Jerome. Readings from these versions were occasionally followed where the Masoretic Text seemed doubtful and where accepted principles of textual criticism showed that one or more of these textual witnesses appeared to provide the correct reading... [Note: this is "conjectural emendation]

FALSE CLAIM: THE "ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES" ARE EXTREMELY QUESTIONABLE
FALSE CLAIM: THE "BEST" CRITICAL TEXTS ARE THE WORST
The Greek text used in translating the New Testament was an eclectic one... Where existing manuscripts differ, the translators made their choice of readings according to accepted principles of New Testament textual criticism. Footnotes call attention to places where there was uncertainty about what the original text was. The best current printed texts of the Greek New Testament were used.

THERE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM IF A TRANSLATION MUST BE CONSTANTLY REVISED
...There is a sense in which the work of translation is never wholly finished...

You read what you want. I use multiple translations including the KJV. Not much of a difference. It is funny what Christians will get fussy over. So much of it sometimes is over the top.

THERE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM IF A TRANSLATION MUST BE CONSTANTLY REVISED

Not necessarily. Changed then yes but revised then no. Revisions can be from new evidence that emerges every year. 81% of this poll would disagree with you. Kinda strange that you and me have agreed on many topics in other posts but somehow my most used version is corrupted?

 

[Roughsoul1991]

But you think it is funny to expose the lies of the corrupt NIV (a joke of a translation)? Which means you do not really want to truth.

Word of God isnt a joke. I do not see the translation being evident to a joke. So sorry I'll be alright with my method of reading scripture. As much studying and reading I do, nothing as set off the alarms that the NIV is corrupted. I'll sleep easy on this topic.

 

[Aerials1978]

Word of God isnt a joke. I do not see the translation being evident to a joke. So sorry I'll be alright with my method of reading scripture. As much studying and reading I do, nothing as set off the alarms that the NIV is corrupted. I'll sleep easy on this topic.

I have had my NIV for quite some time and always found it to be accurate. Of course are there verses that differ from KJV? Sure. Is the overall message for salvation in agreement with the KJV? Absolutely. It really comes down to one’s preference.

 

[Magenta]

I take it your not a fan of the NIV? I heard many who take issue with it. I personally have always liked using it.

Some with a strong preference for the KJV (despite documented errors in it) often despise any and all other translation versions.

 

[JamOn]

here’s just a sample of some of the wording Murdock uses, so far I think it is the only bible I think that uses formal wording, like veracious domestics

Matt 22
16 And they sent to him their disciples, with domestics of Herod, and said to him: Teacher, we know that thou art veracious, and teachest the way of God with truth, regardless of man, for thou hast no respect of persons.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

You read what you want. I use multiple translations including the KJV. Not much of a difference. It is funny what Christians will get fussy over. So much of it sometimes is over the top.

We have so much at our fingertips these days for comparison study. It's a blessing and I'm grateful for the work of the hundreds of translators who have made that possible.

 

[Aerials1978]

Some with a strong preference for the KJV (despite documented errors in it) often despise any and all other translation versions.

God is not limited to mans direction of things. God speaks to all of creation by His essence. If a person comes be saved by the NIV, KJV or even a simple poppy song, Glory to the One who sits upon the Throne.

 

[Dino246]

FALSE CLAIM: THE MOST CORRUPT TEXTS WERE USED

FALSE CLAIM: THE NIV IS NOT AN ACCURATE TRANSLATION

FALSE CLAIM: DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE IS NOT A TRANSLATION BUT A PARAPHRASE

BOTH OLD ENGLISH AND GERMAN USE SPECIAL PRONOUNS

FALSE CLAIM: BIBLIA HEBRAICA IS A CORRUPTED MASORETIC TEXT

FALSE CLAIM: THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH IS A CORRUPTED TORAH

FALSE CLAIM: THE SEPTUAGINT, IS A CORRUPTED HEBREW BIBLE
FALSE CLAIM: AQUILA, SYMMACHUS, THEODOTION WERE HERETICS
FALSE CLAIM: THE LATIN VULGATE IS BIASED TO SUPPORT CATHOLICISM
FALSE CLAIM: CONJECTURAL EMENDATION IS NOT ACCEPTABLE

FALSE CLAIM: THE "ACCEPTED PRINCIPLES" ARE EXTREMELY QUESTIONABLE
FALSE CLAIM: THE "BEST" CRITICAL TEXTS ARE THE WORST

THERE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM IF A TRANSLATION MUST BE CONSTANTLY REVISED

It's so helpful of you to identify the false claims in bold red font. I have to wonder about "conjectural emendation" though....

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Me too, that was quite sad that happen to him, he was trying to be helpful for those who only knew English

I'm sure he'll have rewards in heaven.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Do you know why? Because every modern English translation resorted to corrupted Hebrew and Greek manuscripts and translations. If you found a rotten apple in a bunch of apples, you would throw it away. But when the critics found rotten manuscripts they praised them to high heaven as "the best", and then threw away the best!

I have a lot of respect for you.

And then you come along and pisseth against my beloved Bible.

 

[Roughsoul1991]

I take it your not a fan of the NIV? I heard many who take issue with it. I personally have always liked using it.

The church disagrees on soo many topics that it can cause mental constipation trying to sort out all the theologies, all the opinions, all the preferences, and every individual holds a random mixture of each.

 

[Roughsoul1991]

I have had my NIV for quite some time and always found it to be accurate. Of course are there verses that differ from KJV? Sure. Is the overall message for salvation in agreement with the KJV? Absolutely. It really comes down to one’s preference.

Agree. And I prefer modern English. Try and evangelize to a teenager or millennial using the Kjv and that just makes the message even harder to get across.

 

[Roughsoul1991]

We have so much at our fingertips these days for comparison study. It's a blessing and I'm grateful for the work of the hundreds of translators who have made that possible.

Yes and that is actually a good thing. This same concept was feared by the Islamic leaders. They had many different versions of the Quran but 1 leader thought his Version was the one true Version and he burned all the others in a massive book burning. So now there isn't much to compare to and or to say the modern version is even close to the original.

We do not have this problem. We have sooo much to compare to that spotting false teachings is easy for those who actually read the scriptures.

 

[Aerials1978]

Agree. And I prefer modern English. Try and evangelize to a teenager or millennial using the Kjv and that just makes the message even harder to get across.

The church disagrees on soo many topics that it can cause mental constipation trying to sort out all the theologies, all the opinions, all the preferences, and every individual holds a random mixture of each.

I 100% agree. Unfortunately such things has caused deep derision and even all out wars. Chalk another misuse of God’s gifts to the fallen

 

[John146]

So close and yet so far. The KJV can be trusted when we are told that: "God watches over his word to perform it" (Jeremiah 1:12) Yet this is a horrible translation because IT is "usually in reference to a lifeless thing". God's word is the Word of Life. So we have to go back to the original language if we want to understand. We can use the KJV if we want to claim the promises of God.

We can use the different translations as a Bible commentary. For example the NKJV says: "I am ready to perform My word.” Although ready to perform seems different from watching over His Word. As if they are adding something that is implied but still we are not suppose to add to the Bible. The modern term they use is decree. This is a official order issued by a legal authority.

This “horrible translation” led the largest revival in history. This “horrible translation” is the most attacked book in history.

Before bashing God’s word, you should learn how the English language really works.

 

[Roughsoul1991]

I 100% agree. Unfortunately such things has caused deep derision and even all out wars. Chalk another misuse of God’s gifts to the fallen

Unfortunately like the picture above this is our current church. To a unbeliever on the outside they see a church that is divided as the Red Sea when the Israelites crossed between the walls of water. Everyone says they hold the truth, their way is best, their theology is correct.

Dont get me wrong. We have to divide from some groups but all I'm saying is we must be very patient and in discernment to decide what issues are worth creating a stir over.



Often times the picture above is 2 Christian's. Both looking at the same core doctrine. Both believe in it. But from personal perspective they have different insights on the core doctrine. One individual can be a more studied Christian, a older Christian, a wiser, smarter, holy Spirit led, lack of knowledge, lack of understanding, personal experience, etc.

But as we often see, each pointing at each other and calling the other a heretic, false, or other serious words.

 

[John146]

You read what you want. I use multiple translations including the KJV. Not much of a difference. It is funny what Christians will get fussy over. So much of it sometimes is over the top.



Not necessarily. Changed then yes but revised then no. Revisions can be from new evidence that emerges every year. 81% of this poll would disagree with you. Kinda strange that you and me have agreed on many topics in other posts but somehow my most used version is corrupted?

What about the most important truth that God’s word is 100% true and reliable. Why would someone want to study partial truth? And who are we to determine which parts are true and which parts cannot be trusted? That would make us the final authority on what God has said instead of God Himself.

 

[John146]

I have had my NIV for quite some time and always found it to be accurate. Of course are there verses that differ from KJV? Sure. Is the overall message for salvation in agreement with the KJV? Absolutely. It really comes down to one’s preference.

Does it contain Matthew 18:11?

 

[John146]

Some with a strong preference for the KJV (despite documented errors in it) often despise any and all other translation versions.

I believe the correct wording is documented opinions of so called errors.