Favourite Bible Translations

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Magenta

Magenta

Senior Member
#321
Jul 3, 2015
61,149
30,296
113
#321
Scribe said:
I like it. And Dec 25th is not such a far fetched idea as some think.

The earliest source stating 25 December as the date of birth of Jesus is likely a book by Hippolytus of Rome, written in the early 3rd century. He based his view on the assumption that the conception of Jesus took place at the Spring equinox which Hippolytus placed on 25 March, and then added nine months to calculate the date of birth.

We always hear about the pagan feasts on Dec 25 that they wanted to replace with a Christian theme, but Hippolytus theory was not a crazy theory. Maybe he was right?
Click to expand...
I consider Christmas a commercialized secular holiday more than anything, but the fact remains: it is all about the birth of Christ, regardless of the time of year He was born, which some place during Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles, in September :)

Despite the ever increasing madness and chaos we see this world
descending into, I wish you peace and joy this Christmas season :)

 
T

Truth7t7

Well-known member
#323
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,496
113
#323
T

Truth7t7

Well-known member
#324
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,496
113
#324
Scribe said:
I like it. And Dec 25th is not such a far fetched idea as some think.

The earliest source stating 25 December as the date of birth of Jesus is likely a book by Hippolytus of Rome, written in the early 3rd century. He based his view on the assumption that the conception of Jesus took place at the Spring equinox which Hippolytus placed on 25 March, and then added nine months to calculate the date of birth.

We always hear about the pagan feasts on Dec 25 that they wanted to replace with a Christian theme, but Hippolytus theory was not a crazy theory. Maybe he was right?
Click to expand...
The Shepherds were in the fields with their flocks when Christ was born, Dec 25th the Flocks are put up, out of the winter cold

Dec 25th is in the (Middle) of the Roman Saturnalia, (Sun) worship, wine, women, and song, the big party, indulgences, 2 weeks of drunkenness

Jan 1st New years day, in honor to the Roman god (Janus)
 
Nehemiah6

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
#325
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#325
Blackpowderduelist said:
What error in Mathew? Chapter, verse?
Click to expand...
You could start with Matthew 1:1.

Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
βιβλος γενεσεως ιησου χριστου υιου δαβιδ υιου αβρααμ

New American Standard Bible
The record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham:

King James Bible
The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

The King James Bible has correctly stated "generation" instead of "genealogy" since that corresponds to the Greek word γενέσεως [ geneseos (from genesis)]. The Greek for genealogy is genealogia . Even though there is the genealogy of Christ in this chapter, the Holy Spirit used the word geneseos meaning source or origin .

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 1078: γένεσις
1. source, origin: βίβλος γενέσεως τίνος a book of one's lineage, i. e. in which his ancestry or his progeny are enumerated (equivalent to תּולְדות סֵפֶר, Genesis 5:1, etc.) (Matthew 1:1).

2. used of birth, nativity, in Matthew 1:18 and Luke 1:14, for Rec. γέννησις (ἡμέραι τῆς γενέσεως μουequivalent to ἀφ' οὗ ἐγεννήθην, Judith 12:18 cf. 20);πρόσωπον τῆς γενέσεως his native (natural) face,James 1:23.

As John Gill explains soundly in his commentary, there was a good reason for the use of "generation": "This book is an account, not of the divine, but human generation of Christ; and not merely of his birth, which lies in a very little compass; nor of his genealogy, which is contained in this chapter; but also of his whole life and actions, of what was said, done, and suffered by him. It is an Hebrew way of speaking, much like that in Genesis 5:1 and which the Septuagint render by the same phrase as here; and as that was the book of the generation of the first Adam; this is the book of the generation of the second Adam."

Furthermore there is no "Messiah" in that verse. It is Christ for Christou (Christos). To extrapolate "Messiah" into this verse is to violate the principles of sound translation, since the present title of Jesus is "the Lord Jesus Christ", NOT "the Lord Jesus Messiah".

So when you start off with two blunders, what do you expect at the end?

Also biblos is book not record.
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#326
#326
Magenta said:
I consider Christmas a commercialized secular holiday more than anything, but the fact remains: it is all about the birth of Christ, regardless of the time of year He was born, which some place during Sukkot, the Feast of Tabernacles, in September :)

Despite the ever increasing madness and chaos we see this world
descending into, I wish you peace and joy this Christmas season :)
Click to expand...
I wish you peace and joy too Magenta! :love:
 
T

Truth7t7

Well-known member
#328
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,496
113
#328
Nehemiah6 said:
You could start with Matthew 1:1.

Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
βιβλος γενεσεως ιησου χριστου υιου δαβιδ υιου αβρααμ

New American Standard Bible
The record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham:

King James Bible
The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.

The King James Bible has correctly stated "generation" instead of "genealogy" since that corresponds to the Greek word γενέσεως [ geneseos (from genesis)]. The Greek for genealogy is genealogia . Even though there is the genealogy of Christ in this chapter, the Holy Spirit used the word geneseos meaning source or origin .

Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 1078: γένεσις
1. source, origin: βίβλος γενέσεως τίνος a book of one's lineage, i. e. in which his ancestry or his progeny are enumerated (equivalent to תּולְדות סֵפֶר, Genesis 5:1, etc.) (Matthew 1:1).

2. used of birth, nativity, in Matthew 1:18 and Luke 1:14, for Rec. γέννησις (ἡμέραι τῆς γενέσεως μουequivalent to ἀφ' οὗ ἐγεννήθην, Judith 12:18 cf. 20);πρόσωπον τῆς γενέσεως his native (natural) face,James 1:23.

As John Gill explains soundly in his commentary, there was a good reason for the use of "generation": "This book is an account, not of the divine, but human generation of Christ; and not merely of his birth, which lies in a very little compass; nor of his genealogy, which is contained in this chapter; but also of his whole life and actions, of what was said, done, and suffered by him. It is an Hebrew way of speaking, much like that in Genesis 5:1 and which the Septuagint render by the same phrase as here; and as that was the book of the generation of the first Adam; this is the book of the generation of the second Adam."

Furthermore there is no "Messiah" in that verse. It is Christ for Christou (Christos). To extrapolate "Messiah" into this verse is to violate the principles of sound translation, since the present title of Jesus is "the Lord Jesus Christ", NOT "the Lord Jesus Messiah".

So when you start off with two blunders, what do you expect at the end?

Also biblos is book not record.
Click to expand...
The reason you have so many differences, the (Lockman Foundation) who owns the NASB needed to have so many changes to get a copyright, and yes they used whatever changes as you presented to achieve this, even if it was wrong.
 
KJV1611

KJV1611

Banned
#329
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#329
Blackpowderduelist said:
W
What error in Mathew?
Chapter, verse?
Click to expand...
My bad it wasn’t Matthew it was Luke. According to Isaiah it should be Christ bringing good news and publishing peace to all peoples

Luke 2:14
New American Standard Bible
14 “Glory to God in the highest,
And on earth peace among people [a]with whom He is pleased.”
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#330
#330
Truth7t7 said:
The Shepherds were in the fields with their flocks when Christ was born, Dec 25th the Flocks are put up, out of the winter cold

Dec 25th is in the (Middle) of the Roman Saturnalia, (Sun) worship, wine, women, and song, the big party, indulgences, 2 weeks of drunkenness

Jan 1st New years day, in honor to the Roman god (Janus)
Click to expand...
Don't forget Mithraism which was a problem for the church when they decided to use Dec 25th. It was much more of a problem than Saturnalia feasts. The Mithraism cult was infiltrating churches attempting to mix with Christianity and becoming popular for it's social and business connections, like joining the masons, or rotary club. And it was the influence of Mithraism that was actually written about as the reason for using the Dec 25th day, which was Mithraisms most important celebration day as well.

But it is rarely mentioned by people when you Google. It is a good example of how you still need to actually read Church history books in their entirety and not just rely on the first articles you run across in a Google search.
 
T

Truth7t7

Well-known member
#331
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,496
113
#331
Scribe said:
Don't forget Mithraism which was a problem for the church when they decided to use Dec 25th. It was much more of a problem than Saturnalia feasts. The Mithraism cult was infiltrating churches attempting to mix with Christianity and becoming popular for it's social and business connections, like joining the masons, or rotary club. And it was the influence of Mithraism that was actually written about as the reason for using the Dec 25th day, which was Mithraisms most important celebration day as well.

But it is rarely mentioned by people when you Google. It is a good example of how you still need to actually read Church history books in their entirety and not just rely on the first articles you run across in a Google search.
Click to expand...
Wikipedia: Saturnalia was an ancient Roman festival in honour of the god Saturn, held on 17 December of the Julian calendar and later expanded with festivities through to 23 December. The holiday was celebrated with a sacrifice at the Temple of Saturn, in the Roman Forum, and a public banquet, followed by private gift-giving, continual partying, and a carnival atmosphere that overturned Roman social norms: gambling was permitted, and masters provided table service for their slaves as it was seen as a time of liberty for both slaves and freedmen alike.[1] A common custom was the election of a "King of the Saturnalia", who would give orders to people, which were to be followed and preside over the merrymaking. The gifts exchanged were usually gag gifts or small figurines made of wax or pottery known as sigillaria. The poet Catullus called it "the best of days".[2]
Saturnalia

Saturnalia (1783) by Antoine Callet, showing his interpretation of what the Saturnalia might have looked like
 
B

Blackpowderduelist

Guest
#332
#332
T

Truth7t7

Well-known member
#333
May 19, 2020
7,685
2,496
113
#333
Blackpowderduelist said:
He said NASB. So let's stay on subject.
Click to expand...
The NASB is backed by the same Greek Text as the NIV, ESV, the only difference is they put footnotes

What Greek, (Novum Testamentum Graece)?

1. Are new bible versions supported by the Greek Text (Novum Testamentum Graece) 100% (Yes)

2. Did (Kurt Aland), (Barbara Ehlers), And (Carlo Maria Martini) create the Greek Text above 100% (Yes)

3. Did (Kurt Aland) who was a college professor in Germany, run off with his student (Barbara Ehlers), divorcing his wife (Ingeborg) 100% (Yes)

4. Did (Carlo Maria Martini) write books supporting Homosexual Unions 100% (Yes)

5. Was (Carlo Maria Martini) a Roman Catholic Cardinal, And Jesuit Priest 100% (Yes)
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#334
#334
Truth7t7 said:
Wikipedia: Saturnalia was an ancient Roman festival in honour of the god Saturn, held on 17 December of the Julian calendar and later expanded with festivities through to 23 December. The holiday was celebrated with a sacrifice at the Temple of Saturn, in the Roman Forum, and a public banquet, followed by private gift-giving, continual partying, and a carnival atmosphere that overturned Roman social norms: gambling was permitted, and masters provided table service for their slaves as it was seen as a time of liberty for both slaves and freedmen alike.[1] A common custom was the election of a "King of the Saturnalia", who would give orders to people, which were to be followed and preside over the merrymaking. The gifts exchanged were usually gag gifts or small figurines made of wax or pottery known as sigillaria. The poet Catullus called it "the best of days".[2]
Saturnalia

Saturnalia (1783) by Antoine Callet, showing his interpretation of what the Saturnalia might have looked like
Click to expand...
I think we are going to need a bigger (new) thread. :)
 
B

Blackpowderduelist

Guest
#335
#335
Truth7t7 said:
The NASB is backed by the same Greek Text as the NIV, ESV, the only difference is they put footnotes
Click to expand...
No sir you are wrong.
The NASB comes from the same group of texts as the KJV.
The other texts are used later in the NASB, and those so called missing verses are in the NASB only italicized to show that they are the verses in quest.
I have done a lot of research on the subject so don't state misinformation.
 
B

Blackpowderduelist

Guest
#336
#336
KJV1611 said:
My bad it wasn’t Matthew it was Luke. According to Isaiah it should be Christ bringing good news and publishing peace to all peoples

Luke 2:14
New American Standard Bible
14 “Glory to God in the highest,
And on earth peace among people [a]with whom He is pleased.”
Click to expand...
So you say that " εὐδοκίας" is not there?
You disagree with
Δόξα
14 Glory
14 N-NFS
1722 [e]
en
ἐν
in
Prep
5310 [e]
hypsistois
ὑψίστοις
[the] highest
Adj-DNP-S
2316 [e]
Theō
Θεῷ ,
to God
N-DMS
2532 [e]
kai
καὶ
and
Conj
1909 [e]
epi
ἐπὶ
on
Prep
1093 [e]
gēs
γῆς
earth
N-GFS
1515 [e]
eirēnē
εἰρήνη
peace
N-NFS
1722 [e]
en
ἐν
among
Prep
444 [e]
anthrōpois
ἀνθρώποις
men
N-DMP
2107 [e]
eudokias
εὐδοκίας !
with whom He is pleased
N-GFS
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#338
#338
John146 said:
This is a false statement.
Click to expand...
You're supposed to explain why it is false using irrefutable data that can be verified. You're not very good at this debate thing are you? :p:LOL:
 
KJV1611

KJV1611

Banned
#339
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#339
Blackpowderduelist said:
So you say that " εὐδοκίας" is not there?
You disagree with
Δόξα
14 Glory
14 N-NFS
1722 [e]
en
ἐν
in
Prep
5310 [e]
hypsistois
ὑψίστοις
[the] highest
Adj-DNP-S
2316 [e]
Theō
Θεῷ ,
to God
N-DMS
2532 [e]
kai
καὶ
and
Conj
1909 [e]
epi
ἐπὶ
on
Prep
1093 [e]
gēs
γῆς
earth
N-GFS
1515 [e]
eirēnē
εἰρήνη
peace
N-NFS
1722 [e]
en
ἐν
among
Prep
444 [e]
anthrōpois
ἀνθρώποις
men
N-DMP
2107 [e]
eudokias
εὐδοκίας !
with whom He is pleased
N-GFS
Click to expand...
I’m saying that Luke is a REPEAT of Isaiah. The passage in Luke has nothing to do with peace to people that God is pleased with.

Isa 52:7 (KJV) How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth!
 
B

Blackpowderduelist

Guest
#340
#340
KJV1611 said:
I’m saying that Luke is a REPEAT of Isaiah. The passage in Luke has nothing to do with peace to people that God is pleased with.

Isa 52:7 (KJV) How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth!
Click to expand...
It's not a quote, not even in the KJV .
So again I ask you. Because it isn't a quote and the phrasing is very different. In luke 2:14 the word εὐδοκίας there in the text?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.