WHICH Bible "version" Is Authorized By God?

[posthuman]

Do you believe you and I will be reigning in the
Upper Echelons Of the 1500-Mile-High Heavenly Jerusalem?

who lives in the lowest echelons of heavenly Jerusalem?
we should visit them.

 

[Scribe]

One is lying and cannot be trusted. Which is it?

You will never learn the answer to your questions if you rely on the KJV rather than the original manuscripts.

The number is seventy in some manuscripts of the Alexandrian (such as Codex Sinaiticus) and Caesarean text traditions but seventy-two in most other Alexandrian and Western texts.

the Greek word “hebdomekonta” (coded 1440 in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible) is translated “seventy.” However, immediately following this word is the Greek word “duo” in brackets (duo) translated “two.” Footnotes of several translations indicate that the Greek manuscripts are divided between 70 and 72 as the number sent out and there is no way to be sure of which one is the original.

So when you compare with the following English translations what you are seeing is that the committee of Greek Scholars who are expert in all the manuscripts in extant believe that the evidence leans toward those manuscripts that use the 72

It is not a matter of which one is wrong and which one is right. It is a matter of which manuscripts have 70 and which have 72.
If you are an expert of the manuscripts you can make a decision as to why you will ignore manuscripts that have 72 and go with the ones that have 70 but you won't say that your decision is because the ones that have 72 are lying.

If you don't know Greek and cannot read the manuscripts then you are going to rely on the expertise of those translators who decided which manuscripts had more authority. For instance an older manuscript with 72 might outweigh a newer one with 70.

I am not sure after listening to all the reasons why some say the manuscripts with 72 are to be relied on over the ones that say 70 and I don't have enough knowledge in the Greek or on the history of the manuscripts in question to make my own decision on that.

Does that mean that I MUST decide? No. I can leave it as unknown. It does not really matter to me. I mean if you want to imagine a possible symbolic meaning you might want to go with 72 since there were 72 nations listed in Genesis and it could mean symbolicaly sent to all the nations, but that would not be very wise since they did not go to other nations. It really can be left unknown for me. If I ever get bored enough maybe I will do a complete study on everything that has been written by textual critics on which manuscripts have 70 and which have 72 and which ones carry the day.

At any rate you certainly cannot decide the answer because you WANT the KJV to be the right one, You have to know which manuscripts have 70 and which have 72 and consider that if some of the manuscripts discovered since the KJV that were older than what the KJV had say 72 that might have caused the KJV scholars to side with 72 as well.



New International Version
After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go.

New Living Translation
The Lord now chose seventy-two other disciples and sent them ahead in pairs to all the towns and places he planned to visit.

English Standard Version
After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead of him, two by two, into every town and place where he himself was about to go.

Berean Study Bible
After this, the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of Him to every town and place He was about to visit.

Berean Literal Bible
Now after these things, the Lord also appointed seventy-two others and sent them in two by two before His face, into every city and place where He Himself was about to go.


New American Standard Bible
Now after this the Lord appointed seventy-two others, and sent them in pairs ahead of Him to every city and place where He Himself was going to come.




Christian Standard Bible
After this, the Lord appointed seventy-two others, and he sent them ahead of him in pairs to every town and place where he himself was about to go.



Contemporary English Version
Later the Lord chose 72 other followers and sent them out two by two to every town and village where he was about to go.

Douay-Rheims Bible
AND after these things the Lord appointed also other seventy-two: and he sent them two and two before his face into every city and place whither he himself was to come.


Good News Translation
After this the Lord chose another seventy-two men and sent them out two by two, to go ahead of him to every town and place where he himself was about to go.


NET Bible
After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead of him two by two into every town and place where he himself was about to go.

New Heart English Bible
Now after these things, the Lord also appointed seventy-two others, and sent them two by two ahead of him into every city and place, where he was about to come.

 

[Dino246]

You will never learn the answer to your questions if you rely on the KJV rather than the original manuscripts.

The number is seventy in some manuscripts of the Alexandrian (such as Codex Sinaiticus) and Caesarean text traditions but seventy-two in most other Alexandrian and Western texts.

the Greek word “hebdomekonta” (coded 1440 in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible) is translated “seventy.” However, immediately following this word is the Greek word “duo” in brackets (duo) translated “two.” Footnotes of several translations indicate that the Greek manuscripts are divided between 70 and 72 as the number sent out and there is no way to be sure of which one is the original.

So when you compare with the following English translations what you are seeing is that the committee of Greek Scholars who are expert in all the manuscripts in extant believe that the evidence leans toward those manuscripts that use the 72

It is not a matter of which one is wrong and which one is right. It is a matter of which manuscripts have 70 and which have 72.
If you are an expert of the manuscripts you can make a decision as to why you will ignore manuscripts that have 72 and go with the ones that have 70 but you won't say that your decision is because the ones that have 72 are lying.

If you don't know Greek and cannot read the manuscripts then you are going to rely on the expertise of those translators who decided which manuscripts had more authority. For instance an older manuscript with 72 might outweigh a newer one with 70.

I am not sure after listening to all the reasons why some say the manuscripts with 72 are to be relied on over the ones that say 70 and I don't have enough knowledge in the Greek or on the history of the manuscripts in question to make my own decision on that.

Does that mean that I MUST decide? No. I can leave it as unknown. It does not really matter to me. I mean if you want to imagine a possible symbolic meaning you might want to go with 72 since there were 72 nations listed in Genesis and it could mean symbolicaly sent to all the nations, but that would not be very wise since they did not go to other nations. It really can be left unknown for me. If I ever get bored enough maybe I will do a complete study on everything that has been written by textual critics on which manuscripts have 70 and which have 72 and which ones carry the day.

At any rate you certainly cannot decide the answer because you WANT the KJV to be the right one, You have to know which manuscripts have 70 and which have 72 and consider that if some of the manuscripts discovered since the KJV that were older than what the KJV had say 72 that might have caused the KJV scholars to side with 72 as well.



New International Version
After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go.

New Living Translation
The Lord now chose seventy-two other disciples and sent them ahead in pairs to all the towns and places he planned to visit.

English Standard Version
After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead of him, two by two, into every town and place where he himself was about to go.

Berean Study Bible
After this, the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of Him to every town and place He was about to visit.

Berean Literal Bible
Now after these things, the Lord also appointed seventy-two others and sent them in two by two before His face, into every city and place where He Himself was about to go.


New American Standard Bible
Now after this the Lord appointed seventy-two others, and sent them in pairs ahead of Him to every city and place where He Himself was going to come.




Christian Standard Bible
After this, the Lord appointed seventy-two others, and he sent them ahead of him in pairs to every town and place where he himself was about to go.



Contemporary English Version
Later the Lord chose 72 other followers and sent them out two by two to every town and village where he was about to go.

Douay-Rheims Bible
AND after these things the Lord appointed also other seventy-two: and he sent them two and two before his face into every city and place whither he himself was to come.


Good News Translation
After this the Lord chose another seventy-two men and sent them out two by two, to go ahead of him to every town and place where he himself was about to go.


NET Bible
After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead of him two by two into every town and place where he himself was about to go.

New Heart English Bible
Now after these things, the Lord also appointed seventy-two others, and sent them two by two ahead of him into every city and place, where he was about to come.

I applaud your effort to educate him. At least the information is there for others to read and consider.

 

[John146]

You will never learn the answer to your questions if you rely on the KJV rather than the original manuscripts.

Do you have them? Of course not, they do not exist.

 

[John146]

It does not really matter to me.

It matters to me. I want the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. One contains a lie and the other is truth. The one that is lying should be thrown out for it cannot be trusted.

 

[Scribe]

I applaud your effort to educate him. At least the information is there for others to read and consider.

That is always ever my only goal. To set an example of how we should try and seek answers together and edify one another. Even if we don't agree, we should strive to agree on the proper method of seeking answers.

 

[John146]

You will never learn the answer to your questions if you rely on the KJV rather than the original manuscripts.

The number is seventy in some manuscripts of the Alexandrian (such as Codex Sinaiticus) and Caesarean text traditions but seventy-two in most other Alexandrian and Western texts.

the Greek word “hebdomekonta” (coded 1440 in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible) is translated “seventy.” However, immediately following this word is the Greek word “duo” in brackets (duo) translated “two.” Footnotes of several translations indicate that the Greek manuscripts are divided between 70 and 72 as the number sent out and there is no way to be sure of which one is the original.

So when you compare with the following English translations what you are seeing is that the committee of Greek Scholars who are expert in all the manuscripts in extant believe that the evidence leans toward those manuscripts that use the 72

It is not a matter of which one is wrong and which one is right. It is a matter of which manuscripts have 70 and which have 72.
If you are an expert of the manuscripts you can make a decision as to why you will ignore manuscripts that have 72 and go with the ones that have 70 but you won't say that your decision is because the ones that have 72 are lying.

If you don't know Greek and cannot read the manuscripts then you are going to rely on the expertise of those translators who decided which manuscripts had more authority. For instance an older manuscript with 72 might outweigh a newer one with 70.

I am not sure after listening to all the reasons why some say the manuscripts with 72 are to be relied on over the ones that say 70 and I don't have enough knowledge in the Greek or on the history of the manuscripts in question to make my own decision on that.

Does that mean that I MUST decide? No. I can leave it as unknown. It does not really matter to me. I mean if you want to imagine a possible symbolic meaning you might want to go with 72 since there were 72 nations listed in Genesis and it could mean symbolicaly sent to all the nations, but that would not be very wise since they did not go to other nations. It really can be left unknown for me. If I ever get bored enough maybe I will do a complete study on everything that has been written by textual critics on which manuscripts have 70 and which have 72 and which ones carry the day.

At any rate you certainly cannot decide the answer because you WANT the KJV to be the right one, You have to know which manuscripts have 70 and which have 72 and consider that if some of the manuscripts discovered since the KJV that were older than what the KJV had say 72 that might have caused the KJV scholars to side with 72 as well.



New International Version
After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go.

New Living Translation
The Lord now chose seventy-two other disciples and sent them ahead in pairs to all the towns and places he planned to visit.

English Standard Version
After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead of him, two by two, into every town and place where he himself was about to go.

Berean Study Bible
After this, the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of Him to every town and place He was about to visit.

Berean Literal Bible
Now after these things, the Lord also appointed seventy-two others and sent them in two by two before His face, into every city and place where He Himself was about to go.


New American Standard Bible
Now after this the Lord appointed seventy-two others, and sent them in pairs ahead of Him to every city and place where He Himself was going to come.




Christian Standard Bible
After this, the Lord appointed seventy-two others, and he sent them ahead of him in pairs to every town and place where he himself was about to go.



Contemporary English Version
Later the Lord chose 72 other followers and sent them out two by two to every town and village where he was about to go.

Douay-Rheims Bible
AND after these things the Lord appointed also other seventy-two: and he sent them two and two before his face into every city and place whither he himself was to come.


Good News Translation
After this the Lord chose another seventy-two men and sent them out two by two, to go ahead of him to every town and place where he himself was about to go.


NET Bible
After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them on ahead of him two by two into every town and place where he himself was about to go.

New Heart English Bible
Now after these things, the Lord also appointed seventy-two others, and sent them two by two ahead of him into every city and place, where he was about to come.

The reading of SEVENTY is found in the majority of all texts including, A, C and Sinaiticus. It is also the reading of E, G, H, K, L, N, W, X, Delta, Theta, Pi, Psi, the Old Latin copies f, q, r1, and the Syriac Peshitta, Herclean and Palestinian, as well as the Coptic Boharic, Gothic, Ethiopian and Slavonic ancient versions.

The reading of SEVENTY is that of Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Cranmer’s Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, The Beza N.T. 1599, Wesley’s N.T. 1755, The Alford N.T. 1870, the Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, Godbey N.T. 1902, The Weymouth N.T. 1903, The Moffatt N.T. 1913, Bible in Basic English 1961, The Phillips N.T. 1962, the NASB 1963 - 1995, NKJV 1982, RSV 1954, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the Amplified 1987, the NRSV 1989 (by Bruce Metzger), KJV 21st Century 1994, God’s Word 1995, Third Millennium Bible 1998, Lawrie Translation 1998, God's First Truth 1999, The Last Days N.T. 1999, The Common N.T. 1999, The Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, the Message 2002, The Tomson N.T. 2002, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, the Holman Standard 2009, The New European Version 2010, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Jubilee Bible 2010, Conservative Bible 2011, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Voice 2012, Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), World English Bible 2012, Bond Slave Version 2012, The English Majority Text N.T. 2013, The Far Above All Translation 2014, The Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Pioneers’ N.T. 2014, International Standard Version 2014, The Modern Literal N.T. 2014 and the Modern English Version 2014.

Foreign Language Bibles - 70

Among foreign language Bibles that have our Lord Jesus sending out SEVENTY (and not 72) are the following: The Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, the Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995, the 1997 Biblia de las Américas, and the 2005 La Biblia de los Hispanos. Also reading 70 are the Italian Diodati 1649, the Riveduta 1927, the New Diodati 1991, La Parola e Vita 1997, the Portuguese Almeida, Luther’s German bible 1545, the German Elberfelder 1871, the Russian Synodal version, the Dutch Staten Vertaling, the Chinese Union Traditional bible, and both the modern Hebrew and the modern Greek Bibles.

 

[Scribe]

The reading of SEVENTY is found in the majority of all texts including, A, C and Sinaiticus. It is also the reading of E, G, H, K, L, N, W, X, Delta, Theta, Pi, Psi, the Old Latin copies f, q, r1, and the Syriac Peshitta, Herclean and Palestinian, as well as the Coptic Boharic, Gothic, Ethiopian and Slavonic ancient versions.

The reading of SEVENTY is that of Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Cranmer’s Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, The Beza N.T. 1599, Wesley’s N.T. 1755, The Alford N.T. 1870, the Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, Godbey N.T. 1902, The Weymouth N.T. 1903, The Moffatt N.T. 1913, Bible in Basic English 1961, The Phillips N.T. 1962, the NASB 1963 - 1995, NKJV 1982, RSV 1954, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the Amplified 1987, the NRSV 1989 (by Bruce Metzger), KJV 21st Century 1994, God’s Word 1995, Third Millennium Bible 1998, Lawrie Translation 1998, God's First Truth 1999, The Last Days N.T. 1999, The Common N.T. 1999, The Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, the Message 2002, The Tomson N.T. 2002, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, the Holman Standard 2009, The New European Version 2010, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Jubilee Bible 2010, Conservative Bible 2011, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Voice 2012, Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), World English Bible 2012, Bond Slave Version 2012, The English Majority Text N.T. 2013, The Far Above All Translation 2014, The Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Pioneers’ N.T. 2014, International Standard Version 2014, The Modern Literal N.T. 2014 and the Modern English Version 2014.

Foreign Language Bibles - 70

Among foreign language Bibles that have our Lord Jesus sending out SEVENTY (and not 72) are the following: The Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, the Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995, the 1997 Biblia de las Américas, and the 2005 La Biblia de los Hispanos. Also reading 70 are the Italian Diodati 1649, the Riveduta 1927, the New Diodati 1991, La Parola e Vita 1997, the Portuguese Almeida, Luther’s German bible 1545, the German Elberfelder 1871, the Russian Synodal version, the Dutch Staten Vertaling, the Chinese Union Traditional bible, and both the modern Hebrew and the modern Greek Bibles.

That's good and do you have a list of the manuscripts that have 72?

 

[John146]

That's good and do you have a list of the manuscripts that have 72?

The Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, the so called oldest and best manuscripts upon which most modern versions are based, differ from each other. These two manuscripts differ in significant ways from each other more than 3000 times in the gospels alone.

English versions like the NIV 1984-2011, NET and the 2001-2011 ESV (English Standard Version), along with the Catholic Douay, St. Joseph New American Bible 1970, and New Jerusalem bible 1985 all read “seventy TWO”, which is the reading of Vaticanus, D and P75.

It is of interest to see the confusion of the scholars in that the previous RSV and NRSV both read "70", but then the revision of the revision of the revision - the ESV - has now adopted the reading of "72”.

 

[Dino246]

The reading of SEVENTY is found in the majority of all texts including, A, C and Sinaiticus. It is also the reading of E, G, H, K, L, N, W, X, Delta, Theta, Pi, Psi, the Old Latin copies f, q, r1, and the Syriac Peshitta, Herclean and Palestinian, as well as the Coptic Boharic, Gothic, Ethiopian and Slavonic ancient versions.

The reading of SEVENTY is that of Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Cranmer’s Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, The Beza N.T. 1599, Wesley’s N.T. 1755, The Alford N.T. 1870, the Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, Godbey N.T. 1902, The Weymouth N.T. 1903, The Moffatt N.T. 1913, Bible in Basic English 1961, The Phillips N.T. 1962, the NASB 1963 - 1995, NKJV 1982, RSV 1954, the Complete Jewish Bible 1998, The Koster Scriptures 1998, the Amplified 1987, the NRSV 1989 (by Bruce Metzger), KJV 21st Century 1994, God’s Word 1995, Third Millennium Bible 1998, Lawrie Translation 1998, God's First Truth 1999, The Last Days N.T. 1999, The Common N.T. 1999, The Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, the Message 2002, The Tomson N.T. 2002, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, the Holman Standard 2009, The New European Version 2010, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Jubilee Bible 2010, Conservative Bible 2011, The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, The Voice 2012, Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), World English Bible 2012, Bond Slave Version 2012, The English Majority Text N.T. 2013, The Far Above All Translation 2014, The Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Pioneers’ N.T. 2014, International Standard Version 2014, The Modern Literal N.T. 2014 and the Modern English Version 2014.

Foreign Language Bibles - 70

Among foreign language Bibles that have our Lord Jesus sending out SEVENTY (and not 72) are the following: The Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, the Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995, the 1997 Biblia de las Américas, and the 2005 La Biblia de los Hispanos. Also reading 70 are the Italian Diodati 1649, the Riveduta 1927, the New Diodati 1991, La Parola e Vita 1997, the Portuguese Almeida, Luther’s German bible 1545, the German Elberfelder 1871, the Russian Synodal version, the Dutch Staten Vertaling, the Chinese Union Traditional bible, and both the modern Hebrew and the modern Greek Bibles.

Other translations don't have evidentiary value on this question.

 

[Dino246]

It is of interest to see the confusion of the scholars in that the previous RSV and NRSV both read "70", but then the revision of the revision of the revision - the ESV - has now adopted the reading of "72”.

Why do you continually assert negative characteristics to modern translators? Are you even certain that the same individuals were involved? If not, why do you call it "confusion" instead of accepting it as a revision?

 

[Gideon300]

Absolutely. But let's keep in mind the doctrine of the divine preservation of Scripture, which was trashed by modern liberal critics (both Higher and Lower critics). It ultimately leads to the Authorized Version. The Psalmist said "Thy Word is forever settled in Heaven" and that should be the basis of this doctrine.

We know that God preserved the Tanakh (Old Testament) through scribes (sopherim). This became a hereditary occupation, and the Hebrew scribes had such great veneration for every letter of the Bible that they even counted the letters. And if there was even a single error, they discarded what they had transcribed and started from scratch.

Thus the Lord Jesus Christ -- speaking about 1500 years after Moses -- could confidently assert that the Scriptures (which spoke of Him,) consisted of (1) the Law (5 books), (2) the Prophets (8 books), and the Psalms (11 books beginning with the Psalms). That is a total of 24 books (which were later rearranged and split up into 39 books as found in Protestant bibles). Both Christ and His enemies believed without the shadow of a doubt that the OT was the very Word of God. Thus Christ always said to His detractors "Have ye not read?"

Now the Masoretic Text of the OT, upon which the KJB is based (as found in the Mikraot Gedolot or Rabbinic Bible from the 16th century) dates from around 1000 AD in the Leningrad Codex. But when scholars examined the Isaiah scroll from around 200 BC (which was among the Dead Sea Scrolls), it was an almost exact replica. This confirmed the divine preservation of the Bible for over 1200 years. Going back to Moses then, we have a total of almost 3,000 years of continuous divine preservation, as stated here : "The text of the Great Isaiah Scroll is generally consistent with the Masoretic version and preserves all sixty-six chapters of the Hebrew version in the same sequence..."

The same principle applies to the New Testament Textus Receptus (Received Text) for which over 5,000 manuscripts dating from the 2nd to the 14th centuries are found to agree in the majority of manuscripts, even though they come from various regions and different times.

The problem arose when modern critics resorted to corrupted manuscripts for both the OT and NT (to prove how clever they were). They had a perverse desire to discard the majority of manuscripts and promote a handful of very corrupt manuscripts as "the best" because they happened to be the oldest. In this case oldest translated into "the worst", as clearly established by conservative textual scholars. But the damage was done, and the movement for modern bible versions began in 1881 and has continued to this day. And it is accompanied by animosity to the KJB (along with all kinds of nonsensical propaganda)

There were very few evangelists, pastors, teachers, professors, or theologians who questioned those promoting the corrupt manuscripts. But Edward F. Hills was a genuine scholar who wrote The King James Version Defended, and spelled out everything for the general reader. But to get to the heart of the Great Bible Version Hoax one needs to read and study The Revision Revised by Dean John Willian Burgon (an outstanding 19th century scholar). Both books are available from Amazon.

The issue is not whether someone cannot get saved by using a modern version. The issue is "Which English translation out to 20 or more translations and paraphrases can be, and should be trusted as the very Word of God?". And there is no question that the Bible that has been around for over 400 years is the one to be trusted. Commentators and preachers from the 18th to the 20th centuries had no trouble holding to the trustworthiness, accuracy, and reliability of the King James Bible. And for those who prefer an updated KJB there is the King James 2000 Bible (but NOT the corrupted New King James Version).

Sorry, I cannot agree with you. I detest liberal "scholarship" and "higher criticism". It's just doubt and unbelief masquerading as intellect. My favourite scholar, Watchman Nee, used the American Standard Version. But he was also most learned in Greek. When I'm looking for clarity, I'll check most of the translations on Bible Hub.

More than anything, we need the illumination of the Holy Spirit. Too many false doctrines have been promoted by those who take verses in isolation and out of context. And that includes devotees of the KJV.

 

[Nehemiah6]

My favourite scholar, Watchman Nee, used the American Standard Version.

The ASV was a warmed over version of the Revised Version (RV) or English Revised Version of Westcott & Hort (1881). So Watchman Nee was duped in this matter, since W& H resorted to the most corrupt manuscripts -- primarily Aleph and B -- for their corrupted Greek text. See The Revision Revised.

All Christians should have been OUTRAGED as this blatant attempt to replace the true Word of God with a counterfeit bible. But that did not happen.

 

[Scribe]

The Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, the so called oldest and best manuscripts upon which most modern versions are based, differ from each other. These two manuscripts differ in significant ways from each other more than 3000 times in the gospels alone.

English versions like the NIV 1984-2011, NET and the 2001-2011 ESV (English Standard Version), along with the Catholic Douay, St. Joseph New American Bible 1970, and New Jerusalem bible 1985 all read “seventy TWO”, which is the reading of Vaticanus, D and P75.

It is of interest to see the confusion of the scholars in that the previous RSV and NRSV both read "70", but then the revision of the revision of the revision - the ESV - has now adopted the reading of "72”.

This all sounds like emotional rhetoric. The proper discussion is to drill down to the specific manuscripts that have 70 and 72 and read about the discussion from a textual critic (expert) which I am sure there is much written on it. Scholars who don't have any agenda other than simply explaining why one manuscript differs from another and possible reasons why one is more reliable than the other is a long discussion that can't be summarized into "this English translation is lying" and "this one is telling the truth" as to the 70 or 72.

Frankly my example of how the KJV uses candlesticks instead of lampstands would be a better example than yours as to which is telling the truth and which isn't.

The NIV has Lampstands, the KJV has candlesticks. Which one is telling the truth the NIV or the KJV?

 

[Scribe]

The Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, the so called oldest and best manuscripts upon which most modern versions are based, differ from each other. These two manuscripts differ in significant ways from each other more than 3000 times in the gospels alone.

English versions like the NIV 1984-2011, NET and the 2001-2011 ESV (English Standard Version), along with the Catholic Douay, St. Joseph New American Bible 1970, and New Jerusalem bible 1985 all read “seventy TWO”, which is the reading of Vaticanus, D and P75.

It is of interest to see the confusion of the scholars in that the previous RSV and NRSV both read "70", but then the revision of the revision of the revision - the ESV - has now adopted the reading of "72”.

Revelation 1:12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks;

The NIV has Lampstands, the KJV has candlesticks. Which one is telling the truth the NIV or the KJV?

 

[Dino246]

since W& H resorted to the most corrupt manuscripts -- primarily Aleph and B -- for their corrupted Greek text.

You keep making the claim but providing no evidence. Show us the EVIDENCE of corruption. Without it, your assertions are empty.

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

I do not believe that a translation from the copies of the original Greek manuscripts into English by the KJV scholars was a miracle whereby the English text of the KJV became the new original manuscripts and replaced the Greek manuscripts. No I do not. And who would?

This may be the "straw that breaks the camel's back," eh?:

If The Preserved Scripture Says: "All Scripture is Inspired of God, And, Is Profitable..."

Then, IF none of "the Bibles" today, are "Inspired" Then, NONE of them are "profitable,"
in which case, ALL of us are wasting our time, correct?

 

[Dino246]

This may be the "straw that breaks the camel's back," eh?:

If The Preserved Scripture Says: "All Scripture is Inspired of God, And, Is Profitable..."

Then, IF none of "the Bibles" today, are "Inspired" Then, NONE of them are "profitable,"
in which case, ALL of us are wasting our time, correct?

The word of God is inspired.

The wording of the translations is not; God did not inspire the translators as He did the authors.

It's that simple.

 

[Truth7t7]

There have been many threads with this topic. Obviously, some newer like 2000+ A.D. have been growing more progressive. But older versions are still good and what matters is the translation from Hebrew/Greek.

Is what matters is not using the corrupt texts from the philosophical schools in (Alexandrian Egypt), where they changed Gods words

The new translations are supported by these corrupt Alexandrian texts, and people dont have clue

 

[tribesman]

... Where is it, In God's Pure And Preserved Word, To me, in my own language, that tells me I have to "become a Foreign Language "scholar" in order to understand HIS HOLY Word Of Truth. IF so, I would be more than glad to ADD that to my list of Bible Study Rules! Amen?

Much Better, And, Way Simpler just to obey God's "study" Rule (2 Timothy 2:15 KJB!), and then Rely On The Blessed Teacher (1 Corinthians 2:13 KJB!), instead of man's wisdom, eh?

No one has suggested that you need to become a scholar. A look up at the original texts is not something bad though. Doing so has nothing to do with "man's wisdom". But you'd be well off with KJV as an english speaker in any case.