Bible "versions"?
- Thread starter GRACE_ambassador
- Start date
-
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.
If a person sincerely desires to use the Bible of which God FULLY approves, yes. The Holy Spirit will lead that person to the King James Bible. That is my personal experience as well as that of my wife (and many others).
Could an English translation have remained in use for over 400 years unless it had God's approval? The Geneva Bible was a contemporary of the KJB, but today it is rarely if ever used. For hundreds of years, the English-speaking world (which included the whole British Empire) used the Authorized Version, and all recognized commentators used this Bible without a murmur. And not all of them were Anglicans either.
Had the Revision Committee of the Church of England in the 19th century consisted of only conservative scholars committed to making only absolutely necessary revisions to the KJB, we would not be having any controversies today. They were given a very specific mandate to maintain the Authorized Version and make only revisions which were deemed to be absolutely necessary. Instead Westcott & Hort gained a place on that committee, and subverted the Greek Text as well as the English translation. If you wish to know the details read and study The Revision Revised by Dean John William Burgon.
The English Revised Version (RV) of 1881 spawned all the modern versions such as the ASV, the RSV, the NASV, etc. etc. But a hoax was perpetrated by W & H, and almost everyone fell for it. Just like the hoax of the COVID pandemic. Which shows jhow easy it is to fool everyone.
Could an English translation have remained in use for over 400 years unless it had God's approval? The Geneva Bible was a contemporary of the KJB, but today it is rarely if ever used. For hundreds of years, the English-speaking world (which included the whole British Empire) used the Authorized Version, and all recognized commentators used this Bible without a murmur. And not all of them were Anglicans either.
Had the Revision Committee of the Church of England in the 19th century consisted of only conservative scholars committed to making only absolutely necessary revisions to the KJB, we would not be having any controversies today. They were given a very specific mandate to maintain the Authorized Version and make only revisions which were deemed to be absolutely necessary. Instead Westcott & Hort gained a place on that committee, and subverted the Greek Text as well as the English translation. If you wish to know the details read and study The Revision Revised by Dean John William Burgon.
The English Revised Version (RV) of 1881 spawned all the modern versions such as the ASV, the RSV, the NASV, etc. etc. But a hoax was perpetrated by W & H, and almost everyone fell for it. Just like the hoax of the COVID pandemic. Which shows jhow easy it is to fool everyone.
-
3
-
1
-
1
- Show all
So the amount of time that something exists is what grants it approval from God?? Sin has existed since Adam... I'm sure you wouldn't argue that God approves of sin. Or is it its popularity?? Is it the popularity of the KJV that grants it this approval from God that you believe it has???
I'm not saying that the KJV is the worst translation out there, but it's definitely not the best... and its completely illogical to call a specific translation having God's approval over others. You are totally allowed to feel that way, but it is not based off of factual information.
Problems with the KJV:
Of course the well known ones I mentioned before are "Easter" in Acts 12:4 and "Israel" in Deu 32:8.... But those are the small errors.
The KJV (and other Masoretic Text translations) mess up when it comes to leaving out names and anything dealing with numbers...
1. In The Messiahs genealogy in Luke 3:36 there is name Cainan (not to be confused with Canaan). You can find the record of him in both Genesis 10:24 and 11:13 in the Septuagint. He is missing from both places in the KJV.
2. There is also a big issue with the similar name Canaan.... There are many movies, pastors, etc. that teach the Israelites were in Egypt for 430 years (Exo 12:40). This is not possible. Moses was 80 when they left Egypt (Exo 7:7)... Moses' Father Amram lived to 137 (Exo 6:20).... and Moses' grandfather Kohath lived to 133 (Exo 6:18) who went with Jacob to Egypt (Gen 46:11 and 46:26). You don't even get 430 years when you add up the 80 years that Moses was in Egypt plus the entire life spans of his father and grandfather put together. The math just doesn't work.
The reality is, they were only in Egypt 215 years, not 430 years. But the KJV (Masoretic Text) left out Canaan from Exo 12:40. They were in Egypt and the land of Canaan for 430 years. The Septuagint, Samaritan Pentateuch and Josephus all agree on this. I suggest checking out the video "How long were the Israelites in Egypt" on YouTube by NathanH83
3. The KJV added 3ft (2 cubits) to Goliath's height (1 Sam 17:4)
4. In Genesis 11 it gives the Genealogy from Shem to Abram... and it tells how old each person was when their son was born. The KJV drops 100 years off of all these ages. For example in Gen 11:14 Salah lived 130 years and begat Eber... The KJV has Salah being 30 when this happened. This happens for all 6 generations in this passage which makes the translations off by 600 years. Again, The Septuagint, The Samaritan Pentateuch and Josephus are all in line on this.... its the Masoretic text (KJV) that is the odd one out. If you go by the KJV numbers, they have Shem outliving his son, grandson, great great grandson, great great great grandson, etc. He would have witnessed a lot of death of his offspring and been alive to know Abram as an older man... which there is no record of.
Many times the KJV does match with cross referenced verses from the New Testament:
5. In Acts 7:14 you will see Josephs family being 75 people. Well this is referring to Gen 46:27 and Exo 1:5... The KJV has both of these as "70 people". The Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls correctly have 75 in those verses.
6. In Luke 4:18 The Messiah says one of the things he was sent to do was recover the sight to the blind. That is supposed to be a reference to Isaiah 61:1.... but that phrase is completely missing from the KJV.
This has already gone on long enough, so I'm not going to put a bunch of cross reference scriptures on here... but when they are referring to the OT, I recommend that you compare NT scriptures to the KJV and a Septuagint translation side by side. You will see that The Septuagint will be inline with the NT much more often.
I have seen worse translations than the KJV, but the KJV definitely has its issues as well.
-
1
- Show all
I already replied to this post, but I just wanted to add that the KJV is missing a lot out of Deu 32:43 as well... which you can find in The Septuagint and Dead Sea Scrolls. I wont add any more to the list after that one, but I'm sure I have and will come across many more verses that the Masoretic Text either gives the wrong information, or is missing it altogether.
After all of the errors I clearly pointed out in the KJV and supplied the scriptures so you can look them up yourself.... and this is the only piece of my post you respond to???
I think it is very clear who is the one being "willfully blind".
The "LEADING" translation is irrelevant. Sin has been "leading" this world since the garden. All you are talking about is popularity... That does not negate the fact that it has plenty of errors.
I think it is very clear who is the one being "willfully blind".
The "LEADING" translation is irrelevant. Sin has been "leading" this world since the garden. All you are talking about is popularity... That does not negate the fact that it has plenty of errors.
-
1
- Show all
The KJV has not "maintained itself" as anything. It is merely the translation that happened to be the most-printed and most-readily-available translation for 300 years. It happened to be the translation that was commonly used in the English-speaking world over that time. None of this is evidence for anything.
As for being "under attack from the very beginning", one could say exactly the same for the NIV. After all, the KJV-only folks have been attacking the NIV "from the very beginning" as well.
As for being "under attack from the very beginning", one could say exactly the same for the NIV. After all, the KJV-only folks have been attacking the NIV "from the very beginning" as well.
-
2
-
1
- Show all
Ahh, the legendary Septuagint, Jesus says concerning what scripture he used, No mentioned of Septuagint. Many have erroneously propagated as BC documents but are not. Anyway, we go some examples of your seeming problems with the KJV. We look at the giant Goliath and why KJV adds 2 cubits to his height. Even older versions like Syriac Peshitta and the Latin Vulgate are the same with the Hebrew Text followed by the KJV, so, What do you think could you elaborate more by giving evidence/s?
Luk_24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
Luk_24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
-
1
- Show all
As a matter of fact, the NIV can be called "the ever-changing modern Bible". The NT was published in 1973, the complete NIV in 1978, then revised in 1984, then again revised in 2011, Chances are it is now due for another revision. A "WOKE" revision with some Critical Race Theory incorporated.
Its textual basis is also thoroughly corrupt:
"The manuscript base for the Old Testament was the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia Masoretic Hebrew Text. Other ancient texts consulted were the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion, the Latin Vulgate, the Syriac Peshitta, the Aramaic Targum, and for the Psalms the Juxta Hebraica of Jerome.[21] The manuscript base for the New Testament was the Koine Greek language editions of the United Bible Societies and of Nestle-Aland.[22] The deuterocanonical books are not included in the translation." [Noted in Wikipedia]
Biblia Hebraica is the corrupted OT. UBS-NA is the corrupted NT (going all the way back to Westcott & Hort). The Dead Sea Scrolls, the Samaritan Pentateuch, Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion were all HERETICAL texts! So if you love heretical writings you will love the NIV (the most corrupt English translation).
Its textual basis is also thoroughly corrupt:
"The manuscript base for the Old Testament was the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia Masoretic Hebrew Text. Other ancient texts consulted were the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion, the Latin Vulgate, the Syriac Peshitta, the Aramaic Targum, and for the Psalms the Juxta Hebraica of Jerome.[21] The manuscript base for the New Testament was the Koine Greek language editions of the United Bible Societies and of Nestle-Aland.[22] The deuterocanonical books are not included in the translation." [Noted in Wikipedia]
Biblia Hebraica is the corrupted OT. UBS-NA is the corrupted NT (going all the way back to Westcott & Hort). The Dead Sea Scrolls, the Samaritan Pentateuch, Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion were all HERETICAL texts! So if you love heretical writings you will love the NIV (the most corrupt English translation).
-
2
-
1
-
1
- Show all
4QSama in the Dead Sea Scrolls have goliath's height at 4 cubits like the Septuagint... not 6 like the KJV and Masoretic text. Are you going to address the other examples I gave, or just that one?
What about Canaan missing from Exo 12:40 that has lead all these people to falsely believe that the Israelites were in Egypt for 430 years?
What about the ages in the genealogies that has Shem outliving like 7 of his generations (Gen 11)?
What about the "70 people" in Gen 46:27 and Exo 1:5 that contradicts the "75" in Acts 7:14?
What about Isaiah 61:1 missing "recover the sight to the blind" that it says in Luke 4:18?
...and there is many more
I never claimed that any translation we have today is exactly what The Messiah used... nor do I believe that any translation is without error (including The Septuagint). All I have claimed is that the KJV is not infallible, and I used The Septuagint as a comparison to show some of the things that the KJV got wrong.
I look at God's "Word" as literally meaning "What He Says"... His "Words".
Like when we say "word is bond"... and to "keep your word".... we are speaking about the things we say.
This is how The Messiah was "The Word made flesh"... He was a physical representation of what The Father says... His "Word".
Writings can contain God's Word (what He says) in them, but the bible as a whole does not define what God's Word is. His Word is perfect... without error.... infallible. The bible is not.
Seeing that The Messiah represented the Word perfectly, I believe that he was able to pick about the scriptures and rightly divide God's Word from what was not of The Father. I believe we should be following His lead and attempting to do the same.
Like when we say "word is bond"... and to "keep your word".... we are speaking about the things we say.
This is how The Messiah was "The Word made flesh"... He was a physical representation of what The Father says... His "Word".
Writings can contain God's Word (what He says) in them, but the bible as a whole does not define what God's Word is. His Word is perfect... without error.... infallible. The bible is not.
Seeing that The Messiah represented the Word perfectly, I believe that he was able to pick about the scriptures and rightly divide God's Word from what was not of The Father. I believe we should be following His lead and attempting to do the same.