Bible versions-Is there only one?

[Dino246]

As stated in another post, I believe 'twisted' to be changing words that are to be suited for an audience for social acceptance not for sound doctrine, in other words for politics sake.

Unless you have evidence that specific words have been translated on that motivation, I'd say your argument is lacking merit.

I don't think any Christian should be reading paraphrase bibles.. not unless that person is very young or has reading difficulties. A person who can read without difficulty should be reading word for word.. because it's the words of God that we follow right?

I agree but only to a point. I see value in paraphrases for two specific purposes: getting a different perspective on a verse or passage, and introducing the Bible to someone whose reading preference is "Not unless I must". Any serious learner would do well to read a proper translation.

By the way, there is no "word for word" translation of the Bible in English. Translation does not work that way.

 

[Dino246]

The NIV is slowly changing over to another gospel and another Jesus... sadly, they're not the only ones.

Where is your evidence? Or, as I strongly suspect, is this just biased slander?

 

[Nehemiah6]

You just rendered the passage useless and meaningless by removing unknown. An unknown tongue means it's NOT KNOWN... by anybody, it's not a language.

The "unknown" does not belong in the text and that is why I quoted the actual Greek text.
And the word glossa can literally mean a human tongue, but in this context it means a language.

Strong's Concordance (1100)
glóssa: the tongue, a language
Original Word: γλῶσσα, ης, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: glóssa
Phonetic Spelling: (gloce-sah')
Definition: the tongue, a language
Usage: the tongue, a language, a nation (usually distinguished by their speech).

 

[-BLISS-]

Well excuse me won't you. I went and had some dinner. I don't stay online & on one website continuously.
People are free to read whichever translation/s they choose. You may have noticed there is no 'NIV Only' club.

I was referring to the limited time frame you had between replies wouldn't have been long enough to know the answer, I assume you didn't read the whole NIV newer update within the last hour?
and I do not read the KJV if that was what you was implying. There is absolutely no need to be so rude.

 

[KJV1611]

Where is your evidence? Or, as I strongly suspect, is this just biased slander?

You must have missed my post on the the New Age Christ... You know, the one that has an origin and is a son of the gods.

 

[Dino246]

Many lost people have more knowledge about the Bible issue than Christians. Most Christians have no idea about versions. Most think the new versions are just easier to read versions from the KJV. False.

Fallacious (and groundless) appeal to popularity. Yet another bad argument.

 

[KJV1611]

The "unknown" does not belong in the text and that is why I quoted the actual Greek text.
And the word glossa can literally mean a human tongue, but in this context it means a language.

Strong's Concordance (1100)
glóssa: the tongue, a language
Original Word: γλῶσσα, ης, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: glóssa
Phonetic Spelling: (gloce-sah')
Definition: the tongue, a language
Usage: the tongue, a language, a nation (usually distinguished by their speech).

Who cares if it was in the Greek or not and who knows for sure anyway. Every time God has updated his word he has given more revelation. I'm not going to get into this, I'll be accused of being an arrogant snob for talking about something that actually know about.

 

[Aerials1978]

Maybe it's like Joel Osteen said, Jesus is the only way to God but there are many paths to Jesus.

The only path I know is the one the Father laid:
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day.
John 6:44(NIV)

 

[Dino246]

In 2011 the NIV updated their scripture to include gender neutral language, as this isn't the word of God and they changed wording to be more socially inclusive I view it as the work of the devil!
if you have been reading the NIV for many many years then you wouldn't notice this in the older versions.. although the new versions are gender changed I assumed this was common knowledge for Bible readers.

If the Greek or Hebrew term is not gender-specific, and earlier versions specify gender, is this a change merely for the sake of social inclusivity, or a legitimate change based on the original language? Or, if the term is gender-specific, but the context is clearly gender-neutral? The change could be predicated on legitimate textual issues with no consideration for social pressure.

Again, without specific evidence, you really have no argument.

 

[-BLISS-]

Unless you have evidence that specific words have been translated on that motivation, I'd say your argument is lacking merit.


Evidence? The evidence is written in black & white.. in the book itself
if I remember rightly the NIV and other modern translations specifically admitted changing words to be more socially inclusive.

 

[Dino246]

Who cares if it was in the Greek or not and who knows for sure anyway. Every time God has updated his word he has given more revelation. I'm not going to get into this, I'll be accused of being an arrogant snob for talking about something that actually know about.

No, you'll be accused of being an arrogant snob if you imply that others are inferior for now knowing what you supposedly know.

It's the difference between saying, "Hey, I was studying (x) and found , which I found very interesting" versus, "You all clearly don't understand what is all about." It's in the way you frame the information.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Where is your evidence? Or, as I strongly suspect, is this just biased slander?

Take some time to carefully compare (1) the Received Text, (2) the KJV, and (3) the NIV. It is AN INCONTROVERTIBLE FACT that the NIV has presented us with a corrupt Bible.
https://www.kingjamesvideoministries.com/NIVOmissions.pdf

The Lord's Prayer is a good example of the SERIOUS mutilation of Scripture in the NIV (and other modern bibles)

LUKE 11: KJV: 25 OMITTED WORDS BOLDED
2 And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. 3 Give us day by day our daily bread. 4 And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil.

LUKE 11:NIV
2 He said to them, “When you pray, say: “ ‘Father, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come. 3 Give us each day our daily bread. 4 Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us. And lead us not into temptation.’ ”

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

I was referring to the limited time frame you had between replies wouldn't have been long enough to know the answer, I assume you didn't read the whole NIV newer update within the last hour?
and I do not read the KJV if that was what you was implying. There is absolutely no need to be so rude.

Rude?
You turned up swinging.

 

[Dino246]

Evidence? The evidence is written in black & white.. in the book itself

Here's a principle of debate-format discussion: if you make an assertion, you are responsible to provide the evidence. I can happily ignore your assertion as irrelevant until you provide evidence to back it up.

if I remember rightly the NIV and other modern translations specifically admitted changing words to be more socially inclusive. [/QUOTE]
"If I remember" does not qualify as evidence of the charge you have laid.

 

[JohnR7]

The children of Israel roaming around in the wilderness are a foreshadow of Christianity.

The 40 years is very literal for Christians. It takes 40 years of being a christian before we enter in and really start to understand and become an elder in the church.

 

[KJV1611]

The 40 years is very literal for Christians. It takes 40 years of being a christian before we enter in and really start to understand and become an elder in the church.

All it takes is the right spirit.

 

[John146]

I think your cult has taught you to feel superior.
I never thought my NIV was an easier to read KJV because I read the preface from the committee of translators. The KJV is a translation. That is all. It is not the one translation by which all others must be judged.

When the NIV came out it claimed it was easier to read than the KJV. Why the KJV? You never read a new version comparing themselves to the esv or other new versions. Most compare themselves to the KJV.

 

[JohnR7]

All it takes is the right spirit.

Have you been a Christian for 40 years?

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Take some time to carefully compare (1) the Received Text, (2) the KJV, and (3) the NIV. It is AN INCONTROVERTIBLE FACT that the NIV has presented us with a corrupt Bible.
https://www.kingjamesvideoministries.com/NIVOmissions.pdf

The Lord's Prayer is a good example of the SERIOUS mutilation of Scripture in the NIV (and other modern bibles)

LUKE 11: KJV: 25 OMITTED WORDS BOLDED
2 And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. 3 Give us day by day our daily bread. 4 And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil.

LUKE 11:NIV
2 He said to them, “When you pray, say: “ ‘Father, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come. 3 Give us each day our daily bread. 4 Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us. And lead us not into temptation.’ ”

O but you are a cool liar.

The NIV looks like this

Luke 11
2 He said to them, ‘When you pray, say:

‘“Father,[a]
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come.[b]
3 Give us each day our daily bread.
4 Forgive us our sins,
for we also forgive everyone who sins against us.[c]
And lead us not into temptation.”’[d]

[a] Some manuscripts Our Father in heaven
[b] Some manuscripts come. May your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
[c] Greek everyone who is indebted to us
[d] Some manuscripts temptation, but deliver us from the evil one

 

[John146]

The only path I know is the one the Father laid:
No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day.
John 6:44(NIV)

Here’s the difference. The KJV speaks singular while the NIV speaks in plural form. Which is correct?

John 6:44 44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.