Bible "versions"?

  • 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.
John146 said:
All new versions lack truth, they lack verses, and important key words.
Click to expand...
Rubbish. All versions are in some way flawed because they are translations from a foreign language. The KJV is a problem because the version of English used is archaic. I did not grow up with the Bible. When I got saved, the KJV was still the most commonly quoted. I listened to many preachers tell me that the KJV said this but it really meant that. So rather than try to learn (in effect) a new language, I purchased more modern versions.

I'm not 100% happy with any of them but I can't be bothered to learn Greek. If I could only have one, I'd have the Amplified. I read a lot of the writings of people who are way more qualified than I am to explain God's word. I was blessed to be mentored by Ivor Marshall (who used the KJV exclusively) and Watchman Nee, a spiritual giant who was worked to death in prison by the communist regime of China.

The reality is that we need the Holy Spirit to make God's word real to us. Without the Spirit, it's just confusion. I use Bible hub. Most of the time there is very little difference between translations. The obsession with the KJV is unwarranted and unhelpful. New Christians who are not versed in Shakespearean English should avoid the KJV.
 
Lanolin said:
impotent and impossible are kinda of completely different words...in english anyway!

lol

also if it was 'impotent' that would change the meaning, to something sort of sexual?! although people do use 'omnipotent' to mean Godly.

Anyway, what she said he said was you have to CROSS out the word 'impossible' in your Bibles (whatever version it is) and replace it with the word 'impotent'.

im like um ok. Right.
Click to expand...

I don't know the specific bible verse you are referring to, nor am I arguing that the ESV is necessarily a superior translation. As far as crossing out words in the bible... I'm sure I would do the same thing with the KJV in certain places. What I wouldn't do though is just take one Pastor's word for it. I would try to research why the translator chose that word... of course look up the word in the Hebrew or Greek... and find other places in scripture that use the same word and see how those are translated.
 
Gideon300 said:
The obsession with the KJV is unwarranted and unhelpful.
Click to expand...

If you truly believed you had God's pure and holy preserved words, wouldn't you be obsessed with telling people too? I hope so. The KJV was written with the most correct form of English words.
 
John146 said:
If you truly believed you had God's pure and holy preserved words, wouldn't you be obsessed with telling people too? I hope so. The KJV was written with the most correct form of English words.
Click to expand...

Even IF it was the "most correct form of English words".... It is not now.
 
MalikB said:
Even IF it was the "most correct form of English words".... It is not now.
Click to expand...

Sure it is. What we speak is an informal, watered-down version of English. We use "you" for both singular and plural forms. In English, "you" is plural as well as "ye". Thee and thou are singular forms. That makes for an accurate statement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nehemiah6
John146 said:
Sure it is. What we speak is an informal, watered-down version of English. We use "you" for both singular and plural forms. In English, "you" is plural as well as "ye". Thee and thou are singular forms. That makes for an accurate statement.
Click to expand...

I gave clear examples in my other post of words that don't exist or mean something totally different in todays English. It's dishonest to act like the only differences are the Yes, Thees, and Thous.
 
John146 said:
Sure it is. What we speak is an informal, watered-down version of English. We use "you" for both singular and plural forms. In English, "you" is plural as well as "ye". Thee and thou are singular forms. That makes for an accurate statement.
Click to expand...
What we (well, some of us) speak now is correct English. Your opinion about its quality is irrelevant. We don’t speak 16th-century English. “Thee” and “thou”, while more precise, are neither more correct nor current.
 
John146 said:
If you truly believed you had God's pure and holy preserved words, wouldn't you be obsessed with telling people too? I hope so. The KJV was written with the most correct form of English words.
Click to expand...
It’s sad that your obsession with telling people your opinion about the KJV appears to supersede your interest in telling them about Jesus.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fredoheaven
Gideon300 said:
Rubbish. All versions are in some way flawed because they are translations from a foreign language.
Click to expand...
There is a HUGE DIFFERENCE between flawed and corrupted. When you use corrupt Hebrew and Greek manuscripts (corrupted by Gnostics and others) to make English translations, you get a corrupted translation. The minority text - Aleph, A, B, C, D, and E -- was used (primarily Aleph and B, or Sinaiticus and Vaticanus).

And ALL modern versions follow the corrupted critical text based primarily upon that of West and Hort (as well as Kittel's Biblia Hebraica) . It is currently called Westcott & Hort [/NA 27 variants]. NA stands for Nestle-Aland. See Bible Hub. There are at least 1,500 serious corruptions, and actually thousands of changes (primarily omissions) from the traditional or Received Text (which represents the majority of manuscripts).
The KJV is a problem because the version of English used is archaic.
Click to expand...
Today this is a STRAW MAN argument, since the King James 2000 Bible has already addressed this issue (which is in fact a non-issue). The real archaisms are perhaps a total of 50. the rest of the Bible is in plain English (and thee and thou accurately represent what is in the text for singularity).
 
MalikB said:
I did not say I didn't want the KJV because it was too old. Let me rephrase what I did say: IF the English translation I choose requires me to constantly look up what the English word means, it would make more sense to me to invest my time in to learning the language in which the translation comes from. I have no problem with doing a deeper study into scripture, but isn't one of the main points of having a translation so that you can understand the writing in your native tongue? I would rather spend my time learning Hebrew words than learning new-old English words. For the English translations I do choose, I want them to be as accurate as possible while me still being able to understand the English words.

As far as the specific verses that I brought up, a simple google search on them will give you some more insight if interested. The translations of scripture I mentioned also have some sort of commentary or preface/introduction to explain. It would mean more coming from people fluent in the languages than coming from me.
Click to expand...
Interesting it may seem, learning other languages like Hebrew is fine, however, you learn them for accuracy? How can you say, one translation is accurate? Will you take your lessons to whom? From scholars of today? From lexicons? From the internet google translators? And, I just thought you brought those specific verses with a ready mind but you wanted me to do a google search. Ah.. well…that’s not my assignment but thanks anyway.
 
Gideon300 said:
Rubbish. All versions are in some way flawed because they are translations from a foreign language. The KJV is a problem because the version of English used is archaic. I did not grow up with the Bible. When I got saved, the KJV was still the most commonly quoted. I listened to many preachers tell me that the KJV said this but it really meant that. So rather than try to learn (in effect) a new language, I purchased more modern versions.

I'm not 100% happy with any of them but I can't be bothered to learn Greek. If I could only have one, I'd have the Amplified. I read a lot of the writings of people who are way more qualified than I am to explain God's word. I was blessed to be mentored by Ivor Marshall (who used the KJV exclusively) and Watchman Nee, a spiritual giant who was worked to death in prison by the communist regime of China.

The reality is that we need the Holy Spirit to make God's word real to us. Without the Spirit, it's just confusion. I use Bible hub. Most of the time there is very little difference between translations. The obsession with the KJV is unwarranted and unhelpful. New Christians who are not versed in Shakespearean English should avoid the KJV.
Click to expand...
If we have the Holy Spirit in us who guides us into all the truth, then there is no such bothering of the archaic English. Explore and you will have to know more. God bless
 
fredoheaven said:
Interesting it may seem, learning other languages like Hebrew is fine, however, you learn them for accuracy? How can you say, one translation is accurate? Will you take your lessons to whom? From scholars of today? From lexicons? From the internet google translators? And, I just thought you brought those specific verses with a ready mind but you wanted me to do a google search. Ah.. well…that’s not my assignment but thanks anyway.
Click to expand...

Of course the ideal scenario is not have to use any translation and to learn the entire languages. If you are going to use a translation... how do you know what is more accurate? Sure... lexicons, concordances, people that speak the language, etc. What is your point? How do you determine the KJV is more accurate than The Message bible? Is this not the same process?
 
Dino246 said:
What we (well, some of us) speak now is correct English. Your opinion about its quality is irrelevant. We don’t speak 16th-century English. “Thee” and “thou”, while more precise, are neither more correct nor current.
Click to expand...

Yep, we speak a dumbed down version of the English language. That's a fact, not just my opinion. The modern day English language is the toughest language to learn because we have gone away from correct English.
 
MalikB said:
And the Holy Spirit can only guide people to the KJV?
Click to expand...
According to the English scripture i use, the Holy Spirit will guide us into all the truth. This include the truth, the there is holy bible for me and that there are also perversions. The difference is you have it all flawed english versions but i have one final pure english version and ready to take a stand on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: John146
Dino246 said:
It’s sad that your obsession with telling people your opinion about the KJV appears to supersede your interest in telling them about Jesus.
Click to expand...

I guess I take for granted that those of us on the Christian discussion board have that issue settled.
 
I just went out to my porch and got a new translation of the NT... So far, so good! If anyone is interested... Its called The Good News of Messiah from Daniel Gregg.
 
fredoheaven said:
According to the English scripture i use, the Holy Spirit will guide us into all the truth. This include the truth, the there is holy bible for me and that there are also perversions. The difference is you have it all flawed english versions but i have one final pure english version and ready to take a stand on it.
Click to expand...

You can have that opinion.
 
I prefer the KJV, not because it is the best, but because I have used it so long that I am familiar with many of the errors in it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MalikB
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back