Warning New Bibles Coming Out

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

doctrox

Well-Known Member
Sep 9, 2018
1,281
973
113
worldwide
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
.
I believe that any version of the bible is good for material sufficiency.
Most ppl think so, but such would be a mistake.

Just one example:

All modern versions of the Holy Bible are copyrighted works.

To qualify for copyright protection, a work must be an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. This means the work must be independently created by a human author. Are you beginning to get the picture about why the plethora of bible version$ have been changed? More troubling is the diabolical design behind those changes...

Copyright: "The legal protection given to authors and artists to prevent reproduction of their work without their consent. The owner of a copyright has the exclusive right to print, reprint, publish, copy and sell the material covered by the copyright." The New Standard Encyclopedia, volume 3, page 565.

You've been hoodwinked because you're trusting in a book that is not the Holy Bible. Rather, you're trusting in a copyrighted invention of men who require compen$ation/attribution if you cite their work.

Modern "versions" of the Holy Bible are protected by copyright law. Permission must be obtained from, and fees paid to, the men who claim to own these derivative works. And different publishers have different terms.

"To be copyrightable, a derivative work must be different enough from the original to be regarded as a 'new work' or must contain a substantial amount of new material. Making minor changes or additions of little substance to a pre-existing work will not qualify the work as a new version for copyright purposes." -- Derivative Copyright Law (partial)

Conversely, the King James Bible is the only Bible not bound by a copyright. No author or publisher receives a royalty because God is the author.

The word of God is not bound (II Timothy 2:9) -- but your modern copyrighted version of it is.

If you post passages from your copyrighted version, then you are required by copyright law (and Forum Terms & Rules) to cite your sources:

"You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by Christianity Board, or you have the expressed written permission of the author. Otherwise, please properly cite all articles.
Respect copyrights. If you draw from others’ work, please cite your sources (reasonably) and provide proper credit."
- source: Forum Terms & Rules

Conversely, with the uncopyrighted Holy Bible (AV, KJB), you are not required to cite your source, as the truth cannot be copyrighted; no one can claim ownership of a testimony.
.
Anyone can read the NT and come away knowing that: 1. They are a sinner. 2. God demands us to follow Him in order to be saved. 3. To follow God means to obey Him.
The above will be true for any version.
But that "NT" has been altered for copyright purposes, so you're reading lies mixed with the truth.

If one wants to dive deep into theology and really study the bible,,, then we move to formal sufficiency and this must be studied.
Different versions must be used....
the Greek language must be used....
hermeneutics in general.
None of that is necessary; in fact, it only leads one away from the truth, corrupting minds from the simplicity that is in Christ. (2 Cor. 11:3).

But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. (2 Tim. 3:14-15)

Notice that even a child understands the holy scriptures -- no middlemen wanna-be ‘scholars’ required!

When one is starving...junk food looks good.
It sure does! All the more reason to seek God first on this rather than the approbation of men and their work$.

All of which brings us back to the admonition of @Cyd's OP:

Warning New Bibles Coming Out​

.
 
Last edited:

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
18,224
8,917
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
Gender
Female
.

Most ppl think so, but such would be a mistake.

Just one example:

All modern versions of the Holy Bible are copyrighted works.

To qualify for copyright protection, a work must be an original work of authorship fixed in a tangible medium of expression. This means the work must be independently created by a human author. Are you beginning to get the picture about why the plethora of bible version$ have been changed? More troubling is the diabolical design behind those changes...

Copyright: "The legal protection given to authors and artists to prevent reproduction of their work without their consent. The owner of a copyright has the exclusive right to print, reprint, publish, copy and sell the material covered by the copyright." The New Standard Encyclopedia, volume 3, page 565.

You've been hoodwinked because you're trusting in a book that is not the Holy Bible. Rather, you're trusting in a copyrighted invention of men who require compen$ation/attribution if you cite their work.

Modern "versions" of the Holy Bible are protected by copyright law. Permission must be obtained from, and fees paid to, the men who claim to own these derivative works. And different publishers have different terms.

"To be copyrightable, a derivative work must be different enough from the original to be regarded as a 'new work' or must contain a substantial amount of new material. Making minor changes or additions of little substance to a pre-existing work will not qualify the work as a new version for copyright purposes." -- Derivative Copyright Law (partial)

It takes money to put out a new version of the bible.
Those that do the work are entitled to receive some money for their effort.
I have no problem with this.
It's incumbant on the buyer to know which version is the best for him.

Conversely, the King James Bible is the only Bible not bound by a copyright. No author or publisher receives a royalty because God is the author.
God wrote the KJV?
That's interesting.
I thought King James commissioned its writing:

King James I commissioned the new Bible translation (which included the New Testament) in 1604 at the Hampton Court Conference primarily to resolve religious conflicts and eliminate anti-monarchical commentary in existing English versions. [1, 2, 3]
Key reasons behind the commission include:

    • Countering the Geneva Bible: The popular Geneva Bible contained Calvinist marginal notes that questioned church hierarchy and labeled monarchs as "tyrants," which King James viewed as a threat to the divine right of kings. [1, 2, 3]
    • Banning Controversial Notes: James instructed translators to omit political or partisan commentary and marginal notes, preventing readers from using the Bible to challenge royal authority. [1, 2]
    • Unifying Protestant Factions: England was divided between high-church supporters of the authorized Bishops' Bible and Puritans who favored the Geneva Bible. James wanted a single, authoritative translation that would unite the Church of England. [1, 2, 3, 4]
    • Reinforcing Church Structure: The king wanted a text that respected the episcopal structure (bishops) and traditions of the Church of England
    source: Gemini


The word of God is not bound (II Timothy 2:9) -- but your modern copyrighted version of it is.

If you post passages from your copyrighted version, then you are required by copyright law (and Forum Terms & Rules) to cite your sources:

"You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by Christianity Board, or you have the expressed written permission of the author. Otherwise, please properly cite all articles.
Respect copyrights. If you draw from others’ work, please cite your sources (reasonably) and provide proper credit."
- source: Forum Terms & Rules

Conversely, with the uncopyrighted Holy Bible (AV, KJB), you are not required to cite your source, as the truth cannot be copyrighted; no one can claim ownership of a testimony.
I always list the source for everything that I write that does not come from my own mind or for an expanded explanation. Some Forums require that you post the version you use in your signature line.

.

But that "NT" has been altered for copyright purposes, so you're reading lies mixed with the truth.
Are the lies sufficient to cause me to lose my salvation?

If so, could you give an example?



None of that is necessary; in fact, it only leads one away from the truth, corrupting minds from the simplicity that is in Christ. (2 Cor. 11:3).

But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. (2 Tim. 3:14-15)

Notice that even a child understands the holy scriptures -- no middlemen wanna-be ‘scholars’ required!
I do believe I stated that a 10 years old could read the bible, or an adult person and get all the information they require for salvation. OR theologians could work on it for decades...textual scholars and biblical historians, etc.



It sure does! All the more reason to seek God first on this rather than the approbation of men and their work$.

All of which brings us back to the admonition of @Cyd's OP:

.
I have many versions,,,even in other languages.
A new one doesn't scare me.
I even have the New World Translation.
It's good for apologetics.

But if you want to hang on to your KJV, even with all the new manuscripts that have been found, I'm good with that too.

We must worship God...
not the bible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anchorite

doctrox

Well-Known Member
Sep 9, 2018
1,281
973
113
worldwide
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
It takes money to put out a new version of the bible.
Those that do the work are entitled to receive some money for their effort.
I have no problem with this.
Of course. It's all about the money - truth be damned. There's the rub. Truth is no longer the priority - money is.

It's incumbant on the buyer to know which version is the best for him.
There can be only one truth - however enticing it is to become one's own "scholar."

God wrote the KJV?
That's interesting.
I thought King James commissioned its writing:
Rather, God inspired his word.

King James simply happened to be the man on watch at the time. He wrote nothing.

I always list the source for everything that I write that does not come from my own mind or for an expanded explanation. Some Forums require that you post the version you use in your signature line.
If you're not using a man's copyrighted invention (e.g. a modern version of the Holy Bible), then you don't have to cite anything because a testimony cannot be copyrighted.

Are the lies sufficient to cause me to lose my salvation?

If so, could you give an example?
The hackneyed phrase "lose my salvation" is a red herring. No one "loses" anything, but one can walk away from the covenantal relationship that is salvation e.g. many will fall away. And all who believe and abet a lie end up in the lake of fire, as per Rev. 22:14-15.

I do believe I stated that a 10 years old could read the bible, or an adult person and get all the information they require for salvation. OR theologians could work on it for decades...textual scholars and biblical historians, etc.
There you have it! That choice has been laid out before each of us. My God is a jealous God who won't share his glory with any other. There can be only one; make your calling and election sure.

I have many versions,,,even in other languages.
"...appealing to the eyes, to make one wise..."

A new one doesn't scare me.
It should at least concern those with discernment.

I even have the New World Translation.
It's good for apologetics.
Such is to your spiritual detriment.

But if you want to hang on to your KJV, even with all the new manuscripts that have been found, I'm good with that too.
So 'finding new manuscripts' somehow validates your use of copyrighted works of men in place of the Holy Bible?

God did not inspire man; God inspired his word.

While we know men wrote the text and later, other men copied it, your theology would force us to pigeonhole the truths of inspiration so the 'scholars' can proceed with their (uninspired and copyrighted) dissimulations.

Inspiration is the lock that the scholar establishment will never attempt to open, because to do so would remove them from the throne of their own construction.

Here we see the problem with man's textual criticism laid out before us, and why "Christian" forums are full of that misdirection. Many of you believe that God inspired men to write God's words and, therefore, as most would promote, 'we better make certain we have credentialed EXPERTS doing the writing.'

This is why many of you would push for 'bigger and better bibles,' that appear "pleasant to the eyes" and "to make one wise," that come with the highest recommendations of the 'scholars' who offer periodic "updates" of their findings to their yes-men and other subscribers.

We must worship God...
not the bible.
Problem is, folks don't know what "the bible" is...
 
Last edited:

Anchorite

Well-Known Member
May 1, 2026
899
861
93
68
Peoria
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
.


Conversely, the King James Bible is the only Bible not bound by a copyright. No author or publisher receives a royalty because God is the author.

You really believe God authored, wrote the King James Version of the Bible?

Actually it was a team of translators.

Do not make the KJV an idol.


But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. (2 Tim. 3:14-15)

Notice that even a child understands the holy scriptures -- no middlemen wanna-be ‘scholars’ required!

Timothy understood the holy scriptures because they were in Hebrew.

Children today do not understand the 600 KJV archaic words like trow, anon, fain, wist, raiment, ague, betimes, etc.
 

doctrox

Well-Known Member
Sep 9, 2018
1,281
973
113
worldwide
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
You really believe God authored, wrote the King James Version of the Bible?
Actually it was a team of translators.
Do not make the KJV an idol.
You've mischaracterized the issue, conflating and presuming because you have an agenda.

Timothy understood the holy scriptures because they were in Hebrew.
...another presumption. You're conflating language with discernment.

When the Bible refers to “scriptures,” as it does in Acts 17:11, the reference is to copies, not "original" manuscripts. Consider 2 Timothy 3:15, “…from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures.” Neither Timothy, nor the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8), who also read “the scriptures,” had the eight hundred year old "original" copy of the book of Isaiah.

Acts 17:11 - These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily.

Children today do not understand the 600 KJV archaic words like trow, anon, fain, wist, raiment, ague, betimes, etc.
...and there's your agenda; another presumption.

The built-in dictionary of the Holy Bible (AV):

built-in bible dictionary rip 1.jpg

built-in bible dictionary rip 2.jpg
built-in bible dictionary rip 3.jpgbuilt-in bible dictionary rip 4.jpg
built-in bible dictionary rip 5.jpg
built-in bible dictionary rip 6.jpg
built-in bible dictionary rip 7.jpg
built-in bible dictionary rip 8.jpg

dictionary and reference sources:

OED Oxford English Dictionary (unabridged)
WEB Webster's 1828 Dictionary
WNC Webster's New College Dictionary
NSD Nuttall's Standard Dictionary
WUD Webster's Unabridged Dictionary
ODEE Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology
SDWO Shipley's Dictionary of Word Origins
WED Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary
WCT Webster's Concise Thesaurus
NRTDF New Roget's Thesaurus in Dictionary Form
CED Concise English Dictionary
 
Last edited:

Anchorite

Well-Known Member
May 1, 2026
899
861
93
68
Peoria
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
You've mischaracterized the issue, conflating and presuming because you have an agenda.


...another presumption. You're conflating language with discernment.

When the Bible refers to “scriptures,” as it does in Acts 17:11, the reference is to copies, not "original" manuscripts. Consider 2 Timothy 3:15, “…from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures.” Neither Timothy, nor the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8), who also read “the scriptures,” had the eight hundred year old "original" copy of the book of Isaiah.

Acts 17:11 - These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily.


...and there's your agenda; another presumption.

I have no agenda. I am not selling various versions of the Bible.

I am just responding to your assertions.

The copies Timothy read or heard preached were in Hebrew language that he understood.


dictionary and reference sources:

OED Oxford English Dictionary (unabridged)
WEB Webster's 1828 Dictionary
WNC Webster's New College Dictionary
NSD Nuttall's Standard Dictionary
WUD Webster's Unabridged Dictionary
ODEE Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology
SDWO Shipley's Dictionary of Word Origins
WED Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary
WCT Webster's Concise Thesaurus
NRTDF New Roget's Thesaurus in Dictionary Form
CED Concise English Dictionary


And you think children have all these dictionaries?
 

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
18,224
8,917
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
Gender
Female
You've mischaracterized the issue, conflating and presuming because you have an agenda.


...another presumption. You're conflating language with discernment.

When the Bible refers to “scriptures,” as it does in Acts 17:11, the reference is to copies, not "original" manuscripts. Consider 2 Timothy 3:15, “…from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures.” Neither Timothy, nor the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8), who also read “the scriptures,” had the eight hundred year old "original" copy of the book of Isaiah.

Acts 17:11 - These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily.


...and there's your agenda; another presumption.

The built-in dictionary of the Holy Bible (AV):

View attachment 92856

View attachment 92857
View attachment 92858View attachment 92859
View attachment 92860
View attachment 92861
View attachment 92862
View attachment 92863

dictionary and reference sources:

OED Oxford English Dictionary (unabridged)
WEB Webster's 1828 Dictionary
WNC Webster's New College Dictionary
NSD Nuttall's Standard Dictionary
WUD Webster's Unabridged Dictionary
ODEE Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology
SDWO Shipley's Dictionary of Word Origins
WED Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary
WCT Webster's Concise Thesaurus
NRTDF New Roget's Thesaurus in Dictionary Form
CED Concise English Dictionary
You have proven my point D.
In order to read the KJV,,,it is required to have a dictionary by your side.

You will have to accept its demise.
Eventually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Anchorite

GodsGrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 29, 2017
18,224
8,917
113
Tuscany
Faith
Christian
Country
Italy
Gender
Female
Of course. It's all about the money - truth be damned. There's the rub. Truth is no longer the priority - money is.
The above is a misrepresentation of what I stated.

There can be only one truth - however enticing it is to become one's own "scholar."
I'm not a scholar.
THE TRUTH does not depend on a version of the bible...
JESUS is The Truth...not a version of what Paul taught, or what something meant 2 thousand years ago.

Rather, God inspired his word.

King James simply happened to be the man on watch at the time. He wrote nothing.
Who said King James wrote anything?

If you're not using a man's copyrighted invention (e.g. a modern version of the Holy Bible), then you don't have to cite anything because a testimony cannot be copyrighted.


The hackneyed phrase "lose my salvation" is a red herring. No one "loses" anything, but one can walk away from the covenantal relationship that is salvation e.g. many will fall away. And all who believe and abet a lie end up in the lake of fire, as per Rev. 22:14-15.
In modern venacular,,,,we say that salvation can be lost.
I agree with you, but WE are not going to fix how Christians speak.

There you have it! That choice has been laid out before each of us. My God is a jealous God who won't share his glory with any other. There can be only one; make your calling and election sure.
You don't believe the NT has enough information in it to allow a person to know how to become saved?
What do you think the gospels and letters were written for?

"...appealing to the eyes, to make one wise..."


It should at least concern those with discernment.


Such is to your spiritual detriment.
YOU don't have the New World Translation??
How do you speak to JWs?
Are you aware of the changes they've made to the bible?
Now THAT is distorting the truth.
You should be upset with THAT translation...
not the NIV or the NASB or the NLT...all very popular versions.
So 'finding new manuscripts' somehow validates your use of copyrighted works of men in place of the Holy Bible?
Sir, finding new manuscripts means finding new information.
That should concern YOU who are so fixed on the bible as salvation.

God did not inspire man; God inspired his word.
Let's say it correctly:
God inspired man to set His revelations to paper.

While we know men wrote the text and later, other men copied it, your theology would force us to pigeonhole the truths of inspiration so the 'scholars' can proceed with their (uninspired and copyrighted) dissimulations.
A scholar does not require inspiration.
He's doing A JOB.
The inspiration has already been supplied.

I' m going to write a sentence,,,please tell me what it means:

I NEVER SAID YOU STOLE MY WALLET.

Do YOU know what I mean to say?

Inspiration is the lock that the scholar establishment will never attempt to open, because to do so would remove them from the throne of their own construction.

Here we see the problem with man's textual criticism laid out before us, and why "Christian" forums are full of that misdirection. Many of you believe that God inspired men to write God's words and, therefore, as most would promote, 'we better make certain we have credentialed EXPERTS doing the writing.'
You write nonsense to which I will not reply.

This is why many of you would push for 'bigger and better bibles,' that appear "pleasant to the eyes" and "to make one wise," that come with the highest recommendations of the 'scholars' who offer periodic "updates" of their findings to their yes-men and other subscribers.


Problem is, folks don't know what "the bible" is...
What do YOU think the bible is D?

I know some folk that are better Christians than I'll ever be,,,
who never held a bible in their hands.

Worship God and not your KJV.
 

Rockerduck

Well-Known Member
Nov 7, 2022
4,554
3,592
113
72
Marietta, Georgia.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
All you have to look for in bible translations is how many updates it has, and what was wrong to change it. The last KJV update was in 1769 because of typeset errors previously. The NKJV never updated, never needed it. NASB 1975, updated for too long sentence runs. NASB 1977- this is the most accurate of all the NAS bibles, however still retained thee, thou, and ye. NASB 1995 is the same as the 1977, without the thou, thee, and ye. The ESV has had 4 updates to clarify and change phrases. This one gets a down vote. The first ESV is probably the best one.
 

One 2 question

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2023
2,412
719
113
Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia

Warning New Bibles Coming Out​

My hope is anchored in Jesus not the Bible .....so it makes no difference to me if there were a thousand versions.

Imagine if you were blind and born in Lapland 150 years ago, or you were an indigenous African on a slave ship who couldn't speak English. Do we think Jesus has abandoned these folk because of their inability to read or know of the bible.

It behooves us not to become bible worshippers and think we have an advantage.
What or who leads a human into all truth?
 
  • Love
Reactions: doctrox

Anchorite

Well-Known Member
May 1, 2026
899
861
93
68
Peoria
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gender
Male
As I said, if they have the AV, then they have all they need.
So you do not care that the KJV contains 600 archaic words that require an external dictionary to understand?

I love the KJV, but do not see it as ideal for children or some adults new to the faith.
 

doctrox

Well-Known Member
Sep 9, 2018
1,281
973
113
worldwide
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
In order to read the KJV,,,it is required to have a dictionary by your side.
Secular humanism at its worst. Again, a "dictionary" is an integral part of the AV. Understanding comes from the Holy Spirit - not from Secular dictionaries.
 

doctrox

Well-Known Member
Sep 9, 2018
1,281
973
113
worldwide
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
So you do not care that the KJV contains 600 archaic words that require an external dictionary to understand?
Are you capable of following a given line of thought? It is merely your presumption that some external dictionary is required.
 

doctrox

Well-Known Member
Sep 9, 2018
1,281
973
113
worldwide
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Let's say it correctly:
God inspired man to set His revelations to paper.
This is the nexus of your dilemma. You do not discern that God never inspired any man; God inspired his word. Understanding never comes from men.
 

doctrox

Well-Known Member
Sep 9, 2018
1,281
973
113
worldwide
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
YOU don't have the New World Translation??
How do you speak to JWs?
I certainly would never countenance the wicked invention they use! Touch not the unclean thing. I don't need to experience a needle in the arm to know that heroin is is bad for me.
 

doctrox

Well-Known Member
Sep 9, 2018
1,281
973
113
worldwide
Faith
Christian
Country
New Zealand
Gender
Male
Of course, no one has yet actually applied the Holy Bible's built-in dictionary as I posted above. And they won't, because they are those who seek the approbation of men rather than the discernment of the Holy Spirit. They would rather argue and remain clueless. Selah.
 

Dryhn

Member
Oct 29, 2026
283
38
28
Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
So you do not care that the KJV contains 600 archaic words that require an external dictionary to understand?

I love the KJV, but do not see it as ideal for children or some adults new to the faith.
Yes, the English can be hard to understand
This version of the KJV might be of help to some

This is a translation of the Bible based on the original King James Version. It is a simple word for word update from the King James English. Care has been taken to change nothing doctrinally, but to simply update the spelling and vocabulary. The grammar has not changed the grammar because that could alter the doctrine.

The American King James version of the Bible was placed into the public domain on November 8, 1999.