Does it matter which version of the Bible you read?
- Thread starter Hobie
- Start date
-
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!
Aunty Jane
Well-Known Member
This cannot be stressed enough…..the whole purpose of a translation is that it is rendered into a language you understand. Archaic English is no longer the language of the day…it is outdated and confusing to say the least, to a new Bible student. A good Interlinear and a reliable Concordance are very important to our understanding of any text in Hebrew or Greek. A translation, if it is inaccurate can lead a person away from God rather than to him by suggesting things that the original text did not say.
We also have God’s reaction to the people of Nineveh who were scheduled for destruction, but they changed their attitude and repented, so God changed his mind and withdrew the sentence at that time.
Jehovah is not a despot or a tyrant…he is compassionate and he observes people’s responses to the things written in his word or pronounced by his prophets…the word of God is a powerful tool in the right hands…but a weapon in others.
Agreed. It’s a dinosaur now in this age. It does not accurately convey God’s word in the language that people speak today…..there are so many verses that just don’t work in today’s English.
As long as you have good study tools, any translation can convey “the truth” about any subject…and that is all that matters.
1 Cor 14:8-9…
”For truly, if the trumpet sounds an indistinct call, who will get ready for battle? 9 In the same way also, unless you through the tongue utter speech easily understood, how will it be known what is being spoken? you will, in fact, be speaking into the air.”
Last edited:
Bob Carabbio
Well-Known Member
Nope - not really. Bibles all say the same stuff, and reading them will get you to the same place. "Theologians" howl, and beat their breasts when somebody INTERPRETS something in the Bible differently than they do. but it's only "Theology, after all. Jesus promised the HOLY SPIRIT to Born again Christians, and promised that the Holy SPirit would lead into TRUTH. Personally I've found that HE does - if one listens to HIM instead of "Theologians" who write books ABOUT the Bible.
Personally I like the KJV as my "Main Squeeze, but I found the "Living" paraphrase if use, and even the "New World" version is nice for it's choice of words.
Well, do you want me to list them all and go into them. After one paragraph people start to say, its too much, make it shorter, too much to read, etc.. on that line. And if I keep it short then complaints to the opposite, so its six or half dozen, as I have pages on pages on the changes and deletions...
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
What is a "deletion?" If it wasn't there in the original then seeing it there is an addition--not a deletion.
Yes, I use to do the same till I noticed the things taken out, and purposely to say nothing of intent..I wanna buy an Easy Read Version. Sometimes it’s cool just to read a different style of writing and there is nothing wrong with that. Anyone who says otherwise is just not allowing you to have freedom of choice.
Holy Bible Easy to Read Version (ERV) English Green/Tan (Duotone)
The English language Easy to Read Version of the Bible (ERV) accurately expresses the full meaning of the original text in a style that is clear and easy to understand. The ERV Bible is especially helpful for those who have limited experience with English, including children, and people learning...www.christianbook.com
Do you still have that version? I would really like to own one. Went to the local bible store the other morning, and they did not have one.
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
A SHORT LIST OF ERRORS, MODIFICATIONS, ADDITIONS THAT APPEAR IN THE KJV FOR THE NEW TESTAMENT ONLY … THERE ARE MANY MORE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.
As a matter of perspective all of these discrepancies do not originate from the King James Version of the scriptures…many of them were adopted from the Jewish Vulgate Translation, the William Tyndale Bible and the Geneva Bible. At times the translators of the KJV played the Amplified Bible thing. Where they would add words that they thought clarified the meaning of the scripture.
But opinions do not belong in the translational process.
But what is an established consistent fact is that as they discover more and more manuscripts-texts, they find that additional scriptures were added as time went on. In other words scriptures that are not in the older manuscripts.
These follow through and end up in the William Tyndale Bible and the Geneva Bible and the KJV Bibles because the sources used for the these translations were inaccurate.
(1) Matthew 9:13
KJV: But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”Discrepancy: The KJV added “to repentance”..ie come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”
(2) Matthew 17:21
KJV: Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition and not found in earlier manuscripts.
(3) Matthew 18:11
KJV: For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition and not found in earlier manuscripts. But a longer version of this appears in Luke 19:10.
(4) Matthew 20:16
KJV: …. for many be called, but few chosen.
Discrepancy: An addition and a duplication of Matthew 22:14 and not found in earlier manuscripts.
(5) Matthew 23:14
KJV: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts. And is an expansion of similar verses in Mark and Luke.
(6) Mark 7:16
KJV: If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
Discrepancy: This verse is nearly identical with verses 4:9 and 4:23. But this verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts.
(7) Mark 9:44 - 46
KJV: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. .. (Both verses identical to each other, and to 9:48, which is still in the main text)
Discrepancy: Both verses 44 and 46 are duplications of verse 48. These verses are additions and not found in earlier manuscripts.
(8) Mark 11:26
KJV: But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.Discrepancy: This verse is very similar to Matthew 6:15 but this verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts.
(9) Mark 15:28
KJV: And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, "And he was numbered with the transgressors."Discrepancy: This verse is similar to Luke 22:37. But this verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts. It does not appear in any manuscript until the 6th century.
(10) Mark 16: 9-20
KJV Eleven verses added to the ending of the Gospel of mark.
Discrepancy: The KJV adds eleven verses to the end of the Gospel of Mark. Not found in earlier manuscripts.
(11) Luke 4:4
KJV: And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
Discrepancy: The KJV added the words; but by every word of God. Not found in earlier manuscripts.
(12) Luke 4:8
KJV: And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.
NASB: Jesus replied to him, “It is written: ‘YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD AND SERVE HIM ONLY.’”
Discrepancy: This is an addition. The NASB has it in brackets noting that it does not appear in the earlier manuscripts.
(13) Luke 17:36
KJV: Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
Discrepancy: This verse is obviously a rewording of Matthew 24:40. This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts.
(14) Luke 23:17
KJV: For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.Discrepancy: The same verse or a very similar verse appears in Matthew 27:15 and Mark 15:6. But in Luke they are additions. Not appearing in older manuscripts.
(15) Luke 24:40
KJV: And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition and does not occur in older manuscripts.
(16) 1 John 5:7–8
The infamous Comma johannine Addition
KJV: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
Discrepancy: This is a well known reworking of the scriptures to support a theological belief of the time period.
(17) John 8:1-11
KJV: The story of the Adulterous Woman brought before Christ
Reason: This is an addition and no part of it appears in older manuscripts.
(18) The words witch witchcraft and bewitched in the KJV
KJV
Exodus 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Sorceress here pointed directly women.
Deuteronomy 18:10 The phrase here is practice magic.
1st Samuel 15:23 The word here is divination.
2nd Kings 9:22 The word here is sorcery.
2nd Chronicles 33:6 This verse is reworded from the original. The words here are sorcery and divination and mediums….the words wizards, enchantment, and familiar spirits were added.
Acts 8:9 The word here is amaze or astonish, not bewitched.
Acts 8:11 The word here also is amaze or astonish, not bewitched.
Galatians 3:1 Now this one is interesting, It appears once in the scriptures. Scholars do not agree on its use here or its meaning. Just that bewitched is not in the scriptures…. something like….cast a spell or enchanted.
Galatians 5:20 The word here is socery.
Discrepancies: The word witch, witchcraft, and bewitched cannot be in the scriptures because the words did not exist at that time. These insertions contributed to the horrible torture and deaths of millions. The word witch has it own mean(s) and imagery and superstitions associated with them, that are not biblical. The atrocities of the Church, both Catholic and Protestants that were associated with the witch-hunts and inquisitions are so horrible that we cannot discuss them on this forum. Most of the women and men that died were killed for their property, because they would charge them for the torture and executions. Most of the inquisitions were politically motivated or they were killing people of other faiths, not necessity none Christians. The word witch is mostly associated with women. The Catholic Church produced a book called the Malleus Maleficarum …Latin for the Hammer of Witches which was an instruction manual on how to locate and torture and execute witches, mostly female. A lot of the information in the Malleus Maleficarum was a collection of superstitions which eventually made its way into Christianity. First step, strip them and inspect them.
Now in perspective, there are witches….mostly nature witches and satanic witches. The new age beliefs dabble in this. I know Satan witches exist because I have had run in’s with them.
(18) John 9:4
KJV: I must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is day; the night is coming when no one can work.
Discrepancy: Should be; We must work the works of Him who sent Me….
Continued…
Last edited:
Grailhunter
Well-Known Member
(19) Acts 8:37
KJV: And Philip said, "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest." And he [the Eunuch] answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition to the scriptures….not found in earlier manuscripts.(20) Acts 9:5–6
KJV: And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.
Discrepancy: The bolded part of this scripture is an addition and does not appear in the older manuscripts.
(21) Acts 15:34
KJV: Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.Discrepancy: This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts and is worded differently between newer manuscript. The bolded area is a modification to the scripture and does not appear in older manuscript.
(22) Acts 13:42
KJV: And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.
NASB: As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath.Reasons: A modification to the scripture, removing the names of Paul and Barnabas and changing the present and past tense and adding the Gentiles into the scripture. Not in older manuscripts.
(23) Acts 15:34
KJV: Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.Discrepancy: This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts and is worded differently between newer manuscript.
(24) Acts 24:6–8
KJV: Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, Commanding his accusers to come unto thee: by examining of whom thyself mayest take knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him.
Discrepancy: This verse has been completely reworded but why? The meaning was not changed.
(25) Acts 28:29
KJV: And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.Discrepany: This verse is an addition and does not appear in the older manuscripts.
(26) Romans 13:9
KJV: For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not bear false witness,” “You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
Discrepancy: Although “You shall not bear false witness” was part of the Commandments…it was not part of this verse….it was added.
(27) Romans 16:24
KJV: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
Reason: This is an addition to the scriptures not occurring in older manuscripts.
(28) Colossians 1:14
KJV: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Discrepancy: The KJV added the words “through his blood” to this scripture.
Not in the earlier manuscripts.
(29) 1st Timothy 6:5
KJV: useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself.
Discrepancy: “From such withdraw yourself” the KJV added this to the scripture. Does not appear in earlier manuscripts.
(30) 1st Peter 1:22
KJV: Ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit.
Discrepancy: “through the Spirit” was added by the KJV. Does not appear in the earlier manuscripts.
(31) Revelation 5:14
KJV: And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.
Discrepany: Should read; And the four living creatures kept saying, “Amen.” And the elders fell down and worshiped. Him who lives for the ages and the ages.
The words “And the four and twenty” where added to the scripture and it does not appear in the earlier manuscripts. Part of this is a mis-translation.
(32) Revelation 21:24
KJV: And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
Discrepancy: Should read; The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring glory and honor of the nations of them into it.
Last edited:
Episcopalian or Anglican Church member eh?
That's literally the denominational bent of that translation. Especially when Cambridge and Oxford universities translated the popular translation still used today to help support their theologies and practices.
Michiah-Imla
Well-Known Member
You were seduced into the modern textual criticism cult.
Some faulty manuscripts were discovered and suddenly every traditional reading became “erroneous” after 1880 with the faith killing Revised Version.
Unbelievable that people fall for this foolishness.
“Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,” (Romans 1:22, KJV)
Michiah-Imla
Well-Known Member
I’m not a member or follower of any denomination or cult group (modern churches).
So much for that nonsensical rationale…
Last edited:
Well,I’m not a member of follower of any denomination or cult group (modern churches).
So much for that nonsensical rationale…
The 3 century old KJV was developed by Cambridge and Oxford University to promote the Anglican church and its doctrines. That's why all the additions and subtleties with that translation that aren't in more modern translations. The original 1611 being long since forgotten.
The Geneva Bible is one of more note as it was the foremost prolific Bible that was read in English first by more people than any other translation. But it's "glosses" were decidedly Calvinist as Elizabeth did nothing about its proliferation. The Geneva Bible is the Bible of Shakespeare and Sir Francis Drake and the Pilgrims in America.
The KJV was made "popular" once again due to a MARKETING CAMPAIGN from publishers needing to make money. Lots of printers needed work....one group published the KJV because there wasn't any royalties that had to be paid and made a massive marketing campaign over it. It's an "Okay" translation....but not any better than any other Anglican or Episcopalian Bible. (Even they use a more modern one today bent towards their beliefs like the KJV once was)
The Church of God claims the NKJV as their Bible....not exactly sure why. They don't have much in common with its origins or modern translation in any capacity really....but people do things for various reasons all the time without a drop of logic to them.
The AOG? They like any Bible that promotes what the pastor is preaching at the moment. Usually amplified or KJV or something else difficult to understand clearly so they can torture the scriptures to death. (Everyone loves to self-justify)
ESV is the choice for Calvinists of every persuasion....this includes Presbyterians, Reformed, Dutch....etc, etc, etc.
The most popular NIV....it's used by literally everyone who is the least "churched". It has many modern variations these days for easy reading. I like the original...but whatever.
The NASB claims to be a word-for-word instead of a dynamic equivalent.....but Young's actual literal word-for-word translation reads like stereo instructions run through a blender. NASB is a bit better to read than Young's...but it translates some of the idioms out....just like EVERY English Bible does.
Michiah-Imla
Well-Known Member
I’ll stop you there.
The KJV was translated by a group of god fearing men desirous to put forward the best translation bar none.
They were successful.
End of story.
I never suggested that they were not sincere in their faith....I only suggested that they had an agenda for their particular denomination.
Which is supported clearly by the scholar's other papers concerning doctrines.
Some of which went on to do more translation work for the ESV.
Translating the scriptures is highly politically charged subject. Everyone wants "their version of the truth" to be known or considered correct.
True humility stops it from becoming divisive.
Pick your poison.
Michiah-Imla
Well-Known Member
So....you want to use scissors on the history books as well as scriptures?
I couldn't invent this history if I wanted to. I find it fascinating and interesting.
Your hubris concerning it all is rather mundane and common...but the History of how God preserved his words and made them prolific is interesting though.
Michiah-Imla
Well-Known Member
Scissors is what the textual critics use on the scriptures these days.
The KJV just happened to be the last faithful translation to the received textual evidence prior to the promotion of the minority and faulty textual variants.
That's opinion and not based in any facts using reality.
If you happen to like the Anglican Church or Episcopalian Church doctrines that's just fine. I'm not here to throw stones at your church of choice. You have to answer for it and not me.
I'm only giving the "Cliff Notes" version of the origins and history of the English translation of scriptures. Why you wish to argue commonly accepted History is beyond my understanding. It's not like there's a hotbed of controversy concerning who and why this translation was commissioned or who the translators were and were about.
And it was not King James that commissioned this commonly read translation. (He had been dead for quite some time) It was the Anglican Church. And the commissioning was due to the aging Geneva Bible which was strongly Calvinistic. (Once upon a time the Calvinists and Anglicans didn't get along)
But it never was popular until in the 1920's in America due to a massive marketing campaign.
Michiah-Imla
Well-Known Member
I have spiritual evidence that the KJV is the true and faithful English translation. The natural man will never see it nor discern it.
“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Corinthians 2:14, KJV)
God uses the foolish things of this world to confound the wise.
“But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty” (1 Corinthians 1:27, KJV)
Textual critics are high and mighty in their pedantic work and look down on folks like myself.
That’s more evidence that I have the correct translation.
I told you already that I’m not in any denomination or church cult.
I haven’t identified with any organization.
Typical for this format: nobody reads responses and they just want to lecture people.
Similar threads
