Read the King James Bible only. The New-age Bible translations have perverted God's Holy Bible by omitting verses, deleting key words and phrases in order to diminish God's power, confuse Christians and redefine what sin is. See the link document for details. God bless you.
(files.catbox.moe)
🗣️ DISCUSSION 💬
Comments (262)
sorted by:
Sorry, OP, but even the KJV is a version.
I have been in church all my life, and I can't get on board with you here. Not that I have issues with KJV. It's a good Bible, but it's still one translation. One needs to be a Hebrew scholar to get the real, untranslated stuff. Even the Septuagent is a translation.
What I have issues with, is the way Christians make themselves into cliquish circular firing squads all the time, by imposing these types of "thou shalts" on each other and those who are seeking, and being dismissive of anything that doesn't match. The church has been woefully bad at communication in general, and even worse about carrying out Christ's mission, because of over-judgementalism. I'm guilty of this as well. God is the judge, but many Christians assume this role for themselves, and it pushes people away in the same way that over-liberalism pushes people away.
My personal experience is that God speaks in any way He sees fit to. Through music, through signs and wonders, through relationship, through business. We just need to listen.
this, KJV has been revised many times. OP is flat out wrong. we have discovered a ton more since the KJV was initially written.
KJV-only-ism has only been around for a century... it is a championing of ignorance against academia. That said, it's a fine translation. Using it when clearer translations are available is setting a greater distance between a reader and hearing the voice of God in the text though. I'm surprised this hasn't come up on here before now...
The problem is the modern Bibles are not based on Hebrew Masoretic OT and Textus Receptus Koine Greek New Testament.
They're based on the "oldest" manuscripts, which were edited by the Alexandrian Gnostic scholars.
Codex Alexandrinus ended up in the hands of Charles I of England, who just happened to be a Roman Catholic. Codex Vaticanus was stored away in the Vatican for centuries. Codex Sinaiticus was "discovered" by Tischendorf, a supposed Protestant, who just happened to have an audience in Rome before taking a trip to a Roman Catholic convent on Mt. Sinai in Egypt, where he found the manuscript in a wastepaper basket where it had sat for centuries.
When your Old Testament translation is based on the Septuagint, a Greek translation and Vatican/Alexandrian manuscripts, instead of the original Hebrew, that's a problem.
If your Bible has a footnote for Acts 8:37, or if Acts 8:37 is missing completely, it's a sure sign it's corrupted.
See my top-level post about Chris Pinto's documentaries exposing the fraud used to create the newer versions.
Reposting here as my top-level post seems to be shadow banned.
Chris Pinto from Adullam Films has done a brilliant 3 part (so far) documentary where he gives compelling evidence to show that after the KJV was published, the Vatican launched the counter-reformation and using the Jesuits, forged the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus as a way to undermine the authority of the bible, since the KJV is translated from the Textus Receptus and the two former manuscripts are claimed to be older and therefore more authoritive, and the motto from the reformation was "Sola Scriptura", undermining the authority of the Pope.
A Lamp in the Dark: The Untold History of the Bible
Tares Among the Wheat
Bridge to Babylon
Videos can be purchased at:
https://www.adullamfilms.com/
Reposting here as my top-level post seems to be shadow banned.
Chris Pinto from Adullam Films has done a brilliant 3 part (so far) documentary where he gives compelling evidence to show that after the KJV was published, the Vatican launched the counter-reformation and using the Jesuits, forged the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus as a way to undermine the authority of the bible, since the KJV is translated from the Textus Receptus and the two former manuscripts are claimed to be older and therefore more authoritive, and the motto from the reformation was "Sola Scriptura", undermining the authority of the Pope.
A Lamp in the Dark: The Untold History of the Bible
Tares Among the Wheat
Bridge to Babylon
Videos can be purchased at:
https://www.adullamfilms.com/
Revisions to be more accurate to the original meaning, not less
Yes these "discoveries", Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus look like they are actually frauds. See my top-level post.
kjv was a version of Douay Rheimes translation
We haven’t “discovered” anythinh. The bible hasn’t changed. Except for unfaithful versions like KJV which just changed entire passages for the sake of a king who disagreed
Not true at all. The modern Bibles are closer to the Roman Catholic Douay Rheimes, because they're based on the same edited Alexandrian Greek source texts such as Codex Vaticanus.
The King James NT is based on the Textus Receptus, which was preserved when Orthodox believers fled both the wrath of the Holy Roman Empire and the Muslim invaders.
I very much agree.The best Bible is the one you hear God's voice in. I don't think we need to be surprised if that changes from time to time.
It's the words of Jesus that will give you life, no matter how they're written. You have to have ears that hear and eyes that see.
13th Gospal was removed. dead sea scrolls confirmed it: why remove it?
Jesus died for your sins and rose again. He gives His Spirit to all who believe in His name.
What more do you need to know?
Start here ↑. Everything else is gravy.
THIS. It’s quite simple and so easy even a child can understand and live to the tenants of Jesus. That’s why it’s called The Good News which is also the translation of the word “Gospel”. Good news
You're talking about milk, which is indeed important for teachers and new believers.
As we mature in our walk, we need strong meat in the form of doctrine.
Hebrews 5:12-14
12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.
13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe.
14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
What do you imagine a church is? Do you still imagine the Roman Catholic "Church" was the original "Church"?
"The Orthodox Way" by Oxford scholar, Ware, can be an eye opening and life transforming read.
Oh fren... Check this out.
I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like the sound of a trumpet, saying, “Write in a book what you see, and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Pergamum and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea.” Revelation 1:10-11 NASB1995 https://bible.com/bible/100/rev.1.10-11.NASB1995
My people didn't slaughter anyone. They were nonresistant to the point of having their families tortured and murdered for their faith by the Catholic Church.
We have our issues but plz don't ASSume.
According to the Orthodox Christian Church who compiled the original bible, texts not chosen for inclusion in the bible can still be very helpful.
Unlike later Western sects who turned Christianity into a religion rather than a Way of Life focused on your unique personal relationship with God, Orthodox Christians view the bible as one of countless ways God connects with us.
They definitely do NOT view the bible as a Christian Koran and are puzzled and saddened by Solo Scriptura devotees.
brilliant comment
What is the best version of the Bible in English, in your opinion?
Edit: This was aimed at u/Fefifofumdrum since it was his comment, but feel free to join in.
ESV is a good updated version based on translations derived from the KJV. The philosophy is to be as literal as possible.
For study, I like the NET. It comes with notes that explain why the translation team decided what it did and what the other options are. With the notes, you get more of a sense of how to translate the source text without learning Hebrew and Greek.
u/#Wrong
Textual Basis and Resources
The ESV is based on the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Bible as found in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (5th ed., 1997), and on the Greek text in the 2014 editions of the Greek New Testament (5th corrected ed.), published by the United Bible Societies (UBS), and Novum Testamentum Graece (28th ed., 2012), edited by Nestle and Aland. The currently renewed respect among Old Testament scholars for the Masoretic text is reflected in the ESV’s attempt, wherever possible, to translate difficult Hebrew passages as they stand in the Masoretic text rather than resorting to emendations or to finding an alternative reading in the ancient versions. In exceptional, difficult cases, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Syriac Peshitta, the Latin Vulgate, and other sources were consulted to shed possible light on the text, or, if necessary, to support a divergence from the Masoretic text.
https://www.esv.org/preface/
The ESV translators attempted to stick to the English phrases found in the King James Bible while modernizing them, and claim to have used the Masoretic text for their Old Testament, which they did in all parts except where the modern translations diverge from the Masoretic text. In other words, the changes in the so-called modern translation are mirrored in the ESV.
The ESV does not stick to the Hebrew Masoretic Old Testament and uses the Nestle Aland NT, not the Textus Receptus NT, which are the texts the Geneva Bible, the King James Version, and Young's Literal Translation are based upon.
That's my point. The English parts will sound familiar for someone coming from KJV. That's usually what someone's thinking about asking a general question like, "what transition should I use?"
The problem here is the base texts.
If somebody made a modern translation based on the Hebrew Masoretic OT amd Textus Receptus NT, I'd be happy to check it out and recommend it to others.
The Geneva and Young's Literal Translation are both examples of this.
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God
Vs
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Repeat ad nauseam. I find most translations utter trash.
https://anthonygflood.com/2019/03/romans-13-another-contrarian-interpretation/ does a fair job explaining why your Bible probably lies to you if it says anything about obeying the government. It's laughable to anyone with common sense
If you keep the 10 commandments, you're not breaking very many earthly laws to begin with.
Lol ok
I like the Bible app and I compare many versions of the Bible against each other. New American is great, Message is interesting, NIV, etc. you can do a lot at one time. When I compare it to KJV, I have yet to see much difference except KJV is harder for me to read.
You will find that this OP is on the wrong track most likely if you talk to him in person. Might be a legalistic or a seventh day Adventist who has a lot of things messed up in interpretation.
You know what’s funny is sometimes I use the Pigeon version. It’s Hawaiian language and it explains things in a way that’s well, funny to ready but also dirt simple.
i like the New American
Honestly, there is none - at least not for the serious Bible student. If all someone desires is a cursory read, then any version will pretty much work.
All translations have translated certain passages/verses differently depending on their own particular biases. My advise to people has always been, use several translations. Where there are differences when comparing the translated text, that is probably a good indication that a particular text did not translate well and therefore, there are discrepancies. Caution should be exercised when using that particular text to draw dogmatic conclusions. It also helps to go back to the original language for some clarification. Bible Hub interlinear is a good tool.
and a good bible concordance to help in ones study and understanding.
Yes. There are a variety of tools that are helpful. To study the Scriptures is not a casual undertaking - it is a life's long journey filled with discovery and reward. The treasure in the field will only be found by those willing to pick up a shovel and dig for it.
The translation that best captures the sense of what the original author intended to say to the intended audience that is most accurately represented in you common language.
The church has this problem because Luther caused it to become disunited
Before that it was On, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic since Christ
Bow, every new denomination, starting with luther, is literally defined by its doctrinal disagreement with whatever denomination it came from.
KJV is a version of the bible which was literally corrupted by King James
KJV came from Douay Rheimes translation, a faithful translation into english. King James ordered passages changed that he disagreed with.
Don Quixote makes his appearance.
The modern Bibles are based on Codex Vaticanus just like the Douay Rheimes version.
Erasmus compiled the Textus Receptus from various Orthodox scrolls. His first edition had a few passages based on the Latin Vulgate because he couldn't find a complete copy of Revelation. This issue was resolved in later editions.
The KJV translators used Erasmus's final compilations as source texts.
If it was indeed a Catholic translation, Guy Fawkes wouldn't have tried blowing up King James and his entire Parliament...
"One, Holy, Catholic (ie Universal), Apostolic Church".
Indeed. When the Roman Catholics split away from the original Body of Christ ie Church to create a religion now known as Western Christianity, as the Orthodox jokingly say, they became the first Prostestants. 😘
That claim is preposterous since the orthodox rejected the thousand year tradition of the papacy which they could have rejected any time in the thousand years preceding but they didn’t.
Orthodox left. They deny the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Christ said he would leave us His Paraclete which obviously proves the Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son.
The papacy proves the Orthodox left since they rejected the papacy. If a group rejects something that has been there from the beginning, they are the ones who left.
While thats a lovely sentiment, you dont actually address OP's primary concern, which is that the newer translations do not as accurately reflect the true will of god. If you have arguments to contradict that opinion then you should make them!
I prefer the Geneva Bible, which was the prevalent Bible among the American colonists. It was the Bible that King James disliked because he thought it disparaged the power of royalty. From that standpoint, the KJ Bible is the first revisionist Bible.
I have started studying and comparing the passages in revelations in particular in Geneva vs KJV for this very reason, curious as to what King James changed translation on
have you found anything interesting?
I had to buy a magnifying glass and a dictionary to decipher and cross reference and I haven’t given it the attention it needs to be able to speak intelligently
According to the Geneva Bible, most of Revelations had already happened!
According to the Ethiopian Bible as well. Even Eastern Christianity. Revelations was about Hellenization and its collapse.
True.
https://www.apuritansmind.com/puritan-worship/the-geneva-bible/
He wanted the margin notes gone.
The average person will never study enough of the bible to understand the context of 13 missing verses. The average person will also not understand the language of the King James Version of the Bible.
The all or nothing mentality of this argument is a fool's errand. Why not just demand everybody study Hebrew or Latin? Same argument.
Or specifically worship the way I worship.
You know who else thought they for sure had it correct? The Pharisees...
At the same time, doctrine was stressed in Acts. You are not to congregate with those who follow wrong doctrine. "Doctrine" being a word that is faux pas in Come as you are Leave as you were churches. Non-denominational as well. People say they're Christian very readily and without thought.
It's Jesus's call who gets in and who doesn't. In the grand scheme, very few people are likely to end up in hell. If the god you worship intends to send a non believer to the same place as Bill Clinton and Jeffrey Epstein, that is not a just god you worship at all, rather an insecure baby.
Well... If God isn't an insecure baby, then the arms of forgiveness might be wider than fundamentalists need it to be... And that's the fucked up part of Christianity and why I walked away from the bullshit altogether, is the people who WANT their fellow humans to go to hell... And I was one such bastard. Never again.
"Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."
JeSus IS tHE oNLy wAY!!! eVERyONe ELse is SssstUPid aNd saTANIc!!!
Try quotes next time. I see and agree with what you're saying. Jesus is the only way... For me. Between everyone else and Jesus it's between them.
Otherwise, yes I am done with religious elitism regardless of if we agree ideologically...
Big disagree here. I grew up on this Bible and it was primarily used in the Baptist circles I was in. Not everyone was a scholar. Some were even reformed criminals with minimal education.
One of the top comments suggested this. You would also have to study Koine Greek if we're talking New Testament.
Can study Syriac for better rests and read a less corrupted version.
During the Pentecost everybody heard the message in their own language. What occurred that changed that principle.
Technically, we still do.
Which is why we should never make war over it.
This is true.
Here's a site arguing the opposite of what I'm about to claim, but it's worth quoting because of what it does admit to be true in my argument-
https://dustoffthebible.com/Blog-archive/2016/05/26/is-the-kjv-really-on-a-grade-school-reading-level/
It admits the KJV averages out to a 5th grade reading level according to the Flesh-Kincaid Grade Level Indicator. In comparison, the NIV averages out to an 8th grade reading level.
The author argues that doesn't tell the whole story, because it doesn't factor in vocabulary words used in the King James which are no longer in common use, such as whence, agone, bewray, hath, anon, and ere.
Fair enough, but there are just as many words in the NIV not commonly used in everyday English.
From the NIV-
Song of Songs 1:16 (NIV)
How handsome you are, my beloved! Oh, how charming! And our bed is verdant.
Do you know the meaning of verdant without looking it up? If you know Spanish, you will recognize the word verde, which means green. Verdant is based on the same Latin root and also means green.
Here's the same verse in the KJV as a comparison-
Song of Solomon 1:1 (King James Version)
16 Behold, thou art fair, my beloved, yea, pleasant: also our bed is green.
When there is an issue understanding a word in the KJV, the Webster's 1828 dictionary is in the public domain and can be downloaded for free.
There's even a searchable website and you can look up any word in the KJV to determine its meaning.
As an example, here's the definition of Whence- https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/Whence
Interesting use of down doots here. The only other comment I have been down dooted on was one with a photo of a possible meth lab and I said show the photo to the Sheriff and let them decide. The down doot there was somebody telling all of us to mind our own business.
I simply stated here that the average person is more likely to study the word of God if they understand the words written on the pages of the Bible.
I take the down doots as disagreement of my choice of Bible versions and not my sentiment that the word of God should be accessible to the largest portion of the population.
The Blue Letter Bible is available on the Internet for free and allows you to study the original Hebrew and Greek words underlying the texts. It's worth incorporating it into your Bible study.
Correct. This is why each version must be violently thrown against the wall of scrutiny. This is why I only follow Jesus's teachings over the rest of it because His actions speak for themselves. You can see the fruits of loving your enemies and treating others the way you want to be treated firsthand.
There are versions if the Bible that probably speak more to individual freedom and the necessity of people CHOOSING to follow Jesus for themselves.
Or I am wrong. Good thing we have Forgiveness either way...
Stamped with approval by cabal royalty. Y'all really gonna trust that that scumbag "elite" hasn't tainted holy scripture with ulterior motives?
Even if that is just by omitting other texts from canonization and erasing their history.
Even the Devil can quote scripture right?
Worse, KJV has verse that is nowhere found in the manuscripts it is based on.
This has no basis in reality. The King James agrees 100% with the Hebrew Masoretic OT and the Textus Receptus Koine Greek New Testament, as do the Geneva Bible and Young's Literal Translation, which are based on the same texts.
You are sadly incorrect.
Why do we have the Bible we have today? How many other holy scriptures were left out of the Bible? Who was Constantine? How did he reform the church into what we know today?
Careful, absolutionists HATE easy and obvious questions.
It is a complicated question, understandably.
One the one hand, the Bible relies on the notion that it is the word of God, written under divine inspiration, and therefore can be considered a direct communication from Heaven.
On the other hand, the source making this claim tends to be the Bible, and the people who maintain power when people follow the Bible.
There is no reason to reject the possibility that the fallible humans who physically wrote the Bible lied, or at least were wrong, about their divine inspiration. It’s possible that the advice and rules from the Bible were just written by regular guys who nonetheless believed strongly in their moral system and divine inspiration.
But, that would mean God left us without a trustworthy guide to moral rules, which seems out of character for the Christian God, and that means that we all have to kind of figure it out on our own through introspection and personal prayer, and when those views inevitably don’t line up, we don’t get the kind of communities that tend to make religion a religion, and not just a personal morality.
I’ve been hesitant to talk religion too much here, but I’ve found these kinds of questions fascinating ever since I was a kid. Most religions have a book that claims to be a communique from God, and all of them were penned by human fingers. And in most cases, I can’t interrogate those writers to see if I believe them.
Frustrating and totally worth the mental resources.
Jesus's teachings speak for themselves. When you love your enemies, treat others the way you want to be treated and turn the other cheek, you're gonna see that fruit for yourself.
The rest is... Between you and Him to figure out. But He did not give you a chance at a personal relationship to flaunt about and lord over people. He doesn't share knowledge so you can exploit stupid people nor to vindicate your stance in thinking you're correct. It's not about being right. Never was.
So yeah I have my doubts about man's handling of the Word of God. It amazes me how in this time of great deception, the Bible is still off the table for some when it comes to tools of deception. In its current state, it has been perverted and that's across all translations. It's a good thing we have Forgiveness because there's a better chance that we're all wrong than there is that out of 8 billion people and 6000 active religions that you scored the correct one...
You really should practice what you preach here on GAW.
Edit: and I don't mean that as an attack.
I appreciate your response.
For obvious reasons, I don’t think I’m going to go much further into religious discussion, just given my status around here. But I do agree that forgiveness has to be part of any divine plan; it’s very hard for me to accept that anyone without access to the One Truth before they die is essentially destined by God to be firewood for an eternal Hell.
The golden rule seems to be a pretty ubiquitous belief in all major word religions, and I have to believe that a general adherence to it is worth something, even if I don’t always get the right answer.
So because someone questions what's generally accepted they're automatically your enemy?
Fuck off with your tribalistic bullshit. You're part of the problem and until you realize that, every point you try to make is negated by that last, uncalled for sentence.
Occam’s Razor: Jews
It really doesn’t matter what names they told others to call them. Jews. Khazars. Pharisees. Phoenicians. Morenos. Keep in mind this is not a monolithic or entirely continuous group. It has lost and added people over time as well as ebbed and flowed geographically. And many are “Catholics”. But they are all the true meaning of the word Jew. The word Jew itself implies namestealer.
actually its a modern liberal meme that's not supported by any historical scholarship worth its salt. It's simply the hip thing especially since Da Vinci Code for this "MUH bible was created by Constantine who oppressed all the other gospels that tell the REAL story". LOL. Ignorant viewpoints get plenty of mileage on Internet forums, but that's about it.
That's it? That's all you got? A baseless claim that doesn't address the original question?
They made a 1611 KJV with an included Apocrypha.
Laughs in Ethiopian and Slavonic.
Of all the religious distractions, this one is the dumbest.
I tried to witness to a cult member with an NIV or Good News (can't recall which) and came badly unstuck: the verse I needed was so altered as to be useless. I always go back to the KJ (not the NKJ), it resonates.
We all should be turning to Christ as we read the bible. I dont agree that other bibles are evil. There is so much that goes into translating and interpreting.
If I was on a deserted island with no bible, could I still have a relationship with Christ. YES I can right. We need to Have that relationship before we truly understand the bible. U can develop that while reading the bible and I have heard different people say different ones helped.
HERE HEAR = "If I was on a deserted island with no bible, could I still have a relationship with Christ." - AND a daily INTIMATE relationship with God/Jesus, is far, Far, FAR more critically important, than any Bible-reading anywhere. True.
Yeah this thread got out of hand a little quickly, lol
Talk about the blind leading the blind.
I'm a KJV person too. However, it required experience through the GNB edition.
During my early years understanding the Bible I found it beneficial to use a program like https://www.swordsearcher.com/ or https://www.e-sword.net/ to have multiple versions up at the same time and compare.
The translations can aid new readers to get the message instead of struggling with the old english while trying to get the message.
Satan has one mission in life - steal souls from reaching the Kingdom of God. One way he does that is by perverting the Word of God so that Christians are reading and studying a perverted bible translation.
Do not be fooled. Make sure your bible is a King James version.
New age bible translations
I have to say, I'm very shocked at all the KJV hate.
Talk about Satan's plan in action. Sheesh.
I'm not. I spent 2.5 years on VOAT and 1.5 yrs on GA talking about God, Jesus and the Bible. The atheists get triggered easily. They usually have a superficial knowledge of theology and religious doctrine mixed in with a few f-bombs but when it comes to standing up for Jesus, following His commandments and being guided by the Holy Spirit, they quickly head to their hate-speak home base (a place where they are much more fluent and comfortable).
Satan has waged an effective campaign in creating a bible translation tower of Babel. Confusion for the little guy. Follow the crowd. Don't think for yourself. Major denominations have gone NIV/ESV across all their churches as matter of central policy. The bible predicted that there would be much deception in the end times. Some of that deception comes from places that we would not expect it.
I will continue to proclaim the Good News of Jesus Christ until He comes for me. I'm used to the hate and name-calling (although it was much worse on VOAT than it is here on GA). God bless you.
The Catholics tried to assassinate King James and his ministers a year after they had begun work on the KJV (the Guy Fawkes gunpowder plot). They DESPISE the KJV to this day. Might give you a clue as to the type of people disparaging the KJV.
Not bc it was good vs evil. Bc it was evil bs evil contending for power.
Oh, the irony…
How isnt the king james a perverted version?
Anyone reading this, if u enjoy this discussion u will really enjoy c/christianity, where discussions like this take place every day. Be sure to check it out and even post something if u feel led. Love u all. God bless
Hey Slechta, I know you've been leading the daily prayer threads and you don't get enough credit for that, along with a few others I see posting daily verses or quoting Scripture - Andyman and AshlandDog
Are Q friendly topics safe in c/christianity? The handful of times I've been looked in that sub, it's pretty strictly Christianity based. I've been meaning to post a thread, asking Christianity based questions, but within the context of the Qverse. I'm conflicted if GAW is the best spot or the other forum - my gut says here, but would like your input. Thanks and God bless!
I would strongly encourage you to ask questions. I'm fairly certain most of the people there believe in Q. i personally feel WE need to explore more topics about Q in Christianity. As long as the question is founded in Christ/christianty that should be ok. We have had a couple post but not as much as I would like. Feel free to tag me In your post, I will do my best to help. Also remember I am not a mod, they are good people so if ur genuinely trying to explore the mix of 2 ideas, u should be able to. Frame it in a loving way as well please. Not that you wont just giving you my full thoughts. I look forward to seeing your post. Thanks for your kind words as well. All glory To God. JESUS CHRIST IS KING
Awesome, appreciate your response! I did think you were a mod for some reason, but no matter. I'll see what I can come up with for an OP that won't ruffle feathers but still get answers to my questions. I'll make sure to tag you, if only for visiblilty.
Amen, brother. Christ is the king of kings!
I trust u will be just fine. Give them a chance. They understand sometimes deep questions require saying things as simply as possible. Just be kind when u interact and they should atleast answer your question. Yeah I'm not a mod. I dont know nearly enough about bible to moderate stuff.
God bless u fren. Look forward to reading your post.
Yes, certainly NOT the NKJV.
The KJV stands out for me as the most artistic and epic-feeling translation. The way the language is used gives the KJV an other-worldly tone that helps put me into a more spiritual frame of mind when I read it. And in general, I prefer the wording of this version to all the others I've read.
As for accuracy, I don't have an opinion as I don't read the original language.
IMO, the King James translation is to other translations what the Walter Kaufmann translations of Nietzsche are to all others: a more elegant and emotional experience.
Still, it is sometimes worth reading other translations if only because it is impossible to convey every nuance from the original language into a translation. And the choice of what wording to use in a translation depends on many factors including context, the translator's point of view, provincialisms in both the original and the output language, etc.
For example: Exodus 20:13 says "Thou shalt not kill" in the KJV and in most other translations, but “You shall not commit murder (unjustified, deliberate homicide)" in the Amplified Bible. Big difference, really. Likewise, the exhortation to not be angry with others is clarified by adding "with cause" in some translations, which makes more sense. God / nature gave us anger for a reason and there are times when anger can preserve your life or the life of those you love.
https://www.biblegateway.com/ provides quick access to a large number of different translations.
Same here. I had a really good sense of poetry when I was young that I picked up from this Bible.
Not only does it feel amazing to speak the words, it feels amazing to speak them in an old church with the round ceilings, so your voice echos and booms with reverb!
Next time you're in an older church, look up above where the preacher speaks and note the ceiling architecture there vs the ceiling in rest of the building.
Yes! Acoustics matter, in music, theater, and in church. Heck, even in a home; the silence you find in an old-school study with books lining all the walls is a good example.
You're right that you need to know what words such as kill meant in the 1600s.
With that being said, there are resources to easily determine the original meanings, such as the Blue Letter Bible, which links to the original Hebrew and Greek words and their definitions. There's also Websters 1828 dictionary, which is in the public domain and free to download.
Here's a list of over 1000 words in the King James Version which were not in common use even as early as the 1800s-
https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Bible
Thanks for the link, and for reminding me about Webster's.
take the word of the guy who killed his translators when they were done. no. really. he's not effing with the text, we swear...
The KJV was the original State Approved Bible... hmmm....
I have to disagree but appreciate your love for Scripture. I like to read different versions, but usually stick to the ESV, NASB or NKJV. I like those for word for word translation. NIV is interesting, but not my favorite for everyday use. Putting ultimatums on translations puts God in a box. As Christians we must learn to discern truth. Sometimes that’s easier than others, but you will never learn and grow if you don’t try. I think what it most important is your individual relationship with Christ. Just my opinion and has been working well for me.
The problem I have with the "King James is the only bible that should be read" crowd is that it is divisive.
The other problem is If you want to really know the text, it is imperative to learn ancient Aramaic, Hebrew, and Greek... and... because a text out of context is a pretext... you must also learn and understand the ancient cultures of the old testament... in the different areas it all took place, understand the culture in the time of Christ and the early church after the resurrection (new testament), read the thousands of manuscripts yourself (papyri , uncials, minuscules , and lectionaries) and compile a full picture of what it all means and put it all together... in your own language. Luckily, there is a rich, documented history of this tedious work already being done with the ultimate goal of spreading the good news.
But for those who need more... The King James bible writers didn't have the number of manuscripts we have today. We have a better picture of the text now than the King James translators.
The most important manuscripts of the new testament are probably the uncial codices that date from around the fourth century. Notably, A, B, C, and Aleph being the most important. These were not available to the King James translators. The best Greek uncial manuscript available in 1611 was D, and it was barely used in the preparation of the King James Version. Based on that fact alone, the King James version needed to be, at the very least, revised because of the earlier better manuscripts.
The bible is not God and to treat a translation as such misses the point. I am a proponent of accurate translations that communicate what the author was actually saying. This is why translations are important, and if one needs to be corrected because of better copies and evidence of the authors intent, then that version needs to be corrected and revised. We can only go off of the evidence we have in front of us.
I do believe the bible is special, but here is what is special about it... it tells us a story of the redemptive grace our God has for His people through the gift of the King. We are the ones who have fallen, and our God has given us a gift to stand, be protected, and thrive in the Light of life. From dark to Light.
Anyway... Why is was post about the KJV stickied?
Yes—excellent!
So many people here would enjoy a good class or two on where the Bible came from. The KJV is a translation from a translation. Jerome translated the Greek and Hebrew into Latin around 400 AD, and it was called the Vulgate. KJV was translated from the Vulgate. Now, we have over 1,000 pieces of ancient manuscripts of the New Testament. There is NO other ancient work which has anything even close. It is really amazing.
The goal of any good translation is to understand the meaning. We have at our literal fingertips, so many resources. Download the Bible Hub app. Then you can go to Strong’s Concordance, look up the scripture in the original language, cross reference it with other verses, look up commentaries, Bible maps, etc.
But please—no more arguing over one translation—they are all translations. Pray and ask the Holy Spirit to teach you and give you understanding as you read. Find a good teacher who can answer questions. God knows you are searching. He will guide you.
The King James was not translated from the Latin Vulgate. The King James is based on the Hebrew Masoretic OT and the Textus Receptus Koine Greek New Testament.
Erasmus based his compilation Greek translation of the New Testament on the Textus Receptus, the same texts as the King James Bible, but didn't have a full copy of Revelation in the original Koine Greek, and used the Latin Vulgate for just those passages, and just for his first translation.
Erasmus published his first Greek NT in 1516, nearly 100 years before the KJV was put together. His subsequent revisions to his Greek New Testament were not based on the Vulgate in any way.
Asked and answered elsewhere in this post. But to repeat: The moderator saw one of my comments here on another post and suggested that I create a separate post so he could sticky it. So I did.
ahh ok. It was a good discussion starter!
You special or something?
Read The Geneva Bible b4 KJV.
The Geneva Bible is what the Pilgrims brought with them to North America on the Mayflower. KJV was literally commissioned by a tyrant.
New Russian Translation is also quite good for something “new agey”. Better than anything ultimately derived from the vulgate.
Sorry, but I would never use the KJV as my go to Bible.
Do you want snake handling? Because this is how you get snake handling.
The discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls proves they haven't been.
Wescott and Hort.
If you know, you know.
Tares Among The Wheat.
Yup. Knowing what I know, makes me lean “Textus Receptus” trusting, but not necessarily KJV only
Amd thanks for the reminder… I find most other arguments in favor of other translations very reasonable until I remember the dirt on those two occultists
Same time period as Darwin and Blavatsky. Don't tell me the devil wasn't getting stuff ready for the times we live in during that period.
The remarkable thing about the Bible is that it has inbuilt redundancy - you could drop several books in any Bible and the central message remains that Man chooses in the beginning to chose not to obey God, in doing so He dies - spiritually - the rest is God's plan to redeem Mankind so that we can spend eternity with Him.
I have my preferred translations as all do, but would recommend avoiding any translation which is the work of a single or very small group of individual(s).
The other thing to do is to check everything you read seeking multiple scriptures which convey the same meaning - yes this does mean reading the book several times over.
BTW 'KJV only' you could not read the version from 1611 the language and spelling has changed so much, what most call KJV comes from much later.
King James is a great translation and I still think best for memorization however it also is a revision of the Bishops Bible. It was not a new translation at all - kind of like how the ESV is essentially a reformed RSV.
I also have the modern spelling Tyndale translation (by Daniell) that the Bishops Bible pulled from and love it. it is a shame the OT was never fully translated by Tyndale. Most of the KJV words and phrasing is actually from Tyndale's translation.
I land on the NKJV mainly as I like the notes indicating the differences in the TR vs Critical text. Also its easy to adapt KJV memory verses to it.
**I know that if I were in a prison or on the run that ANY faithful translation would be a comfort. **
Note I did not say paraphrase but translation - the Message is just rubbish. Note also too many people seem to regard notes in study Bibles as somehow inspired, they are not but can be often very useful :)
Sin consists in aim. Aim for God, or aim for yourself. If God is the bullseye, aiming toward yourself is definitely gonna “miss the mark”.
“There are servants of God, and enemies of God.”
St John of the Ladder.
Serve well frens. God Bless us all.
Love Saint John of the Ladder, fren. Also love reading the Desert Fathers. God Is blessing us all.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Sorry, but you are Clearly OUT-numbered, & in a Good way :)
Right, and going by that logic there is always a pope who is the direct representation of Christ?
Biblehub is very useful in this conversation, you can check out all the other versions against the KJV
https://biblehub.com/1_john/5-7.htm
All the other versions
New International Version For there are three that testify:
The KJV
King James Bible For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Check out any verse that deals with the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ and see if the other Bibles deny it (they do.)
Do you deny the Divinity of Jesus Christ?
Matthew 10:33 KJV But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.
Better think very carefully about this.
Look at the CEPHER. Not only are many books restored it provides the meaning of many words. Also restores the proper names of God. Most English translations use Lord and not Adonai, Elohim, or Yeshua.
Also the KJV uses Easter while other translations appropriately use Passover.
I will take the KJV over NIV, or ESV.
https://www.gotquestions.org/Cepher-Bible.html
The King James isn't "magical". It's simply a translation. I agree, there are some really bad translations out there! But the ESV, and the NASB, and the New KJV are all pretty good. It's best to compare several when you have questions. Ideally, learn and read manuscripts in the original language! But that's not going to work for most people. So seek out those who can read the original language and listen to what they have to say about it. Understanding the original meaning is what is important.
Why was this stickied? I'm really curious.
The moderator saw one of my comments here on another post and suggested that I create a separate post so he could sticky it. So I did.
Thank you.
As someone who grew up reading KJV, I found his history lesson very interesting.
While the KJV is not the most accurate when it comes to original Koine Greek text. It is a solid choice in the English language, and it's the one I go to when I read the Bible. It's very poetic, and its a great way of learning multiple arts at once.
Im shocked that no one has mentioned this aspect yet.
I'm also ashamed to see everyone so triggered on this subject.
It does seem to be a point of sore contention.
Just a guess but Q has led many to God as well as others back to God and it is Sunday.
Here is an awesome resource for understanding the bible. The Bible project. Everything is free. Check how the How to read the bible video it is a one minute video. https://bibleproject.com/explore/how-to-read-the-bible/
KJ, a known deviant, perverted the Bible with his version. The Geneva bible is the one you want, no verses omitted (like in KJV) and full notations.
King James was a homosexual according to Sir Anthony Weldon.
Adam Schiff said Trump was a Russian spy and he's just as believable as Sir Anthony Weldon, that I can tell you.
Good to learn that entire verses were omitted. I thought I had a good plan using the Englishman's Bible, because it has the alternative translations of words that are open to interpretation. But that doesn't help if verses are deleted.
I have heard that KJV was tweaked to protect the "divine right of kings" idea which would make sense, commissioned by a king, but of course unquestioning obedience to elites is clearly a big problem.... today. So for sure we don't need more obedience to self appointed kings...
The best answer the question "what is the 'best version' of the Bible" is "whichever opens your eyes to the Way, the Truth, and the Life."
My Bible is The Englishman's Bible
It is the Authorised KJV - but also has all the alternative translations on the same page. So where KJV might say "Oh God, the heathens have come into your inheritance" The Englishman's Bible has margin notes to show that Oh God could be translated as "Elohim" and "the heathens" as nations.
It becomes "Elohim nations have come into your inheritance" potentially very large differences.
So you get a chance to understand the translation, and what could have been the intent of the original. A lot of insights become available to you.
https://archive.org/details/holybiblearrange00newb/page/n3/mode/2up
A lot of times translation itself muddies up the text due to differences in language. Shouldn’t really be the case here though because it’s just Old English to modern. Try being a Pagan. Those stories were passed down verbally long before people wrote anything down. It’s like playing the telephone game.
King James also wrote another book called Daemonologie.