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 💬
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
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.
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?"
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
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!