Bible Versions

[Sword7]

I apologize if this topic has already been discussed, but I could not find it.

What Bible version(s) do you use? Why and does it really matter?

 

[CryptoLutheran]

I apologize if this topic has already been discussed, but I could not find it.

What Bible version(s) do you use? Why and does it really matter?

I use a number of translations, NAB and ESV are the two I probably use the most though.

As for whether or not it matters, that depends on what we mean by "matters". If we're discussing simple, daily (and more-or-less casual) Scripture reading/devotion then it may not matter all that much, unless the translation is truly abysmal. When discussing what best renders the source texts, and then which source texts and manuscripts and text types are more faithful to what the original autographs looked like then it matters a lot.

I actually think it's unfortunate that as Christians we don't place the importance on understanding Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek the same way that say Judaism does on Hebrew and Islam does on Arabic; it would do us all a world of good if we were able to become more intimate with the original text languages and be able to see all the various nuances and subtleties that invariably get lost in translation.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Sword7]

I use a number of translations, NAB and ESV are the two I probably use the most though.

As for whether or not it matters, that depends on what we mean by "matters". If we're discussing simple, daily (and more-or-less casual) Scripture reading/devotion then it may not matter all that much, unless the translation is truly abysmal. When discussing what best renders the source texts, and then which source texts and manuscripts and text types are more faithful to what the original autographs looked like then it matters a lot.

I actually think it's unfortunate that as Christians we don't place the importance on understanding Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek the same way that say Judaism does on Hebrew and Islam does on Arabic; it would do us all a world of good if we were able to become more intimate with the original text languages and be able to see all the various nuances and subtleties that invariably get lost in translation.

-CryptoLutheran

Do you believe that God can't give us His Word in English? He used fallible men to write Scripture. Surely he can use fallible men to translate them into English. The fact is, God promised to preserve His word. (Ps. 12:6,7)Yet where is the preserved text in all these different versions that don't even agree with one another? Every few years we get either another "version" or an updated, "improved" revised edition of a previous one. Doesn't this make man the final authority, and not God?

 

[CryptoLutheran]

Do you believe that God can't give us His Word in English? He used fallible men to write Scripture. Surely he can use fallible men to translate them into English. The fact is, God promised to preserve His word. (Ps. 12:6,7)Yet where is the preserved text in all these different versions that don't even agree with one another? Every few years we get either another "version" or an updated, "improved" revised edition of a previous one. Doesn't this make man the final authority, and not God?

So who decides which version is God's preserved word in English?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Sword7]

So who decides which version is God's preserved word in English?

-CryptoLutheran

First of all, do you believe God made the promise to preserve His word? If you do, do you believe God keeps His promises?

God does not have "versions." He has ONE book. God told Isaiah to write things down in a book, not books.

Publishers and translators of these "new" bibles make changes to God's word. They must do this because their bible is copyrighted, which means it has to be different from previous bibles. Therefore, what we have are versions that don't agree. Words are omitted or changed where sometimes even the meaning itself changes.

 

[brandplucked]

First of all, do you believe God made the promise to preserve His word? If you do, do you believe God keeps His promises?

God does not have "versions." He has ONE book. God told Isaiah to write things down in a book, not books.

Publishers and translators of these "new" bibles make changes to God's word. They must do this because their bible is copyrighted, which means it has to be different from previous bibles. Therefore, what we have are versions that don't agree. Words are omitted or changed where sometimes even the meaning itself changes.

Hi Sword, there are multiple "Bible" versions out there in Bible Babbylonia land and yet nobody who reads any of these multiple choice, contradictory "new and improved" "late$t in $cholar$hip finding$" believes that any of them are the complete and inerrant words of God. Every single Christian who is not King James Bible only has abandoned the belief in the inerrancy of "the Bible", without exception. People read these Bible of the Month Club versions less and less and believe them less and less. Those are the facts.

Even the secular world USA Today reports that the Bible that most people actually read is the King James Bible. The "world" has more sense and wisdom than most Christians today -

Bible readers prefer King James version - USATODAY.com

 

[Deaver]

I apologize if this topic has already been discussed, but I could not find it.

What Bible version(s) do you use? Why and does it really matter?

After a lot of prayer and some reading about which bible translation is best, my position is that it is best to consistently read God’s Word in more than one translation. I use the KJV, NIV,AMP, along with a Greek/Hebrew Interlinear. I also use e-Sword software where I have 24 or so versions.

Multiple versions result because of the many choices of how to translate a word into English. We hear God speaking when we’re listening, not distracted by the argument of which version is “right”. If we ask, the Holy Spirit will open our mind; change our heart; and work out salvation in our life.

 

[brandplucked]

After a lot of prayer and some reading about which bible translation is best, my position is that it is best to consistently read God’s Word in more than one translation. I use the KJV, NIV,AMP, along with a Greek/Hebrew Interlinear. I also use e-Sword software where I have 24 or so versions.

Multiple versions result because of the many choices of how to translate a word into English. We hear God speaking when we’re listening, not distracted by the argument of which version is “right”. If we ask, the Holy Spirit will open our mind; change our heart; and work out salvation in our life.

And yet you don't believe that ANY of them ARE the inerrant words of God.

"In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did that which was right in his own eyes." Judges 21:25

Which one of these is the real "God speaking to you"?


It is devastating for the modern version promoter to see where the New Jerusalem Catholic bible lands on these verses. Also notice how the previous Catholic Douay-Rheims read. It was a whole lot closer to the historical truth than are these more modern translations.

The following short list is just a sampling of the divergent and confusing readings found among the contradictory modern bible versions. There are numerous other examples, but these are just a few to make you aware of what is going on here with "the late$t in $cholar$hip Finding$".

Among these “historic details” are whether Jeremiah 27:1 reads Jehoiakim (Hebrew texts, RV, ASV, NKJV, KJB, Douay-Rheims) or Zedekiah (RSV, NIV, NASB, ESV, NET, Holman, Catholic New Jerusalem 1985)

whether 2 Samuel 21:8 reads Michal (Hebrew texts, KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, Douay-Rheims) or Merab (RSV, NIV, NASB, ESV, NET, Holman, Catholic New Jerusalem)

or 70 (NASB, NKJV, RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, Holman, KJB) being sent out by the Lord Jesus in Luke 10:1 and 17 or 72 (NIV, ESV, NET, Catholic New Jerusalem)

or in Matthew 18:22 does the Lord say to forgive your brother not “until 7 times, but unto 70 times 7 times” (= 490 times - KJB, RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, RSV, ESV, Douay-Rheims, ALL Greek texts) or 77 times (NRSV, NIV, Catholic New Jerusalem)

or the 7th day in Judges 14:15 (KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, Douay-Rheims) or the 4th day (RSV, ESV, NASB, NIV, NET, Catholic New Jerusalem)

Or Hannah taking young Samuel to the house of the LORD with THREE bullocks in 1 Samuel 1:24 (KJB, Hebrew texts, RV, ASV, JPS 1917, NKJV, Youngs, NET, Douay-Rheims) or “A THREE YEAR OLD BULL: (LXX, Syriac RSV, ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman, Catholic New Jerusalem)

or God smiting 50,070 men in 1 Samuel 6:19 (KJB, RV, ASV, NASB, NET, Douay-Rheims) or 70 men slain (RSV, NIV, NRSV, ESV, Catholic New Jerusalem), or “70 men- 50 chief men” (Young’s), or “70 MEN OUT OF 50,000 Holman Standard

or there being 30,000 chariots in 1 Samuel 13:5 (KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Douay-Rheims) or only 3000 (NIV, NET, Holman, Catholic New Jerusalem)

or 1 Samuel 13:1 Here we read: “Saul reigned ONE year; and when he had reigned TWO years over Israel, Saul chose him three thousand men of Israel.” reading - ONE/TWO years (NKJV, KJB, Geneva, Judaica Press Tanach), or 40/32 (NASB 1972-77) or 30/42 (NASB 1995, NIV), OR 30 years/ 40 years (NET) or _____years and.______and two years (RSV, NRSV, ESV, Catholic New Jerusalem), or even “32 years old...reigned for 22 years” in the 1989 Revised English Bible!

2 Samuel 15:7 “forty years” (KJB, Hebrew, Geneva, NKJV, NASB, RV, Douay-Rheims) OR “four years” (NIV, RSV, ESV, NET, Catholic New Jerusalem)

or whether both 2 Samuel 23:18 and 1 Chronicles 11:20 read “chief of the THREE” (KJB, Hebrew texts, RV, ASV, NKJV, NRSV, Holman, NIV, NET, Holman, NET, Douay-Rheims) or THIRTY from the Syriac (NASB, RSV, ESV, Catholic New Jerusalem)

or 2 Samuel 24:13 reading SEVEN years (KJB, Hebrew, ASV, NASB, NKJV, NET, Douay-Rheims) or THREE years (LXX, NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Holman, Catholic New Jerusalem)

or whether 1 Kings 4:26 reads 40,000 stalls of horses (Hebrew, KJB, RV, ASV, NASB, ESV, NKJV, Douay-Rheims) or 4,000 stalls (NIV, NET, Catholic New Jerusalem)

or whether 1 Kings 5:11 reads 20 measures of pure oil (Hebrew texts, Geneva, KJB, ASV, RV, NASB, NRSV, Douay-Rheims) or 20,000 (RSV, NIV, ESV, NET, LXX and Syriac, Catholic New Jerusalem)

or in 2 Chronicles 31:16 we read "males from THREE years old" (Hebrew texts, KJB, Geneva Bible, Wycliffe, LXX, Syriac, RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV, NKJV, Holman, NET, Douay-Rheims) or "males from THIRTY years old" (NASB - ft. Hebrew “three”, Catholic New Jerusalem)

or where 2 Chronicles 36:9 reads that Jehoiachin was 8 years old when he began to reign (Hebrew texts, KJB, NASB, NKJV, RV, ASV, KJB, RSV, NRSV, ESV 2001 edition, Douay-Rheims) or he was 18 years old (NIV, Holman, NET, ESV 2007 edition!!! and once again the Catholic New Jerusalem)

or that when God raised the Lord Jesus from the dead it is stated in Acts 13:33 “this day have I begotten thee” (KJB, NASB, NKJV, RV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Douay-Rheims) or “today I have become your Father” (NIV, Holman, NET, Catholic New Jerusalem).

If you go back and read through this list of just some of the numerous very real differences that exist among these Bible of the Month Club versions, ask yourself Which (if any) are the 100% historically true words of God. IF "the Bible" is not 100% historically true in the events it narrates, then when does God start to tell us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

 

[Deaver]

Do you believe that God can't give us His Word in English? He used fallible men to write Scripture. Surely he can use fallible men to translate them into English. The fact is, God promised to preserve His word. (Ps. 12:6,7)Yet where is the preserved text in all these different versions that don't even agree with one another? Every few years we get either another "version" or an updated, "improved" revised edition of a previous one. Doesn't this make man the final authority, and not God?

While I agree it appears that Psalms 12:6-7 is a "word preservation" passage, I think it requires the breaking of Hebrew grammar rules. Without going into all the issues of ‘masculine’ or ‘feminine’ verbs, suffice it to say that in the Hebrew, this passage is clearly a "people preservation" passage. The meaning that is clear in the Hebrew is blurred and is easily missed in the KJV and other translations.

I am not saying that God won't preserve his words. I'm simply showing that Psalm 12:6-7 is not talking about ‘word’ preservation, but ‘people’ preservation. Also, there's no mention in Scripture about how the Lord will preserve his words (i.e. there's no mention that it will be only in a 17th century English translation).

 

[Deaver]

And yet you don't believe that ANY of them ARE the inerrant words of God.

That is not at all what I said.

Which one of these is the real "God speaking to you"?

God speaks to me through all versions of the Bible that I read. More importantly, when I compare what I read to other scripture and see contradictions, I ask the Holy Spirit to clarify what God wants me to know.

The following short list is just a sampling of the divergent and confusing readings found among the contradictory modern bible versions. There are numerous other examples, but these are just a few to make you aware of what is going on here with "the late$t in $cholar$hip Finding$"

If you go back and read through this list of just some of the numerous very real differences that exist among these Bible of the Month Club versions, ask yourself Which (if any) are the 100% historically true words of God. IF "the Bible" is not 100% historically true in the events it narrates, then when does God start to tell us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

I am aware that there are many “divergent and confusing readings” in all translations available to us today.

Again all I am saying is that no translation is perfect. All translations available to us today have been prepared by man and are not the same as the same as the original manuscripts which were perfect and the inspired word of God. Fortunately we have several good translations of the Bible, like the KJV, ASV, NASB, NIV, and NKJV, which are satisfactory in conveying the necessary truth to those who diligently search for such.

If you take time to think about it, the great problem we have today is not the variety of translations that are available but rather that few people take the time to read and study the Bible. This is an age old problem – a lack of knowledge of the word of God. It is clear from the Bible that, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” (2 Timothy 3:16 KJV)

That is God gave us His written word so that we might learn from it the way of life through His Son. May we be committed not only to studying Scripture, but may we also be committed to living according to its principles.

 

[2thePoint]

It would be interesting to see a study on whether most of those insisting that one particular translation is the best have any training in the original languages, translation experience of any kind, the history of text transmission, ANE cultural influences, etc. It's fine for people to have convictions, but not to accuse those with other convictions of heresy or stupidity, as is the case with many who hold that a single translation alone is the Word of God.

 

[brandplucked]

That is not at all what I said.

God speaks to me through all versions of the Bible that I read. More importantly, when I compare what I read to other scripture and see contradictions, I ask the Holy Spirit to clarify what God wants me to know.

I am aware that there are many “divergent and confusing readings” in all translations available to us today.

Again all I am saying is that no translation is perfect. All translations available to us today have been prepared by man and are not the same as the same as the original manuscripts which were perfect and the inspired word of God. Fortunately we have several good translations of the Bible, like the KJV, ASV, NASB, NIV, and NKJV, which are satisfactory in conveying the necessary truth to those who diligently search for such.

If you take time to think about it, the great problem we have today is not the variety of translations that are available but rather that few people take the time to read and study the Bible. This is an age old problem – a lack of knowledge of the word of God. It is clear from the Bible that, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” (2 Timothy 3:16 KJV)

That is God gave us His written word so that we might learn from it the way of life through His Son. May we be committed not only to studying Scripture, but may we also be committed to living according to its principles.

Deaver, by your saying that No translation is perfect and "the originals WERE perfect" (which you have never seen) you are declaring yourself to be a Bible agnostic and an unbeliever in the inerrancy of the Bible.

So, IF (as you say) the Holy Spirit clarifies what God wants you to know, then has God shown you which (if any) of those readings I showed you are His inerrant and 100% historically true words?

The fact is, people read these new versions less and less and believe them less. Even the secular world like USA Today tell us that the highest percentage of those who actually READ their bibles are those who read the King James Bible. This should tell you something.

Bible readers prefer King James version - USATODAY.com

 

[Sword7]

Its really interesting that those who endorse all these myriad of bible versions want us to believe that God promised to preserve the "poor and needy" in Ps. 12. By claiming its the people and not God's words, this jives with their MVs endorsement.

The rule of bible intereptation is to let scripture interpret scripture. I don't worry about the original Hebrew or Greek or what textual critics say, the KJB isn't confusing. What's confusing is all these MVs which omit and change words and none of them agree.

 

[Deaver]

Deaver, by your saying that No translation is perfect and "the originals WERE perfect" (which you have never seen) you are declaring yourself to be a Bible agnostic and an unbeliever in the inerrancy of the Bible.

Well I am not sure how to respond. Let's try this, I went to your web-site and found the definition of "Bible Agnostic" They do not know what the Bible is or where to get one". I can assure you I know what the Bible is, it is the Word of God, inerrant in its original manuscripts. There are many places I could get one if I didn't already have one. What I am saying is simply that all of today's translations have been written by man and not through the inspiration of God. They have simply, in most cases, tried to translate the Bible into modern language. In many cases, like the KJV, it is pretty accurate. But there are an estimated 800 words in the KJV that have since changed meaning. Several other words have been poorly translated, such as Hell in Acts 2:27 should be Hades.

So, IF (as you say) the Holy Spirit clarifies what God wants you to know, then has God shown you which (if any) of those readings I showed you are His inerrant and 100% historically true words?

Not taking the bait. When I am involved in Bible Study and I pray and ask the Holy Spirit for clarification. If I have time, I may look at some of your verses. However, I can assure you that whatever, version you want to profess as inerrant, there are those that can point out errors. I usually find that exercise not worth the effort. When I am involved in personal discussions and I think someone is interpreting scripture in error, I will enter into a discussion. Sometimes I re-think my position and other times not.

The fact is, people read these new versions less and less and believe them less. Even the secular world like USA Today tell us that the highest percentage of those who actually READ their bibles are those who read the King James Bible. This should tell you something.

Bible readers prefer King James version - USATODAY.com

Okay, I am glad that you have a source that supports your position.

 

[brandplucked]

Its really interesting that those who endorse all these myriad of bible versions want us to believe that God promised to preserve the "poor and needy" in Ps. 12. By claiming its the people and not God's words, this jives with their MVs endorsement.

The rule of bible intereptation is to let scripture interpret scripture. I don't worry about the original Hebrew or Greek or what textual critics say, the KJB isn't confusing. What's confusing is all these MVs which omit and change words and none of them agree.

Hi Sword. You are correct. I discussed Psalm 12 with inerrancy denying Doug Kutilek. He presents the typical bible agnostic view of most today regarding these verses.

Here is the discussion and interchange we had on Psalm 12.

Doug Kutilek Psalm 12 - Another King James Bible Believer

Will K

 

[brandplucked]

Well I am not sure how to respond. Let's try this, I went to your web-site and found the definition of "Bible Agnostic" They do not know what the Bible is or where to get one". I can assure you I know what the Bible is, it is the Word of God, inerrant in its original manuscripts. There are many places I could get one if I didn't already have one.

Whoa, Deaver. Hang on a minute here. THERE ARE NO ORIGINALS, and you know there are no originals. yet you claim to have the words of God. No, what you have are multiple, textually conflicting versions of what may be parts of these words of God (you hope, but are not sure). I gave you a list of completely different readings as asked which are the God given inerrant readings, and you won't tell us.

What I am saying is simply that all of today's translations have been written by man and not through the inspiration of God.

Now your telling us that all translations are not inspired. You don't have the originals. And yet you somehow magically and wonderfully "have the word of God"? Can you tell us where to get a copy of this apparently phantom inerrant Bible you seem to want us to think you actually believe in? No, you say?

They have simply, in most cases, tried to translate the Bible into modern language. In many cases, like the KJV, it is pretty accurate. But

there are an estimated 800 words in the KJV that have since changed meaning. Several other words have been poorly translated, such as Hell in Acts 2:27 should be Hades.

Now you show us that your are just another bible corrector who has made your own mind and understanding your final authority. Yes, indeedy, that mythological place called Hades is much clearer than the word Hell, huh?

 

[Deaver]

Its really interesting that those who endorse all these myriad of bible versions want us to believe that God promised to preserve the "poor and needy" in Ps. 12. By claiming its the people and not God's words, this jives with their MVs endorsement.

The rule of bible interpretation is to let scripture interpret scripture. I don't worry about the original Hebrew or Greek or what textual critics say, the KJB isn't confusing. What's confusing is all these MVs which omit and change words and none of them agree.

First you should know that the Bible I rely on the most is the KJV. But I recognize that it is not without error.

To your post, I agree that we should let scripture interpret scripture. You should also know that my point had nothing to do with modern versions of the Bible. My point was that based on the words used Psalms 12:6-7 is clearly a "people preservation" passage. For further clarification, I suggest a couple of things: (i) go to your church and ask your church leader for clarification; (ii) take a look at a variety of commentaries and see what they say; or (iii) look through the “Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge. I would also recommend a Greek/Hebrew Interlinear Bible.

 

[Deaver]

Sword7 and brandplucked, I could be wrong but I assume that you both are stong supporters of the KJV. If that is the case can you tell me who wrote the KJV you use?

 

[Deaver]

Sword 7 and brandplucked, one more thing. As Christians I think we agree the Bible is infallible in the original language and proper translations show no inconsistencies. However, to be honest, we all must agree that all translations have mistranslated some thing. Some translations have more severe mistakes than others. It is up to us to search the scriptures for the truth. We should not get hung up on those things that have little or no impact on the message of the Bible "salvation through Jesus Christ".

For example, I point the following out only for illustration and not to be combative:

The clearest KJV error/addition is 1 John 5:7, which reads, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." Although this is not false teaching, it never was, however, a part of the original inspired word of God.

 

[Sword7]

First you should know that the Bible I rely on the most is the KJV. But I recognize that it is not without error.

To your post, I agree that we should let scripture interpret scripture. You should also know that my point had nothing to do with modern versions of the Bible. My point was that based on the words used Psalms 12:6-7 is clearly a "people preservation" passage. For further clarification, I suggest a couple of things: (i) go to your church and ask your church leader for clarification; (ii) take a look at a variety of commentaries and see what they say; or (iii) look through the “Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge. I would also recommend a Greek/Hebrew Interlinear Bible.

Are you sure you want me to ask my pastor? Ok, here goes: He has a website and this is his response to Ps:12

In verse 1 the main point of this Psalm is set forth that the “godly man” ceaseth, but the “words of the Lord” do not. This psalm discusses the use of language repeatedly.
Verse 2 says godly men fall into apostasy and “speak vanity” and use “flattering lips” and “speak” with a hypocritical “double heart.” This is expanded upon in Isaiah where it says they draw nigh to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.
In verse 3 the Lord promises to cut off the flattering lips of apostate godly men who speak proud things.
In verse 4 it says that apostate godly men are their own authority. With their own “tongue” they will prevail, and with their “lips” they can speak what they want, there is not an authority greater than their own “tongue.”
Why a Solution is Required

In verse 5 God is setting up why He is going to promise something later in the psalm. God says, for the sake of the “poor” and “needy,” He will rise to the occasion and protect them from these apostate godly men who are proud and speak with a “double heart,” whose own “lips” are their final authority. Now did you catch that? God is talking about protecting the poor and needy babes from the godly men whose tongue is their final authority.
Verse 6 continues the setup of His point by saying what is said all over this Bible, that God’s words are the only things that are pure, and by obvious contrast, godly men are not pure. God then says something very prophetic; He mentions seven fold purification. I know that on the surface it seems only to be a reference to the purity of the words of God. However, there are some that interpret this in reference to the reformation English Bibles.
The Solution

In verse 7, God says, that He shall preserve them (His words from the preceding verse) from this generation for ever. In my mind He clearly is promising to preserve his pure words for all generations because the godly man ceaseth, and He will do this to help the poor and needy. So in a sense, God is promising to preserve Himself a people (a remnant if you will), but only through the preservation of His holy words. The Lord’s word is a light to your path, how else shall a young man cleanse his way? God is saying that godly men fall away and pervert the living words of the living God, and only through the preservation of His words can the poor and needy find safety.
Conclusion

God closes with verse 8 with the wickedness that will be rampant when the godly man ceaseth. This will be a time when the vilest men are exalted, and this wickedness is only rebuffed by God’s holy preserved words, the sword of the Lord. I believe this psalm is for the day we currently live in more than any other, and its distortion in the modern versions is very telling about the “godly men” who were their translators.


Will Hoyt, Learnthebible.org