Modern Bibles

[Teekz]

This is really serious in my opinion, i don't know if this topic has been discussed before, but ima give it a try

here are some examples from the modern bibles

King james bible
Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

NIV Bible
How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

Why does the NIV label Lucifer as the morning star, the morning star is the name of Jesus Christ?

NIV: Revelation 22:16,
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."


NIV: 2 Peter 1:19,
And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.


NIV: Revelation 2:28--
I will also give him the morning star.


Why does the NIV conterdict it's self, first it calls lucifer the mornign star, then it calls Jesus the morning star

Some people would say that the defenition for Lucifer means morning star, but thats COMPLETLY wrong

lucifer: Middle English (meaning) morning star, fallen rebel archangel, the devil

Old English (from Latin) the morning star, from lucifer, light bearing from lue-lux light

First time i read that defenition i thought ok, maybe lucifer does mean morning star, but then i came across this page

"Looking in an older (1960's) encyclopedia, Lucifer does not mean morning star, as the dictionary tells us, nor does it mean day star. Lucifer was a name given to the planet Venus, by ancient astromaners in Latin, meaning light bearer. Venus will sometimes appear as a morning star, however, it is not a star at all, but a planet that reflects the light of the sun"


*So it seemed who ever translated the new updated encyclopedia, mixed the truth with lies*


So now we can really see the TRUE defenition for satan, he is now the phony star, not the morning star


In conclusion.. why did i spend all this time talking about one word, it's because the NIV and the newer modern bibles have MISTAKES, IF YOU DON"T HAVE A KING JAMES BIBLE GET ONE, satan is the father of lies, he can twist the truth and make it a lie without you knowing it, there are alot more mistakes that i can show, but it would take to long


P.S.. this discovery isn't only my effort, i'm just pointing it out thats all

 

[Melethiel]

Ever thought that perhaps it's the KJV that has the wrong translation?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

King james bible
Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

NIV Bible
How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

Why does the NIV label Lucifer as the morning star, the morning star is the name of Jesus Christ?

NIV: Revelation 22:16,
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

I generally use Young'LT or Rotherham's to compare other verisons or Hebrew/english interlinears.
In some ways, I view the OC Jerusalem/High Priesthood as this "Lucifer", as Jesus came to set up a "New Jerusalem" above and "spiritual priesthood/kingship. Thoughts?

Lamentations 2:1 How the Lord has covered the daughter of Zion With a cloud in His anger!He cast down from heaven to the earth The Beauty of Israel, And did not remember His footstool In the day of His anger.

http://www.tegart.com/brian/bible/kjvonly/isa14_12.html


Isaiah 14:12, Job 38:7 & Revelation 22:16 Will The Real "morning star" Please Stand Up...

"One distinction that can be seen right away is that the title "morning star" in Isaiah 14:12 of the NIV is in all lower-case letters, while the title "the bright Morning Star" in Revelation 22:16 is capitalized. Another distinction is that in the Revelation verse, the title is qualified with the definite article "the", as well as the descriptor "bright", both of which are not present in Isaiah 14:12. These differences seem minor, but they are more than enough to distinguish between the KJV's "sons of God" and "Son of God", "lord" and "Lord", "god" and "God", "spirit" and "Spirit", etc."

I don't see an article "the" before Dawn in the interlinear as they have here though?.

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

(Rotherham) Isaiah 14:12 How hast thou fallen from heaven, O Shining One--Son of [the] Dawn! Hewn down to the earth, O crusher of nations!

(Young) Isaiah 14:12 How hast thou fallen from the heavens, O shining one, son of [the] dawn! Thou hast been cut down to earth, O weakener of nations.

 

[Carey]

Context is the point of the terminology used

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I don't see an article "the" before Dawn in the interlinear as they have here though?.

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm

(Rotherham) Isaiah 14:12 How hast thou fallen from heaven, O Shining One--Son of [the] Dawn! Hewn down to the earth, O crusher of nations!

(Young) Isaiah 14:12 How hast thou fallen from the heavens, O shining one, son of [the] dawn! Thou hast been cut down to earth, O weakener of nations.

Context is the point of the terminology used

Yep. What about this context concerning the OC Priesthood/Law that the Jews would easily notice?

Lamentations 2:1 How the Lord has covered the daughter of Zion With a cloud in His anger! He cast down from heaven to the land The Beauty of Israel, And did not remember His footstool In the day of His anger.

Reve 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out,--the ancient serpent, he that is called Devil and the Adversary/Satan, that deceiveth the whole habitable world,--he was cast to the land, and his messengers, with him, were cast.

 

[eoe]

 

[Asinner]

Why does the NIV conterdict it's self, first it calls lucifer the mornign star, then it calls Jesus the morning star

Some people would say that the defenition for Lucifer means morning star, but thats COMPLETLY wrong

Excellent points. My dh used to go through the varying interpretations with me, pointing out the contradictions. Read the intro to your NIV and see who exactly translated it. Inevitably, the theology of the ones interpreting comes through in the text. Makes me glad my priest is Greek.

God Bless

 

[LibraryOwl]

Dear brother in Christ,

Even if we are to assume you are right, refusing this passage as the point of contention, there is another point of contention upon which we now fall: For what reason, is some passage in Isaiah about this or that, or that or this, or some supposed contradiction between it and a passage in the new testament, of any consequence?

You, upon careful and hostile (that is to the NIV) study, have presumed it to be so, but how will any reader of the Bible notice it, or derive any negative impact from it? Is the message of God to be reduced to such trite points? We would be better if we should zoom back from minute points of contention and see the whole of God's glory revealed to us in the scriptures.

The NIV reveals this whole quite well. It is not like the New World Translation, and it certainly could not be called ugly or unholy. How is my knowledge of the scriptures hampered over things like the 'morning star?' Would not it be far more seriously hampered by the archaic and unintelligible language of the King James Bible than a few inaccuracies about word choices in the NIV?

 

[Asinner]

(reserving this spot in the thread- currently typing reply)

Did you put down a deposit?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

(reserving this spot in the thread- currently typing reply)

Any response to my post # 3

 

[Lynn73]

This is really serious in my opinion, i don't know if this topic has been discussed before, but ima give it a try

here are some examples from the modern bibles

King james bible
Isaiah 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

NIV Bible
How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

Why does the NIV label Lucifer as the morning star, the morning star is the name of Jesus Christ?

NIV: Revelation 22:16,
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."


NIV: 2 Peter 1:19,
And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.


NIV: Revelation 2:28--
I will also give him the morning star.


Why does the NIV conterdict it's self, first it calls lucifer the mornign star, then it calls Jesus the morning star

Some people would say that the defenition for Lucifer means morning star, but thats COMPLETLY wrong

lucifer: Middle English (meaning) morning star, fallen rebel archangel, the devil

Old English (from Latin) the morning star, from lucifer, light bearing from lue-lux light

First time i read that defenition i thought ok, maybe lucifer does mean morning star, but then i came across this page

"Looking in an older (1960's) encyclopedia, Lucifer does not mean morning star, as the dictionary tells us, nor does it mean day star. Lucifer was a name given to the planet Venus, by ancient astromaners in Latin, meaning light bearer. Venus will sometimes appear as a morning star, however, it is not a star at all, but a planet that reflects the light of the sun"


*So it seemed who ever translated the new updated encyclopedia, mixed the truth with lies*


So now we can really see the TRUE defenition for satan, he is now the phony star, not the morning star


In conclusion.. why did i spend all this time talking about one word, it's because the NIV and the newer modern bibles have MISTAKES, IF YOU DON"T HAVE A KING JAMES BIBLE GET ONE, satan is the father of lies, he can twist the truth and make it a lie without you knowing it, there are alot more mistakes that i can show, but it would take to long


P.S.. this discovery isn't only my effort, i'm just pointing it out thats all

You're preaching to the choir here. I use the KJV only, even though my pastor and most in my church use the NIV. But you won't find too many here that agree with you. But I do. You might find this interesting:

http://www.watch.pair.com/another.html

The KJV Textus Receptus if the only one for me.

 

[Tonks]

Why does the NIV label Lucifer as the morning star, the morning star is the name of Jesus Christ?

A holdover from us dirty Romans and our Vulgate. However, your question does lack the proper context of the verse.

 

[Llauralin]

For those who have problems with NIV (a very inelegant translation to be sure), try checking out The Message.

 

[Teekz]

Lynn73... i very much agree with you, and to others who have backed up the KJ bible.. peopel think it's not a big deal, but it is really, ANY change to gods word is wrong, i just stated 1 example, you know how many things i can expose about the NIV, TNIV, ASV. NASV, RSV,.. think about this, there was ONE untouched, uncorupted bible before, what makes yout hink satan wouldn't want to twist God's word, it's not immpossible, as long as there is evil in manz heart, devilc an use them, as someone said before, read the intro to the NIV bible, and see who wrote it
, here is another example from the NIV

LUKE 2:33: The King James Bible reads, "And JOSEPH and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him."

The NIV reads, "The CHILD'S FATHER and mother marveled at what was said about him." The "CHILD'S FATHER"? Was Joseph Jesus's father?


someone said that, most people read through the bible without seeing those mistakes, and it's true, one can go through the bible and past that without even knowing that it was wrong, but for those who MEDITATE one his word day in and day out, you will start to see these differences, imagine, most people don't see this difference, if we don't see them then they will keep on makign newer and newer bibles, whiel changing up gods word without us even knowing.

Lynn73.. yes it's true, more and more i see fellow brothers and sisters in church using the NIV, or a different modern version.. EVEN THE PASTORS use the new versions, i fidn it offensive that someone would have the guts to try and change up Gods word.. yes the KJ bible is old english, it's hard for most people to read, but "do we walk through the wide road to get to heaven, or do we walk through the narrow road?"... hard as it may be to read it, we must preserve hsi word in our hearts, we are coming to the dark days soon i beleive, we need to be well rooted in gods word, i see people debating about this, go look for your self and see the difference, i'm noting attacking the NIV bible i'm just pointing out things that i beleive are important to know, i'm sorry if i offended anyone

 

[Teekz]

Melethiel.. lol i don't know if thats a joke or your being serious, think about it, the KJ bible is old, the NIV bible is new..... do you see what i mean, the KJ bible was published beofre the NIV version, so hwo can the KJ bible be wrong, it's like me going up to a guy that experienced a crime first hand, and telling him how it happend, while i wans't even there.. does that sound right?

 

[Teekz]

LibraryOwl istated before while answering Lynn73. yes most people won't see the difference, but who are we talkign about, are we talking about the people who read the bible once a 3 times a week, or twice a week?.. let me ask you, do you meditate on gods word everyday, by your response and level of wisdom, i will guess you do, so why doesn't it bother you, that alot of people turned away for gods ORIGINAL word to read the NIV, is because it's modern to oru times?.. GODS WORD NEVER CHANGES, so why should we act like little gods(sorry i'm not angry at you or anything, i'm just kinda ****ed off that satan can work in people and make them do this)... i won't say no more, but please if you may visit this site http://www.av1611.org/niv.html

 

[Tonks]

Melethiel.. lol i don't know if thats a joke or your being serious, think about it, the KJ bible is old, the NIV bible is new..... do you see what i mean, the KJ bible was published beofre the NIV version, so hwo can the KJ bible be wrong, it's like me going up to a guy that experienced a crime first hand, and telling him how it happend, while i wans't even there.. does that sound right?

If age was indicative of accuracy everyone in the West would still be using the Vulgate....or the Douay if one prefers the English variety....

 

[Maccie]

there was ONE untouched, uncorupted bible before,

Really? There were no translations from Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin etc. before King James??

Come on, you really don't know what you are talking about! Do you think God dictated the KJV?

What on earth do you think people read before Christianity even got as far as the UK, let alone the USA? Where do you think the French, Germans, Italians etc. got their Bibles from??

 

[acorn_777]

Dont think to hard about wording in the Bible. Heres an example of some miswording that occurs in all translations.

This is the same event, just in case you werent aware of that. In Samuel, the numbering of Israel is pointed toward Gods anger; and in Chronicles it points toward Satan moving David to do this.


1 Chr 21:1
1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.
(KJV)
2 Sam 24:1
1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.
(KJV)

Here is an even more confusing version that places "he" in capital letters, in which would really mislead someone to think that God directed David to this event.

2 Sam 24:1
1 Again the anger of the LORD was aroused against Israel, and He moved David against them to say, "Go, number Israel and Judah."
(NKJ)

 

[Lynn73]

think about this, there was ONE untouched, uncorupted bible before, what makes yout hink satan wouldn't want to twist God's word,

Did you check the site I gave you? It tells about the different streams of Bible texts, one being the true and the others corrupted. And, yes, why wouldn't satan want to corrupt the word of God? Why wouldn't he want to confuse people by providing a seeming never ending amount of translations with subtle changes? He hates the word of God so of course he's going to do his best, if unable to destroy it, to corrupt it's message.

CHRISTIANS BELIEVE THAT GOD’S WORD IS THE TRUTH

divinely inspired and inerrant. Attempts to destroy it under the pretext of clarifying its meaning have accelerated over the past one hundred years. This paper documents an investigation into the domain of Bible scholarship which, having evaluated the evidence found therein and within the various Bible translations, has determined:The Greek Textus Receptus, from which the King James Version and New King James Version were translated, is the true Word of God.

The New Greek Text, from which modern versions (Revised Version, New International Version, New American Standard Version) are derived, is a corrupted Greek text.

The reader will find in these pages historical information concerning the translation of the KJV and modern versions, evidence which discredits the translators of the New Greek Text and the Revised Version of 1881 (ERV or RV), and Tables which compare selected Scriptures in the KJV, ERV (RV), NASB, NIV, and NKJV. The negative impact of numerous changes in modern translations upon Christian doctrine and also upon the Church will become apparent. This treatise will deal primarily with alterations to the New Testament.​

The reader should take into consideration that not all editions and printings of each modern translation are the same. For this paper, the 1881 ERV, 1973 NASB, 1978 NIV, and the 1982 NKJV were used for the Tables of Comparison of Selected Scriptures. All other Bible references are from the Authorized King James Version.

~ Robert M. Baker​

http://watch.pair.com/another.html​

I'm with you, Teekz, but you will find much argument so you're probably wasting your time here.​

​