No English Version of the Bible Is Reliable

[abbayabba]

Maybe... your response to this thread is, "No, the King James Version is reliable." If so, can I entertain with you the idea, or rather the fact, that King James was a freemason who inverted scripture and made The Word contradict itself?

Isaiah 33:6 in the Hebrew Bible
And He (Yahweh, the LORD) will be the stability of your times, a wealth of salvation, wisdom and knowledge; The fear of Yahweh is his treasure.

KJV Isaiah 33:6
And wisdom and knowledge shall be the stability of thy times, and strength of salvation: the fear of the LORD is his treasure.

Here's a video to shorten up what I would have typed.

I've searched up almost every translation that I've read of in blogs; these translations were documented as reliable. Every translation fails the test of that YT video above. For example, it will say something like "God tempted" instead of "God tested." Each (English) translation has one of these "errors". Prove me wrong?

I really think it's funny how the NIV will correct an "error" in the King James Version--error is quoted due to the writer's intention to place it-- while subsequently taking "Jesus" and "hell" out of a few dozen verses. It all kind of reminds me of a dystopia. When you're an English speaking Christian in these times; it's almost impossible to get the truth. The ENTIRE truth.

BTW, for all of my friends who think much older Bibles are 100% true (I was one of them), I checked the 1599 Geneva Bible and it has a mistake too.

10 But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room, that when he that bade thee, cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, sit up higher: then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at table with thee. (GNV)

 

[Radagast]

No English Version of the Bible Is Reliable

Seems like a gross exaggeration. The ESV is quite reliable:

and he will be the stability of your times, abundance of salvation, wisdom, and knowledge; the fear of the Lord is Zion's treasure.

And I don't waste my time watching YouTube.

 

[Hieronymus]

Then no translation or manuscript is reliable by itself.
Which is true to a certain extent.
This is the business of Bible scholars, who seek to find the most reliable renderings.

 

[*LILAC]

Then I guess we're all just doomed. No way out now! (sarcasm)

 

[Explorer55]

Ok.

 

[tampasteve]

Funny enough, most of the newer English translations make the translation similar to your "Hebrew Bible" translation, with the "He". However, both JPS and Artscroll leave it out. Artscroll being pretty conservative, I am going to go with the thought that the meaning behind the passage does not really change when one reads it in context.

 

[Hieronymus]

Then I guess we're all just doomed. No way out now! (sarcasm)

Meh, it's fairly well known (or knowable) where the problems are in the various translations and manuscripts.

 

[abbayabba]

Seems like a gross exaggeration. The ESV is quite reliable:

and he will be the stability of your times, abundance of salvation, wisdom, and knowledge; the fear of the Lord is Zion's treasure.

And I don't waste my time watching YouTube.

Okay... All you did was insult my claim and add one correct verse. There are plenty of correct verses in every version. Satan tells the truth most of the time, but it's the one lie that kills you. And 4 minutes watching a YouTube video that helps lead you to God's truth is not a waste of time; there are plenty of other "constructive" things that are a waste of time in God's eyes!

Now here's something to refute your claim on the ESV seeming quite reliable (that one lie that Satan includes which is easy to miss):

Matthew 18:11
KJB: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

ESV: Omitted
NWT: Omitted
NAB: Omitted

Mark 11:26
KJB: But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.

ESV: Omitted
NWT: Omitted
NAB: Omitted

Don't these verses seem extremely important to you? Where are they in your ESV?

 

[abbayabba]

Meh, it's fairly well known (or knowable) where the problems are in the various translations and manuscripts.

What about that teen reading the Bible for the first time, who's weak in faith, and is easily confused by contradictions? They should be able to access truth immediately, not through obscure blogs categorized as extremist.

 

[tampasteve]

Okay... All you did was insult my claim and add one correct verse. There are plenty of correct verses in every version. Satan tells the truth most of the time, but it's the one lie that kills you. And 4 minutes watching a YouTube video that helps lead you to God's truth is not a waste of time; there are plenty of other "constructive" things that are a waste of time in God's eyes!

Now here's something to refute your claim on the ESV seeming quite reliable (that one lie that Satan includes which is easy to miss):

Matthew 18:11
KJB: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

ESV: Omitted
NWT: Omitted
NAB: Omitted

Mark 11:26
KJB: But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.

ESV: Omitted
NWT: Omitted
NAB: Omitted

Don't these verses seem extremely important to you? Where are they in your ESV?

The KJV is based on a different manuscript family than most modern translations (textus receptus vs critical text/Alexandrian/Majority,etc.). The real question should be, why does the KJV have these additions where most manuscripts, even older ones, omit them?

 

[tampasteve]

What about that teen reading the Bible for the first time, who's weak in faith, and is easily confused by contradictions? They should be able to access truth immediately, not through obscure blogs categorized as extremist.

The message of salvation through Jesus Christ is consistent regardless of the version used or manuscript it might be based on. Perhaps the best solution for someone more interested in the different versions and text families would be to get a interlinear Bible with both the KJV and ESV or similar.

 

[Hieronymus]

What about that teen reading the Bible for the first time, who's weak in faith, and is easily confused by contradictions? They should be able to access truth immediately, not through obscure blogs categorized as extremist.

Yeah, it's a bumpy road to truth and understanding, (in my experience).
We should be able to help eachother out, which is how it's intended i.m.o.
The seeker should seek Truth and pray to find it too.

 

[Radagast]

Matthew 18:11
KJB: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

ESV: Omitted

Check the ESV footnote: "Some manuscripts add verse 11: For the Son of Man came to save the lost."

That verse does not exist in the Greek (I checked!), except for a small number of manuscripts. It can, however, be found at Luke 19:10 (in both the Greek and the ESV).

Mark 11:26
KJB: But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.

ESV: Omitted

Similar story. The ESV footnote says: "Some manuscripts add verse 26: But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father who is in heaven forgive your trespasses."

It's not in the Greek (at least not in any of the oldest manuscripts). It can, however, be found at Matthew 6:15 (in both the Greek and the ESV).

And I'm struggling to understand your point of view. If English translations are unreliable according to you, and the original Greek is unreliable according to you, what is reliable according to you?

Okay... All you did was insult my claim

No insult was intended. But in my experience, 99% of YouTube videos are false. There are more reliable sources of information, like good books. That's what I spend my time on.

 

[Hieronymus]

Okay... All you did was insult my claim and add one correct verse. There are plenty of correct verses in every version. Satan tells the truth most of the time, but it's the one lie that kills you. And 4 minutes watching a YouTube video that helps lead you to God's truth is not a waste of time; there are plenty of other "constructive" things that are a waste of time in God's eyes!

Now here's something to refute your claim on the ESV seeming quite reliable (that one lie that Satan includes which is easy to miss):

Matthew 18:11
KJB: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

ESV: Omitted
NWT: Omitted
NAB: Omitted

Mark 11:26
KJB: But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.

ESV: Omitted
NWT: Omitted
NAB: Omitted

Don't these verses seem extremely important to you? Where are they in your ESV?

You assume they were omitted, but you dismiss the possibility they could have been added later.
And not with bad intentions, but added still.

 

[abbayabba]

The KJV is based on a different manuscript family than most modern translations (textus receptus vs critical text/Alexandrian/Majority,etc.). The real question should be, why does the KJV have these additions where most manuscripts, even older ones, omit them?

You know, I think this is a good question you asked. Here's my counter, explain this verse,

"12 “How you are fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn!
How you are cut down to the ground,
you who laid the nations low!" Isaiah ESV 14:12

“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.” (Revelation 22:16 ESV)

Why are Jesus and Satan basically called the same thing? Why couldn't the ESV just use Lucifer's name... Lucifer... as in the KJV (a Bible I must use as an example, not because it's perfect, but English and more accurate than others... unless you want to counter). Or maybe they phrased it like that because they worship Lucifer and believe Jesus should fall instead.

 

[Hieronymus]

Lucifer means light bearer in Latin.
So you still have the same 'problem'.

 

[LaSorcia]

Okay... All you did was insult my claim and add one correct verse. There are plenty of correct verses in every version. Satan tells the truth most of the time, but it's the one lie that kills you. And 4 minutes watching a YouTube video that helps lead you to God's truth is not a waste of time; there are plenty of other "constructive" things that are a waste of time in God's eyes!

Now here's something to refute your claim on the ESV seeming quite reliable (that one lie that Satan includes which is easy to miss):

Matthew 18:11
KJB: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

ESV: Omitted
NWT: Omitted
NAB: Omitted

Mark 11:26
KJB: But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.

ESV: Omitted
NWT: Omitted
NAB: Omitted

Don't these verses seem extremely important to you? Where are they in your ESV?

What do you think of the Quran?

 

[Radagast]

explain this verse,

"12 “How you are fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn!
How you are cut down to the ground,
you who laid the nations low!" Isaiah ESV 14:12

“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.” (Revelation 22:16 ESV)

Why are Jesus and Satan basically called the same thing? Why couldn't the ESV just use Lucifer's name... Lucifer... as in the KJV

In Isaiah 14:12, "Lucifer" does not occur in the original Hebrew (it comes from the Latin Vulgate translation). Translations of what the Hebrew actually says include:

CSB: Shining morning star, how you have fallen from the heavens!

ESV: How you are fallen from heaven, O Day Star, son of Dawn!

NASB: How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn!

NIV: How you have fallen from heaven, morning star, son of the dawn!

Revelation 22:16 was originally written in Greek, not Hebrew, and uses slightly different wording.

 

[Dave G.]

It is well known that there are mistakes in translation or variation in wording that means almost the same thing. Part of this is due to the indirect possible translations from Greek or Hebrew to the English language. I don't believe it's a plot, I believe it's a matter of having x amount of words to choose from. In the case of the King James, indeed there are a couple of places where the meaning gets reversed and this in part is why the NKJV was written, to iron out some of these spots ( a KJV advocate will tell you the NKJV is wrong LOL, even to the point of leaving a bible study because the pastor uses the NKJV).. This is nothing new, any good bible teacher will point these places out in a bible study or class if they use the King James. And any good teacher will refer you to, and or suggest, that you study the Greek and Hebrew as well.

 

[abbayabba]

You assume they were omitted, but you dismiss the possibility they could have been added later.
And not with bad intentions, but added still.

Fair. I have reviewed some of the omitted verses in entire chapters, and they were either added later or were reasonably predictable in the context of the verses. But what about Lucifer and Jesus both being the morning star? (I got 3 alerts of new messages as I was typing this).

 

[tampasteve]

You know, I think this is a good question you asked. Here's my counter, explain this verse,

"12 “How you are fallen from heaven,
O Day Star, son of Dawn!
How you are cut down to the ground,
you who laid the nations low!" Isaiah ESV 14:12

“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.” (Revelation 22:16 ESV)

Why are Jesus and Satan basically called the same thing? Why couldn't the ESV just use Lucifer's name... Lucifer... as in the KJV (a Bible I must use as an example, not because it's perfect, but English and more accurate than others... unless you want to counter). Or maybe they phrased it like that because they worship Lucifer and believe Jesus should fall instead.

This is a common KJV-O argument. The fact is that "Lucifer" was an addition to the Latin Vulgate by Erasmus or by Jerome earlier. Lucifer is only ONCE in the Bible (here) and means "morning star" in Latin, IIRC. Further, there is no contradiction to say both Jesus and Lucifer can be called the "morning star" or "Day star" as there is different context. Both Jesus and Satan are also likened to lions in other parts of scripture, but they are not the same thing or for the same reason. Therefore the context matters and the KJV translated this passage incorrectly, it should read morning star or day star, not Lucifer.