Which "BIBLE" is best ? Why it REALLY Matters !

[Paul of Eugene OR]

One of the sites had over 314 different editions / versions of the bible are you saying those are all for altruistic reasons ? I highly doubt that.

https://hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/BlasphemyBlasforyou

http://mentalfloss.com/article/52016/4-unusual-bible-translations

Klingon, Lolcats, The Word on the Street, Pidgin English,The Cotton Patch Bible, Hippie Bible, Stinque Zombie Bible, TheIsraelBible, The "Bible Emoji, Conservative Bible, American Patriot’s Bible

Of these 314 different editions/versions of the Bible, are you saying those are all for selfish, dollar centered reasons? I highly doubt that.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Let me try to make it more simple :
Who do you trust with/ concerning Yahweh's Word:
(1) Yahweh
(2) Anyone else

The King James version had the apocrypha as part of its translation. Do you accept the catholic version with the apocrypha, or the protestant version without the apocrypha? Why is it so hard for you to just tell us?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Let me try to make it more simple :
Who do you trust with/ concerning Yahweh's Word:
(1) Yahweh
(2) Anyone else

That's not an answer. Which bible canon to you follow - the Protestant or Catholic, with or without the apocrypha?

Your responses (they aren't answers so far) seem to be intended to manipulate understanding instead of share reasoning. You don't make things more simple by asserting a postulate from which you wish to, later, derive a conclusion you are holding back for the time being. That is making things complicated.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

That's not an answer. Which bible canon to you follow - the Protestant or Catholic, with or without the apocrypha?

Your responses (they aren't answers so far) seem to be intended to manipulate understanding instead of share reasoning. You don't make things more simple by asserting a postulate from which you wish to, later, derive a conclusion you are holding back for the time being. That is making things complicated.

Actually it is much much much more simple to simply trust Yahweh, not men.

Stop asking whether I trust one or another man/ men/ in any way. I don't. Do you ?!

Remember you did not offer the true choice, so I told you again and again.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Actually it is much much much more simple to simply trust Yahweh, not men.

Stop asking whether I trust one or another man/ men/ in any way. I don't. Do you ?!

Remember you did not offer the true choice, so I told you again and again.

I'm just asking you which canon you follow. How can this not be a "true choice?" Don't you accept some documents as scripture, but not others? Refusing to discuss things like this in a reasonable manner shows me you have a hidden agenda.

Me, I accept the 66 books of the protestant Bible as the canon.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Wow, I didn't expect you would assume a 'hidden agenda' because I trust Yahweh and not men.

Yahweh established His Word, and before any men got hold of it and added to it or took away from it, He already had it set, His Way.

Tradition you follow, or know about, that does not accept that Yahweh did this, thinks men made the decisions and somehow came up with the canon,
but I just trust Him, that He did, and it is that simple.

Trusting and relying on Yahweh also solves a lot of other issues/ problems / other things that trusting in man does not solve but makes worse.

I'm just asking you which canon you follow. How can this not be a "true choice?" Don't you accept some documents as scripture, but not others? Refusing to discuss things like this in a reasonable manner shows me you have a hidden agenda.

Me, I accept the 66 books of the protestant Bible as the canon.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Wow, I didn't expect you would assume a 'hidden agenda' because I trust Yahweh and not men.

Well I didn't say that because you trust Yahweh and not men. I said that because you won't do me the courtesy of answering a simple question as to what canon you accept, and instead keep asking a question clearly intended to force the conversation to a direction you have not revealed.

Trusting and relying on Yahweh also solves a lot of other issues/ problems / other things that trusting in man does not solve but makes worse.

There you go again, trying to get us to accept YOUR IDEAS as the ideas of Yahweh, and thereby end all disgreements with you.

 

[gordonhooker]

The King James version had the apocrypha as part of its translation. Do you accept the catholic version with the apocrypha, or the protestant version without the apocrypha? Why is it so hard for you to just tell us?

Because he doesn’t understand the question I would suggest. When the whole thing started going around in circles like most KJV only topics go I pop them on the ignore list.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The Old Testament Apcryphal books were found in the Septuagint, which was the greek translation of the OT. They just showed up there, but since that was the version of the OT that was widely circulated in the church around the world, the fathers read it and quoted it. They are not found, however, in the Hebrew text and for that reason the protestant reformers insisted they be left out. So our protestant bibles lack some of the books found in the catholic bibles.

I always think it is worth noting that while Luther began the tradition of setting aside the Deuterocanonicals in their own separate appendix, and other Protestant translations followed, along with different Protestant groups defining the Canon to the exclusion of the Deuterocanonicals (such as the 39 Articles of Religion or the Westminster Confession), we Lutherans never formally rejected the Deuterocanonicals. Unlike other confessional literature of the 16th and 17th centuries, the Lutheran Book of Concord never offers a definitive position, and Lutheranism has never had an official position on the canonical status of the Deuterocanonical books.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

There you go again, trying to get us to accept YOUR IDEAS as the ideas of Yahweh, and thereby end all disgreements with you.

I gave up trying to hold conversations with Jeff. Precisely for the reasons you are experiencing right now. I'd recommend not engaging him, it'll be far less headache that way.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Do you think men were responsible for what Yahweh said He would do ?
Did the men you are trying to get me to choose from always choose exactly the same and in perfect agreement with Yahweh and with each other ?

Or as written in Scripture, is Yahweh the One Who Guards His Word, and causes all things to work for the good of all who love Him, who are called according to His Purpose ?
All things including breathing His Word thru men He chose, and all things including putting together His Word and directing it as He Pleases through all the centuries ?

Again, did the men you keep trying to get me to choose from, did they lead a sinless life? Even just for a few years or some other amount of time ?

This did not need to get any more complicated than simply: I trust Yahweh to have put together His Word as He Pleased, as He says in His Word He makes sure His Word accomplishes all that He sends it for, and He is Faithful to put His Word Together as it is. See? Simple. And without trusting in men who I don't even know and have no idea how to test them to see if they are approved by Yahweh.

If it helps, My most used for decades and first Bible is a RSV, but not because I trust men I don't know, whoever they were. Simply because Yahweh has shown Himself Faithful and True, without fault and without sin or iniquity, with perfect Righteousness and holy and complete and unprejudiced and impartial Justice.

See the difference between trusting Yahweh and trusting any men in the flesh ?
This becomes more important every day! (by faith in Jesus Messiah)

I said that because you won't do me the courtesy of answering a simple question as to what canon you accept, and instead keep asking a question clearly intended to force the conversation to a direction you have not revealed.

 

[Strong in Him]

One of the sites had over 314 different editions / versions of the bible are you saying those are all for altruistic reasons ? I highly doubt that.

You might highly doubt it, but but do you have any PROOF?
Do you know for a fact that these people, or even some of them, were motivated by money instead of by a desire to make the Word of God more accessible to others - lead by the Holy Spirit?
Do you know if they NEEDED money; how much they had before they started, and how much they got paid - if anything at all?

If you do, if you know for a fact that some people said "what's the best way to make $100,000? I know, let's produce a version of the Bible"; then show us the evidence and I'll agree that you made a valid comment.
If you don't, if your thinking is just "there are so many versions of the Bible, I imagine people only do it to make money"; then yours wasn't a valid comment but a judgement.

 

[kiwimac]

https://bible.org/article/why-so-many-versions

Where have all the verses gone? The modern translations seem to have cut out many of the most precious lines of Scripture. They end Mark's gospel at the 8th verse of chapter 16; they omit the reference of the angel of the Lord stirring the waters at the pool of Bethesda (verse 4 of John 5); and, most notably, they excise the story of the woman caught in adultery in John 8.

Besides omissions, these modern versions make significant changes in the text. For example, in I Timothy 3:16, the King James reads, "God was manifest in the flesh," but most modern translations read, "He was manifest in the flesh." In Revelation 22:19 the King James speaks of the "book of life" while virtually all modern versions speak of the "tree of life." Altogether, there are hundreds of textual changes between the King James and modern translations

KJV-Onlyist nonsense.

 

[AnticipateHisComing]

For example, Revelation 2:4-5 is translated in that version as:

But you walked away from your first love—why? What's going on with you, anyway? Do you have any idea how far you've fallen? A Lucifer fall! "Turn back! Recover your dear early love. No time to waste, for I'm well on my way to removing your light from the golden circle.

ESV has:
But I have this against you, that you have abandoned the love you had at first. 5Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent, and do the works you did at first. If not, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place
NKJV:

Nevertheless I have this against you, that you have left your first love. 5 Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place

Most churches don't even teach on the Book of Revelation let alone use an obscure translation of it to teach from. Dare I say there are some in heaven that never read the book.

And as far as small things mattering a GREAT deal.

ames 3:4 - King James Bible
Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth.

Matthew 17:20 - King James Bible
And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.

1 Samuel 17- 50 So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him; but there was no sword in the hand of David.

The minor differences MATTER A GREAT DEAL in some cases.

Your examples are a joke. The issue is do small differences in the text of translations matter a GREAT deal. I did not ask for you to point out petty small objects in scripture. I guess you have only a small argument to make.

I tried to use a truism that there are multiple ways of saying the same thing. You completely ignore this. You should not be so legalistic in translations because even the NT misquotes the OT, used different words. Also the whole point of the synoptic gospels is to present the same message using different words. You miss Jesus' command to preach to all nations, which is an endorsement to translate his word. Understand that there is not always a one to one translation of words between languages so there is by a necessity an "altering" of God's word.

And to my point that there are multiple valid ways to present the same message, you refute not. You don't even attempt even a small argument.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

If it helps, My most used for decades and first Bible is a RSV, but not because I trust men I don't know, whoever they were.

Well, that's a nice bit of information. You remind me of the experience I had back in my student days, wandering around in the bookstore I found an RSV version of the apocrypha for sale, and I bought it. It was a Christian school, but oddly, hardly anybody ever bought the same book. I read it, not for biblical inspiration, but out of sheer curiosity. It puzzled me that so many of my fellow students lacked that kind of curiosity. Still does.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Well, that's a nice bit of information. You remind me of the experience I had back in my student days, wandering around in the bookstore I found an RSV version of the apocrypha for sale, and I bought it. It was a Christian school, but oddly, hardly anybody ever bought the same book. I read it, not for biblical inspiration, but out of sheer curiosity. It puzzled me that so many of my fellow students lacked that kind of curiosity. Still does.

Don't let it puzzle you.
The vast majority of members/ posters/ men and women everywhere
have no interest in following Yahweh (God),
according to all Scripture.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Don't let it puzzle you.
The vast majority of members/ posters/ men and women everywhere
have no interest in following Yahweh (God),
according to all Scripture.

So when you used the RSV version of the bible, how many "books" did it have inside it? The 66 books of the standard protestant Bible?

 

[kiwimac]

So when you used the RSV version of the bible, how many "books" did it have inside it? The 66 books of the standard protestant Bible?

The RSV comes in two flavours, a 66 book protestant version and a 73 book Catholic one. I keep waiting for an 80+ book Coptic version.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

The RSV comes in two flavours, a 66 book protestant version and a 73 book Catholic one. I keep waiting for an 80+ book Coptic version.

The RSV version of the Apocrypha that I purchased (and I still have it) contains 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, additions to Esther, The Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, The Letter of Jeremiah, The Prayer of Azariah and the song of the three men, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, the Prayer of Manasseh, 1 Maccabees, and 2 Maccabees.

of these, additions to Esther, Prayer of A. and song of the 3 men, and Bel and the Dragon are clearly written into books already existing. Susanna was also part of Daniel.