does it make a difference?

[Nehemiah6]

Hi Nehemiah,

I looked in my NASB and it's there, but it has a foot note that the earliest manuscripts don't contain that verse.

If there is a footnote casting doubt on this verse, the NASB might as well have expunged it. They have also placed footnotes for many other Scriptures, which is essentially SOWING THE SEEDS OF DOUBT AND CONFUSION. Is there any vaiidlity to any of that? None whatsoever.

The age of any manuscript is NOT the sole criterion for determining whether it is authentic or not. As a matter of fact, the earliest extant manuscripts are the most corrupt. Kindly download The Revision Revised by Dean John William Burgon and study the matter in depth.

 

[Hizikyah]

If there is a footnote casting doubt on this verse, the NASB might as well have expunged it. They have also placed footnotes for many other Scriptures, which is essentially SOWING THE SEEDS OF DOUBT AND CONFUSION. Is there any vaiidlity to any of that? None whatsoever.

The age of any manuscript is NOT the sole criterion for determining whether it is authentic or not. As a matter of fact, the earliest extant manuscripts are the most corrupt. Kindly download The Revision Revised by Dean John William Burgon and study the matter in depth.

I agree age is not always the determining factor, yet to say

As a matter of fact, the earliest extant manuscripts are the most corrupt.

Is not true, each manuscript and passage has to be loked at one by one. There is no sweeping right answer.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Is not true, each manuscript and passage has to be loked at one by one. There is no sweeping right answer.

As I suggested, download, read, study, and digest The Revision Revised. It has direct application to all modern versions. There are also many other books related to this matter, but this is written by an actual textual scholar who devoted his life to determine the true text of the New Testament.

 

[Adstar]

does it mater what bible you have like NIV or KJV is there much of a difference than the wording ?
Thanks for you're answers guys

Yes there are serious differences between the NIV and the KJV ... I trust that the KJV is the inspired word of God and i do not have that trust in the NIV ...

The first bible i read was the NKJV but i later discovered that it also had problems.. So now i keep to the KJV..

 

[Andy]

thanks for all the answers i just asked because i own an NIV and dont get paid till 28th but still want to read constantly. i would use online bibles instead for now but i am out of the house alot and dont have a cell phone, and i really like the NIV as far as i can tell. You all made youre points and learned alot how some say verses are missing and others say it just in the foot note. What i do know is it all represents the word of God and im sure anyway it is written is fine aslong as it means the same thing. have a great night/day

 

[IamWhoIam]

does it mater what bible you have like NIV or KJV is there much of a difference than the wording ?
Thanks for you're answers guys

I think it does make a difference, though at the same time shouldn't be about nit picking either, when a new bible is published, I feel as if it should try to stay with the orginal concepts as much as it can, like say behold, is it more proper to say see,look, survey,contemplate,inspect, probably nothing wrong with that say they are pretty similair in concept,

what is needed is knowing when a author of a bible, is mixing in a theory concept and not so much of similarity.

i like the NIV for somethings, somethings I don't like, one just for a example of a theory mixed in would be this,
Jesus started His ministry about the age of 30, hmm I can debate that if that was really the case or not.

I have just started looking into and reading a brand new version, called the (New Heart English Bible), it grabbed my interest because I learned something from it, I had not known, I did not know That in the old Greek translations the word Nazarene is used 6 times in scripture while the word Nazorean was used 13 times in the same scriptures, so actually the word was used twice depending on were it was placed, most bibles just use the one Nazarene word and not both, yes no doubt very basic and not really a concept issue but I found that interesting that the word was spelled differently yet used collectively 19 times in the old Greek translation.

 

[IamWhoIam]

Just don't let anyone say, hey this bible is all truth the complete word of God without errors or without mistranslations,

investigate the bible yourself, example of this is

Matthew 10

5These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go onto the road of the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel. 7As you go, preach this message: ‘The kingdom of heaven is near.’ 8Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, drive out demons. Freely you have received; freely give.

In verse 8, almost all bibles get this wrong (raise the dead) or was left as so possibly out of fear to correct it, or that it was left as such so you can understand the bible as being inspired, not written word for word straight from God.

no the apostles did not raise the dead before Jesus was crucified, though yes after the resurrection of Jesus,
Paul and Peter did raise the dead. Verse 8 (raise the dead) That was sort of putting the cart before the horse statement.

if you enjoy the NIV go for it, just be aware that every bible published has some kind of issues in it.

 

[trofimus]

does it mater what bible you have like NIV or KJV is there much of a difference than the wording ?
Thanks for you're answers guys

It does not matter for a normal Christian life. You will get saved with all translations, you will know you must not to lie, to kill, you will know who Jesus is etc.

It matters when you want to get deeper into theological questions. But in this case, no translation is sufficient and you must go to the original languages. Some translations are more precise, some less, but you need to know the underlying text to decide that.

So far, I have seen that almost any silly and strange theology here on CC comes from people using the KJV, so I would be very careful when using it.

 

[Willie-T]

People lived for a millennia and a half with God's Word before a king named James decided he wanted a new version of the Bible. So, basically, those people saying the KJV is THE Inspired word of God are actually condemning all those millions of people to who-knows-what, because supposedly they didn't have the "real" Bible.

Be very wary of "The KJV Only" crowd.......... As was stated earlier, besides that crazy basic notion they cling to that there is no other Bible, they often do come up with some of the strangest doctrine you ever heard.

 

[Bogadile]

People lived for a millennia and a half with God's Word before a king named James decided he wanted a new version of the Bible. So, basically, those people saying the KJV is THE Inspired word of God are actually condemning all those millions of people to who-knows-what, because supposedly they didn't have the "real" Bible.

Be very wary of "The KJV Only" crowd.......... As was stated earlier, besides that crazy basic notion they cling to that there is no other Bible, they often do come up with some of the strangest doctrine you ever heard.

They do not say that the people had no God's word before the King James bible. If you were to ask them where was the word before KJV they usually say it is in the textus receptus texts.

 

[TMS]

Conterfieting is done in a way so that you can't tell the difference. Satan is a conterfieting expert, and the little chages can make a big difference.
I say don't get so sidetracted about which bible to read that you neglect reading it. But i have notice little changes in some new versions that is lowering Christ.
Also if the negative things said about Westcott and Hort are true, I'd stay away from bibles that use their translation.

 

[trofimus]

They do not say that the people had no God's word before the King James bible. If you were to ask them where was the word before KJV they usually say it is in the textus receptus texts.

Textus receptus did not exist before Erasmus. Its a medieval compilation!

 

[Issachar92]

If there is a footnote casting doubt on this verse, the NASB might as well have expunged it. They have also placed footnotes for many other Scriptures, which is essentially SOWING THE SEEDS OF DOUBT AND CONFUSION. Is there any vaiidlity to any of that? None whatsoever.

Yup! Get a king james bible, im telling yall keep watching these new translations, they finna remove more and more verses with more and more ancient manuscripts.
They keep finding em somewhere. Last time I checked even the story in John 8:1-11 wasnt part of the original manuscripts according to the "scholars". WATCH!

I wonder why christians are so easily convinced by someone with a university degree of some kind? In the bible those guys was usually the ones who were wrong and the regular folks like fishers heard Jesus gladly, looks like its the same deal today

 

[Locutus]

thanks for all the answers i just asked because i own an NIV and dont get paid till 28th but still want to read constantly.

Stick with your NIV Andy. don't worry about payday or other versions - just continue reading it and letting the words sink in.

As for the KJV, it's one I've used over the years but it does have some translation issues that need to be understood.

 

[trofimus]

Yup! Get a king james bible, im telling yall keep watching these new translations, they finna remove more and more verses with more and more ancient manuscripts.
They keep finding em somewhere. Last time I checked even the story in John 8:1-11 wasnt part of the original manuscripts according to the "scholars". WATCH!

I wonder why christians are so easily convinced by someone with a university degree of some kind? In the bible those guys was usually the ones who were wrong and the regular folks like fishers heard Jesus gladly, looks like its the same deal today

So, why are you so easily convinced by the medieval scholars.

 

[Dino246]

does it mater what bible you have like NIV or KJV is there much of a difference than the wording ?
Thanks for you're answers guys

Hello Andy, and welcome to CC!

The short answer is that the best Bible is the one you read consistently.

The long answer is much more complicated. Both NIV and KJV are "good" translations, but there simply is no "perfect" translation, and "best" is extremely subjective, as there are many parameters and considerations.

If you are comfortable reading Shakespeare, you will probably be comfortable with the KJV. There are many words in the KJV which either aren't used anymore, or mean something different today than in 1611.

Some people will argue that the KJV is better because of better source material, or will say that the NIV is "corrupt". There is an ongoing debate over these issues, and very few people are convinced to change their views. I would caution you to watch out for arguments which slander other people or denigrate their views.

The practice of translation is neither simple nor straightforward, and there isn't necessarily only one "right" way to translate every passage, even if two people start with the same source material.

I would encourage you to read both versions, and maybe a few others. There are strengths and weaknesses in every translation. Above all, ask Jesus to reveal His truth to you through His word and by His Spirit.

 

[Prov910]

I started with the KJV. Then I switched to NIV in college, and prefer it now because the language is more straightforward making it easier for me to understand.

But I think some passages just sound more poetic in KJV. For example, Psalm 23 sounds much better in KJV than NIV or other versions. /jmho

 

[DustyRhodes]

No, it really makes no difference if you are just looking for God. But, many of us seem to have a need to find ammunition for various vendettas, and thus find certain translations much more effective in our specific brand of bashing.

AMEN...most of the mainline scripture will lead to God. This the message of intent for scripture

 

[DustyRhodes]

Thanks alot i just heard people saying that KJV was the best but ive got NIV and wondered if it really effects what i learn

NIV is an excellent choice. Our mission in life is to come to God and not to be a sholar.
you will not go astray with NIV or several other versions.

 

[IamWhoIam]

I like the Syriac Peshito translated by James Murdoch in 1852, he was ahead of his time, he used a lot big words, of coarse that isn't everyone's cup of tea, but I find it quite enjoyable to read and it gets me to look at the meaning of the word he had chosen to use and that increases my understanding, for example who uses "felled" anymore,