Which Bible version shall I use

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jan 31, 2009
2,225
11
0
#41
I would recommend staying away from the New World Translation or Christian Science books & the "new earth" book and the "Secret" book & the book of Mormon. I do not think my NIV is "satanic" as my relationship with Christ has grown immensly and my relationship with satan has deteriorated... I did have issues with portions of scripture that were omitted and therefore study in conjuction with my King James Version. I plan on purchasing a NKJV as I think I may be happy with that translation... hopefully. Baptistrw, Pastor Keith, Wisdom seeker, Mahogany what do you guys think of this version or do you have any experience with it? I'm looking for an accurate translation that I can read as well. Tried going back to just the KJV but found I was reading ALOT less because I spent time in confusion. I value your opinions.

Jas 1:5If any of you lack WISDOM, let him ask of GOD, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.

If we seek knowledge on putting A bike together, you need true/correct instructions, if the instructions are incorrect then the bike will either look funny when you get it together or either it will not even work right when it is done if you can even get it done . the Bible needs to be the truth. with man it would be impossible to have a true Bible but with God all things are possible, if we can't believe that God can give us a true Bible in the language we speak then how can we trust God to do anything. we believe that God inspired men to write the orginal manuscripts, but now adays we believe that God can not in 1611 inspired men to translate the true Bible in english. but for about 330 years men believed that we had the true bible the authorized version the King James Bible. but men wanted to learn more about God so they said let's make the word easier, But God said if you want wisdom ask me. so My advised is to stay with the Knig James ask God for wisdom everytime you read it.

But these verses helped me more than anything Hope they help you:

Pr 2:1My son, if thou wilt receive my words, and hide my commandments with thee;Pr 2:2So that thou incline thine ear unto wisdom, and apply thine heart to understanding;Pr 2:3Yea, if thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for understanding;Pr 2:4If thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid treasures;Pr 2:5Then shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD, and find the knowledge of God.Pr 2:6For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding.


If I gave you a treasure map and told you that if you followed the instrutions that it would lead you to a treasure chest worth 1 million dollars. I dare say that you would even forsake everything , even your family for awhile so that you could focus on the map and search for the treasure. this is what God is saying here, just popping open the Word every once an awhile. but if we get serious about learning more about God , with every free minute we have grab the Word dig in there just like digging for that treasure , for what is within the Pages of the Word is far greater than any earthly treasure we can find.

Ac 3:6Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.
 
M

miktre

Guest
#42
That article made my head hurt in a bad way...it's ok to hyperlink, folks.

The little "666" logo isn't a 666 logo...it's a symbol that people have found handy to represent the Trinity...sort of like the number 10 represents the idea of ten objects or things.
Everyone has an opinion, but sadly few base it on scripture. Here we find a reed but shaking in the wind. Its a sad state the church is in today. Turn to the Word:

29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
 
May 3, 2009
246
2
0
#43
Each religion is known by its most characteristic ritual. The Mass is for Catholicism the essential act of worship to God. Protestants of different hues are known by their insistence on reading the Bible, which they read and insistently recommend to others, as if by reading it one would find salvation. The assumption of those protestants is that everyone, no matter how ignorant, can fruitfully read the Scriptures because the Holy Spirit Himself would inspire people to grasp the correct sense of what they read. By this reasoning, the Bible is easier understood than a newspaper or comic book.
Moreover, anyone could give any interpretation one wished or judged to have understood from sacred text. By inference, the Holy Scripture would not have an objectively correct meaning. All the interpretations would be right, even if they were contradictory to one another. This is what is called the “free interpretation of the Bible”, principle proclaimed by Luther to destroy the Pope’s power.

The result of this free interpretation of the Holy Scriptures was an almost endless(infinite) multiplication of sects. Such a system produces a biblical Babel. Nowadays, there are millions of “evangelic” sects, every one of them offering a different interpretation of the sacred text, and all of them proclaiming themselves to be right. At heart, every protestant is a “church”, so there cannot be a church of Christ. Protestantism poses itself against the Pope’s infallible power, and to fight it, proclaims every “believer’s” infallibility.

Protestantism's reasoning goes that every single person should read the Bible, and each one should have a different understanding of the Holy Scriptures, denying, by doing so, the existence of one objective true meaning meant by God in those words. Thereby, it is denied that there is “only one faith”. God would have created the Bible as an “Open Book”: it would have millions of possible senses, all of them likely to be true, but none of them exclusively true and unique.

Now, it is curious that in the Bible itself there is no text which says: “Read the Bible”. It is quite obvious, for no one can bear witness of oneself (?) (John 5: 31). Neither in the Ten Commandments, given by God to Moses, nor in the words of Christ, is the advice that Christians should read the Bible, to be found. How come does this omission happen? Where do protestants of many cults take this law or advice from, that everyone should read the Holy Scriptures?

If reading the Bible was mandatory to our salvation, Jesus Christ would certainly have told the apostles to read, and would have ordered everybody to read it. Christ would also have ordered people to distribute Bibles to everyone. The command would have been: ’Go print out’, instead of saying “go and preach to all people” (Matt 28: 19). He did not say: “Read the Bible”, neither “Distribute Bibles to all people”. Nor did he assert: “Advise everyone to read the Bible”. Why has he not ever said that? Obviously, books – even the holy ones – are meant to be read. Thus, God made the Holy Scriptures to be read. But read by whom? Everyone?

Of course not. If not everyone is competent enough to read common books, much less are able to read specialized and scientific books, or able to understand the books of the Holy Scriptures, that are much deeper. An unprepared reader, or someone with no convenient knowledge, will either not understand the text, or misunderstand it, and be placed in an even worse state than that one of ignorance. Because not knowing it is not as bad as misunderstanding. For this reason, God said in the Book of Proverbs: “As if a thorn should grow in the hand of a drunkard: so is a parable in the mouth of fools.” (Prov.26: 9).

Thus should only a few people read the holy books? Who are they? Who would have the mission to read the Scriptures and teach it to wise and humble minds?
 
C

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest
#44
Each religion is known by its most characteristic ritual. The Mass is for Catholicism the essential act of worship to God. Protestants of different hues are known by their insistence on reading the Bible, which they read and insistently recommend to others, as if by reading it one would find salvation. The assumption of those protestants is that everyone, no matter how ignorant, can fruitfully read the Scriptures because the Holy Spirit Himself would inspire people to grasp the correct sense of what they read. By this reasoning, the Bible is easier understood than a newspaper or comic book.
Moreover, anyone could give any interpretation one wished or judged to have understood from sacred text. By inference, the Holy Scripture would not have an objectively correct meaning. All the interpretations would be right, even if they were contradictory to one another. This is what is called the “free interpretation of the Bible”, principle proclaimed by Luther to destroy the Pope’s power.

The result of this free interpretation of the Holy Scriptures was an almost endless(infinite) multiplication of sects. Such a system produces a biblical Babel. Nowadays, there are millions of “evangelic” sects, every one of them offering a different interpretation of the sacred text, and all of them proclaiming themselves to be right. At heart, every protestant is a “church”, so there cannot be a church of Christ. Protestantism poses itself against the Pope’s infallible power, and to fight it, proclaims every “believer’s” infallibility.

Protestantism's reasoning goes that every single person should read the Bible, and each one should have a different understanding of the Holy Scriptures, denying, by doing so, the existence of one objective true meaning meant by God in those words. Thereby, it is denied that there is “only one faith”. God would have created the Bible as an “Open Book”: it would have millions of possible senses, all of them likely to be true, but none of them exclusively true and unique.

Now, it is curious that in the Bible itself there is no text which says: “Read the Bible”. It is quite obvious, for no one can bear witness of oneself (?) (John 5: 31). Neither in the Ten Commandments, given by God to Moses, nor in the words of Christ, is the advice that Christians should read the Bible, to be found. How come does this omission happen? Where do protestants of many cults take this law or advice from, that everyone should read the Holy Scriptures?

If reading the Bible was mandatory to our salvation, Jesus Christ would certainly have told the apostles to read, and would have ordered everybody to read it. Christ would also have ordered people to distribute Bibles to everyone. The command would have been: ’Go print out’, instead of saying “go and preach to all people” (Matt 28: 19). He did not say: “Read the Bible”, neither “Distribute Bibles to all people”. Nor did he assert: “Advise everyone to read the Bible”. Why has he not ever said that? Obviously, books – even the holy ones – are meant to be read. Thus, God made the Holy Scriptures to be read. But read by whom? Everyone?

Of course not. If not everyone is competent enough to read common books, much less are able to read specialized and scientific books, or able to understand the books of the Holy Scriptures, that are much deeper. An unprepared reader, or someone with no convenient knowledge, will either not understand the text, or misunderstand it, and be placed in an even worse state than that one of ignorance. Because not knowing it is not as bad as misunderstanding. For this reason, God said in the Book of Proverbs: “As if a thorn should grow in the hand of a drunkard: so is a parable in the mouth of fools.” (Prov.26: 9).

Thus should only a few people read the holy books? Who are they? Who would have the mission to read the Scriptures and teach it to wise and humble minds?
Greetings,

Very well written and sensible reply. I see also that God certainly did not provide the means for everybody to read the Bible and does not require everybody in the whole world to read let alone understand the Bible. The idea that one poorly translated Bible can be handed out for free like cheap candy in a shopping mall to people who have no interest in God and that those people are going to read that Bible even though their reading comprehension is most likely very limited, and their knowledge of Bible History and interpretaion nil, those people are going to have the Holy Spirit of GOD come to them personally and reveal to them all the truth and wisdom of Scripture! That idea is simply absurd, not only is it absurd but it disrespects God, it shows contempt for His word and belittles it, treating it as a cheap base item that can be read like the back of box of cornflakes!

How can self-proclaiming christians pretend, that anybody can read and understand the Bible, as if it was as easy as falling of a log! Why a good deal of folk have never even read a paperback crime novel let alone the most complicated, detailed and intricate book of knowledge and wisdom known to man, a book written by God! You think that that the average uneducated crude fool has the ability to grasp Scripture, how ridiculous, what a foolish notion. Would you ask the village idiot to educate your own children? Think about that....Would you! How about the local thief, would you give him the keys to your house while you went on holiday? No! Then why in God's Name do christians continue to trample God's words, and throw His holy book in the gutter? "Do not cast pearls among swine."

'At heart, every protestant is a 'church' so there can be no church of Christ. Protestantism poses itself against the Pope infallible power, and to fight it proclaims every "believer's" infallibility.' - eric51
 
M

miktre

Guest
#45
Greetings,

Protestantism poses itself against the Pope infallible power, and to fight it proclaims every "believer's" infallibility.' - eric51



Yeah, how can you measure up to this con artist who kisses the koran and sits in upside down cross chairs. Wow, and love the way his church moves around the pediphiles from country to country to avoid prosecution. How can a church like that be not of God? The idolitry worship alone would make the babylonians blush. You might as well be trying to tell us that satan is accually God to come in here trying to get anyone to beleive that.
 
Nov 14, 2008
2,715
4
0
#46
I like to use the version with really large letters......
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#47
I know the Catholic often says we can't learn and study the bible ourself, or get the right meaning ourself. But it's simply not true. The fact is millions of Christians read the bible for themself today, including Catholics, and get the right interpretation out of it.

There's a few reasons:

a) it's not that hard !. A lot of the bible is simple. Paul's letters for example are not that hard to understand. To say that we cant understand Paul's letters would be to say that the churches he was writing to couldnt understand them either, and needed an expert to explain them to them. Simply not the case.

b) Compared to even a hundred years ago, most people are very well education in our society.
It's a sad state of affairs that Sunday School children can know the truth from the bible better that they have read themselves, than what comes out of the mouths of some priests and pastors.


c) The average christian may not be able to explain the history, and depths of scripture like a theologican with a PhD can, but they can know the essentials and the basics that is enough to get them through life and to heaven.




Each religion is known by its most characteristic ritual. The Mass is for Catholicism the essential act of worship to God. Protestants of different hues are known by their insistence on reading the Bible, which they read and insistently recommend to others, as if by reading it one would find salvation. The assumption of those protestants is that everyone, no matter how ignorant, can fruitfully read the Scriptures because the Holy Spirit Himself would inspire people to grasp the correct sense of what they read. By this reasoning, the Bible is easier understood than a newspaper or comic book.
Moreover, anyone could give any interpretation one wished or judged to have understood from sacred text. By inference, the Holy Scripture would not have an objectively correct meaning. All the interpretations would be right, even if they were contradictory to one another. This is what is called the “free interpretation of the Bible”, principle proclaimed by Luther to destroy the Pope’s power.
The allegation that "The assumption of those protestants is that everyone, no matter how ignorant, can fruitfully read the Scriptures because the Holy Spirit Himself would inspire people to grasp the correct sense of what they read." is simply not true. Protestants are very much involved in discipleship , teaching and learning. Protestants do not simply give someone a bible and say "go fend for yourself". But yes with an obedient heart desiring to know the truth the Holy Spirit does inspire people, we shouldn't underestimate the role of the Holy Spirit in each individual's lives.


The result of this free interpretation of the Holy Scriptures was an almost endless(infinite) multiplication of sects. Such a system produces a biblical Babel. Nowadays, there are millions of “evangelic” sects, every one of them offering a different interpretation of the sacred text, and all of them proclaiming themselves to be right. At heart, every protestant is a “church”, so there cannot be a church of Christ. Protestantism poses itself against the Pope’s infallible power, and to fight it, proclaims every “believer’s” infallibility.
Not quite true. The The different sects are not caused by different bible interpretations. There are many deeper issues that cause different denominations, usually disagreements over leadership or style, or purpose, sometimes new denominations are led by greed, power, control. Sometimes they are started when someone has a claimed revelation or vision from God. I think different interpretations is post-fact, not a main cause of the different sects. Division is simply fallen human behaviour.


Protestantism's reasoning goes that every single person should read the Bible, and each one should have a different understanding of the Holy Scriptures, denying, by doing so, the existence of one objective true meaning meant by God in those words. Thereby, it is denied that there is “only one faith”. God would have created the Bible as an “Open Book”: it would have millions of possible senses, all of them likely to be true, but none of them exclusively true and unique.
Again that's not true. Protestantism hopes that every person arrives at the same conclusions when they read the bible. What organisation in its right mind would hope that everyone gets a different conclusion? That's chaos. Yet it is remarkable that despite everyone having what you call "free interpretation", the great similarities between the different sects of protestantism. The differences are often only in trivial matters. As a Protestant I can and have freely and happily mixed with all other versions, from Seventh Day adventist, presbyterian, baptist, to lutheran and church of england.
Yet the situation in catholicism is not much better. Today catholics are encouraged to read their own bible, but for what purpose if they can't (supposedly) understand it anyway? Despite the claimed existance of uniform teaching in the Catholic church, and absense of free interpretation, Catholicism is fragmented in doctrine and there are many variants of catholic thought and belief existing. Different priests teach different messages, different church members all believe different things. Free interpretation is not restricted only to protestants, but is a common trait amongst any human who has freedom of thought and interpretation. Otherwise they would have to be brainwashed and belong to a cult. The irony I suppose is that few Protestants in their private interpretation of SCriptures have reached the conclusion that the Roman Catholic church is correct. Rather, private interpretation of the scripture has reinforced and justified the stance that salvation is by grace through faith, and not of ourselves. The individual who reads the bible themselves soon realises the lack of scripture concerning purgatory, indulgences , veneration of Mary, and many other practices which are concidered to be unbiblical.


Now, it is curious that in the Bible itself there is no text which says: “Read the Bible”. It is quite obvious, for no one can bear witness of oneself (?) (John 5: 31). Neither in the Ten Commandments, given by God to Moses, nor in the words of Christ, is the advice that Christians should read the Bible, to be found. How come does this omission happen? Where do protestants of many cults take this law or advice from, that everyone should read the Holy Scriptures?
There is no text which says pray to Mary, nor any text mentioning purgatory or indulgences, either. But from history we know that the early church distributed the various writings amongst themselves, well before the bible was put together. It is generally understood that the members of a particular religion, would read and study and know the Scriptures of that religion. In fact it is remarkable that you are suggesting that we shouldn't read the bible. We know that Timothy knew the scriptures since he was new in the faith. Having being taught by his grandmother Lois, and his mother Eunice had learned the Scriptures since childhood. The Jews at an early age taught their children the Ssriptures.

2Ti 3:15 and that from a babe you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise to salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
2Ti 3:17 that the man of God may be perfected, thoroughly furnished to every good work.



While it is true that free interpretation may result in strange and wrong doctrines, that cannot be avoided. At the same time, there is nothing to say that free interpretation cannot and will not result in the right interpretation and right doctrine. That is also a real possibility. There is really no better alternative. The alternative is to trust the authorities interpretation, whatever they may be.



If reading the Bible was mandatory to our salvation, Jesus Christ would certainly have told the apostles to read, and would have ordered everybody to read it.
Christ would also have ordered people to distribute Bibles to everyone. The command would have been: ’Go print out’, instead of saying “go and preach to all people” (Matt 28: 19). He did not say: “Read the Bible”, neither “Distribute Bibles to all people”. Nor did he assert: “Advise everyone to read the Bible”. Why has he not ever said that? Obviously, books – even the holy ones – are meant to be read. Thus, God made the Holy Scriptures to be read. But read by whom? Everyone?
They are good points, but remember the apostles did already know and read the Scriptures. Yes the scriptures are to be read by everyone. They don't have to of course, and can still be saved if they don't, but they are essential to Christian living in this day and age. There are no apostles around it seems, and most of what is preached today is only half the story. So yes the bible is essential.



Of course not. If not everyone is competent enough to read common books, much less are able to read specialized and scientific books, or able to understand the books of the Holy Scriptures, that are much deeper. An unprepared reader, or someone with no convenient knowledge, will either not understand the text, or misunderstand it, and be placed in an even worse state than that one of ignorance. Because not knowing it is not as bad as misunderstanding. For this reason, God said in the Book of Proverbs: “As if a thorn should grow in the hand of a drunkard: so is a parable in the mouth of fools.” (Prov.26: 9).
Perhaps not the deep theologians discussions. But for what is essential to living anyone can understand. For example, Jesus's teachings about loving thy neighbour, and turning the other cheek. These are easily interpretated by even sunday school children. In any case, if you suggest that scripture can be misinterpreted via "free interpretation", then by logic it must also be able to be interpreted correcly by the same method.


 
Nov 14, 2008
2,715
4
0
#48
How come your answer is better than mine???
 
B

Braveheart47

Guest
#49
Miktre....doesn't sound like a discussion, just a torrent of mis information....you lost me on your first post when you said that Newer versions were translated from the King James.....not so....so the rest wasn't even worth reading. NIV, NASB, and others are actually more accurate because we have found manuscripts that are closer to the time of christ than we had when the king james was written.. And these versions are translated from the original Greek and Hebrew....not the English King james...
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#50
I suppose the irony is, that if we didn't have the KJV, we'd be using NIV or NASB and wouldn't know any different. And then if Barack Obama (to use an example for you american folk) decided to make a KJV , we'd be calling the KJV "satan's bible" and saying how terrible it is that its' different from the NIV etc.
 
M

miktre

Guest
#51
Miktre....you lost me on your first post when you said that Newer versions were translated from the King James.
Is English not your first language or pehaps what it was a haphazard mistake on your behalf. This was never in my first post.
 
M

miktre

Guest
#52
I suppose the irony is, that if we didn't have the KJV, we'd be using NIV or NASB and wouldn't know any different. And then if Barack Obama (to use an example for you american folk) decided to make a KJV , we'd be calling the KJV "satan's bible" and saying how terrible it is that its' different from the NIV etc.
Irony is, that people would defend the "satanic bible" no matter what it said. They would also say that if God guided through the "satanic bible" that God would make sure they got the "right" message. I thought we were supposed to do the best we could and God would take care of the rest? Its a sad day if one thinks NIV is the best.
 
C

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest
#53



Yeah, how can you measure up to this con artist who kisses the koran and sits in upside down cross chairs. Wow, and love the way his church moves around the pediphiles from country to country to avoid prosecution. How can a church like that be not of God? The idolitry worship alone would make the babylonians blush. You might as well be trying to tell us that satan is accually God to come in here trying to get anyone to beleive that.
Yeah, and the Catholic Church is open to assualt by Satan and has been assualted since it was first established, there have been many Popes who were hopelessly corrupted and had no power and yet they are in a position of great power, why is this? It is because we get the leaders we deserve, God will deliver us into the hands of the enemy if we disobey, that is what He has done and that is what He will continue to do. The Church of Jesus Christ does not exist in a Protestant's individual personal heart and it is blasphemy to imagine so, neither does the power thereof come from your heart. It is Protestants with a corrupted KJV in hand have spiritualized the Kingdom of God, the Catholic Church has never done such a thing, neither has the Orthodox. The greatest sin of the Protestants is Spiritualism, a perverted spiritualism that was born out of their misguided reading of Scripture, to put it simply the Protestants on the whole lack knowledge and the ability to rightly divide the word has been cast off, for the most part their Bibles are corrupted as they are.
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#54
Why wouldn't satan use the KJV anyway? Why would he need other versions?

The assumption is that everyone who uses the KJV arrives at the correct and right interpretation. Simply not the case. The assumption is that the NIV results in wrong doctrine, again, simply not the case.
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#55
And the assumption is the Catholic church is always right and private interpretation is always wrong and leads to wrong conclusions. Again ,simply not the case.
 
M

miktre

Guest
#56
Why wouldn't satan use the KJV anyway? Why would he need other versions?

The assumption is that everyone who uses the KJV arrives at the correct and right interpretation. Simply not the case. The assumption is that the NIV results in wrong doctrine, again, simply not the case.
Nah, satan uses any old thing he can get his hands on and the people love it so. Its not important if its based on the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus texts. You're right you should read any ole thing ya can get your hands on. Who cares where it came from.
 
Jan 8, 2009
7,576
23
0
#57
You make bible translation sound like such a clean, unfabricated, pure, innocent act, authorized by God Himself who preserved and kept safe the original scriptures for us today in the KJV. It sounds so simple, so pure, so impractical and so unrealistic and downright unhistorical. The history of the KJV and where it comes from, tells me the process of bible translation isn't so perfect and bias-free as some pretend it is. The irony is, we believe God kept the KJV safe and perfect and error free, but why doesn't God stop preachers preaching bad stuff, or stop denominations from being created, or stop the Catholic church doing what it did, leading to the Reformation etc.
 
C

cpuaggie

Guest
#58
The King James version is the most accurately translated version of the Bible. To verify the accuracy of the translation, once passages were translated to English, they were translated back to the original language (Hebrew for OT & Greek for NT) to verify the translation. There are so many inaccuracies in today's per-versions that the true meaning of the text is lost. There are even entire passages that are left out in some of the new translations. I can't but think of the verses in Revelation 22:18-19

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."
 
C

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest
#59
Nah, satan uses any old thing he can get his hands on and the people love it so. Its not important if its based on the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus texts. You're right you should read any ole thing ya can get your hands on. Who cares where it came from.
And the fact that the KJV is based on Masoretic Manuscripts compiled by Talmudic Masorete Preists means nothing to you, the same preists who wrote the Talmud, I would certainly reject their version of the New Testament as much as the Old Testament, the fact of that matter is that the KJV is taken from manuscripts written in Hebrew in 1009 AD, these manuscripts are corrupt and deliberately so.
 
C

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest
#60
"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."
Well the KJV writers are guilty because they have taken away entire chapters, whole books and thousands of single words, they have added, whole chapters, verses and words that do not appear in Scripture. I would also add that it is a fallacy to believe that the OT was originally written in Hebrew, the fact is that the Hebrew manuscripts that were used for the KJV are Masorete Texts Leningrad Codex, The Cairo Geniza, The Codex Babylonicus ! The Manuscripts that the Apostles used and Jesus Himself were Greek Old Testament and this agrees with the exclusive use of the Greek Septuagint 285 BC for the Bible in the early Christian Church.

There was no appearence of a Hebrew Old Testament until 1008 AD! Jesus spoke Greek, the Israelites of that time spoke Greek, Luke read the Septuagint because it was the only Bible in existence. There is NO proof of Hebrew existing as a alphabet prior to 300 AD, there was the Herodian Script and it is the Herodian Script from which the Hebrew alphabet was formed, does that name Herod mean anything to anybody, you might want to consider that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.