New world order Bible Versions (NIV ESV NKJV etc)

  • 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.

Dai3234

Senior Member
Sep 6, 2016
524
4
0
ACtually, you are totally wrong.

Textus receptus is based on 7 manuscripts.

There are 5000 of manuscripts so The TR is not even close to "all".

And guess what. Even though 3 oldest complete codexes are the most authoritative for Nestlé aland, its text is based on many others, try to read the preface. Every nuance is carefully examined and at least recorded in notes.

And now, the Editio Critica Maior will be the most comprehensive work in this field. TR is really absolutely lower league.
No, it must based on more texts outside of TR 7 texts, because there are no texts other than previous bibles and recorded church father quotes, that support John 5:7, I think it's 5:7, the Jesus is God, father is God and Holy Ghost is God verse.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
No, it must based on more texts outside of TR 7 texts, because there are no texts other than previous bibles and recorded church father quotes, that support John 5:7, I think it's 5:7, the Jesus is God, father is God and Holy Ghost is God verse.
1 John 5:7 was inserted to the Textus Receptus by Erasmus because the RCC wanted it to be there. Its in Latin and 3 or 4 late Greek manuscripts.

Thanks for pointed this RCC influence on the TR out.
 
May 11, 2014
936
39
0
No, it must based on more texts outside of TR 7 texts, because there are no texts other than previous bibles and recorded church father quotes, that support John 5:7, I think it's 5:7, the Jesus is God, father is God and Holy Ghost is God verse.
Can you provide a quote from a church father who quotes 1 john 5:7?
 
May 11, 2014
936
39
0
It's written by tischendorf in a book somewhere?? They were going to be burned at some point, but he had a look and kept them etc.
If they were about to get destroyed that would tell me those texts cannot be that reliable.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
If they were about to get destroyed that would tell me those texts cannot be that reliable.
Like if never in the history anything good was destroyed by an accident or stupidity.
 
May 11, 2014
936
39
0
Like if never in the history anything good was destroyed by an accident or stupidity.
I checked and church fathers do quote the textus receptus reading of the text. Including 1 john 5:7 and acts 8:37.
I wish they would make a readable translation in finnish from the textus receptus. Finland is a spiritual abyss truly, be lucky you americans, you do not know how good you got it in comparison.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
I checked and church fathers do quote the textus receptus reading of the text. Including 1 john 5:7 and acts 8:37.
I wish they would make a readable translation in finnish from the textus receptus. Finland is a spiritual abyss truly, be lucky you americans, you do not know how good you got it in comparison.
It is in Latin, so Latin Church fathers can quote it. Irrelevant to Greek text.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
Textus receptus is latin? Well I feel like an idiot now.
No, please read the flow of the conversation.

1 J 5:7 is in Latin and was put into the TR because it is in Latin. RCC wanted it to be in the TR because of it.

So yes, its in the TR, but not because it is "in the majority of Greek manuscripts", but because the RCC wanted it.
 

Locutus

Senior Member
Feb 10, 2017
5,928
685
113
I'd like to see one doctrine that has been affected by any of the newer bibles (not the JW's bible) - I'm taking about whole letters or gospels not nitpicking over a particular verse of verses.
 

FlSnookman7

Senior Member
Jun 27, 2015
1,125
135
63
I find it curious that some think that God, who spoke all things into existence, is unable to keep His message pure through different translations of His Word...
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,658
3,540
113
I'd like to see one doctrine that has been affected by any of the newer bibles (not the JW's bible) - I'm taking about whole letters or gospels not nitpicking over a particular verse of verses.
How about the most important doctrine that God's word is truth and can be completely trusted.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,721
13,394
113
I'd like to see one doctrine that has been affected by any of the newer bibles (not the JW's bible) - I'm taking about whole letters or gospels not nitpicking over a particular verse of verses.
How about the most important doctrine that God's word is truth and can be completely trusted.
How is this doctrine affected by the newer Bibles?

Please don't respond with any of the following:

- "They cause confusion" because that can be applied equally to the KJV;
- Circular arguments or other logical fallacies;
- Red herrings or changed subjects;
- Questions like, "Which Bible do you trust?"

Rather, please respond with an actual argument from Scripture, which is clearly the gist of Locutus' question.
 
Last edited:

Johnny_B

Senior Member
Mar 18, 2017
1,954
64
48
Any translation is basically a commantary of the original Greek manuscripts. The KJV was translated in a time before the discovery of common language notes found in dumps in the late 1800's and early 1900's that shade much light on the konié Greek and it's common use. I also like to read them without the itelcized words to see how it reads, like John 12:32 ESV "And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself." NKJV "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself."

Notice "peoples" is in itelics in the NKJV, the KJV has it as "
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." Greek New Testament

"κἀγὼ ἐὰν ὑψωθῶ ἐκ τῆς γῆς, πάντας ἑλκύσω πρὸς ἐμαυτόν." Notice there is not the word "Ἄνθρωπός" which can be translated man, men, people.

People use this verse to say that Jesus draws all people or men to himself, when it simply says He will draw all to himself, all who? All who will believe.

Point being if you really want the original New Testamant you need to read the Greek New Testament. For those that say you can make the Greek say anything, that can only happen if you allow people to go outside the rules of language, lexicons and dictionaries give us the meanings of the words. You can not make go mean stop, when you follow the rules of translation and the use of a reliable lexicon and/or dictionary.


 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
Any translation is basically a commantary of the original Greek manuscripts. The KJV was translated in a time before the discovery of common language notes found in dumps in the late 1800's and early 1900's that shade much light on the konié Greek and it's common use. I also like to read them without the itelcized words to see how it reads, like John 12:32 ESV "And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself." NKJV "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself."

Notice "peoples" is in itelics in the NKJV, the KJV has it as "
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." Greek New Testament

"κἀγὼ ἐὰν ὑψωθῶ ἐκ τῆς γῆς, πάντας ἑλκύσω πρὸς ἐμαυτόν." Notice there is not the word "Ἄνθρωπός" which can be translated man, men, people.

People use this verse to say that Jesus draws all people or men to himself, when it simply says He will draw all to himself, all who? All who will believe.

Point being if you really want the original New Testamant you need to read the Greek New Testament. For those that say you can make the Greek say anything, that can only happen if you allow people to go outside the rules of language, lexicons and dictionaries give us the meanings of the words. You can not make go mean stop, when you follow the rules of translation and the use of a reliable lexicon and/or dictionary.


Which Greek manuscripts are the correct ones? Vatican anus or textus receptus?
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,658
3,540
113
How is this doctrine affected by the newer Bibles?

Please don't respond with any of the following:

- "They cause confusion" because that can be applied equally to the KJV;
- Circular arguments or other logical fallacies;
- Red herrings or changed subjects;
- Questions like, "Which Bible do you trust?"

Rather, please respond with an actual argument from Scripture, which is clearly the gist of Locutus' question.
There is truth to be understood in the following passage:

Luke 10:1 After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come.

ESV Now after this the Lord appointed seventy others, and sent them in pairs ahead of Him to every city and place where He Himself was going to come.

The majority of new versions including the ESV has the Lord appointing 72. Which is truth? Which can be trusted?or who killed Goliath? Which can be trusted?

KJV 2 Samuel 21:19 And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.

ESV And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, the Bethlehemite, struck down Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.

NASB There was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
6,646
1,397
113
The majority of new versions including the ESV has the Lord appointing 72. Which is truth? Which can be trusted?or who killed Goliath? Which can be trusted?
What?? You mean, one version is translated as 70 people appointed (2000 years ago, right?) and another one translates it as 72????

That's it.... I give up on this whole "religion" thing. My faith is gone. I'm done with it.. finished.

I think I'll try Scientology next. Maybe Buddhism.... I just can't live with any typo's in MY scripture.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
Which Greek manuscripts are the correct ones? Vatican anus or textus receptus?
Textus receptus is not a manuscript. Its a compilation. No manuscript in existence has the same reading as the Textus Receptus.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
There is truth to be understood in the following passage:

Luke 10:1 After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come.

ESV Now after this the Lord appointed seventy others, and sent them in pairs ahead of Him to every city and place where He Himself was going to come.

The majority of new versions including the ESV has the Lord appointing 72. Which is truth? Which can be trusted?or who killed Goliath? Which can be trusted?

KJV 2 Samuel 21:19 And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.

ESV And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, the Bethlehemite, struck down Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.

NASB There was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.
Wow, such a corruption!!! Unbelievable!!!

Gnostics made it!!! Vatican made it!!!
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
16,658
3,540
113
What?? You mean, one version is translated as 70 people appointed (2000 years ago, right?) and another one translates it as 72????

That's it.... I give up on this whole "religion" thing. My faith is gone. I'm done with it.. finished.

I think I'll try Scientology next. Maybe Buddhism.... I just can't live with any typo's in MY scripture.
If God's word can't be completely trusted, then how does man trust the truth about Jesus? Who is man to say which part to trust and which part not to trust? That's the world's argument. What I posted was just a sample of the many differences concerning truth between the KJV and the new versions.

The biggest change of them all, in my opinion, is the doctrine of faith and justification.

Galatians 2:16

KJV Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

ESV yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

The KJV states the truth that the believer is justified by the faith OF Jesus Christ, not faith in Jesus Christ. All the new versions state that it's man's faith in Christ that justifies. HUGE DIFFERENCE! Whose faith justifies? Christ's or man's? Man's pathetic faith waivers day by day, moment by moment. Christ's faith never waivers. Amen for that.