Bible versions-Is there only one?

  • 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.

Is there only one true version of the Bible?


  • Total voters
    21

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
5,553
4,554
113
There are many translations and revised versions of Bible’s(NIV, Amplified, King James, Living Translation, AS). Did any of these lose essential Biblical meanings and teachings via the translation process? If so, which ones? If true, should those versions be avoided by Believers?
I believe that if a true seeker asks, The Spirit will guide. Many languages exist as well, but there is only one Word of God. My favorite is KJV, but it is not the only one that God can use to speak to people. Having said that, I cannot vouch for those versions with which I am not familiar.
 
Dec 30, 2019
1,266
290
83
Moses? By Jesus, you mean what He has said and the testimony written about Him in Scripture. Scripture is the final authority.
By Moses I mean the first five books in the Bible. We are told that Moses would speak to God face to face: "I speak with him face to face, clearly and not in riddles; he sees the form of the LORD" (Exodus 33:11 Numbers 12:8) Only Jesus can add to what we learn from Moses. What Jesus said is in RED letters in some bibles. Of course there are prophets that have visions of future events but that is different. David was pretty amazing in the love he had for God and the law of God. He understood that God wants the best for us.
 
Dec 30, 2019
1,266
290
83
Wow! Angela found something God cannot do....speak His word into English.

Who cares about a words for word translation. That’s the case for all languages. Can’t God preserve His word into any language He sees fit, and that translation be the pure words of God in that language? Is God bound by language?

We see all throughout Scripture, someone speaking one language and what was said was translated into Hebrew or Greek and that translation is the so called “originals.”
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
17,523
9,608
113
Who cares about a words for word translation. That’s the case for all languages. Can’t God preserve His word into any language He sees fit, and that translation be the pure words of God in that language?
What God can do is not the subject of this discusion.

Is God bound by language?
No, which is why He is not bound to the KJV in English.

You really need to think through the implications of your arguments before you post them.
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
5,553
4,554
113
Very true. Romans 14 addresses this.
14:1 Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, [but] not to doubtful disputations.
14:2 For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.
14:3 Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.
14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.
14:5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.
14:6 He that regardeth the day, regardeth [it] unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard [it]. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks.
14:7 For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself.
14:8 For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.
14:9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
14:10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
14:11 For it is written, [As] I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
14:12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
14:13 Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock or an occasion to fall in [his] brother's way.
14:14 I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that [there is] nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him [it is] unclean.
14:15 But if thy brother be grieved with [thy] meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
14:16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:
14:17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.
14:18 For he that in these things serveth Christ [is] acceptable to God, and approved of men.
14:19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.
14:20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed [are] pure; but [it is] evil for that man who eateth with offence.
14:21 [It is] good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor [any thing] whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
14:22 Hast thou faith? have [it] to thyself before God. Happy [is] he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.
14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because [he eateth] not of faith: for whatsoever [is] not of faith is sin.
 
Jun 10, 2019
4,304
1,653
113
Anglo Saxon wasn't a language of The British Isles during the Roman occupation. It developed later after Rome withdrew and the Anglo Saxon and Jute tribes began to invade from the continent.
Rgr that, something I would like to know more on is the difference between old, middle and modern English
 
Dec 30, 2019
1,266
290
83
Can’t God preserve His word into any language He sees fit, and that translation be the pure words of God in that language? Is God bound by language?
God wants us to do it. There is a lot of the Bible that a lot of people do not understand. We have to study history & science to understand the Bible.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,247
2,405
113
What does Scripture say about high education? Having letters behind your name means nothing when it comes to God’s word.
You are both arrogant and ignorant. Higher education is quite simply:

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." 2 Tim 3:15 KJV

Of course, even the KJV is not consistent in translating σπούδασον, or spoudason-study. Most translations use "diligence" in this occurrence, and so does the KJV in 2 Tim 4:9, 21, and Titus 3:12.* Sort of annoying when the same translation doesn't translate a word consistently, isn't it?

The point is, you have gifted yourself with the ability to somehow be able to affirm 100%, that you have declared your preferred version is the only right, and perfect translation, when you have never educated yourself to understand and compare the original languages, or basic exegesis and hermeneutics. You use all the stock, meaningless phrases, based on no evidence but what other KJV Onlyists say within their cult.

You insult me personally every time you put down higher education, along with many others in this forum. Again, you are arrogant enough to think you have this "special" knowledge of the "true" Bible, demanding everyone MUST use it. I think if the KJV works for you, then use it! But don't force me and others to read a version we don't understand, as many have testified in this thread.

But a Bible version doesn't become the only authoritative translation just because you and your cult say it is. As Dino so eloquently pointed out, you have already failed when your standard is that the KJV comes before the original languages, or even other, modern and more accurate versions. The KJV has so many additions, and is inaccurate, just like translating σπούδασον as diligence 3/4 times, then translating it once with a completely different word - study!!

I studied higher learning, because God expressly told me to! God might not have called you to do that. But do not insult this forum by making yourself and your version of the Bible higher than any other version! Especially a Bible with constant additions, which is too foreign for many of us to understand. You keep giving us definitions of words from an obsolete and dead language. No one, except perhaps some Quakers, speak KJ English. If I want to spend time studying word meanings, I prefer Greek, Hebrew, or even German, which at least is a current language. I am not wasting a minute on learning words from an archaic version!

I am blessed to have been given the opportunity to have studied the Bible in depth, from wise, godly people. You mock my professor, but a more educated man, a more humble and irenic servant of God you could not find. He even allowed us to disagree with him, acknowledging that he is not perfect, even though he literally started learning Greek at his father's knee, who was also a Bible translator and wrote commentaries, too. And his cousin is the top Greek grammarian in the world. He actually phoned him about a grammar issue that came up in our class. Sorry for you that you are a small minded cultist, who truly is both arrogant and ignorant in all the worst ways!


*https://biblehub.com/greek/spoudason_4704.htm
 

Locoponydirtman

Well-known member
Oct 9, 2018
2,872
1,728
113
Texas
I voted no, there is no perfect translation in English, because I read Greek & Hebrew, I studied Greek under a scholar who has been on the translation committees of many modern versions, and he explained hundreds of translational issues. You can't even begin to translate Greek into English, because the mechanism for word order, syntax and grammar are totally different. Some words just not directly translatable.

German is much closer to Greek, but still not identical. (Don't forget Martin Luther translated the NT into German in 1522, and the OT in 1534! Well before the KJV! And the earliest French version was in 1530, although it was substantially revised by 1535.)

People who think the KJV is the only true Bible simply no nothing about translating. The receiving language is as important as the sending, which means the people reading need to understand it. So, a Bible from the 1600th century, with obsolete grammar and words is simply not acceptable.

As for manuscripts, do most people know the TR, or Textus Receptus, sprang into being in the 800 to 900 century in the Byzantine Empire? All the other families of texts, date back to much earlier. The TR was copied over and over, with many addition and notes in the margins creeping into the actual text. Lower textual critics can trace most of these errors back to the original mistake. The TR, is probably the worst set of manuscripts in existence. If one wants to talk about corruption, the TR (also called the "Majority Text" because they were recopied by Greek scribes, complete with errors, and springing up almost a millennium after the original autographs were written.) is the most corrupt set of manuscripts. Again, they have no origin, meaning it was translated somewhere within the Byzantine Empire very late, and became the standard for Greeks. Even Jerome's badly translated Latin version was made in the 4th century, centuries earlier than the so-called TR!

However, I agree with many others, that all bibles, modern and much older preach the true gospel, and all are valuable for every Christian to grow and learn more about God and how to serve Jesus Christ. People should read the Bible daily, in a version they understand. Stay away from cult versions, like the JW Bible. Stay away from paraphrases, until you have read a more formal translation, KJV, NASB, ESV etc) 10 or my times.

I started reading the Bible through yearly, when I was saved in 1980. I've read it in 10 different translations, the NT in Koine Greek, many books of the OT in Hebrew, the whole Bible in French, and parts in Spanish. I'm reading an updated Martin Luther German version, making good progress.

My point is that read the BOOK! Stop claiming you have the only "true" version. God has preserved his Word in many languages and translations, our job is to read it in our heart language, study it, memorize it, meditate on it, and obey it!
If I were near you right now I would hug your neck and kiss you square on the cheek.
I wish this were written on the inner cover of every translation. God gave us minds we should apply them to the study of his word, and the history of what He has given us.
God Bless you. from the bottom of my heart.
 

Locoponydirtman

Well-known member
Oct 9, 2018
2,872
1,728
113
Texas
I voted no, there is no perfect translation in English, because I read Greek & Hebrew, I studied Greek under a scholar who has been on the translation committees of many modern versions, and he explained hundreds of translational issues. You can't even begin to translate Greek into English, because the mechanism for word order, syntax and grammar are totally different. Some words just not directly translatable.

German is much closer to Greek, but still not identical. (Don't forget Martin Luther translated the NT into German in 1522, and the OT in 1534! Well before the KJV! And the earliest French version was in 1530, although it was substantially revised by 1535.)

People who think the KJV is the only true Bible simply no nothing about translating. The receiving language is as important as the sending, which means the people reading need to understand it. So, a Bible from the 1600th century, with obsolete grammar and words is simply not acceptable.

As for manuscripts, do most people know the TR, or Textus Receptus, sprang into being in the 800 to 900 century in the Byzantine Empire? All the other families of texts, date back to much earlier. The TR was copied over and over, with many addition and notes in the margins creeping into the actual text. Lower textual critics can trace most of these errors back to the original mistake. The TR, is probably the worst set of manuscripts in existence. If one wants to talk about corruption, the TR (also called the "Majority Text" because they were recopied by Greek scribes, complete with errors, and springing up almost a millennium after the original autographs were written.) is the most corrupt set of manuscripts. Again, they have no origin, meaning it was translated somewhere within the Byzantine Empire very late, and became the standard for Greeks. Even Jerome's badly translated Latin version was made in the 4th century, centuries earlier than the so-called TR!

However, I agree with many others, that all bibles, modern and much older preach the true gospel, and all are valuable for every Christian to grow and learn more about God and how to serve Jesus Christ. People should read the Bible daily, in a version they understand. Stay away from cult versions, like the JW Bible. Stay away from paraphrases, until you have read a more formal translation, KJV, NASB, ESV etc) 10 or my times.

I started reading the Bible through yearly, when I was saved in 1980. I've read it in 10 different translations, the NT in Koine Greek, many books of the OT in Hebrew, the whole Bible in French, and parts in Spanish. I'm reading an updated Martin Luther German version, making good progress.

My point is that read the BOOK! Stop claiming you have the only "true" version. God has preserved his Word in many languages and translations, our job is to read it in our heart language, study it, memorize it, meditate on it, and obey it!
Part of the problem is that people are lazy, and insecure. Clinging to a version excuses them from research, and gives them the confidence they need to go on secure in their ignorance.
So while the rest of us go on in our multiple translations, and our reference books, they can cling dogmatically to their blessed version/ translation, and in the case of the King James often transliteration. Because it's security not depth that they require.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
12,010
2,283
113
What God can do is not the subject of this discusion.


No, which is why He is not bound to the KJV in English.

You really need to think through the implications of your arguments before you post them.
Did God give us His word, told us to live by every word, and yet not preserve His words for us today?
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
12,010
2,283
113
You insult me personally every time you put down higher education, along with many others in this forum. Again, you are arrogant enough to think you have this "special" knowledge of the "true" Bible, demanding everyone MUST use it. I think if the KJV works for you, then use it! But don't force me and others to read a version we don't understand, as many have testified in this thread.
You constantly give us your credentials of how learned you are, but yet somehow you cannot understand English.🤔
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
12,010
2,283
113
I studied higher learning, because God expressly told me to! God might not have called you to do that. But do not insult this forum by making yourself and your version of the Bible higher than any other version!
He called me to study His word, the KJV, not to correct it and be my own final authority.

I’ll use your own argument. The KJV translators would blow away your professor in Greek and Hebrew. Facts.