Bible "versions"?

  • 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.

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,468
1,590
113
You have never been convinced that the KJV is in error. You refuse to consider the possibility and so insulate yourself from the evidence.
I've spent the majority of my years as a Christian believing the KjV was in error compared to the modern translations . So actually its quite the turn a round ,for me .
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,897
10,436
113
I've spent the majority of my years as a Christian believing the KjV was in error compared to the modern translations . So actually its quite the turn a round ,for me .
Again, I respect your choice. However, you have not shared anything that looks like good evidence for your choice. It appears that you just noticed that there were differences; you haven't yet identified those differences or explained how you came to believe that one was superior to others.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
12,705
2,562
113
The one standard to go by is the original autographs - that is what God gave under inspiration. If man chooses one translation as the standard, then man becomes the final authority on what God said. I am not willing to do that.
Too bad they’re gone. Let’s not put more emphasis on the originals than God. If God thought we needed the originals He would have preserved them for us.
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,468
1,590
113
Again, I respect your choice. However, you have not shared anything that looks like good evidence for your choice. It appears that you just noticed that there were differences; you haven't yet identified those differences or explained how you came to believe that one was superior to others.
Give it a try .
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
12,705
2,562
113
You go with "the theologians" from the 17th century instead of those from the 20th century. There is no fundamental difference in that regard.
Nope my friend, my trust is in the Lord’s promise to preserve His words.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
12,705
2,562
113
As for "different truths", you have yet to justify your rhetoric with evidence.
I have many times and then people come back with, “well, no major doctrines are changed”...🤦‍♂️
 

Chester

Senior Member
May 23, 2016
3,874
1,168
113
Too bad they’re gone. Let’s not put more emphasis on the originals than God. If God thought we needed the originals He would have preserved them for us.
No, it is not too bad they are gone. It is not the printed text that needs to be worshipped. It is the message that God wants to communicate to our hearts that is imperative. Let's not put more emphasis on the KJV than God does (in fact, there is not a word in the Bible directly about the KJV version). If God thought the KJV was his inspired text he would have said so through the writers.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
12,705
2,562
113
You have never been convinced that the KJV is in error. You refuse to consider the possibility and so insulate yourself from the evidence.
And you have never been convinced that you can hold God’s word in your hand.
 

Chester

Senior Member
May 23, 2016
3,874
1,168
113
And you have never been convinced that you can hold God’s word in your hand.
But I do have his word (rhema) in my heart! PTL! (Better in the heart than in the hand! ;)
 

DeanM

Well-known member
May 4, 2021
550
311
63
All of the Greek manuscripts use the word πάσχα (pascha) 29 times, which is translated 28 times in the KJV as Passover. The KJV mistranslated πάσχα (pascha) one time in Acts 12:4 as Easter, which is a word that was not in use until the 11th or 12th century.

Why do you think the KJV translators discarded God's word "pascha" for something else?
I would say they used Easter because people could relate to Easter as opposed to passover and understand when it happened.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
12,705
2,562
113
I would say they used Easter because people could relate to Easter as opposed to passover and understand when it happened.
Jesus fulfilled the Passover on the cross. There’s no need to celebrate the Passover any longer for Easter is the Passover revealed.
 

DeanM

Well-known member
May 4, 2021
550
311
63
Jesus fulfilled the Passover on the cross. There’s no need to celebrate the Passover any longer for Easter is the Passover revealed.
My point was, 17th century english speaking people could relate to easter moreso than passover as to the timeline.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,897
10,436
113
I have many times and then people come back with, “well, no major doctrines are changed”...🤦‍♂️
The problem is that you have a double standard. You present issues that confirm your belief, but you reject outright the issues that contradict it. You don't operate with integrity on this matter.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
12,705
2,562
113
There is truth to be known in Luke 10:1. Did the Lord send out 70 or 72 as the new versions state?

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.

No major doctrine? How about the major doctrine in God's word is truth. How about the major doctrine that a faithful witness cannot lie?