What bible for study?

  • 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.

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,024
2,379
113
#61
Do you know the people who have researched the issues and come to their conclusions? They may not be correct but calling them evil is judging them. You do not know their motives or their research methods. God will judge you as harshly as you judge them.

Calling something counterfeit because a few verses are missing is also excessive. What vital doctrines are missing? I've studied Amplified, NEB, Berkley, RSV, NIV, NASB, KJV, and NKJV. That's before I discovered Bible Hub. While not every version has the same interpretation, they agree on the fundamentals. I tend to use the NASB mostly. Whatever suits you, as long as you study something.
Just A Few Major Examples, There Are "Many"

Daniel 11:37

The KJV has a monotheistic God of the Hebrews (God Of His Fathers), with a man that is gay or celibate (nor the desire of women) and it strongly suggest's this figure will be a Jew/Hebrew in decent

The NIV has polytheistic (gods of his ancestors) with the figure being a playboy, (one desired by women) The NIV hides the true identity of the figure in the verse, the future antichrist.

Daniel 11:37KJV
37 Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.

Daniel 11:37NIV
37 He will show no regard for the gods of his ancestors or for the one desired by women, nor will he regard any god, but will exalt himself above them all.

Isaiah 14:12

The KJV has (Lucifer), the NIV (morning star) as the NIV has changed Lucifer/Satan into Jesus Chrsit the Morning Star of Revelation 22:16

Isaiah 14:12KJV
12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

Isaiah 14:12NIV
12 How you have fallen from heaven,
morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!

Revelation 22:16KJV
16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Revelation 22:16NIV
16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,247
2,405
113
#62
You call hundreds of verses and thousands of words missing "a few"? The most vital doctrines which have been attacked are (1) the doctrine of the divine preservation of Scripture and (2) the doctrine of Christ itself. So rather than anyone else telling you that this is true, it behooves you to closely examine the critical texts vs the traditional texts and discover for yourself the fraud and the hoax which has been perpetrated on unsuspecting Christians.

In any event the slightest attempt to tamper with the Word of God is forbidden by God. So even if one verse of Scripture had been removed, that would not have been acceptable to God and Christ. The fact is that hundreds of verse have been tampered with. Let's take one very critical passage (Mark 9:41-48) about the reality of eternal Hell. A doctrine that is mercilessly attacked by the cults.

I am quoting from the NIV which could not help but make itself look foolish by inserting the numbers for verses 44 and 46 and then blithely skipping to the next verses. The NIV, like all modern versions, is based upon the corrupted critical text. Therefore two important verses -- the words of Christ recorded for us -- have been expunged. But the translation itself is faulty.

[Mar 9:41-48 NIV] 41 Truly I tell you [TRANSPOSED], anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah [SUBSTITUED FOR CHRIST] will certainly not lose their [INSTEAD OF HIS] reward. 42 "If anyone causes one of these little ones--those who believe in me--to stumble, it would be better for them [INSTEAD OF HIM] if a large millstone were hung around their [INSTEAD OF HIS] neck and they [INSTEAD OF HE] were thrown into the sea. 43 If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. [NOT THE SAME AS NEVER SHALL BE QUENCHED] 44 [GLARING OMISSION OF WHOLE VERSE] 45 And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. [INTO THE FIRE THAT NEVER SHALL BE QUENCHED OMITTED] 46 [GLARING OMISSION OF WHOLE VERSE] 47 And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, 48 where " 'the worms [INSTEAD OF THEIR WORM] that eat them [ADDITION] do not die, and the fire is not quenched.'

The corresponding passage in the KJB is as follows: 41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink [OMITTED] in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward. 42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea. 43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [WHOLE VERSE OMITTED]
45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 46 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. [WHOLE VERSE OMITTED] 47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: 48 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Did Jesus -- who is God -- have a good reason for repeating Himself over and over again in this dire warning to sinners? Absolutely. No one can describe the horrors of Hell. But Christ wanted all men to turn away from their evil ways and be saved. Hence this dire warning, which was corrupted gratuitously.

Sorry, the KJV is not the Standard! Koine Greek for the NT and Hebrew and some Aramaic is the bar you compare the KJV too. And you will find the KJV has many additions as errors.

If you would take a few minutes and read about manuscripts, you would find all those "missing" verses were never in the earliest manuscripts. Instead every so-called missing verse in the NIV, is truthfully an added verse in the Greek manuscripts. The Byzantine tradition is carefully tracked from when it suddenly sprang into existence in the 9th or 10th century AD, to the 15th century, and many scribes copied and made mistakes. Many scribes liked to make notes in the margins, like commentaries. But the next generation of scribes, would incorporate those words in the text, adding more and more words to the text, which were not inspired, nor part of the original manuscripts. Mistakes were copied and recopied over 500 years. The Byzantine manuscripts by the 15th century were very corrupt. But, those corrupted manuscripts were used by Erasmus, a Catholic priest, and also the KJV Committee to translate the Bible into an early form of English, much of which is difficult to understand. And all those many, many extra words, verses and passages were included in the KJV. Although they don't change doctrine, they were not part of the manuscripts that God inspired the writers of the NT to write.

So, using the right bar or standard, the copies of the original manuscripts, dated as much as a thousand years earlier makes the modern Bibles much more accurate, not the later corrupted TR. In fact, it is the KJV that has extra verses, and there are no missing words/verses in the newer Bibles, which use far better manuscripts and translations tools than existed 400 years ago.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,024
2,379
113
#63
Sorry, the KJV is not the Standard! Koine Greek for the NT and Hebrew and some Aramaic is the bar you compare the KJV too. And you will find the KJV has many additions as errors.

If you would take a few minutes and read about manuscripts, you would find all those "missing" verses were never in the earliest manuscripts. Instead every so-called missing verse in the NIV, is truthfully an added verse in the Greek manuscripts. The Byzantine tradition is carefully tracked from when it suddenly sprang into existence in the 9th or 10th century AD, to the 15th century, and many scribes copied and made mistakes. Many scribes liked to make notes in the margins, like commentaries. But the next generation of scribes, would incorporate those words in the text, adding more and more words to the text, which were not inspired, nor part of the original manuscripts. Mistakes were copied and recopied over 500 years. The Byzantine manuscripts by the 15th century were very corrupt. But, those corrupted manuscripts were used by Erasmus, a Catholic priest, and also the KJV Committee to translate the Bible into an early form of English, much of which is difficult to understand. And all those many, many extra words, verses and passages were included in the KJV. Although they don't change doctrine, they were not part of the manuscripts that God inspired the writers of the NT to write.

So, using the right bar or standard, the copies of the original manuscripts, dated as much as a thousand years earlier makes the modern Bibles much more accurate, not the later corrupted TR. In fact, it is the KJV that has extra verses, and there are no missing words/verses in the newer Bibles, which use far better manuscripts and translations tools than existed 400 years ago.
Your claims are false,the Alexandrian text was local to Alexandria Egypt, from the philosophical schools of Origen and Arius the Heretics

The church never used or received the corruptions that mutilated Gods words, you think it's a mystery why the Alexandrian text is less than 1% of manuscript evidence

God used Tischendorff in 1844 to bring his truth to the world in the Sinaticus manuscript, the church had been wrong for 1800 years? :LOL:

Big Smiles to that one :giggle:

And God didnt use Adulterers Kurt Aland or Barbara Ehlers in preserving his words in the Greek Text (Novum Testamentum Graece) they created, that supports the NIV, ESV, NASB, RSV, ASV
 

Blik

Senior Member
Dec 6, 2016
4,888
1,510
113
#64
As we study scripture it is important to know that we are studying a translation of the original language and there is no translation of one language into another that gives the perfect thought of the original.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,024
2,379
113
#65
As we study scripture it is important to know that we are studying a translation of the original language and there is no translation of one language into another that gives the perfect thought of the original.
A student should be aware of the manuscript(s) that supports the translation, its apparent your not
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
17,480
9,584
113
#66
A student should be aware of the manuscript(s) that supports the translation, its apparent your not
Actually, her post does not convey anything of the sort. You are just throwing shade.
 

Blik

Senior Member
Dec 6, 2016
4,888
1,510
113
#67
A student should be aware of the manuscript(s) that supports the translation, its apparent your not
And why in the world would an understanding that it is impossible for a translation to perfectly reflect the original mean you are not to check translations?

I think you are guilty of trying to make others wrong so you can appear righteous. And I am guilty of hitting back when I am treated unfairly.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,024
2,379
113
#69
And why in the world would an understanding that it is impossible for a translation to perfectly reflect the original mean you are not to check translations?

I think you are guilty of trying to make others wrong so you can appear righteous. And I am guilty of hitting back when I am treated unfairly.
Liberal crys of empty

The new bible versions NIV, NASB, ESV, ASV, Etc, follow the Adulterers corruption in the (Novum Testamentum Grace), the Nestel/Aland Greek text

Yes Kurt Aland was lead translator, he left his wife Ingeborg and married his student Barbara Ehlers (Adultery)

The new bible versions follow the Counterfeit corruption, created by Adulterers in the (Novum Testamentum Grace)

It's a matter of did God use Adulterers to preserve his words, answer (NO) :)
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,024
2,379
113
#70
Actually, her post does not convey anything of the sort. You are just throwing shade.
Sounds like a "Liberal" outside the sheep fold gate throwing opinions in distraction :)
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
14,288
6,653
113
#71
As we study scripture it is important to know that we are studying a translation of the original language and there is no translation of one language into another that gives the perfect thought of the original.
The "perfect thought" is beyond the scope of translators. A word-for-word translation (as much as is possible) is quite sufficient. And that is what we find in the King James Bible (which separates the words of the translators from the actual translation by the use of italics). You should also be aware that for their translation of the Hebrew Tanakh into English, the Jewish Publication Society (JPS) originally used the King James translation, since they deemed it as close to the Hebrew as possible.

All English translations ARE NOT EQUAL. And modern English translations since 1881 are based on corrupted "critical" printed texts (texts revised by lower critics). However, in order to get these corruptions accepted, a hoax was perpetrated on an unsuspecting public. The worst manuscripts were touted as the best. And woe unto them that call evil good and good evil.
 

Gideon300

Active member
Mar 18, 2021
127
84
28
#73
Luke 4:4KJV
4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Psalm 12:6-7KJV
6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Psalm 138:2KJV
2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

Revelation 22:18-19KJV
18 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:
19 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.
God is still speaking right now. Do you follow every word? You don't even know what God is saying right now. The KJV translation of Luke 4:4 is implied by Deuteronomy 8:3. Lord Jesus did not always quote the OT verbatim. Luke 4:18 is a prime example. Perhaps you should call Him out for that. Personally, I'd advise against it.

You should keep in mind that the Lord Jesus is the living Word of God. The Bible is the written word. If you want the perfect revelation of God, it's not the Bible, it's the Lord Jesus (John 21:25)
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,024
2,379
113
#74
God is still speaking right now. Do you follow every word? You don't even know what God is saying right now. The KJV translation of Luke 4:4 is implied by Deuteronomy 8:3. Lord Jesus did not always quote the OT verbatim. Luke 4:18 is a prime example. Perhaps you should call Him out for that. Personally, I'd advise against it.

You should keep in mind that the Lord Jesus is the living Word of God. The Bible is the written word. If you want the perfect revelation of God, it's not the Bible, it's the Lord Jesus (John 21:25)
I have Gods words in my KJV bible, and it contains all of Gods words
 

Gideon300

Active member
Mar 18, 2021
127
84
28
#75
I have Gods words in my KJV bible, and it contains all of Gods words
No way. The gospels are just a small portion of the ministry of Jesus. He ministered for over 3 years. How long would it take you to read the gospels?
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,024
2,379
113
#76
No way. The gospels are just a small portion of the ministry of Jesus. He ministered for over 3 years. How long would it take you to read the gospels?
I have exactly what God wants me to have in my KJV Holy Bible, enough said.

2 Timothy 3:16-17KJV
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
17,480
9,584
113
#77
I have Gods words in my KJV bible, and it contains all of Gods words
Actually, your KJV translation itself tells you that it does NOT contain all of God's words. However, because you are brainwashed and closed-minded, you will dismiss this truth instead of verifying it for yourself. You'll probably respond with a personal insult to assuage your pricked conscience as well.
 
Apr 21, 2021
64
28
18
#79
Online resources have completely spoiled me. There are a few online Bible sites that make study so easy it's ridiculous. You can get individual verses from many different translations side-by-side. You have Strong's Concordance, Interlinear, even original Greek from many different manuscripts and much much more—all with a few clicks. I'd post links but I'm not sure if it's okay here.

Nowadays I just use my Bibles for reading. I have one I normally read from and another to compare with.
 
Apr 21, 2021
64
28
18
#80
Someone else mentioned Bible Hub, that's my go-to source.