WHICH Bible "version" Is Authorized By God?

  • 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.

Evmur

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2021
2,896
1,594
113
London
Good.

I have never questioned the scholarship of the KJV translators, as I have no reason to do so. However, I recognize that they were limited in the material they had available, and in the information available to them regarding the original languages. Some things they just didn't know because they had not been discovered by 1611.

As to interpretational bias, one can find evidence of it on various issues in various translations, but the KJV is not exempt from this. Calvinism is just as much a bias as anything else.
I agree, totally. But this is an argument for word for word rather than dynamic thought.

A careful reading of the KJV of the doctrines of Paul relating to Predestiny and election has not led me to accept Calvin's views on those doctrines.
 

Evmur

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2021
2,896
1,594
113
London
right. And their homosexual king. you have absolutely no idea how these people behaved in their private lives.

too bad you can't ostracize the people who sinned whose stories are in scripture.

seems the only truth is your own personal interpretation of it
nah, King James is nothing to do with it. He despised the evangelicals and only granted them permission to translate the bible as a sop to appease them.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,708
2,502
113
In many ways that is true. And we give God all the glory that we can breathe. But when it comes to determining which English translation does the best job of communication as if you had read it in the original, the answer is always "It depends on the verse in question" That's true whether someone is saved or not. It is a linguistics question. For example:

Consider also Matthew 5:2, where Jesus begins his Sermon on the Mount: “Then He opened His mouth and taught them, saying” (NKJV)
“And he opened his mouth and taught them, saying” (ESV)
“and he began to teach them saying” (NIV, NCV)
“and he began to teach them” (NCV) The Greek idiom uses two phrases, to stoma (“open the mouth”) + (“teach”), to express a single action. For the Greek reader opening the mouth and teaching were not two consecutive actions, but one act of speaking (see Acts 8:35; 10:34; Rev. 13:6). The functional equivalent versions (NIV, TNIV, NCV) recognize this idiom and so accurately render the Greek, “he began to teach them.” The more literal NKJV and the ESV are understandable, but they miss the Greek idiom and so introduce an unnatural English expression.
Fee, Gordon D.; Strauss, Mark L.. How to Choose a Translation for All Its Worth . Zondervan Academic. Kindle Edition.

We don't ever say "She opened her mouth and spoke" It is a literal translation like in Spanish "what do yourself call" instead of What is your name?
It's all about the Greek text used for translation in the New Testament.

Novum Testamentum Graece (Alexandrian Text Type) vs Greek Received (Byzantine)
 
S

SophieT

Guest
nah, King James is nothing to do with it. He despised the evangelicals and only granted them permission to translate the bible as a sop to appease them.
Oh I know that. Maybe rename the Bible. :LOL:

It's not really as simple as you state though, but true, Jimmy certainly did not have interest in a godly life
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
6,337
4,623
113
True, but we do have the Lord's promise that He has preserved His words for us today. Where are they? When God preserved something, it is perfect and without error. Where are His perfect, pure words for us today? I believe they are preserved in English in the KJV. Where do you believe they are?
I don't believe as you do.
I believe The Word of God is living & active.


His word. Not his words

If he gave us words for just for today then they would be words we use today.
 

Truth7t7

Well-known member
May 19, 2020
7,708
2,502
113
For someone who is KJV-only, you have a very poor understanding of written English. Maybe you should start reading it and paying attention to the spelling, punctuation, grammar, and style instead of spending so much time posting on this thread.

At the moment, I primarily use the NASB, and that is the version to which I referred.
Acts 8:37 has been "removed" from the main body of text in the (NASB), and given a footnote as I stated.

You claim the footnote covers it being in the text is false, the claim by the Lockman foundation that later Manuscripts (Added) the verse is a lie. The Novum Testamentum Graece, And its creators, Adulterers Kurt and Barbara Aland, homosexual union supporter (Carlo Maria Martini) chose to (Remove It)

Biblegateway:

Acts 8:37NASB
36 As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch *said, “Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?”[r] 38 And he ordered that the [s]chariot stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
13,928
2,861
113
I don't believe as you do.
I believe The Word of God is living & active.


His word. Not his words

If he gave us words for just for today then they would be words we use today.
6 The words (plural) of the LORD are pure words (plural): as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7 Thou shalt keep them (plural), O LORD, thou shalt preserve them (plural) from this generation for ever.
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
6,337
4,623
113
6 The words (plural) of the LORD are pure words (plural): as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7 Thou shalt keep them (plural), O LORD, thou shalt preserve them (plural) from this generation for ever.
Psalm 68 isn't unique to the KJV. Nor is it about the KJV.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
43,476
18,073
113
Jesus is the Word of God; the Bible is the word of God. English allows for such confusing juxtapositions. :)
I often differentiate by saying: Jesus is the living Word of God, whereas the Bible is the revealed written Word of God :)
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,531
113
Any English translation of the bible save for the paraphrase types is certainly sufficient to convey the gospel. Study bible are a different story but God has given numerous versions so any bible student can find one that meets their needs.

Best advice is to obtain and read several versions to get to the truth. The Holy Spirit will lead the heart of those who seek in earnest.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
13,928
2,861
113
Any English translation of the bible save for the paraphrase types is certainly sufficient to convey the gospel. Study bible are a different story but God has given numerous versions so any bible student can find one that meets their needs.

Best advice is to obtain and read several versions to get to the truth. The Holy Spirit will lead the heart of those who seek in earnest.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
What's in the new versions that's not in the KJV that is truth?
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
20,969
11,473
113
6 The words (plural) of the LORD are pure words (plural): as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7 Thou shalt keep them (plural), O LORD, thou shalt preserve them (plural) from this generation for ever.
Sometimes I suspect the KJV omits the word "from", or prints it with invisible ink.

It completely undermines your premise.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
20,969
11,473
113
Acts 8:37 has been "removed" from the main body of text in the (NASB), and given a footnote as I stated.

You claim the footnote covers it being in the text is false, the claim by the Lockman foundation that later Manuscripts (Added) the verse is a lie.
You owe me an apology.

Acts 8 37 NASB.jpg
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
20,969
11,473
113

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
20,969
11,473
113
It's all about the Greek text used for translation in the New Testament.

Novum Testamentum Graece (Alexandrian Text Type) vs Greek Received (Byzantine)
However, the NTG is not the Alexandrian text type. It just draws from it as well as from the Byzantine. Your black-and-white assertions are quite easy to refute; it's far better to try to understand the gray, for the truth is often found there.