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.

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
19,351
10,633
113
As far as being "unique", or "one of a kind", God has made every individual who has ever lived on the face of this earth "unique" and one of a kind. No two of us are exactly alike in our mental, physical or spiritual makeup.

The first mention principle explains...
3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and after his image; and called his name Seth:

Seth literally came from Adam. Likewise, Jesus came from God, born in His own likeness and image. Jesus is the image of the invisible God.
How you understand "unique" is irrelevant to the fact that it is the sense intended by the biblical author. ;)
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
I don't consider Bethel to be part of the WOF movement, though there are some similarities in regard to certain specific doctrines.

They don't talk about 'positive confession' as far as I know, and Bethel doesn't have the same three or four sermons or variations thereof as Kenneth Copeland.
Kenneth Copeland has endorsed Bill Johnson.

Isn't Copeland the main "guardian" of the WOF movement now?
 

Evmur

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2021
1,733
1,039
113
London
I've never had a Bible with a commentary attached. Commentary to me is extra-biblical reading.
I view it the same as any other Christian writing. Opinion, some of it very helpful but not the word of God.
Seeking a Bible that I think backs up a specific doctrine more than another would be an alien approach to me.


John 3:16 reads the same in every translation I can find.
How a preacher delivers it really isn't going to change my mind about what it means.



I can't speak for Jehovah's Witness or Mormon Bibles.
exactly so, iff a translation is word for word it reads the same to everybody. But if it is dynamic thought it becomes a commentary.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
19,351
10,633
113
exactly so, iff a translation is word for word it reads the same to everybody. But if it is dynamic thought it becomes a commentary.
Translating from Greek to English requires some degree of interpretation, because the word order is different. Here is a sample from one interlinear version:

Paul a slave of Christ Jesus called an apostle having been separated to (the) gospel of God which he promised beforehand through the prophets of him in writings holy concerning the Son of him come of (the) seed of David according to (the) flesh designated Son of God in power according to (the) spirit of holiness by a resurrection of dead persons Jesus Christ the Lord of us through whom we received grace and apostleship for obedience of faith among all the nations on behalf of the name of him....

You can get the gist, but it's difficult to grasp the whole.
 

Evmur

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2021
1,733
1,039
113
London
Translating from Greek to English requires some degree of interpretation, because the word order is different. Here is a sample from one interlinear version:

Paul a slave of Christ Jesus called an apostle having been separated to (the) gospel of God which he promised beforehand through the prophets of him in writings holy concerning the Son of him come of (the) seed of David according to (the) flesh designated Son of God in power according to (the) spirit of holiness by a resurrection of dead persons Jesus Christ the Lord of us through whom we received grace and apostleship for obedience of faith among all the nations on behalf of the name of him....

You can get the gist, but it's difficult to grasp the whole.
I trust Tynedale and the translators of the KJ ...
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
5,652
3,933
113
I trust Tynedale and the translators of the KJ ...

It's your right to use the translation/s you like.

Where does this leave us though?

Should staunch KJVO believers be given a free hand (or mouth) to keep branding those of us who prefer other Bibles as "CORRUPT"?
Do we sit back and allow them to call our Bibles "Satanic"?

We can allow them their KJV exclusive churches were some like myself will never set foot.
If they consider every pastor who reads from an NIV as preaching from a "Satanic" bible they aren't likely to venture into a freer environment.

Where can all this lead other than another sect?
It's not healthy for the church.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
12,966
4,610
113
I quite like the Fun crossword Bible because its interactive.
You can also get colour in Bibles.

In fact, you can pretty much find any type of Bible if you search hard enough.

I saw someone had done a Minecrafters Bible even.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
12,966
4,610
113
Its unofficial though.

Maybe if you want the official version you have to pay Mojang a fee or something.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,459
2,639
113
Was this from one local PAOC or from the denomination? My understanding is that the A/G in the US would not make believing in pre-trib an issue of salvation. Having been raised, partly, in that movement, that sounds like something that would be considered false doctrine in the A/G. But there can be individual radical preachers and congregations that don't fit with the overall movement's beliefs, and PAOC is affiliated with the A/G, but probably has some of its own characteristics that I am not familiar with. I have one friend raised as a PAOC MK, and I met her parents.



The idea that if you have faith you can be healed was a belief that some in the faith cure movement had back in the 1800s. My understanding is that some in the Pentecostal movement would have thought of healing that way. There was also a Pentecostal church that formed in Zion, Illinois that had people formally had been with Dowie. There were a number of A/G ministers that had lived in Zion, and also plenty of Pentecostals from independent congregations and the CMA.

A lot of WOF doctrine draws from believes that some Pentecostals would have held to, but not others, mixed with Kenyon. Some Pentecostals liked the WOF movement but stayed in Pentecostalism, but there were others that did not, and preached against aspects of it. A lot of the WOF preachers would come up with innovative doctrines and statements, as if they were trying to say something new that sounded shocking and contrary to what people believed. The A/G has some position papers on various topics, including disagreement with some of the ideas of WOF, if I am not mistaken.

The late Kenneth Hagin seemed to think God just allowed calamities and did not cause them. That doesn't fit the thinking of those who read Exodus and other parts of the Bible or just went to Sunday school, including a lot of Pentecostals. Being raised Pentecostal, some of the WOF movement teachings and attitude about money seemed unseemly. It seemed like some of the WOF movement preachers, say, in the 1980s, had 80 or 100 verses they read, and preached the same sermons topics over and over about positive confession, healing, getting more money through faith, etc.

My biggest concerns with the movement were the really weak view about God's sovereignty Hagin taught, and a lot of specific strange teachings-- not to pray 'thy will be done', theories about 'Jesus died spiritually', and an emphasis on having faith to get money that seemed to me to encourage greed. There were some real extreme examples of that on TV at 2 AM like Tilton, and Popoff-- with the miracle oil and all that. Popoff might not have been accepted as one of the group by other WOFers. I think some of them accepted Tilton as a real preacher, at least early on. I'm not sure about later.

It seems like WOF as a distinct movement is kind of getting watered down, mixing in with seeker sensitive, mega-church style, and getting influenced by Bethel's emphases. I visited a couple of churches and found out they were historically WOF or the preachers went to rhema, and the feel of the service and to some extent the emphasis in teaching had changed from when I was exposed to WOF in the '80's and '90's (mostly on TV.)
That was in the denomination statement of beliefs, maybe 10 years ago. However I googled it and they produced a new statement of faith in 2014, and they left out the heretic part. Apparently they are writing a whole new statement, eschatology is finished, but they will release it all together.

Glad to see they had the flexibility to change that. I was always taught that there were 4 different end times scenarios, and they were all Biblical. In other words, don't put down another viewpoint, it could also end up being the truth. I know what I believe, and I will discuss it. But in the end, I have to accept the other 3 end times views, as valid, even if I don't agree with them.

I find less and less discussion about WOF. Maybe many have abandoned it because it doesn't work? I don't much like Bethel, either. And they are very dogmatic about healing, if you have enough faith, including raising the dead, which has caused them real issues in the past. A 2 year old in the church died. The whole church was praying she would be resurrected, and the elders would not let the family bury her. In the end, they did give up. That smacks of WOF to me.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,459
2,639
113
exactly so, iff a translation is word for word it reads the same to everybody. But if it is dynamic thought it becomes a commentary.
This is total nonsense. If you spoke any other language, you would know that you cannot translate word for word, ever! My Greek teacher, Bill Mounce, who has been on most of the modern Translation committees, and written many commentaries, used to scoff and people who say this.

Even translating modern languages m, you cant do word fir word. For example, in French (which I am fluent in!) la maison Blanche translates directly into English:

La maison blanche.
The house white.

That is bad English, because we say:

The white house. That is proper English. Further, the fact that maison is feminine in French is untranslatable to English. Same with genders in both Hebrew and Greek!

Hebrew has issues with verbs, plus it doesn't just have singular and plural, but dual verbs. There is no way dual verbs can ever be directly translated, without adding words. Plus their verb system is very different than in English. They start with a 3 letter root word, made of three consonants. The basic form is Qual, then Piel and a bunch of other forms we do not have. You can't directly translate a Hebrew verb to English.

Greek is much worse. They have noun and adjective cases.
Nominative
Genitive
Dative
Accusative
Vocative (rare, found 9 times in the NT.)

Plus, Greek nouns have three genders, masculine, feminine and neuter. Plus singular and plural. So, most words have 4 cases x 3 genders x 2 numbers. So that is 24 different spelling differences, which vary at the end of the word, and sometimes the consonant, although some words are repeated! The genitive plural for "the" uses " tone" for each plural gender. I believe there are 17 different forms of "the" in Greek, as some are used twice, too.

The position of the word in English in the sentence determines whether it is the nominative -subject, or predicate, (unless it is a predicate nominative). The direct object in English is the accusative in Greek, the Dative the indirect object, and Genitive is used for possession. Greek would translate "the friend of his". We would likely say, "his friend." Or "the boy's father", with the apostrophe showing possession

In Greek, the most important thing in the sentence is thrown forward. So, the direct object could be the first part of the sentence, with article and descriptive adjectives agreeing in gender, case and number. The subject might end the sentence in Greek, and it is determined by the endings on the words, like other cases. If a Greek sentence is in some kind of reversed or different word order, in English, you would have a sentence that made no sense in English if you didn't reorder the sentence, plus move around the adjectives adverbs etc. It simply is not possible to keep the same order from Greek to English. German is much better, because it has cases and 3 genders, too. But it is a bit watered down and less forms than Greek.

Anyway, don't make stupid statements about things you have never studied and know nothing about. Anyone who says the KJV is "word for word" has never studied Greek! And I didn't get into the huge differences in verbs. Verbs are about time in English, the are about aspect in Greek. And so much more!
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
16,197
7,985
113
100%, every time they change it, they sell more...
And every time a product is changed to say "NEW AND IMPROVED" it is guaranteed to be of a lesser quality, lesser quantity, and greater price. But the public is so easily fooled (it seems) that the hucksters continue with their shenanigans. The Great Bible Version Hoax took Christendom by storm, and there were very few who saw through the smoke and mirrors.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,459
2,639
113
I trust Tynedale and the translators of the KJ ...
A other dumb thing to say! Tyndall and the KJV committee all knew that you can't translate word for word from Greek to English. In some places, King James required a direct word for word, and you end up with things like "heap coals of burning fire," instead of "heap burning coals." Romans 12:20
 

Evmur

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2021
1,733
1,039
113
London
A other dumb thing to say! Tyndall and the KJV committee all knew that you can't translate word for word from Greek to English. In some places, King James required a direct word for word, and you end up with things like "heap coals of burning fire," instead of "heap burning coals." Romans 12:20
perhaps if you read [with all your forebearance and all] other peoples posts