Why don't we have a perfect bible today?

  • 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.
L

Last

Guest
#61
Differences between the translations do not affect anything.
 
May 15, 2013
4,307
27
0
#62
Of course we do have a perfect bible today, but most on this forum don't believe that. My question to ya'll is:

A) Is God not capable of preserving his word.
B) Does God not want us to have his inerrant word today.
C) Is there another option I'm missing? Please explain.
The very first originals were written in a different language. God had told the people to set aside scribes that will keep the word from changing, but things has changed; they were put into captivity, and the scriptures has been taken away from them. The Scribes remembered some but not all because of being in captivity. Some of them started speaking the languages of their captors had spoken at the time and lost their own language that Abraham had once spoken. At the cross, they didn't understand what Jesus was saying; He was saying Eloi, but they were trying to figure out what He was saying, some had thought that He was calling on Elijah and which it sound close to Eloihim, and Jesus had to translated the word "Peter" from the original language to their language which was Greek. Since Jesus had kept everything, He also had kept the language that was spoken at the time of the covenant, and even His bloodline had still remained the same from Abraham's. He was a son of a carpenter (someone that restore old things and make them new) that he was able to read the scriptures and filled in the blanks at the Temple, ever since He were at the age of twelve, and which the people were amazed at Him that he was able to read and understand the scriptures. Its says that He is leaving behind His spirit to help us to understand everything.
 
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
182
0
#63
I do no not need to walk by sight. I have faith. There are a million reasons that could explain it. They could be fakes or deliberate corruptions. I see the observable evidence that the KJV is the preserved Word of God for our day. It internally verifies itself and is superior to other translations (If one were to do a simple side by side comparison). For the blood atonement, salvation, the deity of Christ, the mention of specific sins are watered down. Certain passages are changed that would create two different sets of faiths or beliefs (One being KJV and the other who is a Modern Translationist). Also, the devil's name is not placed wrongfully in the KJV, either. Bible numbers confirm the inspiration of the KJV as they do the original Greek text.
The remarkable thing about scripture, according to the men who discovered some written 300 years before Christ, is that it was so much the same when it was copied by men by hand.

You see evidence that the KJV is so perfectly dependable, I see evidence it is the best translation God helped men make, but men who reflected what people though God said in 1600. I see evidence that depending on this translation by men must NOT be accepted the same way the original as God breathed it is to be accepted. Unless we go into the way the world thought of God in 1600, we can't watch this translation for being influenced by the prevailing thought. They did remarkably well, but they were not perfect and they did not listen to only God without any influence by thought of the times, thought that twisted God's word.
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
613
113
70
Alabama
#64
I do no not need to walk by sight. I have faith. There are a million reasons that could explain it. They could be fakes or deliberate corruptions. I see the observable evidence that the KJV is the preserved Word of God for our day. It internally verifies itself and is superior to other translations (If one were to do a simple side by side comparison). For the blood atonement, salvation, the deity of Christ, the mention of specific sins are watered down. Certain passages are changed that would create two different sets of faiths or beliefs (One being KJV and the other who is a Modern Translationist). Also, the devil's name is not placed wrongfully in the KJV, either. Bible numbers confirm the inspiration of the KJV as they do the original Greek text.
Why would you immediately attribute variances to intentional and deliberate acts and nefarious motives?
 

Agricola

Senior Member
Dec 10, 2012
2,638
88
48
#65
le numbers confirm the inspiration of the KJV as they do the original Greek text.
Does that include the Greek translation Erasmus made of the last part of Revelation from the Latin Vulgate?
 
B

BeanieD

Guest
#66
Absolutely right Tintin, And I had four different versions, and they all came close enough to get the true meaning across the way God intended it. The biggest problem with ANY version or ANY translation is how the reader interprets what they read. They all say the same thing, but too many people get too nitpicky about each and every little word or punctuation. The word of God was made simple and with the power of the Holy Spirit, the true meaning of any will be totaly clear. Blessings
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#67
Why would you immediately attribute variances to intentional and deliberate acts and nefarious motives?
Because Paul talks about how there are those who seek to corrupt the Word of God.
 

Billyd

Senior Member
May 8, 2014
5,075
1,507
113
#68
Of course we do have a perfect bible today, but most on this forum don't believe that. My question to ya'll is:

A) Is God not capable of preserving his word.
B) Does God not want us to have his inerrant word today.
C) Is there another option I'm missing? Please explain.
I would like to ask you if you get God's inerrant word from the translation that you use?

If you are, then who am I to tell you that yours is not perfect (a complete translation).

If I use the NHEB and understand God's inerrant word from it, why is mine not perfect?
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
613
113
70
Alabama
#69
Because Paul talks about there are those who seek to corrupt the Word of God.
That is true but, it is rather naive to automatically attribute all variances in ancient MSS to either incompetence or evil intent. There are many factors that we know contributed to MSS variances.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#70
The remarkable thing about scripture, according to the men who discovered some written 300 years before Christ, ...
The remarkable thing about Scripture is that ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness to lead the man into perfection and into every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17). A corrupt word cannot lead me into perfection or every good work. A tainted Word cannot do that.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#71
That is true but, it is rather naive to automatically attribute all variances in ancient MSS to either incompetence or evil intent. There are many factors that we know contributed to MSS variances.
If it's true, then why not believe it? Or is this passage in error? Maybe another manuscript will appear one day that will cast doubt upon it. See, that's what I am talking about. You are going about this the whole wrong way. It's faith in God's Word first, then you can see spiritually on this matter, my friend.
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
613
113
70
Alabama
#72
If it's true, then why not believe it? Or is this passage in error? Maybe another manuscript will appear one day that will cast doubt upon it. See, that's what I am talking about. You are going about this the whole wrong way. It's faith in God's Word first, then you can see spiritually on this matter, my friend.
There are some undeniable facts that you have to come to grips with
1. We do not have ANY original MSS.
2. Every MSS we have extant was copied my men.
3. Men did not copy by inspiration.
4. It is therefore conceivable that every MSS we have found contains some copying errors.
5. There are very few significant variances between the early MSS.
6. Most variances can be attributed to a number of factors that have nothing to do with deliberate attempts to deceive.
7. It must also be recognized that God has preserved his word for us in just this way. So, who are we to question how God has preserved his word?
 

Billyd

Senior Member
May 8, 2014
5,075
1,507
113
#73
Because Paul talks about how there are those who seek to corrupt the Word of God.
Jason, doesn't the corruption of the Word of God come more from our inability to understand the written word, than from the introduction of many translations of the word. Today, I can compare any scripture from virtually all the current translations from my keyboard in a few seconds. I can read the text it in the original language from my keyboard. I have a dozen or more concordances at my finger tips. It is much more difficult for the word to be corrupted by the use of a particular translation.
 
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
182
0
#74
The remarkable thing about Scripture is that ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness to lead the man into perfection and into every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17). A corrupt word cannot lead me into perfection or every good work. A tainted Word cannot do that.
What are you doing in order to find the least tainted word? I have spent a lot of effort looking for the answer to that. You are looking at translations themselves to decide how to do that and I think that is not the way to do it. In fact, I think scripture tells us it is not the correct way. I have posted some things that I think can be done to find the word with the least corruption in it.
 
Sep 7, 2014
255
0
0
#75
Of course we do have a perfect bible today, but most on this forum don't believe that. My question to ya'll is:

A) Is God not capable of preserving his word.
B) Does God not want us to have his inerrant word today.
C) Is there another option I'm missing? Please explain.
We do have a Perfect Book: Christ. He is the book of life.

Revelation 13:8 (KJV)
[SUP]8 [/SUP]And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
John 1:1 (KJV)
[SUP]1 [/SUP]In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.


He is the book of life. God's Elect are written in His Life.

We [His Elect] are the thought of God. [Gr. "word" = "thought"]
 
Last edited:
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#76
There are some undeniable facts that you have to come to grips with
1. We do not have ANY original MSS.
2. Every MSS we have extant was copied my men.
3. Men did not copy by inspiration.
4. It is therefore conceivable that every MSS we have found contains some copying errors.
5. There are very few significant variances between the early MSS.
6. Most variances can be attributed to a number of factors that have nothing to do with deliberate attempts to deceive.
7. It must also be recognized that God has preserved his word for us in just this way. So, who are we to question how God has preserved his word?
You don't have a time machine to prove what is true or not true. All you can go by is what text is most pure and lines up with the present Word of God for our world language today. If you can't find a text that lines up with the King James, then you have not looked hard enough. For KJV folks have no problem pointing them out.
 
Last edited:
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#77
You don't have a time machine to prove what is true or not true. All you can go by is what text is most pure and lines up with the present Word of God for our world language today. If you can't find a text that lines up with the King James, then you have not looked hard enough. For KJV folks have no problem pointing them out.
While I believe the KJV is the preserved divine Word for our day, I would not classify myself as KJV only because I believe that there is one written Word that existed thru out time. I also believe in reading Modern Translations so as to update the Old English in certain places.
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
613
113
70
Alabama
#78
You don't have a time machine to prove what is true or not true. All you can go by is what text is most pure and lines up with the present Word of God for our world language today.
A time machine is not necessary. These are simple facts. Translations are NEVER the standard. All translations without exception have issues with translational errors. This is due to a number of reasons. Sometimes these variations reflect the bias of the translators, whether it is a translational comity or an individual as in the case of the Phillips translation or the Moffit translation or the Berkley translation or the McCord translation, etc. Sometimes it is due to the fact that there are some words in the Hebrew or the Greek languages that simply do not have an English equivalent. In such cases, the only thing that the translators can do is try to convey the meaning that the original word expresses. This can sometimes be subject to personal bias. Still, other time these variations are the result of differences between the ancient manuscripts themselves. These differences are the result of a number of possibilities such as fatigue, misspelling, poor lighting, poor eyesight, line confusion, letter, word, or line duplication, or just simple carelessness on the part of the scribe who was copying the document. There are lots of reasons why the variants appear. Most linguistic scholars try very hard to uphold the integrity of the original languages. Oddly enough, this is especially true of those scholars who are nonbelievers. The reason is, they have no religious agendas nor any religious ax to grind. The only thing they care about is their reputation as a linguistic scholar. Therefore they are more concerned about getting it right than about defending any particular religious doctrine.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#79
We do have a Perfect Book: Christ. He is the book of life.

Revelation 13:8 (KJV)
[SUP]8 [/SUP]And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
John 1:1 (KJV)
[SUP]1 [/SUP]In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.


He is the book of life. God's Elect are written in His Life.

We [His Elect] are the thought of God. [Gr. "word" = "thought"]
There are three major Words mentioned in the Bible (Which are all perfect).

1. The Living Word who could not be hurt by fire or death.

2. The Written Word that survived fire and it being broken into bits from being on stone tablets (See the story of Jeremiah and the story of Moses).

3. The Spoken Word is like fire which can be confirmed with the written Word (See Jeremiah and Acts 17:11).
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
51
0
#80
A time machine is not necessary. These are simple facts. Translations are NEVER the standard. All translations without exception have issues with translational errors. This is due to a number of reasons. Sometimes these variations reflect the bias of the translators, whether it is a translational comity or an individual as in the case of the Phillips translation or the Moffit translation or the Berkley translation or the McCord translation, etc. Sometimes it is due to the fact that there are some words in the Hebrew or the Greek languages that simply do not have an English equivalent. In such cases, the only thing that the translators can do is try to convey the meaning that the original word expresses. This can sometimes be subject to personal bias. Still, other time these variations are the result of differences between the ancient manuscripts themselves. These differences are the result of a number of possibilities such as fatigue, misspelling, poor lighting, poor eyesight, line confusion, letter, word, or line duplication, or just simple carelessness on the part of the scribe who was copying the document. There are lots of reasons why the variants appear. Most linguistic scholars try very hard to uphold the integrity of the original languages. Oddly enough, this is especially true of those scholars who are nonbelievers. The reason is, they have no religious agendas nor any religious ax to grind. The only thing they care about is their reputation as a linguistic scholar. Therefore they are more concerned about getting it right than about defending any particular religious doctrine.
So what would happen if Jesus revealed to you a line manuscripts that line up with the KJV (with the respective differences in language)? What then?