New bibles since 1960

  • 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.

preston39

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2017
1,675
240
63
New translations appear because of newly discovered manuscripts during the last few decades.
I question that the recent dig findings are the reason for the new, new age religion interpretations of the Bible (since the 1960's)I.E.

OSAS
Baptism not required
Super grace
Everyone will be saved
10 commandments do not apply to us
Repentance not required Christ did that for us
etc.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,680
13,366
113
I question that the recent dig findings are the reason for the new, new age religion interpretations of the Bible (since the 1960's)I.E.

OSAS
Baptism not required
Super grace
Everyone will be saved
10 commandments do not apply to us
Repentance not required Christ did that for us
etc.
Well, given this post, are you now willing to unpack your original post with more explanation?
 
R

Rasputin_OZ

Guest

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,645
13,120
113
I question that the recent dig findings are the reason for the new, new age religion interpretations of the Bible (since the 1960's)I.E.

OSAS
you are aware that John Calvin lived in the 1500's and that he read the Bible in Greek & Latin, right?
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,645
13,120
113
still watching, but I want to be part of the puritans church, loved that concept of them near start of film
i do like the idea of 2 hr teaching sermons vs 20 minute pep talks..
 

preston39

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2017
1,675
240
63
you are aware that John Calvin lived in the 1500's and that he read the Bible in Greek & Latin, right?
Yep.

My ongoing study surrounds the facts that most new, new age religion interpretations and most newer (since 1960) editions of the Bible seem to have a correlation of purpose........the changing of G-d's meaning and intent....slanted toward new age religion purposes.
 
R

Rasputin_OZ

Guest
The Holy Spirit will speak thru any translation
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
Yep.

My ongoing study surrounds the facts that most new, new age religion interpretations and most newer (since 1960) editions of the Bible seem to have a correlation of purpose........the changing of G-d's meaning and intent....slanted toward new age religion purposes.
We require modern translations. For example the KJV was translated in 1611. Since then significant changes in English has occurred.

Problems with the KJV

Because of the changes in the English language between 1611 to today, a number of words occur in the King James that make zero sense to most people today. These include the following nuggets that you will find scattered here and there:

Almug
Algum
Charashim
Chode
Cracknels
Gat
Habergeon
Hosen
Kab
Ligure
Neesed
Nusings
Ouches
ring-straked
sycamyne
trow
wimples, ….

In addition knowledge of nature has advanced greatly since 1611. The King James translators translated some animal names into animals that in fact we now have pretty good reason for knowing don’t actually exist:

unicorn (Deut. 33:17)
satyr (Isa 13:21);
dragon (Deut 32:33) (for serpent)
cockatrice (Isa 11:8),
arrowsnake (Gen 49:11, in the margin).

Moreover,, there are phrases that simply don’t make sense any more to modern readers: Phrases that no longer make sense:

ouches of gold (Exod. 28:11);
collops of fat (Job 15:25);
naughty figs (Jer 24:2);
ien with (Jer. 3:2);
the ground is chapt (Jer 14:4);
brazen wall” (Jer 15:20);
rentest thy face (Jer. 4:30);
urrain of the cattle (Exod. 9:2);

And there are whole sentences that are confusing at best, virtually indecipherable (or humorous)

And Jacob sod pottage (Gen 25:29)
And Mt. Sinai was altogether on a smoke (Exoc. 19:18)
Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing (Ps. 5:6)
I trow not (Luke 17:9)
We do you to wit of the grace of God (2 Cor. 8:1)
Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels (2 Cor. 6:12)
He who letteth will let (2 Thes 2:7)
The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies, which are given from one shepherd (Eccles. 12:11)


Other sentences make sense, but would today be considered somewhat problematic – at least for the sacred Scripture. My favorite is the one that refers one who: “Pisseth against the wall:…. 1 Sam 25:22, 34, I Kings 14:10!
NIV uses the word man.

In 1611 kill meant first degree murder.
In KJV "Thou shalt not kill." is translated in modern translations as "You shall not murder."
 
R

Rasputin_OZ

Guest
You know ive read many different translation and still don't see all these weird new Doctrines being preached.

I don't believe in once saved always saved.

I don't believe that we canot sin after salvation

I don't believe that we don't need to repent .
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
36,645
13,120
113
Yep.

My ongoing study surrounds the facts that most new, new age religion interpretations and most newer (since 1960) editions of the Bible seem to have a correlation of purpose........the changing of G-d's meaning and intent....slanted toward new age religion purposes.
i do agree that all those 'paraphrase' rubbish editions like 'good news' and 'living' and 'message' etc, including all the iterations of the 'new living translation' do not merit the description 'translation' at all and all have a certain foolish bent.

i don't think it has anything to do with what additional ancient copies have become available since the 16th century though. those things don't have any basis in accurate translation at all; they set aside accurate preservation of the truth of what's written for the sake of personal interpretation. you might as well read the 'cotton patch' version, IMO

there are efforts to improve the accuracy or translation. that's not what i'm talking about, but i don't know if it is what you are - whether you reject the very idea of improving the accuracy of the kjv. some people do, just on some weird principle they have been taught that the kjv is divinely perfect. i think it's painfully clear that it's not: even one thing that could be approved would destroy that idea, if people were honest, and i'l provide a very simple one:

Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings
(Luke 12:6, kjv)

there were no 'farthings' in Israeli monetary system in 1st century AD.
a farthing was a fourth of a penny. 1/960 of a British pound sterling. today, in USD two farthings = $ 0.0026
are five sparrows sold for 1/4 of 1 cent?
i checked. you can buy a sparrow ((if it's legal to do so in your country)) from this site: https://thefinchfarm.com/eurasian-tree-sparrow/
i added 5 sparrows to my cart, and including shipping, it comes to $364.94 to buy 5 sparrows.
now, if i give them my email address, i can get 10% off, sure -- but $328.45 is still a far cry from a quarter of a penny.


:rolleyes:

sure. that's trivial, you can say. but 'the kjv is 100% perfect word of God for all time' is not a trivial statement. even a trivial flaw blows that silly idea up, and there's no way you can tell me 'two farthings' is an accurate translation of Luke 12:6 in 2019.

my suggestion in re: that verse? give me the literal word in the manuscript, 'two assarion' and give me enough respect to allow that i will figure out we're talking about a unit of currency in a particular place and particular time.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
You know ive read many different translation and still don't see all these weird new Doctrines being preached.

I don't believe in once saved always saved.

I don't believe that we canot sin after salvation

I don't believe that we don't need to repent .
OSAS comes from the following scripture.

John 10 NIV
24 The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.”

25 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”
 
R

Rasputin_OZ

Guest
yes no on can snatch them from HIM , but the sheep can walk away.. The prodigal son is the best example.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
yes no on can snatch them from HIM , but the sheep can walk away.. The prodigal son is the best example.
I disagree with you. Once a person experiences the grace of God through faith in Jesus I don't see any way they can turn away from Jesus.
 
R

Rasputin_OZ

Guest
I disagree with you. Once a person experiences the grace of God through faith in Jesus I don't see any way they can turn away from Jesus.
then the prodigal son story is a lie . hmmmm
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,680
13,366
113
No explanation is needed.
Obviously not according to you, as you have ignored at least five requests for explanation.

The thread title is cryptic. Your opening post was cryptic. Has it occurred to you that not everyone can read your mind? Clearly, you have specific thoughts that led to your creation of this thread, but you have not shared them. That leads me to wonder why you bothered starting the thread at all.
 

preston39

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2017
1,675
240
63
OSAS comes from the following scripture.

John 10 NIV
24 The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.”

25 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 27 My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.

28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.
29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand......

This means after we are declared saved by G-d's review after death.
I understand your point as a basis. But, therein is the problem. Their basis is void of support for OSAS, in light of other scriptures and G-d's intent...which voids OSAS.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
It is ironic that most new bible interpretations and publications have been since 1960.

Do we know why?
You keep using the absolute wrong word in describing the new bibles. They are not interpretations but translations!! There is a very major difference between those two words. An interpretation is where something is put into different words to try to explain the meaning. A translation is takes the original text and accurately creates the exact meaning in a different language. Modern translations are made by committees making sure the translation is accurate. The idea is where a single person can make a mistake a committee will have a built in method of making sure a mistake by one person will be caught by others on the committee. Thus making the TRANSLATION be correct.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
I understand your point as a basis. But, therein is the problem. Their basis is void of support for OSAS, in light of other scriptures and G-d's intent...which voids OSAS.
I totally disagree with you. Since the subject is not in the creeds we will follow the early elders in agreeing to disagree. This concept was explained by the elders who created the creeds that define what a Christian must believe. They saw several disagreements and stated anything outside the creeds is agree to disagree. Anything contrary is heresy!! The result is all of the Gospel preaching denominations today.