Favourite Bible Translations

  • 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.

Beez

Senior Member
Nov 27, 2017
463
83
28
yep, the KJV only cult fits this definition, thank you
The church I was born into completely fits the definition of "cult," and that is So Irritating! Then I have to remember that for those who are part of the Called, there is nothing that happens to us but what He knows about it, and intends to use it for our good and for the good of others. So I give myself the speech: "Oh, get over it!"
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Not yet. I think he realizes that he's up against a wall and cannot adequately defend his beliefs.
I find it amazing that for centuries the Roman church overpowered God and God was not able to keep his promise as the world had no inspired bible, all they had was pretty much what we have, minus Gods perfect word
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Of course there’s no verse stating such and to ask is nonsense. We all know that.
Ah

then take your advice when you ask to see verses like you keep doing
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,129
3,689
113
I find it amazing that for centuries the Roman church overpowered God and God was not able to keep his promise as the world had no inspired bible, all they had was pretty much what we have, minus Gods perfect word
Ah, the old "where was the bible before 1611" argument. God had it preserved. The following is part of an article from a friend. I cannot take credit, though I'm in agreement. Read on if you like.

God never promised that every nation or individual would have a perfect Bible, but He did promise to preserve His pure, complete and 100% true words in a Book somewhere on this earth. "Seek ye out of the Book of the LORD and read..." Isaiah 34:16.

God is under no obligation to give equal light or gifts to all people. There was a period of time when for about 2000 years only one small nation had the true and pure words of God. Psalms 147:19-20 says: "He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation; and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the LORD."

God's ways are not our ways, and His thoughts are not our thoughts. God will hold us accountable for the light He has been pleased to give us. We who have the preserved and inerrant words of God in the English language of the King James Bible will be held far more accountable for what we have done with this book than those who cannot read English. "For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more." Luke 12:48

We who believe the King James Bible to be the inerrant word of God do not place our trust in the King James translators. We do not defend their comments in the Preface, nor their theology, though I agree with much of it. We trust in God alone Who has fulfilled His promises to preserve His inspired words. He just happened to use the believing men of the 1611 Holy Bible as His instruments to continue this preservation.

They were not perfect nor without error in themselves. Just as God used Peter, though he denied the Lord and later separated himself from the Gentile believers and was to be blamed for his actions, (See Galatians 2:12-14) or Paul who was about to offer another blood sacrifice to appease the Jewish law-keepers in Acts 21:26, or John who twice fell down to worship an angel and was rebuked for it (See Rev. 19:10 and 22:8-9). God always uses imperfect vessels for His glory; if He didn't, nothing would ever get done.

Those who promote today's multiple, conflicting versions of God's words think they finally have the question that will stump the Bible believer and finally rob him of his faith in God's inerrant word. They ask us, "Well, where was the pure word of God BEFORE 1611?" It will greatly enlighten your mind if you ask them the same question. They don't know where it was before 1611 either, or more importantly, where it is now.

God fulfills His purposes in the fulness of time. He is sovereign in history and His timetable is not the same as mans. In Galatians 4:4 we read: "But when the FULNESS OF THE TIME WAS COME, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons."

One might well question why some 2000 years ago was the "fulness of time" to send forth the prophesied Saviour when men had been perishing in their sins for hundreds of years previously. Yet God does all things according to His timetable in the fulness of time.
God sent the Lord Jesus Christ at the perfect time in history. When He completed what He came to do, He said, "it is finished" and then the work was complete. What happened through that work still lives on today.

Just as God did with the INCARNATE Word, so He has done with His WRITTEN Word. God's translation work for the English Bible was completed with the King James Bible. It happened in the fulness of time.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,110
960
113
“Itself” (KJV) vs “himself” (New Modern Versions)

Is “itself” an error in the KJV? As most of the newer versions were found to have it “himself’ in the particular passage below. Here is a historical background why KJV is not in error and the justification of it. Historical view of the word “it”. Source: Shorter Oxford English Dictionary p. 1,120

It

OE, hit, the neuter nominative and accusative of the stem hi, the nominative masculine of which is HE. The dative and genitive were him, his as in the masculine. During the ME period hit lost its initial h first when unemphatic, and at length in all positions, in the standard English.

Itself- means alone

Himself- referring as is own true self.

Of course, the Spirit is not referring to his “own self” but rather witnessing to the spirit of man in the particular passage below. The Holy Spirit itself “alone” testifies to our spirit.



Romans 8:16

New International Version
The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children.

English Standard Version
The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,

Berean Study Bible
The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

Berean Literal Bible
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,

New American Standard Bible
The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God,

New King James Version
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,

King James Bible
The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Christian Standard Bible
The Spirit himself testifies together with our spirit that we are God's children,
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Ah, the old "where was the bible before 1611" argument. God had it preserved. The following is part of an article from a friend. I cannot take credit, though I'm in agreement. Read on if you like.

God never promised that every nation or individual would have a perfect Bible, but He did promise to preserve His pure, complete and 100% true words in a Book somewhere on this earth. "Seek ye out of the Book of the LORD and read..." Isaiah 34:16.

God is under no obligation to give equal light or gifts to all people. There was a period of time when for about 2000 years only one small nation had the true and pure words of God. Psalms 147:19-20 says: "He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation; and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the LORD."

God's ways are not our ways, and His thoughts are not our thoughts. God will hold us accountable for the light He has been pleased to give us. We who have the preserved and inerrant words of God in the English language of the King James Bible will be held far more accountable for what we have done with this book than those who cannot read English. "For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more." Luke 12:48

We who believe the King James Bible to be the inerrant word of God do not place our trust in the King James translators. We do not defend their comments in the Preface, nor their theology, though I agree with much of it. We trust in God alone Who has fulfilled His promises to preserve His inspired words. He just happened to use the believing men of the 1611 Holy Bible as His instruments to continue this preservation.

They were not perfect nor without error in themselves. Just as God used Peter, though he denied the Lord and later separated himself from the Gentile believers and was to be blamed for his actions, (See Galatians 2:12-14) or Paul who was about to offer another blood sacrifice to appease the Jewish law-keepers in Acts 21:26, or John who twice fell down to worship an angel and was rebuked for it (See Rev. 19:10 and 22:8-9). God always uses imperfect vessels for His glory; if He didn't, nothing would ever get done.

Those who promote today's multiple, conflicting versions of God's words think they finally have the question that will stump the Bible believer and finally rob him of his faith in God's inerrant word. They ask us, "Well, where was the pure word of God BEFORE 1611?" It will greatly enlighten your mind if you ask them the same question. They don't know where it was before 1611 either, or more importantly, where it is now.

God fulfills His purposes in the fulness of time. He is sovereign in history and His timetable is not the same as mans. In Galatians 4:4 we read: "But when the FULNESS OF THE TIME WAS COME, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons."

One might well question why some 2000 years ago was the "fulness of time" to send forth the prophesied Saviour when men had been perishing in their sins for hundreds of years previously. Yet God does all things according to His timetable in the fulness of time.
God sent the Lord Jesus Christ at the perfect time in history. When He completed what He came to do, He said, "it is finished" and then the work was complete. What happened through that work still lives on today.

Just as God did with the INCARNATE Word, so He has done with His WRITTEN Word. God's translation work for the English Bible was completed with the King James Bible. It happened in the fulness of time.
Nothing in here states why God did not have a preserved word available to people for centuries

ice try. But you have not proved anything other than God must have been week for these centuries while the Roman church and all churches outside of them held a substandard bible for all people
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
“Itself” (KJV) vs “himself” (New Modern Versions)

Is “itself” an error in the KJV? As most of the newer versions were found to have it “himself’ in the particular passage below. Here is a historical background why KJV is not in error and the justification of it. Historical view of the word “it”. Source: Shorter Oxford English Dictionary p. 1,120

It

OE, hit, the neuter nominative and accusative of the stem hi, the nominative masculine of which is HE. The dative and genitive were him, his as in the masculine. During the ME period hit lost its initial h first when unemphatic, and at length in all positions, in the standard English.

Itself- means alone

Himself- referring as is own true self.

Of course, the Spirit is not referring to his “own self” but rather witnessing to the spirit of man in the particular passage below. The Holy Spirit itself “alone” testifies to our spirit.



Romans 8:16

New International Version
The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children.

English Standard Version
The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,

Berean Study Bible
The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

Berean Literal Bible
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,

New American Standard Bible
The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God,

New King James Version
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,

King James Bible
The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Christian Standard Bible
The Spirit himself testifies together with our spirit that we are God's children,
So the spirit is an it,

good to know you think this also.

next
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,129
3,689
113
Nothing in here states why God did not have a preserved word available to people for centuries

ice try. But you have not proved anything other than God must have been week for these centuries while the Roman church and all churches outside of them held a substandard bible for all people
Read again. God promised to preserve his words and they were preserved throughout every generation. They were translated, completed and placed in a book called the King James Bible.

Is your God too weak to perfectly preserve his words in an English translation? The RCC never had a heart for God's word. He led them to believe a lie and pervert their own beliefs.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,129
3,689
113
So the spirit is an it,

good to know you think this also.

next
Since the King James Bible is often its own commentary, the Bible itself give us such an example. In the book of Exodus chapter 2 verses 6-9 we have such an example. Pharaoh had given a commandment to have all the male children slain as soon as they were born. Moses' mother put her baby in an ark of bulrushes and laid him by the river's banks. Pharaoh's daughter saw the ark and sent one of her maids to fetch it.

Here we read: "And when she had opened it, she saw the child: and, behold, the babe wept. And she had compassion on HIM, (we know the sex of the child; he was a male) and said, This is one of the Hebrew's children." Then in verse 9 we read: "And Pharaoh's daughter said unto her (Moses' mother) Take this child away, and nurse IT for me, and I will give thee thy wages. And the woman took the child, and nursed IT."

The Websters 1967 Collegiate Dictionary defines "it", as "a PERSON or animal whose gender is unknown OR DISREGARDED." The Father and the Son are clearly masculine, but the Spirit is sometimes referred to as masculine and sometimes as neuter, not because He is neuter, but rather because the gender is disregarded or not taken into account in that particular context.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,472
13,785
113
“Itself” (KJV) vs “himself” (New Modern Versions)

Is “itself” an error in the KJV? As most of the newer versions were found to have it “himself’ in the particular passage below. Here is a historical background why KJV is not in error and the justification of it. Historical view of the word “it”. Source: Shorter Oxford English Dictionary p. 1,120

It

OE, hit, the neuter nominative and accusative of the stem hi, the nominative masculine of which is HE. The dative and genitive were him, his as in the masculine. During the ME period hit lost its initial h first when unemphatic, and at length in all positions, in the standard English.

Itself- means alone

Himself- referring as is own true self.

Of course, the Spirit is not referring to his “own self” but rather witnessing to the spirit of man in the particular passage below. The Holy Spirit itself “alone” testifies to our spirit.



Romans 8:16

New International Version
The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God's children.

English Standard Version
The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,

Berean Study Bible
The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

Berean Literal Bible
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,

New American Standard Bible
The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God,

New King James Version
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,

King James Bible
The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Christian Standard Bible
The Spirit himself testifies together with our spirit that we are God's children,
Plausible, but the KJV is still archaic in this regard, and nobody reading it today would know that until they do the digging. Some would even argue that because the KJV uses "itself", the Holy Spirit must be an "it"; I've seen similar arguments.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,472
13,785
113
Read again. God promised to preserve his words and they were preserved throughout every generation. They were translated, completed and placed in a book called the King James Bible.

Is your God too weak to perfectly preserve his words in an English translation? The RCC never had a heart for God's word. He led them to believe a lie and pervert their own beliefs.
So... for the fourth time (or is it the fifth)...

WHY do you believe that God preserves His word in only one translation in any particular language?
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,129
3,689
113
So... for the fourth time (or is it the fifth)...

WHY do you believe that God preserves His word in only one translation in any particular language?
I believe God has preserved and completed his word in the KJV, therefore, all other versions would be corrupt since they contain different words and different truths. Only one version can be the holy word of God for this very reason. The KJV can be translated into any other language, however, I would hesitate to call any other version the holy perfect word of God.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,129
3,689
113
Plausible, but the KJV is still archaic in this regard, and nobody reading it today would know that until they do the digging. Some would even argue that because the KJV uses "itself", the Holy Spirit must be an "it"; I've seen similar arguments.
In one hundred years, the English language will not sound the same as it does today. Do we continue to update the Bible to fit the everchanging language? That is absurd.
 

Athanasius377

Active member
Aug 20, 2020
207
86
28
Northern Kentucky
2Co 6:12 Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels.
2Co 6:13 Now for a recompence in the same, (I speak as unto my children,) be ye also enlarged.

This is what the KJV is saying.

2Co 6:12 You are not put on the straight and narrow path by us, but you are put on the straight and narrow path because your GUT INSTINCT tells you to.

2Co 6:13 Now as payment for getting on the straight and narrow you are increased.
A swing and a miss. Insists on using the KJV only yet cannot give a coherent interpretation of the English. Sadly most of the KJV only folks I know are terrible exegetes again because they don't understand the English. God's word is meant to read, heard and understood by all God's people. Not locked away in an archaic translation. How is this argument any different than what Rome was claiming about the Latin Vulgate during the Reformation?
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Read again. God promised to preserve his words and they were preserved throughout every generation. They were translated, completed and placed in a book called the King James Bible.

Is your God too weak to perfectly preserve his words in an English translation? The RCC never had a heart for God's word. He led them to believe a lie and pervert their own beliefs.
Then show us which bible was perfect before the KJV. Can you?
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Since the King James Bible is often its own commentary, the Bible itself give us such an example. In the book of Exodus chapter 2 verses 6-9 we have such an example. Pharaoh had given a commandment to have all the male children slain as soon as they were born. Moses' mother put her baby in an ark of bulrushes and laid him by the river's banks. Pharaoh's daughter saw the ark and sent one of her maids to fetch it.

Here we read: "And when she had opened it, she saw the child: and, behold, the babe wept. And she had compassion on HIM, (we know the sex of the child; he was a male) and said, This is one of the Hebrew's children." Then in verse 9 we read: "And Pharaoh's daughter said unto her (Moses' mother) Take this child away, and nurse IT for me, and I will give thee thy wages. And the woman took the child, and nursed IT."

The Websters 1967 Collegiate Dictionary defines "it", as "a PERSON or animal whose gender is unknown OR DISREGARDED." The Father and the Son are clearly masculine, but the Spirit is sometimes referred to as masculine and sometimes as neuter, not because He is neuter, but rather because the gender is disregarded or not taken into account in that particular context.
This just showed how flawed the English language is, to call it an it. I mean really. Moses was an IT? :ROFL::ROFL:

this just shows how low you will go
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,129
3,689
113
A swing and a miss. Insists on using the KJV only yet cannot give a coherent interpretation of the English. Sadly most of the KJV only folks I know are terrible exegetes again because they don't understand the English. God's word is meant to read, heard and understood by all God's people. Not locked away in an archaic translation. How is this argument any different than what Rome was claiming about the Latin Vulgate during the Reformation?
The oldy but goody "archaic" argument. I read it daily and so do millions of others.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Plausible, but the KJV is still archaic in this regard, and nobody reading it today would know that until they do the digging. Some would even argue that because the KJV uses "itself", the Holy Spirit must be an "it"; I've seen similar arguments.
Amen, it infers the Holy Spirit is not a being, but an object or an it, (which infers the object was created)
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
So... for the fourth time (or is it the fifth)...

WHY do you believe that God preserves His word in only one translation in any particular language?
And where is the biblical mention of this..