Favourite Bible Translations

Don't be a donkey; just answer the question.

I'll give one simple example of many that can be found.

Luke 10:1 contains truth about how many were appointed and sent out by the Lord.

KJV - After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come.

vs

NIV - After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go.

One contains the truth, one contains a lie. Which is lying?

A faithful witness cannot lie...

You cannot determine which is the correct (note I didn't say, "true") number merely by comparing two English translations.

I've told you this many times before, but you refuse to learn.

Romans 1 proves this

Do you have scripture that says God will produce a perfect bible in the English language almost 1600 years after John completed his letter?

Neither strawberries nor chocolate are mentioned in Scripture, either.

I guess to some, therefore, they do not exist

No coffee, either

Neither one is a lie. More likely a scribal mistake as a few manuscripts vary.
Translators recognise that and explain in the modern English Bibles.
I'm sorry if your KJV leaves you in the dark over it.

Your cult-indoctrinators want you fixated on textual difficulties so they can sell you the myth of KJV superiority.

This is what the NIV actually looks like. It doesn't look as it does the way you pasted it even in online versions.

After this the Lord appointed seventy-two[a] others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go.
[Some manuscripts seventy; also in verse 17 ]

I've looked at 6 English Bibles & all but the KJV have a note next to the number.

Since you don't read the NIV & your KJB doesn't footnote that verse you must be deliberately seeking minor differences through your cult sources. Here is the detailed note provided by the NET.

1. Luke 10:1 tc There is a difficult textual problem here and in v. 17, where the number is either “seventy” (א A C L W Θ Ξ Ψ ƒ1,13 M and several church fathers and early versions) or “seventy-two” (P75 B D 0181 lat as well as other versions and fathers). The more difficult reading is “seventy-two,” since scribes would be prone to assimilate this passage to several OT passages that refer to groups of seventy people (Num 11:13-17; Deut 10:22; Judg 8:30; 2 Kgs 10:1 et al.); this reading also has slightly better ms support. “Seventy” could be the preferred reading if scribes drew from the tradition of the number of translators of the LXX, which the Letter of Aristeas puts at seventy-two (TCGNT 127), although this is far less likely. All things considered, “seventy-two” is a much more difficult reading and accounts for the rise of the other. Only Luke notes a second larger mission like the one in 9:1-6.

The KJV has never been proven otherwise by you or anyone else in history.
Which is correct? What is the truth?

So, all the "mistakes" in the NIV (and there are many) are scribal errors? That's funny.

It's not a lie, just a "minor difference."

Conclusion: The NIV text cannot be trusted.

Still waiting on scripture that says God will inspire a perfect English Bible 1600 years after John finished the book of revelation

Are you saying that before 1611 the whole world was in the dark about God’s truths?

The cult you are serving cannot be trusted. A cult that brings both the KJV and every Bible into disrepute.
You give the King James Bible a bad name.

You're dodging. Please answer my question directly.

Ah this done turned into a KJV only thread, as most of the favorite translation ones turn into.

My favorite ENGLISH translation: KJV.

The only problem with the KJVOnly gimmick is: it only works for English speaking countries. English is NOT my native language, why should I read the Bible on my SECONDARY language instead of my first one? Why should anyone have to learn a new language to get God's word? This aint islam! They gotta learn arabic to properly understand the quran. We dont luckily have to study english to properly understand the Bible.

We know there's not such a verse, only that He would preserve His pure words. I believe they are found in the KJV.

Nope, God's word was being preserved. It was completed in 1611. Btw, it was called the dark ages...

Thanks. In my opinion, bible agnostics are a cult.

Can you cite chapter and verse for any of these?

1. "Only the originals were inspired by God"

2. "The real words of God are found mixed up with thousands of variant readings in the surviving Greek manuscripts"

3. "No Bible is the perfect words of God; they all have errors in them."

4. "All bible versions, no matter how contradictory and different they might be textually, are the infallible words of God."

Define cult