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.

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
9,386
5,725
113
Sister Phoebe had one wife,

eei-i eei-i oooooooooooh!:eek::ROFL:
No. Precisely why there is no need to address female deacons and there is no contradiction.
It was a common practice among males to have multiple spouses (to produce more offspring)
It was very rare among females hence no need to say -

"Deacons must be husbands of one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.
And female deacons must be wives to only one man"

Just
Deacons must be husbands of one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.

It is implied in the text that women deacons would also be expected to have only one husband if they were married.
There is no need to state expressly that it applies to women as well.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,489
13,796
113
Bible Contradiction. Any thoughts how to handle it as found below. Thanks

Romans 16:1
New International Version
I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae.


New Living Translation
I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a deacon in the church in Cenchrea.

1 Timothy 3;12
.
New International Version

A deacon must be faithful to his wife and must manage his children and his household well.

New Living Translation
A deacon must be faithful to his wife, and he must manage his children and household well.
This is not an attempt to understand an apparent contradiction, but an underhanded attempt to criticize these translations.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,489
13,796
113
Welcome to the Unicorn Debate Forum. I am going to throw my weight behind the Unicorn.:)
Given that the "unicorn" is probably a rhinoceros, that's probably wiser than throwing your weight in front of it. ;)
 

BenjaminN

Well-known member
Oct 7, 2020
1,504
307
83
Given that the "unicorn" is probably a rhinoceros, that's probably wiser than throwing your weight in front of it. ;)
A "unicorn" as referred to in the KJV of the Bible (and fortunately not found in the NKJV of the Bible) is a one horned horse (almost any little girl from the countries in the geographical area of the former British Empire can currently tell you that, as the in-vogue it currently is), as found on Lord Rothschild and the British monarchy's coat of arms.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,489
13,796
113
A "unicorn" as referred to in the KJV of the Bible (and fortunately not found in the NKJV of the Bible) is a one horned horse, as found on Lord Rothschild and the British monarchy's coat of arms.
Well... there's an argument for the KJV if I ever heard one. :LOL::ROFL::LOL::ROFL::LOL:
 

BenjaminN

Well-known member
Oct 7, 2020
1,504
307
83
Well... there's an argument for the KJV if I ever heard one. :LOL::ROFL::LOL::ROFL::LOL:
Rabbi Yair Davidiy, orininally from British Empire Australia, tells us more about the KJV "unicorn", and the zionist Rothschild's and British Monarchy's "unicorn" coat of arms, which will "reunite" Judah and Ephraim under the Davidic British Monarchy (not Christ Yeshua in His Millennial Kingdom after his second coming as prophesied in Ezekiel 37 through Ezekiel 48, to be fulfilled in Revelation 20:4-8):

http://www.britam.org

 

BenjaminN

Well-known member
Oct 7, 2020
1,504
307
83
KJV's "unicorns" are representative of a British monarchy (king James') man-made planned Messianic kingdom under British Israelism, as a replacement theology of the true restoration of the Kingdom of Israel (Acts 1), under Christ Yeshua's prophesied Millennial Kingdom of Ezekiel 37 through Ezekiel 48, to be fulfilled by His second coming as prophesied in Revelation 20:4-8, when the resurrected dead and alive Christians (Israelite Judah among the Jews, and Ephraim among the Gentiles, and non-Israelite Gentiles) meet Him in the clouds at our rapture at His second coming.
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
11,887
8,705
113
Rabbi Yair Davidiy, orininally from British Empire Australia, tells us more about the KJV "unicorn", and the zionist Rothschild's and British Monarchy's "unicorn" coat of arms, which will "reunite" Judah and Ephraim under the Davidic British Monarchy (not Christ Yeshua in His Millennial Kingdom after his second coming as prophesied in Ezekiel 37 through Ezekiel 48, to be fulfilled in Revelation 20:4-8):

http://www.britam.org

A lion happily sucking on the horn of a unicorn? Sweet reunion indeed. Now I have heard and seen it all.:rolleyes:
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
I have a special section for unicorns, dragons and mermaids in my school library.

as for deacons, KJV has described Phoebe as servant of the church.
 

true_believer

Well-known member
Sep 24, 2020
940
360
63
Since we're on the topic of favorite Bible translations....How about favourite Bible sites(i.e. BibleGateway, Bible Hub, etc.)?
 

BenjaminN

Well-known member
Oct 7, 2020
1,504
307
83
I have a special section for unicorns, dragons and mermaids in my school library.

as for deacons, KJV has described Phoebe as servant of the church.
Numbers 23 (King James Bible)

22God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.

Numbers 24 (King James Bible)

8God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.

Deuteronomy 33 (King James Bible)

17His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.

Job 39 (King James Bible)

9Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? 10Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee? 11Wilt thou trust him, because his strength is great? or wilt thou leave thy labour to him? 12Wilt thou believe him, that he will bring home thy seed, and gather it into thy barn?

Psalm 22 (King James Bible)

21Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.

Psalm 29 (King James Bible)

6He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.

Psalm 92 (King James Bible)

10But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.

Isaiah 34 (King James Bible)

7And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,844
13,558
113
I wouldn't wish to insult your knowledge but I was not trying to promote an argument for which bible to use but just explaining why I soon learned to leave the choice to God. Do you not wonder why God allowed the King James Bible to be the only english translation for about 400yrs and while english became the most common language used and why so many came to faith in him as a result.
it wasn't 'the only English translation for 400 years.' the 1560 Geneva Bible was around & in wide circulation the whole time and was actually the preferred Bible of the pilgrims & puritans. not to mention Wycliffe, Darby, Tyndale... ???
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,489
13,796
113
Since we're on the topic of favorite Bible translations....How about favourite Bible sites(i.e. BibleGateway, Bible Hub, etc.)?
I frequently use BibleGateway, primarily because it allows for multiple-word searches, which are laborious with a paper concordance, and secondarily because it hosts about 40 different English translations.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
60,279
29,554
113
It's just as bad as the old NASB. Can a leopard change his spots?

The very fact that these CORRUPT modern versions must be constantly updated confirms two things: (1) they were faulty to begin with, and (2) the motive for coming up with new versions (like fashion changes) is purely monetary -- cash for corruption.
Does the same standard apply to updating the KJV to the NKJV and/or KJ21?
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
People in england call KJV the AV meaning 'authorized version' as it was appointed to be read in churches...there were many english versions floating around at the time, but this one was picked as oustanding above all the rest. It was especially commisioned, it wasnt like it was some random publishers trying to make a buck, or disgruntled scholars touting their own version.

KJV has been revised several times since then. I dont think there have been any drastic changes except for spellings and maybe more informal use of pronouns.

the other versions that ppl talk about are from different mansucripts that dont use majority texts. They are problematic because they miss out verses and words, its as simple as that. When you compare them they dont even match.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
Numbers 23 (King James Bible)

22God brought them out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn.

Numbers 24 (King James Bible)

8God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations his enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his arrows.

Deuteronomy 33 (King James Bible)

17His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.

Job 39 (King James Bible)

9Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy crib? 10Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow? or will he harrow the valleys after thee? 11Wilt thou trust him, because his strength is great? or wilt thou leave thy labour to him? 12Wilt thou believe him, that he will bring home thy seed, and gather it into thy barn?

Psalm 22 (King James Bible)

21Save me from the lion's mouth: for thou hast heard me from the horns of the unicorns.

Psalm 29 (King James Bible)

6He maketh them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion like a young unicorn.

Psalm 92 (King James Bible)

10But my horn shalt thou exalt like the horn of an unicorn: I shall be anointed with fresh oil.

Isaiah 34 (King James Bible)

7And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness.
what do the other versions say? Just curious.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,188
113
Since we're on the topic of favorite Bible translations....How about favourite Bible sites(i.e. BibleGateway, Bible Hub, etc.)?
bible hub is my pick, clear easy layout, no ads, clear fonts.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,489
13,796
113
People in england call KJV the AV meaning 'authorized version' as it was appointed to be read in churches...there were many english versions floating around at the time, but this one was picked as oustanding above all the rest. It was especially commisioned, it wasnt like it was some random publishers trying to make a buck, or disgruntled scholars touting their own version.

KJV has been revised several times since then. I dont think there have been any drastic changes except for spellings and maybe more informal use of pronouns.

the other versions that ppl talk about are from different mansucripts that dont use majority texts. They are problematic because they miss out verses and words, its as simple as that. When you compare them they dont even match.
Do you understand why the other manuscripts don't have those words and verses?
 
Jan 1, 2021
35
20
8
Here is a breakdown of how this type of accusation against a brother is manufactured.
It is a work of deception.

False claim: "Hort taught that Revelation 3:15 proclaimed Christ was the first thing created, agreeing with the Gnostic teaching that Christ was a begotten god. [F. J. A. Hort, The Apocalypse of St. John 1-3: The Greek Text with Introduction, Commentary, and Additional Notes (1908; reprint, Minneapolis: James and Klock Publishing, 1976), 36.]" (Crowned With Glory, by Dr. Thomas Holland, chapter 2)

This claim by Dr. Holland is a vain and libelous attempt to portray Hort as an Arian. Hort had "deeply-rooted agreement" with official Anglican views, "above all, Creeds" (Life and Letters of Hort, volume 1, p.400). The Creeds which were written to combat heresies such as Arianism (e.g. the Nicene creed says "We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, of one being with the Father.", the Athanasian creed says "the deity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one, equal in glory and coeternal in majesty", "the Son uncreated", "the Son eternal", "The Son is neither made nor created", etc.). It is inconceivable that Hort could believe that Christ was the first thing created, while at the same time believing the three most-accepted Creeds (Apostles', Nicene, Athanasian). But nevertheless, what does Hort actually say on page 36, regarding "the beginning of the creation" (in Rev 3:14-15)? Here it is (bold added):

" n apx. t. ktis. Prov. viii. 22, [(Prov 8:22 in Greek and Heb)] The words do not define the precise sense. On apxn, as a term cf. Col. i. 18, and for the probable idea Col. i. 16. The words might no doubt bear the Arian meaning "the first thing created": but they equally well bear the sense which the other Christological language of the book suggests, the being antecedent to all creation, in whom all creation came and comes to pass. Christ's last testimony and His earliest function seem purposely combined."​
Hort did NOT "proclaim Christ was the first thing created", as Holland claimed. He simply recognized that the precise Greek words of this particular verse (n apxh thc kticwec), on their own, from a grammatical perspective could mean "the first thing created" - but they could also just as easily mean the source of creation, which is the meaning we accept because it is the meaning the rest of Revelation and the Bible (such as Col 1:16-18, which Hort mentions) and even the Creeds (with which Hort had "deeply-rooted agreement") compel us to accept.
The JW's say the same making Christ less than God.