Bible Recommendations

Abdicate said:
I understand and I'm not defending the KJV. No translation is perfect and since we do not have all the information to accurately defend one version over another, it's a mooted debate. There are site dedicated to bashing the KJV and others for bashing the NIV and still more against every one written, even the Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. There are sites dedicated to the "fact" that the original New Testament was written in Aramaic and not Greek. No one is qualified to say which stories are accurate and true, only more and more speculations. I've said from the beginning that everyone needs to do their own homework and go to the originals - which also begs the question, which ones! :) It's not a debate that will lead to any good other than to stir up dissent, cause the weak to doubt, and the devil wins. God is able to use the green grass or rocks to cry out His word to speak to those willing to listen for His word is written on our hearts.
Click to expand...
Wow just noticed something in your post Bro Ab, are you saying this is a "fact" or are you saying others are saying this is a fact? I thought I had heard it all, but this is a new one on me! I know that some believe Matthew was spread first in Aramaic, but who can doubt that the oldest manuscripts are Greek? And who would doubt that Paul and the others would be writing to the gentiles but in the common script of that day?
 
Mitspa said:
Wow just noticed something in your post Bro Ab, are you saying this is a "fact" or are you saying others are saying this is a fact? I thought I had heard it all, but this is a new one on me! I know that some believe Matthew was spread first in Aramaic, but who can doubt that the oldest manuscripts are Greek? And who would doubt that Paul and the others would be writing to the gentiles but in the common script of that day?
Click to expand...
I have to say that you and Abdicate are really contributing value to this forum...............thanks.
About the missing 'B' from your signature, I think it is caused by the software creating a field in which the Bible verse resides. This field over shadows the first letter of the pasted text.....I think.
2Co 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
2Co 3:15. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.

OK, so try a period after the Bible Verse. Hope this helps
 
Mitspa said:
The Net Bible also adds this note:
"The earliest and best witnesses of the Alexandrian and Western texts have no additional words for v1. Both the external evidence and the internal evidence are completely compelling for the shortest reading. The scribes were obviously motivated to add such qualifications (interpolated from v4), for otherwise Paul’s gospel smelled too much of grace."!
Dr Harry Ironside has an interesting thought on the variation in translations remarking that...
Careful students of the original text discover that the last part of Romans 8:1 in the King James version is an interpolation properly belonging to verse 4 [Romans 8:4]. The magnificent statement that opens Romans 8 - "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus" - requires no qualifying clause. Our justification does not depend on our walk. Freedom from condemnation is given to all who are in Christ, and to be in Him means to be of the new creation. A glance at the Revised version or any critical translation will show that what I am pointing out is sustained by all the editors. It was man's innate aversion to sovereign grace, I am certain, that brought these qualifying words into the text of the King James version. It seemed too much to believe that freedom from condemnation depended solely on being in Christ Jesus and not on our walking after the Spirit. So it was easy to lift the words from verse 4
Click to expand...
Pity though that things get added because the latter part of Ch 7 sets the pace while the opening of Ch8 "Therefore....."is a consequence of what has just preceded, namely the helplessness of the man constantly waring against his flesh.

Rom 7:24. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
Rom 7:25. I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
Rom 8:1. There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus,
So, that would seem to make perfect sense of Paul's writing...........for me anyway.
To add from v4 tends to make things self contradictory...............just another approach which arrives at the same conclusion.:)
 
Mitspa said:
Do you know if they where using the same TR text? Or those few "6" manuscripts? I assume they where so the point is still the same, there are real issues with this Version and with the text used. That have a great effect on the gospel. And thanks for the catch on the signature, I noticed it but decided it was not an issue.

P.S. its right on this one?
Click to expand...

Not a clue sorry.
 
Mitspa said:
Wow just noticed something in your post Bro Ab, are you saying this is a "fact" or are you saying others are saying this is a fact? I thought I had heard it all, but this is a new one on me! I know that some believe Matthew was spread first in Aramaic, but who can doubt that the oldest manuscripts are Greek? And who would doubt that Paul and the others would be writing to the gentiles but in the common script of that day?
Click to expand...

I used the quotes because that's what others say is a fact, not me... I'm not qualified to say. I can only regurgitate, but I do know that there are issues with the Greek and Hebrew versions as well. Hence the reason we must allow the Holy Spirit to teach us. His written word is just a road map to Jesus, then the understandings begin :)
 
Abdicate said:
I used the quotes because that's what others say is a fact, not me... I'm not qualified to say. I can only regurgitate, but I do know that there are issues with the Greek and Hebrew versions as well. Hence the reason we must allow the Holy Spirit to teach us. His written word is just a road map to Jesus, then the understandings begin :)
Click to expand...
Not "qualified" ? Do we have to have a Phd. to reason that the oldest "known" text are in Greek? If its "known" and can be proven then that allows all those who have the ability to reason to make reasonable assumptions. Of course Paul the Greek-Jew and Timothy the half-Greek, half Jew, wrote epistles to the Greeks in Greek. I think even us simple folk with limited education are able to grasp such things as that?
 
Last edited:
Many want to believe that Alexander the great was some wonder of the ages, and I guess if we did not know God we might wonder with the world. The Greek tongue was Gods chosen instrument to proclaim to the world the truth of His Son. Alexander was just a tool in the Will of God. The Roman roads where not built to make Rome great, but so that Paul and others would spread the gospel of grace.
America is not just about the land of the free, it has a place and purpose in the final age. No matter what party or group may think, be sure that God is in control and will always have the final say.
 
Mitspa said:
Not "qualified" ? Do we have to have a Phd. to reason that the oldest "known" text are in Greek? If its "known" and can be proven then that allows all those who have the ability to reason to make reasonable assumptions. Of course Paul the Greek-Jew and Timothy the half-Greek, half Jew, wrote epistles to the Greeks in Greek. I think even us simple folk with limited education are able to grasp such things as that?
Click to expand...

Hang on to your shorts because I'm gonna light a firestorm :)

#1 I don't have access to the original fragments or documents to do my own homework
#2 I don't don't know Greek and still have to rely on dictionaries
#3 Just as there are versions today, there were versions back then; which were real and which were fake
#4 How much truth is presented in papers, documentaries, and archaeologists of today about what is discovered, when and how
#5 Already fluent in two language plus a working understanding of 3 others, I know that translations are very important to local customs - both Greek and Hebrew of today are very different from those language 2000 years ago.
#6 I'm not Jewish to understand their customs to grasp the meaning of the words Christ spoke to the Pharisees, though I'm learning
#7 Aside from the awesome power of the written word of God which is protected in most translations, we do not know what's missing seeing how the canon was finalize by the Great Assembly of Jews for the OT up to 70AD and seeing how Jesus said they were vipers, how do we know we have all the books or the OT?
#8 The NT canon is just as questionable when you review how it was assembled over time splintering into eastern and western "christianity". Even Martin Luther wanted to remove Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation from canon. Why is it the 1 & 2 Maccabees are included in all "christian" religions except the protestant ones?
#9 The oldest known text of scriptures are the collection from the Dead Sea scrolls, but the information about those non-canon books are not so easily available and there's a lot of questions still unanswered 40 years after their discovery on scrolls which have yet to be published.

I highly recommend seeing what isn't included in your protestant bible and why - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon

So no, I'm not qualified, nor am I worried about it, because I have the Author in my heart and I have enough to go on to learn the rest from Him for myself. Unlike many I'm not afraid to read non-canon books. Jude and Peter quote the book of Enoch and seven other books are mentioned within the scriptures which were not chosen to be a part of it like the book of Jasher. I do not make the written word of God, God. Jesus is the Word of God, not the papers we have in front of us.

I hope this answered your question.
 
Abdicate said:
Hang on to your shorts because I'm gonna light a firestorm :)

#1 I don't have access to the original fragments or documents to do my own homework
#2 I don't don't know Greek and still have to rely on dictionaries
#3 Just as there are versions today, there were versions back then; which were real and which were fake
#4 How much truth is presented in papers, documentaries, and archaeologists of today about what is discovered, when and how
#5 Already fluent in two language plus a working understanding of 3 others, I know that translations are very important to local customs - both Greek and Hebrew of today are very different from those language 2000 years ago.
#6 I'm not Jewish to understand their customs to grasp the meaning of the words Christ spoke to the Pharisees, though I'm learning
#7 Aside from the awesome power of the written word of God which is protected in most translations, we do not know what's missing seeing how the canon was finalize by the Great Assembly of Jews for the OT up to 70AD and seeing how Jesus said they were vipers, how do we know we have all the books or the OT?
#8 The NT canon is just as questionable when you review how it was assembled over time splintering into eastern and western "christianity". Even Martin Luther wanted to remove Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation from canon. Why is it the 1 & 2 Maccabees are included in all "christian" religions except the protestant ones?
#9 The oldest known text of scriptures are the collection from the Dead Sea scrolls, but the information about those non-canon books are not so easily available and there's a lot of questions still unanswered 40 years after their discovery on scrolls which have yet to be published.

I highly recommend seeing what isn't included in your protestant bible and why - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon

So no, I'm not qualified, nor am I worried about it, because I have the Author in my heart and I have enough to go on to learn the rest from Him for myself. Unlike many I'm not afraid to read non-canon books. Jude and Peter quote the book of Enoch and seven other books are mentioned within the scriptures which were not chosen to be a part of it like the book of Jasher. I do not make the written word of God, God. Jesus is the Word of God, not the papers we have in front of us.

I hope this answered your question.
Click to expand...
#1 Not sure how much "homework" it takes to understand whether a fragment is in Greek or some other script?
#2 If its Greek then that's the answer to the issue
#3 Not sure how that relates to the issue of the text being in Greek? and have not heard of "versions" or am I sure what you mean by the term? I am have some knowledge of the manuscripts and how the different text we use where put together, but again it does not go to my original questions.
#4 I think that a good research projects, but again Greek is Greek
#5 I hope you do well, but it does not take a great amount of training to understand some of these very simple things.
#6 Again a very good study, but one does not need to know every detail of every issue to use the good reason that God has given to us. I prefer the direct revelation of the scripture but find these things very helpful and often lead to the understanding of what God is trying to reveal.
#7 At some point and on some level we must assume and trust that God has given us the truth we need, even if we have to kind of weed out those tares from the wheat of His Word. I believe as many do, that the many scripts from the many sources, in the big picture, add to the confidence we should have that we have received the truth. No one group had complete control of the scriptures and when they are brought together from all the different sources, they in great detail agree.
#8 See #7
#9 The Dead sea scrolls have no New Testament writings, that I am aware of? So because there are some questions we must assume we have no answers? That does not make sense to me.

I would also add that I understand my "protestant" bible as most bible teachers that I know do. In fact these things you seem concerned with are issues that I believe are discussed in most protestant groups that are preparing those who would teach from the bible.
 
Last edited:
Scott C F said:
I am somewhat confused about what type of bible I should be using. There are so many versions available. I have a NIV. Any suggestions. Im a new believer.
Click to expand...

Rely on the King James Bible for the actual meaning of His words and totally rely on Jesus Christ as your Good Shepherd for the wisdom to understand His words & trust Him by His workmanship in you to abide in His words by His grace & by His help.
 
I use the KJV but I see it for what it is, a translation. Knowing two other languages I know what that means - lost in translation. Don't make the written pages out to be God. The 7th word of the KJV is a mistranslation; it's heavens in the Hebrew not heaven. God's word is infallible, translations are not. Thanks to the Holy Spirit we will learn the truth in all things.
 
I read and study out of the NASB and feel is is a good translation. I do own ESV, KJV, NLT, and NIV though. If I had to pick a close second it would be the ESV or HCSB if I wanted something less word for word.
*edit*
I meant literal, not word for word.
 
Last edited:
Phrase by phrase translations are always better then word by word translations. If you know which bibles are translated from the original manuscripts phrase by phrase then you know which is most accurate.

To be honest though, I don't find any major discrepancies between each version when it comes down to just sharing the gospel with someone.

There is a scripture in the bible where Paul talks about not using many words, but the power of the Holy Spirit working through him is what changes the heart.
That scripture alone is what made me reevaluate how I approach a non believer.
 
After reading this topic, it's a good thing that the person asking for advice in the first post wasn't a new Christian who was seeking advice on how to read the Bible....oh....oops.

Seriously, I know we all have our biases, but can you guys at least LOOK at what you are doing here? You aren't helping someone in need, you are attacking each other. This is just silly.
 
Banarenth, I don't think that's true. Usually in christian forums there are fights in nearly every thread when it comes to the Bible and our beliefs. Or at least that's been my experience.
 
Huntingteckel said:
Banarenth, I don't think that's true. Usually in christian forums there are fights in nearly every thread when it comes to the Bible and our beliefs. Or at least that's been my experience.
Click to expand...

If you take a look at them though, they are always about details. The really important things are fully agreed upon. It's the minutia that cause most of the arguments and debates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top