IS YOUR BIBLE THE RIGHT ONE?

[Soldier4Christ]

Here is another one that causes a lot of problems.

KJV
1Co 14:14  For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.

NIV
For if I pray in a tongue, my spirit prays, but my mind is unfruitful.

[Brother Love]

The NIV which deletes (or casts doubt upon the authenticity of) Mt. 17:21, Mt. 18:11, Mt. 23:14, Mark 7:16, Mark 9:44, Mark 9:46, Mark 11:26, Mark 15:27, Mark 16:9-20, Luke 17:36, Luke 23:17, John 5:4, John 7:53-8:11, Acts 8:37, Acts 15:34, Acts 24:7, Acts 28:29, and 1 John 5:7; as well as portions of Mt. 27:35, Luke 9:55-56, John 3:13, Acts 15:18, Romans 8:1, Romans 11:6, 1 Cor. 10:28, Colossians 1:14, 1 John 4:3, Rev. 1:8, Rev. 1:11, Rev. 5:14, Rev. 11:17, and Rev. 21:24. Just to name a few.

[Philippians 4:13]

My wife's good friend is going to a Bible college in Idaho and she sent my wife one of the books they use at the college. It is titled, "Walking With Jesus: Growing Deep in Christian Life & Ministry" by Benje Graves with Gregg Peterson. I have been reading it a little and found that it has a section devoted to this very subject. So I am going to post it here for all to read. I think it sheds a lot of light on this subject. Here goes...

Bible (Per) Versions


     It seems like everyone is writing a version of the Bible today. This should not surprise anyone as there is a lot of money in the publishing of new versions. Unfortunately many of these versions are inherently flawed. The motivation behind them is carnal in nature. Bible publication is big business these days. The most popular version of the Bible today is the NIV, or the New International Version. I used it for years and only recently became aware of issues that cause me concern. There is an annual revision committee that changes it from year to year. One might ask, if the translators were inspired the first time, why do they need to keep changing it? Now they have produced the TNIV (Today's New International Version). The TNIV is non-gender specific among other grave errors and typifies the liberal direction of the publication. This is a huge controversy and I will leave it for a study of it's own. More frightening to consider is the question, "If they change these versions from year to year, what will we be holding in our hands five years from now?" If the motivation is to sell Bibles, what motivates these changes? Most of the newer versions availible today are "Dynamic Equivalence" translations as opposed to a literal approach at translation. This means that the translators would read a section of original texts, decide what they think it means in modern English, and then write it out. As far as I'm concerned this reduces it to a commentary or a paraphrase. It is true that an individual can find Christ and grow to a degree by studying them, but shouldn't our goal be to use a literal version? A literal version is one that the original translators translated, as much as is possible, word for word from the Textus Receptus, or "Received Text" leaving the reader to make the conclusons. Examples are the KJV (King James Version) or the NKJV (New King James Version). As I mentioned previously, this is a subject for another study. However, it should be clear to everyone that there is an assault on the Word of God today. Publishers have taken what were once sold as paraphrases and retitled them as actual translations. One example is the Living Bible, which a man wrote for his children. This was a noble effort and I suspect his intention was never for it to be sold as a Bible version. It contains all his doctrinal biases. Unfortunately once the publisher owns the rights they can do whatever they want. The Living Bible is no longer sold as a paraphrase, but an actual Bible version. Even "The Message" by Eugene Peterson is sold as an actual Bible! These are simply one man's opinion on what the Bible teaches. They are no more reliable then a commentary. When "The Message" first came out it was clearly promoted as a paraphrase and I though it was kind of clever. As a book about the Bible it is interesting, as a Bible in itself it is frightening.

     Study Bibles can be a good resource as we grow in the Lord. However, many study Bibles contain a running commentary at the bottom of the page. These can bring an interesting slant and provoke healthy thought if taken for what they are, an opinion. Unfortunately I have met a number of people who spend more time reading the commentary section then the Scripture itself. We must be careful not to exalt the opinions of men. We are all, to some degree a product of our teaching. This is why we must be careful about the source of that teaching. Anointed and gifted men and women of God can offer a lot of wisdom, but the Spirit-inspired Word of God is our greatest teacher and the only one that is right all of the time!

I hope this helps some people who are curious and concerned concerning what Bible version they are and should be reading. I personally like the NKJV (New King James Version), but that's just my personal preference.

God Bless,
Robert

[Saved_4ever]

Wow! some threads never die!  

[Brother Love]

Wow! some threads never die!  

Just like me, we just keep ticking

[Marv]

From the article above.

"One might ask, if the translators were inspired the first time, why do they need to keep changing it?"

No Bible translator other than cults has claimed to be inspired in their translation work, including the translators who produced the KJV.

Marv

[nChrist]

Marv,

Countless scholars have examined the KJV, and that's why it is a trusted translation. If you wish to study the ancient language texts, they are available to anyone at little or no cost.

However, I seriously doubt that is the reason for your comments. If so, I'll be happy to help you get the ancient texts.

Love In Christ,
Tom

[Talmadge]

I can not read Greek or Hebrew anyway, so I guess I'll stick with the KJV for now and if it is wrong, I guess I"ll and alot more will be in hell together.ENOUGH!!!!!

[Joey]

Hope it's ok to post a link here. The following link is for reading the KJV online and included is the Strongs reference.

http://www.apostolic-churches.net/bible/strongs.html

[Brother Love]

Hope it's ok to post a link here. The following link is for reading the KJV online and included is the Strongs reference.

http://www.apostolic-churches.net/bible/strongs.html

Thanks Joey, its a keeper

[Joey]

Brother Love

Your Welcomed Brother. This is definetly one of the best online bible sites that i have seen  

[Marv]

blackeyedpeas,

I did not say there was anything wrong with the KJV.  It is a good translation, especially with the limited resources available to the translators.  Most of it follows Tynsdale.  I think many people think the traslators had this great big pile of Greek manuscripts from which they worked.  They actually were rather limited,

The article was about the NIV and commented about if the original translators were inspired, why keep changing it.  I assumed the article would be referring as if the NIV were inspired.  Reading it several times.  I can see were the person might be referring to the KJV as inspired.  Would be a couple of problems with that.

First the traslators themselves clearly did not claim it, and even expected the work they did to continue.

Secondly, they weren't the original translators, as I said above, they mostly followed Tynsdale.  So if it would be the "original" that would be inspired, then you would have to say Tynsdale was inspired, and then you would be caught in the problem of if Tynsdale was inspired why the revision by the KJV?  People might find this series on the traslation into English of the Bible helpful
 http://www.bible.org/series.asp?series_id=117

Thirdly, I will just point to 1 John 5:7-8, the verse as it is used in the KJV was from a Greek manuscript clearly fabricated to get Erasmus to put it into his Greek New Testament that way.  Now having it the correct way, doesn't change that the Bible clearly teaches the Trinity, what it does do is show that there was an error in the KJV and as such the KJV is not inspired by definition.  Here is a link to an article on this very thing.  
http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=665

Last, I would point to Matthew 23:24 Instead of the "strain at a gnat and swallow a camel" in the KJV it clearly should be "strain out a gnat and swallow a camel".  Those who can read Greek can check it for themselves.  It is an error in translation.  Nothing great, just shows again that the translators were not inspired and without errror.

The KJV is a fine translation, and there is nothing particularly wrong with it especially for those who study enough to be able to know, for instance, what "by and by" means and the other words that have changed their meanings.  It should not be elevated to something it is not, it is a tool to help trasmit God's word to English speaking people.  It has been a good tool for that.

The problem would be if one claimed the KJV is inspired and hence infallible, or if one claimed the KJV is the only English Bible to read.

The Protestant reformation was in large part a call away from tradition, it would be too bad that one of the great fruits of the Reformation would itself be used to establish another traditon.  Which, as you know, has already happened.   So once again people insist on a tradition, insist on rejecting God's grace by creating another law.  It is so sad.

Marv

[Brother Love]

New International Version Bible Authority Test

Doug Dodd s.b.g. - Berean Bible Church - Edgewater, Florida - 09/28/99

The Church That Preaches What The Bible Teaches

 

INSTRUCTIONS:

Using the New International Version Bible, answer the following questions.
Do not rely on your memory. As the Bible is the final authority, you must take the answer from the Bible verse (not from footnotes but from the text).


1. Fill in the missing words in Matthew 5:44. "Love your enemies,__________ them that curse you, ______________ to them that hate you, and pray for them that __________ and persecute you."


2. According to Matthew 17:21, what two things are required to cast out this type of demon?


3. According to Matthew 18:11, why did Jesus come to earth?


4. According to Matthew 27:2, what was Pilate's first name?


5. In Matthew 27:35, when the wicked soldiers parted His garments, they were fulfilling the words of the prophet. Copy what the prophet said in Matthew 27:35 from the NIV.


6. In Mark 3:15, Jesus gave the apostles power to cast out demons and to: ____________


7. According to Mark 7:16, what does a man need to be able to hear?


8. According to Luke 7:28, what was John? (teacher, prophet, carpenter, etc.). What is his title or last name?


9. In Luke 9:55, what did the disciples not know?


10. In Luke 9:56, what did the Son of man not come to do? According to this verse, what did He come to do?


11. In Luke 22:14, how many apostles were with Jesus?


12. According to Luke 23:38, in what three languages was the superscription written?


13. In Luke 24:42, what did they give Jesus to eat with His fish?


14. John 3:13 is a very important verse, proving the deity of Christ. According to this verse (as Jesus spoke), where is the Son of man?


15. What happened each year as told in John 5:4?


16. In John 7:50, what time of day did Nicodemus come to Jesus?


17. In Acts 8:37, what is the one requirement for baptism?


18. What did Saul ask Jesus in Acts 9:6?


19. Write the name of the man mentioned in Acts 15:34.


20. Study Acts 24:6-8. What would the Jew have done with Paul? What was the chief captain's name? What did the chief captain command?


21. Copy Romans 16:24 word for word from the NIV.


22. First Timothy 3:16 is perhaps the greatest verse in the New Testament concerning the deity of Christ. In this verse, who was manifested in the flesh?


23. In the second part of First Peter 4:14, how do [they] speak of Christ? And, what do we Christians do?


24. Who are the three Persons of the Trinity in First John 5:7?


25. Revelation 1:11 is another very important verse that proves the deity of Christ. In the first part of this verse Jesus said, "I am the A______________ and O___________, the _________ and the _______:"


Conclusion: Little space is provided for your answers, but it's much more than needed. If you followed the instructions above, you not only failed the test, you receive a big goose egg.
(Ed. These are all missing in the NIV.) So now what do you think of the NIV as an "accurate, easy to understand, up to date Bible"?


If you would like to improve your score, and in fact score 100%, you can take this test using the Authorized (King James) Bible.

[Soldier4Christ]

Amen, Bother Love, no goose egg for me.  

[Marv]

Noone said that people should read and study only the NIV.

The basic question would be why do you seem to believe that only a small subset of the Byzantine Greek Manuscripts should be used and all others excluded?  Actually, the translators did not use Greek manuscripts they used a Greek text, the Stephanus text of 1550 (third edition), which, in turn, relied essentially on Erasmus’ third edition of 1522.

The Greek used for the KJV relied heavily on the work of Eramus, a Catholic Priest.  He back-translated the end of Revelation from the Latin Vulgate.  That is why in Revelation 22:19 Eramus had that "God shall take away his part out of the book of life"  and book should be tree.  Book only appears in Latin manuscripts not in Greek.  

So again why should a translation be based on a text from about a half a dozen manuscripts when we currently have thousands of manuscripts available.  Why just those few?

Marv