Most accurate Bible Translation

[Guest yod]

Matthew 18:11

KJV: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. NIV: Verse DELETED by the Editors of the NIV!

————————

Luke 4:4

KJV: And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

NIV: Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone.”

+ Note the removal of ‘the word of God.’ An interesting deletion considering what the NIV does to the written word to God!

————————-

Isaiah 7:14:

KJV: Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall cal His name Immanuel.

NIV: Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel.

+ Note that the KJV calls her a “virgin” while the NIV has it as a “woman.” This is due to the ongoing debate over the meaning of the word almah. Once again the NIV paraphrases according to interpretation rather than translation. Its true that the word “almah” does not directly translate as “virgin,” however its root “alam” means something which is “concealed, kept out of sight, protected.” This Hebrew word refers quite clearly to a young “protected” maiden, probably around the age of twelve to fourteen, i.e. a virgin. If Mary was not a virgin, then she was not an “almah” but in any case, she certainly wasn’t an adult “woman.”

[Where, Fresno Joe, Is the immaculate conception of Jesus Christ, what is so miraclous about a young woman giving birth. The NIV attacks the Lordship of Jesus Christ, my brother.]

I am not nearly the best defender of the KJB, but I can see the modern versions omisions and attack on Jesus' Lordship, attack on the word, attack on the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ]

Well, like it or not, what is implied in one language doesn't always have an exact translation, so NIV went with accurate translation of a particular word used, rather than accurate interpretation of the idea being conveyed by that verse. Like I said, there is no such thing as a perfect translation.

Another example is from Zechariah 9 where, in the hebrew, it says this king riding on a donkey contains salvation within himself. LIterally what it says is that He is able to save Himself, which implies He can only be the Messiah because no one else can save themselves. But how do you translate that complete idea without inserting a lot more words than the one used and, in the case of gentiles who don't understand hebraic thought or culture, how do they interpret without adding commentary that might not be completely accurate theology? Most translations say "bearing salvation" here but that's not a complete interpretation. Shall they start inserting words that aren't actually used to convey the idea? Maybe so...but then you are adding to what is actually written.

So my approach is to read all the different versions and try to find the middle ground between them, or some consensus. Then I check the original language definition when possible to see how the word is used, instead of how it is translated.

The best way still is to read it in hebrew. Even the Newer Covenant scriptures should be researched for the original hebrew words the speakers would have used (before being translated to jewish-greek) and then trying to understand the way it was used and intended for the original audience.

[Guest]

.... but I can see the modern versions omisions and attack on Jesus' Lordship, attack on the word, attack on the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ....

Amen~!

[Guest]

.... So my approach is to read all the different versions and try to find the middle ground between them, or some consensus. Then I check the original language definition when possible to see how the word is used, instead of how it is translated.

The best way still is to read it in Hebrew. Even the Newer Covenant scriptures should be researched for the original hebrew words the speakers would have used (before being translated to jewish-greek) and then trying to understand the way it was used and intended for the original audience....

Amen~!

And If It Does Not Point To Messiah,

Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me, Psalms 40:7

Check Again~!

Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Hebrews 10:7

[He giveth more grace]

.... but I can see the modern versions omisions and attack on Jesus' Lordship, attack on the word, attack on the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ....

Amen~!

Bro., your on the other side, remember.

[He giveth more grace]

Using the NIV will somone tell me how we are to live in Luke 4:4.

[Guest]

.... but I can see the modern versions omissions and attack on Jesus' Lordship, attack on the word, attack on the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ....

Amen~!

Bro., your on the other side, remember.

:24:

Beloved, The Kings James (Cambridge Edition) Is Indeed The Bible Of My Heart

My tongue shall speak of thy word: for all thy commandments are righteousness. Psalms 119:172

And If I Was Left With But One Version, I Pray It Would Be This One, This Holy And Loved Bible Of My Youth

I rejoice at thy word, as one that findeth great spoil. Psalms 119:162

And Considering The Evil Attacks Upon God's Word, I Am Indeed Blessed To Have It In My Hands And Singing Within My Soul

____________

_________

______

___

My God

Oh How I Am Blessed

And I Rejoice And Bless You And Thank You Abba Father

I Am So Thankful LORD Jesus For Your Holy Words Of Yesterday And Today And Of The Tomorrow Yet To Come

I Bless You Mighty And Oh So Tender Holy Ghost For Filling Holy Men Of Old With God's Love Letters To Sinners Such As I

I Bless You My God For This Awesome And Magnificent Big Book Of Jesus And For The Saints Who Carried It

And I Thank You For All The Dear Folk In It

My Mentors And My Family

Because Of Calvary

I Am Blessed

In Jesus I Pray

I Love You LORD

Your Joe

Amen

[John Robinson]

Back on the old Crosswalk site I saw a very similar discussion to this run dozens and dozens and dozens of pages. When the site finally closed, it was still going strong, generating--as these things do--more heat than light.

I only have have one question to the folks who say "it's the KJV or nothing": how do you reconcile that with the Wykcliffe folks, who translate the Word into various languages? I've seen copies of these, and there are simply some words, phrases, and thoughts which cannot be rendered in say, Maori, or Ukranian, or Inuit.

[B3L13v3R]

At times, one cannot give a short answer, "Easter" being one of them in the KJV.

There may be some that may not care to read all of this, but it is precisely the time-lines given with Scripture below that the KJV was supposed to say "Easter."

The simple version is this, Passover had already passed by. Easter was at a later date, during the days of "unleavened bread." Herod was throwing his own party of sorts called "Easter."

Act 12:4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

This is an excerpt from a book I have called "The Answer Book" by Samuel C. Gipp on "Easter" vs "Passover" pages 3-8

Some of this fellows tones seem to be a bit charged, but the study of the Word in the KJV he did is sound enough. He is a KJV advocate.

QUESTION: Isn't "Easter" in Acts 12:4 a mistranslation of the word "pascha" and should it be translated as "passover"?

ANSWER: No, "pascha" is properly translated "Easter" in Acts 12:4 as the following explanation will show.

EXPLANATION: The Greek word which is translated "Easter" in Acts 12:4 is the word "pascha". This word appears twenty-nine times in the New Testament. Twenty-eight of those times the word is rendered "Passover" in reference to the night when the Lord passed over Egypt and killed all the firstborn of Egypt (Exodus 12:12), thus setting Israel free from four hundred years of bondage.

The many opponents to the concept of having a perfect Bible have made much of this translation of "pascha".

Coming to the word "Easter" in God's Authorized Bible, they seize upon it imagining that they have found proof that the Bible is not perfect. Fortunately for lovers of the word of God, they are wrong. Easter, as we know it, comes from the ancient pagan festival of Astarte. Also known as Ishtar (pronounced "Easter"). This festival has always been held late in the month of April. It was, in its original form, a celebration of the earth "regenerating" itself after the winter season. The festival involved a celebration of reproduction. For this reason the common symbols of Easter festivities were the rabbit (the same symbol as "Playboy" magazine), and the egg. Both are known for their reproductive abilities. At the center of attention was Astarte, the female deity. She is known in the Bible as the "queen of heaven" (Jeremiah 7:18; 44:17-25). She is the mother of Tammuz (Ezekiel 8:14) who was also her husband! These perverted rituals would take place at sunrise on Easter morning (Ezekiel 8:13-16). From the references in Jeremiah and Ezekiel, we can see that the true Easter has never had any association with Jesus Christ.

Problem: Even though the Jewish passover was held in mid April (the fourteenth) and the pagan festival Easter was held later the same month, how do we know that Herod was referring to Easter in Acts 12:4 and not the Jewish passover? If he was referring to the passover, the translation of "pascha" as "Easter" is incorrect. If he was indeed referring to the pagan holyday (holiday) Easter, then the King James Bible (1611) must truly be the very word and words of God for it is the only Bible in print today which has the correct reading.

To unravel the confusion concerning "Easter" in verse 4, we must consult our FINAL authority, THE BIBLE. The key which unlocks the puzzle is found not in verse 4, but in verse 3. (Then were the days of unleavened bread... ") To secure the answer that we seek, we must find the relationship of the passover to the days of unleavened bread. We must keep in mind that Peter was arrested during the "days of unleavened bread" (Acts 12:3).

Our investigation will need to start at the first Passover. This was the night in which the LORD smote all the firstborn in Egypt. The Israelites were instructed to kill a lamb and strike its blood on the two side posts and the upper door post (Exodus 12:4,5). Let us now see what the Bible says concerning the first passover, and the days of unleavened bread.

Exodus 12:13-18: "And the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are: and when I see the blood, I will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of Egypt.

14 And this day shall be unto you for a memorial; and ye shall keep it a feast to the LORD throughout your generations; ye shall keep it a feast by an ordinance for ever.

15 Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day, that soul shall be cut off from Israel.

16 And in the first day there shall be an holy convocation to you; no manner of work shall be done in them, save that which every man must eat, that only may be done of you.

17 And ye shall observe the feast of unleavened bread; for in this selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt: therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance for ever.

18 In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even."

Here in Exodus 12:13 we see how the passover got its name. The LORD said that He would "pass over" all of the houses which had the blood of the lamb marking the door.

After the passover (Exodus 12:13,14), we find that seven days shall be fulfilled in which the Jews were to eat unleavened bread. These are the days of unleavened bread!

In verse 18 we see that dates for the observance were April 14th through the 21st.

This religious observance is stated more clearly in Numbers 28:16-18: "And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the LORD.

17 And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast: seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten.

18 In the first day shall be an holy convocation;ye shall do no manner of servile work therein:"

In verse 16 we see that the passover is only considered to be the 14th of the month. On the next morning, the 15th begins the "days of unleavened bread."

Deuteronomy 16:1-8: "Observe the month of Abib (April), and keep the passover unto the LORD thy God: for in the month of Abib the LORD thy God brought thee forth out of Egypt by night.

2 Thou shalt therefore sacrifice the passover unto the LORD thy God, of the flock and the herd, in the place which the LORD shall choose to place his name there.

3 Thou shalt eat no leavened bread with it; seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread therewith, even the bread of affliction: for thou camest forth out of the land of Egypt in haste: that thou mayest remember the day when thou camest forth out of the land of Egypt all the days of thy life.

4 And there shall be no leavened bread seen with thee in all thy coast seven days; neither shall there any thing of the flesh, which thou sacrificedst the first day at even, remain all night until the morning.

5 Thou mayest not sacrifice the passover within any of thy gates, which the LORD thy God giveth thee:

6 But at the place which the LORD thy God shall choose to place his name in, there thou shalt sacrifice the passover at even, at the going down of the sun, at the season that thou camest forth out of Egypt.

7 And thou shalt roast and eat it in the place which the LORD thy God shall choose: and thou shalt turn in the morning, and go unto thy tents.

8 Six days thou shalt eat unleavened bread: and on the seventh day shall be a solemn assembly to the LORD thy God: thou shalt do no work therein."

Here in Deuteronomy we see again that the passover is sacrificed on the first night (Deuteronomy 16:1). It is worth noting that the passover was to be celebrated in the evening (vs.6) not at sunrise (Ezekiel 8:13-16).

In II Chronicles 8:13 we see that the feast of unleavened bread was one of the three Jewish feasts to be kept during the year.

II Chronicles 8:13: "Even after a certain rate every day, offering according to the commandment of Moses, on the sabbaths, and on the new moons, and on the solemn feasts, three times in the year, even in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles."

Whenever the passover was kept, it always preceded the feast of unleavened bread. In II Chronicles 30 some Jews who were unable to keep the passover in the first month were allowed to keep it in the second. But the dates remained the same.

II Chronicles 30:l5,21: "Then they killed the passover on the fourteenth day of the second month: and the priests and the Levites were ashamed, and sanctified themselves, and brought in the burnt offerings into the house of the LORD. And the children of lsrael that were present at Jerusalem kept the feast of unleavened bread seven days with great gladness: and the Levites and the priests praised the LORD day by day, singing with loud instruments unto the LORD."

Ezra 6:19,22: "And the children of the captivity kept the passover upon the fourteenth day of the first month. And kept the feast of unleavened bread seven days with joy: for the LORD had made them joyful, and turned the heart of the king of Assyria unto them, to strengthen their hands in the work of the house of God, the God of Israel."

We see then, from studying what the BIBLE has to say concerning the subject that the order of events went as follows:

(1) On the 14th of April the lamb was killed. This is the passover. No event following the 14th is ever referred to as the passover.

(2) On the morning of the 15th begins the days of unleavened bread, also known as the feast of unleavened bread.

It must also be noted that whenever the passover is mentioned in the New Testament, the reference is always to the meal, to be eaten on the night of April 14th not the entire week. The days of unleavened bread are NEVER referred to as the Passover. (It must be remembered that the angel of the Lord passed over Egypt on one night, not seven nights in a row.

Now let us look at Acts 12:3,4: "And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.) And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people."

Verse 3 shows that Peter was arrested during the days of unleavened bread (April 15-2 1). The Bible says: "Then were the days of unleavened bread." The passover (April 14th) had already come and gone. Herod could not possibly have been referring to the passover in his statement concerning Easter. The next Passover was a year away! But the pagan holiday of Easter was just a few days away. Remember! Herod was a pagan Roman who worshipped the "queen of heaven". He was NOT a Jew. He had no reason to keep the Jewish passover. Some might argue that he wanted to wait until after the passover for fear of upsetting the Jews. There are two grievous faults in this line of thinking.

First, Peter was no longer considered a Jew. He had repudiated Judaism. The Jews would have no reason to be upset by Herod's actions.

Second, he could not have been waiting until after the passover because he thought the Jews would not kill a man during a religious holiday. They had killed Jesus during passover (Matthew 26:17-19,47). They were also excited about Herod's murder of James. Anyone knows that a mob possesses the courage to do violent acts during religious festivities, not after.

In further considering Herod's position as a Roman, we must remember that the Herods were well known for celebrating (Matthew 14:6-11). In fact, in Matthew chapter 14 we see that a Herod was even willing to kill a man of God during one of his celebrations.

It is elementary to see that Herod, in Acts 12, had arrested Peter during the days of unleavened bread, after the passover. The days of unleavened bread would end on the 21st of April. Shortly after that would come Herod's celebration of pagan Easter. Herod had not killed Peter during the days of unleavened bread simply because he wanted to wait until Easter. Since it is plain that both the Jews (Matthew 26:17- 47) and the Romans (Matthew 14:6-11) would kill during a religious celebration, Herod's opinion seemed that he was not going to let the Jews "have all the fun ". He would wait until his own pagan festival and see to it that Peter died in the excitement.

Thus we see that it was God's providence which had the Spirit-filled translators of our Bible (King James) to CORRECTLY translate "pascha" as "Easter". It most certainly did not refer to the Jewish passover. In fact, to change it to "passover" would confuse the reader and make the truth of the situation unclear.

[Botz]

Hi Botz, Firstly, in regards to your reproof for taking Psalm 12:7 out of context, i have to disagree wholeheartedly. Your translation is different to my AKJ translation and i believe it is your corrupt version that distorts the meaning of the text. The Psalm reads: "Help, LORD; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men. They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak.

The LORD shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things:

Who have said, With our tongue will we prevail; our lips are our own: who is lord over us?

For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him.

The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted".

As you can see, there is a full stop at the end of verse 5" I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him. " The next verse(6) starts off with a "statement" and a "new sentence" regarding the LORDs words and how pure His "words" are. The Psalmist also says very clearly that GOD will preserve them from his generation forever. The LORDs words are pure words and that HE will preserve them. JESUS said that if any man shall add or take from GODs pure and preserved words, that HE shall take his part out of the book of life and out of the holy city.(Rev22:18-19). If you think GOD cannot preserve His word through all generations and keep it pure then you underestimate the ONE whom you profess to serve. I am glad that you are starting to study these things Botz and i hope you continue until you realise that satan has deceived many regarding GODs pure and preserved word. Many disobedient (Eph2:2) and wise in their own eyes have taken and added to His word,deceived many and sealed their own destruction. Check out my reply to "Yod" regarding the NASB and see that even the co-founder and translator Frank Logsdon renounces publicly and repents of his part in that per-version.

Hi, every translation from the 1811 revised version has been tampered with and corrupted by either ungodly unregenerate translators and or translation based on corrupt texts. Have you studied how the 1611 AKJV came about ? Do you know about the 1811 Revised Version translators Dr's Westcott and Hort ? The Bible warns that there would be those who would corrupt the word of God (2ndCorinthians 2:17) and handle it deceitfully (2nd Corinthians 4:2). There would arise false gospels with false epistles (2nd Thessalonians 2:2), along with false prophets and teachers who would not only bring in damnable heresies but would seek to make merchandise of the true believer through their own feigned words (2nd Peter 2:1-3).

Hi TLF,

I still don't see the point you are pursuing regarding Psalm 12....I have no doubt at all that G-d has preserved His word though....just that what you quote here is very tenuous regarding the AKJV.

I am pushed for time (have to ride my horse)...but I am diligently working my way through various writings concerning the formation of the Bible....and the modern versions. I have done so before to a small degree, but some of what you suggested has niggled my spirit and I am once again checking things out with I hope an unblinkered heart and a receptive mind to the Spirit of Truth.

I would be interested if you could demonstrate a few quotes from the NASB alongside the same passages in the AKJV that show where there is a deliberate attempt with intent to falsify Scripture, rather than give clarity through the use of better resources and vastly more advanced methods of double checking everything...I'm presuming that part of the technological advances over the last hundred years especially in utilising every bit of available information in minutes rather than decades can be optimised to assist in producing a Bible translation equal to or more consistant with the AKJV of 1611....my emphasis is on the word translation, as I am aware that the word of G-d cannot obviously be changed or improved upon.

By the way thanks for providing some real food for thought...it is challenging, pertinent, instructive (hopefully) and I can see the importance it poses for all of us if what you claim is even patially correct.

Best regards. Botz

[Guest Butero]

Tell you what, we've had so many arguments about which English version is the best, I'd like to know which if these translations are as good as the one you read ...

Afrikaans • Ainu • Albanian • Aleut • Alutiiq • Amharic • Aniwan • Apache • Arabic • Aramaic • Armenian • Arapaho • Assamese • Auca • Avar • Azerbaijani • Basque • Batak • Belarusian • Bengali • Bisaya-Inunhan • Breton • Bulgarian • Burmese • Cakchiquel •Carrier • Catalan • Cebuano • Cherokee • Chichewa • Chinese • Minority languages of China • Chope • Bemba • Coptic • Cornish • Cree • Croatian • Czech • Dakota • Danish • Dogrib • Dutch • Esperanto • Estonian • Finnish • French • Georgian • German • Gilbertese • Gothic • Greek • Gullah • Gwich'in • Haida • Haitian • Hawaiian • Hawaiian Creole English • Hebrew • Hopi • Hungarian • Icelandic • Indonesian • Ilocano • Inupiaq • Irish • Italian • Japanese • Jèrriais • Kannada • Kazakh • Keres • Kikamba • Konkani • Korean • Koryak • Koyukon • Kurdish • Kyrgyz • Lacandon • Latin • Latvian • Lisu • Lithuanian • Macedonian • Malay • Malayalam • Maltese • Manx • Maori • Marathi • Miao • Micmac • Mixtec • Mohawk • Mongolian • Nama • Navajo • Norwegian • Chinyanja• Nyika • O'odham • Ojibwa • Oromo • Oshindonga • Otjiherero • Paniya • Pashto • Piegan • Persian • Pipil • Polish • Portuguese • Prekmurian • Quenya • Romani • Romanian • Russian • Sakha • Seneca • Serbian • Shawi • Shor • Slavonic • Slovene • Spanish • Swahili • Swedish • Tajik • Tashelhayt • Tagalog • Upper Tanana • Tatar • Tamil • Telugu • Tewa • Thai • Tibetan • Tlingit • Tongan • Tsimshian • Tulu • Turkish • Turkmen • Tuvan • Ukrainian • Urdu • Uyghur • Uzbek • Vietnamese • Wakhi • Welsh • Wampanoag • Xhosa • Yiddish• Yoruba • Yupik languages • Zulu • Zuñi

Do these translations bring about His word?

What translations? These are names of languages, not translations. What I would say is that to get the most accurate translation to these people, someone should use the KJV Bible as their starting point, and translate it word for word to their language.

This is not possible since going from one language to another involves many complex issues like idioms, no equivalent word, etc. It makes far more sense to work from good Hebrew/Gk. MSS to all these languages instead of going from an imperfect KJV that has known translation errors. Even Joseph Smith plagiarized KJV portions with known grammatical errors, a solid argument (not to mention anachronistic issues) against the perfect inspiration of Book of Mormon. Some view the preservation of KJV like the Koranic or BOM model of supposed perfect inspiration. This is simply not how God preserved His Word. It is bad advice to work from KJV to other languages when we should be working from originals to other languages, including English. KJV was a product of previous versions like Vulgate, Geneva, etc. It is not strictly from original languages like it should be (so imperfections were perpetuated instead of nipped in the bud).

Thank you for answering without insults. Any translation will suffer to some degree when you go from the original to something else. I have admitted that. You can only move to the best word available. What I would do if I was going to translate the Bible to another language is to first look at the word in the KJV, and then the original word it was translated from in Hebrew and Greek. Then I would look for the best available word in the language I was translating to.

Here is the problem with going back to the original language. You don't have the original TR manuscripts. If we still had them, I would agree, but all we have is new fragments in the original language. In many cases, they don't contain the entire text from the TR.