Which version of the Bible do you prefer?

[digitalinchrist]

KJV, something tells me God wants it to be hard to understand. That way you learn about all those strange words. It expands your mind and ability to comprehend. Go look up Mark 9:29 in the KJV then check the NIV and ESV and see what word is missing.

[another_poster]

KJV, something tells me God wants it to be hard to understand. That way you learn about all those strange words. It expands your mind and ability to comprehend. Go look up Mark 9:29 in the KJV then check the NIV and ESV and see what word is missing.

Does it matter that its missing? I only ask because everytime a KJV only person has used that argument I have never once found the meaning to have changed. If the meaning is the same then squabbling over which specific word is used seems a bit pointless to me. Do you think the meaning of the overall passage has changed? Of course then one also needs to prove that the KJV was accurate in including whatever it was that they included and others were not accurate by leaving it out. Often the assumption made by people is that if it is in the KJV then it must be correct. That is not a reasonable assumption in my opinion.

[another_poster]

Loss of "thee" and "thou"

Please decide what God is saying to Moses:

"And the LORD said to Moses, "How long do you refuse to keep My commandments and My laws?" (Exodus 16:28, NKJV)

It looks like God is saying, "Moses, you are continuing to refuse to keep My commandments and My laws." But look carefully at the accurate King James:

"And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?" KJV

Now we understand! It was the people, not Moses, that God was upset with. "Ye" and "you" mean more than one person. "Thee," "thou," "thy," "thine," "doeth," "hast," etc., only mean one person. How do we know? The "y" is plural. The "t" is singular. Isn't that easy? Now you know what Jesus meant when He said to Nicodemus, "Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again" (John 3:7).

And then there is the therefore rule  “ Anytime you see the word therefore back up 10 to 15 verses and make

Sure what the therefore is for”

I like the kjv, I have bought several and before I did I searched the internet for omissions in bibles, and so I kept with the kjv after some research.

These rules help me read kjv.

out of curiosity where do you find these rules? If they are not listed in the front of the KJV bible then it is not real useful. Considering the KJV translators did not want to put in useful notes because they thought they were bad  and/or unhelpful. In any case we can look at surrounding verses and see that it is talking to people in general not Moses specifically. 

[digitalinchrist]

 

KJV, something tells me God wants it to be hard to understand. That way you learn about all those strange words. It expands your mind and ability to comprehend. Go look up Mark 9:29 in the KJV then check the NIV and ESV and see what word is missing.

Does it matter that its missing? I only ask because everytime a KJV only person has used that argument I have never once found the meaning to have changed. If the meaning is the same then squabbling over which specific word is used seems a bit pointless to me. Do you think the meaning of the overall passage has changed? Of course then one also needs to prove that the KJV was accurate in including whatever it was that they included and others were not accurate by leaving it out. Often the assumption made by people is that if it is in the KJV then it must be correct. That is not a reasonable assumption in my opinion.

 

 

Does it mean Jesus can't or won't save you by using a non kjv bible?  No, but many will sware by the KJV, that its almost positively spiritually charged.  I dunno about why the other verses are changed, but I do have some reasoning for mark 9:29. This is refering to the man with son with a dumb spirit (devil) that the disciples could not cast out. So the man took his son to christ personally to cast him out. Afterwards the disciples privately went to Christ and asked him why not. Mark 9:29 was your answer. The word FASTING is in the KJV, but it is removed from many of the other bibles.  I have heard it said the NIV and ESV are devil bibles.  What does wikipedia say about fasting?  "Fasting is primarily an act of willing abstinence or reduction from certain or all food, drink, or both, for a period of time."  This could mean no food for a period of time like food fasting.  It could also mean fasting from drugs, or pornography, or any addiction.  In essense, Jesus is telling you it requires prayer AND fasting to remove some demons.  Now why would Satan not want that info out there? There are webpages out there that will prove to you the KJV is the infallible non perverted word of God. Its worth looking into if you have never checked it out.  I imagine any truly saved christian will have the discernment to know it is the one.

Edited July 19, 2014 by digitalinchrist

[OakWood]

I have what is known as the Parallel Bible. They have 4 different translations all together on one page. I really like it because you can compare verses side by side. They come in different groups of translations. It's not as thick as you might think. I provided a link to an Amazon page search for them.

 

That sounds like quite a good idea.

[another_poster]

 

 

KJV, something tells me God wants it to be hard to understand. That way you learn about all those strange words. It expands your mind and ability to comprehend. Go look up Mark 9:29 in the KJV then check the NIV and ESV and see what word is missing.

Does it matter that its missing? I only ask because everytime a KJV only person has used that argument I have never once found the meaning to have changed. If the meaning is the same then squabbling over which specific word is used seems a bit pointless to me. Do you think the meaning of the overall passage has changed? Of course then one also needs to prove that the KJV was accurate in including whatever it was that they included and others were not accurate by leaving it out. Often the assumption made by people is that if it is in the KJV then it must be correct. That is not a reasonable assumption in my opinion.

 

1.  Yes, the words left out do matter.  The word fasting is left out with regard to casting out certain devils.  In Mark 16, everything past verse 8 was put in question. 

 

2.  For hundreds of years, we had a text everyone said was scripture.  Then you have people discover incomplete manuscripts in caves, and the translators use them as the foundation of their new Bible version.  IMO, they have the burden of proof on them to justify removing scripture.  Their older manuscripts argument has no validity since those manuscripts were preserved in caves, while the others were being used, meaning they deteriorated and needed to be copied. 

 

3.  Those people that hold your view are questioning the integrity of the Bible as a whole, because if all translations are basically equal, and they aren't all the same,  that means we can not have complete confidence in them.  It also means that what is accepted today may be disregarded down the road as more incomplete manuscripts are discovered. 

 

Now you have your answer once again.  The question that was asked was which translation we prefer, not the KJV only position.  That has been debated over and over and over again.  I can tell you that there is zero chance anyone will change my mind without adequately addressing the arguments I just gave.  I will not accept someone claiming to have read a book about the history of translations as a basis for anything, as history has gone through it's own revisions.  That is evident by the documentaries about the creation of the Bible on the History Channel.  Lets try this again.  What translation do you prefer?  The KJV Bible, and it is the only one I use.  Up to now, I haven't said anything in this thread about issues with other translations. 

 

not sure what you are getting at Butero. however I will say this I have no intention of responding to your points. We have discussed this in a different thread and I know your position which I believe is based on assumptions which I think you know I do not agree with. That is fine. I was just asking digitalinchrist a question. You respond as if I'm attacking him/her which is not the case. 

[another_poster]

 

 

KJV, something tells me God wants it to be hard to understand. That way you learn about all those strange words. It expands your mind and ability to comprehend. Go look up Mark 9:29 in the KJV then check the NIV and ESV and see what word is missing.

Does it matter that its missing? I only ask because everytime a KJV only person has used that argument I have never once found the meaning to have changed. If the meaning is the same then squabbling over which specific word is used seems a bit pointless to me. Do you think the meaning of the overall passage has changed? Of course then one also needs to prove that the KJV was accurate in including whatever it was that they included and others were not accurate by leaving it out. Often the assumption made by people is that if it is in the KJV then it must be correct. That is not a reasonable assumption in my opinion.

 

 

Does it mean Jesus can't or won't save you by using a non kjv bible?  No, but many will sware by the KJV, that its almost positively spiritually charged.  I dunno about why the other verses are changed, but I do have some reasoning for mark 9:29. This is refering to the man with son with a dumb spirit (devil) that the disciples could not cast out. So the man took his son to christ personally to cast him out. Afterwards the disciples privately went to Christ and asked him why not. Mark 9:29 was your answer. The word FASTING is in the KJV, but it is removed from many of the other bibles.  I have heard it said the NIV and ESV are devil bibles.  What does wikipedia say about fasting?  "Fasting is primarily an act of willing abstinence or reduction from certain or all food, drink, or both, for a period of time."  This could mean no food for a period of time like food fasting.  It could also mean fasting from drugs, or pornography, or any addiction.  In essense, Jesus is telling you it requires prayer AND fasting to remove some demons.  Now why would Satan not want that info out there? There are webpages out there that will prove to you the KJV is the infallible non perverted word of God. Its worth looking into if you have never checked it out.  I imagine any truly saved christian will have the discernment to know it is the one.

 

However you have not justified that the word fasting should be there. (I did look up the passage in the end before I came back to look at these forums). Even then your comment does not make much sense to me because several other translations include the word fasting. So either way the KJV then is no better or worse than any other translation.

 

I have heard the argument that the NIV is the devils bible. This is based on the parent company of Zondervan which publishes and owns the NIV has the same parent company as the company that publishes the Satanic bible. This is an issue for some. To me it is just Rupert Murdoch recognises there is money to be made and so purchased the different companies at separate times and put them under his book publishing arm of Harper Collins. Some seem to want to think there is something sinister about it but I just don't see it. 

 

If there is a particular website you would like me to look at I will be happy to look at it and consider its arguments. I have seen several different websites making these arguments and have not been convinced by any of them. I have found many of their claims to be the equivalent of clutching at straws or meaningless such as number of words being different. It is not unusual for word counts to be different in old english and modern english, That's just the way it is. The KJV may be hard to understand today but when it was written it was not. It was using normal everyday language of the time. So that is why I dismiss word count arguments. I also dismiss any argument where the meaning of the passage is not changed. For example one of the more common arguments is that the word Lord is removed from one verse and they argue that it could then be talking about anybody. however when reading that verse with surrounding verses there is no doubt it is talking about Jesus. As I said I am happy to look through a website if you would like me to. Just provide a link or tell me the name and I can search for it.

[OneLight]

I prefer the Interlinear Bible where I can read how it was written when it was written, comparing the original to the translations.

[coheir]

 

Loss of "thee" and "thou"

Please decide what God is saying to Moses:

"And the LORD said to Moses, "How long do you refuse to keep My commandments and My laws?" (Exodus 16:28, NKJV)

It looks like God is saying, "Moses, you are continuing to refuse to keep My commandments and My laws." But look carefully at the accurate King James:

"And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?" KJV

Now we understand! It was the people, not Moses, that God was upset with. "Ye" and "you" mean more than one person. "Thee," "thou," "thy," "thine," "doeth," "hast," etc., only mean one person. How do we know? The "y" is plural. The "t" is singular. Isn't that easy? Now you know what Jesus meant when He said to Nicodemus, "Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again" (John 3:7).

And then there is the therefore rule  “ Anytime you see the word therefore back up 10 to 15 verses and make

Sure what the therefore is for”

I like the kjv, I have bought several and before I did I searched the internet for omissions in bibles, and so I kept with the kjv after some research.

These rules help me read kjv.

out of curiosity where do you find these rules? If they are not listed in the front of the KJV bible then it is not real useful. Considering the KJV translators did not want to put in useful notes because they thought they were bad  and/or unhelpful. In any case we can look at surrounding verses and see that it is talking to people in general not Moses specifically. 

 

Not sure where I found this particular one, I may have found it here on Worthy. I do copy things from here when I like them, and I make no money from anything I copy. The KJV translators probably didn't put in the kjv because at the time on translation it was not needed. It is only needed no that we far removed from those days.

I don't know that they thought it bad/unhelpful most likely it was not needed at the time 400 years ago; only now it is needed. It was not hard to find and anyone can find this type of info.

here is the info I used to decide which version I want to use, anyone can look here and get help to decide their choice.

 http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/mcelroy-nkjv.html

and here is another version of the rule I posted from a different site

http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/bacon-theethou.html

And yet another version of the rule

http://brandplucked.webs.com/theeandye.htm

 

Im not here saying the kjv is the best or only Bible; I am saying this is how I decided and so can anyone else if they read these articles.

[other one]

I prefer the Interlinear Bible where I can read how it was written when it was written, comparing the original to the translations.

amen to that...