Which Bible Version can you recommend (KJV, NIV, NKJV, etc)

[hmbld]

More Got Questions, yes I know some dislike this, but it is well written,

 

When the Bible is translated for the first time into a new language today, it is translated into the language that culture speaks and writes today, not the way they spoke and wrote 400 years ago. The same should be true in English. The Bible was written in the common, ordinary language of the people at that time. Bible translations today should be the same. That is why Bible translations must be updated and revised as languages develop and change. The KJV Only movement is very English-focused in its thinking. Why should people who read English be forced to read the Bible in outdated/archaic English, while people of all other languages can read the Bible in modern/current forms of their languages?

Our loyalties are to the original manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments, written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Only the original languages are the Word of God as He inspired it. A translation is only an attempt to take what is said in one language and communicate it in another. The modern translations are superb in taking the meaning of the original languages and communicating it in a way that we can understand in English. However, none of the modern translations are perfect. Every one contains verses that are at least somewhat mistranslated. By comparing and contrasting several different translations, it is often easier to get a good grasp on what the verse is saying than by only using one translation. Our loyalty should not be to any one English translation, but to the inspired, inerrant Word of God that is communicated by the Holy Spirit through the translations (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

[saved34]

1 hour ago, Butero said:

I am finding more and more crazy stuff as I compare the modern translations.  They don't even all omit the same verses, but they all seem to leave out at least some.  I have never seen such a confusing mess as what these people have done to the Holy Bible.  At least I thought I understood what they were doing, all using the Alexandrian and Egyptian manuscripts, which at least made sense, even though I think it was wrong, but now I don't know what to think.  This cannot be of God.  He is not the author of such confusion. 

You are right, it is not of God but is of the hyper kjv movement. It seems they are the only people confused in trying to push the completely unbiblical double inspiration of the kjv as the only English version.

The confusion comes from your stance in believing there is a conspiracy to move verses. Yes, satan has deceived people to dedicate their lives to Christ and to believe his promises. To trust God and live for him. Yes, unless you read the kjv you are blind and not following God. I guess there were no saints before or after the kjv.

[ccfromsc]

2 hours ago, Ezra said:

And not by the dozens, but by the hundreds and thousands.  People need to do their own research, since  it would take a book or two to show all the deviations from Scripture and explain their doctrinal significance.  Just one example (Acts 8:37).  You won't find it in the modern versions.

(Act 8:37 NIV)  Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." The eunuch answered, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

That is a modern trans;ation.... it is there...Sorry bud that makes you wrong!

 

[ccfromsc]

2 hours ago, Butero said:

I am happy to hear that, but it is not in my English Standard Version.  My NIV is at home, so what I will do in the meantime is go to Biblegateway.com and see what it shows for the NIV.  Regardless, I know for a fact it is missing from at least this modern English translation.  I have a Revised Standard Version, and it has Matthew 12:47, but leaves out Matthew 18:11.  It has Matthew 21:44, but leaves out Matthew 23:14.  It is also missing Matthew 17:21.  I guess they remove what they want and leave in what they want from translation to translation? 

I love it! Since you failed in your purpose to destroy the NIV you change the version. Why are you filled with such hate?

[gdemoss]

Carnality leads to legaistic views of the bible and destroys a persons ability to accept anything that doesn't appear to be word for word.  Legalism leads to death but the Spirit gives life.  I don't believe for a moment that the Holy Spirit is giving any witness against these translations.  

[ghtan]

2 hours ago, Butero said:

3 hours ago, ghtan said:

So now you think the devil got the bible translators to remove those verses so that we would not trust our bibles? If that were his plan, he has failed miserably. I don't think those who like the modern versions distrust their bibles. If they did, they would not be reading them! Face it; you cannot find good reasons for the devil to trick bible translators to remove those verses. So your conspiracy theory has no motive. Which means there is likely no conspiracy.     

He did not fail at all.  We have had people at WB posting that they don't think this verse belongs or that verse belongs to back up some false doctrine of theirs.  I remember one guy thought John 1:1 didn't belong because he didn't believe in the deity of Christ.  He believed Jesus was the Son of God but not God, so he simply decided John 1:1 wasn't really scripture.  That is the kind of stuff we are getting because of modern translations removing part of the text. 

Most if not all modern translations have John 1:1. So that guy's problem was not caused by modern translations. Are you trying to blame all heresy on modern translations? That would be clutching at straw. 

Instead, I daresay many more people read the bible now because of modern translations than if we only have the KJV. Reason is simple: the modern translations make the bible easier to understand and thus more enjoyable to read. Now, the devil certainly wouldn't want people to read their bibles. So if he did trick bible translators to come up with modern translations, he has shot himself in the foot! I think he is smarter than that.

2 hours ago, Butero said:

I gave you good reasons why the devil got the translators to remove verses and cast doubt on others.  I don't care if you think they are good reasons or not.  I believe that is exactly why it has occurred.  He is gradually destroying the credibility of the Word of God.  There is also the matter of churches creating their own translations, like the Catholics and Jehovah's Witnesses to make the text agree with their teachings.  It is all about confusion.  It is obvious to those who don't have scales on their eyes. 

I believe others reading this thread know that the reasons you have given so far are unconvincing to say the least. Only you think the credibility of the word is destroyed by modern translations. I use the NIV but I also use the KJV sometimes; I am not confused for I still hold the bible, not any particular translation, as the word of God. And I believe that is true also of others who use modern translations. So if the devil is successful in causing confusion, it must be with people like you.    

[manuelf324]

KJV because of the FACT its the ONLY Bible on earth from the Antioch greek texts textus receptus

See below 

Im therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth? 

Edited April 25, 2016 by manuelf324

[manuelf324]

KJV is the word Jesus is the Word made flesh one Jesus one book 

Edited April 25, 2016 by manuelf324

[Deborah_]

42 minutes ago, Butero said:

Here are verses I have confirmed are left out of the NIV.  Good luck locating these in your NIV Bible.

But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.  Mark 11:26

And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.  Mark 15:28

Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.  Mark 9:44

Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.  Mark 9:46

If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.  Mark 7:16

How appropriate that final verse is. 

Easy peasy...

Mark 11:26 = Matthew 6:15

Mark 15:28 = Luke 22:37

Mark 9:44 & 9:46 = Mark 9:48 (i.e. once in this paragraph, instead of three times)

Mark 7:16 = Mark 4:23 (and many other places)

 

Took me just 2 minutes

Edited April 25, 2016 by Deborah_

[Deborah_]

1 minute ago, Butero said:

When I said good luck locating it in the NIV, I meant in the places where it was removed.  You won't find it there, because it was removed.  Anyway, rest assured there are more missing verses to come. 

Well, good luck to finding a mention of the virgin birth in Mark, or of Jesus changing water into wine in Luke. You don't bother looking for them if you know from the start that they aren't there, and it doesn't worry you either.

There are websites that list every single one of the "missing verses"... I've seen them all before. The vast majority are just removal of duplications, like the ones above.