Is the KJV easy for you to read?

[Scarletprayers]

Well I may get screamed at, but no I don't think there is a translation that does not have some error to it.

[Scarletprayers]

Well I may get screamed at, but no I don't think there is a translation that does not have some error to it.

I'm not going to scream at you. I appreciate you giving an honest response.

Yeah but you love me Butero!

[Vickilynn]

I fully accept what you said. I was just showing you why I thought you were endorcing the NIV. Since you are now stating you are not, I would like your opinion on what translation if any is the pure Word of God? Is there any English translation we can have 100 percent confidence in, or are there errors in all of them? I have been asking this throughout and have had no takers, with the exception of Floatingaxe who seemed to accept there are errors, but wasn't that concerned about them. I am in no wise attacking you or your position, but would like to understand more fully your position.

Shalom Butero,

Thank you for not arguing.

I do not believe the KJV is error-free. I believe that EVERY translation has some error simply because they are translations from the original languages.

I also am not concerned about them, because as Marnie pointed out, they are not doctrinal errors.

I hope that explains my position and that helps you understand better.

[Marnie]

John, you are the quintessential defender of the KJV. I could have written your arguments.

The only thing I want to point out for accuracy sake is that the gender neutral NIV was NOT a product of the same translation committee that worked on the original NIV. How successful is the gender neutral NIV? Do you know anybody that owns one? Me neither. Do you ever see them in the Christian bookstores? No. It's because believers have a measure of Holy Ghost discernment and can smell a piece of doctrinal garbage a mile away. Which is why the original NIV is still the Bible of choice.

And with that, I lower my saber an salute you.

[Marnie]

The quesiton.... WHERE IS GOD"S PRESERVED WORD.

Crystal

The answer is so obvious, Crystal--

Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee. Ps. 119:11

Notice, I quote from your version of choice.

[Marnie]

4. Which is why the original NIV is still the Bible of choice. This was not a question, but I have one for you. Which one? You have stated the NIV has gone through numerous changes over the years as the translators supposedly gained in knowledge.

The one that says NIV, not tNIV.

The NIV has not gone through changes, it goes through updates. The essential translation remains intact. If you compare the 1978 edition with the latest one, you will notice additional footnotes and translators notes. G-d's Word is forever settled in heaven, so it doesn't change.

[Marnie]

4. Which is why the original NIV is still the Bible of choice. This was not a question, but I have one for you. Which one? You have stated the NIV has gone through numerous changes over the years as the translators supposedly gained in knowledge.

The one that says NIV, not tNIV.

The NIV has not gone through changes, it goes through updates. The essential translation remains intact. If you compare the 1978 edition with the latest one, you will notice additional footnotes and translators notes. G-d's Word is forever settled in heaven, so it doesn't change.

I just added a link to the other post giving information on the TNIV, and in that web-site it states in reference to the TNIV "This translation was done by the Committee for Bible Translators (CBT) which is the same committee that translated the NIV." I will provide the link here as well.

http://www.genderneutralbibles.com/news.php?id=1

Yes, but the committee members change; the original work done on the NIV was almost 30 years ago. That would make some of the original members over 100!

[HAZARD]

Floatingaxe wrote:

"I do not lie.

Furthermore, I believe the God of the Universe is perfectly capable of seeing to it that His Word is preserved and His message is intact for all generations, including the 21st Century! In English, in Spanish, in Portuguese, in Hungarian, in Croatian, in Chinese, in Latvian, in Russian, in French, in Swahili, in Dutch, in Swedish, etc, etc, etc.

You limit God"

.

First I believe you do not lie.

Second I agree with you that God has preserved His Word and message intact for all generations, in English, and every other language you have mentioned.

God preserving His Word has nothing to do with which versions are correct or easly read. Men, throughout history have changed the Word of God. Learned men have tortured Scripture untill it confesses anything they want to hear. God's Word as He originally gave it will remain the same throughout all eternity future.

God's Word, written down in the Bible is a simple book to understand because it was given by God to be understood by the simple. Jesus thanked God that the truths of the Bible were hidden from the worldly wise who refused to believe, and stated that God has "revealed them unto babes" (Matt. 11:25-27). Jesus gives the reason the truths are hidden from anyone because they refuse to humble themselves to believe and conform to the Bible (Matt. 13:10-17). He speakes of the devil taking the Word from the heartsof men lest it should bring forth fruit (Matt. 13:19-23). No man can get the vastness of the Bible at once. The most simple beginners can understand the Bible one line at a time, for this is the way it was given, and it is the best way to understand it (Isa. 28:9-13).

God can not and will not judge people based on a book written in such a way as to confuse people, or which needs interpretation by experts.

Anyone who understands the most simple human language can undserstand what it says. Every time any group of persons reads a particular part of the Bible they all read the same thing. If they should read it again, it would still be the same. If they were asked what the passage says they could all do it without exception. If they can tell what it says, and if they can read what it says, then they can all believe what it says; and that is all that is necessary to understand the Bible.

Over fourty different authors wrote the sixty six books of the Bible during a period of over 1,800 years; and they all had one theme____the vreation and redemption of the human race by God through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. These books were written by men from all walks of life such as kings, priests, judges, lawyers, princes, shepherds, soldiers, courtiers, statesmen, musicians, inventors, singers, poets, preachers, prophets, fishermen, farmers, tent makers, publicans, physicians, richmen and poor men. They were written in many various lands of three continents____Europe, Asia, and Africa. They were written in different ages by many men, some who never ever saw each other or even knew what the others wrote on the same subjecs, yet when their writings became one book, there is not one contradiction among them.

Suppose fourty medical men, each in a different land, language, and age, would write sixty books on how to cure a disease, what kind of cure would such a collection of books make. How much unity would we find in their writings?

There is perfect unity between the books of the Bible, which speak of the hundreds of subjects in the realm of religion, politics, science, etc. This proves there is one divine author for all the sixty-six books. Who but a divine author could produce such a work. Even convinced a hard harted, major sinner like me that God does exist and His Word is real.

A God who could not make Himself clear, or had to be interpreted evey time He said something, would be no God at all. Almost any human being can express themselves clearly enough to be understood. Furthermore, a God who could could make Himself clear and chose to do otherwise in such a way as to confuse and hide from man those things He seeks to reveal to man, would not be worth hearing. A God that gave man a revelation and deliberately sought to hide it from man, and then judge him for not being able to understand it, would be a tyrant and not a God of love and justice.

At the Council of Trent the Catholic Church enumerated the books which must be considered by Catholics, "as sacred and canonical". Everyone knows there are the seventy-two books found in Catholic editions of the Bible, forty-five in the Old Testament and twenty-seven in the New. Protestant copies usually lack the seven books (viz: Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, and First and Second Maccabees) and parts of books (viz: Esther 10:4-16:24, and Daniel 3:24-90; 13:1-14:42) which are not found in the Jewish editions of the Old Testament.

The Council of Trent, held in the year 1545, also declared that tradition is of equal authority with the Bible. By tradition is meant human teachings. Jesus bitterly condemned such teachings, for by human traditions, they nullifiey the commandments of God (Mark 7:7013l Col. 2:8; Rev. 22:18).

There's the Bible, the Word of God, preserved for all eternity future, and theres the Catholic Bible, which includes the words of men, and theres all the other versions be they correct, easy or hard to understand.

Those who accuse you, FloatingAxe of lying firstly do not know anything about you at all, and completly missunderstand you.

[apothanein kerdos]

All translations, including the King James, go through changes (such as, one could not read the original King James unless one was schooled in out-dated English).

For instance, Genesis 38:7 in the modern King James:

And it came to pass in the time of her travail, that, behold, twins were in her womb.

And how it was written in 1611:

And it came to passe in the time of her trauaile, that beholde, twinnes were in her wombe.

Though the spelling is changed and the meaning is the same, this still shows that it has had to go through renditions in order to evolve with the English language.

[apothanein kerdos]

All translations, including the King James, go through changes (such as, one could not read the original King James unless one was schooled in out-dated English).

For instance, Genesis 38:7 in the modern King James:

And it came to pass in the time of her travail, that, behold, twins were in her womb.

And how it was written in 1611:

And it came to passe in the time of her trauaile, that beholde, twinnes were in her wombe.

Though the spelling is changed and the meaning is the same, this still shows that it has had to go through renditions in order to evolve with the English language.

The only changes are the spelling. I use a 1611 version for my personal reading and study so I'm aware of the changes in spelling. I made mention of it earlier in this thread.

And Grammar. And order of words. And punctuation. And the lack of an Apocrypha.