"There are no conflicting bibles"

gb posts: "There is only one Bible. The Bible is comprised of the inspired documents not any translations. God did not need a translation to give the Bible writers His version. He gave them the original. "

gb, this all sounds very good, but would you mind pointing out for us where this "original" is today? Do you have it and have been keeping it a big secret from the rest of the world? Why, it must be word Billions by now.

Do you posses now or have you ever seen the original?

Will Kinney

 

Bible Babel in a few verses in I Corinthians

"Will the true Bible please stand up". This is easy. The true one has been standing in the English language for almost 400 years now. The false ones have been falling by the wayside one after another. They come out with big fanfare, are popular for a few years, and then are cast into the dustbin of oblivion. The "scholarly" NASB is rapidly following in the footsteps of the ignominious ASV of 1901, and, with those who desire to have their ears tickled with something new, is now being replaced by the NIV.

Others, with little spiritual discernment or reverence for the words of God, have ignorantly taken up the NKJV, thinking it is just like the KJB but with "modern" speech. Let's look at just a few of the "gems" that modern scholarship have given us to make the word of God more understandable.

I Corinthians 3:5 KJB "Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, EVEN AS THE LORD GAVE TO EVERY MAN?"

This carnal church of believers was in danger of splitting apart at the seams because they had their focus on different great teachers instead of seeing Christ as the source of their salvation and author of their faith.

The Lord is He who gives the gift of faith to His own people; it does not come from man himself. See Romans 12:3; Phil. 1:29, Heb. 12:2; Acts 13:48; 14:27; 18:27; Eph. 2:8,9 and Titus 1:1 for just a few examples of this truth. This is clearly what the verse teaches and is confirmed by the very next verse: "I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase." Man can sow the word of truth and another can come along and water it with more teaching, but unless God quickens it and produces life, it is all in vain.

The RV, ASV, Geneva, Tyndale, NKJV, Darby and Spanish all agree with the King James Bibled. However the NASB says "servants through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave opportunity to each one." The NASB has italicized this word "opportunity", but is changes the meaning to fit more with modern, easy on the ears, flattering to the ego and self esteem theology of today's Christians. The NASB implies that God only gives you the opportunity to believe, but the decision is up to you. This is false doctrine.

The NIV gives this verse a whole new slant than even that of the NASB. The NIV says: "servants, through whom you believed--as the Lord has assigned to each his task." There are no words in any text anywhere that say "his task". By this ruse, the NIV simply changes the meaning and says the tasks of Paul and Apollos was to preach, and avoids here the whole doctrine that God is the Giver of saving faith.

This is the type of thing that is referred to in another letter to the Corinthians by the Holy Ghost when Paul said "For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God".

I Cor. 4:7 KJB "For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?"

I personally just love this verse. It gives all the glory to God, and none to man. If I am different in any way, or have any good, it is solely because of the good pleasure of Almighty God. Most versions teach the same thing here, even the NKJV and NIV.

But when we look at the NASB, something is just a little bit out of place. The NASB asks: "For who regards you as superior?" instead of "For who maketh thee to differ from another?" What does the NASB even mean? and how would you answer the question?

The obvious answer to the question in the KJB, NKJV and NIV is "God, of course". Now if you answer "God" to the NASB, does God regard me as superior? I thought He said He chose the foolish, weak, and despised to confound the wise, mighty and exalted, that no flesh should glory in His presence.

The vaunted NASB comes out with another gem in I Cor. 8:4. Whereas the KJB, NKJV and NIV are in agreement with "As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, WE KNOW THAT AN IDOL IS NOTHING IN THE WORLD, and that there is none other God but one".

An idol is just a piece of wood or stone; it has no real spiritual power. However the NASB actually says: "We know that THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN IDOL IN THE WORLD." I'm sure the Catholic church is delighted with this verse. This is plainly a stupid statement put out by the type of men God is refering to when He says that He will destroy the wisdom of the wise.

I Cor. 14:37, 38 "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. But IF ANY MAN BE IGNORANT, LET HIM BE IGNORANT." In essence, we either recognize that this is God's word and not mans, or we don’t. If you are ignorant of this and refuse to acknowledge this, you may go your own way in continued darkness. It is like when Jesus said they are blind leaders of the blind, LET THEM ALONE.

In this verse we have an example of the hypocrisy of the modern version editors, who tell us they use the "oldest and best" manuscripts. The reading as found in the KJB is in Vaticannus, in the first correction of Siniatics, the majority of mss. and even in P 46 which predates Sin. & Vat. by 150 years.

Yet the NASB & NIV follow mss. A of the 5th century and the first reading of Siniaticus. Their "oldest and best" differ between themselves and the KJB reading is at least 150-250 years earlier than the reading followed by the NASB & NIV.

The NASB has "But if any one does not recognize this, he is not recognized" and NIV reads "If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored." Now, there are a whole lot of people today who do not believe we have the very words of God, written through man and preserved by God; yet they are not being ignored nor unrecognized. They in fact hold prominent positions in many churches and seminaries. But They ARE ignorant.

Lastly for now, I Cor. 15:33 "Be not deceived: EVIL COMMUNICATIONS CORRUPT GOOD MANNERS."

Paul has been talking about the doctrine of the resurrection, and how our whole faith is made vain if this fact is not true. He has mentioned in verse 12 "How say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?"

Imagine that, some "Christians" were saying and telling others that there is no such thing as the resurrection. This is the context of Paul's statement in verse 33 - evil communications.

The word is homiliai - plural, not singular, and it comes from the verb to speak, to talk, to commune. It pertains to what is being said; thus communications.

Versions agreeing with the KJB are Tyndale, Geneva, Young’s, Darby, Webster’s 1833 translation and the Spanish Reina Valera. The Wycliffe bible says “evil speeches destroy good conduct”.

However all three, the NKJV, NASB, and NIV have messed up what this verse actually says, and have replaced it with a popular proverb: "Bad company corrupts good morals." Well, this may be true, but it is not what God has inspired to be written here in this verse. I would say "bad bibles corrupt good minds."


Will Kinney

 

Hi TC, you post: "Will, your getting great at showing where English translations differ from each other. Now, impress us by showing what the original language manuscripts say and mean. After all, the KJV is a translation just like the NIV, NASB, NKJV, Geneva, Tyndale's, ect... are translations. However, you treat the KJV as the source instead of a translation of a source. "

TC, a few problems here with your premise. First of all, WHICH "original language manuscripts" are you talking about? That is a major part of this whole problem.

Your guys behind the nasb, niv, rsv, esv etc. all believe the Hebrew texts have been corrupted and lost in some cases. They do not even agree among themselves as to which Greek texts are the right ones to follow and especially the nasb keeps on changing its underlying Hebrew and Greek texts from one edition to the next.

Second, you say the KJB is just a translation. Can a translation be the inspired words of God? What does the Bible itself teach about this?

You see, TC, I believe the Bible speaks of God preserving His words, and He does not lie.

He either did it or He didn't. I believe He did and they are found today in the King James Bible. The KJB does not lie and does not teach false doctrine at any point. Your nasb, niv, nkjv, esv etc. all do contain errors even their promoters can not adequately defend.

They show themselves to be false witnesses.

Do you seriously think any of them (nasb, niv, esv, etc.) is the complete, inerrant, pure words of God?

Which "original language manuscripts" EXACTLY do you think are the complete, inerrant words of God? (give them a name, and tell us where we can get copies of them)

Thanks,

Will K

 

Bible Babel -to add drunkenness to thirst

Deuteronomy 29:19

Moses was warning the children of Israel of the dire consequences that would befall them from the hand of the LORD if and when they forsook the covenant of the law and turned to idols. We pick up in verse 18 "Lest there should be among you man, or woman, or family, or tribe, whose heart turneth away this day from the LORD our God, to go and serve these nations; lest there should be among you a root that beareth gall and wormwood; And it come to pass, when he heareth the words of this curse that he bless himself in his heart, saying, I shall have peace, though I walk in the imagination of mine heart TO ADD DRUNKENNESS TO THIRST."

This is the reading in the Geneva Bible, the 1936 Hebrew-English, the Spanish and the Italian Diodati bibles. It is even found in the footnote of the NIV. Simply put, "to add drunkenness to thirst" means to sin. Thirst is a legitimate need, but drunkenness is a sin.

However in the NKJV we read "AS THOUGH THE DRUNKARD COULD BE INCLUDED WITH THE SOBER";

the NASB says: "IN ORDER TO DESTROY THE WATERED LAND WITH THE DRY"

and the NIV says: "THIS WILL BRING DISASTER ON THE WATERED LAND AS WELL AS THE DRY." Go figure.

My Redeemer liveth Job 19:25-28

Job 19:25-28

"For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth; And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet IN MY FLESH shall I see God: Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; THOUGH MY REINS BE CONSUMED within me. But ye should say, Why persecute we him, seeing the root of the matter is found in ME.?"

Reins is not an archaic word. It has a very Hebrew flavor, as does the KJB. Websters 1999 defines this word as either kidneys, or the seat of feelings or affections. The word reins is found 12 times in the Old Testament and once in the New Testament in Rev. 2:23 "I am he that searcheth the reins and the heart."

The word in Hebrew does not mean "heart" though the NKJV, NIV and NASB have translated it as heart.

In fact the word "reins" has completely disappeared from the NKJV, NIV & NASB versions. In the Rev. 2:23 all three have translated it as “mind”, though it does not mean mind either. Plus here in Job, the NKJV, NIV & NASB have all messed up the meaning of the phrase where this word is also found , as we shall see.

"Though my reins be consumed within me" is the reading of the KJB, Revised Version, ASV, Geneva, Spanish, 1917 and 1936 Jewish translations, Young’s, Darby’s and others.

But the NKJV and NIV have "HOW MY HEART YEARNS within me." First, the word is not "heart" but reins, and the verb consume does not mean "to yearn" but to consume as in Job 7:9 "the cloud is consumed"; 4:9 "By the blast of God they perish, and by the breath of his nostrils are they consumed." ; and 33:21 "his flesh is consumed away."

The part about "yet IN MY FLESH shall I see God" in the NASB of 1972 reads "yet WITHOUT MY FLESH shall I see God" but in the 1995 NASB it now reads "FROM MY FLESH". Which is it, NASB, in a body or without a body?

Verse 28 "But ye should say, Why persecute we him, seeing THE ROOT OF THE MATTER IS FOUND in ME.?" is the same in the RV, ASV, Darby, Young, 1917, 1936, and NKJV, but the NIV says:"If you say, how will we hound him, since the root of the trouble lies in HIM (not me); while the NASB reads "If you say, How shall we persecute him? And "WHAT PRETEXT FOR A CASE AGAINST HIM CAN WE FIND?" Again, a totally unique and different meaning.

Small wonder God says they shall wander to and fro seeking the words of God and shall not find them.

"There are no conflicting bibles" - noted scholar and modern version proponent.