" reasons I reject the modern Bibles "

Reason no 1. Most new editions fail to distinguish
between "known" and "unknown tongues" [1 cor 14:2]

Reason no 2 . Most new editions have eliminated
Matthew 17:21 from their texts, or only have at
the bottom of their pages in parenthesis ( )
insinuating and casting doubt, as to wether it
should have been included from the original
manuscripts.

Their is no doubt about it's inclusion, because
what these other counterfeit bible publishers -
don't want you to know, is often God bears witness by ... repeating the same text in another
book !!( hence we find the same verse in Mark 9:24 ) So to cast doubt as to wether it belongs
is to be showing clever manipulation and a bold
faced lie ) caught-out !!

Friends often things are repeated in the four accounts of Christ's life, and so the diligent
and the knowledgable can often spot the lie at
WORK. !!

For this reason their are at least 2 to 3 accounts
of teaching on what "constitutes the blaspheming of the Holy Ghost" and so often people get caught
out when they teach it impossible to commit that
offence in the 21st century, as they say Christ
has ascended and no longer ministering in person
so it is impossible therefore to commit that
offence, but a closer read teaches that Christ
taught blasphemy against him is forgivable and
always will be - but it is and was, blasphemy
against the spirit of God ( the Holy Ghost ) which
was the concern and issue at....hand

And we all know the Holy Ghost is still present, and in the earth....as we speak - and read now.

So God cathes out the lies and the false teachers
this way - with the repeat passages, just said
in a slightly different way, that is ...all !!!

Reason no 3. Because of the way new bibles hack to
shreds and remove words from 1 John 5:7-8 taking out ...up to 20 word and more !!

Some editions reducing verse seven to meager 7
words - instead of the 22 words we find in the
( KJV ) edition - that is from the 1611 edition.

Not to mention the same crime commited in verse 8

Implying the texts don't belong again

It's all lies friends !!!

This is why we rejrct the modern bibles

Hi guys,

Why is there so much emphasis on the "newest" "coolest" water proof, remix edition teachers, soldiers, hunters, fisherman's, lightest, easy read versions? Because it reflects how fat and immature believers are in these times. We want to look a little holier than thou, you by a study bible that is filled with some other guys interpretation of the scriptures. (Not against study Bibles, but against status symbols) Get real people, do we really need a water proof NIV? In all honesty we don't need that version anyway.

The point is that we are Christians and we shouldn't compromise with the world so as to win the world. That is what many of the publishers are saying about their products. They trying to gear them toward the unsaved. But that is impossible to do. We cant give that which is holy to the dogs...

One more thing, What is the deal with these "Biblezines". They have to be the worst thing that these money hungry publishers have come up with. Just take a look at the covers and see the compromise. They are supposed to help young women with their teen years and dating. Dating is not even in the Holy scriptures so they must be twisting something around. This is but another promoter of Christian stagnation.

""The copyright"" To my understanding the KJV is the only Bible not copyrighted, or was not. This says a lot. The other versions are out to make a buck and terrified if you use more than 100 words with their paraphrases. The KJV is far superior for the furthering of the Kingdom. (We can use as much scripture as we want and not get in trouble for it...)

Let Christians not get caught up in this "newest/ coolest" thinking and then become stagnant. Let us not compromise as these money hungry publishers have. Let us be content as our Christians of 300 years ago. Lets stick with a battle hardened KJV. Not some wimpy "revolve" Biblezine!

It goes much deeper than this.

Please do a search of the site before retreading previously covered ground, there has been a lot of mileage given to this already ...

How tremendous it is that the note of bitter criticism accompanying some of these discussions is what makes any truth of the matter all but worthless. It is getting weary, hearing all this pontificating on matters beyond our understanding and experience, far worse is the spiritual pride.

Jam 3:14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.

ack! this has been revisited and revisited and revisited! :-)foreeeeeeeeeeeeeevvvvvvvvveeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrr and eeeeeeeevvvvvvvveeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrr ;-)
KJVonlyadvocate: "i dont like the new translations cause they take stuff out of the bible"
newversionadvocate: "oh yeah, well i dont like thte old translation cause it adds stuff to the bible"
kjvonlyadvocate: "well my manuscripts have it, and they've been used by the church for at least 1000 years"
newversionadvocate: "well my manuscripts dont and they're older than yours"
(here's the best part, wishful thinking maybe)
kjvonlyadvocate: "wait do my "extra" verses make me believe in heretical doctrines according to your church/beliefs?"
newversionadvocate: "well no they dont, do my "lost" verses make me believe in heretical doctrines according to your church/beliefs?"
kjvonlyadvocate: "well no they dont"
newversionadvocate:hmmm.....dont the Jehovah's witnesses use a new version(granted their own) but a new version?
kjvonlyadvocate:yes they do....dont the Mormons use a kjv?
(really best part)
kjvonlyadvocate:"love you cause your my family!"
newversionadvocate:"i love you too"

anyways thats my fantasy :-P

Quote-""The copyright"" To my understanding the KJV is the only Bible not copyrighted, or was not."

It has no worldwide copyright, but its reproduction is perpetually restricted in certain parts of the United Kingdom under the Royal Prerogative.. A lot of other (older)translations are in the public domain as well like Young's literal, Darby's, American Standard, ect..

Sometimes threads are posted without forethought of their effects on others. Here is a good example.

reasons we reject the modern Bibles

Coming here today and seeing such words as this thread title feels like a piece of lead thrown right in the middle of my faith.

To be honest, I considered using KJV here on SI out of respect for all those who do not believe that God speaks through modern versions, and thus they may discount my words. I don’t want to be a stumbling block to these people. But then I realized that they don’t need my posts at all, they are well versed in Bible knowledge. It is those who come here who are needy, don’t have strong English skills, who are seeking divine insight that I need to be aware of.

I wonder if God sends some people elsewhere in cyberspace in order to protect them from such faith-damaging words as the title of this thread topic could potentially be.

Just think: What if God touched a soul through the Message. (God forbid, right?). Can you not rejoice in the work of the Spirit without feeling the need to warn with a “Be careful, that Bible has poison in it!”

Those who wish to remain in unbelief won’t “get it” regardless of what translation they use, and those who are searching will find God - even in a crumpled-up page torn out of a Bible retrieved from a latrine. (I read about this happening in China)

I confess, I was never good in English in school. I dreaded Shakespeare. And when God lead me to the Good News for Modern Man I soaked it up – yes, read the entire Bible when I was 17. I had a long way to go in my journey, but still, God was speaking to me even back then – through his Word!!!

I will continue to post verses from modern versions for the sake of others. Also, I trust that our more knowledgeable SI members here will show me where my faith might be in jeopardy because of the translations I use. I have been quite transparent, so there must surely be something that one could point out. Honestly, I am not inviting a dual – I NEED the exhortation of the Body. I am willing to be set straight.

But in the mean time, I fully stand behind our moderators warning – 100%. I care too much about those out there in this big world who may drop in here for a refreshing cup of water. I want to offer something that they can swallow.

May God help me to become considerate of others – including those whom I do not even know exist.

Diane

Hi bro John,

I think that it's o.k. to go over the translation issue again however there are a couple of fresh threads concerning translations.

I wanted to comment on this in one way. What we are dealing with is not "translations" but "paraphrase's" I have respect (at times) for translations. But little to none for these childish first grade English paraphrases. Does that mean I'm against anyone who uses it? No, just against that particular material masquerading as a authentic translation. Most of my younger life I hated the KJV and was opposed to KJV only people, (still am on some). As I grew in the faith started seeing the major errors in the NLT, NIV, CJB, ESV, and less so in the NKJV. I used all of these "bibles" and loved the NIV.

Now I'm not so dogmatic as to proclaim the KJV the divine inspired word of God. It to has its errors but it is still far more dependable and rugged.

Roadsign said,

It is those who come here who are needy, don’t have strong English skills, who are seeking divine insight that I need to be aware of.

If I may say, I hated English, never really got down, and never used the KJV. But when I got one and read a page or two, it was no prob. I often used this excuse when defending the NIV but later came to realize that I was just making it justifiable to read and "hope" to trust in a modern paraphrase. Who doesn't know what "ye" means? Or perhaps, "thou". This has no real baring on the facts concerning modern paraphrases.

Remember, I have no problem with the users of the paraphrase books, but with the paraphrase. Please don't apply what I say as being a personal attack. It is not! 8-)

Bless the Lord!!! bro Doug

Everbody has their say and that is indeed good , as i have done, and outlined in the following post.

Have i personally legislated that people can't own or carry around another copy or version of scripture. ?? ( no don't believe the post said that )

Everyman is rewarded according to their own works
( as i shall and will be too )iam accountable to God for my words - this i know well, and tremble.

Also i am "new poster" here, and not privy to what has gone on or been said before, nor what has been previously discussed at the forum.( so forgive me this wrong ). Forgive i pray you - then this very ignorance on my part ( sincerely )

Not many of you have commented on the missing texts - i brought to your attention ??

Why not - simply don't care, i was however hoping for some feedback on the Matthew 17:21 AND 1 JOHN 5:7-8 issues ( in particular )

People freely attack the ( Kjv ) edition and don't even bat a single eye-lid when they do it - i know friends as ive witnessed it with my own ears at their meetings, saying it's antiquated, not contemporary, and to hard to understand etc etc.

If they can under-mine the version a lot of people love, cherish, hold to, and trust impicitly, then it works both ways !!

Meaning if we defend it's accuracy and authenticity - then we are responding by re-action

I know it can be a sensitive issue...im not...so naieve in this - WAY - if i highlight then ommisions and errors, and a clear-case of distortions, how then is that reckoned to me as being one of - "offence" ??

Do we savour the things that be of God - or not ??

I can remember sitting in what modern churches call "pews" one morning, and the minister was doing a series on the "gifts of the holy spirit"

He was teaching on the gift of "prophecy" etc etc

When i happen to glance up at the man sitting in front of me, anyway i had my "bible" open at 1 cor 14 and so did he, it was then that i noticed
this sabotage....of no "distinction" made between tongues and unknown tongues, which is critical to our understanding of what happened in acts chapter two and acts chapter ten ( that which occured in those chapters was - "tongues" as a sign gift to the non-believers )

And unknown tongues is when what is uttered - no
man understands him ( at all ) therefore it is catagorized by Paul - as falling into this category of ["unknown"] tongues, and that person then is uttering "mysteries" in the spirit to his God.

Therefore he is speaking to God only !! ( and not to men ) and commanded by Paul to speak to God only - and not to MEN ( MEANING IT'S USE IS NOT - FOR PUBLIC USAGE ) NO ONE UNDERSTANDS HIM !!

His spirit is praying and he is uttering unintelligle words - therefore to speak in public has no place. ( as he utters - an unknown tongue )

Book of acts tongues was as a "sign-gift" {acts 2 & 10 } as they heard them magnify God - in their dialects.

So then THIS is 1st corinth 14 ( known tongues )

and the "unknown tongue" - is the tongue that no man understands, AS no interpretation follows.
( HENCE UNKNOWN TOGUE )

So it falls into the category of: "unknown tongue"

So he is admonished to speak to himself - and to [GOD only] OR HE IS EQUATED TO THAT OF BEING BARBARIAN. [A FOREIGN SPEAKER AND MIGRANT AS SUCH]

So speaking in tongues in public has no place unless accompanied by interpretation - OR UNLESS it the "sign gift tongue" to the non-believer DISPLAYED IN ACTS chapter [TWO AND TEN]

Which is permissable in public - because the heathen man fully understands what is being uttered and saidin his own known dialect ( again this then becomes tongues, because they are known tongues) and not what Paul described as the "unknown tongue".

So just another good reason why the newer bibles -are doing a in-justice in this way, and to the uncovering of precious truths.

Also the newer bibles have eliminated the terminology "holy Ghost" from most of their pages - and every thing is pronounced as being "holy spirit" instead and (no distinction)is again... made

1 John makes this distinction however: the Holy Ghost was in "heaven" bearing record to the certainty of Christ's coming into the world, whilst the [spirit] was in "earth" witnessing along with the "blood" and the "water" " - to both Christ's coming and that of his death in the earth.

1 Peter 1:12 says the "holy ghost" was sent "down" ...from heaven, upon Christ's death.

Which is the promise of the father ( the blessed comforter ) and the entire Joel chapter two prophecy and fulfilment.

So using Holy Ghost terminolgy is valid and distinctive in scripture - and so im Guessing that is the dilemna most new bibles had when they came to 1 john 5:7-8 they have not made any clear distinction, regarding the Holy Ghost in heaven [and] the spirit of God in the earth - and use the words holy spirit - to the total exclusion of the "Holy Ghost" in scripture.

Is that important though ?? well if Jesus said i will baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire, and that Holy Ghost according to 1 Peter was not [sent down], until after his acension, i would hazard a guess , that the right terminology and understanding of the Holy Ghost is rather significant !!

YOU SHALL KNOW THE TRUTH, AND THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE YOU FREE.

LIES BRING PEOPLE INTO NOTHING BUT CAPTIVITY AND INTO BONDAGE , AND LEAD US ASTRAY

THOSE WHO WANT TRUTH AND LOVE TRUTH - REJOICE WHEN ERROR IS BOTH OVERTHROWN AND EXPOSED, DEFEATED AND BROUGHT DOWN. !!

LIES PROSPER NO ONE, BUT TRUTH LIBERATES THE SOUL, AND SETS PEOPLE FREE ( GLORY GLORY )

S.O.F

Be blessed in your saviour
One and all - God bless !!

:-)

and so im Guessing

Thank you for admitting this. I feel that speculation is not always the most productive way to spend our thinking time. We need to hear from God’s Spirit first and foremost. Here is God’s heartbeat: “He is not willing that any should perish.” That should be our first and foremost burden.

I feel that the overall concern I shared has been ignored. At this very time I am sharing by email with an unsaved person who has been visiting SI regularly but is not a member. This person is trying to sort out a lot of things. I am sensitive to potential extra heavy loads thrown in the path (which is how I view some of this gobbily-gook.)

Why not come along-side with what God is doing and you may be surprised at what he is using to build his kingdom. Jesus annoyed the religious experts in his day because he always did the "no-no's". Nothing has changed.

I would appreciate it if you would change the “we” in the thread title to “I” as you are not speaking on behalf of all the members here.

Diane

I feel that the overall concern I shared has been ignored. At this very time I am sharing by email with an unsaved person who has been visiting SI regularly but is not a member. This person is trying to sort out a lot of things. I am sensitive to potential extra heavy loads thrown in the path (which is how I view some of this gobbily-gook.)

An important note, one to keep in the front of our minds.

I would appreciate it if you would change the “we” in the thread title to “I” as you are not speaking on behalf of all the members here.

Personally I can't understand why there is something so mystically special about the KJV. Does God not want us to have a translation of the Bible in the spoken language of our day?

I agree that many versions stray from the original text which is concerning, i especially agree that paraphrases like the Message should only ever be used as just that a 'paraphrase' and not a main Bible. But it seems that during the reformation one of the very things that these great men fought for was that we might have the Word of God available to everyman in the common tounge, so that even the plough boy could study the scriptures. It has to be said, as sad as it is, that today the average person has a vocabulary of about 5000 words which is dramatically less than it used to be. If I gave the young people I work with a copy of the KJV they wouldn't have a clue what half of the words and especially the 'old, archaic language' meant.

I agree that some balance has to be found, because many of the modern translations really do water down the hard-hitting truth of the original text. But I believe that what is needed today is the most accurate translation of the original text as possible in our spoken language of our day.

If the Word offends people and turns them away from Christ that's one thing, but surely we don't want to turn people away because they think that Christianity is archaic and a relic only from a by-gone age.

This was posted elsewhere but applicable ...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now while Paul was waiting for them at Athens, his spirit
was provoked within him as he saw that the city was full of
idols. So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the
devout persons, and in the marketplace every day with those
who happened to be there. Some of the Epicurean and Stoic
philosophers also conversed with him. And some said, "What
does this babbler wish to say?" Others said, "He seems to be a
preacher of foreign divinities"--because he was preaching
Jesus and the resurrection. And they took hold of him and
brought him to the Areopagus, saying, "May we know what this
new teaching is that you are presenting? For you bring some
strange things to our ears. We wish to know therefore what
these things mean." Now all the Athenians and the foreigners
who lived there would spend their time in nothing except
telling or hearing something new.

So Paul, standing in the midst of the Areopagus,
said: "Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very
religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of
your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, 'To
the unknown god.' What therefore you worship as unknown, this
I proclaim to you."
-- Acts 17:16-23 (ESV)

_______________________________________________________________

Quotation:
If those who say that we must preach the same message as
Paul and the other apostles mean that we should also exhibit
the same adaptability and sensitivity to the background
culture, then they are right... If, however, they mean that we
should expect results merely by repeating the actual phrases
found in the New Testament, then they are mistaken. They are
making, in fact, one of the basic mistakes in verbal
communication, which is to confuse words with what they
describe. The gospel is something God has done, not a series
of phrases describing it. Saying this does not undermine the
Christian's belief in the inspiration of the Bible, for the
important thing about the Bible is what it talks about, rather
than the way it does the talking. If we considered that there
was the same degree of essential inspiration in the way it
does the talking, then we would have to insist that every
Christian learn Hebrew and Greek. The mere fact that we in the
Western world read translations of the scriptures is a clear
admission that times and cultures have changed.
... Gavin Reid, The Gagging of God [1969]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Not many of you have commented on the missing texts - i brought to your attention ??

For the same reasons brother, these have been gone over, argued over, multiple times. Everything from conspiracy theories, to the devils personal handwriting attributable. If there is anything that I have found very helpful to take as a first principle of sorts, it would be this;

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=10811&forum=36&post_id=&refresh=Go]Preface to the King James Version 1611[/url]

John, Yes, we do indeed need experts - our theologians to keep the message from straying. Yet it has also been theologians (experts of the law) who have done the greatest amount of harm to the Word. (like in Bible days)

This morning I heard Ravenhill say:

The Bible suffers more from its exponents than its opponents.

I suspect that even the simplest Bible version is safer in the hands of a humble school drop-out than the most accurate version is in the hands of experts who have lost connection with the Head. These kinds come up with a lot of gobbly-gook - pages and pages of explanations that are so convoluted no one knows how they arrived at thier conclusions. So the lesser scholars just nod, "Aye, Aye, you're the experts. Whatever you say." And before anyone catches on, something has been ADDED to or something has been SUBRACTED from the the pure message (in the minds of people).

Consider Scoffield. Surely we wouldn’t blame the translation he used. Maybe it was something about his heart condition.

Lets say that a person swears by the NIV

PS I know of someone who got saved by reading only the Old Testament.

Diane

Fair call: "reasons i reject modern bibles"

Hey if this is the worse the objections get

Im doing well...ive encountered 100 fold worse
criticisms !!

My reply would have to be like Paul's in Galations
"ye have not injured me at all"

At the end of the day we are all justified or
condemned by our speech.

And to use a Ravenhill quote from the judgement
seat of Christ ( message )

Anything considered as idle talk will be judged.

If people are happy to defend bibles that ad-lib
and take out verses from the original manuscripts
at there own pleasure and at random for i.e matthew 17:21 ...then that is your business

The consenus is - ahhh who cares - is not surprising to me

Makes you wonder what is going on though

when were blahh-say, and just yawn over inspired scripture.

Makes you wonder if the next watered down version
that comes along had only half of the original texts in it - wether we would get the same -
"don't care" response.

The counterfeit bibles originally use to
respect matthew 17:21 by at leaast including it at the bottom of the page - in paranthesis ( )

But now much more daring: they don't include at
all....yes in these counterfeit impostor bibles -
it will just have this ( verse 20 & 22 ) together

But lo ~~ verse 21 is GONE ( VANISHED, REMOVED )

If things get past unwittingly - the publishers
become, even more bold and brazen, and take out
what they don't want, like, or agree with.

For further information on this for the interested parties: there is a message entitled
"what's wrong with modern bibles" in it you find that new bibles have removed over 100 texts from the original manuscipts ( from the new testament alone ).

"I know" ( won't use the words "think" or "i suppose" Even though paul used them many times at - corinth )

But i know this: if we ADD OR DIMINISH FROM
THE DIVINE SCRIPTURES....GOD LIKEWISE WILL ADD
TO THAT MAN'S PLAGUES - IN THE LAKE OF FIRE AND BRIMSTONE ( NOT MY WORDS - BUT CHRIST'S )

TAMPER WITH THE SCRIPTURES: TO YOUR OWN PERIL

Hey if this is the worse the objections get
Im doing well...ive encountered 100 fold worse
criticisms !!

At the end of the day we are all justified or condemned by our speech.

You might want to reconsider the first with the second.

[i]We piped unto you, and ye did not dance; we wailed, and ye did not mourn.[/i]

The error in your posturing is in making a lot of assumptions without taking into account that as was mentioned, a great deal of this has been covered. Including the same bitterness and pride that far too often accompanies it. Educate yourself.

[i]*Edit, changed the thread title appropriately[/i]