Barnes and Nobles will have a comparative Bible. In fact, they usually have two or three different kinds. If the Christian book store is a pretty good size, they will also have at least one kind. It will usually include four versions. I have one edition that includes 8 translations of the New Testament. A wonderful way to study the Bible, I find. I hope you find what you want.

Yes, I have book. Willie Josiah Sutton also wrote another book, this one about the anti-Christ. Both are full of good documentation.

Willie Sutton once stayed with my father, an SDA pastor, in Tennessee, during the late 1980s. I'm not sure Willie's still alive.

King James Version.

I usually study the sabbath school lesson with my NRSV then on Sabbath I take my NASB with me.

I like them all.

We have something in common, then.

Almost all of them have something good about them. Even the Jehovah's Witness's bad translation does have some very good, very accurate parts, but they are fairly rare. For instance, Ps. 1 and also the parts of Psalms which refer to the dead.

My favorite right now-- apart from the KJV, which is always #1-- is the Standard English Version. It's more accurate than the NIV, but the NIV is superior stylistically. I mean it sounds better to the ear when read aloud.

All bible versions have good seed and bad seed in the same field. it's only if you focus on the testimony of Christ (OT and NT) that you will begin to see the confusion that the bible leads the Christian denominations into. Bottom line.. all bibles today are Catholic Doctrine.

This study illustrates that clearly by page 35 and 36

http://www.thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/the%20death%20and%20resurrection.pdf

the information is free. The best things in life usually are but people are all to willing to pay for speculation.

God Bless

Do you mean the OT equally with the NT?

Are you talking about the underlying Greek printed texts or are you speaking primarily of the translations made from those printed texts?

Can you name any "doctrine" or teaching found in the KJV that is not found, or cannot be taught from, the Critical Text of the NT?

I'm not referring here to the "changes" in some of the verses, but I refer to actual doctrines or teachings.

To see why this applies to portions of OT as well as NT You have to understand the Almah/betulah controversy. Page 35 at this link gives the facts of the christian condition with testimony that is validated ancient by more than one source in the study that presents it.

http://www.thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/the%20death%20and%20resurrection.pdf

This link which you will find at that page gives much more information on why the christian today is not takeing the gospel to the world.

http://www.thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/the%20virgin-maiden%20controversy.pdf

The Christian today does not realize to what extent they are born into the spirit of anti-christ by Christian tradition handed to them by Rome. They must overcome this spirit with the wisdom Of God from God(baptism of spirit). Until mankind understands why this is not happening today. They will continue in the false perception of salvation which Christ prophecied.

Picking a bible version is like trying to define the term christian.

-Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
-Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.
-Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
-Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents.
-Showing a loving concern for others; humane.
-One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
-One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.

How history defines christian.
-one who kills jews.
-30,000 different versions of denominational names all caliming to follow the same persons teachings, only different facets of the teschings. All build on a book called the bible and reject that the leader of the movement said to build on Him.
-A people who claim christ did not come according to the flesh. See Matt chapt 1. It illustrates christ coming according to special surcumstance leaving mulitple prophecies unfulfilled.
-A people who claim to preach the Gospel of jesus who unknowingly only have half the information God wants them to have.

With Christian being such a shakey term to define. Anyone claiming to be bult on the solid testimony of Jesus should never use this term since it cannot be clearly defined just as the many bible versions that exist today cannot get the story strait, they all carry the same title.. yet many have more books than others while some have more verses in certain chapters than others.

The bible is no different thant the Christian that carries it. It goes by a name that cannot be clearly defined! Christ pointed you to the heavently parent. When will the Christian go to the parent? The Law will take you there. It's how we walk in the parents ways and become faithful witnesses.

To know these definitions are true.
See information at the link. The first link is mearly to validate that the second link is worth your while.

http://www.thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/the%20death%20and%20resurrection.pdf

http://www.thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/gospel%20of%20holy%2012.pdf

Just remember there is both good seed and bad seed in the same field. You are not to uproot what you think are tares or you uproot the wheat. your Christian forfathers did this against the voice of prophecy. the end result leaves you holes in your history which in turn leaves you confused and speculating.

God Bless

You can have as many Bibles as you feel you need to do a credible job of finding truth, all for free. Google E-Sword or for Mac users MacSword. There you will find numerous down-loadable Bibles, Concordances, Strong's Greek and Hebrew lexicon and other source books all for free. I also use an very easy to use interface called Bible Desktop into which you can place all this material and access it in multiple windows so you can do Biblical comparison with ease. Try it, I think you will really like it.

I have included the links:

E-Sword MacSword

God said man can only live by Every word that proceeded from the mouth of God. Show me any version of the book titled the bible that contains every word. The gospel found at this link contains more words of NT testimony that Christ spoke. The 4 Roman Gospels in your bible came from this document. Untill you read the document, test it against prophecy you will continue to make a book your shepard.

http://www.thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/gospel%20of%20holy%2012.pdf

Can the cry be any louder to come out of Babylon? or will Christians reject their history because of the traditions of men?

P.S. The holy spirit will be grieved away by our traditions.

Todd,
I have already downloaded this document on my own and am in the process of going through it. It was not a criticism of you for posting it, and I agree that there are a number of documents that didn't make it into the New Testament and others that were included strictly based on a political view point not on a search for truth. God never said we should check our brains at the door in the discovery of Truth and blindly accept a Canon as true simply because we have been told to. I test all prophecy with the 7 rules of prophetic interpretation as found here:
Seven Rules for Prophetic Interpretation

These rules come from Scripture and take personal bias out of the study of prophecy. With these 7 rules anyone can understand prophecy for themselves, and don't need an 'expert' to interpret the prophecies for them.

To understand anything spiritual we must become discerning people, able to tell truth from lies. This is why I rely on the Words of Jesus Christ ONLY as my source for truth.

If you don't except the whole Bible, than how do you know for a fact that the word's of Jesus are correct? You can't just pick and choose!

pk

Are you talking about the underlying Greek printed texts or are you speaking primarily of the translations made from those printed texts?

Can you name any "doctrine" or teaching found in the KJV that is not found, or cannot be taught from, the Critical Text of the NT?

I'm not referring here to the "changes" in some of the verses, but I refer to actual doctrines or teachings.

To find what is wrong with a counterfeit dollar, one must first study and know the real one. Therefore I urge everyone to first study the words of Jesus given to us by His eyewitnesses first. This would be Matthew, Mark (for Peter's words), John and Revelation. James is interesting, but Jesus' brother was not one of the disciples and John 14:26 and 17:20 do not apply. I also found it interesting that Jesus' own brothers tried to get Him killed at one time. Right?

The original KJV was translated from the Textus Vaticanus c. 10th - 11th centuries that in turn was copied by a monk named Erasmus, and is, in textual criticism circles, widely held to be inferior to earlier texts. This being said (and look it up for yourselves) this is why it is important to have a wide variety of translations (not transliterations as is the Clear Word) at your fingertips with with to make comparisons. That is why I recommended E-Sword and MacSword.

As to a Doctrine taught in the O.T. version of the KJV as opposed to the Critical text of the N.T. here is just one:

The Doctrine of the immortality of the Soul is very much in the Critical Text that was translated into the N.T. Paul is a great proponent of "Life after Death" with a number of his texts that refer to it. In the O.T. there are any number of passages that prove or at the very least strongly imply that "the dead know not anything". In Luke (Luke writing for Paul) there is the story of the Criminal hanging next to Jesus to which Jesus is purported to have said, "I say to you,(comma here) today you will be with me in paradise." (This is ONLY found in Luke.) The Greek language is anarthoris, that is there are no definite articles such as 'and', 'of', 'but', 'it', etc. There is also NO punctuation. All articles and punctuation are supplied by the translator, whoever that was. Therefore this passage could just as easily have been translated, "I say to you today,(comma here) you will be with me in paradise." The translator of the Textus Vaticanus being a monk in the Catholic church certainly believed that Paul was a valid apostle of Jesus and would have translated that text to reflect Paul's understanding of the immortality of the soul, that is, when you die you go directly to Heaven-do not pass go and collect $200.

This is just one of dozens of 'mis-translations' that are reflected not only in the KJV but is most other translations. Does this mean that it is automatically true? Certainly not, which is why I said we must become discerning people, able to judge what is true and what is not from the totality of what is said in the O.T. and by Jesus Christ said in the N.T.

This is the problem with typed forums. Many take out of context the words written as critisim.

My appoligies for sounding less then humble.

That is just it.. i have accepted the whole bible where the christian picks and chooses to make their doctrine. Observe carefully any study on the internet today. See if they use every word of bible testimony that applies to the topic of the death and resurrection.

You will find that they take what only suites their preconcieved perception of truth. thus ignoring Jesus testimony and claiming christ as figurative.

You ask a good question out how do you know what is from God and what is not.

Two prophecies for the same event are in your bible and they give a different perception of time. Do you go on the majority of the witness of men who do not speak in one accord in your bible? or do you go on the mulitiple prophetic witnesses which are God's witness of his son?

The choice is your. what defines your perception?

Have you not clicked on any of the free information I have shared with you?

http://www.thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/gospel%20of%20holy%2012.pdf

A full lengh gospel sufaces in history revealing much yet the christian world wants nothing to do with it because it was not a preserved gift from Rome their Mother.

The study at This link validates the credibility of the content since the testimonies of men differ regarding the first link. this study validates credibly that the 4 roman gospels of half truth came from the gospel being shared.

http://www.thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/the%20death%20and%20resurrection.pdf

Blessings

to find what is wrong with christianity. write the laws of the Lord on your heart and you will hear the voice from the source of truth. Keep reading half truth gospels if you wish.. the Lord is your shepard.. are you not listing? Does your living Lord live in the pages of a book?

To have multiple translation of Roman doctrine only adds to the confusion of Babylon (the mixing of words causing confusion).

When are you going to come to your God whom you claim to serve? God simplified the message he taught... keep the commandments of God For this is mans all... everything else is to identify Christ as the one who would give the knowlege of how this is done since even the Jews could not get it right and played the harlot with false God's just as the gentiles are doing today.

Jeremiah 16:19
O LORD, my strength and my fortress, My refuge in the day of affliction, The Gentiles shall come to You From the ends of the earth and say, “ Surely our fathers have inherited lies, Worthlessness and unprofitable things.” Will a man make gods for himself, Which are not gods?

By not commming to God throught the wisdom he gave to all men. The Law (pentacost) (shavot)
They all make a God of a book and writings.

Untill mankind can dicern why God allowed this gospel to surface in history and what it means for mankind. they will never know the truth. They know not how to keep the Law.

http://reluctant-messenger.com/essene/gospel_index.htm

http://www.thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/gospel%20of%20holy%2012.pdf

This link illustrates how to use Prophecy (God's word) as a light to the world and differing testimonies of men even within your bible.

http://www.thedeathandresurection.com/pdf/the%20death%20and%20resurrection.pdf

It's time to wake up.. the shaking is here!

Davar – Another Free “Scripture Study Tool”

Use It - and e-Sword Too!







Here’s Davar v. 3 - another great “Scripture Study Tool!” It can do some things e-Sword doesn’t do for you yet… Like helping you read the Aramaic Peshitta New Testament using either Arabic or Hebrew font!


Praise the Lord!

Thanks, I'll get it.

The vast majority of my reading and studying is through the NASB version.

However, in deeper study, I'll use my BibleWorks to pull up just about any version known to man to get to the root of a text. In English, though, the RSV, KJV, NKJV, NIV, and TEV versions get the nod.

In Christ,

”Which Bible version…”











Dear Gail,


Answering your question directly, and in terms similar to those of Ted Oplinger’s post just above…

I use which ever Bible version that, from my point of view, is best helping me perceive the underlying original writ. When the original text is not available or when it is not even known with certainty which one may be closest, then I consider the internal evidence of the extant available texts in close comparison with the reality and with the laws of nature as designed and upheld by the Creator.

For instance, I’ve been impressed that, re the Gospel of Matthew, the closest thing we have to the original is that transcript which is known as Shem Tov’s Hebrew Matthew, which I find is definitely not a translation from the Greek as has been commonly believed in the past. Re Mark, Luke, Acts, Revelation, and probably at least some of Paul’s epistles, which are more than likely also originally written in Hebrew, I use the Greek Textus Receptus while remembering always that that Greek is the translator’s best effort of accomplishing as literal a translation as possible of the text being translated, whether from the Hebrew or from an Aramaic intermediary translation.

Re the Old Testament, at one time, years ago, I used to believe that the LXX was the one closest to the original because at that time I believed that there was insufficient space of time for known dated historical events following the flood using the Masoretic text. After having studied the evidence provided by Immanuel Velikovsky in his Ages in Chaos series of books, I came to recognize that conventional ancient history has inflated the real ancient history by some 600 to 800 years that never were. In consequence of that I find that the remaining evidence points to the Masoretic text being the one closest to the original text written.

Given that I am not by far as fluent in either Greek or Hebrew as I wish I was, I use any and all translations of those texts that are available to me in a language I am more familiar with, for instance English or Swedish. My preferred English version is the Amplified English Bible because it really has a way of bringing out much more from the original languages than any of the other versions, yet, more often than not, I use KJV because of its close ties to the original by means of Strong’s numbers.

Lately, I’ve had the question raised in my mind as to whether or not the Peshitta may possibly be that intermediary Aramaic text between the original Hebrew New Testament books and the Greek Textus Receptus etc., but that question of mine I have yet to pursue before being better able to determine the answer…


Shalom,

Tree of Life©

Four of the best and most literal and accurate translations of the whole Bible are:

(1) Robert Young's Literal (which basically follows the same texts as the KJV);

(2) Joseph B. Rotherham's Emphasized Bible (which follows texts similar to those followed by the NASB and RSV); (Except in a few places, this is the best, most reliable and most accurate single translation I know);

(3) King James II Bible (translated by J. P. Green, and following the same text as that followed by the KJV); and

(4) The New American Bible (Roman Catholic)-- this translation is the most faithful to the Critical Greek Text of Nestle-Aland (26th and 27th editions) and the United Bible Society (fourth edition).

Ted when you say Bible Works, what do you mean?

pk

Hi, I would urge extreme caution with the Clear Word. All paraphrases will reflect the theology of the writer.

The author is proceeding to destroy the Adventist pillars of faith. Worse than that, what else is he doing to God’s Word? So am I to believe Jesus opens this seal and watches Himself oppose His own truth?

Here's what Revelation 6:1,2 of the Clear Word Bible says:

1. After the chorus had ended, I saw the Lamb break all the seals and unscroll the scroll. As He revealed the events of the first seal, I heard the first of the four living beings say to me in a voice that sounded like thunder, "Come! See the controversy over giving the gospel!"

2. I looked to where he was pointing and saw a galloping white horse.
The rider on it had a bow in his hand and arrows strapped to his back.
He was allowed to wear a victory wreath on his head and galloped into the future bent on stopping the gospel and overcoming the people of God. This is the first phase of the history of opposition to the gospel.

This is incorrect, white in the Bible always represents God, and the good and the right.

The white horse represents the early Christan dispensation as the early church went forward to conquer victoriously.
Here is the KJV:

Rev 6:1 And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see.
Rev 6:2 And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.


Rev 22:19 and if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life, and out of the holy city, which are written in this book. God Bless, Steve

John, we've been through this before. Young's changes repentance in the KJV to reformation. There can be no reformation without repentance first.Not only that, reformation, is not repentance.

When one repents, that is reformation, but one can reform in a worldly way without true repentance. Since repentance is the very heart of the Gospel, for that reason I would throw out Young's. You can bet the devil wants to do away with repentance.

Acts 2:38 (Young's Literal Translation)

38 and Peter said unto them, `Reform, and be baptized each of you on the name of Jesus Christ, to remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit,

This is very bad.




God Bless,

Thanks for the info steve. I do love the CW but I would never try using it to uphold stuff.

pk

John317, today I picked up a Rotherham's Emphasized Bible!!! I got it in a Bible liquidation- super deal :)

I could see its potential when I had a look inside. I thought that besides the marks for emphasis, This book has some interesting study notes!

Rotherham's translation is one of the most literal and accurate translations of the Bible ever published. But it was translated from the Westcott and Hort Greek text and before the discovery of many important ancient manuscripts, such as the Dead Sea Scrolls and a good number of NT manuscripts.

I will take that into consideration. Kinda like the RV?

Yes, it is based on pretty much the same Hebrew and Greek texts as the English Revised Version of 1885 and the American Standard Version of 1901. I have no problem with those texts but it's something to be aware of because there are quite a few significant differences between them and the KJV and NKJV. Ellen White quoted both the 1885 and 1901 translations.

Rotherham's translation is one of the few that is consistent (and accurate) in its translation of 2 Thess. 1: 12: "the grace of our God and Lord Jesus Christ."

Like any translation, though, it is far from perfect. See, for instance, Titus 2: 13, which contains exactly the same Greek construction as found in 2 Peter 1: 1.

I tend to use a variety, but do enjoy learning about these differences.

I use TNIV as my study Bible.

If I go to caregroup I'd bring my Clear Word, because it's small and compact. However, it's a paraphrase so I don't use it for Bible study.

Since my husband is a pastor, he has lots of versions at home, including the Tanakh and the Greek Bible. Once in a while I'd open an NLT, or CEV, or ESV, whichever is closest to me.

It is with considerable interest I have read this, at times, heated discussion on Bible Versions which has been going on here for a few years. Personally I thank the Lord that there are so few errors or discrepancies and therefore almost any version can be used to find the TRUTH and salvation in Jesus Christ.

Many years ago while I was a ministerial student at Emmanuel Missionary College, Berrien Springs, I heard a certain sermon preached in the old chapel where offerings were taken up to build the Pioneer Memorial Church. What I remember of that sermon is that the speaker warned against any new translation, since the Lord Himself had only given us the KJV, and therefore the KJV was the only Bible teaching Seventh-day Adventist doctrine.

Coming from Scandinavia I wondered how this could be true since we had many Adventists all over the world who did not have the KJV at all, and where only newer versions of the Bible are available in the language of the people.

I love the KJV for the beautiful language, but it does have its limits. While serving as a Bible teacher at Ile-Ife in Nigeria a man from the British and Foreign Bible Society came to see me, and he sold me a whole box of New Testaments in Today's English. Somebody smelled they were there, and within a short time my box was empty. The nursing students, and others, were hungry for a message it was easier to understand.

Isn't that the purpose of the Word of God?

I tell people that the best version is the one that is READ.