Bible Study Bible Corruptions

[JLB]

I am not that familiar with the NKJV. The main thing that I like about the NET is that there are more than 60,000(!) translators' notes that do an excellent job of explaining, not only why a word, phrase, sentence, etc. was chosen, but the alternatives, problems, etc. In essence it thoroughly explains the reasons and difficulties of translating the ancient texts into 21st Century English.

Those who stick with one translation that they claim to be "superior" to others just don't understand the art/science of translation.

I will look at using the NET more, now that you have taken the time to explain why you like it.


I may start using it, even though I’m leary of using modern translations.




JLB

 

[Quantrill]

And your criteria for " the one that reflects the original writings from God, accurately" is? The KJV is a => translation <= and therefore cannot be 100% accurate considering that there are so many differences between the ancient source languages and the English product. Additionally, NOBODY ANYWHERE SPEAKS 17TH CENTURY ENGLYSHE AS THEIR NATIVE LANGUAGE so the KJV must be re-translated in the reader's mind.

So many hate (really? hate? Ya' think?) the KJV because it is an outdated translation, full of errors and mistranslations. Let me know when thou seest a unicorn.

The best translation is the one that conveys God's Word in one's native language as clearly as possible. That rules out the KJV from the start. So many excellent translations exist that there is no reason to use a 400+ year-old relic -- ever.

I have said many times already why the King James is the superior translation. It is based upon the Hebrew Masoretic Text for the Old Testament. It is based upon the Majority Text for the New Testament. Contrary to modern versions.

The style of English that the King James is written in doesn't matter. What matters is how true it is to the original manuscripts.

The King James doesn't need to be re-translated. If another translation is made, then make it following the Masoretic Text and the Majority Texts. Therein lies the problem.

The King James is not outdated. No translation has surpassed it. I doubt that more effort will ever be made to produce a translation then the King James. I doubt more money will ever be spent to produce a translation then the King James. I doubt you will ever see a nation support such an effort as the King James was. I doubt you will ever see a group of translators more devoted to God, then those who translated the King James Bible.

Translating into a native language is commendable. But if what you translate is not what was in the original manuscripts, what good is it? It's not. What you are translating from is key.

All modern translations are based upon the Septuagint and the Alexandrian Texts. The Minority Texts. I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them.

Quantrill

 

[GodIsMySavior]

I am not that familiar with the NKJV. The main thing that I like about the NET is that there are more than 60,000(!) translators'
Those who stick with one translation that they claim to be "superior" to others just don't understand the art/science of translation.

Great point.

I will look at using the NET more, now that you have taken the time to explain why you like it.

I may start using it, even though I’m leary of using modern translations.
JLB

I prefer reading YLT, but doing deeper study of the Grk texts.

A lot of Christians just prefer to read their favorite version [I started out with my daughter's NIV in 2003 and liked it. Went thru 2 of them and I then went to the NKJV my mother gave me.
Then I started delving into the Grk of the NT and found a plethora of Bible study sites and decided to create my own translation, harmonizinge the different Grk texts and looking at parallel verses in various Bible versions.

Translating the book of Revelation was especially daunting, merely because of so many variances within the major Grk texts.

Textual variants in the Book of Revelation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Textual variants in the Book of Revelation are the subject of the study called textual criticism of ... John Mill's 1707 Greek New Testament was estimated to contain some 30,000 variants in its accompanying textualapparatus which was based ...
‎Legend · ‎Notable textual variants
===================
I also look at various commentators, especially EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

One example I found
Are we Kings and Priests or a Kingdom to be Priests in Reve 1:6 and 5:10? We or They?

Revelation 5:10 - The Lamb is Worthy

You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign upon the earth.

biblehub.com

Revelation 1:6 5:10

King James Bible
Reve 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and ominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Reve 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
Young's Literal Translation
1:6 and did make us kings and priests to his God and Father, to him is the glory and the power to the ages of the ages! Amen.
5:10 and didst make us to our God kings and priests, and we shall reign upon the earth.'

Kingdom Priests

New American Standard Bible
1:6 and He has made us to be a kingdom, priests to His God and Father-- to Him be the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Amen.
5:10 "You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God; and they will reign upon the earth."
English Standard Version
Reve 1:6 and made us a kingdom, priests to his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.
5: 10 and you have made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth.
NETBible
1:6 and has appointed us as a kingdom, as priests serving his God and Father--to him be the glory and the power for ever and ever! Amen.
5:10 You have appointed them as a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth."
====================

Greek New Testament - Parallel Greek New Testament by John Hurt

The Parallel Greek New Testament can be downloaded for $5.00 or shipped on CD ROM, and contains 14 parallel Bible texts, including 5 Greek font texts.

www.greeknewtestament.com

Only the T R has Kings and Priests. The other 3 have a kingdom of priests.

Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus
kai epoihsen hmaV basileis kai iereiV tw qew kai patri autou autw h doxa kai to kratoV eiV touV aiwnaV twn aiwnwn amhn

Byzantine Majority
kai epoihsen hmaV basileian iereiV tw qew kai patri autou autw h doxa kai to kratoV eiV touV aiwnaV twn aiwnwn amhn
Biblehub is a favorite site of mine. Here you cand see various translations and commentaries of each verse
====================================

Revelation 1:6 Commentaries: and He has made us to be a kingdom, priests to His God and Father-- to Him be the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Amen.

biblehub.com

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

This is on Reve 1:6

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
6. and hath made] Lit., and He made; the construction “that loveth … and that freed …” is broken off, to be resumed by “to Him” in the next clause: kings and priests] Read, a kingdom, priests: a phrase synonymous with the “royal priesthood” of 1 Peter 2:9. That is an exact quotation from the LXX. version of Exodus 19:6 and a correct rendering of the Hebrew; this is not.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 6. - And hath made us kings and priests; rather, as in the Revised Version, and he made us (to be) a kingdom, (to be) priests. "Made us" is not coordinate with "loosed us;" the sentence makes a fresh start. "Kingdom," not "kings," is the right reading. Christians are nowhere said to be kings. Collectively they are a kingdom - "a kingdom of priests" (Exodus 19:6), or, as St. Peter, following the LXX., gives it, "a royal priesthood" (1 Peter 2:9).
==========================

 

[Quantrill]

My advice to any Christians today, who use the KJV Bible, is to buy now how many you think you will use for the rest of your life. Buy for you and your family.

There will come a time, when it will be Politically Correct to defame the King James Bible, and to halt it's publication. It will be seen as supporting slavery. It will be seen as against women. It will be seen as against homosexuals, etc, etc, etc. And many so called 'liberal christians' will be supporting such an effort.

If you know anything of history, you will know that as nations fall away from God, His Word becomes lost to them. Even Israel. (2 Kings 22:1-14)

Quantrill

 

[GodIsMySavior]

My advice to any Christians today, who use the KJV Bible, is to buy now how many you think you will use for the rest of your life. Buy for you and your family.
If you know anything of history, you will know that as nations fall away from God, His Word becomes lost to them. Even Israel. (2 Kings 22:1-14)
Quantrill

The Hebrew speaking Jews of today that convert to Jesus have a translation, and I find it pretty interesting.
Just saw it on biblehub:

Revelation 1 Orthodox Jewish Bible

biblehub.com

Orthodox Jewish Bible

1 The Hisgalus [Revelation, Appearance, Exposure of what is Nistar (Hidden), Sod (Secret), Raz (Mystery)] of Rebbe, Melech HaMoshiach Yehoshua/Yeshua [Zech 6:11-12; Ezra 3:8] which Hashem gave to him to show to his mesharetim (servants, klei kodesh, ministers) MAH DI LEHEVE (" what will happen," Dan 2:28f), the things which are destined to take place, and speedily; Rebbe, Melech HaMoshiach made it known by sending his malach (angel) to his mesharet (servant, keli kodesh, minister), Yochanan. [AMOS 3:7]

Revelation 1:1
An un-veiling/revealing of Jesus Christ, which gives to Him, the GOD, to show to the bond-servants of Him, which-things is binding to be becoming In Swiftness<5034>.

Revelation 1:1 TSK: This is the revelation of Jesus the Messiah, which God gave him to show his servants the things that must happen soon. He made it known by sending his messenger to his servant John,

biblehub.com

Revelation. 1:1 TofSK

Daniel 2:28, 29
But there is a God in heaven who reveals mysteries, and He has made known to King Nebuchadnezzar what will happen in the latter days. Your dream and the visions that came into your mind as you lay on your bed were these: . . .

Amos 3:7
Surely the Lord GOD does nothing without revealing His plan to His servants the prophets.

Romans 16:25
Now to Him who is able to strengthen you by my gospel and by the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery concealed for ages past,

 

[jaybo]

I will look at using the NET more, now that you have taken the time to explain why you like it.


I may start using it, even though I’m leary of using modern translations.




JLB

May I ask why you're "leary of using modern translations"? Do you think that modern translators are less capable than earlier translators? Don't you think that the plethora of source documents, both Biblical and not, that we have today, compared to what earlier translators had, allows for better translation than what translators used earlier? Don't you think that God's Word, written in your native language, is more understandable than a version written in a language that is no longer in daily use by anyone, anywhere?

Give a modern translation a try and let God speak to you in your own native language.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Could you post the version you are using?


1 John 4:20 is also one of my favorites.

NASB.

 

[SovereignGrace]

May I ask why you're "leary of using modern translations"? Do you think that modern translators are less capable than earlier translators? Don't you think that the plethora of source documents, both Biblical and not, that we have today, compared to what earlier translators had, allows for better translation than what translators used earlier? Don't you think that God's Word, written in your native language, is more understandable than a version written in a language that is no longer in daily use by anyone, anywhere?

Give a modern translation a try and let God speak to you in your own native language.

Isn’t the NKJV a modern version? Yes, I know it uses the same mss that the KJV uses, with updated English language, but wouldn’t it still be a modern version? I know the KJVO ppl loathe it, or most do.

 

[SovereignGrace]

My advice to any Christians today, who use the KJV Bible, is to buy now how many you think you will use for the rest of your life. Buy for you and your family.

There will come a time, when it will be Politically Correct to defame the King James Bible, and to halt it's publication. It will be seen as supporting slavery. It will be seen as against women. It will be seen as against homosexuals, etc, etc, etc. And many so called 'liberal christians' will be supporting such an effort.

If you know anything of history, you will know that as nations fall away from God, His Word becomes lost to them. Even Israel. (2 Kings 22:1-14)

Quantrill

King James Bible? Show me where I can buy a King James Bible. They don’t exist. There’s the King James Version(something the KJVO ppl will never accept, the KJV being a version) of the Holy Bible. But there’s no King James Bible. That’s just talk to put it in a pedestal to idolize.

 

[jaybo]

Isn’t the NKJV a modern version? Yes, I know it uses the same mss that the KJV uses, with updated English language, but wouldn’t it still be a modern version? I know the KJVO ppl loathe it, or most do.

Yes, the NKJV is a modern translation. From the publisher, " Commissioned in 1975 by Thomas Nelson Publishers, 130 respected Bible scholars, church leaders, and lay Christians worked for seven years to create a completely new, modern translation of Scripture, yet one that would retain the purity and stylistic beauty of the original King James. With unyielding faithfulness to the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic texts, the translation applies the most recent research in archaeology, linguistics, and textual studies." I don't like the name. If it's a completely new translation, why do they give it virtually the same name as a 400-year-old translation? (The answer is obvious: marketing. The name "King James Version" is not copyrighted)

 

[GodIsMySavior]

I’ll post two...
In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.[1 John 4:10]

We love, because He first loved us.[1 John 4:19]

Could you post the version you are using?

1 John 4:20 is also one of my favorites.

NASB.

May I ask why you're "leary of using modern translations"? Do you think that modern translators are less capable than earlier translators? Don't you think that the plethora of source documents, both Biblical and not, that we have today, compared to what earlier translators had, allows for better translation than what translators used earlier? Don't you think that God's Word, written in your native language, is more understandable than a version written in a language that is no longer in daily use by anyone, anywhere?

Give a modern translation a try and let God speak to you in your own native language.

Isn’t the NKJV a modern version? Yes, I know it uses the same mss that the KJV uses, with updated English language, but wouldn’t it still be a modern version? I know the KJVO ppl loathe it, or most do.

Let's compare the 4:

I will quote 1:John 4:20

1 John 4:20 - Love Comes from God

If anyone says, I love God, but hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen.

biblehub.com

New American Standard Bible
If someone says, "I love God," and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen.

New King James Version
If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen?

King James Bible
If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

Now compare, not only the literalness of YLT, but also the tenses and grammar which follows the Grk text quite nicely.
And because of it's literalness to the Grk texts, it is more awkward to read for newer Christians so it must be read slowly.

Young's Literal Translation
if any one may say -- 'I love God,' and his brother he may hate, a liar he is; for he who is not loving his brother whom he hath seen, God -- whom he hath not seen -- how is he able to love?
========================
YLT it younger than the KJV but older than the NKJV and NASB.

IMHO,YLT is more accurate and literal than either of the other 3.

Young's Literal Translation (YLT) is a translation of the Bible into English, published in 1862. The translation was made by Robert Young, compiler of Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible and Concise Critical Comments on the New Testament. Young used the Textus Receptus (TR) and the Masoretic Text (MT) as the basis for his translation.

The King James Version (KJV), also known as the King James Bible (KJB), sometimes as the English version of 1611, or simply the Authorized Version (AV), is an English translation of the Christian Bible for the Church of England, commissioned in 1604 and completed as well as published in 1611 under the sponsorship of James VI and I.[a]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version#cite_note-3

The New American Standard Bible (NASB) is an English translation of the Bible by the Lockman Foundation.[2]
The New Testament was first published in 1963, and the complete Bible in 1971.[3] The most recent edition of the NASB text was published in 1995.

The New King James Version (NKJV) is an English translation of the Bible first published in 1982 by Thomas Nelson.[1] The New Testament was published in 1979, the Psalms in 1980, and the full Bible in 1982. It took seven years to complete.[2] The anglicized edition was originally known as the Revised Authorized Version, but the NKJV title is now used universally.

 

[JLB]

May I ask why you're "leary of using modern translations"? Do you think that modern translators are less capable than earlier translators? Don't you think that the plethora of source documents, both Biblical and not, that we have today, compared to what earlier translators had, allows for better translation than what translators used earlier? Don't you think that God's Word, written in your native language, is more understandable than a version written in a language that is no longer in daily use by anyone, anywhere?

Give a modern translation a try and let God speak to you in your own native language.

The Lord speaks to me in English.

 

[JLB]

Isn’t the NKJV a modern version? Yes, I know it uses the same mss that the KJV uses, with updated English language, but wouldn’t it still be a modern version? I know the KJVO ppl loathe it, or most do.

What differences are their in the KJV and NKJV, besides it is in a more modern day English.

 

[JLB]

Let's compare the 4:

I will quote 1:John 4:20

1 John 4:20 - Love Comes from God

If anyone says, I love God, but hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen.

biblehub.com

New American Standard Bible
If someone says, "I love God," and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen.

New King James Version
If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen, how can he love God whom he has not seen?

King James Bible
If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

Now compare, not only the literalness of YLT, but also the tenses and grammar which follows the Grk text quite nicely.
And because of it's literalness to the Grk texts, it is more awkward to read for newer Christians so it must be read slowly.

Young's Literal Translation
if any one may say -- 'I love God,' and his brother he may hate, a liar he is; for he who is not loving his brother whom he hath seen, God -- whom he hath not seen -- how is he able to love?
========================
YLT it younger than the KJV but older than the NKJV and NASB.

IMHO,YLT is more accurate and literal than either of the other 3.

Young's Literal Translation (YLT) is a translation of the Bible into English, published in 1862. The translation was made by Robert Young, compiler of Young's Analytical Concordance to the Bible and Concise Critical Comments on the New Testament. Young used the Textus Receptus (TR) and the Masoretic Text (MT) as the basis for his translation.

The King James Version (KJV), also known as the King James Bible (KJB), sometimes as the English version of 1611, or simply the Authorized Version (AV), is an English translation of the Christian Bible for the Church of England, commissioned in 1604 and completed as well as published in 1611 under the sponsorship of James VI and I.[a]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version#cite_note-3

The New American Standard Bible (NASB) is an English translation of the Bible by the Lockman Foundation.[2]
The New Testament was first published in 1963, and the complete Bible in 1971.[3] The most recent edition of the NASB text was published in 1995.

The New King James Version (NKJV) is an English translation of the Bible first published in 1982 by Thomas Nelson.[1] The New Testament was published in 1979, the Psalms in 1980, and the full Bible in 1982. It took seven years to complete.[2] The anglicized edition was originally known as the Revised Authorized Version, but the NKJV title is now used universally.

I do refer to the YLT when discussing various verses, but as far as reading, I use the NKJV.

 

[JLB]

I like the NASB over the NKJV in this passage, as it brings out the enhanced definition of the word believe.


He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36 NKJV


He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36 NASB


Biblical believing results in obeying.




JLB

 

[Quantrill]

King James Bible? Show me where I can buy a King James Bible. They don’t exist. There’s the King James Version(something the KJVO ppl will never accept, the KJV being a version) of the Holy Bible. But there’s no King James Bible. That’s just talk to put it in a pedestal to idolize.

What nonsense.

Note I indicated KJV Bible. The V stands for version.

So, if you don't want to use the KJV, then don't. I don't care. I was addressing those who do.

Quantrill

 

[SovereignGrace]

What differences are their in the KJV and NKJV, besides it is in a more modern day English.

They took the thee’s and thou’s out. Plus, they replace Lucifer in Isaiah 14 with morning star, iirc. That’s two things they’ve changed.

 

[jasonc]

King James Bible? Show me where I can buy a King James Bible. They don’t exist. There’s the King James Version(something the KJVO ppl will never accept, the KJV being a version) of the Holy Bible. But there’s no King James Bible. That’s just talk to put it in a pedestal to idolize.

i submit the kjv is a revised version of 1611, it was revised twice, 1768 and 1801. i like that version but i also have tried to learn these, three years of spanish, some pashto and dari which actually is closer to the older culture of the jews then one would think. it helped me see things with the way jews were mentioned about shepharding and also the word to intreat , in fact the later beit(beth) is associated with abraham and also the marriage chuppa.

our modern culture is very much far from what the bible was revealed to as the prophets spoke and men moved to write. not that we must be able to understand that fully but it does help with things

 

[GodIsMySavior]

I like the NASB over the NKJV in this passage, as it brings out the enhanced definition of the word believe.

He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36 NKJV

He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36 NASB

Biblical believing results in obeying.
JLB

Makes sense.
Truthfully, I just really never got into the NASB, but I will include it when comparing verses as it is a popular version.

Some verses using G544 [which is used only 1 time in the Gospels. Rest in Acts, Epistles]

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G544&t=[B]NKJV[/B]&ss=1

Rom 11:30 For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience,

1Pe 2:7 Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient,[fn]
“The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone,”[fn]

1Pe 4:17
For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?
=========================
He who believes<4100> in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey<544> the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36 NASB

Greek and Hebrew Reader Online

biblewebapp.com

36 ὁ πιστεύων<4100> εἰς τὸν υἱὸν ἔχει ζωὴν αἰώνιον· ὁ ἀπειθῶν1 τῷ υἱῷ οὐκ ὄψεται<544> ζωήν, ἀλλ’ ἡ ὀργὴ τοῦ θεοῦ μένει ἐπ’ αὐτόν,

4100. pisteuo pist-yoo'-o from 4102; to have faith (in, upon, or with respect to, a person or thing), i.e. credit; by implication, to entrust (especially one's spiritual well-being to Christ):--believe(-r), commit (to trust), put in trust with.

544. apeitheo ap-i-theh'-o from 545; to disbelieve (wilfully and perversely):--not believe, disobedient, obey not, unbelieving.

 

[GodIsMySavior]

They took the thee’s and thou’s out. Plus, they replace Lucifer in Isaiah 14 with morning star, iirc. That’s two things they’ve changed.

I especially like the use of the thee's, thou's and also the ye's [to distinquish between sing "you" and the plural.]

I use those in my own translations.

A few examples.
It is not just the High Priest Jesus is talking to, but the rest of his clan:

Matthew 26:64 Jesus is saying to him "thou say,
moreover, I am saying to ye, from present<737> ye shall be seeing the Son of the Man sitting out of the rights<1188> of the Power and coming upon the clouds of the heaven

Same as in this awsome parable
This is not just one person, but also a people associated with this Rich Man.
I couldn't find any versions that used the plural "ye".

Luke 16:26 - The Rich Man and Lazarus

And besides all this, a great chasm has been fixed between us and you, so that even those who wish cannot cross from here to you, nor can anyone cross from there to us.'

biblehub.com

Luke 16:26 And upon all of these between us and ye a great chasm hath been established, so that those willing to cross-over/diabhnai <1224> (5629) hence toward ye no may be able,
neher thence toward us may be ferrying/diaperwsin <1276> (5725)

Gives me a chance to link to my study thread on Luke 16:

Parable/Story of the Rich Man and Lazarus.

This, what I like to call a "Covenantle" parable/story, is perhaps my largest study of the NT of the Bible, and I would like to share it with others as I go thru it verse by verse, and I welcome comments on it. I happen to like the commentary on this site, as he delves into the Greek a lot [as...

christianforums.net