Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

brandplucked

Are Bible Versions 99.5% the Same?

Recommended Posts

Are all bible versions 99.5% the same?

One of the common and most obvious falsehoods we often hear by those who rail against the idea that the King James Bible is the complete, inspired and 100% true words of God is the claim that all thousands of textual variations out there are very minor and not of any real importance, and that the various bible versions are basically 99.5% the same.

These ridiculous claims by those who do not believe that ANY Bible in ANY language are the complete, preserved and infallible words of God are so easily proven to be absurdly false that one has to assume that such people are either speaking out of complete ignorance of the facts or they are deliberately lying.

Here is one such claim found on a popular anti-King James Bible only site written by a man named Steve Rudd. http://www.bible.ca/b-KJV-only.htm We will look carefully at what he says and then respond to his statements. He writes:


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are all bible versions 99.5% the same?

One of the common and most obvious falsehoods we often hear by those who rail against the idea that the King James Bible is the complete, inspired and 100% true words of God is the claim that all thousands of textual variations out there are very minor and not of any real importance, and that the various bible versions are basically 99.5% the same.

These ridiculous claims by those who do not believe that ANY Bible in ANY language are the complete, preserved and infallible words of God are so easily proven to be absurdly false that one has to assume that such people are either speaking out of complete ignorance of the facts or they are deliberately lying.

Here is one such claim found on a popular anti-King James Bible only site written by a man named Steve Rudd. http://www.bible.ca/b-KJV-only.htm We will look carefully at what he says and then respond to his statements. He writes:


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets look at the facts : No.1 God Word SHALL NOT pass away
No.2 God is NOT the author of confusion
No.3 The serpent was the most subtle beast in the garden,i.e. which is how satan works !
Now , Gods Word shall not pass away which means its preserved for us English Speaking believers . He is not the author of confusion , SO He would NOT have left ``several`` versions of ``subtle `` differences to us !Therefore HE MUST have preserved His Word in One particular version . Also if He is not the author of confusion He undoubltedly gave enough common sense to His disciples to follow His lead by faith in choosing the proper version!
I have learned by study second and faith first , that the KJV is the ONLY version for the true believer !!
YES there are subtle differences in the other versions but then THATS HOW SATAN WORKS !
Forgive me ,for I feel I am preaching to the choir.
In Christ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not long back, in a publication from the Baptist Churches I grew up in, they revealed that from that time forward they would be using a modern version of the Bible to prepare the youths Sunday school Lessons.

The next week there was a letter to the editor saying how bad of an idea this was, that modern versions could not be trusted.

The next week there was 4 or 5 letters to the editor from pastors that said we will no longer use this literature for our youths.

The next week there were a few more letters, some for, some against. One was from a person that prepared the youths literature saying that this version of the Bible that we will use can be trusted, just as 3 or 4 more versions can, their something like 99% the same.

The next week there was about 4 letter published on this subject, 2 against modern version, 2 for, along with a note from the Editor. Keep in mind all of these letter were from pastors. The editor, which is a woman, said, "That will be the end of this discussion, we will not discuss this no more, do not send in no more letters."

I always like it when a woman usurps, excises, authority over pastors, of course they asked for it, by placing her in that position as editor.

I suppose as soon as 15 years back I would not have thought those churches would fall for the modern versions of the Bible. But I suppose many of them are getting duped by the seminaries they are attending. While others just go along with the world.

The older I get, I am fast approaching 65, the better I understand that narrow gate, & the broad wide gate, understanding many that claim top follow Christ will never approach that strait narrow gate, & how many leaders are leading many to the broad wide gate.

No doubt, you can trust the good old proven King James Bible, yet many of those modern versions will lead you away from that strait narrow gate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing how the KJB has a 400 year proven record yet folks today seem to think there is something wrong with the KJB and they must continually come up with different translations that are "better" but always have to be updated and retranslated so they can be "better". The reality is, it's all about money. Each new translation and update makes loads of money for those who make and sell them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, we are a group of people that has to have the latest & newest item. Throwing the old away even if it has lot of use left in it.

And with God, we know He nor His Word has changed.

One more thing I have noticed, with pastors, they have to have more than one version to force their agenda, of which it hard to do with one King James Bible.

Edited by Jerry80871852

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good point Jerry. Many pastors today love to use many different versions so they can get "Scripture" to agree with what they want to preach on. One church I visited back when looking for a church home the pastor quoted from at least six different versions. He didn't carry a Bible either (neither was anyone else I saw other than mysel and my son). Of course, no need to have a Bible if you are going to show the quotes on the big screens and it would be hard to fit a half dozen Bibles on the podium.

Another thing I've noticed is how many professing Christians buy the latest Bibles, saying they can't understand the one they have, but then they never actually read that one and they don't actually read the new one, or the next one. Why do some people expect to understand the Bible by reading a couple of verses a couple times a year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, & it seems to me, both pastors & church members speak of using modern versions for they are easier to understand.

But as we know, because of changes & wording in modern versions it well may lead them to understand a lie.

Ac 8:31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.

The best way to understand the Bible is perhaps is to pray to God that He will send someone along to help in this matter. It surely seems that is what this eunuch did, & God answered this prayer & sent Phillip to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One odd thing I've noticed over the past year or so is the number of non-KJB preachers quoting from the KJB because it's clearer than their MV! They won't use the KJB in their preaching, some even denounce the KJB as being less accurate than MVs, yet it seems more are now quoting from the KJB after reading the verse in from their MV because the KJB is clearer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was anything added to the text as the KJV was translated? Try 'God forbid'; try 'Easter' ; two glaring additions. There are others want me to prove it?


Hi kiwimacahau!

No offense intended, but I have a few questions...
  1. Are you a Christian?
  2. If so, what do you base your being a Christian on?
  3. Are you into textual criticism?
  4. If you proceed in pointing out "glaring additions", what manuscripts will you be using to base proving your point(s) on?
Edited by No Nicolaitans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was anything added to the text as the KJV was translated? Try 'God forbid'; try 'Easter' ; two glaring additions. There are others want me to prove it?


No, we do not want you to prove what you can't prove, to do so you have to get out of the honesty department, we like for people to stay honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, more KJV-only nonsense. If a modern version omits anything it is because the KJV added it in the first place.


Not so. My wife uses a French Bible. She uses a 1996 revision of the Ostervald, which itself was a revision of the 1535 Olivetan bible which was the first French bible. In the preface to the 1996 revision, it says that in all those centuries till the 20th Century, nothing was taken out of the French bible but after 1900, just as in the modern English versions, much was left out. Ther olivetan bable was the bible of the Vaudois (Evangelical christians of the Alps,) It was the bible of the réformateurs, Calvin, Farel and Théodore de Bèze. It was use was the fruit at numerous conversions. Its use encouraged sacrifice and revival. It uses the Texte Reçu, the Received Text which God has used through the centuries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, more KJV-only nonsense. If a modern version omits anything it is because the KJV added it in the first place.


Perhaps you should lean something about this site before you stared posting. To do so would shows respect for the owner, which your not showing, your only posting here because the owner lets you, its a privileged, not a right. If your going to post nonsense, you ought to go to a place that its allowed.

Now to the point, what this site believes about the KJ.


Just click on the above to find out.

Your welcomes to believe as you wish, but your not welcomed to run down the KJ Bible on this forum. If you have honest questions, ask, but don't ask questions with your point being to run down the KJ Bible.

On 2nd thought, I will copy & paste Regarding the KJV Issue below, making it easier for you to read it.



Most of us who devoutly believe and defend the King James Bible are well aware of how "stupid" "ignorant" "backward" "cultic" "unloving" and "narrow minded" we are IN YOUR EYES.

You do not need to tell us again, we heard you the first time and have been hearing you for hundreds of years. The trouble is that we are a loyal and faithful lot finding it difficult to change our stand and beliefs. Even with all of your books, magazines, articles, and posts, you have not given us any evidence, either material or Spiritual, to show that you offer us anything better than what we already have. In fact there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that you could even offer us anything as good as we have!

Therefore to listen to your insults, blasphemies, and offers, is a repeat of history and a waste of our time but we thank you for your concern (you did come out of true concern didn't you?) but we are really not interested in your offers.

We will however pray that you come to know and believe in something to the point that you are willing to stand as a true defender of the faith in the face of any and all opposition just as most of us do.

We DO however stand with open invitation to all who come sincerely seeking the truth in the matter of the King James Bible versus the Modern Versions. I don't know of a single KJBible defender who will lie to you or twist History or the Scriptures to make a point. If any do then they have other problems that need dealt with before the Lord and have no fellowship with the true defenders of God's Word.

We ask the seeker to look beneath all the hype and the arguments found in every public KJBible forum, for the devil sends such events to keep you discouraged and in the dark. Be not detoured from your mission of truth, for in the end the Spirit of God will testify to the Spirit in you as to what is true and what is not.

But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me: John 15:26

Written by Jim Oakley and used by permission.

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

Added 11/05/05

I feel it is time I bring this back up to the top. It seems we go in circles talking about these issues and neither side gets anywhere. It is a waste of my time and yours if you will not listen to answers when they are given. If you do not like our stand that is fine just remember that you are the one who came here to fellowship with us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who killed Goliath?
In reading the King James Bible Authorized Version, NIV and NASV, you can see that they do not teach the same thing:
2 Samuel 21:19
King James Bible Authorized Version: "...Elhanan slew the brother of Goliath..."
NIV: "...Elhanan killed Goliath..."
NASV: "...Elhanan killed Goliath..."
Daniel 3:25
King James Bible Authorized Version: "He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God."
NIV: "He said, Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed and the fourth looks like a son of the gods.
NASV: He answered and said, Look! I see four men loosed and walking about In the midst of the fire, without ham, and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods."
Genesis 6:4
King James Bible Authorized Version: "There were giants in the earth..."
NIV: "The Nephilim were on the earth..."
NASV: "The Nephilim were on the earth..."
Genesis 7:1
King James Bible Authorized Version: "And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou ... into the ark;"
NIV: "The Lord then said to Noah, Go into the ark,..."
NASV: "Then the Lord said to Noah, Enter the ark,..."
NOTE: There is a difference between "Come" and "Go". The King James Bible Authorized Version shows that the Lord was in the ark with Noah and his family.
I Samuel 13:1
King James Bible Authorized Version: "Saul reigned one year; and when he had reigned two years over Israel,"
NIV: "Saul was thirty years old when he became king, and he reigned over Israel forty two years."
NASV: "Saul was forty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned thirty-two years over Israel."
The KJV is the only modern English Bible we have ----- not the only Bible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 36 Guests (See full list)

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...