Are they leaving out more scriptures in the newer versions? And yes, I only read the KJV, because I haven't heard anyone else say there is a newer version that is better. Besides, that is what we use at church and Bible study.
2006-06-18 10:27:55 · 15 answers · asked by mitch 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I didn't say you couldn't use any other Bible in our church. You are free to bring any. we just use KJV9 Pastor and Bible Study teacher)....
2006-06-18 12:15:31 · update #1
All answers were good! Even the one from Taimer. Sounds like he loves to disprove the trinity! Must be Muslim?
2006-06-19 11:32:10 · update #2
I am staying with the KJV
1 John 5:7
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are ONE
2006-06-18 10:30:59 · answer #1 · answered by ? 3 · 5⤊ 2⤋
The closest verse regarding "Trinity" in the Bible, has now been thrown out of the Bible
1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one."
In the Revised Standard Version of the Bible (R.S.V.) revised by 32 Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 different co-operating denominations, this verse which is the keystone of the Christian faith of trinity has been removed as an interpolation . Its no longer there in the RS Version of the bible, because the RS Version of the bible takes back more closer to the source, approx. 200 years after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus Christ pbuh. The more closer to the source, the more authentic it is.
It has NOT been expunged from the Revised Standard Version of the Bible by the Muslims or by non-Christian scholars, but by 32 Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 different cooperating denominations as a fabricated insertion of the church, because this verse does not exist in the original manuscript.
GOOD NEWS BIBLE
1st Epistle of John, chapter 5
verse no 7 - There are three witnesses:
verse no. 8- the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and all three give the same testimony
REVISED STANDARD VERSION
1st Epistle of John, chapter 5
[7] And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth.
[8] There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree.
This verse (1 John 5:7 of KJV) is now universally recognized as being a later "insertion" of the Church. All recent versions of the Bible, such as the Revised Standard Version the New Revised Standard Version, the New American Standard Bible, the New English Bible, the Phillips Modern English Bible ...etc. have all unceremoniously expunged this verse from their pages. Why?
Don't you think it is possible that other passages in the Bible may likewise be later additions?
The scripture translator Benjamin Wilson gives the following explanation for this action in his "Emphatic Diaglott." Mr. Wilson says:
"This text concerning the heavenly witness is not contained in any Greek manuscript which was written earlier than the fifteenth century. It is not cited by any of the ecclesiastical writers; not by any of early Latin fathers even when the subjects upon which they treated would naturally have lead them to appeal to it's authority. It is therefore evidently spurious."
2006-06-18 18:26:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some early manuscripts do not contain that verse. As such, its inclusion would be "to add anything to the prophecies".
"Better" is very subjective, especially when it comes to translations. By the use of older manuscripts, translators aim to provide a closer approximation to what was originally meant.
Would you rather read a translation that contained only the text that the original author wrote, or one that included material which was added to by other people, in a later point in time?
If your preference is for the second, then stick with the KJV. If your preference is for the former, then use one of the newer translations. Or better still, learn Greek & Hebrew, and read the text in the original language. That way can you see just how diverse the manuscripts are.
2006-06-18 19:03:04 · answer #3 · answered by jblake80856 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, everyone else is wrong. I've seen at least one NIV, along with other translations, that has an added footnote explaining some ancient texts don't appear with this line, so they felt it necessary to place it separate. They still give a translation, but if anything they are being more honest and objective in their translations. And when did it become popular in the church to deny any non KJV? Do you all approve of NKJV??
2006-06-18 17:35:16 · answer #4 · answered by tomservo552 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You answered your own question. It says in Revelation 22:18-19
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part of of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are writtten in this book.
To believe completely in this book (the Bible), you have to have faith. Other versions mess this book up completely. The Bible is the Inspiration of God, and whoever takes the words away, will be accountable for it at judgement.
The KJV is the very first english translation, taken from the original greek text, authorized by King James in 1611. The number 7 represents Gods number of completion, and that are exactly 7 translations from the original Hebrew and Greek texts. The KJV is the 7th one.
Hope this helps. Kayla
2006-06-18 18:23:07 · answer #5 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, people take out verses in the newer versions. They also take out Acts 8:36 or 37. They don't like a verse, so they just take it out and say it was later added to the KJV, baloney, you understand.
2006-06-18 17:32:33 · answer #6 · answered by jessicake 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because that verse, and some others mentioned above, are not a part of the best and earliest Greek manuscripts, which means they were more than likely added on at a later time and are not original to the text.
2006-06-18 17:36:59 · answer #7 · answered by Swish 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've heard that they found older texts that pre-date the ones the KJV went off and they dont have i think that verse and others so it was probably added into it by someone other then the author
2006-06-18 17:36:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
1John 5:7 was never in any of the inspired Greek manuscripts. So I guess the NIV is more updated.
2006-06-18 17:50:41 · answer #9 · answered by KNOWBIBLE 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's the very reason that my old KJV is duct taped together.
I've had people offer to buy me a new one and I always say thanks but no thanks.
Some have even said it don't look right for a Preacher to carry a Bible taped together.
I'm not interested in looking right, but being right.
2006-06-18 17:46:21 · answer #10 · answered by drg5609 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The NIV is a good example of twisting and picking scripture they want to keep, get rid of or change.
2006-06-18 17:31:56 · answer #11 · answered by Loo 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋