Jesus Christ foresaw that there will be groups that will breakaway from the Church he founded and so he gave the Church the sole authority to interpret Sacred Scripture. The teaching authority of the Catholic Church comes directly from Christ and is, therefore, infallible.
Matthew 16,18-20: "And so I tell you Peter, you are a rock, and on this rock foundation I will build my Church, and not even death will ever be able to overcome it. I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven; what you prohibit on earth will be prohibited in heaven and what you permit on earth will be permitted in heaven."
Matthew 28,20: "And teach them to obey everything I have commanded you. And I will be with you always, to the end of the age."
Timothy 3,15: "But if I delay, this letter will let you know how we should conduct ourselves in God's household, WHICH IS THE CHURCH OF THE LIVING GOD, THE PILLAR AND FOUNDATION OF TRUTH."
St. Paul begs the early Christians to be unified in mind and in what they say. There can only be one "true" Christian Church. How can the Holy Spirit guide the Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church, the Presbyterian Church, the Baptist Church, etc. if all of those denominations have doctrines and beliefs differing from each other? There is only one interpretation of the Bible. Otherwise, people can and have "read" literally anything into It.
What did Martin Luther, the Protestant Reformer, state about the Bible? In his "Commentary On St. John," he stated the following: "We are compelled to concede to the Papists that they have the Word of God, that we have received It from them, and that without them we should have no knowledge of It at all." Regardless of what non-Catholic Christians may think or say, according to secular, objective historians, the Catholic Church alone preserved Sacred Scripture throughout the persecution of the Roman Empire and during the Dark Ages. All non-Catholic Christian denominations owe the existence of the Bible to the Catholic Church alone. Why did God choose the Catholic Church to preserve Scripture if It is not His Church?
2007-04-04 02:09:54
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Is there really just 26?
Anyway, the ones with the works of Westcott and Hort are the most accurate.
Most Bibles compiled in the 1800's are good because more was available for the translaters than when the KJV and other Clementine Bibles were made.
Back to Westcott and Hort, they were award winning Greek scholars, but their works are rejected by most churches. Why?
Because their works disprove much of church doctrine.
One more note, Bibles edited after 1987 have God's Name completely removed. Ones like the NKJV, NIV are very inaccurate.
2007-04-04 09:06:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by rangedog 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Jason David BeDuhn, Ph.D. is an historian of religion and culture, currently Associate Professor of Religious Studies at Northern Arizona University.
He subsequently wrote Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament (ISBN 0-7618-2556-8), which generated controversy when he found the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (published by Jehovah's Witnesses) and the New American Bible (published by the American Catholic Church) to be more accurate than other respected translations linked to Protestant constituencies. He had criticisms for every translation he reviewed, finding a consistent pattern of anachronistically imposing modern Christian views onto the biblical text. He has also been active on the www in discussions (two of which can be read online still) notably with evangelicals/trinitarians where he has argued against certain translations (not interpretations) often used by such in support of their belief that Jesus Christ is "God," maintaining that a wide variety of views about the nature and status of Christ were held by early Christians and are discernible in the Bible.
2007-04-04 08:59:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
You mean English translations?
Any that have good and reputable Bible translators on staff. They do not contradict each other.
FYI there were plenty of translations before the King James. And after. It was not the first of anything except the first to be commissioned by King James.
2007-04-04 08:54:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by Makemeaspark 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
they are not "versions" that would indicate that meanings are different - they are translations and they all are translations from the original language -
They all are true - and to study the Bible the best way to do it is to use more then one to get a more in depth understanding
2007-04-04 08:57:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by servant FM 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
NRSV (New Revised Standard Version) is the closest to the original greek and hebrew texts.
2007-04-04 09:00:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by GLSigma3 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
King James Version . It's the closest ,not perfect but the best to the truth
2007-04-04 08:56:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Anyone but the New World Translation
Seriously....the NWT was put together by the Watchtower Society and all of the references to the Deity of Christ were strategically yanked out....and that's a blasphemous no no
2007-04-04 08:54:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by primoa1970 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
God knows the heart of the seeker....He is bigger than a version of His word...if someone seeks Him...He is there....this is the glory of our Father in Heaven, who is jealous for our attention and faithful with His love and mercy....so....without all the doctrine, theology, denominational, religion.....any version is true when the reader is seeking truth...Gods there....cause He is God.....†
2007-04-04 08:57:55
·
answer #9
·
answered by implumbus 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
the one before the first
2007-04-04 08:54:56
·
answer #10
·
answered by Invisible_Flags 6
·
0⤊
0⤋