Which Bible?

[Cyberman]

Skeptic's annotated = king james

Ah - thanks.

[Christian]

Which bible do you use?

KJV. It is the best and unmodified.

[Cinjin]

KJV. It is the best and unmodified.

LOL ... this is such an AWESOME thread!!!

All of our resident True Christians™ (and they all claim to be) all use different Bibles and "know" that their pick is the best one to use.

LMAO ... I wonder which one of those is the right one??? Which one did their god put his stamp on??? And if you USE to read one and gave it up to read another version, does that mean you were living your life according to an imperfect version of the bible for a time period? No wait, let me guess ... the one you that you read NOW is just better suited for studying and understanding - they're all still god's holy word right?? "yep"

LMAO ... except of course when you make claims of context, copy errors, and modern translations to defend some contradiction you need to wriggle out of.


great thread ----- shows so much about their stupid stupid stupid religion.







By the way Christian(the member not the generic term ... and by the way, thanks for picking that name so everyone would get confused when we address you - fucktard), The KJV is jammed full with errors thanks to the fact that very few of the translators of that time had a real understanding of Hebrew ... but I'm sure your pastor has assured you of it's authenticity.

[DeeTee]

I am sorry if this has been brought up before, but I am new to these forums and just searched them attempting to find a post similar to this.

The question I have is for both Christians and Atheists who quote or argue with text from the bible, and it is simply this:

Which bible do you use?

The three best I have found are the KJV, the 1974 0r 80 NIV and the NASB, I think the 1972 or 76 version. I do not remember off hand. The latest or more recent translations are suspect as the influences from the secular world are getting stronger.

One has to remember that God promised to preserve His word so one does not have to worry as long as they rely on the Holy Spirit to lead them to that preserved work.

[kılıç_mehmet]

I am sorry if this has been brought up before, but I am new to these forums and just searched them attempting to find a post similar to this.

The question I have is for both Christians and Atheists who quote or argue with text from the bible, and it is simply this:

Which bible do you use?

The bible that everyone uses.

[Xyster]

I have a NIV , NKJV , KJV , red letter somthing or other( dont remember off hand) that I cross refernce with a Strongs exaustive concordance and to check refernce with the old test. I have a hebrew to eng TANAKH. So when someone challenges me on "little children or Youths" in 2 kings or the fact that Lucifer is a translation error and NOT a fallen angel.

[DeeTee]

I have a NIV , NKJV , KJV , red letter somthing or other( dont remember off hand) that I cross refernce with a Strongs exaustive concordance and to check refernce with the old test. I have a hebrew to eng TANAKH. So when someone challenges me on "little children or Youths" in 2 kings or the fact that Lucifer is a translation error and NOT a fallen angel.

Read John 14 and 16 as those two passages talk about the Holy Spirit helping believers and they say that the unbeliever cannot get the HS nor His help.

So with that in mind, why do you think your 'translation' work is going to produce the truth in the Bible?

[kılıç_mehmet]

I think nothing can produce truth in the current bible.
It is a book created out of books which are re-interpretations of eachother.
I solely respect the book, due to my kindred, of whom some are believers of the orthodox christian religion.

[Xyster]

I have a NIV , NKJV , KJV , red letter somthing or other( dont remember off hand) that I cross refernce with a Strongs exaustive concordance and to check refernce with the old test. I have a hebrew to eng TANAKH. So when someone challenges me on "little children or Youths" in 2 kings or the fact that Lucifer is a translation error and NOT a fallen angel.

Read John 14 and 16 as those two passages talk about the Holy Spirit helping believers and they say that the unbeliever cannot get the HS nor His help.

So with that in mind, why do you think your 'translation' work is going to produce the truth in the Bible?

LOL so only a true beliver can read the bible and get the "true" meaning if that was true there woulent be THOUSANDS of denominations..... give me a fuckn break... but then again that would fall into line that your god just likes to fuck with people

If the EVIL ONE was given dominion over this world it seems to me that he would have had a hand in writing the book and then brain washed the population to believe it.. how else could the killing of millions, genocide, slavery, child sacrifice and mysogonie be a good thing? He is not called the Great Deciever for nothing.. IF (verry big IF) the bible was inspired by a deity it was not an all loving god....... It is most likly a test and the only way to pass is to REJECT IT..

[Ryft]

The latest or more recent translations are suspect as the influences from the secular world are getting stronger. One has to remember that God promised to preserve His word so one does not have to worry as long as they rely on the Holy Spirit to lead them to that preserved work.

Wait, so God promised to preserve his word ... only until about 1980? After that, secular influences would become too strong for him?