Definitions:
Revise-To reconsider and change or modify. to amend or alter.

Edit-To prepare (written material) for publication or presentation, as by correcting, revising, or adapting.

Edition-.one of a series of printings of the same book, newspaper, etc., each issued at a different time and differing from another by alterations, additions, etc ...

Redaction: -Redaction is a form of editing in which multiple source texts are combined ( redacted) and altered slightly to make a single document.


The entire body of christianity rests rests solely on the words written in the Bible.
To Christians, the bible is the inerrant words of god, inspired and dictated to by the holy spirit.

Therefore, for christians, the bible explains origin, creation, history, priesthood, rules and commandments, as well as salvation and punishment.

To Christians, the bible is :

1. The word of god.
2. Sacred
3. Truthful and factual.
4. Perfect and non-contradictory.
5. Complete and Sufficient.

With all these attributes in mind, it is kind of confusing to note that starting from early days of the christian movement, the bible has undergone many many major redactions, editings and revisions by various self-appointed bodies or groups of men.

In fact, no major religion that we know ever revises or edits it's sacred scriptures from time to time.

What is even more ironic and puzzling is the fact original manuscripts or scrolls which would have served as a genuine template fro these revisions or editions do not exist anywhere , nor have they been mentioned or cited in any theological literature, past and present.

Apart from the glaring and obvious contradiction in editing and revising god's complete words, my question is: who qualifies and what criteria or template are the additions and subtractions based on?

Who is competent enough, equally wise or wiser than the supposed author of these great literary works?

Are revisions done for Truth or for Ecclesiastical Agendas?

Is an edited or revised truth still truth?

If the bible is 100% whole, 100% complete, and 100% inspired truth, then when it is edited, revised, redacted, etc, it can no longer be 100% whole and 100% truth.
If you add or subtract anything from 100%, then common sense says that it can no longer remain 100%.
The new revised product is either 110% or 90%, more or less than the original starting material.

Since the bible has undergone countless number of revisions( very strange for a supposedly perfect works of god) over the years, what might be the percentage of wholeness, completeness and truth in today's current editions of the christian bible?
150% or 50%? More or less?
It has got to be either.
You cannot alter something, and still expect it to remain same.
That would be cognitive desonance.

What is even more hilarious(for want of a better word) is the fact that in this great literary work, different editions and versions are circulating simultaneously.
That makes little sense for supposedly perfect and complete words of an omini omni lone superpower of the universe.

Even renowned pervert, Jimmy Swaggart, has his own Jimmy Swaggart Bible, edited in his own words.


How many versions of one truth can you have?
When truth is divided into so many different versions, is it still the whole truth, or just partial-truth?

Can Christians come and enlighten us , please.

You are indirectly saying bible shouldnt be translated to various language

The bible is revised simply to suit the language of the people at any particular time.
Take for example the language of shakesparean novels, English language was used different from what we have now. Words like anon, ere, etc, are no longer used these days.
The best way to communicate with the people of this era would be to revise and edit this language no longer in existence to the current trend.
What do you think?

saintvc: You are indirectly saying bible shouldnt be translated to various language

I don't think that is his position. He's talking about the revision that happens with a particular language.

the op is one of many atheists who keeps musing and questioning about a none existence God (according to them). Have never seen folks so bothered about nothingness as atheists. Its obvious, how boring and mind dibilitating atheism is without christianity. Like an atheist inferred, "the presence of christians make atheistism interesting". such is the emptiness that goes with atheism. The long essay, most likely copied by the op from a foreign website is baseless and pointless, why? OP, WITHOUT GOGGLING, POINT OUT A PART OF THE BIBLE THAT HAVE BEEN EDITED OUT, BY WHOM, AND WHEN.

The bible was written in hebrews..not everybody understands hebrew so there was a need 4 it to be translated to english. Just lyk any other language, you cnt find translatns to english for all words, u can only find words very similar. Now, english spoken 100 to 200 yrs ago isnt the same spoken now, sme words av bn changed even in the dictionary that we use. So as time goes by nd as sme words fade, dont u think they need to be changed in d bible?
Ur assignement is: take as many versions of d bible u knw and read, u'l find out dey are The same things said said in different ways. Thanks

Rhymeyjohn: the op is one of many atheists who keeps musing and questioning about a none existence God (according to them). Have never seen folks so bothered about nothingness as atheists. Its obvious, how boring and mind dibilitating atheism is without christianity. Like an atheist inferred, "the presence of christians make atheistism interesting". such is the emptiness that goes with atheism. The long essay, most likely copied by the op from a foreign website is baseless and pointless, why? OP, WITHOUT GOGGLING, POINT OUT A PART OF THE BIBLE THAT HAVE BEEN EDITED OUT, BY WHOM, AND WHEN.

Let's not bother ourselves on the sincerity of his question nor throw in red herrings.

Reyginus:
The bible is revised simply to suit the language of the people at any particular time.
Take for example the language of shakesparean novels, English language was used different from what we have now. Words like anon, ere, etc, are no longer used these days.
The best way to communicate with the people of this era would be to revise and edit this language no longer in existence to the current trend.
What do you think?

Oh really ?
So it's about language, huh?
Are you sure of that?

Ok then, please kindly tell me since the king James version of the bible was translated, how many different versions of the English language has there been?

Or, better still, how many different versions of the English Language we currently speaking today?
Because, there is at least 50 or more editions of the English bible currently in circulation.

Does Yoruba dialect of english deserve it's edition, Warri, it's own edition too, etc?

Do you now realise that what your rather quick justification does not make much sense?

How come muslims insist that adherents study the Koran in it's original language of Arabic?

Rhymeyjohn: the op is one of many atheists who keeps musing and questioning about a none existence God (according to them). Have never seen folks so bothered about nothingness as atheists. Its obvious, how boring and mind dibilitating atheism is without christianity. Like an atheist inferred, "the presence of christians make atheistism interesting". such is the emptiness that goes with atheism. The long essay, most likely copied by the op from a foreign website is baseless and pointless, why? OP, WITHOUT GOGGLING, POINT OUT A PART OF THE BIBLE THAT HAVE BEEN EDITED OUT, BY WHOM, AND WHEN.

Of course, atheism would not even have a name without religion.

And yes, religious irrationality makes good food for our bored brains.
So what?

When was the last time an atheist stopped on you on the road to preach to you?
As long as religion and religious folks disturb my peace and my space, I will always endeavor to understand the method in their overwhelming madness.

Now, back to the topic.

Are you denying that the bible has never been edited?

anochuko01: The bible was written in hebrews..not everybody understands hebrew so there was a need 4 it to be translated to english. Just lyk any other language, you cnt find translatns to english for all words, u can only find words very similar. Now, english spoken 100 to 200 yrs ago isnt the same spoken now, sme words av bn changed even in the dictionary that we use. So as time goes by nd as sme words fade, dont u think they need to be changed in d bible?
Ur assignement is: take as many versions of d bible u knw and read, u'l find out dey are The same things said said in different ways. Thanks

We are not talking about translations here.
Pls read my post again.

If it was about translations, then we would have one single bible edition for each and every language .
Not so?
Please address the posers if you can.

plaetton:

Oh really ?
So it's about language, huh?
Are you sure of that?

Very sure.

plaetton:

Ok then, please kindly tell me since the king James version of the bible was translated, how many different versions of the English language has there been?

Frankly speaking, I don't know.

plaetton:

Or, better still, how many different versions of the English Language we currently speaking today?
Because, there is at least 50 or more editions of the English bible currently in circulation.

I don't know either. I'm yet to see where you are heading to

plaetton:

Does Yoruba dialect of english deserve it's edition, Warri, it's own edition too, etc?

Yes. The principal thing is to enable communication. You can add the igbo version too.

plaetton:

Do you now realise that what your rather quick justification does not make much sense?

I'm willing to admit it if you are willing to show me your meaning.

plaetton:

How come muslims insist that adherents study the Koran in it's original language of Arabic?

I think to avoid it getting twisted.

plaetton:

Oh really ?
So it's about language, huh?
Are you sure of that?

Ok then, please kindly tell me since the king James version of the bible was translated, how many different versions of the English language has there been?

Or, better still, how many different versions of the English Language we currently speaking today?
Because, there is at least 50 or more editions of the English bible currently in circulation.

Does Yoruba dialect of english deserve it's edition, Warri, it's own edition too, etc?

Do you now realise that what your rather quick justification does not make much sense?

How come muslims insist that adherents study the Koran in it's original language of Arabic?

i'm sure u didnt do what i asked you to do in the latter part of my post. If u did dat, did u find any difference? If yes, pls let me know.
How do you expect me to read the quran in arabic when i'v never attendend arabic classes? There's no way d quran would be translatd without aving the slightest issue as well.
Take an example... The word HIGH is gradually replacing the word DRUNK... If this change is made in d bible, does it render the bible useless?

Reyginus: Very sure.
Frankly speaking, I don't know.
I don't know either. I'm yet to see where you are heading to
Yes. The principal thing is to enable communication. You can add the igbo version too.
I'm willing to admit it if you are willing to show me your meaning.
I think to avoid it getting twisted.

My point is simple.
I can understand translating a bible to a particular language. That was not my concern in the op.
Today, everyone speaks one standard english that everyone in every country can understand.
Therefore, if it was about language per se, then there would be only one standrad edition of the English bible.
Not so , sir?

But today, we have one standard english taught in schools and used world wide for communication, so why do we have more than 50 different editions (and growing) of the english bible currently in circulation?

How can the truth of one edition be the same as the others?
If they are the same truth, then what is the point of revisions and editions?.
The truths of the bible are in words.
Therefore periodic alteration of words would undoubtedly alter the wholeness and completeness of presumed truths of the bible.

That is the issue I want all to dwell on and help me understand.

anochuko01:

i'm sure u didnt do what i asked you to do in the latter part of my post. If u did dat, did u find any difference? If yes, pls let me know.
How do you expect me to read the quran in arabic when i'v never attendend arabic classes? There's no way d quran would be translatd without aving the slightest issue as well.
Take an example... The word HIGH is gradually replacing the word DRUNK... If this change is made in d bible, does it render the bible useless?

The word "High" is gradually replacing the word "Drunk" in your neighborhood?
Excellent!

So a new edition of your neighborhood bible should read " God most drunk" , instead of "God Most High"?
Lol.
Do you now understand what I mean?
Thank you for helping make my point.

Now that we have made that point clear with the above example, the rest of you should try to have a serious and honest discussion on this issue.

plaetton: Definitions:
Revise-To reconsider and change or modify. to amend or alter.

Edit-To prepare (written material) for publication or presentation, as by correcting, revising, or adapting.

Edition-.one of a series of printings of the same book, newspaper, etc., each issued at a different time and differing from another by alterations, additions, etc ...

Redaction: -Redaction is a form of editing in which multiple source texts are combined ( redacted) and altered slightly to make a single document.


The entire body of christianity rests rests solely on the words written in the Bible.
To Christians, the bible is the inerrant words of god, inspired and dictated to by the holy spirit.

Therefore, for christians, the bible explains origin, creation, history, priesthood, rules and commandments, as well as salvation and punishment.

To Christians, the bible is :

1. The word of god.
2. Sacred
3. Truthful and factual.
4. Perfect and non-contradictory.
5. Complete and Sufficient.

With all these attributes in mind, it is kind of confusing to note that starting from early days of the christian movement, the bible has undergone many many major redactions, editings and revisions by various self-appointed bodies or groups of men.

In fact, no major religion that we know ever revises or edits it's sacred scriptures from time to time.

What is even more ironic and puzzling is the fact original manuscripts or scrolls which would have served as a genuine template fro these revisions or editions do not exist anywhere , nor have they been mentioned or cited in any theological literature, past and present.

Apart from the glaring and obvious contradiction in editing and revising god's complete words, my question is: who qualifies and what criteria or template are the additions and subtractions based on?

Who is competent enough, equally wise or wiser than the supposed author of these great literary works?

Are revisions done for Truth or for Ecclesiastical Agendas?

Is an edited or revised truth still truth?

If the bible is 100% whole, 100% complete, and 100% inspired truth, then when it is edited, revised, redacted, etc, it can no longer be 100% whole and 100% truth.
If you add or subtract anything from 100%, then common sense says that it can no longer remain 100%.
The new revised product is either 110% or 90%, more or less than the original starting material.

Since the bible has undergone countless number of revisions( very strange for a supposedly perfect works of god) over the years, what might be the percentage of wholeness, completeness and truth in today's current editions of the christian bible?
150% or 50%? More or less?
It has got to be either.
You cannot alter something, and still expect it to remain same.
That would be cognitive desonance.

What is even more hilarious(for want of a better word) is the fact that in this great literary work, different editions and versions are circulating simultaneously.
That makes little sense for supposedly perfect and complete words of an omini omni lone superpower of the universe.

Even renowned pervert, Jimmy Swaggart, has his own Jimmy Swaggart Bible, edited in his own words.


How many versions of one truth can you have?
When truth is divided into so many different versions, is it still the whole truth, or just partial-truth?

Can Christians come and enlighten us , please.

If we go back through history, you will agree with me that the bible was the handiwork of some institutions that wanted to establish their authority, plain and simple. Religious individuals are simply the ones that are too dumb to think and challenge. Up ATHEISTS.

plaetton:

The word "High" is gradually replacing the word "Drunk" in your neighborhood?
Excellent!

So a new edition of your neighborhood bible should read " God most drunk" , instead of "God Most High"?
Lol.
Do you now understand what I mean?
Thank you for helping make my point.

Now that we have made that point clear with the above example, the rest of you should try to have a serious and honest discussion on this issue.

haha...u must be a comedian. I meant high in the sense of been drunk. Look at this:Ephesians 5:18 ''And be not
'drunk' with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit''
i know u would not refer to God as the Most drunk, i cn undrstnd ur anxiety bro.

.

plaetton:

My point is simple.
I can understand translating a bible to a particular language. That was not my concern in the op.
Today, everyone speaks one standard english that everyone in every country can understand.
Therefore, if it was about language per se, then there would be only one standrad edition of the English bible.
Not so , sir?

But today, we have one standard english taught in schools and used world wide for communication, so why do we have more than 50 different editions (and growing) of the english bible currently in circulation?

How can the truth of one edition be the same as the others?
If they are the same truth, then what is the point of revisions and editions?.
The truths of the bible are in words.
Therefore periodic alteration of words would undoubtedly alter the wholeness and completeness of presumed truths of the bible.

That is the issue I want all to dwell on and help me understand.

I will continue having problem with you guys when you dont reason from another angle.

Pls is there no difference between british english, jamaican english and american english?

Make your argument something better pls

plaetton:

My point is simple.
I can understand translating a bible to a particular language. That was not my concern in the op.

I didn't mention 'translation' in my post either. I don't know where you are getting that from.

plaetton:
Today, everyone speaks one standard english that everyone in every country can understand.
Therefore, if it was about language per se, then there would be only one standrad edition of the English bible.
Not so , sir?

Plaetton, you are speaking as though these new editions came into existence a decade ago. As if it is a recent development.
On another note, the editorial body of a new version may have considered and observed that the existing ones are not properly reduced to the understanding of lay men. So they set up a new version to correct that.
Mind you, that it is not properly understood by everyone does not make any version useless. Two different versions may use 'the colour of coal' and 'sun burned' to tell that the colour is black. It doesn't take away the meaning.

plaetton:
But today, we have one standard english taught in schools and used world wide for communication, so why do we have more than 50 different editions (and growing) of the english bible currently in circulation?

No plaetton, I don't agree that we have one standard English. Where then do we now place the American English.
Like I answered above, it is done to fit the language the particular people are familiar with.
Using words like high school, 5th grade, etc is correct in English language, but in Nigeria, such languages will confuse us. It would make much sense if we use that familuar with a people.

plaetton:
How can the truth of one edition be the same as the others?

Lol. Plaetton you are being mischievious now. We know the information any statement carries is not in the particuliar words used but their implications. Like saying that the question, 'where does plaetton live?' and 'plaetton lives where?', have different implications.

plaetton:
If they are the same truth, then what is the point of revisions and editions?.
The truths of the bible are in words.
Therefore periodic alteration of words would undoubtedly alter the wholeness and completeness of presumed truths of the bible.

Slight oversight on your path. The truth of the bible are not in words, bro, but the implications of the words. It didn't occur to you that we wouldn't be having this conversation if the truth is the words.
We would be questioning its translation.

plaetton:
That is the issue I want all to dwell on and help me understand.

I'm trying my best to.

FOLYKAZE:

I will continue having problem with you guys when you dont reason from another angle.

Pls is there no difference between british english, jamaican english and american english?

Make your argument something better pls

i'v u ever read the same verse of the bible from different versions and you got different meanings? If yes, kindly let us know. If no, why do you pple argue?

anochuko01:

i'v u ever read the same verse of the bible from different versions and you got different meanings? If yes, kindly let us know. If no, why do you pple argue?

Lol. Dude, he is on your side.

Reyginus: Lol. Dude, he is on your side.

lol, sorry bro! I quoted d wrong person!
I raised this same point d other time and nobody answered me.

anochuko01:
lol, sorry bro! I quoted d wrong person!
I raised this same point d other time and nobody answered me.

Oh don't worry, I will give you plenty.

FOLYKAZE:

I will continue having problem with you guys when you dont reason from another angle.

Chill bros.
The reason we, including your honorable self, open threads is usually for the purpose of eliciting viewpoints from the other side that one might have missed or overlooked.
But viewpoints have to stand on firm logical and sensible grounds to be considered, let alone accepted.

FOLYKAZE:


Pls is there no difference between british english, jamaican english and american english?

No, there is no difference in the standard english spoken in these places.
What you have are drawls, different pronunciations , voice inflections and broken shortforms.
A jamaican speaks with a jamaican accent but clearly understands , writes and reads standard english.
Same thing with Americans. Americans even different accents depending on whether you are in the North or the South, the east or the West.

In the Uk, the same applies.

I have never read any literary work written in an Irish accent, Jamaican accent( except for cartoons or comedies) or the southern accents of the united states.
American schools teach and write in standard english. American authors write in standard english .

I first read shakespear when I was secondary school class 2, and I understood and enjoyed it, irrespective of the that it was written in old standard English .
Shakespear, in any other variation of english other than the original would be garbled nonsense.

Achebe's Things Fall Apart , written in Ebonics(lol) or Jamaican Patua, or Warri broken English would be a piece of garbage.


So, you guys should stop being disengenuous by pretending that you not understand my querry in this op.

The constant revisions and editions of the Bible can hardly be attributed to the need to respond to small differences or nuances in standard English.

Every religion of the world especially paganic religions do not Change because it is your own version/story of the world as it relates to you.

The Jews wrote the Bible not because it is true but because it relates with them, and that is how they want neighbors to see them.

The Greeks have their history books which is based on everything Greek, mostly written by Homer. I have realized some things were written as it relates to them, and how they want their neighbors to see them

Yoruba have oral traditions and Odu-Ifa, it is the story of the world as it relates wit the Yoruba.

These Beliefs aren't lies, but nothing is to prove their truth.

The Romans who translated the Bible to Greek, did as it wud be to their taste.

The latinos did as they knew little about Greek

The English, which I suspect to have made numerous errors then copied from Latin, which probably made mistakes with their own translation from Greek.

some mistakes in the English Bible might not have been the English doing but the greeks.

there as been a lot of controversy with "Lucifer" a Latin word meaning morning star. Isaiah used that statement in the original Hebrew Bible as wat ever "morning star" means in Hebrew, the greeks copied and then the latinos copied, but the English thought "morning star" or lucifer in Latin was a persons name, so they gave birth to the idea of Lucifer being the name of the devil.

I wonder how can the devil/satan, which is a Jewish character have a Latin name. How can Isaiah who could only speak Hebrew, have known the Latin word "lucifer" and used it in a statement.
(I won't get started on how the "bright morning star" which Isaiah used in 14:12 is referring to not satan but a Babylonian king)


Jesus real name wasn't Jesus, but was a typical Hebrew name pronounced "Yeshua" -Jesus doesn't mean anything in any language, but Yeshua means "to save" which could be interpreted as "savior" in Hebrew. Joshua also bared the same name "Yeshua" but more accurately "Yehoshua".

So many errors have been made due to this translations and some sort of deliberate edifying as occurred

Why only Bible, the quran is still intact, the tanahk and Torah is still intact and all pagan religions are still intact.

The beautiful thing is that the Old testament aka tanakh can be back up by the Jews but the New testament has no prove of genuineness, the Jews debunk it

@OP makes a valid point, let us not blissfully pretend we do not know what he means. Yes in Faith you can believe beyond doubt that it is whole and accurate; the FACTS tell differently.

The reason why the Jews debunk the NT is no so much that they do not believe Christ is the messiah but that the NT is uncorroborated pieces of history that was written and fully formed 80 yrs after the death of Christ. It does not checkout with historical events in some instances so how can it be accurate and perfect as claimed by Christians

if its dis same FAKE BIBLE a chronic armed robber lyk SHINA RAMBO read and was saved nd has bcome a preacher, if its this same bible KENETH HAGIN read and was healed 4rm an incurable blood disease and stroke, if its dis same FAKE BIBLE reinhard bonke reads that made a shop attendant to say "i see Christ in your eyes", if its this same FAKE BIBLE pst adeboye reads dat makes him av a VERY CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD,if its dis same versions of bible kumuyi reads dat makes God do wndrs thru him....and if its dis same versions of d bible i'v been readin dat made me born again and even recievd the baptism of the Holy Spirit dat was promised thousands of yrs ago...tell me, wch original one do you want me to luk 4?
These versions of the bible are tested and certified because by His power, God is performing great signs nd wonders thru them.
"a buk is fake yet a child reads it and had A1 in his exam...abeg wat will the original produce again. Panadol is fake yet it cured my head ache...pls wch othr work will d original do"

i tell u the truth, NO OTHER BOOK gives you a PERSONAL, INTIMATE AND LIVING RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD other than d bible! It has bn tested nd trustd, even by me! GRAB UR COPY NOW!

^^Smh......

anochuko01: if its dis same FAKE BIBLE a chronic armed robber lyk SHINA RAMBO read and was saved nd has bcome a preacher, if its this same bible KENETH HAGIN read and was healed 4rm an incurable blood disease and stroke, if its dis same FAKE BIBLE reinhard bonke reads that made a shop attendant to say "i see Christ in your eyes", if its this same FAKE BIBLE pst adeboye reads dat makes him av a VERY CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD,if its dis same versions of bible kumuyi reads dat makes God do wndrs thru him....and if its dis same versions of d bible i'v been readin dat made me born again and even recievd the baptism of the Holy Spirit dat was promised thousands of yrs ago...tell me, wch original one do you want me to luk 4?
These versions of the bible are tested and certified because by His power, God is performing great signs nd wonders thru them.
"a buk is fake yet a child reads it and had A1 in his exam...abeg wat will the original produce again. Panadol is fake yet it cured my head ache...pls wch othr work will d original do"

i tell u the truth, NO OTHER BOOK gives you a PERSONAL, INTIMATE AND LIVING RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD other than d bible! It has bn tested nd trustd, even by me! GRAB UR COPY NOW!

There are so many people around the world that worship fire, spirits and will testify to u that their life has been changed, does that mean they are right? No, leave the false peace and embrace true peace. Embace the last testament, full of wisdom a guidance to mankind the Glorious Quran

mahdino:
There are so many people around the world that worship fire, spirits and will testify to u that their life has been changed, does that mean they are right? No, leave the false peace and embrace true peace. Embrace the last testament, full of wisdom a guidance to mankind the Glorious Quran

How can you use this logic and still end up with your conclusion? I wonder how you religious folks do it.

This thread is about ironing out the problems existing with editing texts of "godly" origin and nothing to do with purporting your own religion.

anochuko01: if its dis same FAKE BIBLE a chronic armed robber lyk SHINA RAMBO read and was saved nd has bcome a preacher, if its this same bible KENETH HAGIN read and was healed 4rm an incurable blood disease and stroke, if its dis same FAKE BIBLE reinhard bonke reads that made a shop attendant to say "i see Christ in your eyes", if its this same FAKE BIBLE pst adeboye reads dat makes him av a VERY CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD,if its dis same versions of bible kumuyi reads dat makes God do wndrs thru him....and if its dis same versions of d bible i'v been readin dat made me born again and even recievd the baptism of the Holy Spirit dat was promised thousands of yrs ago...tell me, wch original one do you want me to luk 4?
These versions of the bible are tested and certified because by His power, God is performing great signs nd wonders thru them.
"a buk is fake yet a child reads it and had A1 in his exam...abeg wat will the original produce again. Panadol is fake yet it cured my head ache...pls wch othr work will d original do"

i tell u the truth, NO OTHER BOOK gives you a PERSONAL, INTIMATE AND LIVING RELATIONSHIP WITH GOD other than d bible! It has bn tested nd trustd, even by me! GRAB UR COPY NOW!

Ohhhh Migosh!
Unbelievably Dodo bird.

My sincere apologies.
I thought I was discussing with a real person.
I did not know I was engaging with another pentecostal zombie.

I mean, just look at all the garbled crap above.
Whew !
What does all that babble have to do with the op?

Comprehension, comprehension.
That's why most of you all fail English, and yet, you claim to comprehend what you read in the bible.
Nooooo wonder.

anochuko01:

i'v u ever read the same verse of the bible from different versions and you got different meanings? If yes, kindly let us know. If no, why do you pple argue?

Let me show you just a few biblical verses that say different things from different bible editions.

Leviticus 16:8

1.New International Version
He is to cast lots for the two goats--one lot for the LORD and the other for the scapegoat.


2.English Standard Version
And Aaron shall cast lots over the two goats, one lot for the LORD and the other lot for Azazeel.


3.Douay-Rheims Bible
And casting lots upon them both, one to be offered to the Lord, and the other to be the emissary goat:


4.Young's Literal Translation
'And Aaron hath given lots over the two goats, one lot for Jehovah, and one lot for a goat of departure;

Now, please , my dear friend, tell me, with your honest intelligent mind, if all the above four renderings of Levicticus 16:8 say the same thing.

Another is psalm 82:1

1. KJV. God standeth in the congregation of the mighty;

he judgeth among the gods.


2. NIV: God presides in the great assembly; he gives judgment among the "gods


3. New Living Translation
God presides over heaven's court ; he pronounces judgment on the heavenly beings:



4. New American Standard Bible
God takes His stand in His own congregation; He judges in the midst of the rulers.

Once again, my friend, Please honestly tell me if the above 4 different renderings of Psalm 82:1 say the same things.