Jow Forums tells me to read the bible

What do you mean interpret it for me instead? I thought you're supposed to read the bible on your own?

I've only been to church a few times.

Don't touch the shitty protestant KJV garbage
Go for the deuterocanonical books, or douay-rheims bible

Garbage

Don't fuck around with translations, find a truer understanding by comparing translations line by line and reading articles and essays by monks priests scholars and academics when you run into contradictions that you find interesting.

Its fun!

start here
biblehub.com/multi/genesis/1-1.htm

New Version deletions from the Gospel of Matthew:

1.25 ‘firstborn’
4.12 ‘Jesus’
4.18 ‘Jesus’
4.23 ‘Jesus’
5.22 ‘without a cause’
5.27 ‘by them of old time’
5.44 ‘bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you,’ and ‘despitefully use you, and’
5.47 ‘publicans’ is changed to‘Gentiles’
6.4 ‘openly’
6.6 ‘openly’
6.13 ‘For thine…Amen’
6.18 ‘openly’
6.33 ‘God’
8.3 ‘Jesus’
8.5 ‘Jesus’
8.7 ‘Jesus’
8.15 ‘them’ is changed to ‘him’
8.29 ‘Jesus’
8.31 ‘suffer us to go away’ is changed to ‘send us’
9.12 ‘Jesus’
9.13 ‘to repentance’
9.14 ‘oft’
9.35 ‘among the people’
9.36 ‘fainted’ is changed to ‘distressed’
10.3 ‘Lebbaeus, whose surname was’
11.2 ‘two of his disciples’ is changed to ‘by his disciples’
12.8 ‘even’
12.15 ‘multitudes’
12.22 ‘blind and’ [second instance]
12.25 ‘Jesus’
12.35 ‘of the heart’
13.36 ‘Jesus’
13.51 ‘Jesus saith unto them’
13.51 ‘Lord’ [‘Yea, Lord’]
14.14 ‘Jesus’
14.22 ‘Jesus’
14.25 ‘Jesus’
14.30 ‘boisterous’
14.33 ‘came and’
15.6 ‘or his mother’
15.6 ‘commandment’ is changed to ‘word’
15.8 ‘draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and’
15.16 ‘Jesus’
15.30 ‘Jesus’
16.3 ‘O ye hypocrites’
16.4 ‘the prophet’
16.20 ‘Jesus’
17.4 ‘Let us make’ is changed to ‘I will make’
17.11 ‘Jesus’
17.11 ‘unto them’
17.11 ‘first’ [‘shall first come’]
17.20 ‘Jesus’
17.21 ALL OF THIS VERSE IS OMITTED
17.22 ‘abode’ is changed to ‘were gathering together’
18.2 ‘Jesus’
18.11 ALL OF THIS VERSE IS OMITTED
18.29 ‘at his feet’
18.29 ‘all’ [‘I will pay thee all’]
18.35 ‘their trespasses’
19.9 ‘and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.’
19.20 ‘from my youth up’
19.29 ‘or wife’
20.7 ‘and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive’
20.16 ‘for many be called, but few chosen’
20.22 ‘and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?’
....

KJV is probably the best translation for the reason that it is based off of the Textus Receptus rather than the Alexandrian texts(which are what most modern versions are translated from).
MEV is a fairly new translation that is also based off of the Textus Receptus, but you could also use the ESV, or the NASB, though they're based off the Alexandrian texts.

I don't expect you'll know what that means right now, so I'd suggest the KJV if you don't mind the occasional odd sentence structuring and old English, but if you want to want a little bit of a more comfortable read, just use the ESV.

What's important is you don't get stuck trying to find the perfect translation.
Just start reading!

Read those precious words of God and heed His call for you.

Nasb

Jow Forums told you to read the bible?
You sure it wasn't a jew?

Old lady gave me the (((New Living Translation))). What sort of shit should I be wary of? Have a KJV too that's my primary source.

Orthodox is the same long version

The best translations are the Eddas both prose and poetic, another fetching translation is the Havamal. I've also heard the Kalevala isn't too shabby either. Praise the Lord!

Lol I wouldn’t even wipe my ass with that Jesuit trash.

Just read KJV like civilized people do or NKJV if you’re half retarded and don’t understand oldspeak.

You can even find a lot of poetic double meanings by seeing how old words were applied in other verses and have alternate interpretations.

Yesterday I was looking at Enoch 10 in Greek to confirm that Gabriel was sent explicitly to kill, referring to loss of sons. The word "loss" was used but in the original Greek the word was used to refer to casualties in war, thus clarifying the distinction.

If it was me, I'd be looking to read the scrolls that got cut from the Bible.

con't

Matthew 20.23 ‘and be baptised with the baptism that I am baptized with:’
21.12 ‘of God’
21.44 ALL of this verse is omitted in some versions
22.13 ‘take him away, and’
22.30 ‘of God’ [‘angels of God’]
22.37 ‘Jesus’
23.3 AV–‘bid you observe, that observe and do’;
23.8 ‘even Christ’
23.14 ALL OF THIS VERSE IS OMITTED
24.2 ‘Jesus’
24.6 ‘all’
24.7 ‘and pestilences’
24.36 ‘nor the Son’ is added
24.42 ‘hour’ is changed to ‘day’
24.48 ‘his coming’
25.6 ‘cometh’
25.13 ‘wherein the Son of man cometh’
25.31 ‘holy’ [‘holy angels’]
25.44 ‘him’ [‘answer him’]
26.3 ‘and the scribes’
26.28 ‘new’ [‘of the new testament’]
26.59 ‘and elders’
26.60 ‘yet found they none’ [second instance]
26.60 ‘false witnesses’ [second instance]
27.2 ‘Pontius’
27.24 ‘just’ [‘the blood of this just person’]
27.35 ‘that it…lots’ [last half of the verse is omitted]
27.42 ‘if’
27.42 ‘believe him’ is changed to ‘believe in him’
27.64 ‘by night’
28.2 ‘from the door’
28.9 ‘as they went to tell his disciples’
28.20 ‘Amen’
...

You would say that, what about those persecuted Anabaptists, bong? The Geneva Bible is where its at cat.

>This verse means you're supposed to give me a hand job or Mary will pray to God that you get super AIDS

There is a difference between Catholic and Protestant Bibles, Luther removed several books from the Old Testament, keep that in mind. (King James is a Protestant Bible)

Absolute best hands down

Attached: 9057fe81adc950d59ad8bf71dd3b3364.jpg (640x637, 56K)

NIV only served to kick the doors down for every fag translation that came after it. No wonder christians are so worthless.

textexcavation.com/swetelxx.html

here you go

also
khazarzar.skeptik.net/books/index.htm
qbible.com/

honestly, just read NIV. It’s written in modern language so you can actually comprehend what you’re reading. Better yet buy a bible with KJV/NIV side by side. that helps.

I prefer KJV
but I do like the transliteration bible that the JW sell (or used to sell) if there's a fishy passage in the KJV.

Also do your research into the version you choose, many versions are translations of translations, choose a version that is has been translated only once (unless you speak ancient Greek, then read the original, although that is clearly unlikely)

Why not? Or did you mean to greentext that?

JW, please.

That translation, if you can even call it that, was so clearly made with doctrinal bias by the Witness' that it almost makes me sick.

John 1:1 according to the JWs:
>In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.

Not to mention that the JWs specifically translate the word 'worship' as 'do obeisance' *only* when in reference to Jesus, but render it as 'worship' any time it speaks of God the Father. Same exact word from the Greek, but translated differently because of doctrinal bias in translation.

This is only scratching the surface about their Bible, so I'll only mention in passing that the JWs have made false prophecies that have failed to come to pass.

The King James is pretty and it's errors are well documented.
Get a Strong's Concordance and you can sort out most of them. There are plenty of lists available from people who have the sense to read what the translators wrote in the front of it.

If you're having trouble knowing what to do with your new tome, I suggest Chuck Missler's Learn the Bible in 24 Hours. (Book & Youtube) It will give you a short course in bible study.

Here's the part you don't need to miss...
To be safe for all eternity:
A: Admit that you are a sinner, who violates the Will of God, and that you need a Saviour. Repent. Turn away from your sin and toward Jesus.
B: Believe that Jesus Christ, Son of God & Messiah, died for your sins and rose again, as prophesied and recorded in the Word of God. Trust in His finished work.
C: Call on His name, ask Him to save you, and confess that He is Lord.

Really, most translations are sufficient unto salvation.
It was designed to overcome hostile jamming.
Missler's Cosmic Codes describes this. Pic related.

Attached: image.jpg (252x394, 30K)

I would personally suggest, if you are are undecided between Catholic and Protestant, that you find a Catholic Bible and a Protestant Bible to help you decide which version makes the most sense to you

You can read it on your own, but you lack the historical, philosophical, and theological grounding to interpret it for yourself.

I'm confused now, who's right between Protestants and Catholics?

Isn't the Vatican catholic?

I am a Catholic who is opposed to the Modernists who currently control the Church, but I would rather that someone choose the Catholic Church over a Protestant church because of their own faith instead of an argument I made on Jow Forums, so I suggest anyone who hasn't chosen a Church read a Protestant and a Catholic Bible.

And the Pope is the leader of the Catholic Church

user, are you a fan of saint Mel's father, Hutton Gibson? He was as true to Catholicism as possible. There's interesting clips of him being interviewed on Youtube.

Deleted from MARK's Gospel in new versions:

1.1 ‘the Son of God’ [omitted in some versions and margins]
1.2 ‘the prophets’ is replaced by ‘Isaiah the prophet’, [an obvious error]
1.14 ‘of the kingdom’ [AV–‘the gospel of the kingdom of God’; NAS –‘the gospel of God’]
1.41 ‘Jesus’
2.17 ‘to repentance’
5.13 ‘Jesus’ is changed to ‘he’
5.19 ‘Jesus’
6.11 ‘Verily I say…than for that city’ [last part of the verse is omitted]
6.34 ‘Jesus’
7.8 ‘as the washing…ye do’ [last half of the verse is omitted]
7.16 ALL OF THIS VERSE IS OMITTED
7.27 ‘Jesus’
8.1 ‘Jesus’
8.17 ‘Jesus’
9.24 ‘Lord’ [referring to Jesus]
9.29 ‘and fasting’
9.42 ‘in me’
9.44 ALL OF THIS VERSE IS OMITTED
9.45 ‘into the fire that never shall be quenched’
9.46 ALL OF THIS VERSE IS OMITTED 9.49 ‘and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt’
10.21 ‘take up the cross’
11.11 ‘Jesus’
11.14 ‘Jesus’
11.15 ‘Jesus’
11.26 ALL OF THIS VERSE IS OMITTED
12.30 ‘this is the first commandment’
12.41 ‘Jesus’
13.33 ‘and pray’
14.22 ‘Jesus’
14.22 ‘eat’ [AV–‘Take, eat.’ NAS –‘Take it.’]
14.24 ‘new’ [‘of the new testament’]
15.28 ALL OF THIS VERSE IS OMITTED
15.39 ‘cried out’
16.9-20 OMITTED or bracketed in most Bibles (with variations).
[Although missing in the Vatican and Sinai manuscripts, it is found in almost every Greek manuscript which contains Mark’s Gospel. In addition it is quoted by Church Fathers including Irenaeus and Hippolytus in the second and third centuries (thus predating the two ‘old’ manuscripts, Vatican and Sinai).]

Attached: 1555656104287.png (131x1181, 14K)

>objectively the best
The Aramaic Dead Sea Scrolls are who knows where, locked up and the Latin is corrupted by the Jesuits. Go pre masoretic. The Greek Septuagint + Apocrypha. Enoch is a must.

Shor's bones, Hail Talos! See you in Sovengard, brother!

Attached: 1520276048357.jpg (912x599, 61K)

Honestly haven't heard of him, I just recently got picture related though, I would strongly recommend it to any Catholics or Christians of any sect who dislike Catholicism for the Churches current modernism.

Attached: 41Y327CETVL._SX323_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (325x499, 25K)

Wow. I can't believe this isn't the first answer...
DR is superior.

Better yet go pre christian and adopt the religion/philosophies of your own ancestors before they were converted Jihad style by force.

You didnt watch new world order bible versions yet? Its free on youtube for crying out loud.

Hutton was tested as a genius and was responsible for leading some big rows over the Aussie Catholic modernization nonsense.

I'm starting to get really confused now. There's books not in the bible? Wikipedia says that Apocrypha is stuff with doubtful origin?

Is there a list somewhere? I don't want to watch a two hour documentary.

Deleted words from non-KJV versions of Gospel of LUKE:

2.14 ‘good will toward men’
2.33 ‘And Joseph and his mother’ changed to ‘and his father and mother’
2.40 ‘in spirit’
2.43 ‘and Joseph and his mother’
4.4 ‘but by every word of God’
4.8 ‘Get thee behind me, Satan: for’
4.41 ‘Christ’
7.19 ‘Jesus’
7.22 ‘Jesus’
8.38 ‘Jesus’
9.43 ‘Jesus’
9.50 ‘us’ is changed to ‘you’
9.54 ‘even as Elias did’
9.55 ‘and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of’
9.56 ‘For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them’
9.60 ‘Jesus’
10.21 ‘Jesus’
10.39 ‘Jesus’
10.41 ‘Jesus’
11.2 ‘our’
11.2 ‘which art in heaven’
11.2 ‘Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth’
11.4 ‘but deliver us from evil’
11.11 ‘bread’ and ‘will he give him a stone? or if he ask’
12.31 ‘the kingdom of God’ is changed to ‘his kingdom’
13.2 ‘Jesus’
17.36 ALL OF THIS VERSE IS OMITTED
21.4 ‘of God’
22.43 some versions omit ALL of this verse or put it in brackets
22.44 some versions omit ALL of this verse or put it in brackets
22.63 ‘Jesus’
23.17 ALL OF THIS VERSE IS OMITTED
23.34 ‘Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.’
23.42 ‘Lord’
23.43 ‘Jesus’
24.6 ‘He is not here, but is risen’
24.36 ‘Jesus’
24.40 Some versions omit or bracket this verse. It is found in every Greek manuscript of Luke except for one fifth century Western manuscript. The omission results from radical New Testament criticism principles.
24.51 ‘and carried up into heaven’. Only two Greek manuscripts omit this.
24.52 Some versions omit ‘they worshiped him’
...

>Should I just read the King James version?
Yes

KJV

KJV and all Protestant Bibles are from KIKES' MASORETIC CORRUPTION. May they be damned!

There is apocrypha, like the Gospel of Thomas or the book of Enoch, but they were never officially part of the bible. The seven books which are labeled apocryphal by the Protestant Church were part of the Christian Bible for a thousand years before Martin Luther cut them.

Just go for the NIV if you aren't studying and want something easy to understand

Sample of deleted words remove from Gospel of St John in the non-KJV versions:

1.18 ‘only begotten Son’ is changed to ‘only begotten God’
3.2 ‘Jesus’
3.13 ‘which is in heaven’
4.16 ‘Jesus’
4.42 ‘the Christ’
4.46 ‘Jesus’
5.4 ALL OF THIS VERSE IS OMITTED
6.14 ‘Jesus’
6.47 ‘on me’
6.69 ‘thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God’ is changed to ‘you are the Holy One of God’
7.39 ‘Holy’
7.53-8.11 entire section is omitted or in brackets in many modern versions
8.9 ‘Jesus’
8.16 ‘the Father’
8.20 ‘Jesus’
8.21 ‘Jesus’
9.4 ‘I must work the works’ is changed to ‘we must work the works’
9.11 ‘the pool of’
9.35 ‘Son of God’ is changed to ‘Son of man’
11.45 ‘Jesus’
13.3 ‘Jesus’
14.15 ‘If ye love me, keep my commandments’ (a command) is changed to a statement, ‘If you love me, you will keep my commandments’
16.16 ‘because I go to the Father’
17.12 ‘I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me’ is changed to ‘I was keeping
18.5 ‘Jesus’ [second instance]
19.38 ‘Jesus’ [third instance]
19.39 ‘Jesus’
...

I like the ESV because it's clear and easy to understand.
But I guess someone is going to tell me why I'm wrong.

You can't be a good Christian, or a bad Christian, only a Christian.
Read the version that speaks to your heart.
The KJV is the best English translation there has ever been.
If you find the language too archaic, there is a New KJV.
biblegateway dot com has dozens of translations, for free, as does bible hub

>NIV
NIV was written by a lesbian

It's an excellent translation.
We do not have the original autographs, so we have to do with what we have.
And what we have is 99.5% the same as the autographs.
In fact, in the Dead Sea scroll of Isaiah, it was 99.8% identical over 2000 years.

ESV is corrupt. Originated from RSV that was tied to National Council of Churches, a communist front group. It's the "easy to read" commie version.

By a lesbian?
kek
It can't tell the difference between Jesus and the devil, so I call it the NIEVIL.

you don't need to interpret it

Acts 8:37 missing. ESV is garbage.

Attached: 1567386424250.png (1920x1080, 207K)

Read "Translations from the Talmud". It's free!

If you cannot understand for yourself what you read in the bible, that should be an indication, to you, that maybe heaven isn't for you.
Maybe you're happier with Rome.

It’s bad

it's an interesting doc

Has a footnote that the verse is in other manuscripts that they did not use to compile the ESV.....

New Living Translation is corrupt. Stick to the KJV - it's literally inspired. Other versions aren't.

Attached: 1565465767288.png (1920x1080, 207K)

The apocryphal books were canonized by Rome as a result of the counter reformation

Read the Orthodox study Bible

Not exclusively, but the committee had a lesbian on it, so take that influence for what you will.

this
If you can't understand the Bible, you don't have the holy spirit living inside you, it has nothing to do with understanding history or old languages. It has everything to do with being a Christian who has their heart right with God.

>>Should I just read the King James version?
Read several; I would recommend
King James Version
New Revised Standard Version
Common English Version
and
Young's Literal Translation

Scofield reference bible or nothing else.

KJV is early modern English. It is a good and historic translation, but based on inferior source material.

Formal equivalence is definitively superior to dynamic equivalence because it means less insertion of the opinions of the translators.
NASB is the greatest, but it's more difficult to read. HCSB (now just CSB) is similar but at a 7th grade reading level.

ESV is fine too.

Attached: types-of-bible-translations.jpg (781x444, 64K)

>NIV
A very corrupt perversion. Haven't you done ANY research?
Entire verses are missing from the NIV and thousands of deleted or altered words - but you'll find them all in the KJV.

>both Jack Chick and Steven Anderson are KJV-Only
>the former was a Christian Zionist
>the latter is anti-Israel
How do you reach different conclusions from the same book?

Mt 18:11
KJV "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."
NIV OMITTED
NASB footnote casts doubt
NWT OMITTED

Other versions do not like that Jesus was coming to save that which was lost.
So which claim is God's Word? Both claims can't be God's Word.

Mt 19:17
KJV "Why callest thou me good?"
NIV "Why do you ask me about what is good?"
NASB "Why are you asking me about what is good?"
NWT "Why do you ask me about what is good?"

These other versions do not like it that Jesus was called good (and Jesus then reminds them that only God is good - very telling way of pointing out again that He is God). Other versions leave it out.
So which claim is God's Word? Both claims can't be God's Word.

Mt 25:13

KJV "Ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh."
NIV "You do not know the day or the hour."
NASB "You do not know the day nor the hour."
NWT "You know neither the day nor the hour,"

These other versions doesn't like reminding us that it's Christ that will return.
So which claim is God's Word? Both claims can't be God's Word.

Lk 4:4
KJV "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God."
NIV "Man does not live on bread alone."
NASB "Man shall not live on bread alone."
NWT "Man must not live by bread alone."

These other versions are not keen on believers living by every Word of God.
So which claim is God's Word? Both claims can't be God's Word.

Jn 6:47

KJV "He that believeth on me hath everlasting life."
NIV "He who believes has everlasting life."
NASB "He who believes has eternal life."
NWT "He that believes has everlasting life."

These Bibles do not want others to know Christ said we believe ON HIM to have everlasting life - no wonder so many think that they believe in God instead means they have everlasting life, leaving the fact that the truth is actually that we must believe ON Christ. Another huge perversion. So which claim is God's Word? Both claims can't be God's Word.

Attached: The-two-Lines.jpg (2338x3000, 2.06M)

>it's [sic] errors
Incorrect. The KJV has NO errors.

Attached: 1554892076862.gif (284x280, 5K)

Read the greek Septuagint,
the hebrew Masoretic Text,
and the latin Vulgate.

Oh, and these "versions" accept and allow child marriage of girls to men, including in cases of rape (taphas):

[Devarim chapter 22, verse 28: na'ar (child - hebrew masoretic text), padia (child - greek septuagint), puella (young girl - latin vulgate) ]

Thus Jow Forums (and all white men) doesn't like them.

Remeber: white men are heretics who place MUUUHHH WHOITE WUUUHHHMMANNN before YHWH.

Just learn Greek and read the original, brainlet

name a passage from the KJV that you find hard to understand.

The omission of verses and phrases found in the KJV is a question of the source documents. It is a strawman to accuse non-KJV translations of merely perverting the text.

Look up the great "she" Bible.
The KJV is not inerrant, the source text is. The KJV is one faithful translation.

If you don't read the Ronald Knox translation, you need to take that cock out of your mouth and wake the fuck up.

Read the greek Septuagint,
the hebrew Masoretic Text,
and the latin Vulgate.

Oh, and these "versions" accept and allow child marriage of girls to men, including in cases of rape (taphas):

[Devarim chapter 22, verse 28: na'ar (child - hebrew masoretic text), padia (child - greek septuagint), puella (young girl - latin vulgate) ]

Thus Jow Forums (and all white men) doesn't like them.

Remeber: white men are heretics who place MUUUHHH WHOITE WUUUHHHMMANNN before YHWH.

Are you conversationally fluent in greek, hebrew and latin? The King James translator were.

>The KJV is one faithful translation.
No it isn't, doesn't allow child brides (according to whites). The source text does, blatantly.

Do you refute that Na'ar refers to a child in hebrew?
Do you refute that Padia refers to a child in greek?
Do you refute that Puella refers to a young girl in latin.

Answer me white PIECE OF SHIT.

>you lack the historical, philosophical, and theological grounding to interpret it for yourself.
What a guilible cuck! You only have to read it. Can you read? Are you afraid to read? Why are certain religious cults so anxious to instil in their followers a fear against Bible reading? Obviously they worry that a normal person will read and discover that the cult's teachings are false.

>placing the blame on Martin Luther and not the Jesuits
Oh you're going to pay for that one Jesuit.

(OP)
Read the greek Septuagint,
the hebrew Masoretic Text,
and the latin Vulgate.

Oh, and these "versions" accept and allow child marriage of girls to men, including in cases of rape (taphas):

[Devarim chapter 22, verse 28: na'ar (child - hebrew masoretic text), padia (child - greek septuagint), puella (young girl - latin vulgate) ]

Thus Jow Forums (and all white men) doesn't like them.

Remeber: white men are heretics who place MUUUHHH WHOITE WUUUHHHMMANNN before YHWH.

I study them.

Do you refute Padia refers to a child?
The root word for paedophilla?

Ofcourse you will, because you whites hate men being "allowed" virgin child brides.

FUCK you white piece of SHIT.

I have an Orthodox Study Bible.
OT is from the Greek Septuagint to English
NT is NKJV
It has 'all' the books and it has many, many notes. Pretty interesting. No, I don't practice.

Get the Bible app and check out the Common English Version. It's got its issues but the important parts are there, it's easy to understand, and it has some of the books the catholics decided weren't canon anymore translated too.