CHRIST IS REMOVED IN THE NEW BIBLES

[DougE]

[John 4:42 KJV] "And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard [him] ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world."
[John 4:42 NIV] "They said to the woman, "We no longer believe just because of what you said; now we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this man really is the Savior of the world."" ************* The new Bibles remove Christ

 

[Bill]

May Jesus fill us with his love and wisdom

That all depends which translation you are reading. The new Methodist Bibles have removed roughly 2000 versus all regarding Jesus as the son of God and as regarding God as the father. My understanding is that the messages Church wants to make God neutral.

The Jehovah Witness Bible has removed roughly 4,000 versus in regards to Jesus as being the Messiah. I do think it's a little funny personally that they left the Gospel of John chapter 1 in their Bibles which pretty well proves Jesus as the Messiah.

There are many bibles that have removed whole books over the last 1500 years or so. We have to remember that the original Bibles had many books in them, it's just that over the years people have split off and made their own Bibles as they go along.

To me the thing that's interesting enough though, is that what's left is still enough to find that Jesus is God. And that he is the messiah and he died for us and rose from the dead.

Even in the much vaulted KJB, where it's written in Old English. It has changed over the years from having many books to having quite a few removed so it meets the demand of the Protestant churches. But it's still enough to know who God is and what he did for us

 

[EveryKneeWillBow]

That all depends which translation you are reading. The new Methodist Bibles have removed roughly 2000 versus all regarding Jesus as the son of God and as regarding God as the father. My understanding is that the messages Church wants to make God neutral.

The Jehovah Witness Bible has removed roughly 4,000 versus in regards to Jesus as being the Messiah. I do think it's a little funny personally that they left the Gospel of John chapter 1 in their Bibles which pretty well proves Jesus as the Messiah.

I'm curious if they removed the actual, whole verses, or did the remove/change words within the verses to change the meaning?

I'm also curious what version the new Methodist bibles are?

 

[Bill]

I'm curious if they removed the actual, whole verses, or did the remove/change words within the verses to change the meaning?

I'm also curious what version the new Methodist bibles are?

May Jesus fill us with his love and wisdom

There are 2 groups of Methodist, those who wish to follow this teaching and those who are traditional.

I think this came about because they had a bishop in their Church that was gay and tried to defend himself with this concept. And it has cost the church in a big way with division within itself.

I have seen other churches become divided in a big way over things like this. The Church of God is an example of that in the Southern United States. They have been going through a lot of splits in their churches over the years, it's almost like common place with them to have some little issue pop up causing a split. Even so much as did Adam have a belly button or not.

The split with did Adam have a belly button or not happened because they had a mural painted of Adam and Eve and the painter put a belly button on Adam. And that caused the split in the church.

 

[faithman]

In all translations of the Bible there will be omissions but I found that the King James Version and the New King James Version as well as the Amplified Bible are two of the most reliable translations. The more newer translations are paraphrased of what translation think that God was saying. Always stay with the most reliable translations.

 

[DougE]

In all translations of the Bible there will be omissions but I found that the King James Version and the New King James Version as well as the Amplified Bible are two of the most reliable translations. The more newer translations are paraphrased of what translation think that God was saying. Always stay with the most reliable translations.

Not all modern Bibles are paraphrases, which would be called dynamic equivalence. This translates not word for word, but convey the intent of the Bible. Formal equivalence is word for word. There are still versions that are formal equivalence.
It really is a question of what manuscripts are selected to translate the Bible from.

 

[faithman]

The King James Version is one of the oldest translation from the original language into English and is the most reliable. Many translations have come after many years and understanding history and most important the scriptures is important. Just the printed scriptures or translation mean you understand what the deeper truths that lies within.