What is the best Bible Translation?

The editors of the NA/UBS text severely criticized the Textus Receptus, going as far as characterizing the Textus Receptus as the “poorest form of the New Testament text”. The introduction to the Nestle-Aland 26th edition says: That theology and one’s worldview heavily affect the decisions that go into textual criticism.

What is the most alarming fact to me is the insensitivity to the truth that exists in the pulpits of modern Christianity. They seem to have an “Its good enough” attitude towards the new translations without truly examining them. How can they make the decision they are good enough if they haven’t vetted them with the utmost scrutiny? This goes to the heart of the inerrancy of scripture and the Divine inspiration they provide. If it’s not Gods word what is it? If the translation you are reading has been done by a non Christian what are you left with? This is a fundamental issue that is completely overlooked in modern Christianity.

At the heart of the matter is our loyalty to the Father in Heaven and His inspired Word to each and every one of us. By using a faulty translation you are usurping His Divine authority and limiting the power of His Written Word.

This same attitude is carried forth when it comes to Passover which they call easter and Christ’ birth date they call Christmas. Celebrated on the wrong days and called the wrong names. Not to mention all of the false doctrine brought forward by the modern Church. It’s no wonder Christianity is on the decline.

Without Divine inspiration the natural man can never understand the things of God when approached by his own intellect. But yet that is exactly what is happening in the modern Church. They are using translations that have been done by non Christians whether knowingly are unknowingly the result is the same. The Church has lost its power and Divine authority, as a result it has become impotent.

As non Greek or Hebrew speakers-readers we can only rely on what the Holy Spirit bears witness to when it comes to our understanding of translations. Just as the Inspired Word was written through the hands of men I believe the Word has also been preserved by the hands of men. The question then becomes; which men? Who has the Divine authority? Being from Whales may include some bias on my behalf but I do feel that YHVH had His hand on King James and the translators He brought forward to preserve His Word in the English. King James had Divine authority to do so.

The United Kingdom is called by many in the UK; The United Kingdom of Israel and it just so happens to be a hub for the migrations of the 12 tribes of Israel. Isn’t it ironic the scepter would never depart from Judah and the UK monarchy has never departed from England? Prince Charles was just crowned and the Stone of Scone (Jacobs Pillar) was there in plain sight under the Coronation Chair. It has now been overturned 3 times.

It is a well known fact that one of the main duties of the King and Queen of the UK is Protector of the Christian faith. Despite all the criticism of the royal family this is still the case. In my mind the real question when it comes to translations and the controversy about which one is the best comes down to Divine authority. Who actually has the authority to choose which one should be used? No doubt the translators should be Christian and their lives scrutinized to the highest degree possible. Their academic qualifications should be stellar as well but most importantly have they been given the Divine authority by God Himself.

In modern times we have basically two sources of manuscripts; The Textus Receptus and the Nestle-Aland/United Bible Society (NA/UBS) text, published by the Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft (German Bible Society). The KJV is based on a Greek New Testament text called the Textus Receptus, first published by Desiderius Erasmus in 1516 and subsequently revised by a number of scholars.
From my puny perspective most of the attitudes and platitudes in the NT have been left intact but the more complicated subjects have been altered and especially when it comes to the deity of Christ. The ESV is one of the best translations but it has problems just as the KJV. The alterations are very subtitle and fly under the radar to most. If the devil weren’t involved in this he would be remiss in my humble opinion. He has succeeded in watering down the original text and made it less effective and limited its power…again my opinion. I believe this has contributed to the decline in Christianity among many other things.

It is undeniable that the men behind the Textus Receptus were Bible-believers whereas the men behind the NA/UBS text were theological liberals. In making this comparison, one should not assume that a theological liberal would act dishonestly or carelessly in editing a text. However, a Bible-believer and a theological liberal approach the biblical text with very different viewpoints and assumptions. As textual criticism is not an exact science, there are many times when the evidence is divided and either choice may seem reasonable from a naturalistic perspective. The following words of Hort should make us wary of a text that is compiled by theological liberals.
The first impulse in dealing with a variation is usually to lean on Intrinsic Probability, that is, to consider which of two readings makes the best sense, and to decide between them accordingly. The decision may be made either by an immediate and as it were intuitive judgment, or by weighing cautiously various elements which go to make up what is called sense, such as conformity to grammar and congruity to the purport of the rest of the sentence and of the larger context; to which may rightly be added congruity to the usual style of the author and to his matter in other passages. (The New Testament in the Original Greek, the Text Revised by B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort (Cambridge : MacMillan & Co., 1882), p. 20)”
Should Evangelicals use a text that may have been based on the “intuitive judgment” of theological liberals and Jesuits? Should Evangelicals use a text with readings made congruous with the “usual style of the author” when the editing theological liberal may not even believe that the author is who is stated to be? As textual criticism requires the exercise of discretion, it is impossible to discern the correct reading without the “mind of Christ”. 1 Corinthians 2:14-16 says,
“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.”
The Bible is the word of God. Only his sheep can hear his voice through his word. Our Lord said, “My sheep hear my voice” (John 10:27). Since textual criticism is the art of discerning whether a reading is God’s voice or not, the Church must not delegate this deeply spiritual exercise to theological liberals. Evangelicals ought to be more discerning and reclaim the biblical mandate to be its own custodian of the inspired, infallible and inerrant preserved words of God.
Old Testament
This book found by Hilkiah became the ancestral copy of all the Hebrew manuscripts that exist today. One could speculate that Hilkiah found other manuscripts in other places over time, but that would be a speculation since the Bible does not say so. The Bible clearly portrays this single copy found in the temple as the sole catalyst for the great spiritual revival during Josiah’s time and the rediscovery of God’s words for subsequent generations.
Ezra, a direct descendant of Hilkiah (Ezra 7:1), canonized the Old Testament and transmitted it to future generations. Ezra’s Old Testament was surely based on Hilkiah’s copy found in the temple. The readings of this copy eventually diverged into the various Old Testament streams extant today, such as the Masoretic, Dead Sea Scrolls, Samaritan and LXX. Whether or not Hilkiah or Ezra found other manuscripts besides the one found in the temple during Josiah’s reign, the Bible is clear that the number of manuscripts does not matter as long as God providentially provides the manuscripts for a time of spiritual revival. King Josiah saw the hand of God in preserving this single copy and never doubted its authenticity or integrity. He caused the words of this single copy to be read to the people (2 Kings 23:2).
There is a strong parallel between Hilkiah and Desiderius Erasmus, the originator of the Textus Receptus. Both were men of high repute and rank. Both were upright while their contemporaries were apostate. Both caused God’s words to be published after a time of spiritual darkness. Both were catalysts of a great spiritual awakening. The Textus Receptus was to the Reformation what Hilkiah’s discovery was to the revival in Josiah’s days. Modern textual critics need to learn what the Bible says about textual transmission. If God wants his words to be published for a time of spiritual awakening, he can do so through even just one manuscript.
Psalms 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
John 21:15 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
The scribes and the Pharisees sit in the seat of Moses and have taken over Bible translations in modern times. Beware!
Arent the new translations based on a better Greek text than the textus receptus?
https://www.kjvtoday.com/arent-newer-translations-based-on-better-greek-text/

My books are available on Amazon Kindle. My music is available on CD Baby

Defending the faith
https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B085RHWD7P

Last Generation
https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B0834P78ZV

My CD Baby Link
https://store.cdbaby.com/cd/markvaughn3

The Rain Appendixes to the Companion Bible
https://www.therain.org/appendixes/