What's Wrong With Your Bible Version?
In another thread here, I mentioned all the different translations of the Bible into English and offered some links to learn more about those translations. Here's a new thread, about what's wrong with those translations, according to whoever thinks there's something wrong with them. Believe me, whichever translation you use, there are people who will tell you that your Bible is false and might as well have been translated by Satan himself. For example, here are some translations, along with links to a web page from www.jesus-is-savior.com for each that will tell you just how bad they are and why you should throw them in the garbage:
New International Version (NIV) - This popular translation into modern English is clearly horribly flawed according to this link:
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/NIV/why.htm
The Living Bible - Another popular modern English version, it's also hopelessly corrupted and false:
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/Living%20Bible/lb_exposed.htm
Revised Standard Version (RSV) - One of the most widely used translations, it replaced the KJV by being more readable:
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/Revised%20Standard%20Version/revised_standard_version_exposed.htm
According to that website, the only proper version of the Bible is the 1611 King James Version. All others are corrupt and will probably keep you from your heavenly reward.
N.B.: That website, http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/ , is clearly a wackadoo site, but you can find many others that will tell you what is wrong with whatever version of the Bible you use.
= new reply since forum marked as read
...why present the (supposed) word of god in a form using simple 1st millennium technology?
Why didn't it come on IPads, carried in-hand, with infinity batteries, upon birth?
or
Why not have a multilingual/poly-lingual version continually broadcast through a human accessible ethereal medium, so there would be no need for hard copies or translations. One that a person could access at anytime with no confusion of meaning? One could still exercise "free will" and ignore the presented message at one's peril, but at least there would be no confusion in the intent or accuracy or authenticity of the message.
or
Why not just hard wire the information into our consciousness?
Why a mere, lousy, often misinterpreted, low tech, destructible, book as the medium of choice for the "word" of the supposed creator of the universe?
And if you reply the answer is "42", I'll give you a metaphorical slap across the head with a clue-by-four.
Maybe it's all a test, you know. You have to figure out what it all means before you die, or you're doomed. 
...clue-by-four says "Wrong Answer!"
"This ain't a test!"
Apologies if I am being too graphic...
There are "translations" like the "Living Bible" that are paraphrases and not translations. It has no claims to being a translation--the guy looked at the KJV or whatever and decided it needed rephrasing to express what he thought it should express.
There are bona fide translations like the NIV and RSV which tend to omit, usually with footnotes, bits of text that aren't in the best Gk mss. The KJV was based on a rather late Greek ms and there were things interpolated, according to most scholars. If the KJV is what God really intended, then those are wrong.
Then there are politically correct translations, which is the only way to put it. Things are translated a certain why not to inform religion but conform to politics or social norms. So the Tanakh and NT are clearly gendered. God is Father, Jesus is brother, Church is mother in the NT and Xians are her children. In the OT, God is often neuter in function but is pictured as the bride of Israel (whence "Church is mother", most likely). It's become "correct" to neuter everything to avoid offense. Where exegesis and contextualizing was enough, people are so easily offended and often consider this to be virtuous. If something's considered culturally good, it must not be condemned in the Bible but, in fact, must be affirmed. However anachronistic.
I personally like translations that are required for equivalence. If you're in a place where wine's just about unheard of, substitute in something local, preferably that's fermented vine fruit. Otherwise you lose the imagery. And I've always found http://www.appleseeds.org/Sailors_23rd-Psalm.htm to be imaginative, even if it does lose the "pastor" and "lamb" bit and adds cultural baggage that's not in the original ("heaven"
.
