Going back to what you said before, before we can know whether or not a particular Bible will support all of our doctrines we have to know what those doctrines are, right? The catch is that all of our doctrines are found in and supported by the Bible, right? So, in effect, we would be reasoning in a circle to presume to establish all of our doctrines upon a given version of the Bible. Better to establish first the quality of the Bible, then find our doctrines in it. Any other way accepts the potential loss of doctrines which we have been given by God.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

The quotation you used from Acts of the Apostles a few posts ago gives me the assurance that I have none of the problems you mention, Green. God provides what I need to discover the TRUTH

Have you checked the Jehovah Witness Bible as that has some outright deletions when it comes to Christ.

Regardless of whether it was originally in the Bible or not? Does what you want, what you desire predetermine whether a version is "valid"?

Not sure the Jehovah Witness Bible was considered for discussion. True, it is a "Bible". So is the Reader's Digest condensed version.

Yes, when I have been dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses, I have used their own Bible where I also in some places find verses that explain SDA doctrines better than certain other versions do. It is nearly impossible to hide TRUTH completely. I never forget the time I greatly surprised one of the national leaders of JW when I showed him the wording in his own Bible which proved that he was preaching the doctrine of anti-Christ in how Jesus is returning. He had never seen anything like that before and tried to change the subject.

One of their members had asked their national leader to visit me at the conference office to explain to me what he was not able to do.

I should have explained that on my visit to one of our local churches in the conference where I was serving then, a young Adventist asked me to go with him out knocking on doors in an area where there were a number of Jehovah's Witnesses. We took them by surprise doing the work they thought was their special kind of work.

In stead of wasting your time on the weaknesses of certain Bible versions, why not use whatever Bible you have, know the powerful texts in that Bible, and proclaim the glad tidings to a world in darkness?

The worth of a translation is determined by the texts it was translated from, not by whether it agrees with our denominational presuppositions or whether it agrees with what Sister White wrote (though she did use translations based on Westcott and Hort's work). As for which has the majority of manuscripts? The so-called majority texts are not in the majority when one considers texts before the 10th century.

With that said, our doctrines are not the standard, but the word of God in its earliest discernible form is. And when looked at in the scrutiny of faithful and competent translation of an eclectically compiled Greek text, our doctrines do stand.

I agree with you, Dave. I was just making the point that it is difficult to find a Bible that is so "corrupt" that it cannot be used to bring us the important message of salvation. By this I see how the Lord has protected his WORD from destruction throughout the attacks of evil forces.