There are certain indispensable resources that every serious student of the Bible needs for the correct interpretation of the sacred writings. Why? Because there are words that need to be defined, concepts that need to be understood, and passages that need to be explained and applied for the spiritual well-being of the soul.
The first indispensable resource is an accurate translation of the
scriptures. Translations may be generally categorized as follows:
- idiomatic, and
- American Standard Version-1901;
- Revised Standard Version-1971;
- New American Standard Version-1995; and
- English Standard Version-2011.
- New International Version-2011;
- New Living Translation;
- New Revised Standard Version-1989, and
- Holman Christian Standard Bible-2009.
- The Living Bible;
- The Contemporary English Version;
- The New Century Version, and
- The Message.
The serious student of the Bible should have at least one of each type of the aforementioned English translations. But a person’s main Bible should be one that is modified-literal for several reasons: they tend to be close to the Hebrew and Greek in form. Modified-literal versions are a good backbone for the Bible student. The ASV-1901 is probably the best of such versions. It is difficult to buy a new ASV because to my knowledge no major publisher sells it. For this reason the ESV and the NASB are good second choices. The NIV-2011 is probably the best of the idiomatic versions. It is eminently readable and generally accurate. The paraphrases are a tossup. Six for one and a half dozen of the others." written by false prophet Ron Daly, the cult leader of the Emerson Avenue Church of the Antichrist.
Notice how Mr. Daly begins his article by saying that a Bible student must have "resources" in order to get the correct "interpretation" of the scriptures. That is heresy. You do not need "resources" to understand the Bible. All you need in order to understand the Bible is to be saved (1 Cor. 2:10-14). You grow by the word of God, not by "resources" (2 Tim. 3:15-17, 1 Pet. 2:2). And besides all of that, nobody has any business "interpreting" the Bible. Peter said: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation (2 Pet. 1:20). Do you know what "interpreting" the Bible is? It is when a man reads what the Bible says and then tells what it "MEANS". "Interpretation" is the most wicked/satanic Bible perversion there is. It is handling the word of God deceitfully (2 Cor. 4:2). When someone starts telling you what the Bible "means" (known as "interpreting") instead of just repeating what it says then they are not handling the word of God honestly.
2 Corinthians 4:
 Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not;
 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.
But Mr. Daly says, "there are words that need to be defined, concepts that need to be understood, and passages that need to be explained". I don't think so. The Bible explains itself. It is a living Book that has eternally existed in heaven and it knows our hearts and foresees the actions of God Himself.
Hebrews 4:12-13 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.
Psalms 119:89 For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.
Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. (there was no written scripture on the earth at the time of Abraham, it was in heaven--Ps. 119:82)
Mr. Daly believes that there are "resources" that we "need" in order to "define", "explain", and "understand" the Bible. Just as Mr. Daly believes that you need man to get you into Christ, he also believes that you need man to make the Bible clear and alive. Thankfully the Bible is already clear, sure, alive, quick, and powerful without any man. There is one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus, and His word is all we need to come to Him (John 5:24, 5:39-40, 5:46-47, 1 Tim. 2:4-5, 2 Tim. 3:15, James 1:18, 1 Pet. 1:23).
Next Mr. Daly says "The first indispensable resource is an accurate translation of the scriptures." What does that mean? What does "accurate" mean? Who decides what is accurate and what is not? "Accurate" is never a term that is applied to the Bible within its own record. The Lord said that His word was truth (John 17:17), the Psalms say it is "very pure" (Ps. 12:6, 119:165), Paul said they were "holy" and "given by inspiration of God", and Peter said that the Bible was living (1 Pet. 1:23-25). "Accurate" is never a term used to apply to the Bible.
Next Mr. Daly says "the original text". What is that? What text is that? There are dozens of different Greek texts that disagree with each other in thousands of different places and some have 3,000 more or less words than the others. None of these texts are "the original"....the originals rotted out 1,900 years ago. Mr. Daly is a liar, there are NO originals.
Next Mr. Daly starts listing off different perversions of the word of God like a mad man. He has three different LISTS of perversions. Mr. Daly wants you to use many different authorities and not regard any of them as the inspired word of God. That is contrary to what the Bible says. Paul told Titus that he had "all authority" in "the faithful word" (Titus 1:9, 2:15). The Lord told us not to have more than one authority! "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other." (Matt. 6:24a) Paul said there is only ONE faith, but there are many corruptions (Eph. 4:5, Titus 1:9, 2 Cor. 2:17, 4:2).
Mr. Daly's last big error is when he says "The paraphrases are generally expansions of the text in that they aim to “restate” passages in another way in order to clarify meaning. This is not necessarily or inherently a bad approach" Not a bad approach? Paraphrasing God's word and passing that off as a complete copy of the scriptures is "not a bad approach"? Mr. Daly must not have ever read the Bible, because if he had then he would know that God CONDEMNS subtracting and changing His word.
Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.
 Is not my word like as a fire? saith the LORD; and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces?
 Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the LORD, that steal my words every one from his neighbour.
Jeremiah 23:36 And the burden of the LORD shall ye mention no more: for every man's word shall be his burden; for ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the LORD of hosts our God.
2 Corinthians 2:17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.
 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Another thing Mr. Daly does is recommend the grossly corrupt ASV of 1901 that went bankrupt not 30 years after it came out. Mr. Daly says that it is the best of the versions but that it is difficult to find....why is the word of God hard to find? "The ASV-1901 is probably the best of such versions. It is difficult to buy a new ASV because to my knowledge no major publisher sells it." No publisher anywhere (to my knowledge) sells it, it went bankrupt and was replaced with the New American Standard.
Mr. Daly obviously knows nothing about the satanic corruption that is found in the modern perversions, notice that there is not a King James Bible in either of his recommended lists.
He recommended the NIV.....but look at all of the omissions it has
Modern versions of the bible are based on Greek manuscripts from Alexandria, Egypt. No more than 50 Greek manuscripts represent the Alexandrian Text (also known as "critical text"). These are the manuscripts by which the Catholic bibles and the Jehovah's Witnesses "New World Translation" come from. The two most famous of these manuscripts are Aleph (Siniaticus--discovered in 1844) and B (Vaticanus--discovered in the Roman Catholic Vatican library in 1481). Both teach that Jesus Christ was the "begotten God" (just like the Watch Tower Society) in John 1:18 instead of the "begotten Son" as it says in the King James Bible. The Vaticanus and Siniaticus manuscripts differ in 3,000 places in Gospels alone, and then they differ 4,000 more times in the rest of the New Testament. They both call Joseph the "Father" of Jesus Christ in Luke 2:33 where the King James Bible says "Joseph".
Vaticanus omits the books: 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews 9:15-13:25, and Revelation.
Vaticanus lacks these verses: Matthew 12:47; 16:2b-3; Matthew 17:21; 18:11; Matthew 23:14; 7:16; 9:44.46; 11:26; 15:28; Mark 16:9-20; 17:36, 22:43-22:44|44; 5:4, John 7:53-8:11; Acts 8:37; 15:34, 24:7; 28:29; Romans 16:24.
Vaticanus lacks major phrases from these verses: Matthew 5:44, Matthew 10:37, Matthew 15:6, Matthew 20:23, Mark 10:7, Mark 10:19, Luke 9:55-56, Luke 11:4, Luke 23:34, Acts 27:16.
Vaticanus adds these books: Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Judith, Tobit, Baruch.
Siniaticus adds the epistle of Barnabas and the shepherd of Hermes to the New Testament and it adds Maccabees, Judith, Tobit, Sirach, and Wisdom to the Old Testament.
Siniaticus omits Genesis 23:19-24:46, Numbers 5:26-7:20, 1 Chronicles 9:27-19:17 from the Old Testament. It also omits the following verses from the New Testament: Matthew 12:47, 16:2b-3, 17:21, 18:11, Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 15:28, 16:9-20, Luke 17:36, 22:43-44, John 5:4, John 16:15, 20:5b-6, John 21:25, Romans 16:24.
Siniaticus also omits major phrases from these verses: Matthew 6:13, Matthew 13:35, Mark 1:1, Luke 23:34.
Vaticanus omits 2,877 words from the New Testament and Siniaticus omits 3,455 words from the New Testament.
The manuscript evidence for the Alexandrian Text of Egypt are these:
Papyrus: 15% support the Alexandrian Text (or 13/88 manuscripts)
Unical: 3% support the Alexandrian Text (or 9/267 manuscripts)
Cursive: 1% support the Alexandrian Text (or 23/2764 mansucripts)
Lectionary: 0% support the Alexandrian Text (0/2143 manuscripts)
On the other hand, there is the "Textus Receptus" (Received Text) of Antioch, Syria (Antioch was the head quarters of the apostles and prophets in the New Testament--Acts 11:19-27, 13:1, 15:35, etc.). The Textus Receptus is what the Luther Bible was translated from, and also the Tyndale/Coverdale, Matthew's, Geneva, Bishop's, and finally the King James Bible.
The manuscript evidence for the Textus Receptus and King James Bible are these....
Papyrus: 85% support the Textus Receptus (or 75/88 manuscripts)
Unical: 97% support the Textus Receptus (or 258/267 manuscripts)
Cursive: 99% support the Textus Receptus (or 23/2764 mansucripts)
Lectionary: 100% support the Textus Receptus (2143 manuscripts)
Also, most ancient translations support the Textus Receptus. This includes the following:
The Peshitta Version (AD 150),
The Italic Bible (AD 157),
The Waldensian (AD 120 & onwards),
The Gallic Bible (Southern France) (AD177),
The Gothic Bible (AD 330-350),
The Old Syriac Bible (AD 400),
The Armenian Bible (AD 400 There are 1244 copies of this version still in existence.),
The Palestinian Syriac (AD 450),
The French Bible of Oliveton (AD 1535),
The Czech Bible (AD 1602),
The Italian Bible of Diodati (AD 1606),
The Greek Orthodox Bible (Used from Apostolic times to the present day by the Greek Orthodox Church).
There are 86,000+ citations from scripture by the early "church fathers", most of these quotations support the Textus Receptus.
In total, the Textus Receptus is supported by 95% of the available information from the ancient translations, Greek manuscripts, and "church father" quotations.
Modern bible versions are based off the Egyptian Greek manuscripts that are highly corrupt.
Here are verses omitted in the ESV, NASB, NIV, and most other Alexandrian text-based versions. Matthew 17:2, Matthew 18:1, Matthew 23:14, Mark 7:16, Mark 9:44, Mark 9:46, Mark 11:26, Mark 15:28, Luke 17:36, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, Acts 15:34, Acts 24:7, Acts 28:29, Romans 16:24, I John 5:7.