Re: Which Bible version is the 'correct' one??

The relatively recent versions are not the only versions to be wondered about. The KJV, itself written somewhere between 1600 to 4000 years after the fact[s], is only 400 years old. According to what history generally tells of the era of Constantine and the Nicea caucus, his version was THE correct version, or else off with your head!.

You ask a really good question, one that I've thought about quite a bit. I have not found THE answer but in the interim it's occured to me that it would help a lot to learn several ancient languages, to include Hebrew, Greek, Latin, as well as some heiroglyphics/cunieform, to stand a better chance of recognizing the true answer in the event I manage to stumble upon it. A reasonable person should also consider - which version of general history - outside of biblical history, is the correct one to use as one's guide? If you take a version of the bible together with a version of history outside the bible, together these generally reveal that there very likelly was no one single human author of the bible. Maybe there was but eitehr history generally seemed to avoid recoring this situation OR it was recorded and subsequently hidden or lost. Even from a strict and conservative view, it seems likely there were multiple original authors. How many? I dunno, but there is a definite mongrel effect that shows through, if you will; diverse participating breeds/strains contributing to a collective product. From a historical perspective, this would seem to have predisposed the bible, from it's outset, to evolve into somewhat of a generic product - story, that has from it's inceptin continued to be the result of many different authors, interpretors, revisionists, publishers and proverbial "authorities".