Those within one church I presently attend often refer to: "The Word" -- whatever that is and is not.

Citing and applying some other singular-verse or instead broader assortment of multiple-verse-combinations as a [but not "the?"] context of smaller-to-greater parts of Scripture (and who as God's spokesman draws the cutoff line for that?), what is meant by "word" is both quantified and qualified in part by such verses as:

First Peter 1:22 Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere love of the brethren, love one another earnestly from the heart.
23 You have been born anew, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God;
24 for "All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls,
25 but the word of the Lord abides for ever." That word is the good news which was preached to you.

The opening verses of the gospel of John do NOT state: 'In the beginning was "the" [which?] context, and "the" context was with God, and "the" context was God.' Nor does it state: "In the beginning was "the" [which?] interpretation, and "the" interpretation was with God, and "the" interpretation was God." Nor does it state: "In the beginning was "the" [which?] commentary, and "the" commentary was with God, and "the" commentary was God."

EACH precise and exact Hebrew and Greek word [singular] and variable-length combination of Hebrew and Greek-Text words [plural] of the inspired and inerrant Text of the Holy Bible [determined and professed as such by those endowed with Spirit-inspired faith to actually be The infallible ben-Ashur Hebrew Text and The infallible Scrivener-Trinitarian Greek Text of Holy Writ] always takes precedent over any connived or presumed context, interpretation, commentary, allegory, symbolism, figurative-allusion comparisons.....all defined and understand by common-sense definitions of singular English words in Webster's (or similarly-reliable) Dictionary.

First Timothy 6:3 If any one teaches otherwise and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching which accords with godliness,
4 he is puffed up with conceit, he knows nothing; he has a morbid craving for controversy and for disputes about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, base suspicions,
5 and wrangling among men who are depraved in mind and bereft of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain.

Second Timothy 2:14 Remind them of this, and charge them before the Lord to avoid disputing about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers.

The First and Second Timothy verses mentioned above quite adequately describe my confrontationally-argumentative own brother-in-law, and rebelliously-asinine persons (including a lot of modern-mistranslations "bible scholars") accusing those who embrace the opening paragraphs above as being "ignorant" for not delving into off-on-a-tangent variations and off-on-different-subject-issue alternatives contrary to the above....along with judgmental claims from them against doctrinally-orthodox saints being "ignorant" for not knowing obviously-irrelevant presumedly-spoken "aramaic" backround involving the above.....plus huffy condemnatory claims against those who dogmatically and assertively "only express their own opinion" [as if that makes such "opinion" wrong and incorrect] and that they "ignorantly" do not know every little jot-and-tittle detail of the Old-Testament Hebrew lettering and semantics allegedly vital to the opening paragraphs stated above....accompanied at times by their irreverent contentions which in essence satanically "throw out the [rich-Christian-heritage Catholic Church of pious saintly scribes of the Middle Ages and Renaissance] baby out with here-and-there-catholic-heresies bathwater" -- reveal that they have never really given themselves totally in humble submission and obedience to Christ as Redeemer, Savior, and Lord, and as such are clearly destined for eternal hellfire punishment where they can forever - like Satan - presume in torment that they and not God know it all in self-qualified omnipotence, are or can become The Boss, plus have or can deviously reinvent Christianity.....

Second Timothy 3:7 ....who will listen to anybody and can never arrive at a knowledge of the truth.

Verses aptly describing both the aforementioned brother-in-law and his often-wrong-way-headed wandering-sheeplike mother are:

Proverbs 14:12 There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.
Proverbs 16:25 There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.

Speaking of that mother-in-law mentioned, I have never seen a woman like her who accumulated so many different errancy-laden bible translations, then claimed that they were "accurate" by being based upon "the Greek" - according to the equally-errant opinions of so and so she referred to.

And speaking of other relatives, there is something dangerously sinister about the brat-feminist daughter Annakate of one of my wife's nieces, who I can tell even at her toddler-age stage, is definitely not on God's side and there is absolutely no indiction that she will ever be.

The hit-and-miss sisters-in-law and near-kin mopheadedness consequences of the wayward heresies evident in my wife's family are both relentless and obnoxious. But many non-chignoned and non-single-ponytailed rebellious and disbelieving, according to Christ, are similarly on the broad and easy road to destruction.

To reiterate, it is EACH precise and exact Hebrew and Greek word [singular] and variable-length combination of Hebrew and Greek-Text words [plural] of "THE Word" (of God) upon which all kinds of hopefully-concordant-and-applicable contexts, interpretations, commentaries, sermons, and sundry dissertations are or can be based upon.

Obviously, persons who use that apparently weird-sounding expression [of "the word"] are plainly uttering a euphemism [referring to both singular words and/or groups of words] to describe a certain specific, limited, but sometimes multi-faceted concept or idea involving whatever they consider to be part of "THE Bible".

What are the conditions for such a euphemistic group of deliberately-selected [not randomly nor haphazardly-selected] translated-into-English words to become considered: "THE Word?"

Unless that euphemism [of "the word"] is specified with solid reference(s) to specific choice word(s), the people who mouth that phrase "the word" will be blattering about a vague nothingness and meaningless abstraction....laughable at best and pathetic at worst, besides committing and instigating hideously-divisive confusion.

Some also, instead of righteously and bravely contending for the faith, infer that discrepant-against-each-other translations of that "word" (whatever such is) is something to not become obsessed about nor nitpick (and I here recollect that frequently-wayward mother-in-law again) concerning "occasional" and "minor" differences -- be they "slight" or "significant" or even "crucial" -- however such designations about those are or are not defined and determined.

The same scenario applies to those who refer to some islamic, computer-manual, mechanics, or sundry religious book as: "THE" "Bible" or as "THE HOLY Bible" - whatever that is supposed to be, and semantically contain, relating to verbage.

Sometimes, dogmatically-conveyed audible assertions declared to others are lamentably based upon a flawed presumption or illusion of some irresponsible or bigoted word or conglomeration of prejudice-based words contained in various "bible" renditions horribly discrepant against each other such as the King James Version, Revised Standard Version, English Standard Version, New American Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, Living Bible and Today's English Version, New Century Version, New King James Version, New American Bible, New Living Translation, Christian Standard Bible, New International Version, Wesley New Testament, and a host of others.

Second Corinthians 4:2 We have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways; we refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God's word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.

Second Timothy 2:15 Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.

As to that euphemism "the word," Scripture says this about itself:

Acts 17:11 Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with all eagerness, examining the scriptures daily to see if these things were so. [sounds like Joel Osteen]
Philippians 2:16 ....holding fast the word of life, so that in the day of Christ I may be proud that I did not run in vain or labor in vain.
Colossians 1:25 ....of which I became a minister according to the divine office which was given to me for you, to make the word of God fully known [Osteen again],
Colossians 3:16 Let the word of Christ reside in you richly, teach and admonish one another in all wisdom, and sing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs with thankfulness in your hearts to God.
First Thessalonians 2:13 And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.
Second Timothy 4:2 ....preach the word, be urgent in season and out of season, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching.
Titus 2:5 .....to be sensible, chaste, domestic, kind, and submissive to their husbands, that the word of God may not be discredited.

Hebrews 4:12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

As previous stated, vital segments of the contents of all the above English translations are dissimilar as to wording, and the severity of differences range from seemingly-harmless (albeit confusing as to which to choose and use) synonym alterations and variations to never-intended ideology and precepts inserted or omitted by words FAR too distant in meaning and association to reasonably be considered equivalent or related.

Resolution of this problem by this webtract author is understandably selective in scope and perhaps considered mere overview by more knowledgeable and learned scholars. However, yours truly will do his elementary best to help enlighten whoever he can with his starter-information honest rationality about the subject.

Zeroing in on Spirit-authenticated manscripts-preserved source words in the original languages involve honest and open-minded analysis of Hebrew words comprising Old-Testament Text along with Greek words comprising New-Testament Text.

Notice that the word: "Text" is used in the singular, and not plural. Such was done to indicate that there are more than one set of Spirit-acceptible manuscripts of Only-One-True-Text Hebrew words for English-equivalent Old-Testament and Only-One-True-Text New-Testament editions (the number of which is dependent upon the number and importance of correctable mistakes in each consecutive edition).

The age of the manuscripts (and please note that I did not here use the word Text nor texts!) does not indicate nor prove their reliability nor non-reliability, nor whether only one truthful and courageous Elijah or Micaiah solitary-witness contrasted to several hundred [apostate] priests of bible-mistranslations Baal-types considered them usable and popular (whenever and wherever they were unearthed and discovered, then when-after).

Suppose you had an older copy of some medieval cultic-catholic "manuscript" stating that the Earth was flat, but you had a newer manuscript stating that NASA had discovered that Earth is round. Would the older flat-Earth [incorrect] "manuscript" be "more reliable" because it was older? Of course not. Similarly, if a newer "manuscript" said that the word gay means 'homosexual' whereas an older manuscript said that the word gay merely means yippe-skippie carefree, would the newer "manuscript" containing the reinvented-satanspeak/weaselword re-definition, puffed by tattooed or open-toes-exposed-by-wearing-soxless-flipflops or self-defaced relative-Jesse-like left-earlobe-earringed renegades, be "more reliable" because it was newer? Of course not.

Regarding the Old Testament, I am aware of only two Hebrew texts of the Old Testament (e.g. the ben Chayyim of rabbi Daniel Bomberg allegedly concocted around the 1500s, and the ben Asher Text containing Masoretic markings synthesized sometime in the tenth century A.D.). The ben Asher Masoretic Hebrew Text is now known as: Biblia Hebraica based upon a Leningrad or Stuttgart manuscript and edited by Rudolf Kittel around the 1920s. It is THE Hebrew Old-Testament Text which I (by faith) consider inerrant.

Regarding the New Testament, I am aware of a number of Greek texts (e.g. the Westcott-Hort, Nestle, United Bible Society, the Aland-Metzger, the Sinaiticus, the Vaticanus, and -- thankfully -- the Scrivener Greek Text). The Scrivener Greek Text was synthesized by F.H.A. Scrivener in England around 1894 (from previous Greek manuscripts discovered and assembled by contemporary-of-Martin-Luther Erasmus, then Elzevir, Beza, and Stephens -- faithfully copied and preserved all the way back through devout-Catholic monasteries of conscientous monks and rabbis back to the church of Antioch), which synthesis of Scrivener probably occurred in angry response against the significantly-corrupt Westcott-Hort text concocted in the 1880s by occultic spiritualists so named.

That Scrivener Text has been copyrighted by the Trinitarian Bible Society and is presently available in various editions, largely credited to the work of Jay P. Green through various publishers such as Baker Books of Grand Rapids Michigan, Hendrickson Publishers of Peabody Massachusetts, and Sovereign Grace Publishers of Lafayette Indiana.

It is the Scrivener/Trinitarian Greek Text of the New Testament which I (by faith, by simple but profound pure logic, and by rather extensive Greek-words-comparison independent study) believe is THE inerrant Greek Text of the New Testament. The inquisitive scientist is expected to investigate my claims for himself by himself instead of gullibly or adversely reacting out of thin air.

Now, getting back to "THE Word" - whatever that is.

Which "word?" There are many words (plural) in the entire Sacred-66-books Holy Bible. Which of those many words (whether only one or an assorted group of them) is THE one-and-only: "THE word?"

It is fortunate that the finalized Texts of exact Hebrew and Greek words I was born into and did not previously pen myself (nor did my parents, nor their parents, nor their parents, pen) have been preserved by who I believe are autographic human authors receiving both verbal and visionary dictation from and by The Holy Spirit of Christ Jesus.

Such is not to be taken lightly, despite the revilings and doubtings emanating from fool adversaries, and there is good reason for that.

Jeremiah 28:15 And Jeremiah the prophet said to the prophet Hananiah, "Listen, Hananiah, the LORD has not sent you, and you have made this people trust in a lie.
16 Therefore thus says the LORD: 'Hey, I will remove you from the face of the earth. This very year you shall die, because you have uttered rebellion against the LORD.'"
17 In that same year, in the seventh month, the prophet Hananiah died.

Acts 5:1 But a man named Ananias with his wife Sapphira sold a piece of property,
2 and with his wife's knowledge he kept back some of the proceeds, and brought only a part and laid it at the apostles' feet.
3 But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back part of the proceeds of the land?
4 While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal? How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God."
5 When Ananias heard these words, he fell down and died. And great fear came upon all who heard of it.
6 The young men rose and wrapped him up and carried him out and buried him.
7 After an interval of about three hours his wife came in, not knowing what had happened.
8 And Peter said to her, "Tell me whether you sold the land for so much." And she said, "Yes, for so much."
9 But Peter said to her, "How is it that you have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? Wow, the feet of those that have buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out."
10 Immediately she fell down at his feet and died. When the young men came in they found her dead, and they carried her out and buried her beside her husband.
11 And great fear came upon the whole church, and upon all who heard of these things.

The Divine Enforcer (who has and can execute by stroke, heart attack, cancer, murder, car accident, and can incapacitate by job loss, divorce, vandalism, etc.) not only has inspired the original authors of Bible words to convey only those precisely-specific verbal and written words to the men who imprinted them on Hebrew and Greek-lettered parchment and paper, but has extraordinarily retained the exact meaning of those words so that humans could perceive and can (to this day) yet perceive the totality of the expressed Will and Intentions of Almighty God.

Such has not been the case with non-Scriptural semantics, allegories, interpretations, contexts, commentaries, symbolism, figurative explanations, fables and myths.

For example, the word "gay" used to merely mean yippie-skippie carefree and happy. But by now, homosexual perverts have thoroughly influenced most people to associate that word with being pseudo-legally effeminate, and have accentuated that sordid and despicable revisionism with the brainwashing buzzphrase: "gay rights." The same lamentable scenario applies to the abortion-homicide issue, when and where deviant-minded people deplorably attempt to legitimize extinction-by-murder-oriented abortion by miscalling it: "reproductive choice," "women's health," and of course: "abortion rights." Indecent-exposure porn is now mistermed: art and evolution-mythology heresy is miscalled: science by those having departed from pure speech.

Zephaniah 3:9 Yes, at that time I will change the speech of the peoples to a pure speech, that all of them may call on the name of the LORD and serve him with one accord.

Not so with Spirit-preserved words of genuine and authentic Holy Writ. The autographic words have NOT been synonymized, and their exact and specific intented meanings have NOT changed whatsoever. Dictionary definitions have changed, but "the word of the Lord abides forever." Such is an eerie phenomena not of this world, and bespeaks of the awesome and potentially-terrifying power of the LORD.

What of discrepant English translations of various bibles?

Microsoft computer engineers and hobbyists have occasionally seen a recurring message when loading software: The file you are trying to load is older than a file you already have. It is recommended that you keep your existing file. Do you want to keep your existing file?. This webauthor likes operating-system and software-compatibility consistency, and so invaribly says: "No!" to such requests on the computer-monitor screen.

Realizing that even "good" people have human frailties and make mistakes for allegedly-innocence causes (not "reasons"), and that The Ultimate Word of God is Jesus Christ Himself, it is through various-Bible-translations comparisons (which, however and of course, make sense) that we largely-non-foreign-language-scholar peasants acquire as-complete-as-necessary Scriptural guidance and direction to "get the whole picture" applying to ourselves and others, facilitating easy and effective communication as missionaries for the sake of edifying everyone comprising the Body of Christ.

Sometimes, though (as is the case of the daughter of that refractory "which word-is-THE-word?" brother-in-law I mentioned above), a proud and impenitent refusal to accept not only contrasting sides of a Divine-love-with-hate Biblical paradox, but also an increasingly-festering-and-paralyzing gangrene of defiant abhorrence against God's authoritative holiness and personal requirement for such...results in growing disbelief and rejection against authentic Christian conversion, experience, and lifestyle.

For example, the verses:

Matthew 5:48 You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Mark 10:18 And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good but God alone.
Luke 18:19 And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good but God alone.

....seem to them an irreconcilable and non-resolvable contradiction, culminating in never being able to determine whether God accepts them unconditionally whatever they do and don't do ...or instead rejects them whatever they do or don't do...resulting in their final hopelessly-confused mental impasse which the damned-to-become irreparably becomes frustrated and hung up with.

Usually, what can be done about such persons and what one should ultimately expect from them [evidenced by their sordid track record of divorce, stuck-in-a-rut-with living expenses, threats from bill collectors, busted ribs and knees and ankles, deceptive outward generosities cloaked in self-righteousness-presumed polite and cooperative friendliness...on their own terms, of course) is:

Proverbs 27:22 Crush a fool in a mortar with a pestle along with crushed grain, yet his folly will not depart from him.
Jeremiah 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then also you can do good who are accustomed to do evil.
First Peter 2:8 ....they stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do.

No present English Bible translation is perfect, nor are all translations perfectly consistent down to the last dot and tittle with all others. Perhaps such can never be the case, with the English language constantly in an ever-changing state of flux. At any given time, there obviously is ONE best English word to use which everyone in their accomodating right minds can, should, and will agree with. But some words suggested are definitely NOT acceptable and assuredly are "out of the question."

A few examples are (keeping in mind that one cannot "have it both ways," being that frequently it is either one way or the other, and such dot-and-tittle objections are not "being hung up on inconsequential trifle incidentals!):

The RSV and NASV refers to Tamar wearing: "a full-length robe with long sleeves" in Second Samuel 13:18, whereas the KJV, NIV, etc. refer to Tamar wearing: "a coat of many colors." WHICH is it? It cannot be both! Obviously, a garment of many technicolor colors is a whole different idea than a full-length garment reaching to the palms and ankles. Such vastly-different concepts are so far from being related that they cannot in all good conscience be considered to be even remotely related, and are as dis-related as much as a leaf is to a rock, or a lightning bolt to lamb's wool, and so forth.

In First Corinthians 7:1, the KJV, RSV, NASV state that a man should not: touch a woman...whereas the NIV [errantly and ridiculously] states that a man should not: marry a woman. "Touching" a woman and "marrying" a woman are obviously two different-enough concepts as to honestly and realistically be thoroughly non-related and certainly not synonymous. And, again, keep in mind that one cannot have it both ways: either one is correct and the other is false, or the other is right and the other is a dishonest and deceptive misinformational lie (whether imposed deliberately and maliciously, or carelessly and accidently).

First Timothy 5:14 in the KJV and Wesley states that: younger women [Gr. ne(o)teras] should marry, whereas the RSV, NASV, NIV, etc. mis-state that: younger widows should marry. Clearly, according to basic common-sense logic, all youngers widows are younger women....but not all younger women are younger widows! Even from that perspective, the words women and widows are definitely not synonymous. Added to that, nowhere in the Greek Text of First Timothy 5:14 is the English-equivalent word for [old or young] "widows" [Gr. ch(e)ras] found. The demonic and devilish presumption that [supposed] previous context [however far back that does or does not go] overrides the Greek word for younger women is simply wrong, warped, twisted, evil, and diabolically demented.

One quick and simple test to determine if a "Bible" translation is generally on the right track is if it has the words: 'the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit' in the main text of its rendition of First John 5:7.

Does it matter whether the word "women" or instead "widows" is printed in a Bible translation? Yes it does!

What are the ramifications and consequences for people in general? By mis-translating something as sociologically important and globally respected as "The Holy Bible," God's will is disasterously not adequately conveyed to people about the subject of whether female humans should or should not marry or remarry....and as a result, supplemental Scripture verses are not reinforced -- resulting in satanic misrepresentation, imbalance, distortion, and confusion with consequences of driving accidents, assembly-line mistakes, lurid and lascivious immodesty competition, partial to complete fornication, adultery, venereal disease, jealousy, guilt and grief, suicide, assaultive abuse and rape, and in some instances, murder.

Please give me a break and do not burden me nor insult my intelligence nor yours by requesting lengthy off-on-a-tangent elaborations on how and in what ways previously-highlighted Scriptural-verse mis-additions and mis-subtractions have concerning all sorts of diabolical and far-reaching effects disrupting the well-being, safety, and satisfaction of human beings.

First Corinthians 3:10 According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and another man is building upon it. Let each man take care how he builds upon it.

Revelation 22:18 I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book,
Revelation 22:19 and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

Yours truly will tell you a story, a story to portray the difficulties of using non-specified pronouns in literature:

Dick and Jane, along with Tom and Jeri (that is, Geraldine), and of course Adam and Eve decided to marry each other as couples, then kiss, then engage in procreative activities (each in their private and secluded marriage-bed accomodations).

Dick started it off scientifically discussing with him and then his friend in precise technical terms which room in the whatchmicallit they should reserve for whatever to: "Be fruitful and multiply." Jane talked to her about it and then she mentioned it to her and him, referencing the whatchamicallit. Then she took it upon herself to talk to him, and he in turn talked to her. Then she had a short conference with him who then talked it over with him and her, upon which he suggested to her that she discuss whatever with him. He then referred back to what they had come up with, after which she proceeded to write down the specifics on a thigamijig for both him and her. Meanwhile, he walked over to her and gave them both some new information on the whatchamicallit, which she decided to tell her what he thought about it, after which the two of them decided to speak with the other two. Then came in a new whatchamicallit who informed everyone that they needed a thigamijig to give to both him and her, after which she could allow him access whatever about both him and her, which she decided instead to actually convey to him. Finally, she and he went to her and him to tell her but not him to go ahead with paying the charge for their thigamijig as soon as possible.

BONUS THOUGHT: Whenever and wherever we see a marker with the "United Nations" insignia on it marking off some terroritory within the United States, it probably is safe to put our gloves on and toss it into the nearest trash can, being that whoever put it there was probably some presumptuous globalist who was not authorized to place it there, being that Congress probably never approved any international treaty to allow it placed there.