On Those Missing Verses In Your ESV and NIV Bible

 

I’ve noticed several people post this on Facebook:

I’m sure you know that NIV was published by Zondervan but is now OWNED by Harper Collins, who also publishes the Satanic Bible and The Joy of Gay Sex.
The NIV has now removed 64,575 words from the Bible including Jehovah, Calvary, Holy Ghost and omnipotent to name but a few…
The NIV and ESV and other versions have also now removed 45 complete verses. Most of us have the Bible on our devices and phones.

Try and find these scriptures in NIV or ESV on your computer, phone or device right now if you are in doubt:
Matthew 17:21, 18:11, 23:14; Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46; Luke 17:36, 23:17; John 5:4; Acts 8:37
…you will not believe your eyes.
Let’s not forget what the Lord Jesus said in John 10:10 (King James Version)
THE SOLUTION
If you must use the NIV or ESV
BUY and KEEP AN EARLIER VERSION OF the BIBLE. A Hard Copy cannot be updated. All these changes occur when they ask you to update the app. On your phone or laptop etc. Buy and KEEP EARLIER VERSIONS AND STORE THEM.
There is a crusade geared towards altering the Bible as we know it; NIV and many more versions are affected.

While one cannot deny the affiliation between Zondervan and Harper Collins, there is not a “crusade geared towards altering the Bible”. I guess I should say, there is not a crusade towards altering the Bible that Crossway’s ESV and the original NIV are part of. So why the missing verses on your app or in your Bible?

Simple. Every one of these “missing verses” were not part of the original manuscripts.

Consider Matthew 17:21 for example. You will notice in your ESV a little note which says, “some manuscripts insert verse 21: But this kind never comes out except by prayer and fasting”. If you read this in a KJV you’ll notice it simply says, “Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting”. No footnotes or anything. So what gives?

In 1881 Westcott and Hort published a Greek New Testament using numerous ancient manuscripts which were not available to the original translators of the KJV—way back in 1611. When we discovered these ancient manuscripts we see that in a few places they didn’t square up with the existing manuscripts. In some places—like Matthew 17:21—the text was omitted in the older manuscript. When you run into one of these differences it is called a textual variant.

When you encounter one of these textual variants the interpreter/translator has to attempt to figure out why there is a difference in the text. And so why would newer manuscripts have Matthew 17:21 but older manuscripts not? Which would should we trust more?

Look at Mark 9:29 (even in your ESV and NIV Bibles) and you will notice a verse that sounds very similar to what was omitted in Matthew 17:21. Now is it possible that a copyists would have inserted material from Mark 9:29 to make it square with Matthew 17:21? Absolutely. In fact we find that this was actually a somewhat common practice.

So what most likely happened is that a well-meaning copyist somewhere along the way put Mark 9:29 here at Matthew 17:21 to get the two gospels to square up. And his error here was copied and copied and copied from that point forward. And so we conclude that Matthew 17:21 was quite likely not part of the original text. In order to be accurate to the original you won’t find it in your ESV Bible.

There is no plot to undermine the word of God. These are very conservative scholars that are doing the work of textual criticism to help us have the most accurate translation of the Bible as possible. And lest anyone think, with all this talk of textual variants, that your Bible cannot be trusted heed these words of David Alan Black:

“No biblical doctrine would go unsupported if a favorite reading was abandoned in favor of a more valid variant…a doctrine that is affected by textual variation will always be adequately supported by other passages.”

Rather than causing us to lose confidence in the reliability of Scripture the work of textual criticism helps us to be able to say with at least 95% accuracy that we know exactly what the original manuscripts stated. So don’t freak out and think that the NIV and ESV are being taken over by a group of people trying to hide God’s Word from you, in fact the opposite is true.

Photo source: here

202 Comments

  1. Enjoyed the article, Mike! One note: might wanna consider an edit to the 5th or 6th paragraph. Wescott and Hort didn’t have any “original” manuscripts. They did gave older ones. They just weren’t original. Sorry to nitpick, but I’d hate to confuse folks. Again, well written and helpful article.
    Blessings!

    • Thank you! I mean “ancient manuscripts”. It’d be wonderful if they had the originals wouldn’t it 🙂

      • I believe that if we possessed originals than they would become an idol. The fact that we have thousands of manuscripts to compare is enough for me. Plato has 7 and Aristotle has 49.

        • It’s certainly enough for me as well. And I agree that we’d likely fall into worship of the manuscripts. But it sure would be nice for biblical translators to have the originals and not have to do the work of textual criticism. But maybe that wouldn’t be any fun 🙂

        • If there were originals people would not be decieved. Any sensible and true believer does not have idols. God comes first and if someone is that deep into then word then their idol is God.

          The manuscripts that have been turned into a lie, yes theres plenty but but what ise are thry of they are a lie?

        • Please don’t assume Chuck Missler is correct. Dr James White has a lot of stuff I don;tr agree with, but his textual knowledge and his understanding of Greek of all eras makes him an expert of texts – and he would agree with this.

          Missler has a lot of good stuff – and a lot of weird stuff that isn’t biblical at all.

        • If God is perfect and all knowing with out mistake then why did Lucifer become corrupt and therefore had to be cast out of Heaven? Why did cast out Adam and Eve for disobedience when they were created in his image therefore like him in which God is all knowing? Wouldn’t man want to be the same bc he is in God’s image? Did God make a mistake by creating man?…

          • One of the characteristics of GOD that was shared with mankind was “Free Will”. So God put ONE challenge before them – ONE they deliberately disobeyed – to become as GOD, just as Lucifer had attempted and failed.

            Rebellion against GOD was NOT unexpected – before the foundations of the earth God had already known of their rebellion and provided a solution.

            But God would NOT have been true to His creation, without granting Free Will, would NOT have been just and holy without the punishment that sin required, nor true to his mercy without providing an escape.

            Nothing catches GOD by surprise, except maybe that we attempt to out-think Him.

            Just my thoughts.

          • Amber your questions are plausible ones for those who wants to excuse man from the issues of life. I believe that these are matters that are beyond our comprehension at our current level of knowledge of the ways of God. One thing that you should look at is they way we humans operate in life that carry the ability to make choices and taking responsibility for the result of our choices. Perfectness does not mean absence of making mistakes in the sense of God’s creation. It is rather function without faults or failure.

          • – Lucifer became corrupt because he wanted to be like God, he wanted to be God, therefore, God cast him out of Heaven along with a third of the heavenly host.

            – To answer both questions together:
            God cast Adam and Eve from the garden because they disobeyed him. They were made in God’s image, however, they were given free choice, a mind of their own.

            – Are you trying to say that God has disobedience in his character? Man will never be like God in the sense that God is all powerful and all knowing. Yes, we were created in God’s image, however, we can not then blame God for our mistakes. Because that is what Adam tried to do when God asked him of his sin. When God created man, he did so in his image only, he did not give them powers or knowledge of the world, therefore, when God created man, he was perfect in his image. What came after that was man’s fault, not God’s.

            – Man did not want to be God or like God because he did not possess the knowledge until he ate of the fruit of the tree of life. Therefore, God did not make a mistake, Adam and Eve sinned against God after he told them not to eat of the tree of life. They doubted God’s word and trusted Satan, this does not make it God’s mistake. Rather man’s for not trusting his creator.

            I hope this helps to answer your questions

            And remember, God loves you

          • Why didn’t he kill you for all the things considered sinful and evil? Think about it?

          • God made people perfect with their own free will and it is their own choices that caused them to be do evil which is nothing to do with the way they were made originally. Who wants robots? Would a man wnat to marry a robot and have words of affection programmed in? Would not be much of a creation.

            If a couple had a child and gave them the best guidance and did everything right does thet mean they cannot be corrupted?

            When some people realise that what they want is harmful they are likey to turn to what is good and beneficial but some people will not hear unless they feel and can then do things as they are supposed to because they have expereonced bas results. Force often results in rebellion so it can be easier for a child to learn then mature and live right than to keep them so sheltered that they always crave for what they have never tasted.

            The tree of live and the one which really was of death being in view, in the middle of then garden of Eden was the best lesson of all and a great thing because now people are understanding the differnce and can choose in a wise way and live right by choice and much more of this will be seen.

            No man gains muscles without training and if he wants to maintain them he will simply keep fit and eat right.

        • I agree…this article is not acurate nor comprehensive. Also debating WHICH manuscripts ot tects were used.

        • What is important is not what aomeone else says to dispute and it is not about finding people wrong but it is about us doing our own research and making true points ans not what others say which is the whole point and the reason people have been decieved and do not even realise the word has been destorted by versions and updates because they are listening to other peoplr and disputes found on links.

          Unless someone can read the more original text on greek and hebrew they cannot agree with an agrument or disagres and can explain by breaking it down in the Biblical languages and no longer need to click on links, cut and paste other peolles info or use other peoples quotes unless they know by their own research.

          The guy has made some good points and helped to show something that many would not have known. He has done a good thing.

          • “Unless someone can read the more original text on greek and hebrew they cannot agree with an agrument or disagres and can explain by breaking it down in the Biblical languages and no longer need to click on links, cut and paste other peolles info or use other peoples quotes unless they know by their own research.”

            So where do YOU get YOUR truth? I’d bet you have absolutely NO knowledge of Greek, Hebrew or Aramaic – the languages of the Bible.

            And one cannot efficiently learn Greek part-time – my father studied it for 3 years in Seminary and then studied it his whole life – at best he was a talented amateur.

            As James white says – a LITTLE Greek is a dangerous thing. And I say it leads to heresy and cults.

            And be careful about Miesler – he is about 90% correct – about the same ratios as the JW’s and SDA folk. There is ROOM for lot of error in that 10%

    • Thanks, Josh. That’s why I write to help folks in local churches…always encouraged to hear that people are helped.

  2. Also: The NIV isn’t owned by Zondervan or Harper Collins. They are simply licensed to publish it in North America. The NIV is owned by Biblia (formerly known as the International Bible Society) and sales go to fund bible translation around the world. And Biblia doesn’t have any control of the text. Control of the text is the domain of the Committee for Bible Translation an independent group of evangelical scholars. Any and all decisions about the text goes through them. Zondervan doesn’t have a say in the text. Harper Collins doesn’t have a say in the text. Even Biblia doesn’t have a say in the text. Only CBT can make changes and they make any and all revisions on the basis of biblical scholarship.

    • Thank you! Just a little bit of work and research and there is an intelligent response that isn’t completely fueled by emotion and speculation. Not everything that happens is part of a conspiracy. God bless you all. Proverbs 16:24 “Pleasant words are as an honeycomb, sweet to soul and health to the bones.”

    • AT last something intelligent on this page. A smidgeon of truth in a page of rabid fanaticism, fueled by half truths and outright lies.

      WE did a debate online on various differences in important areas using STRONGS as a referree – the KJ was wrong on each count, the NIV was right on all but one.

      THAT is the REALISTIC view of the accuracy of the relative Bibles.

      Among the hundreds of examples of KJ errors – this one from a baptist church goes through many many errors one at a time showing the KJ errors and what a more rational wordage should be.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGgsA0biR_4

      And from a wonderful Greek scholar and professor:

    • This is not not true. Satan’s plot is to remove God’s power and Jesus dirty, as well as the power in the Word.

      There are NO errors in the Word of God. The older versions/unchanged…I personally trust in the King James version.

      It may be zondervon it may not be Zondervon who translates.

      There is always someone at work (call it conspiracy theory if you will ) It is scripture. the Bible tells us that the defeated one is roaring about like a lion seeking who he may devour.
      And there is always a ‘hidden agenda ‘, when we belong to Jesus Christ. He is always behind the scenes working in our lives.

      We battle not with flesh and blood, but with principalities and powers in high places, in the evils and darkne_ of this world.

      HE WHO HAS EARS TO HEAR LET HIM HEAR. HE WHO HAS EYES TO SEE LET HIM SEE.

      • “This is not not true. Satan’s plot is to remove God’s power and Jesus dirty, as well as the power in the Word.”

        TRUE, and one of the BEST ways is to get people hung up supporting a corrupted version of the Bible, rather than attempting to understand WHAT that WORD of GODS was that was given to the apostles. ANYONE who studies the KJ KNOWS that it was NOT the KJ that is perfect – claiming it to be perfect is an insult to MY God who makes NO mistakes. The KJ is full of them. And WHY would you make ANY assumption that the KJ was THE Word of God – it is simply ONE translation of many done in that period of time, and the ONLY one done to please a KING. A KING that was sore displeased with the much more accurate Geneva Bible, and upset that it and OTHER Bibles of that time contradicted the teachings of HIS (the king’s) church. The Geneva Bible, by the way, that was used in MANY of the English speaking revivals.

        “There are NO errors in the Word of God. The older versions/unchanged…I personally trust in the King James version.”

        Absolutely true. SO the KLJ cannot be the Word of God then. Its MANY errors are demonstrable. And I am GLAD you enjoy the KJ. But to say you trust it simply means you have never studied its history. IT is NOT a good translation from Greek OR Hebrew. Some of the translators would NOT use it to preach in their own churches, such was their disdain for it.

        “It may be zondervon it may not be Zondervon who translates.”

        Zondervan has NOTHING to do with translation. They ONLY print what they are given. They have been one of the principal publishers of Christian books for half a century, but as far as I know they have never attempted to do a translation. The NET Bible, for example, IS a translation and includes 62,000 notes from the translators explaining WHY they chose the word they did and giving alternatives. For some Greek and Hebrew words – there IS no exact translation into English. They explain their choices.

        “There is always someone at work (call it conspiracy theory if you will ) It is scripture. the Bible tells us that the defeated one is roaring about like a lion seeking who he may devour.
        And there is always a ‘hidden agenda ‘, when we belong to Jesus Christ. He is always behind the scenes working in our lives.

        Absolutely true. And one of his tactics to steal the Word of GOD from the SAINTS is to hide the truth of God’s Words in language the average person can NOT understand. The Pharisees did that by adding so many opinions and rites to the Law of God that no one could figure out HOW to keep the law – Jesus rebuked them for doing so. The Catholic Church did that for centuries by maintaining Latin as the language of the church – a language NOT understood by the populace. They were unable to know the Word of God except what the Priests claimed it said. Luther rebuked them for doing that.

        And the KJ again did that by using archaic, high-level language, making, again, the reading of the Word of God difficult for the layman. Especially today, the street people I work with, even mature and productive educate people, do NOT understand the KJ Bible, which of course is why it has LOST most of its popularity. Its language is almost 600 years old – and English has changed in that time. Significantly.

        YOU cannot sit in a KJ church and NOT have the pastor interpret the KJ to you in understandable English, much as the Catholic Priests had to explain the Latin to their congregants. TRY to read 2 Thess 2:7 without having to explain it. Reading it does NOT tell you what it means. A Pastor by the way who well may NOT be educated as to the actual meaning of those words – and YOU would NOT know if he was right or wrong without having reference to the underlying texts. By the way, it is completely backwards to what it means.

        Can you imagine street people, many without a Grade 9 education, trying to understand the KJ? Again, a ploy of the Devil to prevent its Reading and Understanding by the common folk.

        WHY does the KJ contradict Strongs so often? Because it is poorly translated, even apart from the normal change in language. NO Greek text before 1200 AD agrees with the KJ Bible.

        SO you are left with the inescapable conclusion that the KJ is: 1) a POOR translation of cobbled together documents ( the REAL case) or 2) it was a NEW revelation by GOD to CORRECT the corrupted texts used up to that point. IN that case they multitude of errors would insult GOD, or make Him less than perfect. There are NO other choices available.

        “We battle not with flesh and blood, but with principalities and powers in high places, in the evils and darkne_ of this world.”

        Very true. And holding to an archaic and corrupt version of God’s Perfect word is doing EXACTLY as he would wish – making the Perfect Word of GOD inaccessible to many in this day. IF you read it – great.

        BUT don’t tell me you know what all those words mean. I have the 1812 edition of Webster’s dictionary. I find it helpful to know what the KJ is trying to say. BUT that is 300 years AFTER the KJ, and even THEN the language had changed.

        BUT that does NOT explain WHY the KJ supported purgatory, infant baptism, the Catholic church hierarchy system, etc.

        The ONLY good translation is one that is READ. My street people do NOT understand the KJ language or relate to its message.

        “HE WHO HAS EARS TO HEAR LET HIM HEAR. HE WHO HAS EYES TO SEE LET HIM SEE.”

        Precisely. I have provided above many GODLY Christian Scholars who have spent their lives studying the ancient texts and MSS, who speak the language as the early church fathers spoke it, and who you COULD learn from. Scholars FAR more educated in the ancient texts than ANY of the translators of the KJ, and who have in their possession NOW, texts 1000 years or more OLDER – and hence more likely to be accurate – than the texts relied upon by the KJ Translators.

        Sadly, it seems that you are more interested in the traditions of man than the Word of GOD.

  3. I use three different version of the “Bible” before I open my mind or mouth. Just remember that your a religious leaders definination of something as a simple as the word car may be different from mine. Just imagine how muddle it can get when we discuss faith or science or politics. WOW.

  4. NASB handles that the opposite way – putting the verse in the text but bracketed with a footnote stating that the verse is not included in earlier manuscripts.

    • Yes, indeed. I’m not sure which I’d prefer. I know for me, I tend to kind of read through brackets as if they aren’t there. But I also know that at times I don’t necessarily look at the footnotes.

    • What are you talking? If you read the many corrections made by commenters to this article you would realize that he is also one putting out MISinformation!

      • Verses are missing period…2 Timothy 4:3King James Version (KJV)

        3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
        2 Thessalonians 2:1-3King James Version (KJV)

        2 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

        2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

        3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

        • Typical KJO cultist – quote something totally irrelevant to the issue from a corrupted translation and pretend you have made a point. Sp WHAT was your point?

          So IF those verses are left out, and they almost always are NOT, HOW do you feel about all the books – entire BOOKS – that were left out of the (supposedly inspired) KJB by subsequent revisions?

          How do you feel about the KJB teaching Purgatory?

          How do you feel about all the scribal notes and opinions that were ADDED to the text that the KJ was translated from?

          IF something was added to the KJB that was NOT in any other Greek Bible ever, why should you object to it being removed?

          WHY would you even consider the KJB to be the standard when better and far earlier translations by Wycliffe and others were so much MORE accurate and made without all the insertions and opinions of folk like Beza that are part of the TEXT of the KJB, as well as not having a catholic (Church of England) king (pope) demand that the translation conform to HIS worldview?

          Like I said, hypocrisy is the main feature of KJO cultists – followed by arrogance and pride. And exclusivism. And double standards.

          IF you did NOT have double standards, you would have NONE at all.

          Now HOW does that passage deal in any way with this controversy? Are you using it to justify the FACT that a group of fanatical maybe-Christians idolize a corrupt and perverted text? Making a carefully-crafted text their replacement for the Holy Spirit? Believing lies about both content and authorship rather than actually being SCRIPTURAL and studying as a workman should?

          YOU worship a corrupted text that has spawned any number of cults, and is itself a product of the Seventh Day Adventist cult (they are the ones that started the KJO heresy – it was unknown 100 years ago) ?

  5. I have less of an issue with verses that have been removed as I do verses translated differently from version to version. Example: Revelation 5:9 kjv. “hast redeemed us to God by the blood” NIV ” with your blood you purchased for God persons from every tribe”
    REDEEMED US has a different meaning than PURCHASED FOR GOD PERSONS.

    • Dave,
      I’m having a difficult time seeing the difference between the two. To redeem something is to purchase it for a price, it means to be bought back. That seems to be what the NIV is saying. Is it that they are taking away a precious word like “redeemed” that has you concerned? I know the ESV uses the phrase “ransomed people for God”.

      • Every Greek manuscript except one, of inferior quality, reads “us”. Many modern versions follow that lone manuscript and omit the pronoun, but that leaves the transitive verb “redeem” without a direct object, so they usually supply “men” or some such thing. But the true reading is obviously “us”, so the 24 elders are among the redeemed, and they are already in heaven wearing crowns.
        This is important for eschatology as correctly identifying the 24 elders is essential to understanding our position in Revelation.
        If one uses the NIV solely they tend to end up working out a pre-wrath theology instead of pre-trib. There are many places the NIV varies in this regard and the ESV/NASB contradicts it even though they are all based on the same Critical Text New Testament Greek and fail at Revelation 5:9 and other spots.
        One should balance their study between a Reformation Text, Critical Text and Majority Text Bible versions.

        • Can you please supply ANY evidence of your statement that ALL Greek texts use “US”.

          IF you are going to make a statement, you need to be able to prove it, NOT just go along with Gail and her book of lies . . .

          I am QUITE certain your statement is false, but it would take me too long to check EACH greek text to prove my point. The Interlinear on my desk contradicts YOUR statement.

          The interlinear at Bible hub also contradicts you:

          “455 [e]
          anoixai
          ἀνοῖξαι
          to open
          V-ANA
          3588 [e]
          tas
          τὰς
          the
          Art-AFP
          4973 [e]
          sphragidas
          σφραγῖδας
          seals
          N-AFP
          846 [e]
          autou
          αὐτοῦ ;
          of it
          PPro-GN3S
          3754 [e]
          hoti
          ὅτι
          because
          Conj
          4969 [e]
          esphagēs
          ἐσφάγης ,
          you were slain
          V-AIP-2S
          2532 [e]
          kai
          καὶ
          and
          Conj
          59 [e]
          ēgorasas
          ἠγόρασας
          you purchased
          V-AIA-2S
          3588 [e]

          τῷ

          Art-DMS
          2316 [e]
          Theō
          Θεῷ
          to God
          N-DMS
          1722 [e]
          en
          ἐν
          by
          Prep
          3588 [e]

          τῷ
          the
          Art-DNS
          129 [e]
          haimati
          αἵματί
          blood
          N-DNS
          4771 [e]
          sou
          σου ,
          of you
          PPro-G2S
          1537 [e]
          ek
          ἐκ
          [men] out of
          Prep
          3956 [e]
          pasēs
          πάσης
          every
          Adj-GFS
          5443 [e]
          phylēs
          φυλῆς ,
          tribe
          N-GFS
          2532 [e]
          kai
          καὶ
          and
          Conj
          1100 [e]
          glōssēs
          γλώσσης ,
          tongue
          N-GFS
          2532 [e]
          kai
          καὶ
          and
          Conj
          2992 [e]
          laou
          λαοῦ ,
          people
          N-GMS
          2532 [e]
          kai
          καὶ
          and
          Conj
          1484 [e]
          ethnous
          ἔθνους”

          http://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/5-9.htm
          I await ANY support for your statement

          • I have never read anything by Gail nor will I.
            Remember in what anyone tells you always do Acts 17:11 even from me.
            I apologize for not providing citations to the quotations but I will rectify that now.
            The first paragraph is the marginal note from the Majority Text New Testament at Rev 5:9 by Dr. Wilbur Pickering based on manuscript family 35 of the New Testament. His work can be found at prunch.org
            As for the ESV/NASB vs the NIV you can do a compare at the Bible Hub to check that out in many places and then investigate why the difference. Let me make one thing perfectly clear that the Word of God is found in all translations IMHO.
            As for the interlinear Bibles they are a great resource because you can see exactly what word the author translated from. However finding one from a manuscript is rare to find. For the interlinear you need to find out the source of the Greek text being used, i.e., Erasmus, Textus Receptus, Stephanus, Westcott-Hort, Beza, Tragelles, Tischendorf, Nestle-Aland, UBS, Scrivener, etc. These Greek texts are Eclectic texts meaning the author(s) used a number of manuscripts containing variations and choose what they believed are the best readings between the variations to create their text and in some cases added to or deleted words which are not found/found in the MSS record. The one you provided is the Nestle 1904. So just like language Bible translations you have to consider the author(s) bias if any, denominational and theological basis are usually the major ones. I teach my students to question everything, drill down to the facts, spread your net far and wide.
            As for manuscripts, they are non-eclectic as they are a copy (the best the scribe can do) of a previous manuscript which needed to be replaced due to wear or another copy was required for another location or reason.
            Regards to Rev 5:9, at last count I believe there are slightly over 60 manuscripts containing this verse. Some are quite old and some recent, some complete and some fragments. Here is a break out;
            With “US”; 01, 046, ƒ052, 35, 69, 82, 175, 241, 256, 456, 627, 757, 920, 1006, 1611, 1732, 1733, 1841, 1859, 2017, 2020, 2040, 2042, 1852, 2053, 2059, 2060, 2065mg, 2074, 2081, 2138, 2302, 2329, 2351, 2436 The earliest MSS is from the 4th century and is category I.
            “US” omitted; 02 This MSS is from the 5th century and is category I.
            Variant Reading with “US”; 94, 104, 424, 459, 469, 616, 792, 922, 1828, 1862, 1888, 2019, 2050, 2065, 2070, 2073, 2186, 2344, 2814, The earliest of these variants MSS start in the 9th century.
            Fragments but indeterminate; P115, 04, 051, 88, 1384, 2030, 2062
            MSS with “men, them, people”; None
            If you are interested in tracking this down the MSS# this website should be most useful but hard to navigate and is found at ntvmr.uni-muenster.de/nt-transcripts
            The oldest extant is P115 from the 3rd century but is in fragments with only three words and these are common to all copies. Next is GA01, Codex Sinaiticus, written about 350AD. It clearly contains the Greek word “hemas” which is “us”. Moving up the timeline brings us to GA02, Codex Alexandrinus in the 5th century. This is missing the word “hemas”. If you look at the HD picture of the page at the British museum you find the verse starts at the bottom of one column and continues to the top of the next. Hemas is the word lost between the crack so to speak. Is it possible that the scribe was distracted, tired in a hurry, etc and dropped the word as put forth by H. C. Hoskier? Without the noun it is an incomplete sentence. This is why in the modern English Bibles the word “men, them or people” is usually in italics, brackets or has a marginal note if you have good translation with candor and hence the comment by Dr. Pickering in his translation.
            In summary I realize that in textual criticism there are a multitude of factors to consider about MSS research but have yet to hear a viable reason why MSS 01 should not be accepted as credible since it does have a category I rating and is the oldest extant copy.
            I hope this was helpful.

          • I want to thank Charles for his effort in this post. It took time and I appreciate that. As opposed to most of the emotional and cultish responses, his stands out as scholarly and intelligent. Unfortunately, there is NO reply possible to his effort, which I WILL archive.

            The writer of this blog also needs a commendation. He has much more patience with fools than I – and I commend him for it.

            Maybe that is the mark of a true pastor, as opposed to the prophetic type who see things as black and white and have little use for being nice when it infringes on the Word of God.

  6. Question, Mike: Why isn’t John 7:53-8:11 and Mark 16:9-20 in the NIV and ESV missing? If they were consistent, they would omit those entire sections as well, wouldn’t you agree? Don’t you find it interesting that they will omit a verse here and there (Matthew 17:21, Mark 9:29) but cannot bring themselves to omit something larger, like an entire paragraph? Why is that?

    • That is a good question, Brett. I honestly do not know why they chose to leave it simply in brackets. For me, personally, I believe it would be less confusing if they put it in a footnote or something…but I suppose we are facing something similar to what Jerome experienced when he placed the Apocrypha into his Latin Vulgate though he was pretty confident it wasn’t Scripture. It was something that was used to benefit the churches but it wasn’t Scripture–I imagine those who make these decisions feel something similar. That passage in John 7, especially, has become dear to many people–to see it missing might cause more consternation than having it in brackets. But again for the point of consistency I do wish they would put them in footnotes (I think that is better to say than to say that they are “omitting” these).

      • Thanks, Mike. You are more generous than I am on the subject. I believe it has more to do with the public reception, or the marketability of the product. Let’s say that they were consistent and put those two passages (John 7:52-8:11 and Mark 16.9-20 in the footnotes. I think it would potentially lead to a grassroots rebellion against those translations. As a pastor, I’ve noticed that probably well over 90% of my congregants don’t even notice the “missing” verses. But it sue would stand out if the book of Mark concluded with “for they were afraid” (Mark 16.8, ESV). Or they went looking for the story of the woman caught in adultery and couldn’t find it.

        • correction for above comment… “it would sue stand out” should say “it would sure stand out” 🙂

        • I have reread that there are 4 different endings for Mark in various MSS. ONE is highly unlikely, 2 less so but even the one commonly used seems like a patch.

          When in heaven where it is sealed we will know. NOT now.

    • There are tranlators/editors notes for each translation which gives their justification for why and how they translated certain Scriptures. I suggest if you really want to know, google “NIV translation notes”, or similar, to get some access to the notes for the translation you are interested in.
      The explanations which I’ve seen are very satisfying.

  7. First off I’m glad we don’t have the original documents. If we did I think we would venerate those and make the manuscripts an idol.

    Those verses are found in my esv they are in parentheses to denote that they are found in some manuscripts or they aren’t found in our earliest manuscript. Honestly many of your arguments are weak. The publisher leaves it to the reader to decide by denoting why the verse is marked.

    • I think you are correct that we’d turn those manuscripts into an idol, such is the human heart.

  8. This is a great starting point for understanding textual criticism. I wonder if an amendment could be made in order to explain *how* the scholars come to the conclusions they come to. I.E. the principal of the most difficult reading being the most likely in cases where there is a relatively similar amount of disagreement between verses.

    One that springs to mind is the amendment made to NA28 in Jude v.5. In that ‘Jesus’ brings the people out of Egypt rather than ‘the Lord’ as in previous versions of the Greek manuscripts. Often the footnotes in a decent bible will try to explain this.

    For anyone reading this comment who is not sure what I mean by the most difficult reading, I’ll try to explain it (in case there is no amendment made to the article).
    Basically, if 50% of the manuscripts have a particular word/phrase and 50% don’t (or they phrase it differently), scholars look to what would be the most difficult to understand phrase/word as being the most accurate. The principal being that a scribe may edit something to make it more understandable (change the grammar etc.) but they would never edit something to make it more difficult to understand if it is already making perfect sense. Therefore, the most difficult reading is preferred in cases where there is relatively similar representation on both sides.

    • Chris,
      I actually considered doing this…but I decided to write it on a very popular level. Though that doesn’t mean I’m opposed to writing a follow-up article as you suggested. Perhaps I’ll do that soon.

  9. Why is Luke 2:33 altered then? KJV says ” And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken to him.” NIV alters it and says ” The child’s father and mother marveled at what was said about him.” Now stop me if I’m wrong but I could of sworn God was the 1 and only father of Jesus. So how can Joseph be?

  10. ABSOLUTELY – GOD WAS THE ONE AND ONLY FATHER OF JESUS. BECAUSE MARY WAS WITH CHILD, BEFORE SHE AND JOSEPH EVER CAME TOGETHER. IT’S PLAIN AND SIMPLE. I RECOMMEND THAT YOU READ GOD’S WORD – AND BELIEVE IT. DO NOT PEOPLE ACCEPT GOD AND HIS WORD? REMEMBER ELIZABETH WAS PREGNANT WITH JOHN THE BAPTIST, WHEN MARY WENT TO VISIT HER. AND WHEN MARY GREETED ELIZABETH, THE BABY IN ELIZABETH’S WOMB JUMPED FOR JOY….PLEASE READ THE BIBLE (I RECOMMEND KJV.). A side note here: I would recommend that you purchase a number of bibles because the time is coming soon when “the powers that be” will remove as many bibles as possible.

    • Why would anyone read the KJV when there are so many understandable and better-based Bibles today. Considering that the KJV Bible used only 8 texts of which 3 were simply revisions of another also used, and that Beza stuffed in his own imagination in places, and Erasmus stole bits from the Vulgate to make a Greek text that was found in NO previous Greek text prior to 1400, one wonders how much thought is put into deciding which Bible to use as a “daily driver”:

      Certainly the KNV is pretty near the bottom of MY l;ist of readable bibles based on its deliberate Catholic slant, its archaic English which has actually reversed SOME words meanings, and the Imperial Edicts they were under as to the limits they could tranbslate.

      Including so much Catholic Doctrine into the KJV that was NON-existent in ANY previous Greek text makes a mockery of Christian Scholarship.

      We now have 8000 or so Greek texts that were unknown to the KJ translators, and instead of being limited to texts from the 1400’s we have fragments as old as 78 AD.

      MUCH more likely to be accurate.

  11. I started to look on my app and couldn’t find those verses so I then looked in my NIV printed Bible given to me in 1993 (a Zondervan print). Interesting find, even in 1993 Zindervan print those verses are omitted.

  12. I read many different bibles and the almost all have differing translations but for the most they get the point across. The Bible tells us not to be obsessed by strange doctrine.

  13. As a result of working with an individual who attended a KJV Only church I decided to look into the subject and found many good resources in print and on YouTube. Before I continue, let me state this: I’m sure a God that can create all of the universe, with all it’s complexity, can, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, use any reliable translation, including the beautiful KJV, to accomplish His perfect purpose. If you doubt that… Of course there are ‘bibles’ out there that are clearly satanic in nature and I don’t consider them reliable. Just open any dictionary or thesaurus and you will see many synonyms listed for a given word that shows there are different ways a word can be ‘translated/interpreted’, depending on the context. The same goes for Hebrew and Greek. I believe it is no mistake that God allowed His Word to take different paths as the manuscripts made their way across the known world. Here are a couple sources I’ve found that helped me make sense of the all these translations. One is the various YouTube videos and the book The King James Only Controversy- Can you trust the modern translations? by Dr. James R. White. The book can be complicated to follow at times, but if you take it slow and check out the references, it will make things clearer. Another source is the book How To Choose A Translation For All It’s Worth by Gordon Fee and Mark Strauss. (available on iBooks) They break the art of textual criticism/translation/ interpretation down in easy to understand terms. There is an excellent two-part YouTube video series by the pastor of the ‘NorthBaptist’ church on how they decided what translation they wanted to use as their pew bibles. These two sermons are based on the information contained in the Fee/Strauss book listed above and it makes this whole subject much easier to understand. The videos are titled Why So Many Translations and Why The NIV 2011. You may disagree with the two sources, but they definitely give you something to think about. You may have to unlearn somethings and swallow some pride to fully appreciate the information. Check them out.

    I don’t want sound like I’m bragging, but I personally I own over 25 bibles in a variety of translations and formats, a number of commentaries, bible dictionaries, handbooks, Hebrew/Greek Interlinear Bible, two different concordances, and other print/online study materials to assist in my scripture studies. Why do I own so many bibles? I teach 4/5 grade Sunday School at my church. By having a variety of translations, study notes, commentaries, and real life application stories/situations, and with the help of the Holy Spirit, helps me get a clearer picture of what the scriptures are trying to tell me and gives me a palette of information and thoughts I can use to pass God’s Word onto my students. My main study bible is the NIV 1984 Life Application Bible. It’s the one I markup and carry to church services. I like to use the New Living Translation in class because it’s much easier for the kids to understand. If they can’t understand it, what good is it to them. The best translation is the one that will be read and understood by my students. A bible that is not read will be of No Use to anybody! It’s about Balance! I want the best for my students!

    I’m sorry this is so long, but I feel its very important that people have a good reason to trust the words they are reading when studying God’s Word. I hope this helps. May God Bless you as you dig into the wonderful world of our creators word.

  14. NIV, NASB, and other more recent translations are simply following more ancient manuscripts that had not yet been discovered when the KJV was translated in 1611. Nothing was removed from the Bible (the original autographs which no longer exist). The readings you mentioned as removed are found elsewhere in other verses, so that nothing is lost.

  15. B.F. Westcott was a London spiritualist, necromancer, head of the British “Ghostly Guild”, tied to the “Occult Revival” & was friends with Helena Blavatsky, herself a spiritualist and editor of “Lucifer” magazine. As far as I’ve read, the KJV of 1611 is taken from the Majority text (or Syrian text) while Westcott used corrupted Greek text from Philo’s school in Alexandria, who altered scripture to conform to their philosophical beliefs. This is the basis for our updated versions. The missing verses are part of the uncorrupted Majority Text. Try reading “New Age Bible Versions” by Gail Riplinger. I’m only halfway through the book, but I’ve compared KJV, NKJV, NIV on each verse listed (& some ESV & NASB) & I’m shocked already at some of the changes. I know some think KJV is the only way to go, but I believe NKJV is a close second. It’s sure worth some extra investigation. Give this a read as well: http://www.biblebelievers.com/Reagan_TALE3cities.html

      • You didn’t give him much of a response there. I’m not too hung up on bible versions, but he is exactly right. Those older Westcott and Hoyt manuscripts are junk. They neither agreed with each other nor with the majority text, (which has 100% agreement except for spelling). The correct versions of the Bible are translated from the majority text (textus receptus) that was used to translate the KJV. You should research this before you go writing articles not knowing what you’re talking about.

        • I think you might want to be careful who you claim is illiterate about the foundation for the KJ texts. The TR was not published until 1631 – the KJ in 1611. And NO, the texts relied on by the KJ translators did NOT come close to agreeing with each other, even though they were ALL from the same Erasmus translation, and THAT filled with insertions, additions and editorializing. NOT to mention being based on texts ONLY being 200 years old. Today we have tens of thousands of texts NOT known to the KJ translators, going back as far as 78 AD in all likelihood.

          The marginal notes and alternative readings in the KJV are evidence that there was NO agreement between the texts they used. But they seem to have been edited out . . . I have to wonder why?

      • Kim believes NKJV is a close second is her opinion. Everything else she stated in her comment is true fact. YOU MIKE LEAKE ARE A LIAR PERIOD. 1. YOU STATED IN YOUR ARTICLE THE MISSING VERSES ARE NOT IN THE “ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS”. THE “ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS” DO NOT EXIST SO HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT IS OR IS NOT MISSING? THEN IN YOUR REPLY TO ISRAEL AND SHAWN ON THE 16TH AND 17TH JULY YOU REMARK IT SURE WOULD BE WONDERFUL/NICE TO *HAVE* THE ORIGINALS SO THAT THE TRANSLATORS DIDN’T HAVE TO DO THE WORK OF TEXTUAL CRITICISM, OF WHICH YOU TAKE TO FINISH OFF WITH, “BUT THEN THAT WOULDN’T BE ANY FUN”, FURTHERMORE YOUR SARCASTIC REMARK TO DAVE JULY 17TH….”IS IT THAT THEY ARE TAKING AWAY A PRECIOUS WORD THAT HAS YOU CONCERNED?” IT IS APPARENT THAT YOUR ATTITUDE TOWARDS GOD’S WORD IS ONE OF DISDAIN AND DISRESPECT. IN HEBREW IT CAN BE ONE OF THREE WAYS. I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE YOU TO SCHOOL MR. LEAKE, TO THE SHORT OF IT *REDEEMED* IS THE PROPER CHOICE FOR ITS DEFINITION IS THE ONLY ONE OF WHICH “BLOOD” CAN BE USED AS THE LESSER CHOICES OF RANSOM AND PURCHASED CANNOT. THEREFORE REDEEMED IS SUPERIOR.YOU MR. LEAKE DO NOT HAVE A BIBLE YOU BELIEVE TO BE INERRANT, PERFECT AND PURE, DO YOU?

        • Thanks for reading, Jason.

          A couple points for anyone who skips through the comments. I don’t care much for defending myself so I want really address whether or not I’m a liar. But I would like to clarify two points that Jason made.

          1) My comment to Dave was not meant to be snarky or flippant. I was serious in asking whether his chief concern was losing a precious word like redeemed. I ask that because that is often a concern of my own–that’s why I’m happy that the ESV keeps the word propitiation. It’s a precious word that I don’t think we want to lose.

          2) I would happily sign the Chicago statement of biblical inerrancy a thousand times over. In fact I’m preaching a series right now in our church on these very things and my conclusion to our people is that you can absolutely trust your Bible. Yes, I believe that there are some translations which get at the original better but at the end of the day you can trust your Bible.

          Finally, I’m curious as to why you are talking about Hebrew when Revelation 5 is in Greek. The word there translated “redeemed, purchased, ransomed” simply means “to go to the market, to purchase something”. The KJV itself translates the word as buyeth several times (of course buyeth=purchase in today’s language). And so I don’t see how this is a mistranslation. The text itself is what tells us that this “act of purchase” is by his blood.

          • [Apologies – I earlier posted this reply to the wrong comment]
            This is exactly the spirit in which to make reply to harsh comments.

            Thanks for bringing your articles (and comments) in the tone that you do, Mike. I’ve found them enlightening.

          • I was reading through the NIV and came across this verse in Isaiah 14:12 How you have fallen from heaven,
            morning star, son of the dawn!
            You have been cast down to the earth,
            you who once laid low the nations!
            And I thought that sounded weird considering in Revelations 22:16 16 “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.”
            I cross checked the Isaiah verse in the King James it is completely different, How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
            So are you telling me this was done “mistakenly”? Saying that Jesus Christ fell from Heaven or that Satan is (the Morning Star) Jesus Christ?

          • Thanks for the comment, Michelle. Sorry for a very slow response.

            The Hebrew on Isaiah 14:12 is heylel. It literally means light-bearer or (morning star). The point in Isaiah 14:12 is that this one mentioned clearly outshines all the others. Morning star is the most literal translation. And it’s that same point in Revelation 22. Now we can debate whether or not the NIV/ESV should have supplied Lucifer but this is not an attempt to refer to Jesus and Lucifer as the same…it’s just translating the text as it stands.

      • Mike, for the Christian Bible, everything hinges on the two Greek “lines”. The majority text is from the Antioch line (coincidentally where scripture says believers were first called Christians) and the minority text which is from the Alexandria line. The two oldest “almost” complete Greek bibles come from the Alexandria line. They differ greatly from each other and from these two you get the Westcott & Hort, Nestle Aland and UBS Greek versions. These three are what almost all of the new translations are based. But the greater question for me is if these two oldest bibles (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) are the best Greek, why were they not copied for centuries like all those from the Antioch line? An even better question is why God our Father would allow something (Antioch line) that was not His word, to flourish for 1200 years? If the Alexandria Line is the best Greek, why did the Vatican allow their copy to collect dust in the archive all that time? Same question for the copy found at Saint Catherine’s Monastery in Egypt. Just doesn’t make sense.

        • My guess would be because the Christians at that time knew the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus were corrupt and simply did not accept them. Also explaining why they were so well preserved. Something that does not get used regularly simply does not wear out.

      • The information Kim presented here is 100% accurate….. No debate needed as Wescott’s and Hort’s personal thoughts and correspondences can be read in there own biographies. Where they discuss there exploration of necromancy and esoteric clubs ( the very things GOD warns us of). Wescott’s and Hort’s association with Madam Blavatsky alone should be enough to throw up a red flag. Sorry but I don’t want anything that can be traced back to these three individuals….Also, look into automatic writing. It was practiced regularly in these circles and can be found today in the works of a rather popular author…..

        • And what has ANY of this to do with the Greek scholarship?

          Frankly, Scholarship is independent of personal views – the KJ was certainly controlled by the personal views of its Church of England (the NEW Catholic church of England which included the Catholic structure, purgatory etc)

          And much of your opinion about Westcott and Hort came from Gail Riplinger book of lies “the New Age Bibles” which is basically a lie (or more) per page throughout. Gail pretends to be a scholar, and YES, she WAS a professor – OF INTERIOR DECORATING.BUT nowhere in her book does she state that; the inference is she was a Bible or linguistic scholar.

          That said, Erasmus, upon whose work the KJ was based,was a humanist Catholic Priest; and frankly, I would accep[t the work of a rank secularist over the work of a Catholic priest any day; the Catholic priest had to maintain the church doctrine as the KJ did, while a secularist can more likely dispassionately do a scholarly translation. Hence the inclusion of Purgatory in the KJV, but missing from the W & H.

          YOU need to research a reasonable Greek Scholar such as James White who is thorough, competent and honest in his commentaries about the Greek texts. IT helps that he can actually debate in Biblical Greek; something the KJ translators could NOT do.

  16. Mark 9:29 quotes the verse that has been in these modern times removed from Matthew in NIV. Many many of the scriptures I have had KJV ONLY proponents throw in my face asking me to find in my NIV I have found, to which they then say, find it again then, but look here!

    I can think of dozens of times out of the hundreds of times KJV ONLY peoples have confronted me about my NIV or Greek/Hebrew Transliterations to argue about missing scriptures, that are now gone and how I am missing what God’s wants me to hear. Those confrontations usually have ended with me finding the scriptures they claim are missing in my NIV because I know those verses very well in one form or another, in one gospel or another, etc, or even, on several occasions the missing NIV verse is found within Apostle John’s book titled Revelations!

    The KJV ONLY people fail to miss that many many biblicals being created today have a greater access to earlier and earlier manuscripts than King Jame’s even had during his day.

    I had the great fortune of having a group of KJV ONLY people confronting me with my friend who lives in a very remote part of Latin America. He cannot speak English very well at all, but he loves to read my NIV and struggle through it. He had a year of English Studies in Mexico City during his youth, so he can read and write English to a varied degree, usually with just key words.

    Anyway, this group of people asked him about his own Neuvo Testament Bible, so he went through it, and actually found the scriptures they said were missing. They offered him to read from their KJV’s to which he had a very very VERY hard time even understanding one sentence in it.

    The end of the matter was, “he needs to learn proper English better, so as to be able to understand what he is missing out on”, not being able to read “old” English script.

    SO there we had it, he must learn “proper” English. I refused to argue with them any further about “the meaning” of this or that being changed in my friends Spanish bible and my NIV.

    Then end of the matter is, the Holy Spirit is wise to our needs as followers of His and the Lord has not made us to be fools “unto” Him, but victorious in our efforts, according to His Will alone, so what is lacking in speech, is made up in Power.

    If you look at the latest attempts to change the bible by those super apostles of Televised teaching you will see a sad attempt to change what the Holy Spirit testifies to and teaches, in reference to “explaining the meaning of”.

    Just look at two things, bear with me as I write on.

    Faith. What is faith? Faith is the oil in the lamp. 10 virgins, 5 wise, 5 foolish. The foolish, they need oil. They are told by the wise to go and buy it. Faith can be purchased. By the same amount you give, the same is measured of your faith. The person who sells all, gives all, leaves all they have to chase after HIM, is not only wise, but full of faith!

    Faith is the oil in the lamp, which is purchased, always at great cost, sometimes all you have, by either direct control or indirect reason.

    The Holy Spirit, cannot be bought at any price, by any person. Just look at what the apostles told Simon the Sorcerer. Yet today’s current teaching is the oil is the holy spirit, to which fuels//saturates the wick, and is also, the flame itself. So, all 3 are the Holy Spirit then?

    We even have scripture to guide us in that one, but they fail miserably.

    Now, relative to this, the birds of the air, in the tree of faith. What are they?

    They are overlooked, but the birds of the air, the very fowls of the air roost in our trees, once our faith is complete, and they are what?

    He tells one, go here and it goes, another, go there and it goes. The centurion I am speaking of was said to have great faith. He was wise to understanding the message he had been listening to.

    Even though they submit to you, do not rejoice in that, but that what?

    Then end of the original parable I was referring to, the birds are?

    When his kingdom is divided, it will suffer fail and fall. So, what divides it? What are the birds, that submit to us? Can we make war, in places we cannot enter into?

    Who is it, that explains such things?

    The very One that can explain what is lacking in word and speech, because it is not a matter of speech.

    • This is exactly the spirit in which to make reply to harsh comments.

      Thanks for bringing your articles (and comments) in the tone that you do, Mike. I’ve found them enlightening.

  17. I wanted to add, please forgive my spelling and grammar, and also to NOTE that the THEY ALSO FAIL MISERABLY, IS IN REFERENCE TO THE TV TEACHERS, MAINLY the one who has changed the meaning of the parables and riddles with his red letters, and explained away so many many very important parables and riddles found hidden in the scriptures, right up to and adding to Revelations, that it is terrifying to even know of.

    THEY are who I am in referring to in my statement,* “they fail miserably” * at their attempt to explain many many mysteries and parables.

    Thank you, sorry.

  18. I wish I could find the perfect answer on either side. But it seems both are on a defensive mode. I’m glad to read both responses. I may not be able to give an articulated comment but by reading your responses I am learning a lot as a Bible student.

  19. Danny Israel: It’s not the only bible that has done that, every single bible out side of the KJV, has omitted and changed scripture by “modernising” God’s word, thus, from the time I got saved, I’ve used only the KJV, It’s still the most trusted version and still used by most bible scholars, the KJV is over 400yrs old and has never been changed or “updated”, I call these newer versions,”new age comics”, they are forever being updated and changed to suit the times, but here’s the deal,…you cannot “modernise” God, He is the “SAME” yesterday, today and forever, modern English is changing daily, how can anybody combine the two, “changeable verses unchangeable?,
    Like · Reply · 15 mins
    Danny Israel

    Write a comment…

    • Thanks for the comment, Danny. I agree that you cannot modernize God. I’m also glad that the original translators of the KJV did not hold your same view…otherwise we wouldn’t have a Bible in our language. In 1611 they were translating the Bible into the understandable language of their day. I think the modern translations are born out of the same heart and philosophy which caused Tyndale and Wycliff to endure much persecution so that the Bible could be simply translated into an understandable language.

      • A favorite seed of doubt sown by some. Sorry, the 4 translations you refer to are actually updates for minor spelling and grammar changes. If you are implying something grand here, go ahead and cite the significant “changes” please so we can all benefit.

        • SO obviously NOT inspired OR infallible. And about those 8000 typos and punctuation errors, and the Apocrypha with its teaching of Purgatory etc – That is also Irrelevant?

          IF God could give His true meanings to 47 Scholars, why NOT a dozen printers?

          And the Cambridge vs Oxford and the 1611 vs the 1859, and a MYRIAD of other changes and revisions?

          NOT to mention the footnotes, alternative readings and many OTHER examples of GOOD scholarship, but NO infallibility.

          You cannot claim to be a scholar, rational and a KJO cultist. AT best you can get 2 out of three.

    • “you cannot “modernise” God, He is the “SAME” yesterday, today and forever, modern English is changing daily, how can anybody combine the two, “changeable verses unchangeable?,”

      So, Danny, HOW do you justify “changing” from Hebrew to Greek to Aramaic to Latin and back to Greek and back to Latin and ultmately into outdated ENGLISH if God cannot change?

      If the KJO crowd didn;t have double standards they woulf have none. YOUE entire line of reasioning is completely conteary to the Word of GOD. It is cerusoiny an affront to those who dies for their faith and thir attempte to put the Bibkle into the language of the common plowboy – NIT into a language 500 years out of date.

      The OT was translated frequently as language changed. That was in Hebrew. Then it was translated into Greek as more and more Hebrews were speaking Greek.

      YOU entire hypothesis is irrational, anti-intellectual and anti-Biblical. Much like the Pharisees and THEIR additions to the law to make themselves appear more Godly. Maybe that is why YOU are elitist?

  20. I find the comments here interesting; however, a few are from very uninformed individuals.
    Waycliff was in 1382: Before the King James
    150 years later came Tyndale
    then in 1535 Coverdale took a shot with rvisions in 1539, 1560, and 1568
    Finally along comes the King James, which worked off of Coverdale in large part.
    Now, the older text we have to work off of are in Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew and the like. In a vast number of cases there ARE NO literal translations from those languages to English. ALSO, MANY ENGLISH WORDS from 1381, etc have changed in meaning.
    Finally, from my seminary training I believe I was taught to worship the Word, that is Jesus, not the word. (Note upper case W, and lower case w) There are versions of the Bible not worth reading. However, the NIV, NASB, NKJ are pretty reliable.

  21. Let God be true and every man a liar. Study to shew thyself approved unto God; A workman need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the WORD of truth!Context Context Context is so important but with out the Holy Spirit one can’t be led in the spirit of truth. Bickering and anger and proving oneself is right, is not the way to be. I’m amazed. There’s one ” Word of God, One Lord, One faith and one baptism. One God and Father of us all but so many different opinions from those who profess Christ. But get this, the devil is stealing, killing and destroying. It’s fine to discuss the Bible under the unction of the Holy Spirit and in love but to allow certain spirits to pit us against one another is a trick of the enemy. He is a deceiver. Grace and peace to all!

    • “There’s one ” Word of God, One Lord, One faith and one baptism. ”

      Can you find a verse anywhere that says that OR are YOU adding to the world of God?

      Methinks my baloney detector just caught a whif. . . . .

      But then since adding TO and subtracting FROM the word of God is OK IF you are a King James Only cultist, who am I do drag scripture into this . . . Where is this Apocrypha that was part of the KJ inspiration?

  22. A Warning
    Rev 22:18 For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; 19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

    God is very serious about His Word and whom or who ever removes or change anything In God’s Word is in very serious danger. It is a promise from God!

    I am a KJV believer.
    God Bless
    Paul-Christian

    • There is NOT a shred of respectability in your comment and misapplied verse. The verse about NOT adding or subtracting is also in Daniel; we have the minor prophets and the entire NT following that.

      The adding and subtracting applies ONLY to that BOOK – ie the Revelation of John. TO apply it to any Bible text is itself adding to the word of GOD for no such claim is ever made of the Bible.

      BUT if you insist upon applying it to the KJV, where are the Apocrypha NOW? IT was part of the KJV as given by GOD to the King’s scholars.

      How can you account for all the additions added over the years that all appear in the KJV, including the last few verses of Revelation added by Erasmus, the several additions and unwarranted revisions of Beza that are in the KJV?

      YOU start with an unfounded assumption that the KJV is the standard by which others should be judged – a false and wicked assumption, as its political restrictions and underlying premise certainly prevented it from being an honest translation. And the leading Hebrew Scholar of the early 1600’s stated that the OT translation was incredibly poor.

      The Bible is the word of GOPD – but we worship the WORD of God. Even IF the KJ was inspired, and it OBVIOUSLY is not, the changes in language would require retranslations and updates, just as we see in the OT Hebrew.

  23. We can always make the best choices, but only if we, on purpose,
    trust God and seek His advice first in all things.
    Present your bodies as living sacrifices Paul writes elsewhere in Romans Chapter 12.
    Even during those instances of “easy choices,” it is always best
    to think and even briefly pray before choosing what to do, what to say, or how to act.

  24. I humbly what to ask a question which of this Bible translations has the power to usher to heaven?If non i will like us to concern ourselves to harvesting souls for Jesus Christ,rather than take sides to one translation or the other.We should also bear in mind that no amount of research or theology will give one the ticket to heaven or make one holy and righteous.Mark 16:15-16.I dont preach Bible translation(s) i preach Jesus Christ to the dying world.Abraham had no Bible yet he obeyed God.
    May we be ready for rapture in Jesus name.

    • I find that an interesting comment. That you would prefer a translation that was forced to adhere to Imperial Edicts by the “pope” of the English catholic church (king James was the ruler of the Church of England and controlled the parameters of the translation) as opposed to translations made by committed Evangelical experts in the ancient Greek which the 1611 translators admitted they had NO understanding of.

      Most readers of the KJV have never read the Notice to Reader that used to accompany the book, in which the translators admit that the translationwas NOT perfect in any way and needed further work. Their marginal notes demosntrated some of their confusion. The fact that the leading Hebrew scholar in England at the time denounced the translation as terrible says something of its quality.

      That the printed texts that the KJV was taken from were themselves only a couple hundred years old (as opposed to the 2000 years old MSS available now), and were in some cases PURELY the imagination of the compiler (Erasmus and Beza simply MADE UP, or altered, or inserted passages at will) should make you VERY suspicious of this Bible. Much like the New World translation of the JW, it was translated to prove a doctrine and church structure, NOT what the apostles actually wrote. The evidence is abundant throughout the NT.

  25. Last on the three part best blender list is the Waring MX1000R professional blender. This model also features a traditional design in black. A 3 HP motor is included for even blending along with an oversized base that adds weight for maximum stability. The jar is very similar to the Vitamix blender

  26. Incorporate art into rooms in your house, whether they are paintings, pictures or posters. This can go along with the theme of the house that you choose and will help to improve the overall appearance. If you are a young homeowner, you can frame classical artwork to add to the elegance of your home.

  27. Online TV streaming enables you to do both.
    The card game is set to be released in retail stores
    across North America in late August. I’ve devised this Starcraft 2 Protoss Strategy Guide so you can do well
    as a Protoss player.

  28. Common practice of changing the Bible around? You say that so easily. First where is your proof? Second if that was true it should scare you. Third “older manuscript” codex vat etc? Give me the book that was in pristine condition that no one ever touched just magically appeared? Don’t you think that the common text that was most printed and most used with minimal error and changes would be the correct text to use? Just think about it what does the Bible of the most admirable Christian man you know look like? Is it in pristine condition? Is it hidden from the world? Is it found only in Egypt and the Vatican two very holy places (sarcasm). Come on now. Stop leading the sheep to slaughter. This article is laced with lies and mostly subtle distractions which could make a young Christian question the core truth they already know.

    • Richard, where did you get this bilgewater save those lying propaganda hit pieces – Tares among the Wheat and its related bundle of lies., and the lie-a-page ruminations of Riplinger, a demonstrated false prophet and perpetual liar.

      First, the ONLY church that stood up for the Divinity of Christ and the trinity was the – – – – – —- wait for it -the ALEXANDRIAN church. The ONLY uncorrupted church on the issue. SO we owe our understanding of the trinity AND Christ’s divinity to that church you mock and baselessly defame. YOU are just repeating Sam Gipps deliberate lies.

      “Give me the book that was in pristine condition that no one ever touched just magically appeared?”

      That is a lie. Rather than the lies generally spread by the KJO anti-scholars, the document was shown to Tchindorf I(sp?) wrapped in a red velvet sheath to protect it. It was highly valued, and therefore NOT used daily; copies were sufficient for daily use. Your irrational make believe is disgusting, especially when you mix it in with your insane warning about young Christians.

      The ONLY good translations are ones that are read, and very few people who have ever debated atheists have never had to duck the issue of obsolete and reversed definitions.

      ” This article is laced with lies and mostly subtle distractions which could make a young Christian question the core truth they already know.”

      I NOTE to my amusement but not surprise (not that I would expect ANYTHING different from the illiteracy that accompanies KJO hypocrisy) That you provide not even ONE example to support your lie.

      Its YOU who is deliberately spreading lies, ones that CAN destroy the faith of a young Christian. It happened to me. Fortunately the “Cotton Patches” version was available that demonstrated to this bitter and disillusioned but seeking ex-Baptist that GOD COULD express his love and redemption outside of the peculiar Christian-speak of the narrow minded and often unsaved hypocrites who major in legalism and ignorance – just as the Pharasees did.

      You may remember what Jesus said ti them at various times about adding to the Words of God a burden that could NOT be carried, thereby making it impossible for those folk so afflicted by false teachers, to reach the kingdom of GOD.

      Certainly having to learn another language to be a Christian is just such a burden.

      YOU like being illiterate and uneducated and read the KJ? Great. BUT don’t mock or ridicule ANY carefully translated version of the Bible; as the translators of your insufferably ancient text pointed out in the Notice to Reader (which I’ll bet you are ignorant of): ANY Bible no matter how poorly translated is still the Word of God

      Can you explain WHY the KJ included support for purgatory, the divine right of Kings and deliberately mistranslated a dozen or more words upon the orders of the King?

      Can you find a SINGLE GREEK text before 1500 that contained GOD SAVE THE KING?

      You mock the Vaticanus, but sections of your Bible contain passages DIRECTLY from that – passages found in NO Greek text ever.

      YOU ignore the fact that the text your KJ was based on was compiled by a catholic THEOLOGIAN, and was used to attack Luther and the reformation. The version YOU rely upon was DEDICATED to Pope Leo X

      YET you lie and misinform to protect your archaic translation, the traditions of men poorly taught, poorly done, even at that time, whilst denigrating works by wonderful Evangelical Christian scholars using documents NOT tainted or totally controlled by the catholic system.

      YOU are, simply put, a flaming hypocrite.

      SRY to be blunt and plain spoken, but this intellectual sewage you spout, is simply an extension of the deception of the SDA churches, who began it at the turn of the last century. The intransigence and lack of intelligence and scholarship of the KJO folk, and their passionate willingness to accept lies and then repeat them, has caused irreparable damage to the Christian church, and hypocrites like you are the foot-soldiers of this damnable heresy, a well crafted work of Satan.

    • “Is it hidden from the world? Is it found only in Egypt and the Vatican two very holy places (sarcasm).”

      That statemtnis a lie. there are now almosy 6000 MSS, fragments and cosex- and MOST of them agree with the vaticanus and Sinaticus.

      Almost NONE agree with all the fantastical creatiobs of Erasums and Beza – who BOTH thought theyt could expand and improve on the Bible with their own ideas.

      Many of the passages in the KJ were NEVER found in ANY Greek text before the creative construction and insertion of pure imagination and Vatican portions into the THIRD revision of Erasmus text. They were not even in the First TWO.

      YOU ignore all this evidence in your irrational and fact-fee tirade.

  29. Hi Mike Leake,
    Thanks for sharing your knowledge n info of the Bible versions ..
    Can you comment on the english language version of the Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)? Is it (the OT) translated from the original ancient Hebrew manuscript? And where is the NT translated from? Ta!

    • It depends entirely on which translation you are reading. SO I’ll deal with the KJ first:

      A Catholic theologian named Erasmus collected 6 or 7 Modern Greek texts – ie from about 1300 and compiled his FIRST version of a complete Greek text from them. In all he made 5 revisions, adding passages from the Catholic Vulgate in areas where he was aware of the Vulgate, but that was NOT in any previous Greek text. The last part of Revelation he made up from recorded sermons on the subject by other catholic priests. The Greek text he concocted was dedicated to Pope Leo X. It was also used against Luther, for whom Erasmus was an enemy.

      Before the KJ was assembled, Stephanus also published a Greek text – basically Erasmus again with verse separations – NT in 1551 and the OT in 1571. Theodore Beza also did a version, again based on the Erasmus text in 1550, and simply made up some of the revisions he envisaged – they never appeared in ANY Greek text previously. http://www.bibles-online.net/1550/

      When the KJ translators compiled the KJ from the Erasmus-based texts, it was NOT a true translation, for they simply checked several English Bibles – Geneva, Great Bible, etc and adjusted them according to the doctrines of the Church of England, and the demands of King James to promote the Divine Right of Kings. NO previous Bible or Greek text EVER contained the expression “God Bless the King” for example. The attempt was to dissuade the use of the Geneva Bible in the Church of England which basically stated that IF the king is corrupt – kick him out.

      The KJ was done by committees, and resulted in TWO versions. BUT the committees didn’t bother to check each other very well, hence the use of passover in all cases but one, where EASTER is used; a holiday observance never known for centuries later.

      While a literary masterpiece, it was a corrupted and tampered with rehash of older and very effective Bibles. Its popularity came from the edict requiring its use in all State churches, their confession of faith catechism and prayer book ALL required the use of the KJV.

      And strangely enough a) they retained many if not all of the unfounded changed created by Beza, referred to as “conjectural emendations” – in other words NO SUBSTANCE to the statement and NO previous use, ever, in any Greek text.

      The translators stated in the Notice to Reader (later removed for political reasons) that they had NO clue about the ancient texts they had in their possession – they could NOT understand them, and stated they thought they were written in a heavenly language. That language was KOINE Greek.

      SO the entire KJ came out of a compiled Greek text from a catholic theologian, enemy of the reformation, dedicated to a pope, used by the Catholic church parallel to its latin Vulgate, with passages that were simply made up by the editors of the Greek texts used in the KJ.

      MORE importantly, the KJ came in two versions, and included the Apocrypha, still in use today in the Catholic Bibles – which is (or was) their basis for purgatory. The initial versions contained something like 8000 errors, PLUS copious marginal noted where even with the pre-digested Greek texts provided, they were NOT sure of the correct English word. Sometime later some of these marginal notes were used to replace the text of the original, sometimes NOT. Then there was an American KJ to confuse issues even more.

      Other versions later

      • “SO the entire KJ came out of a compiled Greek text”

        Should be: entire New testament of the KJ Other mi
        nor corrections could be applied . . .

  30. I am no longer certain the place you’re getting
    your information, but great topic. I must spend a while finding out much more or working out
    more. Thanks for wonderful info I used to be looking for this info for my mission.

  31. Hi! Do yoᥙ know іf they mаke аny plugins tⲟ safeguard аgainst hackers?

    Ⅰ’m kiinda paranoid aƅoսt losing evеrything I’ve worked hard on. Any tips?

  32. Undeniably imagine that that you stated. Your favorite
    reason seemed to be at the internet the simplest thing to be aware of.
    I say to you, I certainly get annoyed at the same time as
    other people consider concerns that they plainly don’t know
    about. You controlled to hit the nail upon the top and also outlined out the whole thing without having
    side-effects , people could take a signal.
    Will likely be again to get more. Thank you

  33. Hey I am so thrilled I found your website, I really found you by error, while I was researching on Google for something else, Anyways I am here now and would just like to say thanks for a fantastic
    post and a all round thrilling blog (I also love the theme/design),
    I don’t have time to read it all at the minute
    but I have bookmarked it and also added your RSS feeds, so when I have
    time I will be back to read much more, Please do keep up the great
    work.

  34. Hey Theгe. I foսnd yⲟur weblog the usage οf msn. Thiis
    іs a very smartly wгitten article. І will make
    sure to bookmark it and cⲟme Ьack tо learn morᥱ of your ᥙseful info.
    Tɦank yoս for the post. Ι’ll certainly comeback.

  35. Proverbs 25:23 in the ESV says “The North wind brings forth rain…”
    In the KJV it says
    “The North wind driveth away rain…”

    They are NOT the same and can’t both be the word of God.

    The ESV calls the devil the Day Star in Isaiah 14:12 and Jesus is called the day star by the KJV in 2Peter 1:19 where the ESV uses morning star and they both use morning star in Rev 22:16.
    God preserved his word as he promised he would and you really need to study this issue out completely.
    The KJV is THE word of God.
    The ESV is not.

    • IF you took the time to actually look at the Hebrew text, that is an EXACT translation. That your sensitivities might be HURT is simply YOU imposing your beliefs on the original writings given by God.. TYrust me, you do NOT know more than GOD. Its HIS word.
      Aren’t you one of those folk who promise thunder and damnation on those that change the word of GOD?

      And yet you do so here – where the ONLY translation for that verse is DAY Star. That is what any Hebrew reader would understand the text to say, but YOU want to change it? How can you justify that?

      The ESV is 100% correct. YOU are 100% wrong. Simple as that.

      • IF you took the time to actually look at the Hebrew text, that is an EXACT translation. (In your opinion.) That your sensitivities might be HURT is simply YOU imposing your beliefs on the original writings given by God.. (They are not the original manuscripts. The originals are not available.) TYrust me, you do NOT know more than GOD. (True!) Its HIS word. (Really? With mistakes in it? Do you have an inerrant 100% accurate Bible that you can read from?)
        Aren’t you one of those folk who promise thunder and damnation on those that change the word of GOD? (Can’t change what you don’t have.)

        And yet you do so here – where the ONLY translation for that verse is DAY Star. (In your sinful opinion. Just like my sinful opinion.) That is what any Hebrew reader would understand the text to say, but YOU want to change it? (In your opinion.) How can you justify that? (Don’t have to for it is just your opinion.)

        The ESV is 100% correct. ( In your opinion.) YOU are 100% wrong. (In your opinion.) Simple as that. (In your opinion.)

      • This is an illustration of your belief on the word of God.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I48hr8HhDv0

        The question to be answered is this, “What is your authority for what you believe?” Is it tradition? Or is it your feelings? Is it your “noodle” aka scholarship? Or is it the word of God?

        If you say it is the word of God then there are certain characteristics that must be present. God cannot lie. Titus 1:2Open in Logos Bible Software (if available) Any error in any version is a lie and therefore is not the word of God. Surely a God that created the sun, moon and stars can preserve his word perfectly. If all I have is a reliable translation, where “reliable” is a subjective statement by a corrupt sinner just like me, then I do not have Gods’ word. Without Gods’ perfect words you have no authority. All you have is speculation.

  36. I just have to comment and say that I think HappyLada is the funniest name i have ever seen. You seriously need a new name. I hope you are not a Man because that is embarrassing. Haha

  37. Interestingly enough, when I hover over those verses it pulls them up…in ESV. Your argument is invalid.

  38. you’re in point of fact a excellent webmaster. The website loading pace is amazing.
    It sort of feels that you are doing any distinctive trick.

    Furthermore, The contents are masterwork. you have done a magnificent job in this matter!

  39. wouldnt it be easier to just believe and have faith in God. Follow the commandments..read which ever bible you choose and believe God will give you the truth and understanding. why argue. praising is such a better use of time.
    God bless each of you.

    • It would seem then that you have never been in debate with atheists. They are well aware of every error in the KJ (and to a lesser extent the others) and use those errors as fodder for the ignorant.

      If you START with a Bible that has OBVIOUS scholastic and linguistic errors, how much more difficult is it to present it as the infallible work of the Holy Spirit?

      IF the errors of the KJ are allowed to go unchallenged, why bother to defend the Bible at all?

  40. That is really fascinating, You’re a very skilled blogger.

    I’ve joined your feed and look ahead to searching for more of your great post.
    Also, I’ve shared your website in my social networks

    • There are lots of videos out there – but IF you actually fact check them they ate simply lies and false statements.

      Look up James White, and erudite Biblical scholar and has spoken Biblical Greek since he was a teenager – he deals with the deliberate lies of Gipp and others accurately and leaves them convicted of their own corruption.

      He has gotten several to admit the KLJ is wrong, and yet the insist it is inspired and the ONLY text from GOD. He is also an expert on the additions and insertions in the KJB that were NEVER in any Greek NT text ever before the catholic theologian Erasmus created and compiled the underlying text of the KJ – his 5 versions of the Greek NT don’t agree with each other.

      There is ONE Youtube Video that goes through some 150 passages of the KJ and points out that they are deliberate errors to support the catholic/anglican bias of the translators.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INtIF-a_nO0

      The SDA roots of the KJO controversy are here:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NAuJVFjEjs

      And the fanatic Kinney debating White. I haven’t watched this but I HAVE debated Kinney; logic, history and reality have NO bearing on his cultism
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5H1dWcTGnUQ

      Many of these cultists believe the Bible lost its way over the years and one must depend upon the NEW REVELATION of the KJB to know truth. Many go even FURTHER and claim that you must learn ENGLISH to know the new revelation, just as the muzlims claims one should know Arabic to know the koran

      There are LOTS more.

  41. The battle to undermine the scripture is spiritual not physical. It is a REAL battle.

  42. So we cannot trust the KJV? I am not a KJV onlyist. I like other translations. I enjoy the clarity I get from other versons. What happens when we find other older manuscripts that yet has missing verses? Are conservative scholar innerant? If a verse is taken out by a tranlator because it is not in an older manuscript, does that mean that Jesus did not say it (Matt. 17:21)? Does it mean that a coptist made it up? Does it mean it is unscriptual or even heretical? So when we teach on the scripture and come across a verse not in the older manuscripts we can say,”don’t worry about this verse because it was not in the oldest manuscripts. you don’t have to trust this or obey it?” Are conservative scholars innerant? As Christians we demonstrate confusion on scholarship and more. Thank God we can at least agree on the core truths about Jesus Christ.

    • There are NO missing verses. Those that people fuss about ALL have logical and scholastic reasons for being relegated to MARGIN notes and footnotes – JUST as the KJ translators did with verses that were DUBIOUS in their translation.

      Not ONE make a doctrinal difference to the Gospel in any way, so its NOT rational to assume “So when we teach on the scripture and come across a verse not in the older manuscripts we can say,”don’t worry about this verse because it was not in the oldest manuscripts. you don’t have to trust this or obey it?””

      NOR is it rational to pretend that GOD gave us the KJV to correct the errors in BOTH the OT and NT that had crept in over time as some claim – the KJV itself being riddled with errors for whatever reason.

      AS you say, we have the BULK of scripture wherein themes are repeated, explained and illustrated so that “a fool cannot err therein”. For those interested in ACCURATE textual accuracy, I refer you to the NET Bible wherein the VARIANTS are explained, and the reasons given for their choice. MOST/ALL seem logical and reasonable and in keeping with the overall mass and message of Scripture.

      BUT modern archeology and modern scholasticism HAVE made the content and intent of the writers so much more available, and the KJ simply is an archaic relic of the Bible’s Catholic past.

      ANYONE who debates with muzlims of atheists would soon find that know EVERY error in the KJ and you are powerless to argue against them IF all you have is the KJ; GOD is a liar IF the KJB is His official Word to mankind.

      GREAT literature; terrible text.

  43. The following link illustrates the belief being portrayed in this discussion:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I48hr8HhDv0

    The question to be answered is this, “What is your authority for what you believe?” Is it tradition? Or is it your feelings? Is it your “noodle” aka scholarship? Or is it the word of God?

    If you say it is the word of God then there are certain characteristics that must be present. God cannot lie. Titus 1:2 Any error in any version is a lie and therefore is not the word of God. Surely a God that created the sun, moon and stars can preserve his word perfectly. If all I have is a reliable translation, where “reliable” is a subjective statement by a corrupt sinner just like me, then I do not have Gods’ word. Without Gods’ perfect words you have no authority. All you have is speculation.

  44. The only problem is the lie that you have spread a little more concerning wescott hort .Erasmus knew of and rejected vatanicus and sianaticus was discovered in a trash can being used as tinder decause of its poor quality. Just once I wish One Of you textual critics either knew or cared about the truth.

    • To Jimmy Davis: “Erasmus knew of and rejected vatanicus”.

      Of course – he took sections of it and inserted them in his THIRD revision. from the LATIN, because they were NOT in any Greek Text, and HE thought they should be. YOU cannot provide ANY evidence he rejected Vaticanus.

      “Erasmus knew of and rejected sianaticus”

      You got this from a deliberate lie that has been published. MY references claim it was wrapped in a scarlet pouch and handled with great reverence. It WAS the standard, NOT trash. Can you imagine it being in the tinder-bin for 5 centuries?

      “Just once I wish One Of you textual critics either knew or cared about the truth.”

      I think you have this reversed – its those critical of these ancient documents that don’t KNOW of CARE for the truth. YOUR Bible is NOT the NEW revelation from God you think it is. It ALSO contained some 2000 errors and marginal readings – some of which were corrected over time, proving its lack of infallibility as a translation.

      Erasmus’ work, and its derivatives, were CATHOLIC texts. HIs work was DEDICATED to Pope Leo X, but you willfully ignore that. His later versions included more of the Vaticanus that his first; in any event, his texts contained Greek statements NEVER before found in ANY previous Greek Bible.

      MODERN knowledge of the original languages, recent discoveries of MUCH older texts than the 1200 AD texts used by Erasmus have been found, and VERIFY the historical accuracy of the Bible. BUT one cannot rely on a single corruoted imperially edictyed textr for God’s word – one MUST consider all the sources, and study the variations to arrive at the most likely meaning.

      For this reason I enjoy the NET Bible and its 62,000 translators notes EXPLAINING why they chose the words they did, and offering alternatives – in TRUE scholarly fashion.

      YOU deliberately ignore the FACT that Erasmus was a CATHOLIC scholar and opposed the reformation. His texts reflect that. They also encourage Catholic doctrines and errors. The KJ maintained many of his errors, ecclesiastical mistranslations and included the Apocrypha, supporting Purgatory.

      Tell me again HOW your translation is inspired?

  45. What is your basis on saying the opposite is true (last line in article) sounds like you’re just talking matter of fact but haven’t provided any reason “why”….

    • The reason “why?” is given in the first two sentences.
      The problem though with the views expressed by these evil (Matt. 7:11), sinful (Rom. 3:23), ungodly Gen. 1:27), liars (Rom. 3:4), and I as well am an evil, sinful, ungodly, liar, but do not hold to the views held on this site, the problem with these sinners is that they have nothing that critiques them.
      1. They believe in something that they have never seen, namely the originals.
      2. The truth is something that is determined by their own noodle.
      3. They do not have any authority, for their words are the words of evil, sinful, ungodly, liars just like me.
      4. They are the epitome of 2 Tim. 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. If “Thy word is truth,” then that is something that doesn’t exist anymore. All we have today are reliable translations. Well, that’s just speculation though, by some educated evil, ungodly sinful liars, just like me.

      • KLM – I think you are VERY confused.

        Nothing you say makes sense, unless you are attempting to justify a slavish devotion to a corrupt translation.

        “1. They believe in something that they have never seen, namely the originals.”

        YOU have the same issue – apart from your unreasonable assumption that YOU have the correct translation and no one else does – a translation with bits and pieces NEVER found in any previous Greek Bible – Created from the mind of a Catholic Theologian attempting to counteract the reformation while supporting the doctrines of his church. Hence purgatory, sprinkling etc are ALL included in your original Bible, BEFORE it was edited for the hundredth time to fix some of its errors.

        “2. The truth is something that is determined by their own noodle.”

        NO, scholarship is NOT determining something from one’s noodle – THAT comes from irrational belief based on NO evidence, such as your blind loyalty to a corrupted text, which is COUNTER to scholarship and Biblical study.

        SCHOLARSHIP is taking ALL the evidence, not just some catholic evidence, and attempting to learn EXACTLY what was FIRST written as well as possible, as opposed to taking bits from various CATHOLIC versions and assembling them into something NEVER before seen in ANY version, anywhere.

        “3. They do not have any authority, for their words are the words of evil, sinful, ungodly, liars just like me.”

        Well, then WHO does have authority? The folk translating the King’s version of the Bible could NOT agree among themselves (conflict between Passover and Easter for example) and made thousands of mistakes. Does THAT disqualify them from TRYING to make God’s Word understandable?

        Godly men, committed their lives to the study of the Scriptures, and you brand them with all the negative implications of Humanity?

        One can ONLY presume you claim INSPIRATION for a corrupted human work – and thereby make God a liar. I do NOT see any other alternative.

        “4. They are the epitome of 2 Tim. 3:7 [Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)] Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. If “Thy word is truth,” then that is something that doesn’t exist anymore. All we have today are reliable translations. Well, that’s just speculation though, by some educated evil, ungodly sinful liars, just like me.”

        YOU ignore all the HUMAN errors in EVERY Bible Language is NOT that precise), especially one that was Imperially mandated so as NOT to interrupt the King. Find me ANY previous English Bibles that contain “GOD save the King”? Find me any GREEK Bible that has those words.

        So since YOUR only Bible is one of the most corrupt, what HOPE do you have that GOD was involved with it? Is GOD going to preserve a corrupt, political, Bible and leave the ones that are carefully and reverently thought out to be ignored?

        How did America have its great awakenings WITHOUT an imperially edicted Bible?

        No one could ever accuse you of actually THINKING this through. YOU have just bought into the old Seventh Day Adventist lie of KJ inspiration.

        “The question to be answered is this, “What is your authority for what you believe?” Is it tradition? Or is it your feelings? Is it your “noodle” aka scholarship? Or is it the word of God?:”

        A truly, silly, circular-logic question. YOU are ASSUMING you have a TRUE and INSPIRED Word of GOD. So only YOUR noodle is determining that question. YOUR Bible is ONLY inspired BECAUSE you say it is? Really? ALL the evidence available to a THINKING man is irrelevant?

        YOU can pick 150 places where YOUR Bible contradicts its underlying text; 50 places where it contradicts itself, etc – BUT you have some “private REVELATION” that it’s inspired?

        The Bible is to be “of NO private interpretation”

        • KLM – I think you are VERY confused.

          Nothing you say makes sense, unless you are attempting to justify a slavish devotion to a corrupt translation.

          “1. They believe in something that they have never seen, namely the originals.”

          YOU have the same issue – apart from your unreasonable assumption that YOU have the correct translation and no one else does – a translation with bits and pieces NEVER found in any previous Greek Bible – Created from the mind of a Catholic Theologian attempting to counteract the reformation while supporting the doctrines of his church. Hence purgatory, sprinkling etc are ALL included in your original Bible, BEFORE it was edited for the hundredth time to fix some of its errors.

          “2. The truth is something that is determined by their own noodle.”

          NO, scholarship is NOT determining something from one’s noodle

          Really? Taking all of the evidence is not something that is determined by your brain?

          – THAT comes from irrational belief based on NO evidence, such as your blind loyalty to a corrupted text, which is COUNTER to scholarship and Biblical study.

          SCHOLARSHIP is taking ALL the evidence, not just some catholic evidence, and attempting to learn EXACTLY what was FIRST written as well as possible, as opposed to taking bits from various CATHOLIC versions and assembling them into something NEVER before seen in ANY version, anywhere.

          “3. They do not have any authority, for their words are the words of evil, sinful, ungodly, liars just like me.”

          Well, then WHO does have authority?

          Oh Happylada, you finally got my point! Your authority is the words of men – scholarship. The best rendering is… The best manuscripts are… But this is all from the opinions of ungodly sinners just like me. The point is you are telling people to have faith in man. To say you are telling people to have faith in the word of God, YOU DON’T HAVE A COPY OF IT AND CAN NOT TELL ANYONE WHERE IT IS! You have no authority for you do not have the Holy words of God!

          The folk translating the King’s version of the Bible could NOT agree among themselves (conflict between Passover and Easter for example) and made thousands of mistakes. Does THAT disqualify them from TRYING to make God’s Word understandable?

          Godly men, committed their lives to the study of the Scriptures, and you brand them with all the negative implications of Humanity?

          My bible says the godly man ceaseth… “Godly men?” Their hearts are just as wicked and deceitful as mine. They still have the old nature just like me. Godly men! You have got to be kidding. They are going to be eaten by worms just like me. After four days they stinketh!

          One can ONLY presume you claim INSPIRATION for a corrupted human work – and thereby make God a liar. I do NOT see any other alternative.

          “4. They are the epitome of 2 Tim. 3:7Open in Logos Bible Software (if available) [Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)] Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. If “Thy word is truth,” then that is something that doesn’t exist anymore. All we have today are reliable translations. Well, that’s just speculation though, by some educated evil, ungodly sinful liars, just like me.”

          YOU ignore all the HUMAN errors in EVERY Bible Language is NOT that precise), especially one that was Imperially mandated so as NOT to interrupt the King. Find me ANY previous English Bibles that contain “GOD save the King”? Find me any GREEK Bible that has those words.

          God save the King is in the Old Testament so it would be in Hebrew, unless you believe the corrupt LXX which is Origen’s fifth column.

          So since YOUR only Bible is one of the most corrupt, what HOPE do you have that GOD was involved with it? Is GOD going to preserve a corrupt, political, Bible and leave the ones that are carefully and reverently thought out to be ignored?

          How did America have its great awakenings WITHOUT an imperially edicted Bible?

          No one could ever accuse you of actually THINKING this through. YOU have just bought into the old Seventh Day Adventist lie of KJ inspiration.

          “The question to be answered is this, “What is your authority for what you believe?” Is it tradition? Or is it your feelings? Is it your “noodle” aka scholarship? Or is it the word of God?:”

          A truly, silly, circular-logic question. YOU are ASSUMING you have a TRUE and INSPIRED Word of GOD.

          You know what Happylada. Your ministry is telling people why they do not have the inerrant words of God. Congratulations, for you are keeping company with someone who said, “Yeah, hath God said?” Gen. 3

          You believe in something that you have never seen. You believe that God gave His words perfectly in the originals, which you have never seen, and you never will see them. You believe that God did not preserve His words inerrantly, according to you, so now all we have are reliable translations. But if we can just get back as close as possible to the originals then we can get close to the truth. Yes, ever learning, but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. All you have is speculation from “godly” sinful liars, just like me. Except I am not godly. I would never profess to be even close to being like God.

          So only YOUR noodle is determining that question. YOUR Bible is ONLY inspired BECAUSE you say it is? Really? ALL the evidence available to a THINKING man is irrelevant?

          YOU can pick 150 places where YOUR Bible contradicts its underlying text; 50 places where it contradicts itself, etc – BUT you have some “private REVELATION” that it’s inspired?

          The Bible is to be “of NO private interpretation”

          The Bible? You don’t have “the Bible” and you don’t know where to go to get it. All you have are reliable translations where none of them are in total agreement.

          What has happened to you is Gal. 5:12 NIV. Pitiful! You have no authority other than the sinful words of liars like me.

          • Your post is far too convoluted to actually respond to, so I will skip most of it.

            I have presented a great deal of evidence that the KJ is NOT a particularly useful Bible, feeds far too many leads to Atheists and others attempting to refute the Scripture based entirely on the errors and mistakes in it, and its text source was 100% Catholic and in support of the Catholic Church.

            YOU have provided ABSOLUTELY nothing but an irrational, personal, unsubstantiated, opinion that your KJ is in any way inspired or even correct – MY point was that with a couple hundred, HUNDRED, remaining errors, not to count the several thousand originally, it CANNOT be inspired, or GOD is a liar and sloppy inspirer.

            One cannot even use a reference like Strong’s on the KJ – as it contradicts the Strong’s in several HUNDRED places.

            Now YOU can ignore reality and continue with your worship of corruption and Catholicism, BUT no sensible person would take their personal prejudice over and against a lifetime of Biblical Scholarship. NO intelligent person takes FICTION and mythology over evidnce and fact.

            Nor can your pastor stand up before the congregation and expound from the KJ without having to explain what words and thoughts mean – subject to HIS bigotry, prejudices, and vain traditions.

            Let’s look at 2 Thess 2:7 How can you preach that OBVIOUS contradiction is from GOD? Of course, you have an excuse – by CHANGING it to make sense, as all well-translated Bibles do. The KJ bears only a POOR resemblance to the Greek text in many areas as well, , and reverses its meaning here.

            I could go on, but THAT is flagrant error you cannot cope with.

            Now as to ancient documents – I stand amazed that anyone who claims to be a Christian would be deliberately ignorant, and ignorantly MOCK, the Clarity brought by BOTH the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Ancient texts and Fragments recounting most accurately the Word of GOD as given to his apostles and disciples. What was ACTUALLY circulating in the early church as opposed to what was filtered through Catholocism and down to your bible.

            TO deliberately ignore this preservation for two millenia to ASSURE is we have the closest possible record and meaning of what the apostles ACTUALLY wrote is to me awe-inspiring – ONLY GOD could have done such a thing.

            But you mock it all, in favor of an illegitimate text of a corrupted, anti-reformation, Gospel-hating, Catholic priest, produced hurriedly to make a profit, with NO attempt at accuracy or intent. And four followup revisions with ever more additions from the vulgate and personal opinions expressed as textual history.

            YOU cannot be serious about your faith when you, like the Catholics, put all your faith in a church relic, and a corrupt one at that.

            HOW are you any more righteous than those worshipping the relics of the cross or the bones of Peter?

            YOU read/worship what you DO NOT know, and refuse learning, instruction and FACT to carry on with the Blind traditions of a CULT. I HOPE you are aware that in the 1900’s NO cult existed around the KJ Bible – That came with Mary Baker Eddie, the founder of th SDA. I HOPE you understand it was the mid/late 1800’s when the British and Foreign Bible society produced a revision of the KJ – the ONE you read by the way, as you have NEVER seen a 1611 version, which as you SHOULD know, included the Apocropha as inspired scripture – to allow for ONE Bible among the ONE World Church, however that was understood.

            As one of your fellow cultists wrote, taking the words of Edwards from their context: “(5) Jonathan Edwards believed the King James Bible, the bible he used, was UNCHANGED in translation from the originals.
            “The Scriptures we here read is the same Word that was given of old.
            The same Word has been kept all along: it has not been changed.
            Here it still is the same language in which it was written at first. It must be the same that the Jews had, and that God’s People had in Christ’s and the Apostle’s time.”

            Can you imagine such silliness? That the Apostles spoke English?

            Yet YOU are guilty of the same – that the KJ is inspired but the French and Spanish for example, are not.

            In all this, you IGNORE the example of the Bereans to Dilligently Search the word of GOD – you limit youryself to a cultic BIble without ANY accuracy to recommend itself.

            YOU ignore the plain and OBVIOUS texts used by the Christians almost 2000 years ago and claim to have a more sure word – even after additions, subtractions and alterations by priests and popes and kings – violating the COMMAND of the Word of God to study and obey it.

            YOUR silliness about not having a Bible that I know is inspired is so much drivel from Will someone who I debated for a few years – BUT he was NEVER able to make a rational argument, even though he has tons of stuff on his website.

            YOU have no inspired version either, but you falsely place your faith is a version that is quite corrupt and opposed to the teaching of GOD in many places.

            SOI better I be HONEST and state I have NO complete copy of the original texts than to delude myself into believeing a lie.

            Think abouit what you have said – apart from your utter confusion, your faith bin the KJ is FALSE.

    • Thanks for the question, Tim. I say that because the work of conservative textual critics is not to undermine the original manuscripts or the word of God but their intention is to discover what the original manuscripts actually say. Their motivation is not to undermine people’s faith but to strengthen it by showing how reliable our Bible’s actually are! You can trust your Bible! That’s what I mean.

  46. Sorry about that. I thought the double space would come through but it didn’t.

    2. The truth is something that is determined by their own noodle.”

    NO, scholarship is NOT determining something from one’s noodle

    Really? Taking all of the evidence is not something that is determined by your brain?

    3. They do not have any authority, for their words are the words of evil, sinful, ungodly, liars just like me.”

    Well, then WHO does have authority?

    Oh Happylada, you finally got my point! Your authority is the words of men – scholarship. The best rendering is… The best manuscripts are… But this is all from the opinions of ungodly sinners just like me. The point is you are telling people to have faith in man. To say you are telling people to have faith in the word of God, YOU DON’T HAVE A COPY OF IT AND CAN NOT TELL ANYONE WHERE IT IS! You have no authority for you do not have the Holy words of God!

    Godly men, committed their lives to the study of the Scriptures, and you brand them with all the negative implications of Humanity?

    My bible says the godly man ceaseth… “Godly men?” Their hearts are just as wicked and deceitful as mine. They still have the old nature just like me. Godly men! You have got to be kidding. They are going to be eaten by worms just like me. After four days they stinketh!

    Find me ANY previous English Bibles that contain “GOD save the King”? Find me any GREEK Bible that has those words.

    God save the King is in the Old Testament so it would be in Hebrew, unless you believe the corrupt LXX which is Origen’s fifth column.

    A truly, silly, circular-logic question. YOU are ASSUMING you have a TRUE and INSPIRED Word of GOD.

    You know what Happylada. Your ministry is telling people why they do not have the inerrant words of God. Congratulations, for you are keeping company with someone who said, “Yeah, hath God said?” Gen. 3Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)

    You believe in something that you have never seen. You believe that God gave His words perfectly in the originals, which you have never seen, and you never will see them. You believe that God did not preserve His words inerrantly, according to you, so now all we have are reliable translations. But if we can just get back as close as possible to the originals then we can get close to the truth. Yes, ever learning, but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. All you have is speculation from “godly” sinful liars, just like me. Except I am not godly. I would never profess to be even close to being like God.

    The Bible is to be “of NO private interpretation”

    The Bible? You don’t have “the Bible” and you don’t know where to go to get it. All you have are reliable translations where none of them are in total agreement.

    What has happened to you is Gal. 5:12 NIVOpen in Logos Bible Software (if available). Pitiful! You have no authority other than the sinful words of liars like me.

    • “Oh Happylada, you finally got my point! Your authority is the words of men – scholarship. The best rendering is… The best manuscripts are… But this is all from the opinions of ungodly sinners just like me. The point is you are telling people to have faith in man.”

      NOPE. I am directing God’s people to the texts used by the early church, NOT a text filtered through 1800 years, popes, scribes, catholicism and paganism – to arrive at the KJing James version.

      It is YOU who is relying on the authority of failed mankind for wisdom. We KNOW that the KJB contains material NOT in any previous Bible available to the church, EARLY or late. IT included opinions and commentary NOT in any early Bible. BUT you accept it without any justification as inspired, again without any justification. For GOD is NOT the author of confusion, and errors and deliberate rewriting of the Bible are NOT in his Nature.

      NO inspiration for the KJ – other than money and political power.

      Great possibility of inspiration in those ancient texts that were used by the second century and maybe even the FIRST-century church.

      YOUR point is irrational and mute. When you can be certain of WHAT the apostles actually preached – ONLY then can you express such certainty.

      Until then we KNOW that their teachings ofter vary from what you accept in your man-made politically-inspired Bible.

      Maybe sometimes you could attempt a RATIONAL explanation of WHY you think reading the same Bibles Polycarp, Iraneous and others who were the disciples of the disciples is bad? It wsx after all under THOSE Bibles than Christianity took off across the world.

      And WHY 15 centuries later we are more likely to have an inspired Bible that in the second century?

  47. Happylada,

    One day you and I are going to stand before our Lord Jesus Christ and give an account of our lives.

    When I stand before my Lord I will say something like this; Lord you told me that your words were pure words, as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. You told me that you would keep those words and that you would preserve those words. You also told me that Heaven and earth would pass away, but your words (not word), but your words would not pass away. You also told me that from a child Timothy had known the holy scriptures, and I know Lord, that they were not the originals. So Lord I believed you and told people that they had the Holy words of God and thus the Holy scriptures.

    Happylada, you will stand before your Lord and say something like this. Lord I know that there were errors in all of the manuscripts and that we did not have a perfect copy of the scriptures. But Lord you know how hard I worked to determine as best I could what was the right readings. I know it wasn’t perfect Lord, but I did my best so people could have as much truth as possible even though your words were corrupted along the way.

    I would rather believe God preserved his words perfectly. But that takes faith, and faith comes from the heart, not the head. Ye shall KNOW them by their fruits.

    • I don’t know about you guys but when I stand before the Lord I’m pretty sure all I’m going to be able to muster is a quivering finger that points to Jesus and feeble words saying, “I’m with him.”

    • “Happylada,

      One day you and I are going to stand before our Lord Jesus Christ and give an account of our lives”

      Exactly.

      “When I stand before my Lord I will say something like this; Lord you told me that your words were pure words, as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. You told me that you would keep those words and that you would preserve those words. You also told me that Heaven and earth would pass away, but your words (not word), but your words would not pass away. You also told me that from a child Timothy had known the holy scriptures, and I know Lord, that they were not the originals. So Lord I believed you and told people that they had the Holy words of God and thus the Holy scriptures.”

      Exactly, BUT the KJ is NOT the words that will not pass away – they are the corrupted words of man, revised to suit an earthly King, full of contradictions and confusion as I have already demonstrated.

      NOWHERE EVER, in scripture, is ANY translation specified to be correct or inspired – the “ACCURATELY translated WORDS of GOD”. That is a man-made pharasaical tradition of man; mostly man that refused to acknowledge the value of Studying the Bible and its history as the Bereans did.

      And by the way, your are deliberately MISUSING “Lord you told me that your words were pure words, as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. ” and taking it from its OBVIOUS context:
      “…5 “Because of the devastation of the afflicted, because of the groaning of the needy, Now I will arise,” says the LORD; “I will set him in the safety for which he longs.” 6The words of the LORD are pure words; As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times. 7You, O LORD, will keep them; You will preserve him from this generation forever.…” “THEM”, being refernce to the “afflicted and needy”; it has NO connection with the tried words of God.

      Correctly translated”
      our own lips will defend us—who is lord over us?”
      5“Because the poor are plundered and the needy groan,
      I will now arise,” says the Lord.
      “I will protect them from those who malign them.”
      6And the words of the Lord are flawless,
      like silver purified in a crucible,
      like gold refined seven times.
      7You, Lord, will keep the needy safe
      and will protect us forever from the wicked,
      8who freely strut about
      when what is vile is honored by the human race.

      OR “5“Because of the violence done to the oppressed,
      because of the painful cries of the needy,
      I will spring into action,” says the Lord.
      “I will provide the safety they so desperately desire.”
      6The Lord’s words are absolutely reliable.
      They are as untainted as silver purified in a furnace on the ground,
      where it is thoroughly refined.
      7You, Lord, will protect them;
      you will continually shelter each one from these evil people,
      8for the wicked seem to be everywhere,
      when people promote evil.”

      “You told me that you would keep those words and that you would preserve those words. You also told me that Heaven and earth would pass away, but your words (not word), but your words would not pass away. ”

      YOU are simply ASSUMING this to support your error; iT makes no reference and has NO application to the KJB. That same verse also was in the Luther Bible, the Cloverdale Bible, the Geneva Bible and most MODERN translations. AND the NWT. NOTHING about it makes the KJ special apart from the blinded traditions of man – who were originally members of a cult, the SDA.

      Do you presume the NWT is inspired? Yet there is the SAME authority given there as in the KJ. I do NOT make tht error.

      “I would rather believe God preserved his words perfectly. But that takes faith, and faith comes from the heart, not the head. Ye shall KNOW them by their fruits.”

      NO, that takes arrogance and a bit of ignorance. TO say that of all the Bibles with that same verse included, that ONLY the KJ is the one being refrrred to BECAUSE YOU want it to be, is ignorance – to make the claim, as you seem to do, that one must accept that corrupted version to see Jesus, is arrogance,

      “Happylada, you will stand before your Lord and say something like this. Lord I know that there were errors in all of the manuscripts and that we did not have a perfect copy of the scriptures. But Lord you know how hard I worked to determine as best I could what was the right readings. I know it wasn’t perfect Lord, but I did my best so people could have as much truth as possible even though your words were corrupted along the way.”

      That is foolishness. At least I will be HONEST with God and be able to state that I did the best I could to honestly understand the words He gave to his original sources, who then copied it for others – and some of that we have. YOU have NOTHING but a corrupted assembly of Catholic texts from 1200, full of additions, subtractions and alterations., INCLUDUNG the Apocropha. (How on EARTH can you justify takiing all those books out of the “INSPIRED TEXT”?) In any evcent it would be an utter insult to GOD to claim that HE preserved the KJ PERFECTLY. The errors are OBVIOUS. God makes NO errors, neither is the author of confusion.

      YOU must hang your head in shame and admit to being UNWILLING to go beyond your traditions of man and the corruption of your Bible and confess your unwillingness to even LOOK at the texts used by the early church, preferring to maintain your pride and arrogance, supposedly KNOWING what the Mind of God is, to the exclusion of all others.

      “I would rather believe God preserved his words perfectly. But that takes faith, and faith comes from the heart, not the head. Ye shall KNOW them by their fruits.

      NO it takes arrogance and ignorance. ARROGANCE to PRESUME your favorite text is the ON:Y one God will Bless; to refuse to even LOOK at ancient Texts and MSS that are FAR closer to the truth than YOUR corrupted version, and IGNORANCE, because ALL the evidence you need is available but YOU refuse it. NOT only anti-scholarly, but an insult to GOD who DID preserve those for US to use to know His word today.

      So again, all I ask is some SCRIPTURAL word, example, statement or outline, that you can RELY upon, to DEMONSTRATE that the KJ is GOD’s INSPIRED WORD for today. Some verse that does NOT equally apply to the NWT and other heretic Bibles.

      ANYTHING at all will do as LONG as it’s SCRIPTURALLY based, and contextually correct.

      So far all you have supplied is your (misplaced) faith and opinion – NOT a word of any type supporting your attack on me, OR the Scriptures that many GODLY men have given their lives to translate for the Glory of GOD.

      Anything.

      I’m NOT willing to continue this as it is. YOU are unwlling to supply ANY evidence that, other than your opinion, the KJ is perfect, and we KNOW that to be false. Your statements are based on your opinion and doctrine, which ignores scholarship, study and history AND the Bible.

      If and when you find any EVIDENCE that I am wrong – please present it. FROM the Bible . . .

      • OR “5“
        You don’t know. You are speculating. Your final authority is your own noodle! Thus your conclusion is merely the words of a wicked sinful corrupt liar, just like me. You have no authority for you do not have the words of God. All you have is speculation.

        Ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
        2 Tim. 3:7
        …from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures. 2 Tim. 3:15 And he didn’t have the originals.

        • I see YOU have nothing new to add – so you admit that you CANNOT find ANY Scripture that even SUGGESTS your KJB is any more scripture or the words of GOD than the NWT. BOTH are corrupted vairants. Exactly as I stated.

          And by the way, Timothy didn’t have the KJB, yet people got saved even without it. Still do. Maybe MORE because of its declining usage. Speaking in “king James” tongues is NOT part of Baptist theology.

          But as I said – I will await ANY facts you may have that support the KJB over the NWT as the Inspired word of God. Obviously you have nothing but the concepts in your “sinful noodle” to support your position.

          But it IS a pity that people have these man-made ideas and push them off as Christian teaching, and themselves as knowledgable students of the Bible. To suggest that ONLY the KJ is the words of God is heresy. OR, as I cited from a Baptist theologian, that the Bible has not changed since Paul.

          NOR have you dealt with the contradiction I posed from 2 Thess 7, and it only takes ONE error in the KLJ to make it IMPERFECT, and therefore NOT the words of GOD, who is perfect.

          “And the words of the Lord are flawless,
          like silver purified in a crucible,
          like gold refined seven times.”

          Think about the worship you give to a corrupt translation rather than dilligently studying the words of God as copied down by Godly men following the apostles.

          How anyone can mock or argue against STUDYING what we KNOW of the ancient texts baffles me. HOW anyone can support the KJ when it is SO obviously in contradiction to ancient texts is irrational.

          Still awaiting your imaginary evidence or support for the silly product of your “sinful mind”.

  48. 2Cor. 5:10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.

    Happylada – Jesus Christ is the One you will be answering to.

    • I HOPE you realize that also includes YOU? And IF the best you can offer the ateksst and agnostic as the eternal infallable word of GOD is the KINF James with all its corruption, you will i ndeed be guilty of STOOPPING them from knowing the gospel in their own language.

      There are enough stumbling blocks today to faith in the Resurrected Jesus that we OUGHT not be tossing out any more – like corrupted texts, archaic English, and unhistorical meanings.

      “Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”, and “And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions!”

      Mark 7:13 & 9 – just as an example.

  49. http://www.tbsbibles.org/articles/what-todays-christian-needs-to-know-about-the-greek-new-testament

    They would look into these things more than the average christian
    I have read similar conclusions elsewhere. Not an exhaustive article i realise, but as a bible publisher, they have taken on the responsibility to be faithful in the translation and publication of the bible, in many languages. they have chosen KJV for the english version, I note.
    I have a question: were christians divided about the word of God as much as after Westcott and Hort? If not, then it seems the critical texts have introduced an unwarranted, unwanted extra thing for Christians to debate and fall out over. Yes, its human (fallen ) nature to do so, yet it is still going on after along while. I can only conclude it was not Gods doing to introduce the critical text versions based on Vatican’s and Sinaticus, yet He can of course still use it for His purposes.
    I do think model versions are corrupt, and ALL translations have errors: some are well known, some are not widely publicised.
    However, we are to ‘study to show ourselves approved of God’ which is mainly about conduct and not head knowledge. I do think it has some application though to knowing the differences between the english versions we have today. Some are inspired, some are clearly the musings of man (Message et al), and many shades in-between. Not that God can’t speak to us through ANY version, but some are better for getting Gods doctrines from, and sharing those doctrines with others.
    Let us be one in hope, and love and faith, yet discerning as to where we get doctrine from.
    Like the article posted here says, we have a responsibility to be proclaiming an undiluted gospel with backing from a version that upholds all the key doctrines, otherwise we pass on our errors to the next generation. Im not here to divide but discriminate, like the word is meant to. Heb 4v12
    One last thought, it is interesting that we refer to these later versions as ‘modern’ and I think we humans have a tendency to look for something ‘more modern’ as if its an improvement or more convenient: cars, kitchens, schooling. I don’t doubt the original translators of say NIV or ESV had the intention of producing a worthy work, yet maybe ‘modernity’ was an ingredient in the reason they published. Not everything old is less and not everything new is more. Just saying.
    The main reasons I read KJV are: 1. to look down on everyone else (kidding-early on i just liked it better) 2. Strongs. 3. poetical. 4. nuanced (ye/thee etc.) 5. don’t trust modern versions after reading into the version debate. It is old fashioned, but its fine as it is.
    God Bless you all and thanks for the article!

    • I haven’t time at the moment to give your response the attention it desrves.

      BUT I COUL NOT help but note your reference to STRONGs – which contradicts the KJ in at least 150 places ig mememry serves me right.

      My father was a serious Bible stuident – 8 years of language and theology – and a staunch KJ supporter. After I left the church as a teen – I found the Jerusalem Bible and and the RSV – and realized there WAS more thgen the KJ – andthat was the beginning o the rescue of my soul.

      I knew the KJ has full of errors even as a teenager, and its language was delinerately archaic. And I’m 72 so that was LONG ago.

      Interestingly, I have despoised the KJ my entire life, as you venerate it.

      In my mid/late 20s as I began to take Bible scholarship seriously – myu dad and I would debate the variations of the NIV and the KJ – and to his honor and horror, the KJ was wrong in every instance I raised.

      There is a viseo that explores the sucdatanive and doctrinal errors in the kj at length.

      NOTE I said DOCTRINAL errors – for sprinkling is NOT scriptural, neither is Purgatory – BOTH supported by the KJ.

      I work with street people and addicts. The KJ is impossible a version to use with them, as it was with me having grown up with it, but for different reasons.

      IT was the Pharasees, and then the Catholic Church that made the word of GOD obtuse and impossible for the simple to understand – the KJ intentionally continued that “veiling” of the word of God with archaic language, even for that day.

      Many great men died to bring the Bible into the language of the common man – the KJ dishonor their memory and sacrifice. IF it is the inspired word of GOD, then GOD is a failure. I know God is NOT, so it MUST be the corrupt translation that is faulty.

      One ought NOT to use their traditions to limit God

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NAuJVFjEjs&t=39s

      This examines the contradictions between the KJ and Strongs

      • Hi happylada.Im being accused of venerating KJV. I think it is a worthy translation of my reading and study. I prefer it and see it has errors as I originally alluded to with the word ALL. I am not KJV only. These poor arguements are straw men. I have multiple versions available, but rarely read them. For Strong’s to have only 150 errors I think it applaudable Mr Strong’s did such a fine job with a dedication of many years to the task. One cannot fault him for a few errors. How sad you attack. I did not, merely proposed my views. The christian love was missing but the hurt was not. Sorry for rubbing the sore spot. It was my desire to see people work it out for themselves: the best manuscripts I.e majority text(received text) are best/most accurate. Modern translation, in general, use corrupt texts or let the adjudication go to those whonsupport textual critisism. KJV did a good but imperfect job with a great majority text. Other modern versions using corrupt text may have done good job yet put doubt on the word of God by suggesting they were not there originally or remove verses entirely or other changes to text. That impoverishes what the bible says. Sorry, you may prefer certain modern versions for their readability, but they do cast doubt, in the main. I wish all men to read a version they want to read more of, but remain wise about the issues. I admit I used to get angry and divisive about this version debate, now im wiser and grace is applied, I find the anger is from those who support other versions and denounce the KJV. How the tide turns…
        I admit KJV does muddy waters on some doctrinal issues, but it was not through deliberate leaving out of verses or poor study and deliberation. Hell, hades and Gehenna is an obvious flaw in KJV, not distinguishing them, but this is easily addressed through Strong’s/greek and context. Sprinkling I don’t know enough about to comment other than the verses I found are talking about blood and not baptism. Im sure other doctrines that you consider badly presented by KJV can be cleared up by Strong’s and an understanding of changes to English use over the centuries.
        KJV has errors, but are well known if not well known by all. Other versions will have as many errors, but are less well studied and less publicized.
        Love and peace to you, Happylada. P.s. your comment is full of errors of the spelling kind. Was I or your Master not worth spell checking for?

      • sorry, my response was not with wisdom. I think I have misinterpreted your meaning in what you said at certain points, you likely were not attacking I think now, my fault. I apologise for poor reading of it.. I wish you all the best with the work the Lord has prepared for you.

  50. I leave a response each time I like a article on a website or I have something
    to valuable to contribute to the discussion. It’s
    triggered by the sincerness displayed in the post I browsed.
    And on this post On Those Missing Verses In Your ESV and
    NIV Bible – Borrowed Light. I was actually moved enough to create a thought 😉 I actually do have 2 questions for
    you if you don’t mind. Is it just me or do some of the remarks
    look like left by brain dead people? 😛 And, if you are posting on other places, I would like to follow anything fresh you have to post.
    Could you make a list every one of all your shared sites like your twitter feed, Facebook
    page or linkedin profile?

  51. Hi Guys,
    You’ve probably already seen this, but I just wanted to post it here in case you haven’t. It poses the question of the Sinaiticus and others on their validity. Fun watch. 🙂

    • Based on limited, but agreeable, data – 150 years or so out of date, and without ANY intention or attempt to actually RESEARCH the evidence.

      Here’s a commentary on the (non) EVIDENCE presented and the intellectual and moral issues of the research done on this issue – and a Bibliography of DOCUMENTS and STUDIES that contradict the stated myths:

      “Pinto’s Dated and Selective “Research”
      July 15, 2013

      Recently, I commented on Chris Pinto’s documentary Tares Among the Wheat where he argues that Codex Sinaiticus is a 19th century forgery. It was an egregiously biased documentary interviewing King James Only individuals and using dated and selective material aimed at a predetermined conclusion.

      There is one aspect of his documentary that is the most devastating to his conclusion and his credibility in doing fair research: he depends on 150 year-old research! He claims in the documentary that the leading scholars in the 19th century did not have the paleographical expertise and other similar areas of background to make claims about the authenticity of Codex Sinaiticus. This is not true. But for the sake of the argument let us say it is true. The obvious question in any thinking person’s mind should be: what do scholars today say about the authenticity and nature of Sinaiticus? We have obviously made technological leaps in the past 150 years in dating manuscripts, analyzing handwriting, and other means of dating a document to determine its spurious or authentic nature.

      Pinto conveniently and selectively ignores what contemporary scholarship says. Or, if he is ignorant of contemporary research in this question, then why is he producing a documentary in the first place! Investigative documentaries—as Pinto is claiming he is doing—is about using the most update research and science.

      So either Pinto is intentionally ignoring the facts that he is aware of—which would make him deceptive; or he is incompetent as an investigative researcher—looking for selective evidence that will determine his intended conclusion.

      If it is the former, I’d like to draw Pinto’s attention to the important recent research on Sinaiticus that will inform him on the authenticity of Sinaiticus, not depending on 150 year-old claims.

      Elliott, J.K. Codex Sinaiticus and the Simonides Affair: An Examination of the Nineteenth Century Claim that Codex Sinaiticus was not an Ancient Manuscript, Analekta Vlatadon 33. Thessaloniki: Patriarchal Institute for Patristic Studies, 1982.

      Parker, D.C, Codex Sinaiticus: The Story of the Word’s Oldest Bible (Hendrickson Publishers, 2010).

      Jongkind, Dirk. “One Codex, Three Scribes, and Many Books: Struggles with Space in Codex Sinaiticus,” New Testament Manuscripts: Their Texts and Their World (ed. Thomas J. Kraus and Tobias Nichlas; TENTS 2; Leiden:Brill, 2006) 121–35.

      Jongkind, Dirk. Scribal Habits of Codex Sinaiticus, Texts and Studies: Contributions to Biblical and Patristic L (Gorgias Press LLC 2007)

      Milne, H. J. M. and Skeat, T.C. Scribes and Correctors of Codex Sinaiticus. London: 1938.”

      From: http://www.alankurschner.com/2013/07/15/pintos-dated-and-selective-research/

    • A couple more points – The ALEXANDRIAN church was about the ONLY school of thought that stood for the divinity of Christ at one point. Also the comments about having to accept their DOCTRINE because of their scholarship is typical CHICK rubbish. Based on NO evidence available anywhere. Sometimes the BEST biblical scholarship is from the agnostic scholars who does NOT bring his denominationalism into the study.

      Did he forget that the KJ ALSO included the Apocrypha?

      The first ONE WORLD BIBLE was the KJB, according to the British and Foreign Bible Society. Pity this guy doesn’t actually STUDY Biblical history.

    • There ARE no omitted Scriptures. Simply a myth created by cultists who make the false assumption that a corrupted version designed to support a state church is the REAL Bible, and that before it no one had the Word of God.

      Just like the KJ translators – and other rational and honest translators have done for centuries – where there are passages NOT found in ALL ancient texts, or there is a variation – the passage in question is placed in footnotes, etc.

      Nothing is left out of ANY historical text; BUT there were insertions of opinion and alternate texts – primarily from the Vulgate – inserted into the texts used by the KJ Translators – the KJ NT was based on wording not found in ANY Greek text prior to 1400.

      those claiming “left out” verses are simply making up their mythology. WHY, is the question.

  52. Thank you Mike for taking the time to write this article. Let me start off by saying that I am a King James Version Bible studier. I can agree with you that I believe there is not necessarily a conspiracy to ruin the Bible. However you mentioned the over 65 thousand words that have been deleted from the NIV version, but you never commented on those. It is my belief that these words in most cases are deleted to soften the original text, in order not to offend the reader. However, it is also my belief that it might have been God’s intent to offend and by offend I mean convict.

    • Those ASSUMED deletions are NOT in any Greek Bible PRIOR to Erasmus creating his corrupt text FOR PROFIT, as a Catholic Theologian opposed to the reformation, and dedicating it to Pope Leo X. WHY should they be in OUR Bibles today?

      NOR are they deleted – the MODERN Bibles follow the pattern of the KJ by putting them in marginal notes, etc.

      Along with sheer fantasy of Beza and Stephanus – the KJ DELIBERATELY chose to keep the KJ Bible as CATHOLIC as possible, to justify the practices of the Recently-divided Anglican Church.

      There were ALREADY good English Bibles in existence – MOST far superior to the KJ – BUT none supported the Divine Right of Kings, or Catholic dogma.

      The use of Baptize rather than immerse supported Infant baptism, Bishop rather than elder supported the church hierarchy and the inclusion of the Apocrypha supported Purgatory.

      This cultic frenzy about some allegedly “INSPIRED” English bible that would correct all the errors in the PREVIOUS Greek and Hebrew texts is intellectually and spiritually irresponsible, not to mention historically false.

      The KJ is one of the most corrupted and purpose driven Bibles (Bibles translated for the express purpose of supporting heretical doctrines) anywhere – perhaps on a par with the NWT, which I am sure YOU would agree is corrupt.

      NOTHING ANYWHERE in scripture would lead the OBSERVANT reader to ASSUME there was a perfect text today – even the OT was updated to keep up with the changes in common usage of the Bible. Internal contradictions, OBVIOUS errors, and contradiction with the now available ancient texts makes it a POLITICAL, not a Spiritual, Bible.

      And of course, there is that nagging question of the hundreds of errors in the KJ, the multiple versions, and the Apocrypha. What to do with GODS INSPIRED word with that Apocrypha.

      KJO folk are truly anti-biblical. We SHOULD study the ancient texts to see how close we can get to the original. MANY corrections are now available from the Dead SEA scrolls that were NOT available to the KJ folk. Many Ancient texts of the NT are now available – going back MUCH beyond the 1300 AD texts that Erasmus had available.

      And then there are those pesky insertions from the Vulgate . . .

      Small wonder SOME of the translators REFUSED to allow the use of the KJ in their own pulpits

  53. You’re playing the all too famous game of “operator ” , or “telephone” when you start making the smallest of tweaks. I’m quite sure that most readers of the NIV, or ESV, or any other version is not doing it with the knowledge it has been this severely water down, or distorted from original. My intent in commenting is not to offend, or even correct, but to possibly start a dialogue in which iron might sharpen iron, and you might be able to educate me on something I didn’t know, and vice versa. Thank you and God bless you!

    • ” I’m quite sure that most readers of the NIV, or ESV, or any other version is not doing it with the knowledge it has been this severely water down, or distorted from original.”

      In fact quite the OPPOSITE is true THESE Bibles are FAR closer to the divine revelations than the corruptions of the KJ, which existed ONLY to establish the Kings temporal authority and the spiritual authority of the state church. Although non-state-church participants were on the translation team, some REFUSED to allow the completed project in their pulpits.

      MOST KJO readers have NEVER read the Notice to Reader that came with ALL KJ Bibles until its major revision in the 1800’s – I cannot remember the date. Which of course brings up nthe spectre of WHICH KJ is God’s revelation? There are SO many variants, which one is perfect?

      IF God directed a team of translators to the PERFECT Text – why would He also NOT direct the printers etc to the same PERFECT text? We use this argument to point out the falsity of the Book of Mormon; WHY not the KJ? Reality and common sense are NOT applied.

      And can you tell me WHY the KJ should have included and merged and cross-referenced the Apocrypha with the sacred texts? That ALONE should warn any SPIRITUAL person of its Catholic corruption.

      How people can be so BLIND to the cultishness of the KJO myth astounds me.

  54. And you’re part of the agenda denying the true King James bible.

    Yes there is an agenda to make satan Jesus. Doesnt take a bible scholar to figure that out. Stop playing into Lucifers hands. Then again you wont know who Lucifer is if you havent got the authorised King James!!!!

    • The “K.J. only” adherents believe that they have the original 1611 K.J.V., which is ridiculous since 1611 the K.J.V. was revised in 1613, 1629, 1638, 1644, 1664, 1701, 1744, 1762, 1769, 1850, and 1885. Which of these was the “only inspired Word of God”? If the first one was, why did God make so many mistakes? The revisions included changes in punctuation, capitalization, spelling, many hundreds of changes in words, word order, possessives, singulars for plurals, articles, pronouns, conjunctions, prepositions, entire phrases, and the addition and deletion of words. More than 400 errors in the first edition of the K.J.V. were corrected in a subsequent edition only two years later. There came to be well over 75,000 word changes. How many words does it take to make a translation uninspired? How many mistakes does God make? According to the Word itself only the original writings are God-breathed. {2 Tim.3:16} Every scripture (Greek: “graphe” or writing) inspired of God (Greek: “is God-breathed”) [is] also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness. {3:17} That the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work. No translation that is touched of man is perfect as the original writings were but we can seek the truth and God will lead us to accuracy.
      Furthermore, there were 7 English translations of the Bible before the KJV.

      • An intelligent and spiritual response to utter foolishness – I like it.

        YOUR questions, of course, will be dismissed – reality has NO part in a cult.

        And of those seven translations, the Geneva was the Bible of America long after the KJ was forced upon the (catholic) Church of England.

        Somehow we had a number of revivals WITHOUT the KJ.

        Jesus spoke in plain and simple language – the MODERN account of His words should be the same. LIKE Pharisees, we add to the BASICS of God, all manner of “traditions [or books] of man” and make the gospel inaccessible to those Christ died for.

        I work with street people who have a POOR grasp of English. Elizabethan English is out of the question. The insistence of some of these fanatics like Anderson, that one can ONLY be saved by hearing the KJ Bible is a road straight to hell for so many.

        It almost got me . . .

    • “And you’re part of the agenda denying the true King James bible.

      And you’re part of the agenda denying the true King James bible.
      Yes there is an agenda to make satan Jesus. Doesnt take a bible scholar to figure that out. Stop playing into Lucifers hands. Then again you wont know who Lucifer is if you havent got the authorised King James!!!!”

      How could ONE POSSIBLY assume the KJ is authorized for ANYTHING except maintaining CATHOLIC customs in the English state church? What was wrong with the Bishops Bible? The Geneva Bible?

      MY God don’t make no trash, and the errors in the KJ DISQUALIFY it from even being CLOSE to a perfect Bible. Blaming the KJ on GOD is an insult to God.

      WHY would you make the OBVIOUS mistake of using it as a standard, given its errors and textual corruption?

  55. If your bible has any missing parts throw it away THE MOST HIGH GOD OF ABRAHAM ISSAC AND JACOB SAIDDO NOT ADD TO OR TAKE AWAY FROM HIS WORD REVALATIONS 22:19, DEUTORONOMY 4:2

    • “If your bible has any missing parts throw it away THE MOST HIGH GOD OF ABRAHAM ISSAC AND JACOB SAIDDO NOT ADD TO OR TAKE AWAY FROM HIS WORD REVALATIONS 22:19, DEUTORONOMY 4:2”

      HOW would you KNOW is anything was missing unless you ASSUME the KJ is correct – which it is NOT. IT is filled with insertions, personal opinion, and marginal notes included as text. IT also contained the Apocrypha which the Catholics use to support Purgatory, and the “HOLY conception of the Virgin Mary’s Holy Day” and the “popes birthday/holy day” as well as praising the Vulgate and Jerome.

      The KING James BOTH adds and removes from the Word of GOD. Many hundreds of times in various revisions. “since 1611 the K.J.V. was revised in 1613, 1629, 1638, 1644, 1664, 1701, 1744, 1762, 1769, 1850, and 1885.

      PLUS there are OXFORD and Cambridge editions, and American and English editions. Which of these was the “only inspired Word of God”

      Now what?

      SO IF your Bible has a verse missing – it will be in the footnotes where other unfounded insertions SHOULD be.

      TO make the KJ the standard by which others are judged is not only functionally ILLITERATE but setting a VERY low bar.

      One example – 1 John 5:7 – not in ANY greek Bible at all prior to Erasmus putting it in – and NOT until the second revision of the text the KJ is translated from. He admitted it was NEVER in any Greek text – But because he was a catholic theologian and opposed to the reformation, he was criticized that it was missing. It was inserted from the Catholic VULGATE.

      The ending of Revelation that is so precious to many, was made up from sermon notes from priests, NOT a single Greek text available to Erasmus nor the KJ translators had it.

      A definition of a cult is believing what is NOT evidence and false – but refusing to investigate.

      GOD said come – let us Reason together. Cults won’t – the are stuck in stoopid or whatever their cult teaches – and the King James Only CULT is no different.

      Now I can prove the statements I have made from HISTORY. BUT you will reject it because it makes your paper pope less than perfect, which of course it is. IT contains hundreds of errors – some deliberate. Some irrational. Some at the request of the KING.

      BUT mostly because it was based on a very poor catholic text published to head off Luther and the Reformation. BUT – HEY – You WANT to accept is as a word from GOD? BE my guest. The BOOK of Mormon has some of the same elements of corruption, and fanaticism of its followers.

  56. This is complete and utter garbage…..
    Even in Paul’s times their were counterfeit Apostles and counterfeit texts, there were plenty of gnostics already messing with God’s word in the 1st century . The so called ‘older and more reliable manuscript’ that magically surfaced in 1844 (Codex Sinaiticus) is anything but reliable.
    1. If it is older (which is doubtful) it were tampered with long ago. Older does not magically make it ‘more reliable’. (But that’s what the footnote says in modern translations)
    2. 90% of the Greek texts – the majority – is what makes up the Textus Receptus (where the KJV is derived from)
    When the Codex Sinaiticyus was ‘discovered’ all of a sudden it complimented the codex vaticanus (Rome’s version) which nobody had seen until the 1800’s – yet both these manuscripts are hardly even in agreement with each other and only push Rome’s agenda.
    If you believe that God did not preserve his Word (through the Byzantine texts that the reformers used/Textus Receptus) you have a much bigger problem – then nobody knows who put what and who took what out, then anything goes. Then you have no authority to say or believe anything absolute. Welcome to the church of Laodicea. God is not the author of confusion, your article only adds to it.

    • SO let’s see – there were forged scripture in the 1ST century, BUT you are certain YOUR supposedly Majority Texts is NOT?

      ON what rational basis do you make that claim?

      “. The so called ‘older and more reliable manuscript’ that magically surfaced in 1844 (Codex Sinaiticus) is anything but reliable.”
      YOU insinuation is that there are ONLY two choices – which is patently FALSE. WE NOT only have Sinaiticus but perhaps 5000 OTHER texts that support it. Better and more reliable support than the Majority Text, which as you point out may ITSELF be a forgery.

      “1. If it is older (which is doubtful) it were tampered with long ago. Older does not magically make it ‘more reliable’. (But that’s what the footnote says in modern translations)”

      On what basis would you make these insinuations? YOU have no possible foundation other than pure bigotry and ignorance of textual issues. AS in the telephone game, closer to the source – the THOUSANDS of sources – makes the message more reliable.

      “2. 90% of the Greek texts – the majority – is what makes up the Textus Receptus (where the KJV is derived from)”
      Again you misstate your case – the Texus Receptus was NOT published til 1633 – 20 years after the KJ Bible. HOW then could it be based upon it?

      And where do you get this 90%? Is this taken from the absolutely reliable OPINION you seem to have? Facts might be a better source . . . NOT saying you are wrong – just that you have no EVIDENCE. BUT even a 10% variation is serious. The difference between “let’s eat, Grandma” and Let’s eat Grandma” is tremendous. The first a family meal, the second cannibalism.

      “When the Codex Sinaiticyus was ‘discovered’ all of a sudden it complimented the codex vaticanus (Rome’s version) which nobody had seen until the 1800’s – yet both these manuscripts are hardly even in agreement with each other and only push Rome’s agenda.”

      HUH? I see a lot of unfounded and misstated OPINION here – but NO facts. YOU probably got that misinformation from one of the KJO cultists – NOT from a Bible scholar. Please attempt to restrict your statements to FACT-based information.

      “If you believe that God did not preserve his Word (through the Byzantine texts that the reformers used/Textus Receptus) ”
      Since you seem to have NO concept of the of what the Texus Rexeptus is . . . NOR that GOD did NOT preserve it – it was a concoction of a Roman Catholic Theologian named Erasmus, who published his concocted Greek text to counteract Luther and the REFORMATION – I hate to inform you, but that that was ALL that the later reformers HAD. IN FACT, I think IF you bothered to look at HISTORY, the reformation began from the VULGATE, NOT the “majority text”

      “you have a much bigger problem – then nobody knows who put what and who took what out, then anything goes.”

      Exactly – so here you are mocking those that dedicate their lives to studying exactly WHO and what was inserted and left out. BUT while you fuss irrationally about the POSSIBILITY of there being Textual forgery, you support a TEXT to which the insertions and revisions were not a POSSIBILITY, but a RECORDED fact of history, and the letters of the authors of the revision/insertions are PUBLIC RECORD. 1 JOHN 5:7 was added by Erasmus FROM the Vulgate into his second revision – and thence to the KJB. The ending of Revelations is pure conjecture on Erasmus part.

      SO chose – a text that MAY possibly be altered or one which we KNOW for certain was. YOU are being totally disingenuous.

      “Then you have no authority to say or believe anything absolute.”

      Another KJO cultists line if ever there was one. It’s YOU cultists who cannot be certain of anything. Those of us who try to keep abreast of the scholarship that gives us a 99.99% chance of having the true meaning of the original Word of GOD have far more likelihood than you folk who stick with a KNOWN corruption of the Bible, and refuse any additional enlightenment.

      One, James White, backed one of the leaders of this cult into a corner and from the EVIDENCE showed a deliberate error in the KJB. While the KJO cultist AGREED the text and the KJ were at odds – stated that the KJ should NOT be corrected as GOD probably had a reason for the “mistake”

      ” Welcome to the church of Laodicea. God is not the author of confusion, your article only adds to it.”

      Then WHY would you use the KJ? and WHAT does Laodicea have to do with it in any way?

      YOU just regurgitate silly and illiterate comments from KJO cultists and think you are defending the BIBLE? NOT at all – you are ONLY, and POORLY, defending a corrupted Bible. NOT the Word of GOD as given.

      Logic is NEVER a factor in KJO cultists presentation, and their double standards are the ONLY ones they have. YOU would NOT apply your skepticism of other translations to your paper pope. NEVER.

    • I agree with you my friend the church was infiltrated by the first or second century if not before actually or I feel from my studies. I started my studies to disprove the existence of a God or any, which He has proved me wrong. so I joined the church and found they were not walking by the word of Yahweh and found wrong doings going back to the 1st and 2nd century that were clearly against the word of Yahweh. I currently Believe in Yahshua but have started wondering…… I consider myself to be Messianic Hebrew (Judaism) at this current point of my walk with strong beliefs in the Torah and faith in Christ/Yahshua.

      • Where to start on your utterly illogical and very misinformed rant.

        “Almost every person of God I have come by has stated to me that everyone should read the 14 books removed and make their own decision based on the reasons of their removal because some pan out some do not see to fit that criteria.”

        The Apocrypha was NEVER included in the Hebrew scripture – NOR the Lists of books circulating in the NT era simply because they are NOT inspired – never ONCE did Jesus or the apostles refer to them as scripture – there are more NT comments from pagan literature than the Apocrypha.That the Catholic Bibles contain them shows their lack of discernment – that the KJ Bible contained them showed their subservience to the Catholic structures. MODERN Bibles are quite right to refuse them place.

        “until I started finding flaws in the book of our time and the many celebrations of man that are supported by the church as a whole that clearly are against the word of God that I see as a clear infiltration of the church.”

        You have come under some VERY bad teaching – and you did NOT get your view by reading the Bible – although once brainwashed, you CAN twist the Bible to fit your views. And I emphasize TWIST. You cannot find ONE church celebration in the evangelical community that is NPOT justified by Scripture – and NONE are pagan. YOU have simply been lied to . . .

        ” I advise everyone that wishes to walk with Yahweh to understand. the church has been infiltrated since the 2nd century and to study wisely”

        And ASSUMING the early church was infiltrated since the 2nd century when all its doctrines and practices were being established – WHO do you think is wise enough to contradict the very disciples of the disciples?

        Obviously, the answer YOU propose is YOURSELF – a level of spiritual pride that one should be very wary of – it is approaching that of Lucifer himself.

        “Look at the Obelisk( used by the pagans to worship the Sun god RA the “EXACT” one from Egypt moved and now stands in front of St. Peters church in Rome that was ordered by our father to be destroyed.( Deut. 12:1-3Open in Logos Bible Software (if available) specifically 3) “you are to destroy their alters and destroy their sacred pillars….) and we were told not to use them to worship so it definitely should not be in front of the church! ”

        several errors in this – first that verse you misuse has NOTHING to do with an obelisk in front of any church – and second you conflate the Catholic church with biblical Christianity. There is a LOT more wrong with the Catholic church than an obelisk outside St Peters. The issue of that it is NOT a center or OBJECT of worship in its present location – God demanded memorial stones of the children of Isreal – but they could/did NOT worship those stones.

        YOUR superficial inditement of same is theologically vacuous. “( Deut. 12:1-3Open in Logos Bible Software (if available) specifically 3) “you are to destroy their alters and destroy their sacred pillars….)” never applied to ANYTHING in Egypt. YOU twist reality to fit your presuppositions. “and we were told not to use them to worship so it definitely should not be in front of the church!” Refer to my comment – it is NOT worshiped – it’s at best an historical artifact. MEdoubts its authentic. The Catholic church DOES worship the many relics of the cross they have . . .

        ” Sunday the church’s day of worship is Sun worship as well being named after so look into it History does not lie all is over Roman imperor Constantine.”

        And this almost verges on a deliberate lie. The first day of the week – ONLY Sunday in English so there goes THAT argument when common sense is applied to it – is the ONLY day any gentile EVER worshiped or assembled in the NT or following. The SABBATH was for JEWS only – and the point of Galatians and other passages is that for the Gentiles to attempt to keep the Sinai covenant was to take it ALL on. SO If you plan on keeping the Sabbath, you must also be circumcised and have blood sacrifices.

        YOU may note, IF you actually READ your Bible, that Paul pronounces TWO condemnations on those Gentiles that attempt to live as Jews and/or take on/tell others to take on the Jewish customs – Gal 1 – he condemns them to hell – and in another place, he suggests they emasculate themselves.

        And so without a single case in scripture to support your uninformed attack on Sunday – I must suppose you are simply following some false cult leader’s opinion. And as I alluded to above – SUNday is ONLY in English – French Christians also worship on the FIRST day of the week – but it’s NOT called Sunday. Its “dimanche”. YOUR argument is utterly ridiculous.

        OH, and Constantine? THREE centuries AFTER the Gentiles worshiped on the FIRST day of the week. ALL those utter fabrications you have been taught are utterly false. AS I stated – NOT ONE instance of a NON-Proselyte Gentile worshipping or GATHERING on the Sabbath. ALWAYS the FIRST day of the week for the Gentile church.

        Check out who you are getting all your utter misinformation from . . .

        “Sabbatarians falsely teach that Christian would be keeping the Sabbath in 70 AD when Jerusalem was destroyed. Jesus said “But pray that your flight may not be on a Sabbath”. Matt 24:20. Jesus told them to pray, not so that Christians wouldn’t break the Sabbath, but because, living in Jerusalem, the Jews who controlled the city, always closed the gates and the Christians could not escape!”

        http://www.bible.ca/H-sunday.htm

  57. So let meet this straight. There were no accurate bible translations until the 19th century? That sounds crazy..

  58. The Word has said the word is God breathed: Away with all the excuses textural variants and such…Gods word must be able to give total security and never insecurity to believers of it…Most ppl dont trace or are knowledgeable as to how to search out if the bible is true.

  59. Don’t take this issue lightly! Challenge everything! I compared Matthew 17:21 and Mark 9:29 and what I understand is Jesus said that only prayer and fasting can expel these spirits causing in one instance one to be deaf and dumb (unable to hear & speak) or to be lunatick (crazy, insane). I don’t think the KJV is perfect but these people defending outright omissions and the misleading contemporary language translations may have agendas of their own. Don’t take someone’s word on this topic, pray, study, and compare!

    2 Timothy 3:14-15

    • AMEN!!!! My Friend. Every one should care enough to study the Word for themselves. I “believe” this search for the true word is the reason the gates are so Narrow. Given Most don’t have all day as the LOrd has blessed me with through the sickness of my Daughter. When My daughter was Diagnosed I set out to prove he did not exist not only was I proved wrong by Yahweh. He has since my coming to Him turned her 6 weeks into 6 years no end in sight Yahweh willing I love my Yahweh! But due to her sickness I quit the fire dept. let my state medical license lapse dropped all my previous college invested work. I now have all day to study his word and biblical histories and Languages. Amen!

  60. I hate the way NIV ommits some powerful bible verses,,, but please remember my GOD is watching you,. My GOD is mighty

    • “I hate the way NIV ommits some powerful bible verses,,, but please remember my GOD is watching you,. My GOD is mighty

      You would like to borrow my glasses? NOTHING the apostles and their followers ever had available has EVER been omitted – what you THINK is omitted was never there in the first place. THAT is why it is, as the KJ did, placed in the margins or footnotes. Then again you have probably NEVER seen an original KJB. FUNNY though you are OK with the 1769 version you probably use, removing many complete books as compared to the 1611 version.

      I hope you realize that the oft-revised and many times corrected KJ – which for some UTTERLY unfathomable reason YOU consider to a standard of some type – was simply a concoction by a Catholic Theologian of 5 INCOMPLETE Greek CATHOLIC texts. WITH, of course, many insertions from his imagination, some from the Vulgate, priests notes, etc.

      So before you go knocking Competent versions of the ancient texts – you MIGHT want to actually look into what basis there was for the rather corrupt KJB, and its political reason to be, It is FAR inferior to the Geneva Bible – that was based on the same corrupt texts – but at least HONESTLY translated, and used around the world in so many revivals.

      As the KJ translators wrote in the now almost banned “notice to reader” that accompanied the KJ before 1769, ANY translation of the Bible is a GOOD translation. I’m sure, were they alive today, they would overwhelmingly support the NIV as far superior to their own.

  61. My understanding period is do not add or take away words or any one of the 14 books of the apocrypha pulled from the book by the church which funny enough means “to be Hidden away” I believe everything should be their to make our own decision. if a verse can be changed due to “translation differences” and be okay then we should be able to understand these differences as well.

    • “My understanding period is do not add or take away words or any one of the 14 books of the Apocrypha pulled from the book by the church which funny enough means “to be Hidden away” I believe everything should be their to make our own decision. if a verse can be changed due to “translation differences” and be okay then we should be able to understand these differences as well.”

      NO apostle used those books – Jesus never used those books – they have NO reason to be part of Chrisdtiandom. They are simply Jewish fictional/historical books of interest. They contain great heresy. IT is the foundation for teaching Purgatory.

      They do NOT belong in scripture.

      ” if a verse can be changed due to “translation differences” and be okay then we should be able to understand these differences as well.””

      NO verse has EVER been changed without ample justification. Where the KJB used the 16th-century word “shambles” to denote where farmers brought their crops to sell – the word is MARKETPLACE in the language YOU understand.

      THAT is NOT a matter of a judgment call – but of honest scholarship.

      YOU cannot apply that same criteria/logic to the Apocrypha

  62. Almost every person of God I have come by has stated to me that everyone should read the 14 books removed and make their own decision based on the reasons of their removal because some pan out some do not see to fit that criteria. I am not an expert was under discipleship until I started finding flaws in the book of our time and the many celebrations of man that are supported by the church as a whole that clearly are against the word of God that I see as a clear infiltration of the church. I advise everyone that wishes to walk with Yahweh to understand. the church has been infiltrated since the 2nd century and to study wisely. Look at the Obelisk( used by the pagans to worship the Sun god RA the “EXACT” one from Egypt moved and now stands in front of St. Peters church in Rome that was ordered by our father to be destroyed.( Deut. 12:1-3 specifically 3) “you are to destroy their alters and destroy their sacred pillars….) and we were told not to use them to worship so it definitely should not be in front of the church! ( Deut.12:29-31) Sunday the church’s day of worship is Sun worship as well being named after so look into it History does not lie all is over Roman imperor Constantine.

    • SRY – I put this reply above in the wrong section –

      Where to start on your utterly illogical and very misinformed rant.

      “Almost every person of God I have come by has stated to me that everyone should read the 14 books removed and make their own decision based on the reasons of their removal because some pan out some do not see to fit that criteria.”

      The Apocrypha was NEVER included in the Hebrew scripture – NOR the Lists of books circulating in the NT era simply because they are NOT inspired – never ONCE did Jesus or the apostles refer to them as scripture – there are more NT comments from pagan literature than the Apocrypha.That the Catholic Bibles contain them shows their lack of discernment – that the KJ Bible contained them showed their subservience to the Catholic structures. MODERN Bibles are quite right to refuse them place. And anyone suggesting you read them is doing you a GREAT disservice. There is NOT enough time to learn the INSPIRED WORD of GOD without reading Jewish fables and history.

      “until I started finding flaws in the book of our time and the many celebrations of man that are supported by the church as a whole that clearly are against the word of God that I see as a clear infiltration of the church.”

      You have come under some VERY bad teaching – and you did NOT get your view by reading the Bible – although once brainwashed, you CAN twist the Bible to fit your views. And I emphasize TWIST. You cannot find ONE church celebration in the evangelical community that is NPOT justified by Scripture – and NONE are pagan. YOU have simply been lied to . . .

      And where are these imaginary flaws you think you have found? GOD is NOT confused . . . ONLY if using the KJB will flaws be obvious – although I suspect you MIGHT consider some other translations to also have flaws – they are far fewer and less important.

      ” I advise everyone that wishes to walk with Yahweh to understand. the church has been infiltrated since the 2nd century and to study wisely”

      WHO infiltrated it? And ASSUMING the early church was infiltrated since the 2nd century when all its doctrines and practices were being established – WHO do you think is wise enough to contradict the very disciples of the disciples?

      Obviously, the answer YOU propose is YOURSELF – a level of spiritual pride that one should be very wary of – it is approaching that of Lucifer himself.

      “Look at the Obelisk( used by the pagans to worship the Sun god RA the “EXACT” one from Egypt moved and now stands in front of St. Peters church in Rome that was ordered by our father to be destroyed.( Deut. 12:1-3Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)Open in Logos Bible Software (if available) specifically 3) “you are to destroy their alters and destroy their sacred pillars….) and we were told not to use them to worship so it definitely should not be in front of the church! ”

      Several errors in this – first that verse you misuse has NOTHING to do with an obelisk in front of any church – and second you conflate the Catholic church with biblical Christianity. There is a LOT more wrong with the Catholic church than an obelisk outside St Peters. The issue of that it is NOT a center or OBJECT of worship in its present location – God demanded memorial stones of the children of Isreal – but they could/did NOT worship those stones.

      YOUR superficial inditement of same is theologically vacuous. “( Deut. 12:1-3Open in Logos Bible Software (if available)Open in Logos Bible Software (if available) specifically 3) “you are to destroy their alters and destroy their sacred pillars….)” never applied to ANYTHING in Egypt. YOU twist reality to fit your presuppositions. “and we were told not to use them to worship so it definitely should not be in front of the church!” Refer to my comment – it is NOT worshiped – it’s at best an historical artifact. MEdoubts its authentic. The Catholic church DOES worship the many relics of the cross they have . . .

      ” Sunday the church’s day of worship is Sun worship as well being named after so look into it History does not lie all is over Roman imperor Constantine.”

      And this almost verges on a deliberate lie. The first day of the week – ONLY Sunday in English so there goes THAT argument when common sense is applied to it – is the ONLY day any gentile EVER worshiped or assembled in the NT or following. The SABBATH was for JEWS only – and the point of Galatians and other passages is that for the Gentiles to attempt to keep the Sinai covenant was to take it ALL on. SO If you plan on keeping the Sabbath, you must also be circumcised and have blood sacrifices.

      YOU may note, IF you actually READ your Bible, that Paul pronounces TWO condemnations on those Gentiles that attempt to live as Jews and/or take on/tell others to take on the Jewish customs – Gal 1 – he condemns them to hell – and in another place, he suggests they emasculate themselves.

      And so without a single case in scripture to support your uninformed attack on Sunday – I must suppose you are simply following some false cult leader’s opinion. And as I alluded to above – SUNday is ONLY in English – French Christians also worship on the FIRST day of the week – but it’s NOT called Sunday. Its “dimanche”. YOUR argument is utterly ridiculous.

      OH, and Constantine? THREE centuries AFTER the Gentiles worshiped on the FIRST day of the week. ALL those utter fabrications you have been taught are utterly false. AS I stated – NOT ONE instance of a NON-Proselyte Gentile worshipping or GATHERING on the Sabbath. ALWAYS the FIRST day of the week for the Gentile church.

      Check out who you are getting all your utter misinformation from . . .

      “Sabbatarians falsely teach that Christian would be keeping the Sabbath in 70 AD when Jerusalem was destroyed. Jesus said “But pray that your flight may not be on a Sabbath”. Matt 24:20Open in Logos Bible Software (if available). Jesus told them to pray, not so that Christians wouldn’t break the Sabbath, but because, living in Jerusalem, the Jews who controlled the city, always closed the gates and the Christians could not escape!”

      http://www.bible.ca/H-sunday.htm

  63. Mam First and im sure this will make you irate and im sorry but first I don’t have to argue with you on this. ” Do not cast pearl before swine” my friend (pray for discerning between the spirit of Truth and the spirit of error) 1 john 4:6 to discern between the spirit of Yahweh and the spirit that now works in the son of Disobedience” (Eph. 2:2) I only need to plant the seed Yahweh and the Holy spirit(spirit of truth) will nurture it and make it grow. Look folks it takes five minutes and a couple google searches including search “the catholic church admits they made the change” for proof of the Sabboth( a Roman Catholic gentile church) which they said God gave them the ordained power to change it, really? One of the ten Commandments and if you watch you-tube you can even see it your self. second do another search for the Egyption obelisk in Rome youll find it no questions for those that don’t know its the Washington monument looking structure. Sure search also to see the Egyptions used it to worship RA the sun God. Do not let people keep the blinder on your eyes any longer ever wonder why they call us pagans, HELLO? The list of wrongs we have done Go on forever because. Next lady i am kinda ashamed you as a Christian are to be hateful especially to those that can be converted as you cannot convert the offended and you are showing NO love. Second start studying before posting it make you and Christ look bad. I know here comes the long winded return slam post….. again Ive done my part all he asks us to do. May God/Yahweh bless you all you as well Ms. again those that only studied biblical scripture only know of the bible not the other religions and Gods they have been tricked into worshipping. I love History all of it. Now slam away at me as you wish the Lords seed is planted for Gods chosen Grafts. i will not be arguing over it as that we are not to do as well l:-)

    • “Mam First and im sure this will make you irate and im sorry but first I don’t have to argue with you on this. ” Do not cast pearl before swine” my friend (pray for discerning between the spirit of Truth and the spirit of error) 1 john 4:6 to discern between the spirit of Yahweh and the spirit that now works in the son of Disobedience” (Eph. 2:2Open in Logos Bible Software (if available))

      You realize that goes BOTH ways – your usage of the Bible is exactly what the apostles warned about – deceitfully handling the word of GOD.

      And N O – you can not respond spiritually – for your knowledge of the Bible is terribly warped by the demonic presence you follow – and certainly unorthodox.

      NO Scripture is of any PRIVATE interpretation – IF you or your cult are the ONLY one to have your false opinion – it’s demonic.

      ” Look folks it takes five minutes and a couple google searches including search “the catholic church admits they made the change” for proof of the Sabboth( a Roman Catholic gentile church) which they said God gave them the ordained power to change it, really? ”

      And your point is? AT any other time you would accuse the Catholic church of being dishonest – BUT you do a GOOGLE search and finds all these evil Sabbatarians that quote a NON-EXISTANT Catholic claim and THAT is evidence to you? The statement you are referring to is below – from Gregory in 597 – and says NOTHING of what you claim it to.

      YOU are brimming with hypocrisy. I pointed out to you that HISTORY and the BIBLE agree – Sabbath was NEVER kept by the NT Gentiles – from the day of Christ’s resurrection into the fifth century – we HAVE the evidence your claim is false – I PROVIDED that evidence – YOU ignored it.

      CITE me a PRIMARY source – THEN you will have a point to argue. TIL then you are simply spread lies.

      I provided you with a challenge – you declined – find me ONE example in SCRIPTURE of a gentle gathering on the Sabbath – you OBVIOUSLY have not.

      “One of the ten Commandments and if you watch you-tube you can even see it your self.”

      The ten commandments are ONLY binding on JEWS in ISREAL under the OLD, and now replaced covenent. The NEW covenant is NOT based on days – and Paul makes it plain to be sure you do NOT criticize a person for the day or no day he worships. (Col 2:16 Therefore do not let anyone judge you with respect to food or drink, or in the matter of a feast, new moon, or Sabbath days) And not ONE gentile Christian ever kept the Sabbath. BUT then you don’t care at all about scripture anyway.

      NOONE observed the Sabbath BEFORE Sinai, and no-one needs to observe it AFTER – the Gentile church did NOT – and you have offered NO proof for your heresy at all. JUST an anti-scriptural opinion.

      ” second do another search for the Egyption obelisk in Rome youll find it no questions for those that don’t know its the Washington monument looking structure”

      Again you are simply spouting nonsense – I asked for proof – you have made MORE unfounded opinion. YOU have a great knack for telling lies. YOU make an outrageous claim – YOU are responsible for the evidence for your claim. Unless you are lying . . . and you are.

      ” Sure search also to see the Egyptions used it to worship RA the sun God.”

      This is somehow relevant how? I already demonstrated to you that Sunday was NOT a Christian name of a day in the week – and had NO connection to any Egyptian worship of RE. BUT no, you carry on with your utter illiteracy – as I stated – the first day of the week in any other language is NOT SUNDAY – Dimanche for example in FRENCH – and what the Egyptians worshipped has NOTHING to do with us – NOR has any Obelisk outside the Vatican anything to do with the CHRISTIAN church.

      BUT you refuse to learn – even in the face of EVIDENCE.

      ” Next lady i am kinda ashamed you as a Christian are to be hateful especially to those that can be converted as you cannot convert the offended and you are showing NO love. ”

      YOU are NOT a Christian – you are deceiver in the church – so I am quite free to treat you as Paul treated those spreading lies in the NT church – He DAMNED them to hell (GAL 1:8 But even if we (or an angel from heaven) should preach 11 a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, 12 let him be condemned to hell! 13 “), and suggested they emasculate themselves (Gal 5:12 I wish those agitators would go so far as to castrate themselves!) .

      OR Jesus love displayed as :”Mat 23:27 “Woe to you, experts in the law and you Pharisees, hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs that look beautiful on the outside but inside are full of the bones of the dead and of everything unclean.” And worse.

      Have I gone that far?

      NOT yet, but you are close. NOONE attempts to destroy the Church of Jesus – the BRIDE – without getting pushback.

      Liars have NO right to expect love – but straight talk. CORRECTION. And NO correction seems good at the time. IF you cannot take straight talk – you ought NOT to get caught in your lies about the CHURCH.

      “A greeting of fellowship cannot be given to those who “go ahead” of the doctrine of Christ as some would suppose that all are children of God in Christ. I cannot greet a person as a Christian who is not a Christian nor should I condone their false doctrine. Whether it is in my front living-room, office, front porch or back yard or wherever – we should “always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks” concerning our hope and our trust in Jesus Christ.”

      How did the BIBLE teach us to deal with false teaching in the church?

      “Titus 1:10 For there are many 13 rebellious people, idle talkers, and deceivers, especially those with Jewish connections, 14 1:11 who must be silenced because they mislead whole families by teaching for dishonest gain what ought not to be taught. . . . For this reason rebuke them sharply that they may be healthy in the faith 1:14 and not pay attention to Jewish myths 16 and commands of people who reject the truth. 1:15 All is pure to those who are pure. But to those who are corrupt and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their minds and consciences are corrupted. 1:16 They profess to know God but with their deeds they deny him, since they are detestable, disobedient, and unfit for any good deed.”

      That is scripture. Take heed to it.

      “I love History all of it.”

      Well – yet another lie – for I challenged you to find a single event where a GENTILE worshiped on Sabbath – THAT, my deluded friend – is HISTORY, and I provided you several quotes from the church fathers stating that at NO time had the Gentiles had Sabbath worship.

      http://www.bible.ca/H-sunday.htm The first section deals with the commandments – the second with the historical quotes – dozens of them – which ALL – 100% – contradict your statements.

      I provided you previously with many DOZENS of HISTORICAL quotes from Church writers following Christ’s resurrection and following the Scriptures to PROVE irrefutably that the SABBATH was never kept – making your statements on the subject FALSE. That’s NOT harsh – that’s REALITY

      YOU seem to be impervious to TRUTH and HISTORY. And LOVE.

      SO you are either very confused or a deliberate liar. In neither case is pussyfooting around with your deception a sign of love. LOVE is to call out your evil and expose it. Peradventure you MAY see the error of your ways and cry out to GOD for mercy.

      Had you approached this as a discussion, my tone would be very different – BUT you imposed your false cult teaching as mandatory on the church from a position of spiritual superiority and pride. THAT needs to be rebuked – according to the Scripture above.

      AND as far as speaking kindly to those that are sent by Satan to destroy the church _ the Bible plainly says NOT to grant them Godspeed – wish them well. YOU are OBVIOUSLY illiterate on issues well covered in the BIBLE – YOUTUBE and false teachers seem to be more your style.

      ” i will not be arguing over it as that we are not to do as well l:-)”

      Quite possibly true – you have neither SCRIPTURE, History nor FACTS to support your cults deception. YOU would need some EVIDENCE to make it an argument.

      YOU are not only utterly deceived but a great deceiver as well.,

    • ” Next lady i am kinda ashamed you as a Christian are to be hateful especially to those that can be converted as you cannot convert the offended and you are showing NO love.”

      GOD makes a habit of offending the intellect to reveal the spirit. Spiritual arrogance and pride prevent folk from ever knowing GOD. GOD has ways of getting past that – and it USUALLY involves humiliation of some sort – to realize one NEEDS a savior. At least that is the testimony of many great men of GOD – standing naked before GOD without an intellectual excuse forced them to deal with GOD.

      I pray that someday you may come to know Jesus as your savior – and know the joy of sins forgiven and assurance of your path towards heaven.

      Its all in God’s Word

  64. What other reason could there be except to hide the word of God?

    To take the time and possibly money to sit down and alter a Holy Book? Why not just keep making it available? Unless there is something in it, no business puts in that sort of time to alter so many scriptures which the work of the devil.

    The Bible says that in the last days many will be decieved and possibly even the elect (paraphrasing). This is why there are so many versions yet in various faitgs there is only one book. The one closest to the truth has a copyright on it and those wanting to use it for apps to help people learn cannot?? Hmm? The old version they are trying to get rid of so if it was not the work of the devil they would let people use 1984 if they wanted to but why go all out to stop them to the point of making it a legal thing huh?

    Have they altered the devils bible?
    Someone who would sell that could not have the true word of God at hwart and whoever sold them marerials that corrolates with it plus the Bible, the devil got to them through the lust for money and even the 1984 concordance they took over has been discontinues because it is the truth. Most believers are clueless about this and do not even aware if all the tampering becauae they aee caught up in thorns (the worries of life).

    Why is it that this particular version has been changed so much and so many times otherwise?

    At the end of days God will deal with all accordingly. The damage is done because people have hard copies and wont search and buy the old ones and apps are trying to take over making it appwar more conveniebd and changes are creeping in. The new version promotes a lie as the word has been changed.

    So called believers and pastors need to be prepared to put the work in to learn the Biblical languages or will stay decieved and will pay the consequences. May the Church be revived and refreshed and may they want to open the eyes of their hearts enough to know the truth and learn the Biblical lanuages just as much as they were prepared to complete a degree (meaning they must be capable of learning the Biblical languages) then seeking a job (money) and must therefore be able to seek God enough to find this all out, know what to do and learn the scriptures in a more original form and those who search God will teach. The Bible says to seek God with all your heart and that he will be found of we seek Him and He is the Word.. Simple as

    • ” The one closest to the truth has a copyright on it and those wanting to use it for apps to help people learn cannot?? Hmm? The old version they are trying to get rid of so if it was not the work of the devil they would let people use 1984 if they wanted to but why go all out to stop them to the point of making it a legal thing huh?”

      Your comment makes no sense. IF you are going to pay 30 scholars to take two years to create a new translation – whence thinks you the money for that comes?

      NOW I have an online subscription to Laridian – and to the best of my knowledge NO Bible there costs more than 10 bucks – many are free. Bible Societies have free Bibles in many versions – I think. BUT who cannot afford 25.00 for the Word of GOD? That’s only a couple coffees. Now some of my ancient Bibles are a different story . . .

      The best Bible available today – the NET (NEW ENGLISH Traanslation) Bible – is totally free on the net and with a public use copyright. IF you want their 62,000 translators notes – there is some cost involved – cheap, but I don’t know what it is. IF you want to buy their paper Bible its a tad pricey – 50.00 or so, but is 1100 pages.

      But Bible have ALWAYS been copywritten, or certainly MOST. The KJ was, in 1611. FOR centuries . . .

      And WHO are these imaginary folk who are changing the Bible? And WHAT Bible are they changing? And HOW could anyone make the Word of GOD serve satanic purposes? SO to misquote the translators of the KJV – ANY translation no matter how poor is still the wonderful words of GOD.

      As far back as 1611 the translators of the KJB noted that theirs was a poor transation, in need of revision, and in the future would need additional refining as language changed.

      What happened is we found 5000 more Bibles/fragments than they had – some from the first and second century, before the Catholic church, and the Dead Sea Scrolls that are even older.

      That additional insight into the actual Books used by the apostles and Christians in the NT church allow us a much better insight into their thoughts and practices . . .
      Oh, and Concordances? NOT a good business invstment for a publisher. The net id fREE and far more expansive. I have several concordances from the 50’s and an 1812 Websters dioctionary – NECESSARY when dealing with the KJB – but one needs a certain level of demand to invest half a million or a million dollars or more into publishing a book that will not sell, especially as uaage of the older versions Bibles diminishes. AS well they should.

      Assuming that is what you are speaking of . . .

  65. There were two trees in the garden of Eden. The tree of life and the tree of good and evil. Adam and Eve ate from the tree of good and evil. Had they eaten from the tree of life, man would never have to die, leave this Earth in a casket.

  66. This shows a lack of trust in the Holy Spirit of God. Remember satan is the author of confusion!! Why would God bless us with His Holy Word in english then change it a few years later? Do some praying and research, those manuscripts used for the modern versions were corrupted. Remember satan does have an agenda against God and His people.

  67. “This shows a lack of trust in the Holy Spirit of God. Remember satan is the author of confusion!! Why would God bless us with His Holy Word in english then change it a few years later? Do some praying and research, those manuscripts used for the modern versions were corrupted. Remember satan does have an agenda against God and His people.”

    dUHHH, not AT ALL. The KJ texts were the corrupt ones, NOT the ancient texts that predated the Catholic Church. Erasmus, upon whose text the KJ is based via Beza and Stephanus, simply made up some portions and inserted others directly from the VULGATE – that had never appeared in any Greek text ever. Accurate the KJ is NOT.

    YOUR statement of authority for the KJ is based on pure, irrational, blind FAITH. NOT scriptural or Christian faith, but the traditions and dead works of churcianity.

    And your suggestion that GOD gave us a “pure” words is absurd. That is an assumption of prophetic revelation, as it has NO foundation at all in texts. NO translation can ever be pure; and how can the KJ be pure when it’s wording is quite different from what the apostles wrote? OR do the accounts of the apostles and early fathers NOT carry any weight? They could NOT have God’s “pure” word?

    The deliberate lies that are told about there being only two streams of texts (and many OTHER claims) are not only false but absurd; it DOES, however, make the typical cults us vs them mentality viable.

    The ONLY entity opposing the clear and understandable presentation of the word of GOD is Satan. He opposes the new versions because it makes the Bible relevant and understandable. AND he is an expert at making the Bible a mystery to as many as possible, first through the latin readings of Catholocism, and more recently through the rise of the KJO cult out of the SDA cult.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *