The Bible debate

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
T

Tintin

Guest
I still don't think it's true. To me, KJV-Onlyism is nothing more than an excuse for spiritual pride.
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
I still don't think it's true. To me, KJV-Onlyism is nothing more than an excuse for spiritual pride.

It is not about spiritual pride. It is about having a strong conviction over the pure and inerrant words of the living God.
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
nowhere in the bible does God promise that any translators will be moved by the holy spirit in the same way as the apostles and prophets who wrote the originals...

But God promised to preserve His words. Therefore, we must have them. And thank God. Because we do. God has kept His precious promise to keep and preserve His pure words. And if you want them, just get an Authorized King James Holy Bible.
 
L

LT

Guest
When people start calling the Word of God a work of Satan, I start pressing the 'report' button.
Some on this thread have far too little reverence for the inspired Scriptures, regardless of what language it is in.

Pure blaspheme...
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
whenever anyone tells you they 'understand the KJV'...you already have cause to question their claim...

Why? What for?


If you have the Holy Spirit in you, well then you can understand the text of the King James Bible. Now are you going to understand everything as your reading along? Well no. There are also complex truths in the word of God, which will take more time and more thorough study to get a better understanding of, that's all.
 
Last edited:

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
Here is a good video showing how children can understand the King James Bible.


[video=youtube;laatFaIiDLE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laatFaIiDLE[/video]
 

Nick01

Senior Member
Jul 15, 2013
1,272
26
48
From my experience -- most - by far - of the false doctrine comes from people who read modern currupted bible versions and -think- that those versions are just as good [ to read and study from ] as the KJV -- when, in reality, they have.been misled by Satan's 'easier to read' program... ( Satan has deceived them into believing that they can get just as much truth from a currupted bible version simply because it is 'easier to read'. )
My response to almost all of what you just posted is this:

Which doctrines do you suggest are corrupted in modern translations and how do you know they are corrupted and not the KJV. Preferably, provide actual examples of what you mean.
 

ChosenbyHim

Senior Member
Sep 19, 2011
3,343
113
63
well actually from my experience a lot of the false doctrine comes from people who read the KJV and -think- they understand it...when really they have just been misled by the archaic language...

the insidious part is that the average KJV reader has no way of alerting themselves to the difference...

If a person is going to understand the Holy Bible, they first need to get saved. Because you need to have the Holy Spirit dwelling in you so that He can lead you into all truth.


Another thing that needs to be done to understand the Holy Bible (AKJV) is to RIGHTLY DIVIDE it (2 Timothy 2:15). And to compare Scripture with Scripture (1 Cor. 2:13).


If a Christian refuses to be Dispensational, well then he will obviously open himself up to false doctrine. When you start making the Church Israel. And you do not separate the Church from Israel, well then again, you open yourself up to false doctrine. Pretty soon, you abandon the Biblical Doctrine of Eternal Security, then you abandon the Biblical Doctrine of the Pre-trib. Rapture, and then you totally abandon the Biblical Doctrine of Premillennialism and you become an ammilennialist.


And then you basically are just confused Doctrinally. You no longer have any firm footing and you are no longer rooted in sound Doctrine.

And if a person gets messed up Doctrinally, well its their fault for not studying the word of God and for not rightly dividing the word of God.


And I don't think people are misled by the Archaic language. People are either mislead by one of their teachers who does not study and rightly divide the Book. Or that person is confused because he himself has not taken the time and due diligence to study the Scriptures himself.


Also, here is archaic language in the modern versions as well.
 
Last edited:

Nick01

Senior Member
Jul 15, 2013
1,272
26
48
If a person is going to understand the Holy Bible, they first need to get saved. Because you need to have the Holy Spirit dwelling in you so that He can lead you into all truth.


Another thing that needs to be done to understand the Holy Bible (AKJV) is to RIGHTLY DIVIDE it (2 Timothy 2:15). And to compare Scripture with Scripture (1 Cor. 2:13).


If a Christian refuses to be Dispensational, well then they will obviously open themselves up to false doctrine. When you start making the Church Israel. And you do not separate the Church from Israel, well then again, you open yourself up to false doctrine. Pretty soon, you abandon the Biblical Doctrine of Eternal Security, then you abandon the Biblical Doctrine of the Pre-trib. Rapture, and then you totally abandon the Biblical Doctrine of Premillennialism and you become an ammilennialist.


And if a person gets messed up Doctrinally, well its their fault for not studying the word of God and for not rightly dividing the word of God.


And I don't think people are misled by the Archaic language. People are either mislead by one of their teachers who does not study and rightly divide the Book. Or that person is confused because he himself has not taken the time and due diligence to study the Scriptures himself.


Also, here is archaic language in the modern versions as well.
I'm an amillenialist who doesn't think the Church and israel are the same thing. What does that make me? :)
 
G

GaryA

Guest
I still don't think it's true. To me, KJV-Onlyism is nothing more than an excuse for spiritual pride.
On the other hand -- could it be "spiritual pride" that says:

"It really does not matter how corrupted the language is in my bible version --- the Holy Spirit can still teach me..."

?


Anyone who believes this does not understand "how it really works"...

"Just sayin'..." :D



For the record:

~ I believe that nothing can be more 'true' or 'correct' than the original manuscripts. I am not one of those who believe that the KJV is "better" than the original manuscripts -- except, as a translation for the English language; however, I do believe that - "there is something special about the KJV" - brought into existance by God for His purpose - and, that it is still the best available translation for the English language.

~ I believe that the KJV is the most accurate translation available for the English language today.

~ I believe that it is still possible to produce an accurate translation for the English language that is not corrupted -- only, it has not happened since the KJV - and is not likely to happen - due to Satan's successful corruption of the modern-day mentality of man and his control over human affairs...

~ I believe that ALL modern bible versions are corrupted - to some degree -- some more than others...

:)
 

Nick01

Senior Member
Jul 15, 2013
1,272
26
48
For the record:

~ I believe that nothing can be more 'true' or 'correct' than the original manuscripts. I am not one of those who believe that the KJV is "better" than the original manuscripts -- except, as a translation for the English language; however, I do believe that - "there is something special about the KJV" - brought into existance by God for His purpose - and, that it is still the best available translation for the English language.
What are your thoughts on the manuscript tradition, then? Do you think the KJV relies at leas in small part on a textual tradition that is most probably not original? And if there's something special about the KJV that doesn't have anything to do with the original writings, I don't want to know about it. I just want to hear the words God gave his Prophets, and then the words given to the Apostles taught by Jesus himself. In any case, you would have to provide proof about this 'special something'

~ I believe that the KJV is the most accurate translation available for the English language today.
By what metric? Can you give examples?

~ I believe that it is still possible to produce an accurate translation for the English language that is not corrupted -- only, it has not happened since the KJV - and is not likely to happen - due to Satan's successful corruption of the modern-day mentality of man and his control over human affairs...
So you you would say then that the value of the KJV has absolutely nothing to do with the style of English that it uses, and is entirely about the accuracy of the translation from the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic? Or would a new translation have to use Shakesperean English?

~ I believe that ALL modern bible versions are corrupted - to some degree -- some more than others...
Again, proof? I believe the exact opposite. Who's belief is better than the others?[/QUOTE]
 
T

Tintin

Guest
On the other hand -- could it be "spiritual pride" that says:

"It really does not matter how corrupted the language is in my bible version --- the Holy Spirit can still teach me..."

?


Anyone who believes this does not understand "how it really works"...

"Just sayin'..." :D



For the record:

~ I believe that nothing can be more 'true' or 'correct' than the original manuscripts. I am not one of those who believe that the KJV is "better" than the original manuscripts -- except, as a translation for the English language; however, I do believe that - "there is something special about the KJV" - brought into existance by God for His purpose - and, that it is still the best available translation for the English language.

~ I believe that the KJV is the most accurate translation available for the English language today.

~ I believe that it is still possible to produce an accurate translation for the English language that is not corrupted -- only, it has not happened since the KJV - and is not likely to happen - due to Satan's successful corruption of the modern-day mentality of man and his control over human affairs...

~ I believe that ALL modern bible versions are corrupted - to some degree -- some more than others...

:)
Oh, boy. Please, let's have some evidence of these core Christian beliefs that have been corrupted in the modern translations. I grew up with modern translations and I don't doubt God's divinity or Jesus Christ being God's Son, his death and resurrection, his payment for humanity's sins - or anything like that. I also don't accept evolutionary bollocks in any facet of life, but instead, biblical creation. I'm what you would call conservative (not that we really have those labels in Australia). I'm mentioning this just to provide a little understanding of where I'm coming from.
 
G

GaryA

Guest
When people start calling the Word of God a work of Satan, I start pressing the 'report' button.
Some on this thread have far too little reverence for the inspired Scriptures, regardless of what language it is in.

Pure blaspheme...
I am not absolutely sure exactly what you are trying to say with this, but --- it is the original manuscripts that were inspired --- after that, they were either correctly translated ( i.e., the KJV ) or corrupted [ to varying degrees ] ( i.e., the modern bible versions ).

:)
 
G

GaryA

Guest
Oh, boy. Please, let's have some evidence of these core Christian beliefs that have been corrupted in the modern translations. I grew up with modern translations and I don't doubt God's divinity or Jesus Christ being God's Son, his death and resurrection, his payment for humanity's sins - or anything like that. I also don't accept evolutionary bollocks in any facet of life, but instead, biblical creation. I'm what you would call conservative (not that we really have those labels in Australia). I'm mentioning this just to provide a little understanding of where I'm coming from.
"No, Tintin - you are missing the point..."

The parts of modern bible versions that are not corrupted / perverted are not the problem. It is the parts of the modern bible versions that are corrupted / perverted that are the problem.

I don't think anyone is saying that "every last word" of the modern bible versions is bad / corrupted / perverted. However, because of the parts that are bad / corrupted / perverted -- it renders the bible version as a whole untrustworthy as a whole.

All of the various words and phrases that are removed or changed in the modern bible versions -- take away from the scriptures as a whole -- and, teach error - because, they change the meaning of the truth that is present in the scriptures.

:)
 
Last edited:
Jan 4, 2014
35
1
0
My response to almost all of what you just posted is this:

Which doctrines do you suggest are corrupted in modern translations and how do you know they are corrupted and not the KJV. Preferably, provide actual examples of what you mean.
I am so thankful you asked me this question, The LORD has just given me the liberty to do this

Here is a list i compiled a while ago, of the major doctrines affected by the changes of modern bibles, This list compasses MOST not ALL of the modern translations as i simply lost all hope of finding a modern translation that is without error.

Enjoy.

MATTHEW
1:25 "her firstborn" is omitted. That Jesus was her firstborn indicates that Mary and Joseph had sexual relations after the birth of Jesus and that others were born of her. The omission here seeks to add credence to the false doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church concerning the perpetual virginity of Mary. The Bible is clear that Jesus had brothers and sisters.
5:22 "without a cause" is removed. In the Sermon on the Mount the Lord warned of judgment for those who were angry with a brother without a cause. Should this change be accepted everyone who is angry with his brother may be judged. The effect is to bring Jesus into judgment for failing to observe his own words (see Mark 3:5). Such is contrary to the doctrine of the sinlessness of Christ.
6:4, 6, 18 "openly" is out. It is a Bible Doctrine that Christian work done unnoticed for the glory of the Lord will one day be rewarded openly (Col. 3:4).
6:13 "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever, Amen" is deleted. This ascription of praise to "Our Father" is found in 491 out of 500 existing manuscripts. This statement was made a century ago by Dean John Burgon.
8:29 "Jesus" is left out. The demons bore witness to the fact that Jesus was the Son of God. It was an identification of Jesus (in humanity) as the Son of God (in Deity). It affects the doctrine of the Person of Christ.
9:8 "marvelled" is changed to "were afraid." There is no reason to believe that the people were afraid because Jesus healed the sick of the palsy. There is every reason for them to marvel at the miracle.
9:13 "to repentance" is left out. The Bible doctrine of repentance is one that men would like to do away with. God requires that in order to be saved one must truly repent (Acts 17:30; 2 Peter 3:9). The word means "a change of mind" and there must be that concerning God, sin and salvation. Men think that sin does not really separate them from God--they must change their mind about that. Men think that salvation is by works--they must change their mind about that. There is nothing more evident today than the absence of repentance among those who are professing to be converted.
15:8 "draweth nigh unto me with their mouth" is left out. According to Isaiah 29:13 it belongs in because Isaiah prophesied of these hypocrites exactly that way.
16:2,3 "When it is evening ... the signs of the times" is all omitted. The Pharisees and Sadducees came looking for a sign and the signs were all around them. Jesus called them hypocrites because they could not tell the signs of the times.
17:21 Whole verse is left out. Power with God is to be had by prayer and fasting. That is a fundamental truth of the Word of God.
18:2 "Jesus" is left out. This is done many times by the corrupt Greek Text of Westcott and Hort. I have not chosen to remark about each instance because it would add many pages to this work. The MAJORITY Text continuously places the word "Jesus" in the narrative with the definite article preceding it. Thus it places him in the center of things and in command. It is doctrinally unsound for such prominence to be discarded for the word "he."
18:11 The whole verse is omitted. This verse tells us that man is lost, that he needs to be saved, and that the Son of man is the one who can do that. The doctrine of salvation through Jesus Christ is affected by this change.
18:15 "against thee" is omitted. This omission sets us up as watchdogs over others and if one sins we are to go and tell him. Such is not the teaching of Scripture. Were we to declare every sin we would be constantly busy (bodies) judging the actions and motives of everyone. This change is a very bad error.
18:35 "their trespasses" is omitted. Same thought as mentioned in 18:15.
19:9 "and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery" is removed. This is a very important doctrinal change which concerns divorce and remarriage. A man who divorces his wife and remarries commits adultery, and also the man who marries the divorced wife commits adultery.
19:16,17 "Good" before Master is omitted. In addition to that, the phrase "Why callest thou me good?" is changed to "Why askest thou me concerning the good?" Good Master is correct and Jesus responded to show the young man that only one was good and that one was God. The conclusion should have been obvious. Since Jesus was good he was necessarily God. The omission and change destroys the intended testimony to the Deity of Christ.
20:16 "for many be called, but few chosen" is left out. The Lord would have us know that many are called to inherit eternal life, but few are chosen by virtue of believing in Christ. It is a Bible doctrine that God wants all men to be saved but few will come to Christ for salvation.
21:12 "of God" is out. Jesus, who was God in the flesh, came to his own temple and said, "My house shall be called the house of prayer." It was the temple of God and the God of the temple was there.
22:30 "of God" is removed. There are good angels and fallen angels. The believers, in the resurrection, will be like the good angels "of God" who alone are in heaven.
23:8 "Master" is changed to "teacher." There are many teachers but only one master. The change here takes away the pre- eminence that God intends for his Son.
25:13 "wherein the Son of man cometh" is omitted. The warning to watch is tied to the imminent return of the Lord. The omission here does away with the doctrine of the Lord's second advent.
26:28 "new" is dropped before testament. The apostle Paul tells us that Jesus said, "this cup is the NEW testament in my blood." The change here is intended to corrupt the Word of God and to confuse Christians.
27:35 "that it might be fulfilled ... did they cast lots" is all omitted. It is very important in Matthew's gospel, where Jesus is portrayed as the King of Israel, to show that he is the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies. Here the parting of his garments and casting lots is the fulfillment of Psalm 22:18 which portrays the crucifixion of Christ. To omit this is to show the intended corruption of the Word of God by the textual critics.
28:6 "the Lord" is omitted. The very reverent angels said, "see the place where the Lord lay." They would not say, "see the place where he lay." The constant attempt to humanize Jesus and take away from his Deity does not endear the Westcott and Hort Greek Text to believers.

MARK
1:1 "the Son of God" is left out. These words present Jesus Christ as Deity. Such an omission is a direct attack on the person of Christ and is without doubt a doctrinal error.
1:31 "immediately" is dropped. The descriptive word tells us when the fever left her and therefore provides us with a miracle. The word left out denies the miracle and thus the one who performed it.
2:17 "to repentance" is left out. See comments on Matt. 9:13.
3:15 "to heal sicknesses" is omitted. Jesus gave them authority to heal diseases as well as to cast out demons. Sickness is the result of sin (Adam's) and the only one who has authority to eliminate it is the one who would die for sin. On the basis of his approaching death for sin on Calvary he could say, "Son, thy sins be forgiven thee" and "Rise up and walk."
4:24 "and unto you that hear shall more be given" is left out. It is a Bible teaching that those who seek truth from the Lord shall be given more truth (see John 7:17).
5:36 "as soon" is dropped. The word in the Greek is "immediately." The word immediately is constantly dropped by the Revisers of 1881. It is a key word in Mark which is the Gospel of the Servant of the Lord who came "not to be ministered unto, but to minister." When Jairus was told that his daughter was dead and that he should not trouble Jesus further, the Lord "immediately" encouraged him to believe.
6:11 "Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment, than for that city" is removed from the text. This passage emphasizes the great degree of responsibility that was upon those cities who heard the Lord's apostles as they preached repentance and worked miracles before them. Sodom and Gomorrah did not have such light, yet they are still suffering the eternal wrath of God (see Jude 7 where "suffering" is in the present tense). How much more the judgment of America today where people sit in an abundance of complete revelation from God and choose to remain in darkness.
7:8 "as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do" is omitted. The Lord not only condemns the Pharisees for traditions of men, but he names them. There are traditions of men today which are sending people to Hell and preachers need to name them. It is doctrinally unsound to let men go on in traditions and not expose them.
9:23 "if thou canst believe" is dropped. The father had said to Jesus, "if thou canst do anything." To this lack of faith Jesus answered, "if thou canst believe." It was at once a rebuke and an encouragement to have faith in him. The father's answer in the next verse is beautiful but the Revisers ruined that also. They omitted "with tears, Lord" from the most precious answer as recorded by the Spirit of God.
9:45 "into the fire that never shall be quenched" is dropped. The character and duration of Hell is described here and the doctrine of eternal retribution is affected by this change.
9:47 "fire" is omitted. The words are inspired and in complete agreement with Rev. 20:15. The consignment of the lost to the lake of fire is a Bible doctrine.
10:21 "take up the cross" is left out. The word to the young man was to divest himself of the riches in which he trusted, consider himself dead to the world, and follow Christ into eternal life. There are many who will let go of riches and seek to emulate some of Christ's teachings, but the way of the cross they refuse. The cross for Christ and for believers is Fundamental in Christian doctrine.
10:24 "for them that trust in riches" is left out. This is a very glaring doctrinal error. It is not hard to enter into the kingdom of God (salvation is a free gift through faith in Jesus Christ) but it is hard for those who trust in riches to trust Christ alone for salvation. Their God is their wealth and it is no more compatible with Christ than Dagon was with the Ark of God (see 1 Sam. 5:1-5).
11:26 The whole verse is removed. It is a Bible doctrine that if we regard iniquity in our heart the Lord will not hear us. Answered prayer and clean vessels go together. When I confess my sins and ask God for favor he requires that my confession of sin include forgiveness of those who have sinned against me. If I refuse to forgive others it becomes sin to me (see Eph. 4:32).
13:14 "spoken of by Daniel the prophet" is dropped. Without the reference to Daniel the appeal to understand is without force. Though some might connect it in their thoughts because they are familiar with Scripture, it does not follow that he is referring to Daniel. The reference to Daniel by the Lord also authenticates his writing as inspired Scriptures.
14:22 "eat" is dropped. Our Lord did not give them a relic from the Last Supper to take home and cherish. He gave them broken bread to eat which (when observed) would always remind them of his body which was broken for them.
15:28 The whole verse is left out. Jesus was crucified between two thieves in fulfillment of Isaiah 53:12. It is doctrinal error to eliminate clear statements concerning the fulfilling of prophecy (see Luke 24:27).
16:9-20 Twelve verses are omitted. These verses are found in every known manuscript but two (the oldest of those two leaves a blank space where it belongs). They are found in all the Versions, quoted by the church fathers, and seen in the lectionaries of the church. There are many doctrines affected by the omission of these twelve verses. The resurrection of Christ is deleted. The great commission, baptism, eternal damnation and His ascension into Heaven are all taken out of the Word of God. Certainly the gospel does not end with "they were afraid." Some say the ending has been lost (see Dr. Ryrie's Study Bible) but that destroys the Bible Doctrine that God preserves His Word (see 1 Peter 1:23-25). The evidence is clear that these verses are original and to cut them out is to affect many doctrines of the Christian faith.
 
Jan 4, 2014
35
1
0
LUKE
1:28 "blessed art thou among women" is omitted. There were many virgins in Israel at the time, but God chose Mary. The Son that she bore would be her Saviour from sin. The Roman Catholic doctrine of the immaculate conception of Mary (concerning her birth) is nothing but pagan fiction. Mary was blessed AMONG women, but not ABOVE women. The worship of Mary is contrary to Scripture. This omission is designed to lift her above others and eventually deify her.
2:14 "peace, good will toward men" is changed to "peace among men of good will." The first talks of the birth of Christ as bringing God's peace and good will (reconciliation) to men. Faith in the death of Christ for our sins brings justification and peace with God. The change offers God's peace to men who are good. That is doctrinally unsound since there is none good.
2:33 "Joseph and his mother" is changed to "his father and mother." The Spirit of God is very careful to show that our Lord Jesus Christ was born of a virgin and that he did not have a human father who begat him. The change casts doubt upon the doctrine of the virgin birth of Christ as the "seed of the woman." Later, when Mary refers to Joseph as "thy father," Jesus answers with, "wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business," meaning that God was his father (see 2:48,49).
2:40 "in spirit" is left out. That the child grew and waxed strong in spirit (meaning that he was spiritually strong) is evident from verse 47. It is unlikely that the Spirit of God wanted us to see how strong Jesus was with reference to his physique.
2:43 "and Joseph and his mother knew not of it" is changed to "and his parents were unaware of it." The first retains the teachings of the virgin birth, the second discards it. The virgin birth is a Fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith and the MAJORITY Text upholds it. Let us not hear of supposed overzealous copyists but rather let us beware of overzealous heretics who would deny the fundamentals of the faith.
4:4 "but by every Word of God" is dropped. Many are willing to agree that bread alone cannot satisfy man, but few are willing to live by every word of God. This quotation is from Deut. 8:3 where the omitted words are found. The same one who said, "Yea, hath God said?" is the author of this omission. The Revisers could not leave this passage in because they have changed "every word of God" in over 5,000 places in the New Testament. Satan does not mind if we read the Bible as long as we have a Swiss cheese Bible (full of holes). Holes in the Word cause doubts in the Word, doubts cause faith to be lost, and without faith it is impossible to please him.
4:8 "Get thee behind me, Satan" is omitted. The devil had tempted Jesus to bypass the cross and receive the kingdom over the world. Jesus, whose face was set as a flint to go to the cross, refused to worship him.
6:10 "whole as the other" is left out. These words tell us that not only was his hand restored to use but it was whole as the other. The completeness of the miracle is attested to by these words.
9:54 "even as Elias did" is omitted. Apart from this word they had no precedent for doing such a thing.
9:55, 56 "and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them" is omitted. In reply to the disciples who thought that they could call down fire from heaven, Jesus told them that he came to save men. This passage is consistent with John 3:17, "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved."
11:2-4 "Our ... which art in heaven" is deleted along with "Thy will be done as in heaven, so in earth" and "but deliver us from evil." Only corrupt manuscripts can produce so many departures from the disciples prayer which is found without deletions in Matt. 6:9-13.
14:5 The word "ass" is changed to "son." The use of "son" is too much for the comparison the Lord is making. Only a slavish loyalty to a corrupt Greek text can produce such a foolish change.
22:31 "And the Lord said" is dropped. The Lord Jesus was God and as such he was omnipresent and omniscient. He was present when Satan came before God and asked permission to try Peter's faith. He had prayed to the Father, as Peter's intercessor, that his faith would not fail. It was the Lord who knew all of this and warned Peter specifically.
22:64 "they struck him on the face" is dropped. It is error to minimize the sufferings of Christ. His facial appearance was marred more than any man (see Isaiah 52:14 and 53:5).
23:23 "and of the chief priests" is omitted. The Lord was careful to let us know that the religious priests were involved in the rejection of Christ. Those who call themselves priests today do likewise.
23:42 "And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom" is changed to "Then he said, Jesus remember me when you come into your kingdom." The confession that Jesus is Lord is doctrinally correct because it is required for salvation (see Rom. 10:9- 13).
23:45 "the sun was darkened" is changed to "the sun was eclipsed." The Greek word in the corrupt Greek Text is EKLIPONTOS from which we derive the word ECLIPSE. An eclipse is caused by the natural occurrence of the moon passing between the sun and the earth and usually lasts for about 3-5 minutes. The sun being darkened for three hours was a miracle of God and will be repeated again prior to the Lord's return to earth (see Matt. 24:29) Many modern versions try to hide the Greek word they are using to translate from the corrupt Greek text by using words like: obscured (NASV), faded (AMPLIFIED), stopped shining (NIV), failed (NEW WORLD), but some honestly translate the word "eclipse" (20th CENTURY, MOFFAT, NEB, PHILLIPS). Humanism would try to find some way to explain away the miracles of God's Word lest they be forced to accept it as the revelation from God concerning salvation.
24:36 "and saith unto them. Peace be unto you" is omitted. Jesus had said to them, "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you" (John 14:27). He was now risen from the dead and in their midst to guarantee that peace to them. One of the greatest benefits of our salvation is to have peace with God (Rom. 5:1) and the peace of God ruling in our hearts (Phil. 4:7).
24:40 The whole verse is omitted. The bodily resurrection of Christ is proven here as he showed them his hands and his feet. The omission affects Bible doctrine very much.
24:51 "and carried up into heaven" is left out. The bodily ascension of Christ into heaven is a Bible doctrine that is denied here. It leaves the Lord parted from them but does not tell us where he went. The Revisers removed the doctrine and left the Word in a poor state of disarray. Acts 1:1, 2 tells us that the "former treatise" (Luke) ended with Jesus being "taken up." That ought to be sufficient to show the Revisers are wrong.
24:52 "And ... worshipped him" is omitted by the NASV. The MAJORITY Text says, "And they having worshipped him returned to Jerusalem with great joy." The picture we have is of our Lord receiving their worship because he is God (see 4:8 where worship is to be to God only) and then before their very eyes ascending into heaven. It is a Bible doctrine that we are to worship Jesus and the omission by the NASV is a clear denial of that doctrine.

JOHN
1:18 "the only begotten Son" is changed to "The only begotten God." Such a phrase is foreign to Scripture. It accommodates the Arian teaching that Christ was a lesser deity created by God. It agrees with the teaching of Origen that Christ was not equal with God in essence and nature. Sound Fundamental doctrine concerning Christ is that he is one person of the Triune God and that he proceeds from the Father by an eternal generation and reveals God to men as the Son of God.
1:27 "He it is ... who is preferred before me" is removed. This change removes the pre-eminence and pre-existence of Christ. John wanted us to see that though Christ came after him, he in reality preceded and ranked above him.
3:13 "which is in heaven" is omitted. This change affects the doctrine of the omnipresence of Christ. As man he was here on earth, as God he was able to be everywhere present. The omission is a corruption introduced by those who do not believe in the perfect and absolute Deity of Christ.
3:15 "should not perish" is removed. This deletion removes the opposite of everlasting life, which is to perish. The doctrine of eternal damnation is weakened by the change.
3:16 "his only begotten Son" is changed to "the only begotten Son." The word HIS marks Jesus Christ out as God's own peculiar son in a relationship that no one else has. It marks him as of the same essence and nature. The Deity of Christ is involved and is thereby weakened (3:17 also changed).
4:42 "the Christ" is left out. The purpose of John's gospel as given in 20:31 was to lead people to believe that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God. That belief was to bring life to them. To omit it here is to deny the purpose of the inspired writer.
5:3b, 4 The statement regarding the moving of the water by an angel and subsequent miraculous healing is removed. Should this deletion be permitted there would be no sense to verse 7 since that verse presupposes 5:3b, 4. This is an effort to remove the miraculous from the Bible and thus accommodate humanism.
5:16 "and sought to slay him" is omitted. The Scripture teaches us that on many occasions they tried to kill Jesus but by supernatural power were kept from doing so (see John 18:6). He was omnipotent and there was no way they could take him until his hour was come.
6:47 "on me" is left out. The object of faith has been removed here. Everlasting life does not come to those who believe, but to those who believe on Christ. This is doctrinal error of the gravest sort and has been carried over into the NASV and NIV.
7:8 The little word "yet" is dropped and the result is that the Lord appears to lie to his brothers, since he did go up to the feast. There is a world of difference between "I go not up YET" and "I go not up." The sinlessness of Christ is an indispensable doctrine of the Christian faith and lying is sin.
7:53-8:11 The whole story of the woman taken in adultery is omitted. This is one of the most blessed portions of the Word of God. It is intended by God through the inspired writer to amplify what came before in 3:17. The law was given by Moses but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ (1:17).
8:38 The words "my Father" and "your father" are intended to show the difference between his father and their father, who was Satan. By removing the word "my" and "your" there is a deliberate attempt to remove the offence and cater to the false dream of the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man.
8:39 "If ye were Abraham's children" is changed to "if ye are Abraham's children." The Lord intended them to see that they were not Abraham's children at all. The change gives us to see that they were Abraham's children and therefore they ought to act like it. This is pure humanism and contrary to sound doctrine.
9:4 "I must work the works of him that sent me" is changed to "We must work the works of him that sent us." The uniqueness of Christ as the Sent One of the Father is destroyed and he is placed equally with the disciples as sent from God to do the work of God. This is an attack on the Person and Work of Christ and it exalts humanism. Jesus was sent by the Father and the disciples were sent by Jesus, "as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you."
9:35 "the Son of God" is changed to "the Son of man." The thing to be believed in John's gospel is that Jesus is the Son of God (20:31). The change by the minority texts is not warranted.
10:38 "that ye may know, and believe" is changed to "that ye may know, and understand." The union of Christ and the Father within the Godhead is that which we are to believe and rely upon for the certainty of our salvation. To understand the union is beyond human comprehension and if it could be understood, that would still not be the equivalent of salvation.
11:41 "where the dead was laid" is removed. God intends that we should know that this was the very same place where Lazarus was laid. This is an attempt to cloud the evident miracle which followed. (see also 12:2 where "which had been dead" is also removed).
 
Jan 4, 2014
35
1
0
ACTS
Title "of the Holy Apostles" is deleted. To leave us with "ACTS" means nothing. That the Apostles were sanctified (holy) by the Lord Jesus and sent forth as his sent ones is evident from John 17:17- 19. The title in the MAJORITY Text is doctrinally correct.
2:30 "according to the flesh he would raise up Christ" is omitted. It was not just that one of David's descendants would sit upon the throne, but that his greater Son would be raised from the dead in a body of flesh.
2:31 "his soul" is omitted. The body of Christ was in the tomb but his soul went down into Hades (Hell), the place of departed spirits. The teaching of the Bible is that our Lord had a body, soul and spirit.
2:47 "to the church" is left out. Believers are added to the Church which is Christ's body. The Church is an organism, and when persecutors touched the Church they touched Christ (see 9:5).
3:21 "all" is dropped in front of "his holy prophets." God has spoken of the Kingdom age by the mouth of ALL his prophets since the world began. In harmony with this Jesus spoke to the two on the road to Emmaus about himself from "all the prophets" (see Luke 24:27). There are others in the world who claim to be prophets but they do not speak of Jesus and his kingdom, therefore they are not of God.
3:26 "Jesus" is dropped. The specific name leaves no doubt as to whom God raised up from the dead to offer again the kingdom to Israel.
4:24 "thou art God" is changed to "thou art he who." There is no reason to accept MINORITY manuscripts when they want to change "God" to "he who" (see 1 Tim. 3:16).
6:3 The word "Holy" is dropped. When God led the Church to choose deacons he made it clear that they should be controlled by the Holy Spirit. Many churches since have appointed men who had a lot of spirit and were full of enthusiasm, but that is not the same as being full of the "Holy Ghost." Godly living is required of deacons and it is contrary to sound doctrine to leave out "Holy." The Greek word for spirit can refer to man's spirit or God's spirit and lest we should err here God inserted the word "Holy" before spirit.
6:8 "faith" is changed to "grace." The Bible does not teach that Christians are full of grace but rather that they receive grace. The only one who was "full of grace" was our Lord Jesus Christ (see John 1:14). The measure of faith is given to every believer to profit thereby.
7:30 "of the Lord" is omitted. It was not just an angel that appeared to Moses at the burning bush, it was an angel of Jehovah (the Lord). This was an Old Testament appearance of the eternal Son of God in angelic form. In plain words it was the Lord who appeared to Moses (see Exodus 3:1-5).
7:37 "The Lord your" and "him shall ye hear" are omitted. This is contrary to the original quotation as found in Deut. 18:15. In Stephen's sermon the "him shall ye hear" is most important since those who refuse Christ's words will be judged by God.
8:18 "Holy" is dropped. Four times here in four verses the Holy Ghost is mentioned. To drop the word Holy in one out of the four times is to create confusion and doubt concerning the Word of God.
8:37 The whole verse is omitted. This leaves the question of the Ethiopian eunuch unanswered. Philip's answer is correct in that belief must be from the heart prior to baptism. The eunuch's confession of faith is in exact agreement with what is required for salvation as given in John 20:31. Souls have been led to Christ with this verse of Scripture and it is doctrinally unsound to remove it.
9:5,6 "it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him" is all omitted. This passage gives us a picture of Saul resisting the Spirit of God as he was under conviction. Saul's response is to submit to the Lord's direction, having been humbled before the Lord. Without Saul's "what wilt thou have me to do?" there could be no "arise and go."
9:29 "Jesus" is left out. The reason the Jews went about to slay Saul was not because he spake boldly in the name of the Lord, but because he spoke of the Lord Jesus. As we well know in this day of Modernism there is a great difference.
10:6 "he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do" is left out. The would- be correctors of the MAJORITY Text would have us believe that Cornelius was already saved and that it would be good for him to have fellowship with Peter. The truth is that Cornelius was not saved (see 11:14) and that there was something which he had to do. He must believe on the Lord Jesus Christ or he would be lost and go to Hell.
10:30 "fasting" is left out. Fasting, to find the will of God, is a Biblical doctrine. Though it is little used today, especially since we have the completed Word of God, it was evident in the New Testament apostolic times.
10:32 "who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee" is omitted. See above comments under 10:6.
15:24 "Ye must be circumcised and keep the law" is left out. This is exactly the reason why the Jerusalem council was called or convened. There is no doubt that the reply to the Gentile converts made mention of the all important question.
16:31 "Christ" is omitted. The word speaks of the Deity of Christ. It pointed the Philippian jailer to the God he must believe in for salvation.
18:5 "was pressed in the Spirit" is changed to "was engrossed with the word." When Paul was teaching he was always engrossed with the Word. In Corinth Paul had been laying the groundwork at the synagogue concerning what the Scriptures had to say about their Messiah (Christ). When Silas and Timothy came, Paul was under compulsion to show that Jesus was the Christ.
19:10 "Jesus" is left out. For the heathen to hear about the Lord is not enough. They must hear that Jesus is that Lord.
20:28 "of God" is changed to "of the Lord." The word lord is sometimes used of men and sometimes of God. Therefore, the change does not affirm the Deity of Christ. Our Authorized King James Version shows that God purchased the church with his own blood. This establishes the Deity of Christ irrefutably.
21:25 "they observe no such thing, save only that" is omitted. The Gentiles had been told that they did not have to observe the law of Moses nor circumcise their children (see Acts 15:23-29). James was in error when he sought to keep the Jews obedient to the Law after he had written to the Gentiles that they were not under it. The omission here leaves one with the impression that the Law was optional for the Gentiles and possibly preferable. Tampering with God's Word always leaves the door open for doctrinal error.
26:28 "almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian" is changed to "do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?" King Agrippa was "almost persuaded" and he was in possession of the truth concerning salvation. The change would have us believe that he needed more information and perhaps Paul was too quick to expect a decision.

ROMANS
1:16 "of Christ" is omitted. The gospel message is of Christ and centers around his Person and Work. This is an inexcusable attempt to leave Christ out of the good news of salvation.
3:22 "and upon all" is dropped. The doctrine of imputed righteousness is most blessed to the believer. We are clothed in his righteousness and God sees us in Him, therefore it is "upon us."
8:1 "Who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit" is dropped. To the truth that there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ, the Word adds the truth that they are characterized by a walk in the Spirit. It is a Bible doctrine that those who are saved are characterized by a changed life.
11:6 "But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work" is dropped. The first part of the verse shows that grace rules out works. The second part of the verse shows that works rules out grace. It is intended for those who want to intrude works into the established state of grace for good measure (or safekeeping in salvation). This is a very important doctrinal passage in its' entirety.
13:9 "thou shalt not bear false witness" is dropped. Those who wrote the corrupt manuscripts had no trouble with the other commandments shown here. It is obvious that a smiting conscience would not permit them to include this commandment since it directly involved what they were engaged in, bearing false witness about God's Word.
14:9 "and rose" is left out. Many heretics are willing to say that he died and that he lives again, but that he rose (bodily out from among the dead) they reject outright. The bodily resurrection of Christ is a cardinal doctrine of the Christian faith.
 
Jan 4, 2014
35
1
0
1 CORINTHIANS
2:4 "man's wisdom" is changed to "wisdom." Paul did not reject wisdom in his teaching, he rejected MAN'S wisdom.
3:4 "are ye not carnal?" is changed to "are ye not men?" It should be obvious that they were men, but the Bible truth to be taught was that in their divisions they were being controlled by fleshly (carnal) desires and not spiritual desires.
5:7 "for us" is omitted. This affects the vital doctrine of the substitutionary atonement of Christ. If Christ did not die for our sins then we are still under the wrath of God and without hope.
5:12 The little word "also" is dropped. That word indicated that Paul did judge those who were within the church. Those who were outside the church were for God to judge. The responsibility for believers to carry out discipline within the church is a Bible doctrine.
6:4 "set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church" is changed to "do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church?" The Word of God teaches that it is better to suffer wrong than to go to court against another Christian before a lost world. It is better to leave the judgment of the matter to the least Christian than to the greatest worldly judge. The change here completely turns around the way of God and seems to rebuke the church for leaving the matter in the hands of the least Christians.
6:20 "and in your spirit which are God's" is omitted. The body gives us world consciousness and the spirit gives us God consciousness. We are to glorify God in our body by holy living and in our spirit by walking in fellowship with God. Verses 16 and 17 talk about both.
10:9 "Christ" is changed to "Lord." In the Old Testament they tempted Christ and that rock that followed them was Christ (see verse 4). The word Lord can be used of the Father and the Son. Changing to that word here eliminates the pre-existence of Christ.
11:24 "take eat" is omitted along with "is broken." The symbolic bread was broken and given to the disciples with instruction to eat it. It typified his flesh which "is being broken for you" (literal Greek). Though not a bone of him was broken it is true that his flesh was broken in many places before he died on our behalf.
11:29 "unworthily" is dropped. The word gives the picture of a believer treating the Lord's Supper as a common meal, not reverencing the symbolic meaning and spiritual impact it is intended to make upon his soul and spirit. To remove this word is a very great doctrinal error. When you consider that sickness and death was the result of such unworthy participation, it is no light matter.
11:29 "not discerning the Lord's body" is changed to "if he does not judge the body rightly" (NASV). When we partake of the Lord's Supper we are to see through the elements to the Lord's body. As you think of the cost of your redemption there ought to be more holy living. The change brings absolute confusion concerning what body is meant, the Lord's or the believers. It is hallowed ground and the corrupters of God's Word have dared to tread upon it.
15:47 "the Lord" is left out. God is contrasting Adam and Christ. To say that the second man is from heaven is not enough. There have been men from heaven who were angels. Here the man from heaven is the Lord. This is an attempt to do away with the Deity of Christ.
15:49 "we shall also bear the image of the heavenly" is changed to "we should bear the image of the heavenly." The first is a fact based upon the certainty of our eternal salvation in Christ. The second is an exhortation based upon the uncertainty of a salvation by works. The first is sound doctrine, the second is unsound doctrine.
16:22 "Jesus Christ" is omitted. In a phrase with such import as to be accursed it is unthinkable that the test should center around the general term "Lord." The curse of God is upon those who do not love the Lord Jesus Christ. When his person and work is refused there is nothing to look for but wrath.

2 CORINTHIANS
4:4 "unto them" is omitted. The devil does not have power to keep the light of the gospel of Christ from shining, but he does have power to blind men lest it shine "unto them."
5:17 "all things" is left out. The believer is brought into vital union with Christ so that it is declared that he is in Christ. In the sight of God "old things" of the sinful nature are passed away. It only remains for those old things to be unwound, like Lazarus' graveclothes, in his daily life. In the sight of God "all things" are become new though they make their appearance in the life of the believer as he grows in grace and knowledge. To deny that "all things" are become new is to deny the finished work of Christ whereby we are made accepted in the beloved.
12:11 "in glorying" is dropped. The Corinthians had compelled Paul to talk about his experiences with the Lord. He did not want to brag about his spirituality. He felt that he had become foolish in boasting or glorying. The change would have Paul saying, "I have made a fool of myself." That is not what we are to understand.

GALATIANS
3:1 "that ye should not obey the truth" is omitted. The Galatians had been bewitched by the Jewish legalizers who had put them under the Law to keep saved. Paul tells them that in so doing they were not obeying the truth. The truth was that they were saved by grace and that all spiritual blessings were theirs in Christ. To turn from that is to be in error.
3:17 "in Christ" is dropped. Paul is talking about the covenant with Abraham through his seed which was Christ. The law was added later and did not affect the covenant of promise to those who would be saved by believing as Abraham did. God promised Abraham that through his seed (singular) all the families of the earth would be blessed. That was a covenant confirmed before of God "in Christ."
4:7 "an heir of God through Christ" is changed to "an heir through God." The inheritance is to the children of God through the mediatorship of Christ. We are not heirs of God through God, but through Christ. The change here is intended to destroy the reliance upon the Lord Jesus Christ who said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

EPHESIANS
1:1 "at Ephesus" is left out. It is hard to conceive that the Spirit of God addressed an epistle and then lost the address.
3:9 "by Jesus Christ" is removed. It is a Bible doctrine that all things were created by Jesus Christ and without him was not anything made that was made. This change detracts from the Deity of Christ which is made evident by the fact that ALL THINGS were created by Him.
5:30 "of his flesh, and of his bones" is left out. The Bible teaching is that the believer is vitally conjoined to Christ for a new life and walk in the Spirit. We are "quickened together with Christ," "raised up together," and "seated together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." God likens this to the marriage relationship where two people become one flesh.
6:10 "my brethren" is dropped. These words make it very clear that Paul's instructions concerning Christian living are for Christians who by the new birth have become Paul's "brethren." There is a great danger that unsaved people might get the impression that by imitating the things that Christians do they can become Christians.

PHILIPPIANS
4:13 "Christ" is changed to "him." It is precious to the believer to know that Christ will give him strength for spiritual living. Christ himself said, "without me ye can do nothing" (John 15:5). The word "him" is quite indefinite and can be misconstrued by Modernists to include the "him" of any religious group believing in a Supreme Being.

COLOSSIANS
1:2 "and the Lord Jesus Christ" is omitted. Along with the Father he is the source of grace and peace.
1:14 "through his blood" is left out. Redemption and forgiveness of sins is through the direct agency of his shed blood. Many Modernists today can work around the words "redemption" and "forgiveness of sins," but they cannot work around the shed blood. Therefore they must deny it and be in direct opposition to it.
2:11 "of the sins" is removed. What is left to work with brings the NIV to translate "In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of your sinful nature." It is an established Bible doctrine that by the circumcision of our heart which the Lord made, we are able to overcome the sins of our flesh. But the putting off of our sinful nature will not take place until we are changed in the Rapture. Errors like this can only occur as the group of translators persist in following the MINORITY Text.
2:18 "those things which he has not seen" is made to read "those things which he has seen." Men were vainly attempting to worship angels as emanations from God in a step-ladder effort to reach God. Paul exhorted them to hold fast to the Head (our God-man Christ Jesus) who proceeded forth and came from God (himself being of the Trinity) that he might bring us to God. Paul says they DID NOT see them, heretics say THEY HAVE.
 
Jan 4, 2014
35
1
0
1 THESSALONIANS
1:1 "from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ" is dropped. Are we to think that grace and peace is bestowed by Paul? No, that is not within his power. They have their source in the Father and the Son.
5:27 "holy" is dropped from before "brethren." Paul had other brethren according to the flesh who were not saved (Rom. 9:1-3; 10:1). These were sanctified and preserved brethren and they were "holy" because they were accepted in the beloved.


1 TIMOTHY
3:3 "not greedy of filthy lucre" is omitted. The phrase has to do with obtaining earthly gain through disgraceful means. This happens everyday within professing Christendom. It is inspired of God and belongs in the text.
3:16 "God was manifest" is changed to "He was manifest." The reference is to Christ manifest in the flesh, etc. The MAJORITY Text tells us that this Christ was God. There are 252 copies of Paul's Epistles which have "God" and only 2 copies which have "he." The MINORITY Text leaves us in doubt as to who "he" is. The doctrine of the Deity of Christ is greatly harmed here by the corrupt text.
4:12 "in spirit" is left out. To be an example of the believer it is necessary to have a spiritual man guided by the indwelling Holy Spirit.
5:16 "if any man" is omitted. It is unthinkable that the head of the house should be removed here from the responsibility to provide for widows.
6:5 "from such withdraw thyself" is dropped. The Bible doctrine of separation is affected by this corruption. We are to withdraw from teachers who are destitute of the truth.
6:19 "eternal life" is changed to "that which is truly life." The first talks about the length of life, the second talks about the quality of life. You cannot have the first without being saved. You can have the second but still be lost, depending on what you think is "truly life."

2 TIMOTHY
1:11 "of the Gentiles" is omitted. That Paul was appointed to teach the gospel to the Gentiles is indisputable (see Gal. 2:7-9).

HEBREWS
1:3 "When he had by himself purged our sins" is changed to "when he had made purification of sins." The omission of the word "our" leaves us to wonder whose sins were purged, his own or others. It is not plain and therefore the substitutionary atonement of Christ is affected by the change. With the words "by himself" the Holy Spirit wanted us to see that the atonement for our sins was accomplished by Christ alone. The damage to this verse is awesome in its' consequences.
3:1 "Christ" is omitted. Our High Priest must be anointed of God to that office and the word Christ means the Messiah or Anointed one of God.
10:34 "in heaven" is left out. Those who had lost all their earthly goods certainly had no enduring substance here, but in heaven was their treasure and reward.

JAMES
2:20 "faith without works is dead" has been changed to "faith without works is useless." There is a great difference between dead faith and useless (or idle) faith. The first indicates that no faith exists and the person is lost. The second implies that faith exists but it is not being used. Again we see humanism and the false idea of a little divinity in each one which only needs to be fanned into a flame. The change promotes false doctrine.
4:4 "ye adulterers" is dropped from the text. No reason to excuse the men from the scathing denunciation of God's Word.
4:14 "It is even a vapour" is changed to "Ye are just a vapour." In describing the length of our life, God tells us it will pass quickly like a vapour. The change would have US OURSELVES to exist as a little steam. There is a leaning here toward annihilationism.
5:16 "Confess your faults" becomes "confess your sins." In a context where God talks about sin in relationship to sickness, he moves on to talk about faults (a side-slip or deviation). The change "faults" to "sins" leads to the priesthood and the confession box which is contrary to all of Scripture.

1 PETER
1:22 "through the Spirit" is removed. The Bible teaches that it is through the agency of the Holy Spirit that men are brought to believe in Christ. In John 16:8,9 he convicts the world (all men) and draws them to faith in Christ.
1:23 "for ever" is dropped and thereby the preservation of the Word of God is called into question. The agency here of the new birth is the Word of God, which is eternal. Our new birth therefore is as eternal as the Word which originated it.
2:2 The phrase "unto salvation" is added by Westcott and Hort to "that ye may grow thereby." This puts a question mark over the certainty of our present salvation. It makes salvation a process rather than an accomplished fact. The doctrine of eternal security is denied by the new exhortation to grow UNTO SALVATION.
3:18 "suffered for sins" is changed to "died for sins." The context has Christians suffering for well doing and they are exhorted to keep on because Christ also has suffered for us. It is a Bible teaching that Christ not only died for our sins, but that he suffered for our sins (see Isaiah 53:5-7).
3:18 "quickened by the Spirit" is changed to "quickened in the spirit." The correct rendering attributes the resurrection of Christ to the Holy Spirit. This completes the truth that all three persons of the Trinity were involved in the resurrection of Christ (see John 2:19; Rom. 8:11).
4:1 "for us" is left out. Christ suffered for us, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God.
5:2 "taking the oversight thereof" is omitted. To watch over the flock of God with authority is a clear teaching of the Word.
5:12 "wherein ye stand" is changed to "wherein stand." By the removal of the word "ye" there is a change from our standing in grace to an exhortation to stay there standing. The blessing of a perfected standing in grace is thereby removed.

2 PETER
2:17 The words "for ever" are dropped. Peter, in the word concerning false teachers, states that their darkness is to last forever. The change leaves us with no definite word as to their end.
2:18 "those that were clean escaped" is changed to "those that are scarcely escaping." The change from past tense to present tense moves us from a completed salvation to a hope-so salvation. Those who are saved are in possession of eternal life (see John 5:24).
2:20 "the Lord and Saviour" becomes "our Lord and Saviour." The false teachers had escaped some of the world's worst sins by following the teachings of "the Lord" but they had never come to know him as "our Lord" is known to real Christians. They were not saved and then lost, but never saved at all.
3:2 "us the apostles" is changed to "your apostles." The Church is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:20) and there are no apostles and prophets today nor is there any such thing as an apostolic succession. The phrase "your apostles" indicates that the people he was writing to had special apostles designated for them and lends support to the continuance of a so-called "Apostolic Succession."

1 JOHN
1:7 "Christ" is dropped. This word brings the cleansing blood into relationship with our great anointed High Priest who ever liveth to make intercession for us. Many cults believe that Jesus (as man) died for the original sin of Adam and that Christ (as a spirit) rose without the body. John would have us know that the one who died and the one who arose are the same.
3:5 "our" is removed from before "sins." Once again the question of whose sins were taken away is raised. There have been sins committed by angels and men. The "our sins" refers the atonement to those of men. (see my comments under Hebrews 1;3).
3:14 "his brother" is removed. The teaching of the Word is that a true Christian will love his brother in Christ. If a man does not love a true Christian, then it is evident that he is still lost and abides in death. The test of spiritual life is not that we love, but that we love the brethren (see John 13:34,35).
4:19 "We love him" is changed to "We love." The object of God's love is us, and the object of our love is him. Christians are not just people who love, but people who love God because of his grace. The very next verse deals with the professor who says he loves God but is a liar. Lost people may love, but saved people love God.
5:7 The whole verse bearing testimony to the Triune God is discarded. There are at least 20 Greek manuscripts which have this verse in. It is also seen in the writings of the church fathers and lectionaries. It directly affects the Bible doctrine of the Trinity.

REVELATION
5:10 "kings and priests" is changed to "a kingdom of priests." The 24 elders are representative of all the redeemed who in Christ are constituted kings and priests. A kingdom of priests smells of Nicolaitanism (the rule of the clergy over the laity) and the priesthood for a select few as in the Roman Catholic Church. (The same change is seen in 1:6)
8:13 "an angel" is changed to "an eagle." This is most amusing and shows how captive the Revisers are to their corrupt text. In a setting replete with angels we are told about a talking eagle who pronounces three more "Woes" to the inhabiters of the earth.
14:5 "before the throne of God" is dropped. This phrase speaks of the perfect standing that the saved have in Christ. They are without fault before God because they are, like the church, "accepted in the beloved" (Eph. 1:6).
20:9 "from God" is dropped. At the end of the Kingdom Age the enemies of God are destroyed by fire "from God out of heaven." God is the one who will destroy all enemies and create a new heaven and a new earth.
20:12 "before God" is changed to "before the throne." The dead will be raised, not to stand before an impersonal throne, but to stand before "the God" [literal]. Many would like to change the personal God into some kind of Divine Mind or Supreme Being.
 

Nick01

Senior Member
Jul 15, 2013
1,272
26
48
I am so thankful you asked me this question, The LORD has just given me the liberty to do this

Here is a list i compiled a while ago, of the major doctrines affected by the changes of modern bibles, This list compasses MOST not ALL of the modern translations as i simply lost all hope of finding a modern translation that is without error.
You'll forgive me if I don't believe you are Paul L Freeman, whose work you appear to be copy-pasting as your own. Also, you'll also forgive me if I point out that I didn't ask you anything. However, let's proceed as if I had directed the question to you.

But I wouldn't care if you did write it, I'm simply not going to respond to several pages worth of copy paste. Most of the examples are trivial are trivial, some of them simply false (for instance, the NIV, Holman, and I'm sure other modern translations all include Son of God in Mark 1:1, simply with a footnote), and the only thing any of them prove is that the KJV and modern translations work from different source texts. It certainly doesn't prove the KJV right and everything else wrong. Far from it - the question, from the evidence you have provided, is completely open as to whether it is the modern translations, or in fact the KJV, are corrupted, if that is the word you wish to use. In fact, it's quite easy to prove for several of the most important differences that the text was added IN to the texts the KJV is translated from, rather than taken AWAY from the modern translations.

If you wish to proceed, I suggest you pick four of the most 'heinous' 'corruptions' you can from that list, and I will show you why they are nothing of the sort. I will even do it in detail, and I promise you I won't copy text I found on the internet from at least forty years ago.