The Error of KJV-Onlyism

[Nehemiah6]

PART II
FAKE NEWS #4

They still insist that (following James’ royal edict!) there is only one valid English Bible, despite an overwhelming amount of proof to the contrary. The excuse is that God inspired the KJV translators, even though the TRUTH is that they were forced by King James to follow the his political edict. Those people who did not accept the political edict but stayed true to their Christian faith were forced to flee for their lives. (Read that sentence again!)

Regarding the Pilgrims that has already been addressed.
1. Since the Church of England already had made the King of England the head of the church (which is not biblical) James I was simply doing what he was supposed to do. He called the KJB "The Authorized Version. Appointed to be read in churches" and that was actually a good thing.
2. These remarks have nothing to do with the excellency of the KJB, which is established on other grounds. And of which you know very little.
3. Only a very small minority of Christians believe that the KJB is "inspired" (as were the original autographs). But that does not mean that God's hand was NOT over this translation.
4. James I DID NOT force the translators to do anything. "...for the very Historical truth is, that upon the importunate petitions of the Puritans, at his Majesty's coming to this Crown, the Conference at Hampton Court having been appointed for hearing their complaints: when by force of reason they were put from all other grounds, they had recourse at the last, to this shift, that they could not with good conscience subscribe to the Communion book, since it maintained the Bible as it was there translated, which was as they said, a most corrupted translation. And although this was judged to be but a very poor and empty shift; yet even hereupon did his Majesty begin to bethink himself of the good that might ensue by a new translation, and presently after gave order for this Translation which is now presented unto thee. Thus much to satisfy our scrupulous [Puritan] Brethren."

FAKE NEWS #5

It completely baffles me that some people still believe that the King James translation is still the only valid translation, ignoring the fact that it was developed solely to establish James as the head of the Church of England and the bastion of Christian truth, rather than seeing it for what it actually was: an instrument of political tyranny. They falsely believe that there was only one time in history that God gave translators perfect understanding (REALLY!), and that every other translation created before or since cannot be valid. To me, that completely defies logic and reason. God is in control!

1. These remarks reveal your total ignorance of the reasons for using the KJB exclusively. Apart from the Reformation Bibles, it is THE ONLY English translation which is squarely based on the TRADITIONAL Hebrew and Greek printed texts, which have been well-established as representing the original manuscripts. The handful of corrupt manuscripts supporting the critical texts represent Gnostic perversions.
2. You keep FALSELY speaking about "political tyranny" which had nothing to do with this translation. The Puritans were not politicians, and James was making sure that their demands were satisfied.
3. The other translators were happy to create a new translation since they also had another goal in mind -- to produce an EXCEPTIONAL translation -- "But it is high time to leave them, and to show in brief what we proposed to ourselves, and what course we held in this our perusal and survey of the Bible. Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one... but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavor, that our mark." -- The Translators to the Reader.

THIS IS SIMPLY REPEATING WHAT YOU HAVE FALSELY STATED ( AND BEEN REFUTED)

Even though a) there has been significant change in the English language in 400 years, b) there have been new, important source documents discovered, c) there have been great advances in Biblical scholarship and translation techniques, etc., people still believe the King James edict that his politically-motivated translation is the actual word of God. To me, that is both astonishing and sad!

CONCLUDING REMARKS

I will not continue to discuss this matter with people who falsely believe that God created the King James translation, thereby denying that it actually is not THE BIBLE, but a translation created specifically to glorify James as the head of the Church of England. IT IS A POLITICAL CREATION, AND BY NO MEANS A PERFECT TRANSLATION.

Here is a brand new poster who is both ignorant and arrogant about the matter. He has come here to bash the KJB and has been totally refuted in his false allegations. Yes, James, you would better off to now simply shut up.

 

[EszterBH]

After reading what this discussion is about, Im so happy Im not a native English speaker, or live in a English speaking country.

 

[Nehemiah6]

After reading what this discussion is about, Im so happy Im not a native English speaker, or live in a English speaking country.

Since English is now the language of the world, this discussion is relevant to all. Do you know which texts support your bible?

 

[EszterBH]

Since English is now the language of the world, this discussion is relevant to all. Do you know which texts support your bible?

But this discussion has no place in my church for example. I doubt even my pastor knows what is the KJV haha.

And what do you mean by that question?

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

The Committee on Bible Translation (CBT), the team of translators responsible for the New International Version (NIV) Bible, is composed of world-class scholars and leaders in their respective fields. Their goal is to accurately translate the Word of God in a way that enables readers and listeners to hear the Bible as it was originally written, and understand the Bible as it was originally intended...footnotes are intended to help the reader understand that certain perceived differences in the text are due to improved biblical scholarship.

Precious brother Johann, I've never heard God Say "footnotes" are "Inspired Of
God," but: "All Scripture Is Given By Inspiration Of God..." (2 Timothy 3:16 AV).

Thus I would have serious doubts about this, Because God's
Pure/Preserved Word States, For the end times we are in, things are
not "getting better with so-called improved biblical scholarship", but:

1) In Biblical Fact, men are:

​

"Ever learning, and never able to come to the​

knowledge of The Truth." (2 Timothy 3:7 AV)​

+​

"But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse,​

deceiving, and being deceived." (2 Timothy 3:13 AV)​

​

2) Did you know? Rupert Murdoch is owner of News Corp, And:

"The Church of England (CoE) divested millions in stocks for News Corp​

due to the pornography scandals because of ethical considerations and​

alignment with their values." (ask.ai)​

When are American NIV churches going to wake up and stop buying NIV​

Bibles and "supporting evil of men" like [$1 of every sale of NIV to] Rupert​

Murdock, owner of News Corp, who is owner of the 'parent' company, Harper​

Collins, that owns Zondervan Publisher of NIV?​

​

or is "supporting pornography" OK with God?​

Can Rupert Murdoch be a believer?:​

3) God Does Say: "Be ye not unequally yoked with Unbelievers", Correct?

Hope and pray this helps...May God Very Richly Encourage and Edify you,
precious brother Johann.

Amen.

 

[jamessb]

Uh, there are no copyrights on the KJV outside of the UK.
Even in the UK, the government does not profit from the sales, but they are merely out to protect how the KJV is printed and quoted involving the profit by others. But outside the UK, you are basically free to do with the King James Bible as you wish because it is in the public domain. In Modern Bibles, they get monetary kickbacks as a result of the copyrights. This is not the case with the KJV. So yes, they are peddling the Word of God according to the Modern Bible's wrong alteration of 2 Corinthians 2:17.



For the NIV: You are not reading their policy correctly.

View attachment 260790

Source:
https://www.zondervan.com/about-us/permissions/



The first 500 verses of the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible contain approximately 14,565 words[3].

Sources
[1] Changes to the KJV since 1611: An Illustration https://bible.org/article/changes-kjv-1611an-illustration
[2] KJV, Beautiful Word Bible: 500 Full-Color Illustrated Verses https://faithgateway.com/products/kjv-beautiful-word-bible-ebook-500-full-color-illustrated-verses
[3] POPULAR BIBLE WORDS https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Popular-Bible-Words.php
[4] NIV, Beautiful Word Bible, Hardcover: 500 Full-Color Illustrated Verses https://episcopalshoppe.com/niv-beautiful-word-bible-hardcover-500-full-color-illustrated-verses/
[5] Bible verses including the word or number 500 or more https://www.thelastdialogue.org/article/bible-verses-including-the-word-or-number-500-or-more/

By Perplexity at https://www.perplexity.ai/search/At-what-verse-h69jytZCROeAjxL2NTq0mA

The average person reads about 200 to 300 words per minute. Therefore, it would take approximately 48 to 72 minutes to read 14,565 words[1].

Sources
[1] How Long Does It Take to Record an Audiobook? Number Of Hours Of Work - Charles Bradley https://www.thecharlesbradley.com/how-long-does-it-take-to-record-an-audiobook/
[2] Philosophies of Men Mingled With Scripture: August 2011 http://philosophiesofmen.blogspot.com/2011/08/?m=1
[3] The 66 Minute Bible - Lulu https://www.lulu.com/shop/victor-robert-farrell/the-66-minute-bible/paperback/product-1py4v27k.html
[4] How Long It Takes to Record an Audiobook https://www.backstage.com/magazine/article/how-to-record-an-audiobook-guide-74974/
[5] POPULAR BIBLE WORDS https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Popular-Bible-Words.php

By Perplexity at https://www.perplexity.ai/search/At-what-verse-h69jytZCROeAjxL2NTq0mA

The NIV has fewer words than the KJV. If you lived on planet Earth for any amount of time, you would know that generally, people have no trouble listening to an audiobook for a two-hour road trip. So yes, this would include listening to the Bible. So your claim that people would not listen beyond 500 verses (which is beyond Genesis 18:24) would be untrue.



Try looking at an online Christian book store sometime and look at the way they market those Bibles. Surely new and exciting discoveries of Textual Criticism will excite a person to want to get the next version of the ESV, NIV, etcetera. For the NIV, they made one time a change that was for the worse and not for the better just because they discovered a manuscript. They turn off their brains and or hearts to follow what a manuscript says even if it does not make any sense. The NIV (1984) used to say "Filled with compassion, " in context to healing the leper, but now the NIV says that Jesus was indignant (angry) when He healed the leper (See Mark 1:41). Nothing in the context shows that Jesus would justify Jesus doing such a thing. It's a change for the worse and not for the better. But this is a standard theme in Modern Bibles that you all ignore. You shut off all logic because of some new exciting discovery in some cave somewhere.

View attachment 260793

You are wrong.

Next...

 

[jamessb]

Would you say this is correct-or incorrect brother?

The Committee on Bible Translation (CBT), the team of translators responsible for the New International Version (NIV) Bible, is composed of world-class scholars and leaders in their respective fields. Their goal is to accurately translate the Word of God in a way that enables readers and listeners to hear the Bible as it was originally written, and understand the Bible as it was originally intended.

From the beginning, the translators have been committed to getting the words right. That means being true to the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic of the Bible while at the same time capturing the Bible’s original meaning in natural, everyday English. Each NIV translator believes that the Bible is God’s inspired Word. That conviction, along with their years of studying biblical languages, has helped them capture the depth of meaning in the Bible in a way that is accurate, clear, and trustworthy.

When comparing the NIV with the King James Version (KJV), it would seem that there are some verses “missing” in the NIV (and other trusted translations such as the CEV, CSB, ESV, GNB, HCSB, NET, NLT, etc.). Actually, that is not the case. In 1611, the translators of the KJV used the best resources available to them at that time. For their day, the King James translation was a monumental achievement. However, one of its shortcomings is that the KJV translation committee of 50 scholars drew heavily on William Tyndale’s New Testament. As much as 80% of Tyndale’s translation is reused in the King James version. Tyndale used several sources in his translation of the Old and New Testaments. For the New Testament, he referred to the third edition (1522) of Desiderius Erasmus’s Greek New Testament, often referred to as the Textus Receptus (“Received Text”).

In the years since 1611, many older manuscripts have been discovered and carefully evaluated by scholars. Their conclusion is that the older manuscripts are more reliable. This has given modern translators unprecedented access to manuscripts much closer in time to the original documents. Therefore, translations such as the NIV actually reflect better Bible scholarship than was available in 1611 when the KJV was published.

The verses or phrases that appeared in the KJV, but have been “omitted” in most trusted translations today, are not found in the oldest and most reliable manuscripts. Modern translators include or reference them in footnotes. These footnotes are intended to help the reader understand that certain perceived differences in the text are due to improved biblical scholarship. The treatment of these verses has not changed recently and reflects a consensus among the majority of Bible scholars.

It is important and comforting to note that no doctrines of the Christian faith are affected by differences between the KJV and translations such as the NIV that follow more reliable sources.

Here is a illustrated video we created to better explain:



Additionally, here’s an explanation from Dr. Bill Mounce, who is a member of the Committee on Bible Translation, which oversees the NIV Bible translation.

https://www.biblica.com/resources/bible-faqs/why-does-the-niv-bible-omit-or-have-missing-verses/#:~:text=have missing verses?-,Why does the NIV Bible omit or have missing verses?,-The Committee on

Thanks for posting this information!

 

[Johann]

Precious brother Johann, I've never heard God Say "footnotes" are "Inspired Of
God," but: "All Scripture Is Given By Inspiration Of God..." (2 Timothy 3:16 AV).

Thus I would have serious doubts about this, Because God's
Pure/Preserved Word States, For the end times we are in, things are
not "getting better with so-called improved biblical scholarship", but:

1) In Biblical Fact, men are:

​

"Ever learning, and never able to come to the​

knowledge of The Truth." (2 Timothy 3:7 AV)​

+​

"But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse,​

deceiving, and being deceived." (2 Timothy 3:13 AV)​

​

2) Did you know? Rupert Murdoch is owner of News Corp, And:

"The Church of England (CoE) divested millions in stocks for News Corp​

due to the pornography scandals because of ethical considerations and​

alignment with their values." (ask.ai)​

When are American NIV churches going to wake up and stop buying NIV​

Bibles and "supporting evil of men" like [$1 of every sale of NIV to] Rupert​

Murdock, owner of News Corp, who is owner of the 'parent' company, Harper​

Collins, that owns Zondervan Publisher of NIV?​

​

or is "supporting pornography" OK with God?​

Can Rupert Murdoch be a believer?:​

3) God Does Say: "Be ye not unequally yoked with Unbelievers", Correct?

Hope and pray this helps...May God Very Richly Encourage and Edify you,
precious brother Johann.

Amen.

Thank you @GRACE_ambassador-The KJV is my primary Bible-but love the Koine Greek and Hebrew.

And no-wasn't aware of Rupert Murdoch-always learning something.
Shalom
J.

 

[Johann]

Thanks for posting this information!

Although I posted the information-I don't endorse it brother.
J.

 

[jamessb]

Precious brother Johann, I've never heard God Say "footnotes" are "Inspired Of
God," but: "All Scripture Is Given By Inspiration Of God..." (2 Timothy 3:16 AV).

Thus I would have serious doubts about this, Because God's
Pure/Preserved Word States, For the end times we are in, things are
not "getting better with so-called improved biblical scholarship", but:

1) In Biblical Fact, men are:

​

"Ever learning, and never able to come to the​

knowledge of The Truth." (2 Timothy 3:7 AV)​

+​

"But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse,​

deceiving, and being deceived." (2 Timothy 3:13 AV)​

​

2) Did you know? Rupert Murdoch is owner of News Corp, And:

"The Church of England (CoE) divested millions in stocks for News Corp​

due to the pornography scandals because of ethical considerations and​

alignment with their values." (ask.ai)​

When are American NIV churches going to wake up and stop buying NIV​

Bibles and "supporting evil of men" like [$1 of every sale of NIV to] Rupert​

Murdock, owner of News Corp, who is owner of the 'parent' company, Harper​

Collins, that owns Zondervan Publisher of NIV?​

​

or is "supporting pornography" OK with God?​

Can Rupert Murdoch be a believer?:​

3) God Does Say: "Be ye not unequally yoked with Unbelievers", Correct?

Hope and pray this helps...May God Very Richly Encourage and Edify you,
precious brother Johann.

Amen.

1) you wrote "Precious brother Johann, I've never heard God Say "footnotes" are "Inspired Of
God," but: "All Scripture Is Given By Inspiration Of God..." (2 Timothy 3:16 AV)

-> Please tell me when you have heard from God directly!!! <-

2) Where did you read in God's Pure/Preserved Word States, For the end times we are in, things are
not "getting better with so-called improved biblical scholarship"? Chapter and verse please!

3) You wrote "In Biblical Fact, men are:

​

"Ever learning, and never able to come to the​

knowledge of The Truth." (2 Timothy 3:7 AV)​

So according to you, nobody is capable of coming to a knowledge of the truth? So why did Jesus say in John 14:6,“ I am the way and the truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through me. "

4) There are no such entities as "American NIV churches".

Rupert Murdoch is a saint compared to King James. The latter was a ruthless, cruel despot who caused many to flee his realm to escape being killed. According to you, nobody should read the King James Bible, since it was commissioned by a murderous tyrant, correct?

5) Jesus said in Matthew 11:28-30, "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” Should He have said "Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, but not if you're an unbeliever or a sinner or some other kind of undesirable"? God can use whomever He wants, including a donkey(!) to further His kingdom.

On this last point, Jesus associated many, many times with the worst elements of society. Please read what He said in John 12:47...

“If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world." John 12:47

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Would you say this is correct-or incorrect brother?

The Committee on Bible Translation (CBT), the team of translators responsible for the New International Version (NIV) Bible, is composed of world-class scholars and leaders in their respective fields. Their goal is to accurately translate the Word of God in a way that enables readers and listeners to hear the Bible as it was originally written, and understand the Bible as it was originally intended.

From the beginning, the translators have been committed to getting the words right. That means being true to the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic of the Bible while at the same time capturing the Bible’s original meaning in natural, everyday English. Each NIV translator believes that the Bible is God’s inspired Word. That conviction, along with their years of studying biblical languages, has helped them capture the depth of meaning in the Bible in a way that is accurate, clear, and trustworthy.

When comparing the NIV with the King James Version (KJV), it would seem that there are some verses “missing” in the NIV (and other trusted translations such as the CEV, CSB, ESV, GNB, HCSB, NET, NLT, etc.). Actually, that is not the case. In 1611, the translators of the KJV used the best resources available to them at that time. For their day, the King James translation was a monumental achievement. However, one of its shortcomings is that the KJV translation committee of 50 scholars drew heavily on William Tyndale’s New Testament. As much as 80% of Tyndale’s translation is reused in the King James version. Tyndale used several sources in his translation of the Old and New Testaments. For the New Testament, he referred to the third edition (1522) of Desiderius Erasmus’s Greek New Testament, often referred to as the Textus Receptus (“Received Text”).

In the years since 1611, many older manuscripts have been discovered and carefully evaluated by scholars. Their conclusion is that the older manuscripts are more reliable. This has given modern translators unprecedented access to manuscripts much closer in time to the original documents. Therefore, translations such as the NIV actually reflect better Bible scholarship than was available in 1611 when the KJV was published.

The verses or phrases that appeared in the KJV, but have been “omitted” in most trusted translations today, are not found in the oldest and most reliable manuscripts. Modern translators include or reference them in footnotes. These footnotes are intended to help the reader understand that certain perceived differences in the text are due to improved biblical scholarship. The treatment of these verses has not changed recently and reflects a consensus among the majority of Bible scholars.

It is important and comforting to note that no doctrines of the Christian faith are affected by differences between the KJV and translations such as the NIV that follow more reliable sources.

Here is a illustrated video we created to better explain:



Additionally, here’s an explanation from Dr. Bill Mounce, who is a member of the Committee on Bible Translation, which oversees the NIV Bible translation.

https://www.biblica.com/resources/bible-faqs/why-does-the-niv-bible-omit-or-have-missing-verses/#:~:text=have missing verses?-,Why does the NIV Bible omit or have missing verses?,-The Committee on

As you know, this info is simply not true, brother.

The Textus Receptus, also known as the Received Text, is a series of Byzantine-based Greek texts of the New Testament printed between 1500 and 1900. It was established on the Byzantine text-type, also called the Majority Text, which represents over 90% of the 5,800+ Greek manuscripts of the New Testament still in existence today[2]. The Textus Receptus served as the translation base for the King James Version, the Spanish Reina-Valera translation, and other significant translations[1].

Sources
[1] Textus Receptus - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textus_Receptus
[2] What is the Textus Receptus? - Textus Receptus Bibles https://textusreceptusbibles.com/What_is_the_Textus_Receptus
[3] What is the Textus Receptus? https://www.gotquestions.org/Textus-Receptus.html
[4] The Textus Receptus https://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/TR.html
[5] History - Textus Receptus Bibles https://textusreceptusbibles.com/History

By Perplexity at https://www.perplexity.ai/search/Textus-Receptus-was-4sW_97NOQxuNVUd9_rGJng

Westcott and Hort came up with Lucian Recension Theory without a shred of evidence.

The Lucian Recension theory suggests that the Byzantine text-type, on which the Textus Receptus is based, was the result of a recension or revision of the text attributed to Lucian of Antioch in the 4th century. This theory is not universally accepted and is a topic of debate among scholars.

But Modern scholars believe the texts underlying the KJV were additions to the Bible (even though they might not hold to Westcott and Hort’s theory). They also believe this without any good evidence, either.

 

[jamessb]

As you know, this info is simply not true, brother.

The Textus Receptus, also known as the Received Text, is a series of Byzantine-based Greek texts of the New Testament printed between 1500 and 1900. It was established on the Byzantine text-type, also called the Majority Text, which represents over 90% of the 5,800+ Greek manuscripts of the New Testament still in existence today[2]. The Textus Receptus served as the translation base for the King James Version, the Spanish Reina-Valera translation, and other significant translations[1].

Sources
[1] Textus Receptus - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textus_Receptus
[2] What is the Textus Receptus? - Textus Receptus Bibles https://textusreceptusbibles.com/What_is_the_Textus_Receptus
[3] What is the Textus Receptus? https://www.gotquestions.org/Textus-Receptus.html
[4] The Textus Receptus https://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/TR.html
[5] History - Textus Receptus Bibles https://textusreceptusbibles.com/History

By Perplexity at https://www.perplexity.ai/search/Textus-Receptus-was-4sW_97NOQxuNVUd9_rGJng

Westcott and Hort came up with Lucian Recension Theory without a shred of evidence.

The Lucian Recension theory suggests that the Byzantine text-type, on which the Textus Receptus is based, was the result of a recension or revision of the text attributed to Lucian of Antioch in the 4th century. This theory is not universally accepted and is a topic of debate among scholars.

But Modern scholars believe the texts underlying the KJV were additions to the Bible (even though they might not hold to Westcott and Hort’s theory). They also believe this without any good evidence, either.

Correction: the information that Johann posted is absolutely true. What specific reason to you have to distrust it? Are you claiming that the creators of the NIV translation liars?

 

[jamessb]

Would you say this is correct-or incorrect brother?

The Committee on Bible Translation (CBT), the team of translators responsible for the New International Version (NIV) Bible, is composed of world-class scholars and leaders in their respective fields. Their goal is to accurately translate the Word of God in a way that enables readers and listeners to hear the Bible as it was originally written, and understand the Bible as it was originally intended.

From the beginning, the translators have been committed to getting the words right. That means being true to the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic of the Bible while at the same time capturing the Bible’s original meaning in natural, everyday English. Each NIV translator believes that the Bible is God’s inspired Word. That conviction, along with their years of studying biblical languages, has helped them capture the depth of meaning in the Bible in a way that is accurate, clear, and trustworthy.

When comparing the NIV with the King James Version (KJV), it would seem that there are some verses “missing” in the NIV (and other trusted translations such as the CEV, CSB, ESV, GNB, HCSB, NET, NLT, etc.). Actually, that is not the case. In 1611, the translators of the KJV used the best resources available to them at that time. For their day, the King James translation was a monumental achievement. However, one of its shortcomings is that the KJV translation committee of 50 scholars drew heavily on William Tyndale’s New Testament. As much as 80% of Tyndale’s translation is reused in the King James version. Tyndale used several sources in his translation of the Old and New Testaments. For the New Testament, he referred to the third edition (1522) of Desiderius Erasmus’s Greek New Testament, often referred to as the Textus Receptus (“Received Text”).

In the years since 1611, many older manuscripts have been discovered and carefully evaluated by scholars. Their conclusion is that the older manuscripts are more reliable. This has given modern translators unprecedented access to manuscripts much closer in time to the original documents. Therefore, translations such as the NIV actually reflect better Bible scholarship than was available in 1611 when the KJV was published.

The verses or phrases that appeared in the KJV, but have been “omitted” in most trusted translations today, are not found in the oldest and most reliable manuscripts. Modern translators include or reference them in footnotes. These footnotes are intended to help the reader understand that certain perceived differences in the text are due to improved biblical scholarship. The treatment of these verses has not changed recently and reflects a consensus among the majority of Bible scholars.

It is important and comforting to note that no doctrines of the Christian faith are affected by differences between the KJV and translations such as the NIV that follow more reliable sources.

Here is a illustrated video we created to better explain:



Additionally, here’s an explanation from Dr. Bill Mounce, who is a member of the Committee on Bible Translation, which oversees the NIV Bible translation.

https://www.biblica.com/resources/bible-faqs/why-does-the-niv-bible-omit-or-have-missing-verses/#:~:text=have missing verses?-,Why does the NIV Bible omit or have missing verses?,-The Committee on

Johann, the information above is totally correct.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Correction: the information that Johann posted is absolutely true. What specific reason to you have to distrust it? Are you claiming that the creators of the NIV translation liars?

Well, I don’t think they are lying in this case. More like misinformed. However, there are deceptions in Modern Bible movement.

Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 2): Deceptions in Modern Scholarship or Originals Onlyism:

1. They say THE Hebrew and THE Greek as if there is only one. This is a deception. There are multiple Hebrew and Greek manuscripts that differ from one another.
2. They say we have more manuscript discoveries than ever before, which are better. This is a lie. The King James Bible still has the most manuscript witnesses, with it being 5,800 manuscripts, and it is doctrinally superior.
3. They say all Bibles say the same thing. This is a lie. They do not all say the same thing.
4. They say all Bibles teach the same doctrine. This is a lie. Not all Bibles teach the same doctrines.
5. NKJV deception (See this video here by Theo Hikmat).
6. Westcott and Hort were afraid to reveal their work too soon otherwise they would have been branded with suspicion. This is a deception. On 1861 Apr. 12th – Hort to Westcott: “Also – but this may be cowardice – I have a sort of craving that our text should be cast upon the world before we deal with matters likely to brand us with suspicion. I mean, a text, issued by men already known for what will undoubtedly be treated as dangerous heresy, will have great difficulties in finding its way to regions which it might otherwise hope to reach, and whence it would not be easily banished by subsequent alarms.” (Life, Vol.I, p.445).
7. Westcott and Hort came up with the Lucian Recension Theory in that the KJB or TR conflated the text by adding things to it. There is zero evidence for this.
8. They refer to the NIV (or another translation) as if there is only one edition of the NIV. This is a lie or deception. There are multiple NIV editions over the years. Perhaps this is why the NASB1995 came out, and has been popular among evangelicals. But again, they are not claiming this is the perfect Word of God.
9. Pastors or spiritual leaders will sometimes lift up the Bible and say of their Modern Translation that it is the Word of God (When they really do not believe that).
10. They redefine the original doctrines of inerrancy, etcetera.
11. They say the word of God is inspired as if to suggest there is such a thing in existence today.
12. They act like they know Hebrew and Greek by pointing to a Modern Scholarly dictionary.
13. Some say the Westcott and Hort text is completely different than the Nestle and Aland. However,
    Here is a quote from Textual Critic Eldon Jay Epp:
    
    “The thing to see is that the text of 100 years ago (i.e., in 1980, the text of 1881, Hort’s compilation) is barely different from the text being published as the 28th edition of Novum Testamentum Graece. To offer up-to-date evidence of this point, I have made a fresh comparison of the 1881 compilation and the current edition of the Nestle-Aland compilation….” ~ Quote by: Eldon Jay Epp.
    
    You can find out Eldon Jay Epp’s compilation study or findings here.
14. Some Originals Onlyists will say that KJB believers worship the Bible, which is a false accusation and is a lie.
15. The cover of their Modern Bible that says, Holy Bible is a deception and or lie. They don’t believe it is really holy but a holey Bible, a book full of errors and not divine.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Correction: the information that Johann posted is absolutely true. What specific reason to you have to distrust it? Are you claiming that the creators of the NIV translation liars?

Well, not in this case.

But Will Kinney (a KJB believer) states,

“When James White, and others like him, says "I believe the Bible IS the infallible words of God" he is not referring to a real, tangible, in print, hold it in your hands and read Book at all. He is referring to a mythical, imaginary, hypothetical, invisible and non-existent, phantom "bible" that he has never seen, does not have and certainly cannot give to anybody else.

In other words, he is professing a fantasy faith in a Fantasy Bible. And then he thinks we King James Bible believers who have a real Bible printed on paper between two covers we can actually hold in our hands and give to anybody that asks to see it are "a cult", and even heretics.

In his way of thinking, those of us who confess faith in a tangible, preserved, and inerrant Bible are "heretics" and "cultic", but people like him who LIE when they say they believe the Bible IS (as though it really exists) the infallible words of God" are somehow "Orthodox".

If you go to almost any Christian website or Church home page they tell you what they supposedly believe about “The Bible”. You will usually read words to the effect of “We believe the Bible IS the inerrant and infallible word of God.” Notice their use of a present tense verb “is” as though it were something that EXISTS now.

However, if you press them about it, you soon come to find out they are not talking about any real or tangible “hold it in your hands, read and believe every word is true” type of Bible. No, they don’t really believe such a thing exists. Then they begin their backtracking, Double-Speak Dance by saying something like “Oh well, only the originals ARE inspired and inerrant.” Well, my Christian friend, there ARE no originals and everybody knows it.”​

Source:
Will Kinney - Brandplucked

 

[Nehemiah6]

And what do you mean by that question?

What I mean by that question is that if your bible in your language is based upon the corrupt critical texts, you have a problem.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Well, I don’t think they are lying in this case. More like misinformed. However, there are deceptions in Modern Bible movement.

Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 2): Deceptions in Modern Scholarship or Originals Onlyism:

1. They say THE Hebrew and THE Greek as if there is only one. This is a deception. There are multiple Hebrew and Greek manuscripts that differ from one another.
2. They say we have more manuscript discoveries than ever before, which are better. This is a lie. The King James Bible still has the most manuscript witnesses, with it being 5,800 manuscripts, and it is doctrinally superior.
3. They say all Bibles say the same thing. This is a lie. They do not all say the same thing.
4. They say all Bibles teach the same doctrine. This is a lie. Not all Bibles teach the same doctrines.
5. NKJV deception (See this video here by Theo Hikmat).
6. Westcott and Hort were afraid to reveal their work too soon otherwise they would have been branded with suspicion. This is a deception. On 1861 Apr. 12th – Hort to Westcott: “Also – but this may be cowardice – I have a sort of craving that our text should be cast upon the world before we deal with matters likely to brand us with suspicion. I mean, a text, issued by men already known for what will undoubtedly be treated as dangerous heresy, will have great difficulties in finding its way to regions which it might otherwise hope to reach, and whence it would not be easily banished by subsequent alarms.” (Life, Vol.I, p.445).
7. Westcott and Hort came up with the Lucian Recension Theory in that the KJB or TR conflated the text by adding things to it. There is zero evidence for this.
8. They refer to the NIV (or another translation) as if there is only one edition of the NIV. This is a lie or deception. There are multiple NIV editions over the years. Perhaps this is why the NASB1995 came out, and has been popular among evangelicals. But again, they are not claiming this is the perfect Word of God.
9. Pastors or spiritual leaders will sometimes lift up the Bible and say of their Modern Translation that it is the Word of God (When they really do not believe that).
10. They redefine the original doctrines of inerrancy, etcetera.
11. They say the word of God is inspired as if to suggest there is such a thing in existence today.
12. They act like they know Hebrew and Greek by pointing to a Modern Scholarly dictionary.
13. Some say the Westcott and Hort text is completely different than the Nestle and Aland. However,
    Here is a quote from Textual Critic Eldon Jay Epp:
    
    “The thing to see is that the text of 100 years ago (i.e., in 1980, the text of 1881, Hort’s compilation) is barely different from the text being published as the 28th edition of Novum Testamentum Graece. To offer up-to-date evidence of this point, I have made a fresh comparison of the 1881 compilation and the current edition of the Nestle-Aland compilation….” ~ Quote by: Eldon Jay Epp.
    
    You can find out Eldon Jay Epp’s compilation study or findings here.
14. Some Originals Onlyists will say that KJB believers worship the Bible, which is a false accusation and is a lie.
15. The cover of their Modern Bible that says, Holy Bible is a deception and or lie. They don’t believe it is really holy but a holey Bible, a book full of errors and not divine.

On #2: Meant to say over 90% of the 5,800 manuscripts are Byzantine (The first Majority Text) and they align best with the Textus Receptus. The 5,800 manuscripts also includes non-Byzantine texts.

 

[Johann]

On #2: Meant to say over 90% of the 5,800 manuscripts are Byzantine (The first Majority Text) and they align best with the Textus Receptus. The 5,800 manuscripts also includes non-Byzantine texts.

Thank you for your patience and time in posting this powerful information brother.

2Co 10:4 (For the weapons of our warrefare are not carnall, but mightie through God, to cast downe holdes)
2Co 10:5 Casting downe the imaginations, and euery high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captiuitie euery thought to the obedience of Christ,
2Co 10:6 And hauing ready the vengeance against all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled.

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Heb 4:13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.

if there were and vacillating thoughts in my mind-you helped me-through the Holy Spirit to STAY rock solid IN the reading and studying of the KJV.
Yours in Christ Jesus
Johann.

 

[jamessb]

Well, I don’t think they are lying in this case. More like misinformed. However, there are deceptions in Modern Bible movement.

Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 2): Deceptions in Modern Scholarship or Originals Onlyism:

1. They say THE Hebrew and THE Greek as if there is only one. This is a deception. There are multiple Hebrew and Greek manuscripts that differ from one another.
2. They say we have more manuscript discoveries than ever before, which are better. This is a lie. The King James Bible still has the most manuscript witnesses, with it being 5,800 manuscripts, and it is doctrinally superior.
3. They say all Bibles say the same thing. This is a lie. They do not all say the same thing.
4. They say all Bibles teach the same doctrine. This is a lie. Not all Bibles teach the same doctrines.
5. NKJV deception (See this video here by Theo Hikmat).
6. Westcott and Hort were afraid to reveal their work too soon otherwise they would have been branded with suspicion. This is a deception. On 1861 Apr. 12th – Hort to Westcott: “Also – but this may be cowardice – I have a sort of craving that our text should be cast upon the world before we deal with matters likely to brand us with suspicion. I mean, a text, issued by men already known for what will undoubtedly be treated as dangerous heresy, will have great difficulties in finding its way to regions which it might otherwise hope to reach, and whence it would not be easily banished by subsequent alarms.” (Life, Vol.I, p.445).
7. Westcott and Hort came up with the Lucian Recension Theory in that the KJB or TR conflated the text by adding things to it. There is zero evidence for this.
8. They refer to the NIV (or another translation) as if there is only one edition of the NIV. This is a lie or deception. There are multiple NIV editions over the years. Perhaps this is why the NASB1995 came out, and has been popular among evangelicals. But again, they are not claiming this is the perfect Word of God.
9. Pastors or spiritual leaders will sometimes lift up the Bible and say of their Modern Translation that it is the Word of God (When they really do not believe that).
10. They redefine the original doctrines of inerrancy, etcetera.
11. They say the word of God is inspired as if to suggest there is such a thing in existence today.
12. They act like they know Hebrew and Greek by pointing to a Modern Scholarly dictionary.
13. Some say the Westcott and Hort text is completely different than the Nestle and Aland. However,
    Here is a quote from Textual Critic Eldon Jay Epp:
    
    “The thing to see is that the text of 100 years ago (i.e., in 1980, the text of 1881, Hort’s compilation) is barely different from the text being published as the 28th edition of Novum Testamentum Graece. To offer up-to-date evidence of this point, I have made a fresh comparison of the 1881 compilation and the current edition of the Nestle-Aland compilation….” ~ Quote by: Eldon Jay Epp
    You can find out Eldon Jay Epp’s compilation study or findings here.
14. Some Originals Onlyists will say that KJB believers worship the Bible, which is a false accusation and is a lie.
15. The cover of their Modern Bible that says, Holy Bible is a deception and or lie. They don’t believe it is really holy but a holey Bible, a book full of errors and not divine.

I don't have the time to reply at length to this right now -- perhaps later. However, I will say that your comment -- there are deceptions in Modern Bible movement -- is absurd. What "deceptions" are there? Are you implying that they are deliberate? What exactly is the "Modern Bible" (capitalized) movement? Do you actually think there is some deception and/or agenda by the various groups and publishers?

In response, of course, there is no doubt whatsoever about King James, after becoming the head of the Church of England, deliberately changed the Bible to enforce his power, might, and control of people. His hand-picked translators were ordered to use whatever was convenient to justify his "godly" rulership, including removing all commentary that didn't agree with that principle. His absolute control of the church resulted in the death of some leading Christians and caused many, including the Pilgrims, to run for their lives to other countries in order to practice their faith as they were led by God.

James was a tyrant and his manipulation of the word of God to justify himself and his authority was extremely heretical. Sadly, there are some who still believe that he and his politically-biased translation are from God! Amazing!

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Thank you for your patience and time in posting this powerful information brother.

2Co 10:4 (For the weapons of our warrefare are not carnall, but mightie through God, to cast downe holdes)
2Co 10:5 Casting downe the imaginations, and euery high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captiuitie euery thought to the obedience of Christ,
2Co 10:6 And hauing ready the vengeance against all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled.

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Heb 4:13 Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.

if there were and vacillating thoughts in my mind-you helped me-through the Holy Spirit to STAY rock solid IN the reading and studying of the KJV.
Yours in Christ Jesus
Johann.

You are most welcome. May the Lord Jesus bless you richly with staying true to the Word of God.

Side Note:

Oh, and just to let you know. I do prefer the Pure Cambridge KJB Edition; Especially on the reading of 2 Corinthians 10:4, which says "strong holds."

4 ”(For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds; )​

5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;​

6 And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled." (2 Corinthians 10:4-6). ”​

While Psalms 12:6 has a primary meaning, I also believe Psalms 12:6 speaks prophetically of the seven major KJV editions with the Pure Cambridge being the final settled purification. While I believe all seven KJV editions are correct, I believe the seventh purification or seventh major KJV edition is the one that more precisely reflects the original writings.

This seventh purification or KJV Editiion is the Pure Cambridge KJV at Biblehub.com.
Holman Pure Cambridge at Amazon.com is the proper Pure Cambridge that you can purchase (if you prefer a physical leath bible).

Personally, I use both for different reasons.

To learn more about the seven major KJV editions (or seven purifications according to Psalms 12:6), see my post here in this thread.
Brandon Petersons who has found amazing Biblical Numerics in the King James Bible has shown how certain numerical patterns fell into place involving the standardization of the KJV or with the later KJV editions.

Here are my two favorite videos by Brandon Peterson: