The Error of KJV-Onlyism

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!)

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!

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!

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.

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?

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.

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

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

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



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.

Thanks for posting this information!

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



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.

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.

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

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?

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?

And what do you mean by that question?

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.

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.

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.