Table of Contents |
Forum Discussion |
A Special Web Presentation
"SPIRITUAL DECEPTION IN THE HIGHEST"
An In Depth Study Of:
The Authorized King James Bible vs. All Other 'Modern Versions'
PART ONE OF TWO
by: Jeff Johnson
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
F O R E W O R D
When I began to research the Bible my intent was to use the 'version' I found to be most accurate. That effort has taken three years, covered about 3,100 pages of research, and has resulted in this report.
To analyze the various Bibles required detailed 'verse by verse' comparisons. In chapter 1 of this report, we will review 20 of those verses. Those 20 scriptures were selected because they contain vital Christian doctrine.
As we review each comparison, you will see a lot of subtle, doctrinal, ramifications. Those subtleties are easily overlooked when
just casually reading through the Bible.
When I was in the middle of this research, and the doctrinal implications surfaced; it became obvious that I needed to document my
findings for the benefit of others.
Now that I'm at the end of this project; I am convinced that to be saved is the highest of all priorities. But, right after being saved, the choice of which Bible to use is next in importance. This is especially true for those whom God has called to teach; as Bible teachers will affect a great number of people.
The bottom line is this: I think you will be amazed at what is being taught in some of these 'Bibles'. I truly believe you will find this report to be a real 'eye opener'.
F O O T N O T I N G M E T H O D O L O G Y
During the writing of this report I realized that, in its final form, this information would be converted into ASCII text. ASCII text
can be uploaded to the Internet, uploaded to Christian Bulletin Boards, etc. Also, ASCII text can be read by almost any word processor.
Unfortunately, ASCII text cannot handle the typical "superscripts" used in footnoting. Translation into ASCII deletes all superscripts, subscripts, bolding, etc. etc.
Since I wanted to document all my references (so the reader can verify the facts), I have decided to use the following format for all
Where, S# stands for source number and P# stands for page number.
Thus: [S1P1] is source number 1, page number 1; and [S2P4-5] is source number 2, pages 4 thru 5 etc. etc.
A list of the sources, their source numbers, as well as their distributors, can be found in the References at the end of this report.
P R E F A C E
"No greater mischief can happen to a Christian people than to have God's Word taken from them or falsified, so that they no longer have it pure and clear. God grant that we and our descendants be not witnesses of such a calamity. Let us not lose the Bible, but with diligence, in fear and invocation of God, read and preach it".
- Martin Luther
Table of Contents |
Forum Discussion |
C H A P T E R 1
B I B L E C O M P A R I S O N: A B R O A D A N A L Y S I S
In this chapter we compare the teaching in the Authorized King James Bible to a broad array of 'modern versions'. The purpose is to note the versions' effect on Christian doctrine. 20 verses, many of them familiar to the reader, are used in this comparison.
When I say 'modern versions', I am referring to all other 'versions' except the Authorized King James Bible. 'Modern versions'
include: the NIV, the RSV, the NRSV, the NASV, the NKJV, the TEB, the LB, the AMP, etc. etc.
The NIV, RSV, NASV etc. etc. fit the 'broad comparison' profile contained in this chapter.
However, there are at least 3 modern versions which require a specific 'individual' analysis. The 3 I am referring to are: The New
King James Version (NKJV), the Living Bible (LB), and the Amplified Bible (AMP).
The 'New King James Version', 'The Living Bible', and the 'Amplified Bible' are compared to the KJV in chapter 2.
To get the most out of this chapter, please compare the verses with me, as you read along. You will need a 'modern version' and the King James Bible.
If you have a NKJV, a LB, or an AMP, please read this chapter before going on to chapter 2.
Now that you're ready, let's begin.
1:2 B I B L E Q U I Z: 2 0 Q U E S T I O N S
1:2.1 Bible Question #1: How many Gods are there?
We know there is only 1 God. "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord" (De. 6:4).
Now, turn to Daniel 3:25. In this verse, Shadrach, Messach and Abednego have been thrown into the fiery furnace. However, they are not alone. Another one (a fourth) is there to help them.
Look at this verse in a 'modern version'. (Notice: the wording in each 'modern version' will differ from others. But, those small
differences, will not materially affect this report).
Suffice it to say that, at the end of Daniel 3:25, the 'modern' version has a reading similar to the following:
"... and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods..."
Look at this same verse in your King James Bible. The Authorized (KJ) Bible says:
A son of the gods?! There is only 1 God!
"... and the form of the fourth is like THE SON OF GOD". i.e. Jesus Christ.
It was Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, who was with Shadrach, Messach and Abednego. Jesus protected them from the fiery furnace; and it's Jesus who will protect you and me from the fiery furnace (i.e. hell).
Now, who would think there is more than 1 God? Well, Satan does. Remember what he said to Eve in Genesis 3:5 ?
"... ye shall be as gods ..."!
Satan believes there is more than 1 God as he believes that HE is EQUAL to God.
1:2.2 Bible Question #2: Who was Jesus' father?
The answer, of course, is that God was Jesus' father.
Let's look in a 'modern' version of the Bible, at Luke 2:33.
Starting in Luke 2:27 Simeon has gone into the temple to see the baby Jesus (who is with Joseph and Mary). Again, depending on the particular 'modern' version, in verse 33, it will say something similar to:
" ... and his FATHER and mother were amazed at the things which were spoken of him" [i.e. of Jesus].
What do you mean "... and his father ..." was amazed at the things which were spoken of him?! Jesus' father was NOT Joseph! Jesus' father was God!
Now, let's look in the Authorized King James Bible. The KJV has the correct reading; in Luke 2:33 it says:
"And JOSEPH and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him".
For a 'modern' version ( NIV, NASV, RSV etc.) to say Joseph was Jesus' father is blasphemy!
Think about the doctrinal implications: If Jesus had only an earthly father and mother, then he is just any man. If he is just any
man, then we are still in our sins. If we are still in our sins, then we are not saved! If we are not saved, then we have a big problem!
1:2.3 Bible Question #3: What was Jesus' purpose in coming to earth?
Turn to Matthew 18:11.
You may have a hard time finding this verse. In many new, 'modern', versions this verse is missing! The verses are numbered 10 then 12, 13, 14! Or you may find verse 11 is in brackets, casting doubt as to whether it is scriptural.
Let's see what the Authorized King James says:
"For the Son of man is come TO SAVE THAT WHICH WAS LOST."
This one verse, which summarizes Jesus' entire mission to earth, is either ignored in 'new' versions; or it is put in brackets casting doubt on it! This verse contains a KEY piece of Christian doctrine.
People have to know they are lost, i.e. that they have a problem, to know they need a saviour.
1:2.4 Bible Question #4: Noah was a great man used by God to build the Ark. To be called for such a task required Noah to be approved by the Lord, God. So, how was Noah 'justified' before God? Was Noah's justification by his own works?
For the answer, turn in your Bible to Genesis 6:8.
In a 'modern version' it says something like:
"Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord."
Now think what the word favor implies. Favor implies that Noah was 'better' than others. Favor implies Noah was approved by God because of his own 'good works'.
Now compare that to the KJV. It says:
"Noah found GRACE in the eyes of the Lord".
Even though Noah was used of God, he was also in need of grace (just like all of us). Noah was NOT justified by his good works, but by God's grace.
Look at verse 9: It says Noah walked with God. Notice that Noah's walk with God occurs, in verse 9, AFTER Noah received grace from God, in verse 8. Grace precedes our walk with God. We are NOT justified (NOR saved) by our own works.
Remember, Noah got drunk on occasion (Gen 9:21). He was in need of God's amazing grace. We are, too.
The consistent theme of the Bible is that we are saved by God's grace and NOT by our own works. Grace and favor have two totally, different, meanings.
The Authorized King James Bible is consistent with the Bible's teachings. These 'modern versions' are not.
1:2.5 Bible Question #5: Why did Jesus Christ go to the cross?
Let's look at 2 verses. Turn to 1st Peter 4:1.
In a 'modern' version it says: "... Christ suffered ..."
Notice the last two words give the FULL meaning. Leaving out "for us" misses the point entirely!
This is confirmed again in 1 Corinthians 5:7b.
In your Authorized King James Bible the full reading is quoted as:
"... Christ suffered FOR US."
In many 'new' versions it says:
"For Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed."
Again, the full reading is found in the King James Bible. It says:
"For even Christ our passover is sacrificed FOR US."
1:2.6 Bible Question #6: How did Jesus' going to the cross bring our redemption?
A 'modern' version will NOT tell you how! (in Colossians 1:14). It says (of Jesus):
"in whom we have redemption ..."
The full Christian doctrine is only included in the King James reading of the same verse. Properly stated, it says (of Jesus):
"In whom we have redemption THROUGH HIS BLOOD ..."
Without the shedding of blood there is NO remission of sins. Leaving out "the blood" misses a key point of doctrine (and leaves us in our sins).
1:2.7 Bible Question #7: Who does Jesus "call" and what does he "call" them to do?
The questions are getting harder!
Open a 'modern' version to Matthew 9:13b. It says something like:
"For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners".
Notice how the end of this verse begs the question: "... call the righteous, but sinners TO WHAT?"
Turn to the same verse in the King James Bible:
"... for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners TO REPENTANCE".
The last 2 words of this verse are crucial! In the end, Satan gets all the sinners who don't repent. Jesus gets all the sinners who do
repent. There is a big difference in those two eternal outcomes. And, there is a big difference in these two translations.
We are all sinners, and we must all repent, to be saved.
1:2.8 Bible Question #8: What happens to those who do not receive the testimony of Jesus Christ, i.e. what happens the those who do not receive the gift of everlasting life?
In many 'modern' versions you won't find out! This is because part of the verse is missing (in Mark 6:11). Let's turn there now.
A 'modern' version reads something like:
"... shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a testimony against them."
However, the King James gives the full teaching:
"... shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. VERILY I SAY UNTO YOU, IT SHALL BE MORE TOLERABLE FOR SODOM AND GOMORRHA IN THE DAY OF JUDGMENT, THAN FOR THAT CITY".
I think the reader will agree that this verse contains important information we need to know!
1:2.9 Bible Question #9: After we repent, and are born again (come to saving grace), what else does Jesus command us to do?
There are many changes that come in our new birth/in our new nature, but the answer I'm looking for is this: We are to make a public profession of faith. Then we are to be baptized, by immersion, in water.
Let's look in Acts chapter 8, verses 35-37.
In Acts 8:35 Philip, the Apostle, preached Jesus Christ to the eunuch. In verse 36 the eunuch realized his need to be baptized. The
eunuch then asks if he can be baptized.
Now, take a look at Acts 8:37 in a 'modern' version of the Bible. Many (but not all) 'modern' versions go from Acts chapter 8 verse 35, to
verse 36, then to 38. 38?! Where is verse 37 you ask? And, what did verse 37 say?
This key verse, properly included in the King James Bible, tells us whom should be baptized. It says:
"... IF THOU BELIEVEST WITH ALL THINE HEART, THOU MAYEST." And he [the eunuch] answered and said: "... I BELIEVE THAT JESUS CHRIST IS THE SON OF GOD."
Numbering verses 35, 36, and then 38 is NOT the new math!
These 'modern' versions, which leave out verse 37, are omitting the deity of Jesus Christ. Also, they are missing the key point: We must make a PUBLIC profession of faith. We must believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. If we do not know, believe, and confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, our baptism only 'gets us wet'. Leaving out verse 37 omits a major portion of Christian doctrine.
Omissions of doctrine and corruptions of doctrine are bad news. In both cases, the reader is NOT getting the correct information he/she needs to know.
1:2.10 Bible Question #10: Can you recite the Lord's prayer?
The Lord's prayer, taught to us by Jesus, and recorded in Luke 11:2-4 of the KJV, is as follows:
"... Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us day
by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but
deliver us from evil."
Now turn to Luke 11:2-4 in a 'modern' version and re-read the Lord's prayer. The wording will be similar to:
"... Father, hallowed be Thy name. Thy Kingdom come. Give us each day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins, for we ourselves also forgive everyone who is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation".
Note this modern version states "Father" but then leaves out "... WHICH ART IN HEAVEN ...". You don't know who you are praying to, your Father in heaven, or to Satan!
It also leaves out "our" as in OUR father. We were created by God who is "OUR" father. Satan is a father, but he is not "OUR" father. Satan is the "father" of lies.
And this 'modern' version leaves out "THY WILL BE DONE, AS IN HEAVEN, SO IN EARTH". By leaving out the fact that we are praying to our Father WHOSE WILL IS DONE IN HEAVEN, this 'modern' version is re-directing your prayer away from God and toward someone or something else (in another place).
Lastly, there is a major omission in the last half of verse 4. Verse 4 states: "And lead us not into temptation". But this verse then leaves out: "... BUT DELIVER US FROM EVIL ..."
Personally, I want to be delivered from evil! How about you?
I think the reader will agree: This 'modern version' is NOT the "Lord's Prayer" you want to be praying!
Think about it.
1:2.11 Bible Question #11: After our new birth, how are we supposed to relate to God?
Once we are born again we have a new standard for our lives; it is Jesus Christ. The Bible tells us how we are to relate to him. Please turn to Ephesians 5:1 . In a 'new' version it says:
"... be imitators of God ..."
Compare this to the Authorized King James:
"Be ye therefore FOLLOWERS of God ..."
Even though we are born again; can we possibly imitate God? Can we be the judge of the Universe? Can we be at all places at the same time? No way. We have a new nature, sure; but we are still only men.
Think about it: only Satan tries to imitate God!
Ever since the garden of Eden, Satan has tried to direct worship toward HIMSELF. We, as men, could NEVER imitate God. We are only men. We can only FOLLOW God!
Publishers of 'new', 'more up to date' versions are encouraging us to be like Satan! (i.e. to think of ourselves as God).
1:2.12 Bible Question #12: While we're talking about Satan, now is a good time to ask Bible question #12. What does the Bible say is the test for the antichrist?
Let's turn to 1st John 4:3 . A 'modern' version says:
"and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God. This is the spirit of antichrist, of which you heard that it was coming, and now it is in the world already."
Again, in 'modern' versions, key pieces of scripture are left out. Compare this same verse with the FULL reading in the King James. In the KJV it says:
"And every spirit that confesseth not that JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH is not of God: and this is that [spirit] of antichrist,
whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world."
Remember, evil spirits did confess Jesus. In Luke 4:34 (and in Mark 1:24) a man having a "spirit of an unclean devil" said to Jesus:
"... Let [us] alone; what have we to do with thee, [thou] JESUS of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God."
Contrary to what 'modern' versions would tell you, the antichrist DOES KNOW who Jesus is. But, what the antichrist CAN NOT say, is that:
"JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH".
Modern versions not only need to get their gospel straight; they also need to correctly quote the true test for the antichrist.
Also, take a look at this: Compare 1st John 4:3 again between a 'modern' version and the King James Bible. Look one more time at what the 'new' version says:
"... which does not confess Jesus is ..."
But, in the King James it says:
"... that confesseth not that Jesus CHRIST is ..."
Besides the doctrinal error, these 'modern' versions continually assault the Lordship and Deity of Jesus Christ. If the King James says: "Jesus Christ", many times the modern versions will only say: "Jesus". If the King James says: "Lord Jesus Christ", many times the 'modern' versions will only say: "Lord" or will only say: "Jesus".
1:2.13 Bible Question #13: In the wilderness, when Satan tempted Jesus to turn a stone into bread for food; what was Jesus' response?
Turn to Luke 4:4 . In a 'modern' version it reads: "... man shall not live by bread alone".
Well, that's true and that's part of it. But, what about the rest of the verse? Notice: words have been LEFT OUT in these 'modern versions'.
The Authorized (King James) Bible has the correct and full reading. In Luke 4:4 it says:
"... man shall not live by bread alone, BUT BY EVERY WORD OF GOD".
The fact that we are nourished by bread is true, but that is only part of the story. Our lives are sustained by the Word of God. We need bread to sustain our bodies; but, these 'modern' versions leave out our need for the life sustaining Word of God.
1:2.14 Bible Question #14: Whom does Jesus say has "everlasting life"?
For the answer; open your Bible to John 6:47.
In a 'modern version' it says something like: "... he who believes has eternal life ..."
Notice how this does not make much sense. This verse does not have enough information.
Compare this to the King James. In it, Jesus is quoted as saying:
"... He that believeth ON ME hath everlasting life."
Everyone who believes DOES NOT have everlasting life; only those who believe ON JESUS. In John 6:47, the two words "ON ME" are vital.
Jesus Christ is the rock of our salvation. We must believe ON HIM to have everlasting life. Again, key Christian doctrine is missing.
How can missing information be a 'better', 'improved', translation?
1:2.15 Bible Question #15: Who slew Goliath?
This is an easy one!
Now turn to 2nd Samuel 21:19. Depending on the 'modern version' it will say something like:
"... Elhanan ... killed Goliath ..."
What do you mean Elhanan killed Goliath!? This is wrong you say. Most Sunday school children know that David slew Goliath! Well, you're right. This is clearly in error.
Look at the same passage in your King James Bible. The Authorized King James Bible has the correct reading which is:
"... Elhanan ... slew THE BROTHER OF Goliath ..."
Spiritually, as Christians, we are the equivalent of David. Spiritually, Satan is the equivalent of Goliath. Just as David slew
Goliath (with a rock), we Christians are "more than conquerors" as we have overcome (slew) Satan by the blood of the lamb (Jesus Christ, the rock!) and by the word of our testimony. Not only are 'modern versions' in error; but major doctrinal issues are involved here.
Think about it.
1:2.16 Bible Question #16: Jesus said that our heavenly Father will forgive us of our sins. However, we are told that; likewise, there is something we must do. Do you remember what it is?
Let's turn, in a 'modern version' to Mark 11:26.
Are you not able to find it? Are the verses in Mark chapter 11 numbered 23, 24, 25 and then 27!? Is verse 26 missing? Well, there is nothing wrong with your eyesight! Verse 26 is not there (or it is in brackets, casting doubt on it). It's ANOTHER omission.
Now turn to the same verse in your Authorized (King James) Version. The KJV says:
"BUT IF YE DO NOT FORGIVE, NEITHER WILL YOUR FATHER WHICH IS IN HEAVEN FORGIVE YOUR TRESPASSES."
Oh, man! This is important to know!
Leaving out verse 26, leaves out an important piece of Christian doctrine. Verse 26 needs to be there! And, that's why it is properly
included in your King James Bible.
1:2.17 Bible Question #17: What did Jesus say about religious hypocrisy?
First, let's take a look in a 'modern' version of the Bible. What does it say in Matthew 23:14?
Actually, it says nothing! ( The verse is missing in many modern versions ).
For the word of God, turn to the same verse in your King James Bible. What does it say?
"WOE UNTO YOU SCRIBES AND PHARISEES, HYPOCRITES! FOR YE DEVOUR WIDOWS' HOUSES, AND FOR A PRETENCE MAKE LONG PRAYER: THEREFORE YE SHALL RECEIVE THE GREATER DAMNATION."
Jesus does not like hypocrisy. Notice how God knows our heart!
1:2.18 Bible Question #18: What did Jesus say we are to do relative to each other?
For the answer see: James 5:16
Many 'modern' versions say something similar to:
"... confess your sins to one another ..."
( Notice this could lead to gossip and further sinning ).
But the King James says:
"... confess your FAULTS one to another ..."
Notice the 2 different words.
The Bible says that ONLY God can forgive sins. We are supposed to confess our SINS to Him. We should confess our FAULTS to one another, but SINS are confessed to God.
Faults and sins are entirely different.
Can you see how 'modern' versions have led Catholics astray? And, if it has led Catholics astray; couldn't the same thing happen to us if we, our spouse, our children, or our pastor, uses a 'modern' version?
1:2.19 Bible Question #19: Do modern 'versions' of the Bible have any other problems?
Unfortunately, the answer is yes.
In the Bible, the New Testament sometimes re-quotes the Old Testament. An example of this is in Mark 1:2
Compare the two Bibles again. In a 'new version' it says:
"As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, ..."
Compare this to the King James, it says:
"As it is written IN THE PROPHETS, ... "
Comment: The scripture quoted in Mark 1:2 DID NOT come from Isaiah as stated in these 'modern' versions of the Bible. The scripture quoted is from Malachi 3:1 ! Check it out.
Not only do 'modern' versions misquote God; they even misquote themselves!
The KJV reading of: "As it is written IN THE PROPHETS, ... " is correct, because the verse is from Malachi 3:1, and Malachi was a prophet!
So far we have seen all kinds of problems in these 'new', 'modern', 'more easily readable', 'more up to date', etc. etc. versions of the Bible. This leads to the last Bible question:
1:2.20 Bible Question #20: Why is it important to have the true Word of God (vs. a corruption).
The answer, to our question, is found in 1 Peter 2:2. Please turn there now.
In a 'modern version' it says:
"... long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up to salvation; "
The King James Bible tells us to:
"... desire the SINCERE milk OF THE WORD, that ye may GROW thereby:"
My comment is that this verse, in 'new', 'modern,' versions, contains 2 problems:
First: We are to desire the sincere milk OF THE WORD. The purpose is "to grow thereby". Modern versions leave out "OF THE WORD". It's God's word that feeds us. If, like the modern verse, we leave out "the word" how can we grow? Or, if we get a corrupted translation, how can we grow on 'junk food'?
Second: Contrary to 'modern' versions, we DO NOT grow up to salvation. That says salvation is by works! We are saved by grace, and not of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)
Think about it.
In this chapter, we reviewed the doctrine contained in a "broad" array of 'new', 'modern', 'more easily readable', versions of the Bible. We compared 'modern' doctrine to the KJV. And, we have found significant error.
But, all 'modern' versions do not follow this 'broad' profile. So, in the next chapter, we will analyze 3 versions of the Bible which need an individual, case by case, analysis.
Table of Contents |
Forum Discussion |
C H A P T E R 2
B I B L E C O M P A R I S O N : ( A N I N D I V I D U A L A N A L Y S I S )
In chapter 1, we compared the King James Bible to a broad array of 'new versions'. However, a few 'versions' need a case by case, 'individual', analysis.
In this chapter we will compare the 'New King James Version' (NKJV), the 'Living Bible' (LB), and the 'Amplified Bible' (AMP) to the
2:2 K J V V S. N K J V
COMMENT: There is a difference between sea creatures and whales.
Comment: A MAJOR difference between man and beast is that man is the ONLY creature with a soul. New versions miss this point.
Comment: I know where Ethiopia is, but where is Cush?
KJV: "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye
eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil."
COMMENT: This is major blasphemy! God (with a big G) is not evil! Think about the difference.
NKJV: "Then the serpent said to the woman, "You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you
eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God knowing good and evil."
KJV: "And Abraham said, My son, God will provide HIMSELF a lamb for a burnt offering ..."
Comment: It is true, as the NKJV says, that God did provide FOR himself a sacrifice. However, that is only part of the story. The NKJV totally misses the deeper, and more amazing truth: GOD WAS the sacrifice! The KJV wording is perfect: "God will provide HIMSELF" (in the form of his son Jesus Christ) as the sacrifice.
NKJV: "And Abraham said, My son, God will provide for Himself the lamb for a burnt offering."
Comment: I know what linen is, but what is Keveh?
COMMENT: See comments in chapter 1 of this report. There is a big difference between "THE SON OF GOD" and a
son of 'plural' gods!
KJV: "Woe to the IDOL shepherd that leaveth the flock!"
COMMENT: King Herod, furious over the arrival of Jesus, (and wanting to do away with Him) did not inquire where Christ should be born, he DEMANDED to know!
NKJV: "Woe to the worthless shepherd, who leaves the flock"
Comment: The NJKV says Jesus Christ "has come" to save that which was lost; a PAST TENSE statement. The NKJV implies that ALL who were to be saved, HAVE BEEN saved. Not true. Anyone TODAY can be saved by Jesus. The correct reading is PRESENT TENSE. There are NUMEROUS places where the NKJV changes the verb tense. These types of NKJV corruptions are very subtle.
KJV: "Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, WORSHIPPING him ..."
COMMENT: Kneeling down is not even close to 'worship'.
NKJV: "Then the mother of Zebedee's sons came to Him with her sons, kneeling down ..."
COMMENT: 'BY' and through are totally different. Think about it.
COMMENT: For the NKJV to say: "God is spirit" is to infer that ALL spirits are God. Not true. We know there are evil spirits. And we know in God there is NO evil. Thus the KJV is correct: God is 'A' spirit.
KJV: "Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and IGNORANT men.."
COMMENT: Peter and John had been with Jesus for some time. They WERE NOT untrained. Jesus HAD trained them. They were, however, ignorant.
NKJV: "Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated and untrained men ..."
KJV: "Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are TOO SUPERSTITIOUS."
Comment: Come on! Being very religious and TOO SUPERSTITIOUS are entirely different!
NKJV: "Then Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, Men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are very religious;"
2 Cor. 2:17
KJV: "For we are not as many, which CORRUPT the Word of God ..."
COMMENT: Peddling and corrupting are very different. 'Modern' versions try and hide from the truth they are 'corrupting' the Word of God.
NKJV: "For we are not, as so many, peddling the Word of God ..."
COMMENT: The NKJV is saying their crucifixion is over! Not true. The believers crucifixion is an ongoing, PRESENT TENSE,
Comment: See chapter 1 of this report for a full analysis. Only Satan tries to imitate God as Satan wants to be worshipped AS God. Born again believers cannot imitate God. We can't rule the universe. We can only follow God. Remember Jesus DID NOT tell his "fishers of men" to imitate Him. Jesus said: "follow me ...".
COMMENT: I have rubbish on the top of my office desk, but I don't want 'dung' there!!!
1 Tim 6:10
COMMENT: There is a big difference between the NKJV's "a" root and the correct KJV reading of "THE" root.
1 Tim 6:20
2 Tim 2:15
COMMENT: We are supposed to STUDY the Word of God.
COMMENT: There is a difference between speeches and things.
2:3 K J V V S. L B
In this section we compare the King James to the "Living Bible" (LB). The Living Bible is a 'paraphrase'. In a 'paraphrased' Bible the renderings are arbitrary.
In this comparison we will show the result of a 'paraphrased' approach.
COMMENT: How can someone be as angry as God?
Comment: The two verses are not even close!
Comment: Are PLAYING THE WHORE and running away the same?
I Sam. 20:30
Comment: Some 'modern' versions, like the LB, actually contain vulgarity. Notice this verse. Also, take a look in an NIV 'bible' at Ezekiel 23:20.
II Sam. 16:4b
KJV: "AND ZIBA SAID, I HUMBLY BESEECH THEE THAT I MAY FIND GRACE IN THY SIGHT, MY LORD, O KING."
Comment: There is NO similarity between these two verses.
LB: "Thank you, thank you, sir, Ziba replied."
I Kings 18:27
Comment: Sitting on a toilet ???
II Kings 21:6b
KJV: "HE WROUGHT MUCH WICKEDNESS IN THE SIGHT OF THE LORD, TO PROVOKE HIM TO ANGER."
COMMENT: In God's opinion?
LB: "So the Lord was very angry, for Manasseh was an evil man in God's opinion."
II Chr. 26:4
KJV: "AND HE DID THAT WHICH WAS RIGHT IN THE SIGHT OF THE LORD ACCORDING TO ALL THAT HIS FATHER
COMMENT: Again, God does NOT have opinions. Men have opinions.
LB: "He followed in the footsteps of his father Amaziah and was in general a good king as far as the Lord's opinion of him was concerned."
COMMENT: There are NO ACCIDENTS with God!
KJV: "AND HE SAID UNTO ME, SON OF MAN, STAND UPON THY FEET, AND I WILL SPEAK UNTO THEE."
COMMENT: In the book of Ezekiel `son of dust' is used in place of `son of man'. Does the term 'son of dust' sound as derogatory to you like as it does to me?
LB: "And he said unto me, Stand up, son of dust and I will talk to you."
KJV: "AND ONE SHALL SAY UNTO HIM, WHAT ARE THESE WOUNDS IN THINE HANDS? THEN HE SHALL ANSWER,
THOSE WITH WHICH I WAS WOUNDED IN THE HOUSE OF MY FRIENDS."
COMMENT: The footnote about this verse says: "That this is not a passage referring to Christ is clear from the context. This is a false prophet who is lying about the reasons for his scars." We
wonder how the editor of the LB (Taylor) came
to know this.
LB: "And if someone asks then, what are these scars on your chest and your back, you will say, I got into a brawl at the home of a friend."
KJV: "AND HE SAID UNTO THEM, THIS KIND CAN COME FORTH BY NOTHING, BUT BY PRAYER AND FASTING."
COMMENT: Notice: fasting is left out! Wonder why Satan does not want us to fast?
LB: "Jesus replied, Cases like this require prayer."
KJV: "AND HE SAID UNTO JESUS, LORD, REMEMBER ME WHEN THOU COMEST INTO THY KINGDOM."
COMMENT: What justification is there to strip Jesus of his title "Lord"?
LB: "Then he said, Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."
KJV: "FOR THE LAW WAS GIVEN BY MOSES, BUT GRACE AND TRUTH CAME BY JESUS CHRIST."
COMMENT: The Old Testament contained God's mercy and grace, too.
LB: "For Moses gave us only the law with its rigid demands and merciless justice while Jesus Christ brought us loving forgiveness as well."
KJV: "WOMAN, WHAT HAVE I TO DO WITH THEE? MINE HOUR IS NOT YET COME."
COMMENT: His hour would come at Calvary. His HOUR and His MIRACLES are not the same.
LB: "I can't help you now, He said, It isn't yet my time for miracles."
KJV: "AND NO MAN HATH ASCENDED UP TO HEAVEN, BUT HE THAT CAME DOWN FROM HEAVEN, EVEN THE SON OF
MAN WHICH IS IN HEAVEN."
Comment: Not true, LB! Remember the angels on Jacob's ladder?
LB: "For only I, the Messiah, have come to earth and will return to heaven again."
COMMENT: The word Christ means "anointed". Why does the LB strip him of his anointing?
COMMENT: Was Jesus Christ really HONORING Judas?
KJV: "AND HE SAID, WHO ART THOU, LORD? AND THE LORD SAID, I AM JESUS WHOM THOU PERSECUTEST: IT IS HARD FOR THEE TO KICK AGAINST THE PRICKS."
COMMENT: Jesus title "LORD" is changed to `SIR'. And Saul's name is changed to Paul.
LB: "Who is speaking sir, Paul asked. And the voice replied, I am Jesus, the one you are persecuting. Now get up and go into the city and await my further instructions."
I Cor. 16:22
KJV: "IF ANY MAN LOVE NOT THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA MARANATHA."
COMMENT: Once again; Jesus Christ is separated from title 'Lord'
LB: "If anyone does not love the Lord, that person is cursed, Lord Jesus, come."
II Cor. 8:9
COMMENT: Lord Jesus Christ is stripped down to: Lord Jesus.
I Tim. 2:5-6
KJV: "FOR THERE IS ONE GOD, AND ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MEN THE MAN CHRIST JESUS, WHO
GAVE HIMSELF A RANSOM FOR ALL, TO BE TESTIFIED IN DUE TIME."
I Tim. 3:16
LB: "That God is on one side and all the people on the other side, and Christ Jesus Himself, man, is between them to bring them together by giving His life for all mankind."
KJV: "AND WITHOUT CONTROVERSY GREAT IS THE MYSTERY OF GODLINESS: GOD WAS MANIFEST IN THE FLESH."
COMMENT: Remember the test for the anti-christ. The anti-christ cannot say: "JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH". Notice how the LB dances around this verse! Apparently the LB cannot say "GOD WAS MANIFEST IN THE FLESH!
LB: "It is quite true that the matter to live a godly life is not an easy matter, but the answer lies in Christ who came to earth as a man."
I John 1:7
KJV: "AND THE BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST HIS SON CLEANSETH US FROM ALL SIN."
COMMENT: Jesus Christ is stripped down to Jesus.
LB: "The blood of Jesus, His Son, cleanses us from every sin."
Comment: What does "HIS" wrath and "THEIR" anger have in common?
2:4 K J V V S. A M P.
In this section we compare the King James to the "Amplified Bible" (AMP).
In this comparison, we will see the results of an 'amplified' approach.
COMMENT: God creates monsters?
Comment: A MAJOR difference between man and beast is that man is the ONLY creature with a SOUL.
KJV: "... land of ETHIOPIA."
Comment: I know where Ethiopia is, but where is Cush?
AMP: "... land of Cush."
KJV: "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil."
COMMENT: This is major blasphemy! God (with a big G) is not evil! Think about the difference between "as gods" and "as God".
AMP: "But the serpent said to the woman, You shall not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be as God, knowing the difference between good and evil."
KJV: "... and they cried, the sword OF the LORD, and OF Gideon."
Comment: Notice: "OF" was changed to "FOR".
AMP: "... and they cried, The sword for the LORD and Gideon."
2 Sam. 21:19
Comment: The scholars missed this one! Most Sunday school children know that DAVID slew Goliath.
COMMENT: It was Jesus Christ, THE SON OF GOD, who was with Shadrach, Messach and Abednego. It was Jesus Christ who saved them from the fiery furnace. And, it is Jesus Christ who saves you and me from the fiery furnace (i.e. Hell). There is a big difference between "THE SON OF GOD" and 'a son' of 'plural' gods! Think about it.
Comment: Idol and worthless/foolish are very different.
KJV: "And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds IN THINE HANDS? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends."
COMMENT: Folks: This is a verse prophesying Jesus Christ. Jesus was wounded IN HIS HANDS (and also on His back), BUT NOT ON HIS BREAST! Also, Jesus WAS NOT BEING DISCIPLINED when He went to the cross! Jesus did nothing wrong! And, lastly, Jesus WAS in the house of "His" friends, but they WERE NOT BEING "loving" back to him!
AMP: "And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds on your breast - between your hands? Then he will answer, Those with which I was wounded [when disciplined] in the house of my (loving) friends."
Comment: The AMP says Jesus Christ "came" to save that which was lost; a PAST TENSE statement. The AMP implies that ALL who were to be saved, HAVE BEEN saved. Not true. Anyone, TODAY, can be saved by Jesus Christ. The correct reading is PRESENT TENSE. This AMP corruption is very subtle but very important.
KJV: "As it is written IN THE PROPHETS, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee."
Comment: Sometimes verses in the New Testament requote the Old Testament. This is happening here. The verse being quoted is not in Isaiah, as the AMP says, it is from Malachi 3:1. Check it out! Not only does the AMP misquote the Word of God, it even mis-quotes itself. The KJV has the correct reading: "As it is written in the prophets ...", because Malachi was a prophet!
AMP: "Just as it is written in the prophet Isaiah: Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, who will make ready Your way;"
Comment: This is blasphemy! Contrary to what the AMP would say, Joseph WAS NOT Jesus' father! God WAS Jesus' father! Every Christian knows this! And contrary to the AMP, God was also Jesus' LEGAL father. Think about what the AMP is saying: If Jesus' had an earthly father, then He is just any man. If He is just any man, then we are still in our sins. If we are still in our sins, then we are not saved. If we are not saved, then we have a BIG PROBLEM.
KJV: "And NO MAN hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven."
Comment: Not true AMP. There HAVE BEEN others who have gone up to heaven. Remember the angels of Jacob's ladder? They were ascending and descending. The KJV has the correct reading which is: "... NO MAN hath ascended up to heaven ..."
AMP: "And yet no one has ever gone up to heaven; but there is One Who has come down from heaven, the Son of man [Himself], Who is - dwells, Whose home is - in heaven."
KJV: "Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are TOO SUPERSTITIOUS."
Comment: Come on! Being "most religious" and "TOO SUPERSTITIOUS" are entirely different!
AMP: "So Paul, standing in the center of the Areopagus [Mars Hill auditorium] said: Men of Athens, I perceive in every way - on every hand and with every turn I make - that you are most religious ..."
1 Cor. 5:7b
KJV: "For even Christ our passover is sacrificed FOR US:"
COMMENT: Leaving out "FOR US" misses the point entirely.
AMP: "... for Christ, our Passover [Lamb], has been sacrificed."
1 Cor. 16:22
COMMENT: Leaving out "JESUS CHRIST" leaves us guessing as to whom the AMP wants us to love.
2 Cor. 2:17
KJV: "For we are not as many, which CORRUPT the Word of God ..."
COMMENT: Peddling and corrupting are very different. 'Modern' bibles try and hide from the truth they are 'corrupting' the Word of God.
AMP: "For we are not, like so many ... peddling God's Word ..."
COMMENT: The AMP says their crucifixion is over! Not true. The believers crucifixion is an ongoing, PRESENT TENSE, transaction.
Comment: The AMP documents Satan's position exactly. ONLY Satan tries to IMITATE God as Satan wants to be worshipped AS God. Born again believers cannot imitate God. We can't rule the universe. We can only follow God. Remember Jesus DID NOT tell his "fishers of men" to imitate Him. Jesus said: "follow me ...".
COMMENT: I have rubbish on the top of my office desk, but I don't want 'dung' there!!!
1 Tim. 3:16
COMMENT: God wasn't just made visible, He was MANIFEST in the flesh. The image of the beast, in Revelation, is going to be made visible!
1 Tim. 6:10
COMMENT: There is a big difference between AMP's "a" root and the correct KJV reading of "THE" root.
1 Tim. 6:20
1 Pe. 2:2
KJV: "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk OF THE WORD, that ye may grow thereby:"
COMMENT: The AMP leaves out "OF THE WORD". It's God's Word that makes us grow. Also, unlike what the AMP says, we DO NOT grow to "[completed] salvation". That says salvation is by works! That is heresy. Remember: "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Ephesians 2: 8-9).
AMP: "Like new born babes ... desire - the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may ... grow unto [completed] salvation."
In chapters 1 and 2, we reviewed the doctrine contained in 'new', 'modern', 'more easily readable', versions of the Bible. Verses,
familiar to the reader, were used to compare 'modern' versions to the Authorized King James Bible. As we have seen, 'new' versions contain major error.
In a verse by verse (side by side) comparison, it has been shown that 'modern' versions: Deny God was Jesus' father, omit the deity and Lordship of Jesus Christ, omit Jesus' blood as the atonement for our sins, corrupt the test for the antichrist, misquote Old Testament scripture, omit the purpose of Jesus' coming to earth, omit the fact that Jesus was sacrificed FOR US, omit the need for us to repent, omit the results of not receiving the gift of everlasting life, corrupt the Lord's Prayer, and even misquote Bible stories that most Sunday School children could repeat correctly.
In 'modern' versions we are told: There is more than 1 God, that Joseph was Jesus' father, that justification/salvation is by works, that we should try and imitate God (i.e. be like Satan), that anyone who believes anything is saved, etc. etc.
Clearly, something is wrong!
So, are these examples the "ONLY" problems in 'new' versions of the Bible?
The answer, unfortunately, is no.
Further research into 'new' versions shows that, not counting the Old Testament, there have been about 5,337 changes in the New Testament alone!
Now, could random chance cause 5,337 problems in the New Testament? Could key Christian doctrine become messed up by 1 verse mistranslated here, 1 verse mistranslated there?
How could ANY mistranslation (or corruption) come about; since 'modern' translators have the King James Bible to check their work?
No dear reader; random chance cannot explain this. Something else is wrong!
Somehow, the straight path in the King James Bible has become a crooked path in these new 'versions'.
How did 'new' versions become filled with so much error?
We will answer that question in the next chapter.
Table of Contents |
Forum Discussion |
C H A P T E R 3
H O W C O U L D T H I S H A P P E N ?
In the Authorized King James Bible the Old Testament comes from a Hebrew text called the 'Massoretic Text'; and the New Testament comes from a Greek text called the 'Textus Receptus'.
MANY PEOPLE ASSUME THAT MODERN VERSIONS ARE SIMPLY WORDING 'UPDATES' TO THE SAME HEBREW AND GREEK TEXTS (i.e. updates to the Massoretic Text and updates to the Textus Receptus). This is what I thought. To me, this was a logical assumption.
But, I found out there was a problem with my assumption; it was wrong!
Actually, a DIFFERENT Old Testament Hebrew text and a DIFFERENT New Testament Greek text have been SUBSTITUTED in place of the Massoretic Text and in place of the Textus Receptus.
As to the Old Testament, we learn that: "The NKJV and all new versions have abandoned the Traditional Hebrew, Ben Chayyim Massoretic Text, and follow Rudolph Kittel's 1937 corruption, Biblia Hebraica ..." [S3P594].
Reader note: Rudolph Kittel was "... a German rationalistic higher critic ... [who rejected] Biblical inerrancy and [was] firmly devoted to evolutionism" [S19P9]. And the younger Kittel (Gerhard Kittel) was the chief architect of Hitler's anti-semitism. It was Gerhard Kittel who made the extermination of Jews "theologically respectable" [S3P593].
As to the New Testament we find out that: "In our day there are ... about 110 ... translations of the Bible or New Testament ... in the English language alone ... Of those 110 ... only the King James Version (Authorized) is translated from the Received Text (Textus Receptus). All the others, even though no two of them agree with each other, were translated from ... the ... Westcott and Hort Text" [S14P3-4].
When this Westcott and Hort Greek text is compared with the more than 5,000 known Greek New Testament manuscripts, it is found to DIS-AGREE with them in 90-95% of the cases!
When the Textus Receptus is compared with the 5,000 known Greek New Testament manuscripts, it is found to AGREE with them in 90-95% of the cases.
Rudolph Kittel's corrupted O.T. text and Westcott and Hort's corrupted N.T. text form the basis for more than 110 'modern' versions.
With a bad underlying Hebrew O.T. text, and with a bad underlying Greek N.T. text, it DOESN'T MATTER how good a job a translation committee tries to do: A house built on sand will fall.
Thus, there are really only 2 'versions' of the Bible: The Authorized King James Bible based on the Massoretic Text and Textus Receptus, and then ALL the other 'modern versions' based on 'different' Old and New Testaments.
The 'new' Bibles which publishers want to sell you, are NOT new translations of the same, original, texts. Instead, they are a total
departure, based on a bad foundation.
3:2 B I B L E P U B L I S H E R ' S
C H A N G E G O D ' S W O R D S O N P U R P O S E
Although 'new versions' come from the SAME CORRUPTED TEXTS, they are all DIFFERENT from each other !
Sounds amazing, but it is true!
One reason new versions differ from each other is that they have to!
What I'm saying is this:
For a 'new' version to be called a 'new' version, Bible publishers MUST change God's words (and ignore His warning in the book of
Revelation). If they don't change God's words, they can't call it a 'NEW' version!
So 'new', 'modern' versions come from corrupted, underlying texts. Then, on top of that, publishers purposely change the translation so they can sell it as a 'new' version!
Now, 'different' and 'changed' products are fine in the business world, because this maximizes profits. But, 'different' and 'changed'
Bibles are DISASTROUS for Christian doctrine.
Think about this:
Do you remember that game you played as a child? You know the one where one person would tell something to a second. Then that person would tell the same thing to a third. This would continue until the last person would tell it to the first person.
Do you remember how the message was so messed up, by the time it came around, that the first person could not recognize his/her own message? The message that came back was not even close to the original! And that was when everyone was TRYING to repeat the SAME message!
The message the Bible is repeating is the message of salvation. We're talking about people's souls, here. We are talking about where they will live for eternity. We're talking about an important message.
But, 'new', 'modern' versions (and their publishers) are ignoring God's warning in Revelation and are PURPOSELY CHANGING the message from Bible to Bible.
God says: straight is the path and narrow is the way that leads to life eternal. And broad is the way that leads to destruction. (Matthew 7:13-14).
Clearly, 'modern' versions are on the wrong path. And with more than 110+ of these in print; a broad road is being offered.
So, which path do we want to take? Should we take the path that leads to life eternal or the broad road? And, which path should we teach/encourage our family/friends to take?
3:3 W H A T D O I D O N O W ?
Ok, you've been sold (or given) a 'new', 'modern' version of the Bible. A good question would be: What do I do now?
I wrestled with this question for some time, before making the following recommendations:
In my opinion, you have a DEFECTIVE PRODUCT. I think you should go back to the store (or person) who sold you/gave you that 'modern' Bible. I would take 30 minutes to talk with them. In Christian love, I would take some sample verses of key Christian doctrine, agree on the right answer, and then show them the error.
If you were RECENTLY SOLD the 'modern' Bible; then, you have at least 3 options. In preference order, I would:
1) Trade in the 'modern' Bible for a King James Bible.
Note: I would NOT personally USE a corrupted version in my daily walk nor in my daily feeding on God's Word. I would ONLY use the corrupted version to show others the error so they STAY OFF OF THE BROAD ROAD !
If they won't do that, then I would:
2) Ask for your money back and go get a King James Bible at another store.
If they won't give you your money back, then I would:
3) Take the 'modern' Bible, mark up these sample errors, and show them to others. I recommend showing them to: your pastor/Bible study leader, your family, and your relatives.
3:4 W E N E E D T O T U R N A R O U N D A N D G O B A C K !
Clearly 'modern versions' are going down the wrong road. And, worse than that, they are trying to get Christians to go down the wrong road with them!
When travellers realize they are lost, or when they realize they are going down the wrong road; they stop, turn around, and go back to where they took the wrong turn. Then, they get started onto the right road.
We need to stop, go back, and retrace the path of the Bible. We will review the history of 'corrupted' versions; and, we will review the history of the King James Bible. By doing so, we will find out how 'modern' versions got onto the wrong road.
To re-trace the path, requires that we go back to the beginning ...
Table of Contents |
Forum Discussion |
C H A P T E R 4
" I N T H E B E G I N N I N G ... "
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God" (John 1:1).
When the Word was written down, the Word was then called 'Scripture'.
The original recordings of Scripture are called 'autographs'. Animal skins and papyrus (paper) were used for these first autographs.
Unfortunately, because of decay, these original autographs no longer exist.
What does remain are copies, made by scribes, of these original autographs. These scribal copies are called 'manuscripts'.
The manuscripts of the Old Testament were written in Hebrew and the manuscripts of the New Testament were written in Greek.
We do not have many Old Testament manuscripts. But, we have more than 5,000 New Testament manuscripts.
From these manuscripts variant readings are analyzed and an agreed upon master 'text' is derived. From the agreed upon 'master text' a Bible can then be translated into the desired language.
Thus our Bible was first the Word of God, then an original 'autograph', then a scribal copy 'manuscript', then an agreed upon
'master text', then an English Bible.
4:2 G O D ' S T R U T H
T H E O L D T E S T A M E N T T E X T
"The Bible was written from 1650 BC to 90 AD" [S4P96]. (These dates include both the Old and New Testaments). As to the Old Testament:
"The Hebrew Scriptures were written by Moses and the prophets and other inspired men to whom God had given prophetic gifts" [S8P7].
The Old Testament text (Hebrew scriptures) were passed down both orally and in the written form. As to the oral tradition, we know the following:
"The original Hebrew manuscripts were not 'pointed', that is, the written text was made up of consonants, without the vowel sounds that make words pronounceable. The spoken text was passed down through the centuries by the Hebrew priests, who by their public reading of the Scriptures gave full understanding to the consonantal text" [S15P7].
This oral tradition continued until:
"... a Jewish sect known as the Massoretes, concerned that the demise of this oral tradition would make the Hebrew Scriptures
incomprehensible, set out to produce a standardized copy of the Hebrew Old Testament complete with vowel sounds" [S15P7].
Thus, the Massoretes standardized the Hebrew Text, giving us the 'written tradition'.
In Alfred Levell's book "The Old Is Better"; we are told how the Old Testament was copied and passed down in written form:
"For the Old Testament, the copying was done with extreme care by the Jewish priesthood in the centuries before Christ ... After the time of Christ, copies were made by Jewish scribes, and especially by those from the 6th century onward called the Massoretes, who took extraordinary pains to ensure the correctness of their copies" [S13P17].
The extraordinary pains that the Massoretes used included:
"... many complicated safeguards ... such as counting the number of times each letter of the alphabet occurs in each book" [S8P13].
David Fuller expands on the care which went into copying the Hebrew manuscripts. He says:
"The Jews cherished the highest awe and veneration for their sacred writings which they regarded as the 'Oracles of God'. They maintained that God had more care of the letters and syllables of the Law than of the stars of heaven, and that upon each tittle of it, mountains of doctrine hung ... In the transcription of an authorized synagogue manuscript, rules were enforced of the minutest character. The copyist must write with a particular ink, on a particular parchment. He must write in so many columns, of such a size, and containing just so many lines and words. No word to be written without previously looking at the original. The copy, when completed, must be examined and compared within thirty days; if four errors were found on one parchment; the examination went no farther - the whole was rejected" [S2P112-113]
In his book "God Wrote Only One Bible", Jasper James Ray also speaks about the carefulness of the scribes:
"In making copies of the original manuscripts, the Jewish scribes exercised the greatest possible care. When they wrote the name of God in any form they were to reverently wipe their pen, and wash their whole body before writing 'Jehovah' lest that holy name should be tainted even in writing. The new copy was examined and carefully checked with the original almost immediately, and it is said that if only one incorrect letter was discovered the whole copy was rejected. Each new copy had to be made from an approved manuscript, written with a special kind of ink, upon skins made from a 'clean' animal. The writer had to pronounce aloud each word before writing it. In no case was the word to be written from memory. They counted, not only the words, but every letter, and how many
times each letter occurred, and compared it to the original" [S4P94-95].
Notice: These 2 previous historical accounts differ slightly in a couple of places: namely did 1 or 4 errors cause the rejection of the
whole copy; and did the copy get examined almost immediately or within 30 days. Suffice it to say that, even though these 2 quotes differ somewhat, the copies were made with extreme care. And, that is the point.
Therefore, we can have confidence in the Massoretic Old Testament text, because of what we have just learned, as well as:
"... the extreme reverence with which the Jews regarded their Scriptures affords a powerful guarantee against any deliberate
corruption of the text" [S2P118].
And the Massoretic Old Testament has also been confirmed through other means, namely the:
"... many secondary witnesses ... including translations into other languages, quotations used by friends and enemies of biblical religion, and evidence from early printed texts" [S18P153].
Additionally, David Fuller points out (about the Massoretic Old Testament text):
"The Old Testament, precisely as we have it, was endorsed by Jesus Christ, the Son of God ... The Old Testament was our Lord's only study book .... Five hundred and four times is the Old Testament quoted in the New" [S2P113-114].
In the booklet "God's Inspired Preserved Bible" the author says (of the Massoretic Text):
"As a summary we may say that 10% of Christ's words were taken directly from the Old Testament" [S7P7].
Thus, the Massoretic Old Testament Text has been carefully reproduced and has been attested to by Jesus Christ. It is this Massoretic Text, which forms the Old Testament, of our King James Bible.
4:3 G O D ' S T R U T H
T H E N E W T E S T A M E N T T E X T
"The books which make up the Bible were written over a period of 1700 years from 1650 B.C. to 90 A.D. by men who were directly inspired by God" [S4P96]. (These dates include both the Old and New Testaments).
As to the New Testament:
"The last of the Apostles to pass away was John. His death is usually placed about 100 A.D. In his closing days he co-operated in collecting and forming of those writings we call the New Testament" [S4P94].
"John the Apostle was said to be about the only writer of the New Testament who did not die a violent death as a martyr. Then, following the completion of the New Testament, most of the men who translated the Bible manuscripts into the language of the common people were put to death. History reveals the surprising fact that it was members of the clergy, those supposed to be ministers of Christ, who directed and carried out the cruel deeds of martyrdom" [S4P96].
We now have about 5,000 manuscripts of the New Testament. These manuscripts were written in Greek. And, as we have said earlier; the Greek Text used in the King James Bible, agrees with 90-95% of these 5,000 manuscripts.
Later, we will discuss the 5-10% of the manuscripts and why they are different.
Because the King James New Testament agrees with the majority of these 5,000 manuscripts, it is called the 'Majority Text'. It has also been referred to as the 'Traditional Text' and it is also called 'The Textus Receptus'.
The New Testament of the KJV got its name 'Textus Receptus' because; in 1624 the Elzevir brothers printed, in the preface of their 1624 edition of the Greek New Testament, the following words (translated into English):
"Therefore thou has the text (textum) now received (receptum) by all, in which we give nothing altered or corrupt. From Textum Receptum came the words we now use as the Textus Receptus, or Received Text" [S4P96].
So the King James Bible is called the 'Majority Text', the 'Traditional Text', the 'Textus Receptus' and the 'Received Text'. All
of these names refer to the SAME Greek New Testament Text. All of these names refer to the King James Bible.
For this report I will be use the term 'Traditional Majority Text' to describe the text which underlies the King James Bible.
And, I will use the term 'Corrupted Minority Text' to describe the substitute text used in 'modern' versions.
Now, let's trace the history of both the 'Traditional Majority Text' and the 'Corrupted Minority Text' and their translations into various languages.
Table of Contents |
Forum Discussion |
C H A P T E R 5
G O D ' S T R U T H
T H E P E S H I T T A B I B L E ( 150 A.D. )
( The Traditional Majority Text In Syrian )
After the Apostle John died, the Church used its collection of New Testament manuscripts. With the guidance of the Holy Spirit, these separate manuscripts were brought together into codex (book) form.
In the very early years of the Church, the Traditional Majority Text (i.e. the Bible) was called the Greek Vulgate; Greek because it was written in Greek and Vulgate because Vulgate means:
"... that which is popular; the usual or best known, and most used by the majority of the people" [S4P97].
Then around 150 A.D. the Greek Vulgate (the Traditional Majority Text) was translated into Syrian. This Bible, for the Syrian Church, was named the 'Peshitta Bible'. Syriac scholars state that the Peshitta Bible was:
"... careful, faithful, simple, direct, literal version, clear and forceful in style" [S4P97].
In his book: "Believing Bible Study", Edward F. Hills compares the Syrian Peshitta Bible to the Traditional Majority Greek Text:
"The Peshitta Syriac version agrees closely with the Traditional text found in the vast majority of the Greek New Testament manuscripts ..." and he says: "... the Peshitta was regarded as one of the most important witnesses to the antiquity of the Traditional text" [S8P94].
The statement above is VERY, VERY, important. The original reason (i.e. excuse) given by Westcott and Hort to make a 'new' (i.e.
corrupted) Greek New Testament was that the Textus Receptus did not date back to the early manuscripts. The quote above shows the 'Traditional Majority Text', i.e. the text used in the King James Bible, dates back to the early Syrian Church, and thus to the earliest manuscripts.
It used to be that: "... some scholars of the nineteenth century believed that the 'Majority Text' was a fourth century recension and did not represent the earliest manuscripts ... This [theory] has been abandoned by most present day scholars" [S3P480].
Isn't it appropriate that the Traditional Majority Text can be traced back to the early Church in Syria. I say this because it was in
Syria, specifically at Antioch the capital of Syria, where believers were first called 'Christians'! ( Acts 11:26 ).
Table of Contents |
Forum Discussion |
C H A P T E R 6
G O D ' S T R U T H
T H E I T A L I C B I B L E ( 157 A.D. )
( The Traditional Majority Text In Latin )
At the same time as the Syrian translation, but in another part of the world; the common language of Italy, France, and Great Britain was not Syrian, but Latin. Thus, for these countries, a Bible was needed in Latin. Therefore, the original Greek Vulgate (The Traditional Majority Text) was translated from Greek into Latin. This is believed to have occurred no later than 157 A.D.
"One of the first of these Latin Bibles was for the Waldenses in northern Italy ..." [S4P98]. The Waldenses were: "lineal descendents of the Italic Church" [S4P98-99]. More will be said of the Waldenses later on, but as for the Italic Church suffice it to say that:
"Allix, an outstanding scholar, testifies that enemies had corrupted many manuscripts, while the Italic Church handed them down in their apostolic purity" [S4P98].
Augustine, speaking of the Latin Bibles, said: "Now among translations themselves the Italian (Itala) is to be preferred to
others, for it keeps closer to the words without prejudice to clearness of expression" [S2P208].
Dr. Nolan, who acquired fame for his Greek and Latin scholarship, traced the history of the 'Traditional Majority Text' to the Waldenses of the Italic Church. He says the Traditional Majority Text was:
"... adopted into the version that prevailed in the Latin Church" [S4P99]. This means:
"... the basis for the King James Bible has been proven to be in harmony with translations which go back to the second century" [S4P99].
This statement about the Italic Bible of 157 A.D., along with the statement about the Syrian Peshitta Bible of 150 A.D., both date the 'Traditional Majority Text' with the earliest Church manuscripts.
For terminology sake we will call this Latin Bible the 'Old Latin'. And, as history shows, it's this 'Old Latin' Bible which agrees with the 'Traditional Majority Text' used in the King James Bible.
This Old Latin Bible saw widespread use. In his book: "An Understandable History of the Bible", Reverend Gipp says:
"The true gospel was fast spreading all over Europe due to the Old Latin translation ..." [S1P82]. He goes on to say that:
"The Old Latin Vulgate was used by the Christians in the churches ... throughout Europe. This Latin version became so used and beloved by orthodox Christians and was in such common use by the common people that it assumed the term 'Vulgate' as a name. Vulgate ... which is Latin for common" [S1P67].
6:2 S A T A N I S N O T F A R B E H I N D
In the Garden of Eden, after God spoke with Adam, Satan came by to offer his own translation!
It seems to follow; that whenever God makes His original, it's not long before Satan comes by with a counterfeit.
Satan will offer a counterfeit to God's original Greek Bible as well as a counterfeit to God's original 'Old Latin' Bible, and on and on.
As David Fuller points out in his book "Which Bible?": "From the beginning there has been no pause in the assault on God's Son and God's Word" [S2P4].
The following quote, referring to Christ's victory at Calvary, summarizes Satan's actions against God's Bible:
"Vanquished by The Word Incarnate, Satan next directed his subtle malice against The Word written" [S2P96].
Table of Contents |
Forum Discussion |
C H A P T E R 7
S A T A N ' S C O U N T E R F E I T
T H E O R I G I N - E U S E B I U S B I B L E
( The Corrupted Minority Text In Greek )
To attack God's true Word, Satan had to come up with a corruption. The history goes as follows:
Around the year 200 A.D. a man named Clement:
"... founded the 'Catechetical School' at Alexandria. He brought the wisdom of the world into the teachings of the Christian faith and began to collect a group of corrupt manuscripts" [S7P8]. "Clement expressly tells us that he would not hand down Christian teachings, pure and unmixed, but rather clothed with precepts of pagan philosophy" [S2P191].
These 'historically early' changes to God's Word were also verified by Colwell who found that: "... as early as A.D. 200 scribes were altering manuscripts, changing them from a Majority-type text to a minority type" [S3P484] ).
These changes to the Word of God took place at Alexandria, Egypt.
Reader note: "... it was Antioch that the Holy Spirit chose for the base of Christian operations" [S1P51]. Thus, Antioch was good.
But, we must remember that Egypt was bad. In the Word, God says Egypt is: "... the house of bondage" (Exodus 20:2). Egypt is: "... the iron furnace" (Deuteronomy 4:20).
It was the Egyptians whom Abraham thought would kill him after seeing he had a beautiful wife (Genesis 12:2). It was in Egypt that Joseph was sold into slavery (Genesis 37:36). It was in Egypt that Israel had taskmasters set over them to afflict them with burdens (Exodus 1:11). It was about Egypt that God said to Israel: "Ye shall henceforth return no more that way" (Deuteronomy 17:16). And, it was in Jeremiah 46:25 that God promises to bring punishment onto Egypt.
Thus, Egypt is a type of this world, it is evil. And, as for Alexandria, Egypt; it was a: "... pagan city known for its education and
philosophy ..." [S1P51].
Now, back to the story.
"... The best known graduate of this Alexandrian School was Origen who followed Clement as the head of the school. He became the most influential leader of his generation. He edited a six column Bible called the 'Hexapla'. Each of the columns had a different version of the Bible. He continually changed Bible verses that did not agree with his liberal ideas. He spiritualized God's Word. He believed Christ to be a created being just as Jehovah's Witnesses teach today" [S7P8].
"Origin did not believe that Jesus lived physically on earth!" [S5P65]. We know: "Origin was the first person to teach purgatory"
[S1P75] and that Origin was quoted to say: "The laws of men appear more excellent and reasonable than the laws of God" [S3P527]. And, we also know that: "Origin was baptized as an infant, and he gave no indication that he was spiritually saved" [S4P112].
In her book "New Age Bible Versions" [S3P529] G.A. Riplinger tells us the church rejected Origin because of his heretical beliefs. For example, Origin believed (against scripture) that:
1) The soul is preexistent; Jesus took on some preexistent human soul.
Origin was also the author of the 'Septuagint'.
2) There was no physical resurrection of Christ nor will there be a second coming. Man will not have a physical resurrection.
3) Hell is non existent; purgatory, of which Paul and Peter must partake, does exist.
4) All, including the devil, will be reconciled to God.
5) The sun, moon, and stars are living creatures.
6) Emasculation, of which he partook, is called for, for males.
The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Old Testament.
Remember, it was the Massoretic Old Testament Text which Jesus quoted when he walked the earth. And, it was the Massoretic Old Testament Text that has been verified.
Yet, some 'modern textual critics' use the Greek Septuagint to determine the wording of 'new versions'. Instead of using the proven
Hebrew Massoretic Old Testament Text, some translators admitted they used Origin's Septuagint. For instance; the NIV translators said they used the Old Testament Text that was: "standardized early in the third century by Origin" [S3P537].
Thus, we see that Origin was a key participant in the corruption of God's Word.
"It is clear that Origin is not a safe guide in textual criticism any more than in theology" [S7P8]. "Origin, though once exalted by modern day Christianity as a trustworthy authority, has since been found to have been a heretic who interpreted the Bible in the light of Greek philosophy ..." [S1P74].
7:2 C O N S T A N T I N E
After Origin, "The next step in corrupting the Bible was taken in the time of Constantine." [S7P8].
In 331 A.D. Constantine was the Emperor of Rome and he sought to: "... unite Christianity with pagan Rome" [S2P195]. He regarded himself as: "... the director and guardian of ... [the] world church" [S2P195]. "Constantine, the wolf of Paganism, openly assumed the sheep's clothing of the Christian religion" [S4P19]. "He accepted the Christian faith for political purposes and ordered a Bible that would appeal to the masses. Eusebius, a follower of Origin, was chosen for this task. This was the beginning of the Arian controversy concerning the Deity of our Lord and the spirit of ecumenism" [S7P8].
At this point, let's pause for some clarification and definition:
A) The Arian controversy is the belief that Jesus Christ was a created being. i.e. that Jesus is: "the eldest and highest of creatures, rather than God manifest in the flesh" [S3P535]. The ramification is that Christ is fallen, is less than God, and is not equal to God. This is heresy.
The truth is: "The Bible God wrote through holy men, does not teach ecumenicalism, i.e. that all religious systems should be united into one world-wide fellowship. Instead the Word of God teaches fellowship-separation between true believers and false professors" [S4P113].
B) Ecumenism is the belief in a one world church where I'm OK, your OK,
we're all OK. The ramification here is that no one is a sinner.
Therefore, we do not need to be saved. This is NOT scriptural. This is a
big lie. ( Note: Ecumenism is happening today ).
Now, back to the history of the Bible.
Eusebius has just been chosen by the so called 'Christian' Emperor Constantine to produce a corrupted Bible 'for the masses'. From
historical records we know that:
"Eusebius was a great admirer of Origen and a student of his philosophy. He had just edited the fifth column of the 'Hexapla' which
was Origin's Bible. Constantine chose this, and asked Eusebius to prepare 50 copies for him ... The Emperor Constantine gave orders that ... this edition should be used in the Churches" [S4P18-19].
"Together Constantine and Eusebius called for religious toleration, which is invariably followed by amalgamation. To placate both Christian and heathen, they took a 'middle of the road position' regarding the deity of Christ. Consequently ... the doctrine that Jesus was 'the eldest and highest of creatures', rather than 'God manifest in the flesh', was adopted ..." [S3P535]. And: "... the amalgamation of heathen and Christian doctrine - smoothing out differences thereby allowing for unity - was perfect for Constantine's purposes" [S3P535].
Thus, Eusebius carried on Origin's work in corrupting the scriptures. And, as it turns out:
"Many of the important variations in the modern versions may be traced to the influence of Eusebius and Origin ..." [S2P3].