Your Bible- which one?

sermonindex Jan 17, 2006

Meet Mr. Westcott & Mr. Hort, the two men responsible for creating ALL OF THE NEWER VERSIONS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT in 1888, including the one you are reading (if it is not the King James Bible):Hort said, "I am a staunch sacerdotalist....the sacraments must be the center. The bond of a common divine life derived in Sacraments is the most comprehensive bond possible."The Life of Hort Vol 1, pg. 99The scheme of the two men:"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 difficulty finding its way to regions which it might otherwise hope to reach, and whence it would be banished by subsequent alarms...if only we spak our mind, we shall not be able to avoid giving offense to ..the miscalled orthodoxy of the day..Evangelicals seem to me perverted..There are, I fear still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority and especially the authority of the Bible..At present very many orthodox but rational men are being unawares acted upon by influences which will assuredly bear fruit in due time if the process is allowed to go on QUIETLY; but I cannot help fearing that a premature crisis would frighten back many into the merest traditionalism."Life of Hort, Vol 1, pp 445, 421, 400"But no doubt there was an element of mystery about Westcott. He took his turn preaching in chapel, but he dreaded and disliked the duty and he was quite inaudible"Life of Westcott, Volume 1, p. 198Westcott, in speaking of Revelation, admits, "On this , my views are perhaps extreme."Westcott, Volume 1, p. 225Referring to the Traditional Greek Text, then currently in use, Westcott says, "I am most anxious to provide something to REPLACE THEM. He admits the drastic changes he plans and calls it, "our proposed RECENSION of the New Testament (1852)Westcott, Volume 1, p. 229Then we have Mr. Hort:"It was during these weeks with Mr. Westcott, who had come to see him, [Hort] at Umberslacle, that the plan of a joint REVISION of the text of the Greek Testament was first definitely agreed upon." (1853)Hort, Vol 1, p. 240"About this time Mr. Daniel Macmillan suggested to him [Hort] that he should take part in an interesting and comprehensive 'New Testament SCHEME. Hort was to edit the text in conjunction with Mr. Westcott, the latter was to be responsible for a commentary, and Lightfoot was to contribute a New Testament Grammar and Lexicon."Hort, p.241"We came to a distinct and positive understanding about our Greek Text and the details thereof. We still do not wish to be talked about but are going to work at once and hope we may have it out in a little more than a yeat. This of course gives good employment." Hort, Vol. 1, p.264"How certainly I should have been proclaimed a heretic"Westcott Vol 1, p. 233"Campbells book on the Atonement...unluckinly he knows nothing except Protestant theology."Hort, Vol 1, p. 322"Evangelicals seem to me perverted..There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, especially the authority of the Bible."Hort Vol 1, p. 400"If you make a decided conviction of the absolute infallibility of the New Testament a sine qua non for cooperation, I fear I could NOT JOIN YOU." 1860Hort, Vol 1, p. 420"I REJECT the word infallibility of Holy Scriptures overwhelmingly."Westcott, Vol 1, p.207"I am also glad that you take the same provisional ground as to infallibility that I do..In our rapid correcpondence about the New Testament, I have been forgetting Plato."Horts letter to Lightfoot- Hort, Vol 1, p. 424"English clergy are not compelled to maintain the absolute infallibility of the bible." Hort, Vol 1, p. 454"Dr. Westcott and myself have for about seventeen years been preparing a Greek text...we hope to have it out early next year."Hort, Vol 2, p. 137XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXI surely hope that this is not only an eye opener to all, but also acts as a catalist to research this critical subject for yourself.Westcott & Hort are responsible for the two most popular manual editions of the Greek text today. Nestles-Aland and U.B.S. (United Bible Society) really vary little frm the W-H (Westcott-Hort) text. Why is that? Westcott and Hort are generally credited with having furnished the death blow to the King James bible and the Greek Text which was used for the previous 1880 years and replacing it with the corrupt Alexandrian text that is behind all of the newer Bible Versions, and the Catholic Bible as well!God bless,SteverWestcott: "It is impossible to suppose that two beings distinct in essence could be equal in power (God & Jesus Christ). We find ourselves met by difficulty which belongs to the idea of begetting.."

C

Christinyou Jan 17, 2006

Hi Stever, Why the r on the end of your name?Jhn 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and [of] the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. What is born of water and spirit, I believe that when Jesus changed the ceremonial washing water in the 6 clay pots is the water Jesus is referring to. What happens when we are born again? We are infused with the spirit of Christ, we are given the Holy Spirit by the Father and the Father Himself in Christ and Christ in the Father, "The Father and I are One," they Both with the Holy Spirit come to make their Abode in us and with us, right? What did Jesus use to signify His remembrance? He used wine as the emblem of His Blood and bread as His Body. When Jesus changed the water of outside ceremonial cleansing, He was signifying what would happen when we were born again. What a first miracle to manifest, the old man of Romans 6 passes away and the miracle of new birth is shown by changing the old water of the cleansing of the law, for the outward only, to the new wine, the best, for the wedding feast of the Lamb, signified by the wedding in Cana, is our new birth, the old Law and blood of animals gone and the new birth in Christ the Lambs Blood is come. Old water into New Wine, The old man is dead and the new life in Christ is complete by the birth of Christ in each believer. Also think of new wine in old wine bottles, Christ cannot be put in old bodies, old spirits or old soul minds. That is why the body is quickened and the Spirit is now the Spirit of Christ and the Mind is Christs' and the Holy Spirit will be with and in us forever, our Teacher the Parakeet. If Christ is in us and He is our life who our faith is being authored by, then the faith "OF" Jesus Christ is our all in all. It says that our faith is now the Faith of Christ in us the Hope of Glory. That takes it out of our hands and puts it in the Faith of Christ. The life we now live we live by the Faith of the Son of God. Gal 2:20Now what this is all about. The King James Bible keeps this "Faith of Jesus Christ" and changing the word "of" to "in" by newer translations puts the Faith of Jesus Christ in our responsibility realm and if we just had the faith of a mustard seed not in a mustard seed, we could move mountains. Do we see what such a small change in two little words does to the Gospel of Christ in us the Hope of Glory. Westcott and Hort, did this "of" to "in", probably without even knowing what they were doing to the Salvation by and of Jesus Christ being Born Again in the Believer, but the liar from the beginning knew exactly what he was doing, surely it is you that is like God and it is your faith that will save you, not simply believing and receiving Christ Jesus as our new life and all that goes with working out our salvation with fear and trembling because of the Power that Has been Given us in Christ Jesus, that, Satan wants to keep hidden in our own old man that he can control like he did with the first Adam, with lies to the living soul, keeping us from the life giving Spirit of Christ in us the Hope of Glory. This is the greatest attack on God's salvation of the Lamb and the truth of the Tree of Life in Christ Jesus. The basis for all translation that take away from the Faith, and the Salvation "OF" Christ. In Christ: Phillip

sermonindex Jan 17, 2006

I am in agreement w/you both. But as a veteran of this much debated topic let me warn you that you will receive wrath from some on here. Brace yourselves. Through it all, it is worth whatever wrath one might receive from another if it means we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that we hold within our hands the true and trustworthy Word of God... and not some butchered immitation.Krispy

W

Wildhorse Jan 18, 2006

okay back up a bit.Forgive my ignorance here - What are you trying to say? That anything after the King James Version translation should not be used?Michael

C

Christinyou Jan 18, 2006

That is not what I am saying. I am saying just be aware of the subtleties of the lies of the Devil when it comes to the Word of God, and new translation are most vulnerable. If any translation takes away from the responsibility of God and Christ and the Holy Spirit for our salvation and puts any responsibility in our hands, it is a lie. All we must do is believe.Revelation 22:17-19 And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. John 3:16-19 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever(believeth) in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that (believeth) on him is not condemned: but he that (believeth not) is condemned already, because he hath not (believed) in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.Our change comes by the living Word of God, which is Christ in us the Hope of Glory being the center of our life and The Holy Spirit revelation of who we are and by His Power what our new responsibility as son's of God has been given us. As sons' and daughters' we are a complete new race of God's People, of whom Jesus Christ is the Perfect Prototype, the first born of all new creatures in Christ, from whom all blessings flow.2Cr 5:17 Therefore if any man [be] in Christ, [he is] a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. Gal 6:15 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.Col 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:Our new life and salvation as Christ creatures.In Christ: Phillip

D

deltadom Jan 18, 2006

I am failing at trying to learn hebrew and going to be learning greek. We have got to realise that there is a Lord over all and he cares us finding out. I just need to go deeper into him!!I normally give people the king james except people who find it difficulty reading which is most of us. I own a few bibles of my own I own the Jewish new testament and the whole Jewish Bible , I may disagree with stuff in there. I also own a KJV which I love failing to read. The bigger question would be watch damage is illituracy in the western countries going to have on bible reading as it is getting worse!!Half of the homeless guys cannot read and I so want to give them a bible. I have a friend who cannot read is there any teachers out there who know good books to teach adults to read!!!Or ways I have trouble getting my sister or even my brothers to read the bible because there is so much entertainment why read the bible when you can watch movies. I have problems reading the bible aswell. All I know is that I want to get as many KJV out as possible because they are cheap and I like the versionI want to know the hebrew so my bible knowledge lacks!! In the hebrew the grammar structure and the syntax are different. There are other differences.Can you pray that I can somehow learn Hebrew and teach my friends to read and write and pray that lituracy increases else the bible will be completly useless because there would be no comprehension of languages

P

philologos Jan 18, 2006

Christinyou's That is not what I am saying. I am saying just be aware of the subtleties of the lies of the Devil when it comes to the Word of God, and new translation are most vulnerable. If any translation takes away from the responsibility of God and Christ and the Holy Spirit for our salvation and puts any responsibility in our hands, it is a lie. All we must do is believe.What would you say about the KJV's constant bias towards hierarchical leadership in the church and its return to the anglican orthodoxy in the use of words like 'charity, confession, church'?

sermonindex Jan 18, 2006

I have a friend who cannot read is there any teachers out there who know good books to teach adults to read!!!Hi Dominic,The Government is bringing out new resources for adults to learn to read all the time. You can find out for your friends where they can attend free classes (All the classes for basic English and Maths are FREE to anyone 16 or over.) and help them go and sign up. The teachers are specialists, and usually know something about dyslexia, which many people who cannot read, may have in some measure. If you're going to teach them yourself, the best way is with children's resources - if you can make it fun. A good way to teach the alphabet is with play dough... Get them to make a set of capital letters and a set of matching small letters, in the right order and they will never forget them. (This is good for dyslexics as well.)When you teach the sounds each letter makes, do it without putting a loud UHH after each one. Some letters are very light - like 'p', while others are heavier. After that, you can start mixing it up with two letters at at time. - Oh! and let them practise writing the letters too.About a fifth of the English language is irregular - which means it is a mixture of words and spellings from all the different peoples who have come to live on these islands, going right back into distant history.By the way, until the Bible was translated into English there was no standard spelling. Even William Tyndale's spelling varied on the same page! Spelling is the hardest thing, because it shows you understand everything about reading, already.

sermonindex Jan 19, 2006

Steve posts:Hello there, this Thursday morning. I thought it would be quite educational to have first hand knowledge of the Doctrinal difference between the King James, and the NIV (one of the "newer" versions). Although this comparison is not exhaustive, I feel that we can keep it clean and simple and instructive by focusing on several books of the New Testament, that I will post one by one. The first is in the Books of Matthew:Matthew 6:13 KJV "And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen." NIV "And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one." The NIV leaves out "For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory for ever. Amen." Everything pertaining to His Kingdom and Deity is left out."Matthew 6:33 KJV "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you."NIV "But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well." "The kingdom of God" is changed to "his kingdom."Matthew 8:29 KJV "And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?" NIV "'What do you want with us, Son of God?' they shouted. '"Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?'" NIV leaves out "Jesus, thou", degrading the power of the verse concerning His deity.Matthew 9:18 KJV ". . there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him. ." NIV "While he was saying this, a ruler came and knelt before him and said, 'My daughter has just died. But come and put your hand on her, and she will live.'" NIV changes "worshipped" to "knelt before." Men kneel before their own kings and queens, but they do not worship them.Matthew 13:51 KJV "Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto Him, Yea, Lord." NIV "'Have you understood all these things?' Jesus asked. 'Yes,' they replied." NIV leaves out "Lord," again, leaving out His Lordship.Matthew 16:20 KJV "Then charged He his disciples that they should tell no man that He was Jesus the Christ." NIV "Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ." NIV leaves out "Jesus," as it does in numerous verses.Matthew 20:20 KJV "Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, worshipping him. ." NIV "Then the mother of Zebedee's sons came to Jesus with her sons and, kneeling down, asked a favor of him." NIV again changes "worshipping" to "kneeling down."Matthew 25:13 KJV "Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh." NIV "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour." NIV leaves out "wherein the Son of man cometh."Hope that this is helpful!SteverMatthew 25:13 KJV "Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh." NIV "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour." NIV leaves out "wherein the Son of man cometh."

C

CJaKfOrEsT Jan 19, 2006

philologos wrote:What would you say about the KJV's constant bias towards hierarchical leadership in the church and its return to the anglican orthodoxy in the use of words like 'charity, confession, church'?Ron,Is charity used to translate any word other than "agape"? I personally like the use of charity in 1 Cor 13. Charity implies a love that expects to receive nothing in return. Love, to me does not expect anything in return (notice the slight difference in phrase), but tends to be disappointed if it receives no return, while charity is disappointed when it is repayed by its benefactor. Charity is best expressed anonymously, while love wants its expression shouted from the roof tops.Then there is the expression "charity case", which has negative connotations too in, in modern times. But consider what it means - "Someone who is unable to help themselves". Could the term "poor in spirit" describe a "charity case"? Lord, help me to realise me need for your charity.

P

philologos Jan 19, 2006

Stevers Matthew 6:33 KJV "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." NIV "But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well." "The kingdom of God" is changed to "his kingdom."What doctrinal difference do you see between the 'kingdom of God' and 'his kingdom' when the previous verse has made it quite plain that we are talking about 'the Father'? Do you distinguish between 'the Father's kingdom' and the 'kingdom of God'? As with most of your posts this has nothing to do with doctrinal differences but comes simply from the fact that some Greek text editors do not accept 'of God' as part of the original. I do accept it as part of the original Greek text but I can't for the life of me see any "doctrinal difference".Matthew 8:29 KJV "And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?" NIV "'What do you want with us, Son of God?' they shouted. '"Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?'" NIV leaves out "Jesus, thou", degrading the power of the verse concerning His deity. I am glad in some ways that you have produced this list. It shows clearly your obsession with tiny details and the extraordinary conclusions you draw from them. Your conclusions here are just nonsense.Matthew 9:18 KJV ". . there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him. ." NIV "While he was saying this, a ruler came and knelt before him and said, 'My daughter has just died. But come and put your hand on her, and she will live.'" NIV changes "worshipped" to "knelt before." Men kneel before their own kings and queens, but they do not worship them. The Greek word 'worship' here is proskuneO which derives from the pronoun 'pros' meaning towards and the verb 'kuneO' which means to kiss; hence proskuneO means to make obeisance as when a servant kisses the hand of his master or when a conquered warrior kisses the hand of the his conqueror. This sense of 'kissing' is seen in “Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.” (Psa. 2:11-12, KJVS) ProskuneO is used in “The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all.” (Matt. 18:26, KJVS) where the context makes it quite plain that the servant did not 'worship' his master as though he were a god. Vine's expository dictionary says proskuneo "to make obeisance, do reverence to" (from pros, "towards," and kuneo, "to kiss"), is the most frequent word rendered "to worship." It is used of an act of homage or reverence. Consequently It is equally appropriate to translate the word 'worship' or 'did obeisance'. The NIV with its dynamic equivalence philosophy has sometimes opted for 'worship' and sometimes for 'knelt down'. What you are doing is importing your own understanding of 'worship' into the scriptures. This does not reveal a doctrinal difference but only your own misunderstanding of the word 'proskuneO'.I won't go further other than to comment on the last line Hope that this is helpful! No it is not helpful. It is an unhelpful mixture of ignorance and prejudice.

J

JaySaved Jan 19, 2006

I agree with Phillogos, this is not helpful. This is my favorite "doctrinal difference": Matthew 8:29 KJV "And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?" NIV "'What do you want with us, Son of God?' they shouted. '"Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?'" NIV leaves out "Jesus, thou", degrading the power of the verse concerning His deity.This is just absurd. Stever, please pray about what you post because this is nonsense. You seem to have an agenda that is not helping or edifying the kingdom of God.

I

IRONMAN Jan 19, 2006

i also agree with Ron and Jaysaved on this. the Lord has me using the NIV, Good News and the KJV. while some things read differently among them i've not lost out on anything because the Spirit of God Himself is ministering what He hears from heaven. The preservation of the word of God in it's perfection is in that the Spirit of God does nto change and He is able to minister to us whatever may be lost in translation. without the SPirit of God even the perfect text is of no consequence. Lord teach us to lean on you and not our own foolish understanding.AMEN.

sermonindex Jan 19, 2006

Stever posts:There are many, many, many verses in the new versions that lend themselves to Roman Catholic Theology. For instance, from reading Hebrews 1:3in the KJV we know that Jesus "by himself purged our sins". There is no co-redemptrix. The NIV omits "by himself", allowing for the co-redemptrix of the Roman Ctholic Church- the "Virgin" Mary.In Matthew 1:25 the King James says Jesus was "her firstborn son". She did have other Children, as other places in the bible indicate. The NIV and the NASB omit the word "firstborn", giving heed to the Roman Cathoic notion that Mary was a perpetual virgin. The NIV Old Testament capitalizes the word "Virgin", implying that it is a title for her, indicating her perpetual virginity. The King James always says, 'virgin" (lowercase "v").One of the strangest changes in the newer versions is in Revelation 2:15. There Jesus talks about the "doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate." The NIV and other newer versions take out the phrase, "which thing I hate." Nico means "conquer" and "laity", as defined by Websters Dictionary, means people as distinguished from the Clergy, those not of a certain profession. Jesus hates the doctrine which replaces the New Testament Priesthood that includes all believers with a class of clergy or a class of professional scholars who attempt to "conquer" the common "people" with their credentials. Taking "which thing I hate" out of the Bible is just another move back to Rome.In Luke 11:38, instead of saying "washed", some new versions introduce the term "ceremoniously washed", a very Roman Catholic rendering. In Luke 21:5, instead of "gifts", new versions add, "votive gifts", another Roman Catholic rendering. In Acts 12:15 instead of "angel" (as found in the KJV), newer versions have "guardian angel". Romans 15:16 talks about "ministering the gospel of God" in the KJV. New versions say, "ministering as a priest the gospel of God". They did the same thing in Luke 1:23. Instead of saying "ministration", they say "priestly service".Throughout the New Testament, the new versions distort the linear verb tense that says, "we are saved". They have changed this to "we are being saved". This is identical to the suggestion in Catholic and Christian by Alan Schreck. If anyone asks the Cathoic if he is saed, or if a born-again Christian asks a Catholic, "Are you saved?" they should reply, "I am being saved." In other words, "I was saved when I was baptized as an infant, and I am working my way to heaven now, so I am being saved." The King James is idiomatically correct. New versions give a very poor translation of the linear. Our salvation is not something that we work for; it is a gift from the Lord Jesus Christ. This Roman Catholic rendering in the newer versions, "are being saved" supports the fallacious notion of progressive salvation.In Matthew 12:4, instead of the "shewbread", new version have the "consecrated bread". But in John 6:33 the King James says, "For the bread of God is HE which cometh down from heaven. " They have chaged that in some of the newer versions to "the bread of God is that which comes down from heven". This supports the Catholic notion of transubstantation--- believing that Jesus Christ is the host.Hope this is helpful. Can you imagine the Catholic who is away on a trip and did not bring his latin vulgate Bible with him. He picks up the latest Gideon Bible to read in his hotel room. This Gideon is one of the newer NIV translations. As he reads the above verses, quoted above, they do not reveal that much of the Catholic doctrine that he believes in is in error. Had he picked up the KJV, the difference would at the very least make him want to look deeper.God bless,Steve

sermonindex Jan 19, 2006

JaySaved wrote:I agree with Phillogos, this is not helpful. This is my favorite "doctrinal difference":

Matthew 8:29 KJV "And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?" NIV "'What do you want with us, Son of God?' they shouted. '"Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?'" NIV leaves out "Jesus, thou", degrading the power of the verse concerning His deity.This is just absurd. Stever, please pray about what you post because this is nonsense. You seem to have an agenda that is not helping or edifying the kingdom of God.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxStever responds:Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the name above all names. It was not necessary to delete Jesus name from the verse. If they would of only deleted it once or twice, then of course there would be no problem. The problem is they have systematically deleted it throughout the New Testament.That is the problem. Maybe not for the mature believer, because he knows that Jesus Christ is the name, but to the non-believer or new believer that picks up the NIV or newer versions to read for the first time, it is a great problem.God bless,Stever

T

TheophilusMD Jan 19, 2006

Stever wrote:Had he picked up the KJV, the difference would at the very least make him want to look deeper.This isn't true for the Mormons who also use the KJV bible.Ironman wrote:The preservation of the word of God in it's perfection is in that the Spirit of God does nto change and He is able to minister to us whatever may be lost in translation. without the SPirit of God even the perfect text is of no consequence. I don't believe there's a perfect translation although I love the KJV but I agree with Ironman that this is how God preserves His word (imperfect translations nothwithstanding) - through the Holy Spirit!

J

JaySaved Jan 19, 2006

If I were to apply Stever's logic, I could make the following statements:I thought it would be quite educational to have first hand knowledge of the Doctrinal difference between the NIV, and the KJV (one of the "older" versions). Although this comparison is not exhaustive, I feel that we can keep it clean and simple and instructive by focusing on several books of the New Testament, that I will post one by one. Let's first start in ColossiansColossians 2:9 NIV "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form". KJV "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily". The KJV completely leaves out the word "Christ" and replaces it with the word "Him". We are saved through Jesus Christ, not Jesus Him! Serious doctrinal error!Acts 4:25NIV "You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David: " 'Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain?KJV "Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things?".The KJV completely takes out "by the Holy Spirit". By what did David speak? If we read the NIV, we know that it was the Holy Spirit who was used. The KJV attributes the words to David and does not credit the Holy Spirit in these verses. The KJV is denying the Holy Spirit being used to speak through David. Very, Very serious doctrinal error!!!!Jude 1:25NIV "to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen. KJV "To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen"The KJV OMMITS the words "through Jesus Christ our Lord". This is a huge doctrinal error. The NIV correctly states that it is through Jesus Christ our Lord. The KJV has taken these words completely out of their text and therefore constitutes a serious doctrinal error.Now, (back to reality) we all know that the KJV is not a part of a conspiracy to downgrade the deity of Christ or deny the existence of the Trinity. But, I wanted you all to see how easy it is to pick and choose and distort certain passages of the bible to try to prove a point. I think we all need to take a step back and stop bashing the new translations such as NIV, NASB, Holman, etc. and start seeing them as a translation of the word of God similar to the KJV.

sermonindex Jan 19, 2006

TheophilusMD wrote:

Stever wrote:Had he picked up the KJV, the difference would at the very least make him want to look deeper.This isn't true for the Mormons who also use the KJV bible.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxStever's response:That is true. I was a Mormon many years ago. The problem is the Mormon seldom reads his KJV Bible without the help of his "key to the scriptures"- the Book of Mormon. What he focues on are the corrupt work of Joseph Smith-The Book of Mormon, The Doctrines & Covenants, and the Peal of Great Price. Since the Mormon is not reedemed, he lacks the Holy Spirit to guide him. The longer he stays, the deeper into the maze he goes.God bless,Stever

sermonindex Jan 19, 2006

Stevers response to Jaysved:Total missing names of Christ and Titles of Deity missing in the NASV and the NIVJesus\t73 times in the NASV and 36 times in the NIVChrist 43 times in the NASV and 44 times in the NIVLord 35 times in the NASV and 35 times in the NIVGod 33 times in the NASV and 31 times in the NIVOther names missing= 30 in the NASV and 30 in the NIVTotal names missing in the NASV= 214, Total names missing in the NIV= 176God bless,SteverJaySaved wrote:If I were to apply Stever's logic, I could make the following statements:I thought it would be quite educational to have first hand knowledge of the Doctrinal difference between the NIV, and the KJV (one of the "older" versions). Although this comparison is not exhaustive, I feel that we can keep it clean and simple and instructive by focusing on several books of the New Testament, that I will post one by one. Let's first start in ColossiansColossians 2:9 NIV "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form". KJV "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily". The KJV completely leaves out the word "Christ" and replaces it with the word "Him". We are saved through Jesus Christ, not Jesus Him! Serious doctrinal error!Acts 4:25NIV "You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David: " 'Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain?KJV "Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things?".The KJV completely takes out "by the Holy Spirit". By what did David speak? If we read the NIV, we know that it was the Holy Spirit who was used. The KJV attributes the words to David and does not credit the Holy Spirit in these verses. The KJV is denying the Holy Spirit being used to speak through David. Very, Very serious doctrinal error!!!!Jude 1:25NIV "to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen. KJV "To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen"The KJV OMMITS the words "through Jesus Christ our Lord". This is a huge doctrinal error. The NIV correctly states that it is through Jesus Christ our Lord. The KJV has taken these words completely out of their text and therefore constitutes a serious doctrinal error.Now, (back to reality) we all know that the KJV is not a part of a conspiracy to downgrade the deity of Christ or deny the existence of the Trinity. But, I wanted you all to see how easy it is to pick and choose and distort certain passages of the bible to try to prove a point. I think we all need to take a step back and stop bashing the new translations such as NIV, NASB, Holman, etc. and start seeing them as a translation of the word of God similar to the KJV.

J

JaySaved Jan 19, 2006

Stever responds:Jesus Christ is the Son of God, the name above all names. It was not necessary to delete Jesus name from the verse. If they would of only deleted it once or twice, then of course there would be no problem. The problem is they have systematically deleted it throughout the New Testament.That is the problem. Maybe not for the mature believer, because he knows that Jesus Christ is the name, but to the non-believer or new believer that picks up the NIV or newer versions to read for the first time, it is a great problem.Stever,Here are the facts, you tell me if the NIV is truly the work of Satan because if the devil was behind the NIV translation, why did he miss:- 531 instances of the word "Christ" in the NIV- 1277 instances of the word "Jesus" in the NIV Note: The NIV actually mentions the name Jesus 335 more times than KJV- 132 times the words "Jesus Christ" are mentioned together in the NIV- 101 times the words "Lord Jesus" are mentioned together in the NIVAccording to biblegateway.com:"Christ" appears:In the NIV, 531 timeshttp://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=Christ&;qs_version=31In the KJV, 537 timeshttp://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=Christ&;qs_version=9"Jesus" appears:In the NIV, 1277 timeshttp://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=Jesus&;qs_version=31In the KJV 942 timeshttp://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=Christ&;qs_version=9"Jesus Christ" appears:In the NIV, 132 timeshttp://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=%22Jesus+Christ%22&;qs_version=31In the KJV, 187 timeshttp://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=%22Jesus+Christ%22&;qs_version=9"Lord Jesus" appears:In the NIV, 101 timeshttp://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=%22Lord+Jesus%22&;qs_version=31In the KJV, 115 timeshttp://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearch/?quicksearch=%22Lord+Jesus%22&;qs_version=9This is not a "systematic deletion throughout the New Testament."