Yep, the new versions leave out the faith of Jesus Christ and convince people it's their own faith that justifies. A blatant lie from the great deceiver.
Sounds like you bought into the KJV Only, lie. You do know that KJV was not a TRANSLATION, it was a Paraphrase from older English Versions, to update the Language, and correct some of the KNOW ERRORS in those Older Versions. Their translation team ADMITTED IT, in the 1611 Original Preface to the KJV.
You really NEED to READ the 1611 Original Preface of the 1611 KJV, they admitted that they paraphrased lots of it from earlier English Versions. I think you will find you have put the KJV on WAY TOO HIGH OF A PEDISTAL. Here, I have pulled some excerpts out for you:
1611 ORIGINAL PREFACE
The Translators To The Reader
Zeale to promote the common good, whether it be by devising any thing our selves, or revising that which hath bene laboured by others, . . .
This may be supposed to bee some cause, why the Translation of the Seventie was allowed to passe for currant. . . . he holdeth the Authours thereof not onely for Interpreters, but also for Prophets in some respect: and Justinian the Emperour enjoyning the Jewes his subjects to use specially the Translation of the Seventie, rendreth this reason thereof, because they were as it were enlighted with propheticall grace. . . .
. . . This is the translation of the Seventy Interpreters, com- monly so called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gen- tiles by written preaching . . . It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correction; . . .
{ KNOWN ERRORS in the Septuagint }
. . . that the Seventy were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to add to the Original, and sometimes to take from it; . . .
But now the Latin Translations were too many to be all good, for they were infinite (Latini Interprets nullo modo numerari possunt, saith S. Augustine.) [S. Augustin. de doctr. Christ. lib 2 cap II]. Again they were not out of the Hebrew fountain (we speak of the Latin Translations of the Old Testament) but out of the Greek stream, therefore the Greek being not altogether clear, the Latin derived from it must needs be muddy. . . .
But now the Latine Translations were too many to be all good, . . . Now the Church of Rome . . . Yea, so unwilling they are to communicate the Scriptures to the peoples understanding in any sort, that they are not ashamed to confesse, that wee forced them to translate it into English against their wills. . . .
. . . the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place. { KNOWN ERRORS } . . .
. . . and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if we building upon their foundation that went before us, and being holpen by their labours, doe endevour to make that better which they left so good; . . .
the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also if any thing be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the originall, the same may bee corrected, and the trueth set in place. . . .
Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest {poorest} translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. . . .
Yet before we end, we must answere a third cavill and objection of theirs against us, for altering and amending our Translations [sic] so oft; wherein truely they deale hardly, and strangely with us. { The very same thing you do to MODERN Translations. } For to whom ever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to goe over that which hee had done, and to amend it where he saw cause? . . .
. . . Truly (good Christian Reader) wee never thought from the beginning, that we should neede to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, . . . but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath bene our indeavour, that our marke. . . .
{ That makes it a PARAPHRASE and not an ACTUAL Translation from the original languages. }
(
http://www.ccel.org/bible/kjv/preface/pref1.htm)
There is the website that has the
1611 Original Preface to the 1611 KJV posted on it. I have read it completely 4 times.
That should give you a HEALTHY NEW RESPECT FOR MODERN
ACTUAL TRANSLATIONS.
Yes they corrected some of the errors in Older English Versions, that leaned heavily on the LATIN BIBLE and the SEPTUAGINT with Known Errors. HOWEVER, they also missed some of the UNKNOWN ERRORS by paraphrasing from the Older English Versions.