Of the four MAJOR revisions of the King James translation, which one is the true Word of God?
1)
2)
3)
4)
1)
2)
3)
4)
The Error of KJV-Onlyism
- Thread starter presidente
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
"Since 1978, the NIV has been revised twice, reflecting new archaeological findings, current Biblical scholarship, and changes to the English language. All revisions to the NIV are made for the sole purpose of increasing the accuracy of the English rendering of what the original text says." (Frequently Asked Questions About the NIV Bible)
Don't believe people with an axe to grind...
The NIV tries to bring its readers as close as possible to the experience of the original audience: providing the best possible blend of transparency to the original documents and comprehension of the original meaning in every verse. The NIV is founded on the belief that if hearing God’s Word the way it was written and understanding it the way it was meant were the hallmarks of the original reading experience, then accuracy in translation demands that neither one of these two criteria be prioritized above the other.
Notes from the (NIV) Committee on Bible Translation
The NIV tries to bring its readers as close as possible to the experience of the original audience: providing the best possible blend of transparency to the original documents and comprehension of the original meaning in every verse. The NIV is founded on the belief that if hearing God’s Word the way it was written and understanding it the way it was meant were the hallmarks of the original reading experience, then accuracy in translation demands that neither one of these two criteria be prioritized above the other.
Notes from the (NIV) Committee on Bible Translation
The NIV is one of THE MOST CORRUPT (if not the most corrupt) paraphrases of the Bible. So you are the one with an axe to grind. I already refuted all your lies about the KJB.
Here are the main reasons why you should not use the NIV Bible anymore!
Table of Contents
- Reason no. 1: Missing verses
- Reason no. 2: NIV contradicts other Bible translations
- Reason no. 3: Meaning of the verse changed
- Reason no. 4: NIV denies Christ as the Creator
- Reason no. 5: NIV suggests that Joseph is the father of Christ
- Reason no. 6: NIV underestimated Christ’s Miracles
- Reason no. 7: NIV eliminates Christ’s comfort
- Reason no. 8: NIV deleted Christ’s teachings
- Reason no. 9: NIV altered Christ’s Model Prayer
- Reason no. 10: NIV deleted Messianic prophecies
- Reason no. 11: NIV added words to support unbiblical teachings
- Reason no. 12: Confusing footnotes
- Final words
The N. I. V. INFECTION
https://www.biblebelievers.com/williams_d1.html
*********************************************
May God curse the NIV committee and its owners!
https://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/2012/04/05/may-god-curse-the-niv-committee-and-its-owners/
*********************************************
NIV Corrupts the Doctrine of Jesus in at Least 38 Places!
https://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/NIV/38_places.htm
A lot more could be added to this list, but anyone who goes through these corruptions will see the real nature of the NIV.
CHRISTIANS: BEWARE OF WOLVES IN SHEEPS' CLOTHING
Funny-I didn't receive a notification from your response-just stumbled upon it now brother.
J.
I have experienced many PC problems over the years. Once a fellow co-worker told me about MAC, I never went back. Yes, they are more expensive, but there is a reason why. Little to no viruses, and you can even run Windows with Parallels software if need be. I am on my second MAC since the switch to Apple back in 2007. If you like writing and the arts, MAC is perfect for that.
You said:
I feel the same way about Originals Onlyism, and the Modern Bible Movement.
You said:
Actually, the Modern Bible Movement that has taken over is liberalism or Modernism. Instead of Christians believing in a perfect and inerrant Bible like in the past, they now get to be like the Textual Critic and make that 5-7% of the Bible like silly putty. They follow corrupted texts and we know they are corrupted because if one simply looks at all the false doctrines, it makes one want to puke. Of course, folks in the Textual Critical camp are just not able to see it of course because they like the idea of an imperfect Word whereby they are also the authority on what God precisely said. Many today are like the Pentecostals whereby they are guided by their impressions or feelings that they think are from God. There is no real final authority, but themselves.
You said:
Jesus also said in John 17:17 that the Father’s word was truth. Jesus spoke by the commandment of the Father (John 12:49), and thus, Christ’s words are truth. Jesus said to abide in me and abide in my words (John 15:7). Jesus also said that Heaven and Earth will pass away but my words will not pass away (Matthew 24:35). Paul warns about those who preach another Jesus (2 Corinthians 11:4). So we would not know about a false Jesus if not for Scripture. Modern Bibles make Jesus appear to sin, and they take away His good words. You claim your Modern Bibles are better because the more qualified scholars say so, but the proof in the many false doctrines they promote says otherwise.
You said:
I do not agree with all KJV-Only believers in some of the approaches they use for the King James Bible, either.
This is because many Christians today believe in a "sin and still be saved" type of belief. So then they cannot always interpret the Bible in a spiritual and good way. Sometimes they can, but not always. There are also some really bad KJV-only believers like Peter Ruckman (who is currently deceased), Gail Riplinger, etcetera. I would encourage folks to check out David Cloud of "WayofLife.org" and "Will Kinney" from Brandplucked.com, instead.
You said:
If that's all you got, then you are not looking at Bible history correctly.
Have you ever considered you could be wrong, and there is a mount hill of evidence for the King James Bible being the pure Word of God for today. Well, I don't think it is going to matter to you because you have already decided that you don't want a perfect Bible to be under authority to. At least that is the impression I get from most believers when we have these kinds of discussions. If you are a real truth seeker who is unbiased and seeks the truth wherever it may lead, then you will discover that the KJV is the perfect Word of God. If not, you are going to take the blue pill and believe whatever you want to believe.
You said:
No offense, but I think you mean the mountain of gnats that you have to strain at while swallowing the big camel which is full of false doctrines found in Modern Bibles.
You said:
Like you actually know the changes. If you are aware of them, then you would know they are very small and minor ones. In addition, most KJV believers adhere to either:
(1) The Authorized Version (1769 Blayney with the Apocrypha Removed; Which is the Oxford 1782-1783 edition used today), or:
(2) The Pure Cambridge Edition (circa. 1900), the KJV available at Biblehub (Which is a popular site).
In other words, you have to take into account the influence that God's words have upon His people. This is simply not the case in the Modern Bible movement because each of the popular Modern Bible keep shapeshifting every few years and it is not due to printing errors or trying to standardize the English language because it is going through some kind of major reform.
You said:
So if you are saying that even the Originals are not perfect, then you are even more liberal than the liberals who are for Originals Onlyism.
You said:
Jesus said beware of the scribes. The scribes are those who TRAN-scribe the Law or the Scriptures. This would be the scholar of our day who wants you to either believe them or for you to trust yourself in what reading you prefer by looking at a critical aparatus. So you or the scholar becomes the real authority then. The Bible is just an illusion and not really real. It is subject to man and not by the divine working of God according to the Scholar's worldview.
You said:
Again, I would encourage you to look at all the changed doctrines that are for the worse and not for the better. Again, see my post here.
You said:
Which is confusion about what God precisely said. You do not really know with a Bible like that.
You said:
People can strongly believe the Earth is flat, but they wouldn't be correct.
You said:
Which written Word? In the Modern Bible camp: You are faced with the insanity of a bunch of conflicting Bibles that all say different things that are insulting to God? God is not the author of confusion.
You said:
Reminds me of the change in 1 Timothy 3:16. God was manifest in the flesh is changed to: He was manifest in the flesh.
And you are not believing and feeding yourself only with biased videos and information? Yeah, okay. I don't think you are giving the benefit of the doubt that the KJV is the perfect Word of God. Don't think as other men do in that the KJV translators had lay claim to inspiration in order for their translation to be inspired by God. God is bigger than that. He can work in any way He pleases and I believe He has with the King James Bible. There is no doubt in mind about that. But you would have to discover that by looking at all the really good information on it. But you are keeping such info. at arm's length because you don’t want a perfect Bible.
Overall, this is a good breakdown of the problem of the NIV. While I also agree with how it is wrong to change 1 Corinthians 11:26 to refer to "sisters" in addition to brothers, which runs contrary to 1 Corinthians 11:34, I don't think we should curse anyone under the New Covenant. Jesus tells us to pray for our enemies and to love them. While we may rebuke, I believe we need to balance that with our speech being full of grace seasoned with salt. In any event, thank you for sharing this list. Really good overall.
Kieth Piper also has a PDF that goes into the problems of the NIV., too.
So you are like totally new to this kind of discussion. I have watched debates between the KJV Belief vs. Modern Scholarship. I have had this discussion on other Christian forums before and even talked with a Pastor who loves Textual Criticism. It is common knowledge admitted on both sides that the Nestle and Aland Critical Text is the basis for most of all your Modern English Translations. Please research this topic better.
When knowledge or facts are ignored, it is a sad day indeed. I can equally say the same about your statements. But the difference between us is that the facts are backing my side here. You just keep saying “wrong” etc or you simply just disagree as if that somehow magically proves your right. Yeah, okay.
Either you are in the discussion all the way or you just mindlessly hitting the disagree button as if that proves anything. I find the faith in Modern Scholarship as silly. I prefer believing the Bible instead. Men’s opinions will fade away but God’s word will last forever.
Right, like changing Mark 1:41 for Jesus to say that He was indignant (angry) when He healed the leper? That’s a better change than Him being compassionate? So what you and others believed before on this verse for many years was a lie. Now Jesus got angry when He healed people. Yeah okay.
Just accept the manuscript in what it says and don’t think, right?
However, this is just absurd. You really have to shut your brain off to accept this kind of garbage. Then again, that’s what liberalism does to people’s minds.
Actually, in reality:
The New International Version (NIV) Bible has been revised three times. The first revision was in 1985, the second in 2011, and the most recent in 2020[1][3][4].
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/How-many-times-fAaL5gFPTxalquYRcz0mNw
Agreed. I was simply posting some of the articles that reject the NIV. This person went beyond what he should have said.
I took a closer look. So here is my update on the list:
The Biblebelievers link has a good list overall, but I don’t agree with every point they make.
Jesus-is-Savior link is very strange. I looked at an older version of this article at Archive.org and they say that Jesus’ name is removed 38 times. However, in this updated current article, they are saying the doctrine of Jesus is corrupted in 38 places. The thing is that they did not provide any proof in either version of this article. Then again, I am not a fan of this website. They claim you don’t have to give up your sins to be saved (Which I believe is unbiblical and morally wrong on many levels).
https://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Basics/do_i_have_to_give_up_sin_to_be_saved.htm
I believe there are seven major KJB editions that God was involved in. The seventh KJV edition or seventh purification was the words of God that were a reflection of the originals (Which I believe is the Pure Cambridge Edition KJV, circa 1900). The previous six major editions of the KJV guided by God are not in error but they are advanced revelation. The KJB editions (guided by God) are not major REVISIONS as if to say that the actual content of the meaning behind the words had changed on a radical level by a great percentage. In other words, while the Anti-KJB Proponent could point out changes, and make note of many changes, and say “Ah ha, look, your KJV is very different through time”; The reality is that these changes would be the updating in font style from the 1611, and or the standardization of the English language. Any small changes to the actual meaning of words is very very minor. This is not the case with Modern Bibles.
Rick Beckman who is a Textual Critic Proponent had attacked the KJV in regards to their differences. KJV believers tried to reason with him and give him good answers, but he did not want to hear it. However today, he is no longer a believer in Jesus Christ anymore. He is not the only one, either. Bart Erhman is another. Many who went to Bible college had lost their faith when they learned of the false Science of Textual Criticism. That is what Textual Criticism does. It seeks to destroy your faith. It makes sense because when you don’t have a perfect Bible, there is no real authority to stand upon but yourself or the scholars. But the foundation of man will not last. Only God’s Word (Which is pure) will last forever. This is what you fail to grasp, my friend.
In either case, may the Lord bless you (even if we disagree strongly on this topic).
Why do you think the Bible speaks about a great falling away? It has already happened in these last days. Many are falling away from trusting what God’s Word says because they don’t believe God’s Word is perfect and entirely trustworthy anymore. Granted, I am not saying that this topic may always be a salvation issue. I believe some can be ignorant on this topic and preach in another ways and be saved. But those who look to tear down God’s true Word as if it is their life’s mission are not going to make it, unless they repent. Those who create false Bibles that add and take away from God’s words are not going to make it unless they repent.
This says it all. Quite obviously you ignore facts and will not listen to reason. You are not looking for the truth. Instead you have swallowed a whole load of propaganda. I cannot begin to understand why.
I am putting you on ignore, as I have read enough of your negativity and propaganda.
What is a "perfect" Bible?
All English Bibles are translations of ancient scrolls, written in ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek. There are many differences between the languages of the source documents (many of which are incomplete) and any receptor language, including modern English. As a result, translators must make decisions, such as a) the meaning of the words, phrases, idioms, etc., b) how they were understood by the original hearers, c) what are the closest English equivalents, d) which manuscripts to accept when there are differences, e) etc.
Therefore, it is impossible to have "a perfect Bible".