Date:   4/8/2004 12:14:24 AM ( 21 y ago)
Hits:   1,219
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=629596

0 of 0 (0%) readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

King James Bible Articles
AN EXAMINATION OF MODERN VERSIONS AS COMPARED TO THE KING JAMES VERSION


I. NIV ommisions.

Upon examining an NIV, you will discover that the
Zondervan Corp. has excluded a significant portion of
God's Word. The following WHOLE VERSES have been omitted
from the NIV text:


Mat. 17:21 ... Mat. 18:11 ... Mat 23:14 ... Mark 7:16

Mark 9:46 ... Mark 9:44 ... Mark 11:26 ... Mark 15:28

Luke 17:36 ... Luke 23:17 ... John 5:4 ... Acts 8:37

Acts 15:34 ... Acts 24:7 ... Acts 28:29... Romans 16:24

I John 5:7

The New International Version also sliced up considerable
portions from 147 other New Testament verses. In the New
Testament alone, the NIV completely omits 1,284 words that are
in the KJV and Textus Receptus.



II. NIV Translators' OWN WORDS:


The NIV translators gave their reasons for creating such a
sliced-up version of the bible. They said in their own words:


"The first concern of the translators has been the
accuracy of the translation and its fidelity to the THOUGHT
of the writers. They have weighed the significance of the
lexical and grammatical details of the Hebrew, Aramaic and
Greek texts. At the same time, they have striven for more
than a word-for-word translation. Because thought patterns
and syntax differ from language to language, faithful
communication of the meaning of the writers of the Bible
demands frequent modifications in sentence structure and
constant regard for the contextual meanings of words."
(From the NIV Bible, Zondervan Corp.)


Notice that the NIV translators were more concerned with
the "thoughts" of the Biblical writers than their actual
WORDS! By this statement, it is evident that the NIV
translators believed in "thought" inspiration rather
than "verbal" inspiration. How could anyone not see this?



III. NIV Changes affect doctrine


When Jesus began his public ministry, John the Baptist
immediately identified Him as "THE LAMB OF GOD" in John 1:29.
A junior-age Sunday School child knows that the Passover Lamb
was a type of the Saviour. NIV scholarship changes the King
James reading in Exodus 12:5 of "YOUR LAMB" to "THE ANIMALS
YOU CHOOSE".


Burt Bellows has argued that the King James does not
adequately render the different words (in the Greek language)
for "love"-- ie.-- phileo, agape, etc... however, in Psalms
136, the King James renders a very specific kind of love as
"mercy"-- not a general "love". It says, "His mercy endureth
for ever"... The NIV renders this, "His LOVE endures for
ever".


This stresses the love of Jesus to the exclusion of
His justice. Love is a general term. Mercy involves love,
compassion and forgiveness of sin. Of course the modern bible
translators don't want to bring up the "sin question", do
they? (That would be too negative)


Consider James 5:16:


"Confess your FAULTS one to another...." KJV
"Confess your SINS to each other..." NIV


"Confess your 'sins'" is a bit too much like Roman
Catholic dogma to me. God does not want us to go
into a Confessional Booth and confess our sins to anyone
but Him!


NOTICE THIS: The NIV alters Psalm 12:7-- This is the
most important Scripture reference on Divine Preservation
of Scripure:


KJV: "Thou shalt keep THEM" [the words of the Lord]
is changed to:
NIV: "you will keep US safe"


It is not "us" this verse refers to, but rather God's
Word. Again the NIV corrupts the verses.


The NIV changes Psalm 138:2...


KJV: "thou hast magified thy word above all thy name."


NIV: "for you have exalted above all things your name
AND your word."

BIG DIFFERENCE, isn't it?



In the NIV, the personal name "JESUS" (the name which
is above every name) has been stricken from the following
verses of the NIV:


Mat. 8:29... Mat 13:36 ... Mat 15:30... Mat 16:20


Mat 17:11 ... Mat 17:20 ... Mat 18:2 ... Mat 24:2


Mark 5:13 ... Mark 6:34 ... Mark 11:14 ... Luke 7:22


John 4:16 ... John 4:46 ... John 8:20


(and on and on and on and on throughout the New Testament...)


Consider the NIV rendering of I Timothy 3:16...


KJV: "God was manifest in the flesh"
NIV: "He appeared in a body"
(says nothing about God in human form.)


TAKE A LOOK AT THIS:


The NIV strips Jesus of his sinlessness:


Matthew 5:22...


KJV: "whosoever is angry with his brother WITHOUT A
CAUSE shall be in danger of the judgment."


NIV: "whoever is angry with his brother is in danger
of judgment."


By omitting the words, "without a cause", it makes
Jesus a sinner... Because in Mark 3:5, Christ looked "round
about on them with anger"...


According to the NIV, since Jesus was angry, he is in
danger of judgment-- ie-- he is a sinner.


In order to pander to the "born-again yuppie",
Zondervan Corporation has replaced the dreaded "HELL" with
more soft and less condemning words. In 83 New Testament
verses, the word "Hell" has been replace in the NIV with
words such as "death", "grave", "Hades", and "depths"...


Such a "toning down" of God's Word is typical of our
modern soft and compromised generation.


Look at Proverbs 16:3 ...


KJV: "Commit thy works unto the LORD, and thy thoughts
shall be established."


NIV: "Commit to the Lord whatever you do, and YOUR
PLANS WILL SUCCEED."
(Sounds like "Something good is going to happen to you!")


The NIV seems to continue promoting the "wealth and health"

"gospel" in Ecc. 10:10... by saying that the key
ingredient for success is no longer the spiritual
advantage of "WISDOM"
(as the KJV says) but rather, "SKILL will bring success."


Let's take a look at some more things...


Should any of the "brethren" get to wondering whether
his worldly testimony might be damning some neighbor or
loved one, the NIV is there to relieve his conscience by
altering "Abstain from all APPEARANCE of evil" (I Thess.
5:22) ... The NIV says, "Avoid every KIND of evil".


Now for the New King James (NKJV)...


The NKJV is great for those who have "liberated wives" who
marched in lockstep with Molly Yard and her cronies...


Look at Genesis 2:18:


KJV: "It is not good that man should be alone; I will
make an help meet for him" {note: "meet" means 'suitable'
or 'fitting'}
NIV: "It is not good that man should be alone; I will
make a helper COMPARABLE to him".


Gee wiszackers-- the NKJV makes room for those modern
women's rights folks--


I can go on and on with the NKJV... it claims to be
just a modern-language rendering of the Textus Receptus...
but plain and simple:
it is not at all a Textus Receptus Bible. That's the
fact Jack.


I have numerous other locations that show more and more
evidence that the NIV and NKJV are not the true Word of God.


The argument basically is a preponderance of evidence-
type argument... In other words, in the NIV and NKJV--
where they make some sort of word or verse change or
ommission, the VAST MAJORITY of those changes in some way
cast doubt upon God's Word, or in many cases, change
doctrine. If the modern-English versions are indeed God's
Word, why in heaven's name do they constantly and
consistantly degrade such things as the blood of Christ,
salvation by grace, the deity of Christ, and other
important Bible doctrines?


The modern translators would have us believe that most
of the verse changes are simply "updated language" changes.
That is simply a lie.


The modern translators do, in some cases, update the
language... however, in MOST cases, they CHANGE the WORDS
completely, and therefore change the doctrines of the
Scripture.


It has been demonstrated that the NIV translators do
not believe in word-for-word verbal inspiration. They
believe in "thought" inspiration. Since they believe in
thought inspiration, they are absolutely free to change
the WORDS, if (in their scholarly opinion) they can better
communicate the biblical writers' THOUGHTS.
That is plain old heresy.


That is exactly what the modern United States
Constitutional "experts" are doing to the U.S. Constitution.
They say that "right of the people to keep and bear arms"
really isn't what the original authors of the Constitution
meant. They say that the freedom of religion clause does
not really give freedom of religion. After all, they say,
"It is the thoughts that matter-- the concepts-- rather
than the words"... And that attitude has bit by bit
chipped our religious freedom down to more of a "religious
tolerance".


I say that we need to return to the WORDS of the Bible,
rather than the concepts ONLY. The WORDS matter. The
WORDS are important. It is not only "Biblical Truth" that
is important... but more so the actual WORDS that convey
that Biblical truth.


Mere "thoughts" or "concepts" of what the Bible teaches
can change from person to person... The Words, however,
can never change.



 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.03 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=629596