Read the King James Bible only. The New-age Bible translations have perverted God's Holy Bible by omitting verses, deleting key words and phrases in order to diminish God's power, confuse Christians and redefine what sin is. See the link document for details. God bless you.
(files.catbox.moe)
🗣️ DISCUSSION 💬
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (262)
sorted by:
Although the mainstream English translations are all very close to one another and all sufficient to convert the lost and edify the believer, I would only mention that the KJV is the only English translation (other than Geneva Bible) that is based on the Byzantine text type (which are the Bible texts preserved by Greek speakers). All other English translations are based on the critical text which is primarily based on two manuscripts more recently found which are older than all Byzantine texts. The critical text is a scholarly undertaking compiled by non-Christians. They basically say those two older texts are best because they are old. Even though they were basically shelved, or thrown away and forgotten.
The place this is most notable in critical text translations (ESV, NIV, etc.) Is they leave out the end of Mark and the John Comma, among many other verses. Except they don't actually leave them out, they put asterisks on them and tell you they don't belong in the Bible in a footnote.
Personally I like NKJV. I think the Byzantine text type is better and less polluted by non-Christians and NKJV is easier to read.
They say certain passeges don't belong in the Bible, or they say something like older manuscripts don't include certain verses? Be honest here. There is a difference.
What makes you so certain that the very brief sections you described are actually part of the original text?
Do you want to be unaware that there is a possibility that the text may have been altered over time?
You tell me why they cut out the end of Mark. they believe it's unreliable and a later addition from the original author. They don't think it belongs.
My belief that the Bible is complete and inerrant are based on faith and I believe the history of the byzantine text type is evidence of this fact. The Greeks and Masoretes preserved the best texts and nothing was lost or altered in way in which meaning was lost.
Any Hellenization is already quite corrupted by the time it was wrotten and organized. Alexandria removed like 30 books still found in the Ethiopian bible.
The end of Mark is not cut out. Be honest about this. It is simply noted that all manuscripts do not contain this section, and that earlier-dated manuscripts, which are usually considered to be more reliable, do not contain those verses.
What evidence do you have that the issue is subtraction rather than addition?