Which Version is Best:
Today there are many Versions of the Bible in the English language to select from. Some prefer the KJV Only and insist its the ONLY reliable version out there. While others are not overly concerned about which Version is most accurate only which one is easiest to read. If you buy a large interlineal Bible that compares column for column several Versions, against the KJV, you will find that the newer ones contain many deletions of text and addition of words that change the meaning of certain passages. This is attributed to the use of what is called the Minority Text, more recently discovered manuscripts than those used in the 1611-1769 Versions of the KJV. However in spite of these changes in Biblical text, the scholars and Pundits that argue in favor of one version over another STILL hold to the fundamental doctrines derived out of the Reformation. Without exception, regardless of which Version they may use, they all believe whole-heartedly that it authenticates the basic tenets taught in establishment Christianity over the last 500 years. Such as: Justification by faith alone, Substitutionary atonement, imputed Righteousness (meaning the transfer of Christ's righteousness to man) and Salvation in sin. (meaning apart from any deeds done in faith or repentance, saved as is) So whether or not a Pastor or Bible teacher believes that the KJV only is the inspired and authorized Word of God, or prefers another Version, they ALL believe and teach the same things about Repentance, Justification and Redemption. In other words merely because one version may use the term: 'Sinful Nature to describe man's condition and the KJV says desires or concupiscence, it is still assumed by all that man is born dead in his sins unable to obey God.
In essence the argument over which Version is most correct and accurate is really of no concern at all, as long as what is being taught authenticates the established Doctrines codified in their creeds. And unless you actually Study the Scriptures diligently, dig and compare Scripture with Scripture, what one version says over another is no big deal. As long as you're 'Saved in yours sins and have the Magic Cover why worry about Versions. But if you are concerned about authenticity and the history behind English Bible Versions proceed with the Study. In Truth the KJV Bible (1769 version) is among the best sources of God's Word available to us, but due to the time in which it was translated and the conditions that persisted in 1611, it does contained certain discrepancies that tend to support such doctrines as 'Original Sin, Moral depravity, Faith alone and Substitutionary atonement. But the overall content is founded on Sound ancient manuscripts of renown scholarship.
The Pundits who run around spending all their time refuting modern Versions in favor of the KJV Only, THINK the deletions and changes in them detract from the established doctrines they love so dearly. (Substitution, Moral transfer, pre-forgiveness of sins, eternal security, election, faith alone, original sin, inherited guilt etc) So they are not actually 'defending anything, other than the 'Doctrines of men against what they believe is an attempt to undermine them. However the entire argument is moot because they all believe the same things about man's nature and his need to be Saved in his sins. So this is really nothing more than 'My Book is better than your Book!' Silly, but unless you're willing to take an unbiased look into this mess and examine the facts for yourself, there's really no point in making Versions an issue.
Let's begin with what the Apostle Peter said in his final Epistle to the Saints about 'wresting (twisting, torture as on the rack) the Scriptures:
2 Peter 3:16-18 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever KJV
Men have been 'Twisting the Scriptures to their own destruction since the beginning and every Bible Version translated by men into English (or any language) is subject to this kind of corruption. To sort out the Versions dilemma you need to understand the difference between what is called the Majority Text and the Minority text.
Each text is part of a Codex, which is Latin for ‘Trunk of a tree’, that (like a tree) contains thousands of sub-texts, manuscripts and volumes. The Majority text or Codex, is the one considered most reliable because it is most quoted in writings and manuscripts written by the early Saints. Whereas the Minority Codex is least quoted or not at all quoted. The KJV Version of the Bible NT was translated from the Textus Receptus, or ‘Received Text, complied by Erasmus beginning in 1512 and completed after three publications in 1522. He was one of the foremost meticulous scholars in ancient languages in his time. In his travels he was able to collect and examine existing biblical manuscripts in their original languages and compile them into his massive publication.
Through his intensive work he was able to correct many manuscripts and authenticate them with quotes from early Christian writers. His final publication was an overwhelming success and greatly overshadowed the existing Latin versions of the New Testament. His Greek version of the NT is still in use today and considered one of the most accurate to original Bible text in existence. Also the NKJV, Thomas Nelson publications, 1979 used the TR in it translation of the NT. Understand that many Text and Codex were used to translate not only the KJV bible but the several English versions that preceded it. We will discuss each of them as we continue.
The first thing you must do when investigating the accuracy of a Bible Version is find out which series of ancient texts or Codex it is based on. Then consider the source of the information, where it came from, when was it discovered, how old is it. Investigate the time period the Codex was discovered and the people surrounding its discovery, find out if they had a personal bias or ax to grind over some doctrinal preference and always consider whether or not the Codex was quoted from by the early Saints. Try to keep your personal bias out of it also, all you’re looking for here is accuracy and a general consensus that will confirm the Truth. Anyone sincerely seeking Christ in humble repentance and obedient faith will find Him in spite of what men have done to the Scriptures throughout the ages. Doctrines are the worst stumbling block for people to overcome, its what men have infused into Scripture by presumptions that leads many astray, as Peter said they 'wrest or twist it to strengthen their fables, like turning the Grace of God into a license for immorality instead of receiving it as the Power to live a godly life in this present age. (Jude3-4, Tit2:11) The Prophets long ago said: 'With Lies they make the heart of the Righteous Sad and Strengthen the hand of the wicked so he does not turn from his wicked way to save his soul!' Ezk13:22, Jer23:14, and so it continues, by tampering with the Word, inventing new user friendly versions based on fallacies, they hope to undermine your faith in Christ and cast doubts on accuracy of the Bible. But if you're willing to Strive, Dig Deep, take up the Cross, deny yourself and everything this world has to offer, no force on earth is powerful enough to stifle the Spirit of God revealing Christ to you in reality and the Way to eternal life in His Kingdom.
Let's continue with the Study. Understand that parts of New Testament
manuscripts in existence today are divided between the Masters and the
Copies. Nothing original has survived the test of time due to the limited
type of resources available in times past to preserve parchments and the
material used to inscribe them. The amount of these Masters and copies varies
depending on what source you’re reading from, but it is probably anywhere from
5300 to 5800 in the world today and more
being discovered yearly in ancient Monasteries and other surviving structures.
However by investigating these discoveries you will find that most of the
manuscripts discovered, in walls, stuffed in pottery, etc, are obviously
rejected copies of the Scribes containing many mistakes and omissions. You must
understand that centuries ago they did not have an abundance of writing
materials at their disposal. When a Scribe made a mistake in copying the entire
Parchments would be rejected, but not disposed of because it could be washed and
reused again. So the rejected manuscripts were always stored away for future
use. The Vatican library is filled with these type of copies! Other sources of
NT manuscripts include an additional ten thousand in Latin and more in various
ancient languages including: Syriac, Slavic, Gothic, Ethiopic, Coptic, and
Armenian. The dates of these manuscripts range from 125 (the oldest copy of John
fragments) to the invention of the printing press in the 1500. But I've found
that the Vast majority of them date after the 10th Century. (all
copies of copies) These collections of ancient manuscripts make up the
Codex that are divided between the Majority and Minority text.
(referred to in most bible foot-notes in abbreviations such as: M-Text for
Majority, NU-Text for Minority, or variations thereof)
Remember the Codex stands for the Huge Volume containing hundred if not thousands of manuscripts. So EACH separate text or manuscript has its own varied history behind it. To make a complete study of each one would require a diligent investigation into the individual text; as to its source, original date and how many times it has been copied and where it stands now. This would be like complying a massive Index of Sub-Text branching out (like a tree) into never ending subdivisions. My recommendation is that if you wish to know more about a particular Sub Text in a Codex and why it may differ from others, trace its origin and find out why it was included. The best rule of thumb I've found (rather than running a detailed analysis of each text) is stick with the Majority Text that has a long history of being quoted from by early Christians and used primarily in the translation of most English Bibles of the past. (that we will cover in this study) It's usually people with a doctrinal bias to prove that try to make an issue out of some deletion or addition in a Minority Text. The KJV Only people will do this against the NIV (and other new age versions) because many of newer versions have rejected the Majority Text in favor of more recent discoveries and leave out large portions of Scripture, the KJV and NKJV contain. But again, what is the reasoning behind these objections? Is it to preserve Doctrines or expose the entire System of Error at work today in Professing Christendom convincing people they can be 'Saved in their sins apart from any DEEDS of Repentance and Faith!
That's the central focus of this Study, not necessarily to show how corrupted the new age Bibles have become, but to fairly and honesty examine the facts, compare Scripture with Scripture against ancient text and draw an intelligent conclusion which Versions you should be using and why.
Before we proceed I think that a brief description of Old Testament fragments is
in order. The Old Testament as we know it is taken from a vast collection of
ancient manuscripts dating back many thousands of years. The King James
translators relied on the Hebrew version of the Old Testament known at the
Masoretic Text (MT) Which was copied, edited and disturbed by a group of
Jews (called the Masoretes) throughout the 7-10 Century AD. They also
used the Latin Vulgate which is a fourth century translation of the
entire Bible largely translated by Jerome (and became the official Catholic
Bible for centuries to follow) its OT is translated mainly from the Hebrew
Tanakh rather than the Septuagint. The first publication of the KJV Bible, 1611,
also included books of from the ‘Apocrypha (hidden) because Rome had
included them in the Vulgate. However these books were later dropped in the
third addition KJV in 1769, which is our present day KJV Bible. For Hebrew
reference the KJV used mainly the
Ben Chayyim Masoretic Text in their
translation, dating back to 1524. (The reason for the mismatching Old and New
Testament quotes in our English Bibles is that translations were taken from a
variety of sources available at the time. We will explain this in more detail
In 1946-56 the Dead Sea Scrolls were recovered consisting of 972 texts written in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek and Nabataean. Also the Jerusalem Post reported in 2009 that Manuscripts of the Septuagint have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls and were thought to have been in use among Jews at the time. These manuscripts pushed the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible) back over a thousands years and confirmed much of what has been retained in copies made before the 10th Century. (they did include the Books of Prophets Tobit and Sirach, and what is the other Minor Prophets contained in our English Bibles from Hosea to Malachi) These fragments are presently on display in museums with high definition on line access if you wish to see them. These scrolls were an amazing find and absolutely authenticate the Major Prophets of the Hebrew Bible.
The Septuagint (a Koine Greek translation of the Hebrew OT) has a
questionable history as to its origin.
According to a letter written by Aristeas 2nd Century BC, to his brother, a Greek Version of the Hebrew Scriptures should be undertaken in Egypt commissioned by then King Ptolemy II, for the great library of Alexandria to be added to their already extensive collection. The story goes that the King was favorable to the idea and sent envoys to Jerusalem with lavish gifts to propose the project. The High Priests then selected six men from each of the twelve Tribes totaling 72 (LXX) When they arrive in Alexandria the King greets them with all regalia posing many philosophical questions to them over the next seven days. They then went to work in separate chambers translating the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, each scholar matching their particular work to perfection against the original. The work was completed in 72 days the translators were rewarded handsomely and sent home. This story is mentioned by 1st Century historians Josephus and Philo and was generally accepted as true by the early Christians who were said to be using the Septuagint as their version of the Jewish Bible up through 3-4 Century AD. Even Augustine mentions the existence of the Septuagint around the time the Latin Vulgate was being translated by Jerome, although it is said that Jerome after doing a comparison of Hebrew text against it found problems of mismatching passages and rejected it. But due to pressure from the Roman Church it was included in the Vulgate. (with the Apocrypha)
However upon further research this story has been found to contain many discrepancies. First of all in that time period 2nd Century BC, ONLY the Tribe of Levi were permitted to handle any translation or copying of the Word of God. So would Christ Himself ask for a Written Scroll as He did in Luke4:15-20, that had been re-translated into Greek by scribes other than the Levites? (not likely) And the timeframe of the letter does not line up with historical facts. Aristeas claims to be have been a Greek court official during the time of King Ptolemy and says that a person named Demetrius sent him to request the best scholars of Israel for the work. Yet many that he names are out of his timeframe and some are even Greeks! Also Demetrius was never a Librarian under Ptolemy and the time in which the supposed scholars arrived in Alexandria was said to be the anniversary of Egypt's naval victory over Antigonus, but their only such recorded naval victory occurred many years after Demetrius death. Due to these undisputable facts the letter of Aristeas is a hoax or created by Jewish apologists to promote the Hebrew Scriptures as Divine. And of course with the convenience that the Great library of Alexandria was burned by Julius Caesar around 48BC, all contents destroyed, there's really no way of absolutely confirming that any copies of a Greek Bible were actually there, only historical speculations.
The mismatching Text between Old and New Testament quotes dates back to Jerome’s first analysts of the Hebrew scrolls against the Septuagint mentioned above. From there onward we have the Masorectics working on their translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, spanning into the Tenth Century. Also Origen around 235AD, a known Gnostic posing as a Christian, did a comparative column for column version of the Hebrew Scriptures with various versions of ancient and Koine Greek, including a column of the Septuagint translation. Although only fragments of his work remain it does add credence to the fact that the Septuagint did exist as early as 2nd Century AD. But exactly WHO did the original translation (or what group) is impossible to ascertain. Although the Septuagint is certainly not 'Inspired' as the fictional story suggests, it does have some good content as well as bad and several astute translations of Key passages concerning the coming of Christ. The Apocryphal books included in the Septuagint have always had mixed acceptance among western Christianity, the Latin Vulgate contains them as well as did the first publications of the KJV. They are certainly not inspired in my opinion, but some of them do contain godly wisdom and instruction as do many of the ancient letters of the Church fathers. You take these kind of things with a gain of salt and analyze them against the Wholesome Words of Jesus Christ. They are certainly not a valid reason to outright reject the Septuagint altogether, but a caution to never stop digging and searching the Scriptures to Perfect our knowledge in Christ.
English Versions of the Septuagint available today:
Charles Lee Brenton 1851, primarily based on the Codex Vaticanus (1209) A long time standard, translated directly from the Greek Version dating back to 3-4 Century AD. I can't find any evidence that says he did any comparative studies against the Hebrew text at the time.
The N.E.T.S. in Modern English published in 2007, Not a new translation but instead a revision of already existing publications including the NRSV Bible, Alfred Rahif’s manual from previous studies. Not worth your time.
Orthodox Study Bible, 2008, Published by St. Athanasius Academy of Orthodox Theology. They received permission from Thomas Nelson publishing to use the NKJV New Testament translation therefore all NT quotes match perfectly with the OT, as they boast. However the OT translation is based solely on the Greek Septuagint, on the assumption that it existed before the birth of Christ. The fact that it was checked against the NKJV and the Hebrew, as they claim, does add credence to the speculation that the Septuagint quotes from the NT, not visa-versa. I caution you also that the Orthodox Church, although it does differ from the main-stream Catholic institution, still believes that Mary is the Mother of God and Jesus had no brothers or sisters, among others things as the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist and Wine and many dark traditions from ancient times. The extensive commentary from first minimal Saints are for the most part instructive, but their own commentary is often times contradictory and confusing. They will assert that man is born with free will untainted by original sin and then turn around and strip him of his ability to use that free will because of a ‘Fallen Nature inherited from the fall. Thus instead of original sin or moral depravity, its fallen nature, so what’s the difference. My advice is to dispense with purchasing any of these versions and use the on-line link to Brenton's version if you wish to reference it.
It was the invention of the Printing Press in Germany, 1450's that prompted a renaissance in the translation of Biblical text. The famous Gutenberg Bible began the explosion of religious writings in the common language of the people. This new technology spread like wild fire throughout Europe into the 15-1600's, with millions of books printed and distributed. It was a rebirth of Knowledge unprecedented in history and put the Word of God back into the hands of the common people. The Roman Church tried to suppress it and keep the world in darkness, but men of determination and deep faith assaulted the Papal Stronghold and brought the Bible to the English speaking world. Although the Vatican did have its minions in place anticipating a reformation of sorts, in the likes of Luther and Calvin, likely agents of the new Jesuit order of Ignatius Loyola established in 1536, the SAME year the first addition of Calvin's institutes appeared, firmly establishing Augustinian theology that was later codified in the Westminster Confession 1646. This was also the same year William Tyndale was killed for attempting to translate the Bible into English. So the Vatican foot-prints are all over the Reformation and Protestantism inadvertently played directly into their hands As the Lutherans still pay homage to the Pope, today most of western Christianity rally under his flag. In the System of error all roads lead to Rome and the Jesuit/Templar/Masons have played a vital role throughout our history bringing about their Satanic New World Order.
English Translations of the Bible that precede the KJV:
John Wycliffe Bible 1382-95, Not a translation but a revision from the Latin Vulgate. It was unauthorized by the religious establishment and deemed unworthy. But it did serve as the first English version of the entire Bible and it was popular among the common people. Wycliffe avoided martyrdom and died a natural death in 1384, but was later deemed a heretic by the Catholic Church in 1415. All his works were burned and his bones exhumed ground to ash and cast into a river. You can study the period of history leading up to the Renaissance and the many attempts made to translate the Vulgate into a common language and see how many died trying. (Wycliffe was lucky!)
William Tyndale Bible 1526,
Tyndale’s Bible is credited with being the first English translation to work directly from Hebrew and Greek texts. Furthermore it was the first English biblical translation that was mass-produced as a result of new advances in the art of printing. Although Tyndale never finished his translation of the OT because in 1536 he was deemed a heretic and executed in 1536 by strangulation and his body burned at the stake, his work up to that point was completed by the VERY people who Killed him! And it set into motion a series of English Bibles based on his efforts, including the Great Bible (authorized by King Henry of England) and later the Geneva Bible, taken to Jamestown in 1607 and also on the Mayflower in 1620. It played significantly into the eventual translation of the King James Bible, most scholars believe that at least 90% of the Prose and meticulous work translating the Textus Receptus he did, were used in the KJV. Because of his great scholarship and dedication, Tyndale laid the foundation for future Bibles and finally the great awakening in England itself in answer to his dying prayer: "Lord! Open the King of England's eyes.
Several English versions followed Tyndale's, all Revised from his work:
The Miles Coverdale Bible 1535, Matthew Bible 1537, Great Bible 1540, Geneva Bible 1599, also known as the Calvinistic Bible because of the foot notes, and the Bishops Bible 1568. These Bibles played heavily into the Reformation as the Corrupt Catholic Monarchies lost much of their ecclesiastic strangle hold over Europe and England. But most of these versions were greatly influenced by Calvinistic/ Lutheran theology, filtered into Protestant Christianity by the Vatican, and the translation of the KJV is no exception.
The King James Bible 1611
King James VI commissioned the translation in 1604, gathering 47 scholars from the Church of England.
They worked from the Textus Receptus, Majority-Minority text: The Greek, Waldensian, Albegensian, Gauls and Celtic, Also the Byzantine and Vulgate and of course Tyndale's translation. For the Old Testament they were heavily influenced by the Masoretic text but also referenced the Septuagint and Apocrypha. The translators utilized all previous English versions and consulted contemporary vernacular translations in Spanish, French, Italian and German. They also made wide use of all printed editions in the original languages including the ancient Syriac New Testament a Latin version translated from the original Greek in the second to fifth Centuries. (said to be translated from Greek originals. Research it yourself if interested) Basically about everything they could get their hands on at the time.
Textus Receptus consists of the Majority and Minority text, Byzantine and Greek, Codex Alexandrians, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and the Vulgate. Many of these Codex also contain Old Testament copies and references to the Septuagint. From its origin the TR has been examined, traced verified and re-verified and found to be superior due to the fact Erasmus carefully selected the best Greek Codex and maintained a professional style in translation. Although the Minority text is included in the TR it has always been noted as 'LESS reliable in the notations.
Recent discovery, as mentioned in this study, lack consistency, are filled with
errors, deletions and additions and are never quoted by the early Saints. The
fact that the modern translation committees are so eager to use these
manuscripts is further proof of their on going agenda to undermine the Word of God.
But where did they come from?
To answer that question let's take a brief look into the great 18th century quest to replace the KJB.
First of all the KJV scholars did research manuscripts from the Vatican and found them all to be unreliable.
You should note that most of the Minority Text of the TR is connected to Rome and Alexandria; Codex Vaticanus, Alexandrinus, Sinaiticus, all have Roman origins. And the same holds true of all the so-called recent discoveries, especially those that appeared in this 1800's time frame when a new movement was afoot to replace the KJV.
The main players involved in this conspiracy were Hort (of the Westcott, Hort revised addition) and Tischendorf, a German scholar from Saxony, who supposedly discovered the oldest completed Bible from 325AD, in 1844. However we find that this discovery was prompted by letters from Hort entrusting himself to Tischendorf in order that he would supply some 'rich new material for the purpose of destroying the Deity of Christ. Hort was a strange character in his time, he prayed for the destruction of the American Union in a letter to Reverend John Ellerton, Sept 25, 1862. (Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, volume1 pages 458-459) He praised Charles Darwin and believed in evolution, therefore placing blacks on a lower level in the evolutionary time-table. He also claimed that Genesis Chapter 1 was a fairy tale. After Hort made the claim that Tischendorf would find him new material to rewrite the scriptures, Tischendorf came up with Codex Vaticanus #1209, and Codex Vaticanus # 2061, (Codex B) (supposedly more new found copies from the Vaticanus Library in Rome) Along with the never before discovered Codex Sinaiticus, oldest ever found, at Mt Sinai, St Catherin's Cathedral. There were countless (14,800) corrections grafted into the Sinaiticus manuscripts, even these two Codex's, A and B, did not agree with each other in thousands of places. Quote: 'There are 3036 differences between the readings in Vaticanus and Sinaiticus in the Gospels alone! (Codex B and Its Allies by Herman Hoskier; volume 2, p.1) Needless to say, its no wonder there are hundreds of deletions in such Versions as the NIV, NASB, RSV, because the people who sit on the boards that translated these Bibles are of questionable sincerity. For example:
Bruce Metzger, (1914-2007), served on the board of the American Bible Society and United Bible Societies. Metzger is widely considered one of the most influential New Testament scholars of the 20th century. He sat at the head of Nestles-Aland Critical Text advisory board, (Barbara Aland, Kurt Aland, Carlo Maria Martini, Bruce Metzger) He believed that 19 of the NT books were not valid, also thought that early Genesis was added to the text and not reliable. Bart Erham, an agnostic, was Metzger's star pupil. This is all in Metzger's own book co-authored with Bart Erhman, textual criticism. (these men believed that the majority of the NT was a myth) He felt it was alright to produce a bible with 40% of the text missing, (the Readers Digest Bible) and of course he omitted Rev 22-23. So its wise to beware which Version you're Studying from. Do some homework!
It’s rather amazing also that one man, Tischendorf, commissioned by Hort, would be able to come up with so much manuscript material regarding existing Alexandrian writings. Constantine Simonides was said to be the greatest forger in the 19th century, and admitted that he was the one who forged them. ('Tischendorf was only the senior of Simonides by 5 years, and in the science of Paleography had neither his knowledge nor his experience, Farrar, 1907 Forgeries) Tischendorf was responsible for presenting 3 of the top 4 Alexandrian manuscripts 01, 03, 04 (Codex B). I find the odds of this actually happening quite remarkable and extremely doubtful. (03) The Codex Vaticanus, which by the way, is not a specific name for any specific manuscript, but just a generic label since there are hundreds of Codex Vaticanus. It is merely a library identification, meaning it is a Codex belonging to the Vatican Library. Its real name is a number, 1209. This (03 manuscript) was twice written over, and has this note in the margin of page 1512, next to Hebrews 1:3, "Fool and knave, leave the old reading alone, and do not change it". It is said of its description that, "This re-inking had several side effects, all of them (from our standpoint) bad. First, it defaced the appearance of the letters, making it much harder to do paleographic work. Second, it rendered some of the readings of the original text impossible to reconstruct. Yet they hail this manuscript as a critical-text which is full of punctual and spelling errors. Every place you search it is Tischendorf's and Hort's name that shows up in Textual Criticism. Then furthered along with the names of Bruce Metzger and Aland of the 20th century. These make up the critical text that prevails over the TR in the Newer Versions. One of the main reasons behind this I believe, is to completely remove the Deity of Christ, His worship, and the Triune Godhead, of which is currently under attack. The new Message Bible has almost accomplished this, having only 2 verses that attest to Christ's Deity. (I dare to think what the bibles will be like in another 30 years or so)
Note also how these supposedly discovered Codex bring Key passages into question where the Godhead is revealed, ( Acts 17-29, Rom1-20, Col 2-9) Hort didn't believe in the Deity of Christ and neither did many of cohorts. It becomes pretty obvious that he and Westcott worked hand in hand with the Vatican to produce these manuscripts
The Vatican still considered the Authorized Version as vile and we hear those same words from Hort. When you consider that Tischendorf had a meeting with the Pope and was the one, of a few men that have ever been allowed to examine the Codex Vaticanus, then you begin to understand what their intent was. Tischendorf considered the Authorized Version vile also. The following is an excerpt from Hort to the Reverend John Ellerton, April 1853,
'He and I are going to edit a Greek text of the N. T. some two or three years hence, if possible. Lachmann and Tischendorf will supply rich materials, but not nearly enough ; and we hope to do a good deal with the Oriental versions. It is Tischendorf, who gave us (01) Codex Sinaiticus, (03) Codex Vaticanus, and (04) Codex Epraemi Rescriptus, and he was the ONLY person allowed to see them! In his biography, 1866 concerning the Codex Sinaiticus he said that he had an audience with Pope Gregory XVI in May 1843, and then an intercourse with Cardinal Mezzofanti, and the following year and found 43 sheets of the Old Testament from the Codex Sinaiticus in a waste paper basket in Mt Sinai. Amazing!! Then in 1853, just nine years after finding these OT scriptures, in the very same year Hort said Tischendorf would find him rich material, Even more amazing. Tischendorf went back to Sinai looking for more biblical manuscripts, and he found a fragment of Genesis of that same manuscript for which he found 43 leaves nine years earlier. And then 6 years later in 1859 we find Tischendorf back in Mt. Sinai again where he magically finds yet more of the Old Testament, and all of the New Testament without a fragmented page. You will also find in this same biography that Tischendorf was able to completely decipher (04) Codex Ephrem even though it had been undecipherable for 6 Centuries. Massive evidence of the obvious conspiracy to undermine the Bible, yet the world has bought into it hook, line and sinker! This is why its so important to Know what's behind every challenge someone makes to the validity of Scripture.
Before we look into specific translation discrepancies in the KJV we should fill in the history behind it and the times in which it was translated. First of all the main reason for the tag ‘Authorized’ version was that King James wanted it to supplant the more popular versions of the Bishops Bible and Geneva Bible. He ordered his printers to halt printings of the Bishops bible and it didn’t take long after that for the KJV to become the Authorized Version in England. It took a bit longer for it to take hold in Scotland where the Geneva Bible had long been their standard. London printers however did assert a monopoly in Bible printing in favor of the KJV but it took a while before the general public accepted it as the mainstream English translation. The Geneva Bible was still highly popular and due to the prohibition of printing in England printers in Amsterdam produced them with a London imprint until 1637 when an English Archbishop prohibited their printing and importation. However the advent of the English Civil War 1642-51 tipped the scales in favor of the Authorized version.
Due to the Parliamentary victory in this war the total power of the Monarchy ended and England became a Commonwealth in which the Monarch could not act without consent of the parliament. (if you wish to believe it!) As a result of the distribution of Bibles during this war and the attempted insertion of Geneva notes into the KJV, the Geneva version became politically suspect due to its Puritan leanings. Therefore due to the lucrative printing rights of the Authorized Version printers saw no commercial advantage in marketing a rival addition. Dispute continued throughout the 1600’s over printing rights, misprints and mistakes in punctuation and grammar. Some scholars outright rejected the KJV in favor of the Vulgate and Geneva versions but by the early 1700’s publishers had managed to produce error free volumes and the KJV and it became the dominate version among English speaking Churchmen. A major revision of the text came about in 1769 to quell the scandal of misprinted text showing up at Oxford and Cambridge universities. General standards of spelling, punctuation, typesetting, capitalization and grammar had changed radically in the 100 years since the first edition KJV so the university scholars wanted to produce an updated standard of the text. But it turned out to be a mammoth task with many thousands of changes in punctuation, spelling and minor changes in the text. This also was the time the use of italics was introduced into our language to supply words not found in the original languages. The Oxford scholars also included the Apocrypha in their updated version. The Standardized version became the printers favorite into the 1800’s, mostly excluding the Apocrypha. From 1769 the KJV remained unchanged and was the dominate version in the English-speaking Protestant world. However language scholars continued to voice concerns over unsatisfactory translation of Greek words and phrases into English in some passages in light of comparisons to the Codex of the Textus Receptus. (Our standard Greek & Hebrew Lexicons are based on the KJV, specifically Strong’s Concordance published in 1890)
In 1881 the Westcott-Hort Revised version hit the market based on
the corrupted 'Critical text' mentioned above. Although it sold widely it
was never able to gain dominance over the KJV which dominated the market for
over 250 years. (1700-1950) Further attempts were made into the 20th Century to
supplant the KJV and are still underway.
There is a powerful KJV Only movement, today, but its not necessarily based on preserving the integrity of the TR or Majority text. It's focused mainly on ferociously protecting certain Doctrines (we mentioned before) they believe are taught in the KJV. They will go to great lengths rewriting history and embellishment the facts to prove the KJV was inspired by God and everyone involved in its translation was divinely endowed with miraculous abilities to keep the text free from error and doctrinal bias. They emphasize the 'Authorized tag as though it was authorized of God and all other versions are corrupt, un-authorized of God and of the devil. Of course they will deny all the historical facts surrounding the KJV and call anyone a heretic who uses another version. Yet, as mentioned before, regardless of version, they ALL preach the same 'saved in sin gospel based on the Westminster Confession 1646. The point is that bringing the Bible to the English speaking world was wrought with dangers and perils of life. Not only men like Wycliffe and Tyndale, but thousands of others un-named in history who made attempts to translated the Holy Scriptures into their common languages, endured pain and death. The establishment Catholic Church did NOT want people to have free access to the Scriptures and for centuries they kept the world in great darkness by stamping out any remnant of genuine Christianity from the earth. From the 1800's to now they are still hard at work, behind the scenes, bringing professing Christendom into Mystery Babylon to worship the great Beast of self-exaltation.
It's important to note that although publishing rights are in the public domain in most of the world, in the United Kingdom it still requires a Royal prerogative and a Crown license to reproduce the KJV under letters of patent. Other royal charters grant Cambridge and Oxford universities to reproduce the KJV independent of the Crown’s license, but only because the Queen’s Printer is now Cambridge University press. (inherited by descended rights) The Crown does not retain a monopoly over printing and publishing in the UK and all copy write perpetuities were abolish in 1988. So the common argument that all the other Versions are 'Copy-writes, but the KJV isn't, is rather moot. The Crown originally produced it and isn't about to totally relinquish its control over it.
The King James only crowd elevates the Book itself to some kind
of relic with magical powers to 'Save the soul. (much like Catholic relics
revered throughout history) They view it as the 'infallible Word
of God and stand above anyone who opposes their precious Doctrines derived from
its pages. Its more fanaticism than a sincere desire to preserve the truth and
bring people to a real Repentance and faith proven by deeds. Anyone awake to the
fallacies of Reformed doctrine can use the KJV to refute them by pointing to
passages they deny to accept. The KJV says you will be Judged according to your
Deeds done in Faith and it also makes clear in many passages that man is Worker
together with God in Salvation and must DO his part in the process of
reconciliation. It's the myths and fables handed down through the centuries by
men they wrongly revere that keeps them in bondage to the lies of Moral
depravity, human inability faith alone and magic covers for sin. The WORD
can bring someone seeking God from Darkness to Light from the Power of Satan to
God, if they are willing to Dig, Count the Cost, take up their Cross and follow
Christ instead of men! Despite the partiality and bias of men who translated the
Scriptures, God still speaks through His Spirit to honest and humble hearts
seeking Him in sincerity and truth. What you need to understand is that
EVERY Version is subject to doctrinal bias and the agendas of men, there
are no exceptions. But the WORD itself Commands you to STUDY
the Scriptures Diligently, securitizing, examining, testing and searching to
confirm in your mind a 'precise and correct Knowledge of the Truth. (2Tim2:15,
1Jh4:1, 2Cor13:5) The Spirit will always bear Witness of Christ
and His Doctrine (not doctrines!) which is according to godliness and
self-control, the Wholesome Words of Jesus Christ that teach us obedience and
faithfulness to God. 1Tim6:3, 2Jh7-10
Doctrines that absolve you of your responsibility to come clean with God and Keep yourself Pure to the end are NOT the Doctrine of Christ. (in any Version!)
My purpose is not to cast aspersions on the KJV Bible as a Sub-Standard translation. In fact I believe it is among the best translations out there with a few select definition issues we will cover next. Perspective is the issue here, we need to understand the historical circumstances surrounding the KJV (and any version) Just as we now investigate the present day committees that produce the new age versions and find them wanting, we must apply the same scrutiny to the KJV and take into account the prevailing Doctrines the translators were under. In the 1600's England was dominated by a Puritanical fervor of intolerance and control, that subjugated people under a religious tyranny of sorts that like the Pharisees, strained at the gnat and swallowed the camel, neglecting the weightier maters of justice, mercy and love in favor of oppressive doctrines of men. Therefore every translation during this period was subject to the same bias, including the 'cherished KJV. In fact the Reformation itself that historically began with Martin Luther when he (supposedly) discovered man could be saved by 'Faith alone, apart of any deeds of faith or repentance, is entirely based on the Doctrines articulated in the 1646 Westminster Confession of faith. Therefore every Bible translation from that period and even to now is based in varying degrees on the Doctrinal grounds of:
Moral depravity, Substitution, faith alone, inability, imputed righteousness or moral Transfer of virtue, Pre-forgiveness of sin, rewards system and eternal security. For a full understanding of the Westminster Confession consult my article examining each tenet. Following is a Summary of it:
The Prevailing Doctrine in 1600's England under which the KJV was
Immutable God, never changes His mind or experiences feelings
Chooses from foundation of world elect and non-elect
Works all things in accordance with His holy will but isn’t responsible for man’s rebellion
Imputes guilt and corruption of nature on all mankind for Adam’s sin
Man has no free will or ability to seek Him, God must grant man repentance and faith to believe.
Justification in Sin, Righteousness and Obedience of Christ transferred by proxy
Sin pre-forgiven Paid for in advance by Christ's finish work on Cross, died in your place became sin for you
Elect can never stop sinning in this life, but outcome of Salvation is secure.
Those aware of Doctrinal fallacies can clearly see that the KJV Translators believed in the TULIP:
Total Depravity of man
Unconditional election and reprobation from foundation of world
Limited Atonement applies only to the Elect
Irresistible Grace for the elect, they will be Saved in spite of their
Perseverance of the Saints (eternal security in our lingo)
Certainly there is a Mixture of Truth with the error in Westminster. They believed in the Deity of Christ, the Virgin Birth, Creation, Sovereignty of God, Punishment of the wicked and the return of Christ. There are slight variations in these beliefs among the Calvin / Luther side and the Wesleyan / Arminus, mainly centering on the ability of man to some degree, being made able to make the ultimate Choice to follow Christ or not. But his Will is still disabled by Original Sin and the inbred corruption must be 'Off-set in some manner by God through a 'Special type of Grace, to enable him to repent and believe. But ultimately the differences are nothing more than 'Splitting Hairs' over the finer points in the on-going 'in-house debates that took place between the various Sects of Protestantism. Bottom line man is stripped of his Natural ability to Obey God's Commands and Turn from his sins without some kind of special help. (be it election or some special unction of grace)
That's why they had to invent:
The effectual Call
And Penal Substitution
ALL because, in their minds, man could NOT Rule over it: By rendering simple Obedience to His Commands
‘If you do well will you not be accepted? If you do not well, sin lies at the door and its desire is for you but you should RULE OVER it!’ Gen4:7
Here is what the KJV translators believed about the Nature of man:
Article VI Westminster Confession of faith
Our first Parents fell to temptation according to the wise and holy counsel of God to permit having purposed to order it to His own glory. By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and became dead in sin wholly in all parts and faculties of soul and body. The guilt of their sin was imputed to all (future) mankind with the same death and corruption of nature. Due to this corruption man is utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite of all good, wholly inclined to all evil. (can never stop sinning!)
This corruption of nature remains in those during this life even after regeneration and although Christ has pardoned and mortified (Provisionally) this corruption it still truly and properly sin. All sin both original and actual is Transgression of God’s law and bares the guilt and wages thereof.
Man fell from the original covenant with God by transgression of His perfect law thereby rendering himself incapable of obedience to any law. Thus God does give him a Second Covenant of Grace where He freely offers the helpless sinner Salvation in Jesus Christ by faith, which He also provides to those ordained to be made willing to enter into this relationship. This Covenant although administered differently under the law was also available to those elect through the operation of the Spirit to instruct them as to the promised Messiah in whom they would have remission of all sin.
Perspective established we proceed by examining certain passages from the KJV
(compared mainly to the NKJV) and explain the reasons why they inserted Key
words to slant the passage in favor of the doctrines above.
Note: Why the NKJV?
The first addition of this Bible by Thomas Nelson Publishers in1979, was a decent alterative to the KJV. It did not contain any study notes reflecting the new age interpretations that cast aspersions on the TR nor did it have any of deletions common in the NIV and RVS Versions, but it did contain Foot notes sighting deletions and changes in the Minority Text, although the passages are left intact. The Preface has a brief description of the translation format and the Manuscripts used. There is also an extensive history of the King James Version included in the final section. However I would caution you to beware of the Newer Publications of this Bible beyond the 1982 Copy write because it appears that Thomas Nelson has also fallen prey to the same corruption as all the other modern translations. The newer versions of the NKJV contain extensive study notes and massive deletions much like the NIV. I recommend that you avoid them and if you still wish to obtain a copy of the NKJV try to find one with the 1982 or earlier copy write from the book sellers on line. So understand that my comparisons of Scripture presented in this study are taken from the first publication of this Bible.
I'm also compelled to mention that debating the use of thee & thou in the KJV against 'you is a grammatical argument of semantics over the use of singular or plural. The KJV only people will claim that thee expresses the person being addressed in the singular, where ‘you’ is plural and could be addressed to anyone present or everyone unknown. But Webster’s Dictionary (and I’m certain Daniel Webster used a KJV in his time!) defines ‘you’ as BOTH singular and plural, depending on its use. It’s purely sentence context, not poor use of the English language or misdirected intent. Its more than Obvious WHO Jesus is speaking to in the Scriptures!
We begin with Passages under Consideration:
And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement. Rom5:11 KJV
And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation. Rom5:11 NKJV (the NKJV got this one right)
The Word 'Atonement is not in the text, it was added by the KJV translators, not necessarily in agreement with its use in the OT, but mainly because Mr. Tyndale changed the Word in his version because he believed it better expressed Christ's Substitutionary sacrifice on the Cross, meaning in his mind: 'at one-moment' He paid off mankind's sin debt and made Provision for eternal Salvation to all who would 'trust, receive, believe' in His finished work. The idea of ‘Reconciliation, which simply means: 'Return to favor', has nothing to do with Payment or Substitution, but occurs by Repentance and faith Proven by deeds, that's why the imperative in Scripture is on Repentance, not trust. BUT when you believe that this Reconciliation has ALREADY taken place: 'God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself not imputing their trespasses to them, 2Cor5:19, there is no imperative to: Be Reconciled to God’ 2Cor5:20, by Repentance toward God and Faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ! Acts20:21. In other words under their prevailing Doctrine, you 'Receive the Atonement, not PROVE your repentance by your Deeds. Acts26:18-21. In the OT Atonement means Reconciliation, you were 'returned to favor by offering an acceptable sacrifice to God for your non-presumptuous sins. Now your 'returned to favor by Coming Clean with God and proving it through faithfulness to His Word. The purpose of Changing this word in Rom5:11 was to slant the passage in favor of Substitution and blend it with several other passages, as shown, to build on their premise.
They did the same thing with the Rom3:25 passage with the use of the word: Propitiation, which simply means 'appeasement', translated 'Mercy Seat' in Heb9:5, and inserted wrongly in Heb2:17 (KJV) where the actual Greek Word is Reconciliation. The Propitiation by His Blood, 1Jh2:2, 4:10, is the appeasement, sweet smelling aroma to God, Eph5:2, offered on man's behalf, so he may be reconciled (returned to favor) through repentance and faith. Under the KJV translators premise propitiation means: expiatory sacrifice (as it will read in foot-notes and even in Strongs Lexicon notes) Expiatory is a theological term (not in the bible) meaning Substitution. But the Greek Word translated Propitiation does NOT mean Substitution, merely 'appeasement: hilaskomai : 'To appease, to be gracious and merciful. Again another example of slanting scripture in favor of Doctrine.
Next we examine their attack on the Nature of Man:
But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. Rom7:8 KJV
Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry: Col3:5 KJV
Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God: 1Thes4:5
Again the NKJV Gets these Passages Right:
But sin, taking opportunity by the commandment, produced in me all manner of evil desire. For apart from the law sin was dead. Rom7:8 NKJV
Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. Col3:5 NKJV
not in passion of lust, like the Gentiles who do not know God; 1Thes4:5 NKJV
And he said
unto them, With desire have longed to eat this passover with you before
I suffer Lk22:15
(desire & Lust are the same word in Greek and can be used in either sense, good or bad)
This is a Perfect
example of Slanting Scripture by 'interpretation. The Greek word in these
passages is simply:
epithymia, desire or lust depending on sentence context. The Latin expression ‘Concupiscence or 'Sinful Nature (as its translated in the NIV) is not in the text. It was invented by Augustine (4th Century Rome) to convey an inbred Nature of corruption dwelled in the flesh of man and by its very presence of lustful desires, proves he was born a sinner utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite of all good, wholly inclined to all evil. (Westminster Confession VI) In other words the Natural Inclinations, that make you human, are PROOF your born a sinner! This is why Augustine was also the first person to teach that Romans 7 was the normal state of a 'Christian struggling with their 'Sinful Nature, Rom7:8, and sadly its been the common interpretation of it since. As I said, the NIV actually uses the term: 'Sinful Nature several times in the text, leaving no doubt in the readers mind that his desire to do good is constantly hindered by his 'sinful nature, inclined to evil.
Augustine also translated Rom5:12 in the Vulgate as: 'All Sinned in Adam', instead of 'because or in that, all sinned', the Greek quo Clearly showing the Conditional sense, but in favor of his Gnostic 'dual nature' leanings he was compelled to blame his sin on someone other than himself and sourced it to Adam.
Another glaring example of this bent toward inbred moral depravity is the Phil 3:21 passage where the Greek Word 'Lowly or of low estate' is translated 'Vile to suggest man's body is sinful of itself or that there is something corrupt in his flesh, other than its mortality destine to see corruption in death. (1Cor15:52) Since we are said to 'Serve the Lord in our 'mortal bodies, Gal2:20, nothing 'Vile could be dwelling in it or how could it be a 'Vessel Fit for the master's use? 2Tim2:21. Here is how the passages read in the two Versions, and again the NKJV got it Right.
For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself. Phil2:21 KJV
For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself. NKJV
The Word flesh
in Greek is SARX, simply that which covers the bones, sinew. The
use of it in Scripture is NOT to suggest that human flesh is corrupted by
sin as some kind of inbred malady or disease. (Sin cannot be genetic because it
requires a choice) When Rom7:18 says: 'For I know that in me (that is, in
my flesh) dwelleth no good thing', the writer is referring
to his 'Desires given over to Sinful indulgence, because he has
already said that 'all manner of evil desires' were
the cause of his sin, Rom7:9, NOT his flesh! So the mere fact that our
bodies are SARX (flesh) does not make us 'inclined to evil, its
OUR DESIRES unchecked that entice our bodies to Sin!
But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires-lust and enticed. Js1:14
Even the KJV says, 'You are a SLAVE to who you OBEY, sin unto Death or Obedience unto Righteousness!' Rom6:16, you Obeying your 'lustful desires (not your flesh) makes you a Slave to Sin, Of course the flesh is gratified by Sin, that's why Christ says that if your 'EYE cause you to Sin, Pluck it out and cast it from you, If your FOOT-HAND causes you to sin, cut if off and cast it from you!' Matt5:29-30, Mk9:43, 45, 47. THIS is what the writer means when he uses the word Flesh in such manner: 'The Passions and Desires of the flesh' Gal5:24.
In the SAME Flesh you Serve God! How could the Spirit of God dwell in a 'Corrupted Temple if our Bodies are said to be the Temple of God? 1Cor3:16
I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me. Gal2:20
You don't drive nails through your hands and feet to Crucify the flesh with its passions and desires, Gal2:24, you Put to Death the evil deeds you are doing in the body, Col3:5, when you repent. The KJV reads in Gal2:20, 'I AM Crucified with Christ', miss-applying the Greek Preposition that is in the 'Perfect sense, meaning: 'an action which is viewed as having been completed in the past, once and for all, not needing to be repeated. There is no equivalent in the English other than 'I have been' past tense. They do the same thing in Rom6:6, 'Knowing this that our old man is Crucified with Him', instead of 'WAS Crucified with Him in the NKJV, again miss-applying the Preposition's 'Perfect Tense that this is something the writer is saying has taken place already in the Past and is NOT to be repeated in the future. Quit significant in light of this taking place in the process of our Repentance, not something that is postionally applied to you when you 'receive Christ. The simple miss-application of a Preposition radically changes the meaning of the passage slanting it in favor of reformed doctrines. Again the NKJV translates these passages in question in their correct tense.
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. Rom6:6 KJV
knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. Rom6:6 NKJV
The point of these passages is to show how the body of sin (sinful desires-lusts) are done away with once and for all. By Crucifying the self-indulgent passions and desires in Repentance you Come Clean with God and Clear yourself of all wrong doing as 2Cor7:10-11 clearly shows: 'For observe this very thing, what you sorrowed in a godly manner, What diligence it Produced in you, what CLEARING of yourselves...! This is not some Symbolic theological notion that magically takes place when you 'receive Jesus as the KJV translators believed. When this happens in reality, then 'Sin shall not have dominion over you' Rom6:14, because you are no longer a Slave to your sinful desires, which have radically CHANGED in repentance: 'What Vehement desire, zeal and fear', it Produced in you. God does not 'effect (cause to happen) this Change in your desires, because your desires are connected to your Will and that means its entirely in your hands to Resolve and Determine with Purpose any change that's going to take place in WHO you will Serve. That's why Jesus said: 'If any man WILL Come after Me let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me' Lk9:23, not if anyone merely 'desires, only when the desire is united with the will does the action take place, either in serving Sin, Js1:14, or following Christ Lk9:23.
Further Misuse of Greek Prepositions:
The KJV Translators believed that faith and Repentance had to be 'effected by God and were NOT of yourself, like Grace there were both a ‘Gift to the elect when they received the 'effectual call' to believe in Christ. Many Bible Commentaries and Study Bibles will reflect this view and say that Faith to believe in Christ is something elusive to man and must be given to him by God. So again the KJV translators tampered with the Greek Prepositions in several passages to imply that we are Saved by the Faith of Christ, Not Faith in Him.
To better Study
this understand that the Greek language uses Prepositions much like English.
(in, of, by, no, not, from) They denote point of origin from which the subject
was derived; a fixed position in the subject, or unto or toward the subject. The
expressions are thus: ‘Ek’, ‘eis’, ‘en’, respectively. Strongs:
1537, 1519, 1722, see note:
Since I originally completed this study in 2013, the on line Strongs Lexicon of Blueletter Bible web site (which I used as my source) has removed the link to the prepositions in question in the Book of Galatians. Now if you look at the passage 'faith of Jesus Christ' Gal2:16, 20, 3:22, you can still click on the word Faith for a Greek definition, but NOT on the preposition 'OF', you can only click on the entire Phrase 'of Jesus Christ', and obviously be shown the Greek word for Jesus-Iēsous, access to the specific preposition used in the sentence is blocked! Fortunately I noted the Strongs numbers in my original Study (above) and you can still reference their use in other passages to confirm the definition I derived noted in this study, that 'faith IN Jesus' is the proper understanding in the Greek, speaking of a fixed position of our faith, unto or toward the subject in question-Jesus. Why this was changed on Blueletter I have no idea, but I suspect the committees that monitor these things operate from an agenda as I have noted in this study.
Let’s deal first with the use of ‘EK’ to illustrate misuse:
Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Gal2:16 KJV
I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. Gal2:20 KJV
But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. Gal3:22 KJV (Rom3:22 and Phil 3:9 Read the same)
The NKJV Bible uses the Preposition ‘Faith IN Christ’, in each of these passages. Denoting where the faith proceeds out from; ‘Christ’ and in WHOM it is placed by the person; Proper use of the Greek preposition, You're Saved by placing you Faith IN CHRIST, not by relying on His Faith to replace your lack thereof. But the KJV translators believed otherwise and translated the Prepositions 'OF' instead of 'IN', as though its His Faith that gives you the faith (or makes you willing) to believe. It may seem like splitting hairs here, since the Preposition can be used either way and still convey the same meaning, that you must place Your Faith in Christ. But I've heard many KJV Only Pundits use these Passages to insist that the Bible teaches we must be Given Faith by Christ in order to believe in Him, although they will often conceal their belief in Election. This is why I include it in the Study because we can be assured that the KJV Translators did this for a specific reason. Yet they translate it properly in Gal3:26 ‘For you are sons through FAITH IN CHRIST!’ And similarly in Col1:4, 2:5, 1Tim3:13. Why would they do that when it’s apparent they singled out the Galatians passages to begin with?
Faith and Believe
in the Greek are synonyms,
interchangable in Scripture with Obey:
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth (obey) not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. Jh3:36
The proper definition of Faith is 'Faithfulness, Fidelity, synonymous with Obedience, Believe or Believe Not can be stated 'obey not as in 1Pet4:17, Rom2:8, as it should have been in the John3:36 passage
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Rom2:8
The point is with that with the rampant misuse of John 3:16, to just merely 'believe in Jesus and be saved, in the professed Churches, this needs to be Clarified. Faith is Obedience to the Truth, a mere acknowledgement of belief is the faith of devils, James2:19
Consider the following Passages from the KJV using the same Preposition:
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all, Rom4:16
What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith. Rom9:30
My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. Js2:1
In the Romans 4:16 passage the preposition is expressed ‘of faith’ and ‘of the law’, both showing the origin of such faith and from where it proceeds; either from faith in Christ, or faith in the law. So we either place our faith IN Christ or wrongly IN the law, not wait for Christ to do it for us.
The Romans 9:30
passage again shows from where the Righteousness proceeds: From FAITH,
as in Rom1:17, ‘The Righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith’,
Again: Gal3:11, ‘The Just shall live BY FAITH!’
Faith, pistis, is: Faithfulness, fidelity, synonymous with obedience, Faith is Never alone, its not His faith that Saves us, its our Faithfulness to Him. That’s why faith can be imputed as Righteousness because it proceeds from the heart; the First act of faith is Obedience from the heart! Rom6:17
Certainly the Faith of Jesus Christ preceded our faith and is the origin of all faith, but HIS Faith is NOT our Faith. As the James2:1 passage suggests the ‘faith of our Lord Jesus Christ’ represents everything He taught in accord with godliness. (1Tim6:3) So having this faith with partiality in your heart is dishonoring God.
These Greek Prepositions are used hundreds of times in Scripture to denote a fixed position where the belief is placed in, or toward whom it is directed. Context defines the use as the following:
Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints, Col1:4 KJV
For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ. Col2:5 KJV
Here are slight variations of the Greek Preposition denoting in Col1:4 a Fixed Position of faith (Placed in Jesus Christ) and Col2:5 commending the steadfastness of their faith Toward Christ. Gal6:8 also uses the EK preposition as in the other Galatians passages, expressing the idea of origin in Sowing of the flesh or of the Spirit, reaping what you sow by the choices you made 'Toward serving God or indulging your flesh.
of this is in 1John 1:8
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. (NKJV same)
Every professed Christians' ready response for having 'Sin in them and their excuse for sinning.
'no in this passage is the preposition ov in
the Greek, the exact SAME ov used in Verse 10:
If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us. 1Jh1:10 KJV
John is writing to
people, Gnostics, who claim to have 'Never Sinned, the proper
translation of ov is as shown in Verse 10, ‘have not or Never’,
But like the Gnostics, the KJV translators believed man was born defective with
a ‘Sin Nature and as a result used 1Jh1:8 as their perfect opportunity to
Slant the meaning in favor of man having ‘Sin in him’ and to deny
it (the sin nature) means you deny the Truth. Heaven knows how much damage this
has wrought in evangelical Christianity over the centuries. Today it’s rare to
find a Professing Christian who doesn’t use this passage to defend their
on-going sins. Look at how the NIV perverts the Verse:
If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.
How could you ever show someone that ‘Doing what is Right makes you Righteous, Just as He is Righteous’ 1Jh3:7, who believe this is what the Bible teaches? Under such understanding ‘no one is Righteous no matter what they do, because they always have ‘Sin in them! Such foolishness is the ruin of many souls.
examples of misuse to Convey 'different meanings:
In order to uphold their Doctrine of 'Perseverance of the Saints (their version of eternal security) The KJV Translators 'Softened the use of the Greek Verbs for Keep and Holdfast,
There is only a
slight difference between them as follows:
Tero: generally translated Keep, means attend to carefully, take care of, Guard carefully, watch
Katacho: Holdfast, means to hold Securely firmly, take possession of, action focusing on participant.
In 1Cor15:1-2 the KJV reads: Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
This is a passage of the upmost importance because it CLEARLY indicates a
Condition that must be met in order to remain standing in the
Gospel he preached. The NKJV reads in this manner:
Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. 1Cor15:1-2 (in Vain means without Purpose to no effect)
KJV Only Pundits
will often tell their students that there is no 'IF in the Greek, that
such passages as this could be translated 'Since you keep in memory',
BUT again they are misleading you. If in the Greek is the Participle
'ei or eige, and is clearly Conditional, it is
always connected to an action that must take place in order to fulfill the
Condition. There's simply NO other way to express it in English
than IF. Thus the Passage in question:
'IF you 'Katacho HOLDFAST to the Word I preached (holding it securely, taking possession of it) you will be Saved!' There is NOTHING in the Greek Word Katacho that even remotely suggests remembering something.
In fact the ONLY
place Katacho (holdfast) is translated as 'Keep in memory' is in
1Cor15:2, elsewhere the KJV Translators kept to the original meaning, even
though their gospel was based on Justification by Faith alone. I suppose they
altered the 1Cor15:1-2 passage because it specifically states 'By which
you are Saved!' Whereas the others, shown below, can be made to appear
more ambiguous when made subject to the rhetoric of commentary. By 'straining
at the gnat they explain away the practical application of these passages
implying that its not a 'Condition being stated, but a 'fact applicable
to these already Saved, who are holding fast. So when Jesus said:
'He who endures to the end will be Saved' Mat10:22, He really meant (according to Westminster) 'Those Saved will endure to the end!' They will always argue that Context supports their assumptions, but they deny the Obvious:
But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end. Heb3:6 KJV
For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end; Heb3:14
Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without
wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;) Heb10:23
Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him. Heb10:39
Here's another example of changing 'Holdfast to 'Observe,
conveying a different meaning:
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. Matt28:19-20 KJV
Certainly a person could observe something and never take possession of it, as Holdfast means. Perhaps the KJV translators thought differently, but I'm convinced that Christ wants us to Holdfast to His Words by taking possession of them in our daily lives, not merely observe them as we would a traffic light.
No matter what the so-called experts tell you, IF still means IF, a Conditional Particle in Greek or English. You don't have to be a linguist to understand this or confirm it in a Lexicon. The KJV Translators had every language source at their disposal, meticulously disseminated by some of the greatest scholars of the time. Tampering with these passages in favor of doctrinal bias was done on purpose, not out of ignorance. When they 'softened or outright 'changed a word, phrase or preposition they KNEW what they were doing! Again we see their foot-prints in Col1:23, suggesting that 'hedraias, Steadfast, means 'Settled, as though you merely 'rest in the fact that your faith is already secure in Christ, removing the Conditional aspect that there is effort involved in 'continuing in the faith.
If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; Col1:23 KJV
if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast,
and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was
preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.
Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. Rom11:22 KJV
The Translation of Heb6:6 in our English Bibles is a perfect example of bias. The KJV Pundits speak out of both sides of their mouths! They will deny the IF as Conditional toward the outcome of Salvation in several passages, BUT turn around and USE it to imply Condition in a passage where it does NOT appear! In their minds it makes the context of Heb6:1-8 hypothetical, since no one who has been truly 'enlightened and has actually 'Partaken of the Holy Spirit (as the passage states) could 'fall away to ruin. But why would the writer issue this warning if it was impossible for the 'Saved to fall away to ruin?
If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. Heb6:6 KJV
However the Greek
conjunction 'eige (if) is not used in this passage, rather its
Kai 'having fallen away, in other words something that has
actually taken place and incurs the great danger of eternal ruin. Their are a
FEW Bible translation that expressed this passage properly, Youngs
Literal Translation is one of them:
and having fallen away, again to renew [them] to reformation, having crucified again to themselves the Son of God, and exposed to public shame.
The 'Impossible to renew them again to repentance' in Heb6:4 forces the KJV Translators to cast aspersion on these passages as theoretical, if it is indeed absolutely impossible to restore a true child of God who has fallen into willful sin, then no one could be Saved, because all have sin 'in them! But again the translators could have noted that the word Impossible adynatos, is actually a Greek Phrase that can also be translated: 'without strength, impotent, weak, disabled' as in Rom15:1 'We then who are Strong ought to bear with the infirmities of the weak' A simple footnote in the margin would have easily pointed this out that it is 'Virtually Impossible to renew them to repentance, meaning not entirely impossible, but very difficult. (as in the case of David) However, due to their Doctrinal bias of Perseverance they could Never suggest that a True Saint could forfeit their Salvation under any circumstances and be restored. This is why passages such as: Heb10:26-27, frightened them: (and many today who follow such myth)
'For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.
Their own Doctrines
state that a man is Justified by faith alone and declared Righteous 'in his
sins. And Sin doth remain in him! So if these Scriptures are to be taken
literally, NO ONE could be Saved, therefore they MUST be made
subject to conjecture and alterative meanings in application otherwise all are
doomed to eternal ruin. This is why from the 1600's to now Bible commentaries
will give a thousand different interpretations on these passages and NEVER
give clear explanation of the Greek words and phrases used.
BUT Condition is expressed throughout Scripture, it’s a wonder how anyone could pass this off with such indifference. The terms: Tero & Katacho (Holdfast and Keep) are used in conjunction with IF many times by Christ
Luke11:28 ‘But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.’
If ye love me, keep my commandments John14:15
He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. Jn14:21
Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. Jn14:23
If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love. Jn15:10
another example of bias in translation.
The KJV Translators believed wholly the Saved (elect) could never permanently fall away and forfeit their Salvation. So their common explanation for those who were 'seemingly Saved and went back into sin was; 'they were Never Saved to begin with or were false brethren (non-elect) Since the Apostle Peter was certainly among the Elect, the Luke 22:31-32 exchange between him and the Lord had to be altered. Stated below in KJV and NKJV:
And the Lord said,
Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as
I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted,
strengthen thy brethren.
And the Lord said, Simon, Simon! Indeed, Satan has asked for you, that he may sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you, that your faith should not fail; and when you have returned to Me, strengthen your brethren. Lk22:31-32 NKJV
The Greek Word for
'Converted is: 'epistrepho literally translates ‘Return
to me, turn oneself, turn back’
However Convert in English does NOT suggest a ‘RETURN’ to something or someone you served previously.
It means: 'Cause to change in form, character, or function, not a return to anything. As in Acts3:19
Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, In other words 'Repent of Sin and then TURN from it.
Peter was already a follower of Jesus Christ and had proclaimed Him as Lord and God (Mat16:16) Since the initial message of John the Baptist and Christ was 'Repent for the Kingdom of heaven is at hand' Lk3:8, Mk1:15, we must assume that Peter had already received the Baptism of Repentance. (Mk1:4, Lk3:3) The Greek word for Converted ‘Strepho, is usually translated turn, turning about, turning around, he turned’, with the exception of Matt18:3 ‘And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’, Here it's translated properly, 'expect ye be converted', TURNED from one course of conduct to another. Even Strong’s Lexicon agrees in its commentary, which is the perfect illustration of Repentance.
The point is we're dealing with TWO entirely different words here and the KJV Translators choose this passage in Luke to suggest that Peter was YET to be 'Converted, as many KJV Only Pundits will claim today. So, again they knew what they were doing! Its Obvious that Peter 'Returned to the Lord from his fallen state of denial and the NKJV renders this passage accordingly as they do in Matt13:15, Mk4:12, Jh12:40, Acts26:18-20, 1Pet2:25, Js5:19, but the KJV uses the word 'Converted in four of these passages. Again you may think I'm splitting hairs but given the fact that the KJV Pundits and the past Translators did this for the Specific reason of Slanting these passages to suggest that the person in question was NEVER Saved to begin with instead of RETURNING to the Lord.
The KJV renders the word epistrepho (return again) as Converted, in Matt15:15, Mk4:12, Jh12:40 where the Lord quotes Isaiah 6:9-10 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
The NKJV conveys the proper translation: ‘Seeing they may see and not perceive, and hearing they may hear and not understand, Lest they should TURN and their sins be forgiven them’
Isaiah (as all the
prophets) was calling a wayward people BACK to Repentance,
beseeching them to Return to the Lord and be forgiven of their apostasy. Such is
the nature of James 5:19-20, the passage is Clearly speaking of a Brother going
astray, but the KJV translators couldn’t risk allowing anyone to think that an
elect person could actually fall into the error and ruin and return again as
Peter. KJV Rendering of Js5:19-20:
Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him; Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.
Whereas the NKJV follows the correct translation as in Luke22:30-31, by
using the phrase: ‘Let him know that he who TURNS a sinner form the
error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins’
Using the phrases: ‘When thou art converted’ in Lk22:32 and ‘Converteth a sinner’ in Js5:20, suggests strongly that the person in question has yet to be Saved. Every KJV Pundit I have ever encountered goes directly to these passages to prove the Doctrine of Perseverance. Certainly they have never researched the Greek words and phrases used in these and other passages, nor do they care, because to them the ‘Authorized Version’ is the Holy Word of God, not to be questioned. Peter understood the true nature of Salvation having personally experienced restoration from denial, he said: And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?
I will say this however, had it not been for these insidious Doctrines entrenched in the mind's of people it would NOT be necessary to 'split hairs on these various definitions. It's what the Pundits convey to others that leads them into error. If a person with a sincere heart toward God, not previously indoctrinated in a Church, were to sit down and just read the KJV on face value they would NEVER come to the any preconceived conclusion that that there is such a thing as Elect or non-elect or perseverance of the Saints or being Saved by someone else's faith other than their own! Men teach these things, NOT God and if anyone will take Him at His Word they will be Saved.
The KJV translators were determined to Slant the Scriptures in favor of Moral
depravity, unconditional election and limited Atonement. In their minds, no one
elect by God could ever fall from grace, Passage such as: Acts1:25, had to be
explained away of altered: That he may take
part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell,
that he might go to his own place. But they stand on their own merit for
anyone to accept or not.
Granting Repentance (KJV & NKJV use similar words in the following passages:)
When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life. Acts11:18 KJV
In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 2Tim2:25 KJV
The use of Grant
or Give in these passages is a hot topic among many, not only KJV Pundits.
Many still believe (as did the 17 Century Translators) that man lacks the
ability to Turn to God in sincere Repentance until it is 'Granted
to him, in some special dispensation of Grace to off-set his inbred corruption
so he will be compelled to repent. In other words they will say: Man is
inherently Unwilling until God makes him Willing to turn' and by God 'granting
him repentance he is able to believe and receive Jesus. (although few
believe he can ever stop sinning) Suffice to say at this point that the Holy
Spirit is always Drawing all men, Convicting them of Sin, God is not willing any
perish and His hand is always out-stretched. (Jh12:32, 16:8-11, 2Pet3:9,
Isa59:1-2) So God is always doing His part and calling upon man to do his. No
inability is implied anywhere in Scripture.
Grant in the Greek is ‘disomi’, used hundreds of times in Scripture to express: ‘giving to someone who asks, to reach out extend, basically to give something to someone’. It’s Simply an invitation to those seeking reconciliation with God through Repentance and faith proven by deeds. Used in many passages as ‘giving’ to those in need, Matt5:42, Js2:16, giving self as a Ransom 1Tim2:6, and as giving to those who seek, Lk11:13. It has NOTHING to do with overcoming some mysterious inability in men’s will. As in the 2Tim2:25 passage the archaic word ‘Peradventure’ would be better translated: ‘Perhaps’. So these passages are saying that God ‘invited the Gentiles to repent, and may or ‘Perhaps’ also invite Timothy’s dissenters into the same repentance if they relent.
The English word ‘Grant’ carries with it in the definition the idea of ‘bestowing a privilege’, as though God bequeaths repentance on some and not others, or that we must set by and wait for Him to give His consent. (instead of diligently seeking Him as scripture directs, Mt7:7, Heb11:6) And this is exactly what the 17 Century Pundits believed, that man could NOT Repent until God allowed or gave him repentance in some mystical way. So they used this word, 'Grant', to convey that God, like earthy masters or Royals, must GRANT or give His special permission to men before they could be shaken out of their morally depraved state and respond to Him (if they were among the elect) But God calls ALL men everywhere to Repent without exception! Acts17:30-31, as the Greek word clearly implies, the 'invitation has already been extended, its your Choice to take it or leave it.
To its credit the KJV does maintain the Deity of Christ, whereas since the advent of the Westcott-Hort era in the late 1800's, many translators have followed the so-called critical text (new discoveries) used first in the RSV, with the exception of the NKJV first published in 1979 that maintained the majority text translators of the TR, many modern versions are basing their translations on the critical text, which are more recent discoveries from Vatican sources as we stated on pages 5-6 of this Study. And the main thrust of these supposed newer discoveries is casting aspersions on the Deity of Christ, by eliminating portions of text and claiming the TR is flawed. More reason for the diligent student of the Bible to Keep Digging and stand fast.
let's look where the NKJV got it Wrong.
Little children, let no one deceive you. He who practices righteousness is righteous, just as He is righteous. 1Jh3:7, also Practice used in 1Jh1:6, 2:29, 3:10, Matt7:23, 13:41, Rom1:32, 2:2, 7:15, Gal5:21 (among others)
The KJV uses the Words: Doeth or Doth, in most of these passages. In 1John in particular:
Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 1Jh3:7,9
The Greek Word in this Passage is Poieo often translated: Produce, Bear, Perform, bring forth, commit, keep, work. Note that it is NEVER translated; PRACTICE. Used in the sense of a Good tree Producing Good Fruit or Bad tree producing bad fruit, A Good tree cannot bear (poieo) bad Fruit nor can a Bad tree bear (poieo) Good Fruit’ Mt7:17-19 Similar passages: Matt12:33, Lk3:9, 6:43, in other words the Tree is NOT Practicing to produce its fruit (good or bad) it is Doing so. Translating poieo as Practice denotes that a person can make an attempt toward Righteous behavior but not always achieve it. Therefore the Pundits will use this to teach that if a ‘Christian still gets drunk or fornicates occasionally (as they inevitably will) they remain in Christ because ONLY those who Practice sin (habitably) are ‘of the devil, But John goes on to say again that: He who committeh (poieo) sin is of the devil’ 1Jh3:8 KJV, in other words, like the Bad Tree, it is Known by the Kind of Fruit it Produces. It's either good or bad, not a little of both. That's why Christ said: 'Either make the Tree Good and it fruit good or else make the tree bad and its fruit bad, for a tree is known by its fruit' Mat12:33. It Cannot be both ways.
Either a person is Producing (Poieo) Righteousness or Producing Sin, 'In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. 1Jh3:10 KJV
By adding the Word
Practice into these passages (and many others) the modern Translators
have distorted the meaning of Poieo and rendered man incapable of
'PRODUCING Righteous acts and the DEEDS Worthy of
Repentance! In Repentance you do not 'Practice bringing forth fruit
worthy, you do so:
Bring forth (poieo) therefore fruits worthy of repentance, And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: every tree therefore which bringeth not forth (poieo) good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Lk3:8-9 KJV
Strangely enough the KJV Translators did not tamper with these passages and allowed them to stand accordingly:
Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. 1Jh3:6-7
Sin, Sinneth Not',
Both rendered from the Greek Word Poieo, 'Produce, Bear, Perform',
never Practice. The Children of God are known by the Evidence of Righteousness
being produced in their lives, although they will never be Perfect in Knowledge
of free from ignorance they will NEVER be committing Sins unto
death, 1Jh5:16, even occasionally, because such sins would disqualify them from
(think about Eve in the Garden, how many times did she have to disobey God to be charged with the sin of transgression? Gen3:6-7 Now read 1Cor6:9-10 again applying this same concept)
The Greek Word
Poieo is not in 1Jh5:18, but look at the Rendering of it in the
We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not. 1Jh5:18 KJV
We know that whoever is
born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the
wicked one does not touch him. NKJV
We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the One who was born of God keeps them safe, and the evil one cannot harm them NIV
Both the KJV and NKJV get it Right; Those born of God 'Sinneth not, Do not Sin', BUT along comes the NIV and we find the Word 'CONTINUE again! Now do you understand how important it is to Know what Christ meant when He said: 'Whoever Commits (poieo) sin is a Slave to sin’ Jh8:35
Will or Desire:
And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me. Lk9:23 KJV
Then He said to them all, “If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me. Lk9:23 NKJV
In the Greek: Desire is epithymia and Will is
Will means: To be Resolved and Determined with Purpose. Desire can mean Strong: longing, Lust, yearning
Since the imperative of Taking up the Cross is directed toward man's ability to Choose, he must resolve within and determine with Purpose whether or not he Will Count the Cost, take up his cross and follow Jesus. Whereas a person could 'Desire to do something but never actually accomplish it. Again, splitting hairs, because desire in the Bible can also mean 'craving, and be used in a positive manner. But I can't help being suspicious of 'intent here, because I've heard so many Bible Pundits say that Repentance is a 'Desire to Stop sinning and follow Jesus', but also teach that the Sin never actually stops. So I can't help but think that passages like this in the Newer Bibles were altered for a reason. Will is Will, Desire is desire, TWO completely different words, Jesus is saying: 'If any man Will with Purpose and Determination take up his Cross and follow Me', He's not allowing for any procrastinations on man's part. 'Anyone who taketh NOT his cross and follow after me is not worthy of Me!' Mat10:38, You can Desire your way to Perdition toying with your inclinations and find a thousand reasons why Jesus took up the Cross for you!
Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. 2Tim3:12 KJV is another example of this. The NKJV again uses 'desire to live a godly life', Conveying it may or may not be done, whereas WILL is the determined Purpose and resolve to live it. So I commend the KJV again for not altering these passages.
Body or Substance:
which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ. Col2:17 NKJV
Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. Col2:17 KJV
The distinction of 'body in this passage is significant in understanding the Covenant Christ came to establish. In Heb10:5 speaking of the sin offering of Christ Psalm 40:6-8 is quoted saying: 'Sacrifice and offerings you did not desire, but a BODY you have prepared for Me', it’s the importance of Christ coming to establish the New Covenant in bodily form that is the Core message of the Gospel. 'The body is Christ', in the Colossians passage in the Context of the keeping of Days, Sabbaths, New moons, ect is essential in understanding the thrust of the passage; that its not the keeping of Days, rituals or ceremonies but abiding in Christ as our Sabbath rest, who is no longer a Shadow but our all in all the Head over all things.
Here's Strange One:
The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Mat18:26 KJV
The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all. Mat18:26 NKJV
Worship in the Greek is: proskyneō and it is Clearly present in this passage. Fell down is: Pipto, usually used as the passage shows to fall down and worship, Matt2:11, they fell down and worshipped Christ. WHY the NKJV eliminates the Word in a passage that is Clearly illustrating the Master, 'God, besought by His servant asking for Mercy, is beyond me. They do the same thing in Mat20:20 where the mother of Zebedee knelt before Him in Worship. Yet they keep it in several other passages that show worship to Jesus, Mat2:2, 8, 15:9, Mk7:7 Perhaps they thought that the 'falling down was enough to convey the message, but again, I'm suspicious because Matt18 is a Key passage showing that God's Mercy is granted on virtue of a sincere repentance, but can be revoked if abused. The KJV shows clearly who is being addressed and who is deserving of worship. The NKJV retains the use of Godhead in the Key passages where the Deity of Christ is revealed, 1Tim3:16, Col2:9, Rom2:29, so I see no reason for them to alter Matt18:26 other than some imagined deletion in the Minority Text. It's something few people would even notice unless they do comparative studies of the Bible or care to dig deep into translations.
The Strict aberrance to the English Word Church:
The KJV Translators were ordered to rigorously maintain the Episcopal structure of the Church of England and its belief in an ‘ordained’ clergy. So the Word ‘Ekklesia’, used over 116 times in the NT was translated 'Church. But the word itself has Nothing to do with brick and mortar buildings or sacred places of worship. It is a compound word meaning: ‘Ek’: Out from….’Ekklēsia’ the called out. Thus the ‘Called out’, better translated Assembly as it is in Acts19:32. 39, 41. As pointed out in my Church Study articles, the Greek word most closely related to ‘Church is kuriakos, used in 1Cor11:20 & Rev1:10, translated: ‘the Lord’s, as referring to the Lord’s Supper and the Lord’s Day. Meaning in the Greek: belonging to the Lord, related to the Lord. Originally the 'Called out ones were never associated with buildings or sacred places of worship. His 'Church (called out ones) of which the Gates of hell will not prevail against, Matt16:13-19, are those whose foundation is the ROCK, 1Cor10:4 , Petra, CHRIST, not some man-made institution established in third Century Rome to enslave people under the doctrines of devils.
(the early Saints met in homes: Rom16:5, 1Cor16:19, Col4:15,
Phil1:2, Acts2:46) The Word Pastors, in Eph4:11 is another invention to
maintain authority over the Church. It is the Greek word
Poimen, plural, translated thus elsewhere in the NT. Even
the Words Bishop and elder were strictly maintained to protect the Structure of
the Church. Bishop, episkopos, is derived from the Greek
expressions for 'Watchman, elder, observer. Were as Elder,
presbyteros, the root of our Word:
simply means: 'Advanced in life, a senior, used interchangeably with Bishop,
elders and presbyters. The point is that the Ekklesia is NOT
to be ruled over by a Structure of descending authority, but a Body of Service,
all working together in the ministry for the Perfecting of the Saints as
Eph4:11-16 says. Never one ruling over another, but all Serving a common goal to
But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. Matt23:11 To carry through this deception of Clergy over laity, the translators, past and present, maintained the idea of an 'Office appointed to rule over the Church, in 1Tim3:1 the KJV says: This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. There is no mention of Office in the Greek, just desire; ereog, a Bishop; episkopos, 'the office of' was added to the text as it was also in Titus3:10 'the office of a deacon', there are no Offices in the body of Christ:
Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted. Matt23:10-12 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: Matt20:25-27
(For a full study on this subject consult my 'Church articles)
Substitution upheld by the KJV:
In 2Cor5:21 the KJV Reads: For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
For He made Him who
knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of
God in Him. 2Cor5:21 NKJV
The question is:
Did Christ actually become Sin (on the Cross) for us so that some mystical
transfer of our sin to Him and His Righteousness to us could take place? In 1611
THIS notion was an established Doctrine referred to as Penal
Substitution, therefore instead of translating this passage 'Sin offering'
as it appears in Jewish text, they made it appear as though Christ 'became sin
for us or was made 'to be' Sin (italics, meaning added to
text) in our place. The Word Sin in this passage is simply the Greek:
throughout the NT and Greek OT as 'Sin: Transgression of the Law', what the
translators did was mutilate this passage by adding 'made to be sin' from the
Greek word hamartia and 'might be made' the Righteousness of God
out the Greek word
ginomai which simply means become.
So properly stated
(without some magical transfer theology infused) the passage simply says:
'For He was made a Sin Offering on our behalf, who knew no sin, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him',
Its also important to
note 'Become is in the Subjunctive mood, meaning something that
may or may not occur depending on circumstances. In the Context of Verses 20-21,
it is speaking to those YET to be Reconciled through Repentance
and faith proven by deeds. So the term: 'We are Made Righteous in Him',
in the sense of it being something transferred to us by God when we believe in
Jesus, is NOT Scriptural. Rather it is Christ who has 'become the example
set forth to us as the model of all things pertaining to life and godliness. The
KJV translators did the same thing to 1Cor1:30-31, implying we are 'made
righteous instead of become so through faithfulness:
But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made (Become, ginomai) unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. 1Cor1:30-31
The main reason Sin should be expressed as 'Sin Offering
(in this 1Cor5:21) is that Christ sacrifice was done on our Behalf, not
in our Place or 'instead of us. 'For us in this passage is the
Greek word: 'Hyper, on behalf of, instead of is the Greek
word: anti, and is Never used in reference to Christ's Sacrifice,
Gal3:13, Eph5:2, 1Thes5:10, Titus2:14, In the Greek OT (Septuagint)
hamartia is used over a hundred times in Leviticus alone and it is
always translated 'Sin Offering when referring to sin offerings made in
the Temple, Never implying that the Sacrifice had to actually 'become sin in
order to Atone or reconcile the transgression. Christ did NOT have
to become sin to forgive our sins. Isaiah said:
Isaiah said: Yet it pleased the
Lord to bruise him; he
hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin
53:10. Redemption through His Blood the forgiveness of Sins
(Eph1:7, Col1:11) occurs by Repentance and faith proven by deeds, NOT by
Christ becoming Sin! Rather He Destroyed the Works of the devil, 1Jh3:8, in
order to Release us from bondage if we follow His example by crucifying our evil
passions and desires, Gal5:24. The Bible declares there was NO SIN in
Him, 1Jh3:5, He was spotless and blameless, Heb9:14, and His offering was a
Sweet smelling aroma to God, Eph5:2. Surely He ‘bore our sins in
His own body on the tree, (offering Himself as a Sacrifice) but for the purpose
of us dying to sin and living for Righteousness! 1Pet2:24. Staining our precious
Savior with the stench of sin is blasphemy! The 2Cor5:21 passage is the ONLY
place the KJV Translators inserted 'made to be' (sin) in the text
obviously slanting it in favor of Penal Substitution. To this day Pundits will
use 2Cor5:21 and Isaiah 53:6 to teach the horrible doctrine of Penal Sub, even
though verse 10 says in English Versions that His soul was an 'offering for sin,
as shown above. But even though the Isaiah Text may State in Verse 6: 'The
Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all', it STILL
doesn't say he became sin or was actually made 'to be sin as the KJV
translators inserted, appearing in italics as 'not in the text. Here's how the
passages appear in the OJB:
The Jewish Greek Testament reading of 2Cor5:21 is also thus: (my paraphrase)
'The One, Christ, who had no Sin, made a Sin offering on our behalf that we might become free from worldly influences and fascinations that will contaminate our soul and live for Righteousness
And the rendering of Isaiah 53:6, again my paraphrase:
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own, and He has laid on Him the guilt of our sin that separates us all
Again, no suggestion that He was made 'to be Sin for us, as the KJV rendering of 2Cor5:21 implies. Strangely enough Brenton’s English Version of the Septuagint leaves out the latter part of verse 6 altogether, instead it merely says: ‘All we as sheep have gone astray; every one has gone astray in his way; and the Lord gave him up for our sins.
The 'Gift by Grace and the Free Gift' in Rom5:15-18,
In the Greek Gift is: dorea, but 'Free Gift is charisma, a derivative of the word Grace.
So the 'free gift of many offenses, Rom5:16, is by Grace in remission of Past sins, whereas the 'Gift dorea, of eternal life is to be bestowed upon those who complete the race, by Grace (free gift) past sins are remitted, but by faithful continuance in doing good those who endure to the end inherit the gift of eternal life, Rom2:6-8, 2Tim4:7-8. Its not necessarily a miss-translation issue but I included it in this study as a distinction issue that is not clearly defined in the translation of the Greek or English. Similar also to the translation of the word 'Chastise in Titus2:11 as 'Teaching, 'the grace of God has appeared to all men, teaching us to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts and live soberly, righteously and godly in this present age', Chastise as used in Heb12:3-11, can mean a form of punishment, but it also means to discipline, instruct, admonish, that Grace teaches (chastises) us is notable because through it we resist and overcome sin, not fall into it.
Let's look at a few examples of the mismatching passages in our
Old and New Testaments:
quoting Ps40:6 KJV
Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me...
Psalm 40: 6 KJV
Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou
In Brenton’s English Translation of the Septuagint OT it reads:
Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not; but a body hast thou prepared me...
The early Christians considered the Hebrew passage as proof of the Incarnation of Christ, God becoming Flesh, 'Immanuel, God with us Mat1:23, Isa7:14, the mismatch may be due to some variation in language in the 1600's, the Psalm still clearly states that 'Behold, I come in the scroll of the Book it is written of me, I delight to do your Will, O my God', its a minor infraction in translation that likely stated in the Septuagint properly because the writer was reading Paul's Epistle and decided to mach it word for word. Nevertheless it is a discrepancy that opens the door to dissenters who make it a point to cast aspersions on Paul's Apostleship.
KJV, quoting Deut 32:43
And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
Deut 32:43, KJV
Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful unto his land, and to his people.
The Pharse: ‘Let all the angels of God worship Him’ is omitted entirely.
Deuteronomy 32:43 Brenton’s English Translation
of the Septuagint:
Rejoice, ye heavens, with him, and let all the angels of God worship him...
KJV, quoting Isaiah 42:4
And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.
Isaiah 42:4 KJV
He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law
42:4 Brenton’s English Translation of the
He shall shine out, and shall not be discouraged, until he have set judgment on the earth: and in his name shall the Gentiles trust.
Isaiah 42:4 is regarded by Early Christians as a prophecy of Gentile acceptance of, and faith in, the name of the Messiah, and Matthew 12:21 quotes it as such, but the KJV omits it. Why, I don't know for sure, but suspect its variations in text through the centuries up to the 1600's. As to why the KJV translators choose this rendering over the Septuagint, which they had at the time, I can't say, but again the entire rendering of the Psalm confirms the fact that the Gentiles will be given Light.
I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles; Isa42:6 KJV
I've also found mismatched text in the following passages if you
wish to check them:
Heb13:6 & Ps118:6, Jas. 4:6 & Pro. 3:34, 1 Pet. 2:22 & Isa. 53:9, 1 Pet. 4:18 & Pro. 11:31
Another text that was changed by the KJV translators is Acts12:4 where the Word Passover pascha is substituted with the English word Easter, which was not observed by the early Christians who strictly adhered to the traditional Passover plainly outlined in the pages of Scripture. Easter on the other hand with its hot cross buns, sunrise services, bunnies and egg hunts has NOTHING to do with the Bible. But by 17th Century England it was already incorporated into the establishment Church, Catholic and Protestant alike, with all its added frills. Some say that in ancient Rome it was observed during the Spring equinox festival honoring the goddess of fertility Ishtar (a Babylonian deity) in that the Catholic Church has adopted it into such debauchery as Lent and Mardi gras, we can conclude that it has no place in genuine Christian worship. Much like the celebration of Christ's birth on Dec25, which also corresponds with another Roman festival, the winter solace, observed with three days of indulgence, drunkenness and rivalry. All pagan traditions that have become part of the establishment Church over the centuries. The NKJV Version translates Acts12:4 as 'Passover, as it appears in the Greek.
The Scripture warns us:
And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. 2Pet1:19-20
Private interpretations has brought us the Doctrines of: 'moral depravity, dual nature, the TULIP, Faith alone, Substitution, double imputations, entire sanctification, Prevenient grace, the effectual call, election, dispensationalism, Calvinism, Weslyanism, Pentecostalism, Catholicism and Protestantism. Christ's teaching is called the 'Doctrine according to godliness, the Wholesome Words of Jesus Christ, 1Tim6:3, and warns us that if anyone comes to you and does not bring THIS Doctrine, do not receive him or allow him into your house, 2Jh7-11,
Notice it says 'Doctrine, (singular) Not 'Doctrines (plural) In other words: 'Any teaching that does not have its bases in the Wholesome Words of Jesus Christ and the Doctrine in accord with godliness, (teaching that promotes godliness and self-control in this present age, Titus2:11) is false, anti-Christ, doctrines of demons! 1Jh2:18, 1Tim4:1-3. Teaching that man is born morally depraved unable to obey God and its the 'Faith of Christ that Saves him, cannot be found in the Wholesome Words of Jesus Christ. Teaching a System of Atonement based on a Substitution in which a magic transfer of virtue takes place and Christ is made to be Sin, CANNOT be found in the teachings of Christ. AND telling man that God must 'Grant him a special dispensation that suddenly makes him willing and able to repent, is Contrary to the VERY Words of Christ who began His ministry by telling ALL men everywhere to Repent! Mk1:15. This is exactly what the Apostles Warned us so severely about, men twisting the Scriptures to their own destruction, 2Pet2:1-3, TURNING the Grace of God into a License for immorality! Jude3-4,
These are the Savage wolves teaching perverse things who would rise up among the assemblies, Acts20:30-31 and draw away disciples after themselves. With smooth and flattering speech they would deceive the hearts of the simple minded, Rom16:18, Jude16. They are destitute of the truth supposing that godliness is a means of gain! 1Tim6:5. In Great Swelling words of emptiness they will Promise you liberty while you remain a Slave to your sinful corruption, 2Pet2:18, With Vain babblings, falsely called Knowledge they will increase more and more into ungodliness and shame, 1Tim6:20-21, Tit3:9. The 'teachings and doctrines of men' Jesus called it, Mat15:8-9, adding and taking away at their own discretion, posing as Scholars, men of letters, puffed up with gnōstos (wisdom of men) who profess to Know God, but deny His Truth.
in Scripture is: Didache, (teaching) Sound Doctrine, 1Tim1:10,
4:6, His Doctrine, Jh7:17, is FREE from any Mixture of error. It
is the Wisdom from above, Pure, Peaceable, without partiality without
hypocrisy, producing the fruit of Righteousness Js3:17-18. The Doctrines
of men are full of contradictions, confusion and empty rhetoric, producing envy,
self-seeking and duplicity, Js3:15-16. They have caused many to turn their ears
away from the truth and be turned aside to fables, 2Tim4:4. But its not
necessarily the tampering with phrases
and definitions in
Bible Versions that has lead them astray, if they LOVED the Truth
they would OBEY it no matter what men may do! It's their own
selfish desires and itching ears that drive them to heap up teachers who will
say the things they want to hear that absolve them from Obeying Christ. His Word
is Living and Powerful, shaper than any two edged sword, piecing even to the
division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow AND is a Discerner
of the thoughts and intents of the heart! Heb4:12, Before you give yourself over
to the fables of men consider this:
I, the Lord, search the heart, I test the mind, Even to give every man according to his ways,
According to the fruit of his doings. Jer17:11
The Solid Foundation in Christ is a departure from iniquity, 2Tim2:19, What you
believe will define what you DO,
'If any man WILL Come after Me, let him deny himself take up his Cross and follow Me' Doctrines of men will lead you to Perdition, but Obedience to His Doctrine will save your soul. Lay Hold on eternal life in Christ and beware the profane and vain babblings of men. 1Tim6:11, 20
By Mike D