The Majority Text & Textus Receptus vs. Modern Bibles: NRSV Version -- FREE

m

uring the last several years of the life of the apostle Paul (Hebrew “Saul Paulus,” c. 2-68 AD), heresy already was developing a stronghold in an attempt to thwart the sacred teachings and doctrines as the very books of the New Testament of the Holy Scriptures were being penned through the verbal inspiration of God. Wrote Paul about six to seven years before his martyrdom, “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called” (1 Timothy 6:20). Paul also spoke against several heretics, among them Hymenaeus and Philetus (2 Timothy 2:17), and Alexander the coppersmith (2 Timothy 4:14). In Titus 3:10 Paul wrote, “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject.” And also the apostle Peter (c. 1 BC to 68 AD), who wrote in 2 Peter 2:1, “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.” Some of these “heretics” represented the early yield of “Gnosticism,” a movement comprising an amalgamation of various sects whose chief belief was that special secret knowledge was apportioned to some elect persons, who thereby were allocated special spiritual status and glory.a The word gnosis means knowledgeb (or science), hence Paul’s early reference to a “science falsely so called.” Thriving during the second and third centuries, Gnosticism was designated by second century Church Fathers Irenaeus (c. 130-202), Tertullian (c. 160-220), and Hippolytus (c. 170-236) as an aberrant Christian teaching resulting from the syncretism of unsound Christian doctrine with pagan philosophy, or even astrology and Greek mystery religions. These three Church Fathers attributed Gnosticism to the magician Simon Magus, who is mentioned in Acts 8.c By the fourth century, however, 37 Fathers’ written contributions outweighed those represented in the misguidedly celebrated Greek ma ­ nuscripts Aleph (Sinaiticus) and B (Vaticanus), dated 325-360 AD, by 65.7 percent to 34.3 percent. d Nevertheless, heretical teachings based on this tiny sampling of tainted documents (about 43 all told, eventually) evolved into not only the accepted Christian teachings of the day, but also the official establishment of the fledgling Roman Catholic Church (fourth century). However, this false doctrine embedded within this minuscule collection of manuscripts was abandoned almost entirely by the Church Universal by about the end of the seventh century. Hence, the manuscripts and critical text editions underlying nearly every contemporary Bible version published today were abandoned from the seventh century until a textual critic named Friedrich Constantine von Tischendorf (1815-1874) first discovered the NT manuscript Aleph in a waste heap in the St. Catherine’s Monastery, on Mt. Sinai in Egypt, in 1844. e Vaticanus B was the first entry appearing in the Vatican Library, back in 1475.f Now these 43 or so minority manuscripts, represented foremostly by Aleph and B, remain the foundation of critically edited Greek versions used by modern translators to produce contemporary Bibles. This has been the case since the release of the first new-age pseudo-Bible in 1881, the English Revised Version (or “RV”) New Testament. g Most modern biblical textual critics remain entangled in the fourth century web perpetuated by some heretics and scribes of that time, but the inspired real truth of God’s Word has incontrovertibly been proved. Never has any opponent triumphed over God’s wisdom having appeared in the “unanswered and unanswerable” arguments of the few stalwart orthodox Christian scholars of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries—John W. Burgon (1813-1888), Edward Miller (1825-1901), Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener (1813-1891), Herman C. Hoskier (1864-1938), Edward F. Hills (1912-1981), Floyd Nolen Jones, Donald A.Waite, and others. a

J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (Peabody, Mass.: Prince Press, Hendrickson Publishers, 2004), p. 22. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, 22. c Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, 22. b

d

J. A. Moorman, Early Manuscripts, Church Fathers and the Authorized Version (Collingswood, N.J.: The Bible for Today Press, 2005), p. 116. James Bentley, Secrets of Mount Sinai: The Story of Finding the World’s Oldest Bible — Codex Sinaiticus (London: Orbis Publishing, 1985), p. 86. f William Henry Paine Hatch, The Principal Uncial Manuscripts of the New Testament (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1933), Plate XIV. g Wilbur N. Pickering, “The Identity of the New Testament Text” in Floyd Nolen Jones, Which Version is the Bible?, 19th ed., rev. and enlarged (Goodyear, Ariz.: KingsWord Press, 2006), p. 163. e

I. II.

Cover Page ............................................................................................................... 1 Preface ..................................................................................................................... 2

III.

Introduction ............................................................................................................. 4

IV.

Verse Comparison .................................................................................................... 4

V.

Conclusion ............................................................................................................. 39

VI.

Colophon ............................................................................................................... 40

6Documented Discrepancies between the Majority Text/Textus Receptus 6 and the Critical Text Editions Underlying Modern Bible Versions: NRSV (4th Edition) By EDWARD E. SCOTT This notated comparison document serves to clearly identify and clarify some of the documented differences—here in 105 selected verses/passages—existing between the King James Version—and its “legacy” precursors—and virtually every other New Testament version commercially available since the controversial 1881 release of the English Revised Version (ERV). Many of these alterations have been noted previously by both liberal and conservative theological scholars of the past and present. The author of this document has invested portions of more than two years in conducting research, inputting data, and proofing, editing, and augmenting this document. This comparison assemblage has been produced to the glory of God and for the edification of redeemed believers through Jesus Christ, that the latter may be enlightened about the long-standing, well-disguised and -hidden activities transpiring beneath the massive, deceptive and misguided overarching mechanisms of modern Bible translation and the Bible societies. Since largely the eighteenth century, liberal, naturalistic and spiritually remiss biblical and theological scholars have attempted to undermine and even overturn the NT “Byzantine” text underlying classical Bibles—the KJV and those preceding it in the sixteenth century. Many of these modern theological “naturalists” simply have perpetuated the twisted theories and the deplorable manuscripts and texts which led to the alarming production of the new-age pseudo-Bible, the ERV. From this unholy spring has flowed the multitudinous new tradition of false Bibles. For this comparison the NRSV, NASB and NIV were selected for contrast to the KJV (and its underlying Greek texts) because of their popularity, contemporary representativeness and identical NT textual base.(Other editions of this document have been produced to include modern alternatives to the NRSV version.) (The columns below illustrate the textual—and often doctrinal—differences among numerous selected verses of the New Testament. Analysis is in blue and red.)

KJV Matthew 1:25 — “And (Joseph) knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.”

NRSV

NASB

NIV

NRSV reads: “. . . but had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son;a and he named him Jesus.”

NASB reads: “. . . but kept her a virgin until she gave birth to a Son; and he called His name Je­ sus.”

NIV reads: “But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.”

(Despite the fact that the minority Greek apparatus underlying this edition reads “knew her not,” this highly stylized, neutered, new-age version imposes “marital rela­ tions.”)

(The Greek ouk eyivoskev [ook eginōsken], “had no carnal knowledge” [did not know her], is the same for the NASB and the NIV, yet “kept her a virgin” and “had no union with her,” both dynamic equivalents, are used.)

(The proven corrupt Greek manu­ scripts Aleph [Sinaiticus] and Vat­ icanus [B], ca. 325-360 AD, other Greek Z and 071, plus several of the Old Latin, Syrian and Egyp­ tian, vie against 99-plus percent of the extant Greek mss.)

PROBLEM The Bible clearly identifies, in five places in the New Testa­ ment, that Jesus had four other brothers (step): James; John; Joses; Judas (Jude) [Matt., 2; Mk.., 3]. Support exists in the Majority text, 18 significant uncials, and the Syriac Peshitta (2nd cent.) and Harclean (7th), plus the Armenian and Ethiop­ ic. Four Greek MSS and more against this support belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity.

Omission of the clause “without cause” makes Jesus subject to His own judgment, because He, Himself, showed anger! The Majority text (9095% of Greek), Families 1 and 13, four Syriac versions, the (No footnote about the omission of versions (2), the Gothic (Underscored, italicized and/or red “brother without cause.”) (Only P67 [papyrus], Aleph, B, D- Coptic th (4 ) and Armenian (5th), plus text has been so presented for em­ 2, the Vulgate and Ethiopic, and a two of the oldest five extant (The NRSV indicts itself with its phasis and/or comparative argu­ few other Greek MSS, support the Greek manuscripts, and 15 sig­ own footnote, but is, at least, clear ment. [Some italicized text was so minority reading.) nificant uncials, include and fair therein.) emphasized in its source.]) “without cause.” “Some manu­ scripts” misrepresents!

Matthew 5:22 — “But I say unto you, That whosoever is an­ gry with his brother without cause shall be in danger of the judgment . . .”

NRSV: “But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or a sister,a you will be liable to judg­ ment; . . .” Footnote reads: “a Gk a brother; other ancient authorit­ ies add without cause.”

NASB: “But, I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court . . .”

NIV: “But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment.” Footnote reads: “Some manu­ scripts brother without cause.”

KJV Matthew 5:44 — “But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” (Also see Luke 6:27, 28.)

Matthew 8:29 — “And, behold, [the demons] cried out, ‘What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? Art thou come hither to torment us before the time.’” (Also see Mark 5:7.)

Matthew 9:13 — “But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacri­ fice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repent­ ance.” (Also see Mark 2:17.)

NRSV

NASB

NIV

PROBLEM

Reads: “But I say to you, ‘Love Reads: “But I say to you, love Reads: “But I tell you: Love your your enemies and pray for those your enemies and pray for those enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” Footnote reads: who persecute you.’” who persecute you.” “Some late manuscripts enemies, (No footnote of any kind follows.) (No footnote—as exists in the NIV bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you.” —regarding the truncation of the (Again, the Majority reading is verse.) truncated in the footnote.) (Minority source text support ex­ ists only in uncials [all caps] Aleph and B, Family 1 [Caesarean], the Syriac Sinaitic [4th] and Curetoni­ an [5th], some Coptic (Egyptian), and a few others.)

The Majority (90-95%—at least 5,072 mss) Greek says: “But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those cursing you, do well to the ones hating you, and pray for the ones mistreating you and persecuting you . . .” Most of the Majority manuscripts are later; “some late” is inaccurate. Supporting the Majority are 13 significant uncials, Family 13 (13 mss), the Peshitta and Harclean, and the Gothic, Ar­ menian and Ethiopic.

NRSV reads: “Suddenly then shouted, ‘What have you to do with us, Son of God? Have you come here to torment us before the time?’”

NASB reads: “And they cried out, saying, ‘What business do we have with each other, Son of God? Have You come here to torment us before the time?’”

NIV reads: “’What do you want with us, Son of God?’ they shouted. ‘Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?’”

(As in Mark 5:7, the parallel pas­ sage among the gospels, Jesus is removed, based on a different Greek source text—“lower Chris­ tology.”)

(The word “business,” being a modernistic attempt to appease an allegedly incapable reader, does not appear in the source Greek. Do most people not know what “have to do with” means?)

(Again, “Jesus” is removed, based on a different Greek source text— an effort to subtly degrade Christ’s divine status. This also is done nu­ merous times in the New Testa­ ment by separating “Lord” from “Jesus” or “Jesus Christ”—as is done in the Greek source text.)

The main issue here is that the minority of early MSS separate “Jesus” from “Son of God”— an attempt to denigrate Christ. Only three uncials and L (cursive, 9th) support this reading, led by the corrupt duo Aleph and B. Also collaborat­ ing are several Greek, Family 1 (five mss), the Vulgate, and a few others. Similarly, in the epistles, numerous times “Lord” is separated from “Je­ sus.” Backing the KJV are the vast majority of the Byz., 15 significant uncials, the Syriac Peshitta (2nd cent.) and Harclean (7th), the Armenian (5th), and the Ethiopic.

NRSV: “. . . For I have come to call not the righteous, but sinners.” (NOTE: In The Greek and Eng­ lish Interlinear New Testament [NASB/NIV], the Greek source does not include “to repentance.” Nevertheless, the translators, Wil­ liam D. Mounce and Robert H. Mounce, inserted these two words into the source, but withheld them from the parallel English columns. Is this chicanery of some sort, ig­ norance, or compromise?)

NASB: “. . . for I did not come to NIV: “. . . for I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.” call the righteous, but sinners.” (Despite its omission from the minority source Greek for both the NASB and the NIV, the Zonder­ van Greek and English Interlinear New Testament (NASB/NIV) in­ cludes “to repentance,” in English, underneath the interlinear portion. Why?)

(The minority text has substantial support in six major uncials, plus five others, Family 1, the Peshitta and Harclean, plus the Gothic, Armenian and Ethiopic, and more.)

No 1: The modern versions fail to include “to repentance.” It does not appear in their own Greek source text. No. 2: The Majority (90-95% of Greek) is supported by 15 significant un­ cials (all capitals), plus the Fer­ rar Family 13, the Sahidic (Egyptian), and more. “To re­ pentance” probably is omitted to reduce the severity of the mes­ sage! Most are not amenable to the fact their intrinsic, depraved nature requires repentance before God for justification.

KJV

NRSV

Matthew 11:23a, b — “And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shall be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.”

Reads: “. . . No, you will be brought down to Hades.” Foot­ note reads “Greek to Hades.”

Matthew 12:47 — “Then one said unto him, ‘Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.’”

NRSV reads: “Some told him, ‘Look, your mother and your brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.’”a Foot­ note reads: “Other ancient au­ thorities lack verse 47.”

NASB Reads: “. . . You will descend to Hades.”

NIV Reads: “. . . No, you will go down to the depths.” The NIV’s own Greek source text reads “Hades.” (“. . . To the depths” is an explan­ atory and effectively vitiated sub­ stitute for the direct, essential and practical meaning in this context: hell.)

Those versions supported by the minority Greek either ask a question or state the wrong fact too early in the verse (NASB). The Majority text reads “Haidou” (Hades). Note how the NIV—like some oth­ er moderns—mitigates the severity by using an explan­ atory substitute: “place of the dead”; “the depths;” “the abyss.” For most people, the thought of anyone going to HELL is too frightening to contemplate. The absolute truth wouldn’t sell their “Bibles”!

NIV reads: “Someone told him, ‘Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.’” Footnote reads, “g47 Some manuscripts do not (Only uncials Aleph and B, cursive have verse 47.” L [9th], and cursive [minuscule] (The footnote is nothing but con­ th th fusing to the reader: “What other Gamma [9 or 10 ], plus the (The footnote still casts doubt on th th manuscripts? How important is Sinaitic [4 ] and Curetonian [5 ], the Majority text reading. It should this?” This is none other than a read something like, “Some other support the minority text, along naturalistic, modernistic scholarly with the Sinaitic, Curetonian, and means of casting doubt on what manuscripts read . . .”) Sahidic versions.) previously was accepted as the ir­

With the exception of the di­ visive, confusing and decept­ ive footnotes accompanying the NRSV and NIV versions, the NASB is okay. Support for the KJV includes over­ whelming evidence: the Ma­ jority text; 21 significant un­ cials; Family 13; the Peshitta (2nd) and Harclean (7th); the Armenian (5th); the Ethiopic (4th or 6th); and several MSS of the Old Latin.

Reads: “‘. . . And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the ap­ pearance of the sky, but you can­ not interpret the signs of the times.” Footnote reads: “Other ancient authorities lack c 2When it is . . . of the times.”

Modern theological scholars (most of them) propose the NASB and NIV footnote con­ tents based on seven prolific Greek, some of Family 13, the Sahidic, the Sinaitic and Cure­ tonian, and a few other MSS. Meanwhile, the Majority text, 18 significant uncials, and the Peshitta and Harclean, defend the verse, among other manu­ scripts. And a lot of people don’t like the term “hypocrite.” It indicts them. It is difficult to escape consciousness of fester­ ing guilt.

(Correct here. Hades is the literal translation, from the Greek “haides” [hah´-dace]. From Strong’s Complete Word Study Concordance [p. 2013], “. . . The place [state] of departed souls— grave, hell.” In this context, the correct translation is “hades” or “hell.”)

NASB reads: “Someone said to him, ‘Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing out­ side seeking to speak to You.’”

refutable Word of God.)

Matthew 16:3 — “And in the morning, ‘It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowring.’ O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?” (“Lowring” means “to be gloomy and overcast with clouds.”)

PROBLEM

(The NRSV uses the correct Greek, diakrinein [diakpiveiv], “discern,” but chooses the wrong English word, “interpret.”)

Reads: “And in the morning, ‘There will be a storm today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ Do you know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but cannot discern the signs of the times?”

Reads: “. . . and in the morning, ‘Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.’ You know how to interpret the ap­ pearance of the sky, but you can­ not interpret the signs of the times.” Footnote reads: “a 2 (The Greek purradzi gar stug­ Some early manuscripts do not nadzo (poo-radd´-zī | garr | stoog- have the rest of verse 2 and all of nod-zo), “being overcast,” is not verse 3.” the equivalent of “threatening.” ) (Nevertheless, the source apparatus contains these verses!)

KJV Matthew 17:20 — “And Jesus said unto them, ‘Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, “Remove thee hence to yonder place;” and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.’”

NASB

NIV

NRSV reads: “He said to them, ‘Because of your little faith. For truly I tell you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, “Move from here to there,” and it will move; and nothing will be im­ possible for you.’” Footnote reads: “aGk faith as a grain of”

NASB reads: “And He *said to them, ‘Because of the littleness of your faith; for truly I say to you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, “Move from here to there,” and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.’”

NIV reads: “He replied, ‘Be­ cause you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, “Move from here to there” and it will move. Nothing will be im­ possible for you.’”

(Note how the NASB translators fail to abide by their own, correct Greek: “faith as a grain of . . .”)

(“. . . Littleness of your faith” is literal from the Nestle-Aland27 Greek, but incorrect.)

NRSV

PROBLEM

The Majority text (90-95 per­ cent) Greek reads apistian, (apis-tee´-an) “unbelief,” as do 21 significant uncials, the Syriac Peshitta (2nd cent.) and Syriac Harclean (7th cent.), numerous Old Latin, others. Opposing: codices Aleph, B, and Theta, and most of Caesarean (hybrid Alexandrian/Byzantine) groups (The minority reads, “. . . the size 1 and 13, plus most Sinaitic and the Sahidic. “. . . Faith as a of a mustard seed,” while the Byz. grain of mustard seed” is sup­ text reads, “. . . if you have faith ported by at least the Majority like a grain of mustard [seed]).” and the TR.

Matthew 18:11 — “For the Son Omits the entire verse, then foot­ of Man is come to save that notes with “Other ancient author­ which was lost.” ities add verse 11, For the Son of Man came to save the lost.” (Also see Luke 19:10.) (The “NA-UBS” [or “NU”] texts, supported by their Greek sources, do not include verse 11.)

[“For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.] Footnote reads “Early mss do not contain this v.”

Verse 11 is omitted from the text. Footnote reads, “The Son of Man came to save what was lost.” Why is there no explanation ac­ (Absolute deception is manifested companying verse 11’s footnoted content? Did the NIV committee here: the vast majority of early manuscripts, of various types, sup­ simply not want readers to no­ tice this? port this verse!)

The Majority text includes v. 11: “For the Son of Man came to save the lost [thing].” The Byz. is supported by 20 signi­ ficant uncials, the Syriac Pe­ shitta and Harclean, the Ar­ menian, and more. Only Aleph, B, L, and Theta, most of Famil­ ies 1 & 13, the Sahidic, and more, oppose.

Matthew 18:15 — “Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou has gained they brother.”

Reads: “If your brother sins2, go and show him his fault in private: if he listens to you, you have won your brother.” Foot­ note reads: “18:15 2 Late mss add against you.

The Majority text (90-95%) reads eis se, “against you.” “Late mss” is irrelevant because of the overwhelming witness: 22 significant uncials; Family 13; the Peshitta and Harclean; the Armenian; others. The other Majority reading here is “re­ buke” or “reprove” rather than “tell,” or “show.” “Tell” origin­ ated from Tyndale’s 1526 NT.

Reads: “If another member of the churchd sins against you,e go and point out the fault when the two are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.” Footnote reads: “d Gk If your brother | e Other ancient au­ thorities lack against you”

(“Some manuscripts”: only about five Greek and the Sahidic; et al.)

(The underlying text reads “rebuke him,” and “brother.”)

Matthew 19:9 — “And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry an­ other, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.” (Also see Mark 10: 11, 12, and Luke 16:18.)

NRSV reads: “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, ex­ cept for unchastity, and marries another commits adultery.” a Footnote reads “a Other ancient authorities . . . add . . . at the end of the verse and he who marries a divorced woman commits adul­ tery.”

Reads: “If your brother sins against you,b go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over.” Footnote reads: 15 Some manu­ scripts do not have against you.”

Not only do 90-95 percent of extant NT Greek mss contain the last portion, but also the modern scholars’ favorite, Co­ dex B, and 21 significant un­ cials, plus the Peshitta and Harclean, and more. Why have (“Immorality” long had been used the moderns abandoned B, (“Marital unfaithfulness” is an to mean “sexual immorality.” impotent term for violation of the here? Because doing so would Immorality is underlain by the not sell their “Bibles”? As for seventh Commandment! It simply “immorality,” or “sexual im­ Greek porneia. A more accurate word is “fornication.” Moichatai is “fornication,” or “adultery,” and morality,” a more specific term is “fornication.” means “commits adultery.”) God does not take this lightly!)

NASB reads: “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, ex­ cept for immorality, and marries another woman commits adul­ tery.”

NIV reads: “I tell you that any­ one who divorces his wife, ex­ cept for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

KJV Matthew 19:16 — “And behold, one came and said unto him, ‘Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?’” (Also see Luke 18:18.)

NRSV NRSV reads: “Then someone came to him and said, ‘Teacher, what good deed must I do to have eternal life?’”

NASB

NIV

NASB reads: “And someone came to Him and said, ‘Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?’”

NIV reads: “Now a man came up to Jesus and asked, ‘Teacher what good thing must I do to get eternal life?’”

The Majority text reads Di­ daskale agathe, “Good teach­ er.” “Good” is necessary here because it speaks to God being good: If Christ is not God, then He is not good. Other support (It is interesting that the minority (As always, no footnote exists for (As always, no footnote exists for for the Majority reading: 17 Greek source text underlying this the Majority reading. Because significant uncials; the Peshitta the Majority reading. Because version leaves out “Good” and Harclean; the Armenian; modernists hold that the “best” modernists hold that the “best” the Vulgate; more. Essentially, (agathē). Furthermore, though the manuscripts are the “earliest” or manuscripts are the “earliest” or Greek “teacher” (didaskele) is not “early,” these translators withhold “early,” these translators withhold only the corrupt Aleph, B, D, and L oppose, plus most of capitalized in that Greek, it is in mention of the vast majority of mention of the vast majority of Family 13, and a few Old Lat­ the English translation.) Greek mss outnumbering them.) Greek mss outnumbering them.) in.

Matthew 20:16 — “So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called but few chosen.”

Reads: This verse simply is omitted from the text, based on the inferior Greek source, with nothing but a tiny footnote to in­ form the reader. Footnote reads: (The “called” are those who have “Other ancient authorities add been invited, while the “chosen” for many are called but few are are those who have been genuinely chosen.” saved. —Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible (Those “other ancient authorities” [Greek alone] outnumber the Commentary, Vol. 3, p. 100.) minority text by about 9 to 1.)

Reads: “So the last shall be first, Reads: “So the last will be first, and the first last.” and the first will be last.”

Matthew 21:44 — “And whoso­ ever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.”

NASB: “And he who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust.” The footnote reads: “Some manuscripts do not have verse 44.”

(The “spiritual builders” of Jesus’ time, the Pharisees, Saducees and scribes, personally were being “broken” by “falling” on [reject­ ing] the keystone of the kingdom of God, Christ. Similarly, in their final rejection of Christ, these Jew­ ish leaders would be “ground to powder.” “The Kingdom of God is here a temple . . . .” —JamiesonFausset-Brown Bible Comment­ ary, Vol 3, p. 104)

PROBLEM

NRSV: “The one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and it will crush anyone on whom it falls.”c The footnote reads: “c Other ancient authorit­ ies lack verse 44.”

The Majority text includes the last portion of the verse, as do 21 significant uncials, the Old Latin, the Vulgate, the Peshitta (This first portion of verse 16 im­ (Some theologians interpret the and Harclean, and more. The plicitly calls for a further conclu­ “last” as being the Gentiles and the last portion of this verse has sion. It simply seems incomplete. “first” as being the Jews, the latter been removed from nearly “This and that are true, so some­ first hearing the gospel. But Jesus every modern “Bible” version —most likely because it indic­ thing else must follow.” This verse speaks more about the lowliest is not simply a retelling of the being raised up and the mightiest ates that many hear the gospel, earlier parable in Matt. 19:30. being lowered than He does about but few respond favorably. Doesn’t sell. Also, perhaps What would be the sense in that?) the Jews’ preeminence over the modern scholars do not under­ Gentiles.) stand this portion.

(Again, why confuse the reader with a partial truth: “Other ancient (Verse 44 is omitted from the in­ authorities . . . ”? “The majority of terlinear Greek.) Greek manuscripts” is the plain and simple truth. This is another attempt to foist a proven corrupt text upon a wanton public which is easily wooed by “modern scholar­ ship.”)

NIV omits the verse from the text, then inserts the footnote: “Some manuscripts do not have verse 44.”

The Majority text includes the verse (90-95% of extant Greek) but, more interestingly, modern scholars’ two favorite MSS, uncials Aleph and B, also in­ clude the verse. The only an­ (Not only are many modern biblic­ cient uncial that does not in­ clude this verse is the notori­ al scholars enamored with their ously corrupt Codex D (Beza). false, allegedly “earlier manu­ That’s right, the academics scripts,” but they, like other hypo­ have defied Aleph and B. crites, do not wish to be openly re­ Why? (The verse even has been minded of their misdeeds.) removed in the Greek, from a new interlinear.) The “harsh” tone? Doesn’t sell. Also notice the footnotes at left: “other mss”; “some manuscripts.” Also supporting the Byz. are 24 significant uncials, Families 1 & 13, the Peshitta & Harclean; and others.

KJV Matthew 23:8 — “But be ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.” (The Greek kathegetes [kath-ay´gate-ace] means “teacher,” or “master.”)

Matthew 23:14 — “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypo­ crites! for ye devour widows’ houses, and for a pretense make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.”

NRSV

NASB

NRSV reads: “But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all stu­ dents.”

NASB reads: “But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all broth­ ers.”

(Adelphoi [brothers] is the reading in both Greek texts. However, in his interlinear titled Word Study GreekEnglish New Testament, Paul R. McReynolds, like other NRSV trans­ lators, has chosen to use the term “stu­ dents.” No Greek word for “student” exists. Only the Latin, studens.)

(“But do not be called Rabbi . . .” (Leading the support for the is incorrect according to even the critical text are Aleph, B, D, E-2 critical Greek text. The minority [6th], L, and W.) Greek clearly reads, Humeis de me klathētē rabbi, literally “You but are not to be called rabbi.”)

Reads: The verse is excluded en­ tirely. Footnote reads: “d Other authorities add here . . . Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypo­ crites! For you devour widows’ houses and for the sake of appear­ ance you make long prayers . . .”

(Also see Mark 12:40, Luke 20:47.)

(Only five uncials—including Aleph, B and D—and a paucity (“pc”—small sample) of Greek cursives, plus the Vulgate, Sinaitic, and several other MSS, support this minority reading.)

Puts verse 14 in brackets to indi­ cate suspicion about authenticity, then adds footnote: “This v not found in early MSS.” (Two of the earliest five NT Greek uncial [all caps] manuscripts, among the “[five] old uncials,” in­ clude this verse.)

Matthew 24:7 — “For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pesti­ lences, and earthquakes, in divers places.”

NRSV reads: “For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be faminesb and earthquakes in various places: . . .” Footnote reads: “b Other ancient authorit­ ies add and pestilences.”

NASB reads: “For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and in various places there will be famines and earthquakes.”

Matthew 24:36 — “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels, but my Father only.”

NRSV: “But about that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” Footnote reads: “Other ancient authorities lack nor the Son.” (Evidence clearly supports KJV.)

Adds “or the Son himself,” but provides no footnote evidence for its appearance as an alternate variant to the Majority reading.

(Translators have altered word order—“in various places” ap(The Greek kata [kah-tah´] means —among other things—“against” (Yes, and about 90-95 percent of ex­ pearing last in the Greek—and have omitted “pestilences.”) or “in diverse” [manifold] places.” tant Greek mss, plus more.)

(Remember that Jesus is co-equal to God the Father—hence, Mat­ thew’s not alluding to “the Son.”)

NIV NIV reads: “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for you have only one Master and you are all brothers.”

Omits verse 14, does not mark the footnote in the text and adds the verse below Scripture. Insinuates that “some manuscripts” add verse 14.

PROBLEM The words “the Christ” (o Christos) appear in the Majority Greek—at least 90 percent. As for “Christ,” it also is better-sup­ ported than “Messiah,” or without either: 15 significant uncials; part of the Harclean; the Curetonian, and others. (The minority text does have relat­ ively solid support in six signi­ ficant Greek, most of the Old Latin, the Vulgate, the Peshitta, the Ethiopic, the Coptic, others.

The vast majority of manu­ scripts include verse 14. Three of the oldest five extant manu­ scripts do not include this verse. But the vast majority of the Byzantine text is supported by 19 significant uncials, Family 13 (Caesarean), the Syriac Peshitta (2nd) and Harclean (7th), the Ethiopic, several Old Latin MSS, and more. The NU apparatus is upheld only by six Greek, most of Family 1, and some of other versions. It seems quite conceivable that many modern hypocrites are sparing themselves and readers open indictment here.

The Majority text (90-95 per­ cent of existing mss) reads loimoi (plague, disease, pesti­ lence). Also, 22 significant un­ cials, Families 1 & 13, the Syri­ ac Peshitta and Harclean, and the Armenian (5th) and Ethiopic, (The NIV is notorious for removing support the KJV reading. Only connectors, such as “and,” “but,” the wicked trio of Aleph, B, D, “or,” and for creating more, shorter plus E (6th), plus the Sinaitic and sentences.) Sahidic, dissent.

NIV reads: “Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in vari­ ous places.”

Adds “nor the Son,” then adds the footnote: “Some manuscripts do not have nor the Son.” (Greek support for “nor the Son” are six main Greek—including two Alephs, B, and D—the Ar­ menian and Ethiopic, others.)

The vast majority of extant NT koine Greek manuscripts do not include “or the Son himself,” “nor the Son,” nor any other variant. Three of the oldest five existing manuscripts—plus sev­ eral Old Latin manuscripts—do have “nor the Son.” This is “lower Christology.”

KJV

NASB

NIV

PROBLEM

NRSV reads: “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory.”

NASB reads: “But when the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on His glorious throne.”

NIV reads: “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory.”

(The reading is correct except for the omission of “holy,” and the use of “throne of his glory,” rather than “glorious throne,” which most likely was kept from the KJV.)

(This is the absolutely correct reading here, except for the ab­ sence of “holy,” according to the Byzantine [Majority] text and the Textus Receptus.)

(“Heavenly glory” does not appear in the minority manuscripts repres­ ented in the modern critical appar­ atus. Once again, the NIV deviates from its own Greek source text— presumably for “stylistic pur­ poses.”)

The Byzantine text reads agioi (holy) before “angels.” Eighteen significant uncials support the KJV reading, plus the Peshitta (2nd) and Harclean (7th), Family 13, and others. Opposing are seven Greek—including Aleph, B, and D—and most of the Old Latin, plus the Vulgate, and numerous others of the minority script body. The Ma­ jority text also reads “glorious throne.”

Reads: “. . . for this is my blood of thea covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” Footnote reads: “a Other ancient authorities add new.”

Omits “new.”

Matthew 27:34 — “They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink.”

NRSV: “. . . they offered him wine to drink, mixed with gall; but when he tasted it, he would not drink it.”

NASB: Reads “wine” rather than “vinegar,” then makes no foot­ note reference to the Majority text reading.

(“Gall” is bile secreted from the liver, and, as such, a bitter sub­ stance which biblically is used to denote bitterness of spirit [Acts 8:23, Lamentations 3:19].)

(The problem with the Greek word (See note at left.) used here in the “NU” text, oinon, is that, though it is a fermented drink [wine], it is not sour wine. The Greek oxos is correct here: sour wine—vinegar.)

Matthew 25:31 — “When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory.” (The modern Greek apparatus, the Majority text and the Textus Re­ ceptus each read thronou dozes, “glorious throne.” “Throne of his glory” must have sounded more dignified to the KJV committee. Also, “shall” before “come” probably is an addition by the committee to enhance majesty.)

Matthew 26:28 — “For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” (Also see Mark 14:24.)

NRSV

Omits “new,” then adds footnote, The Majority text (90+% of “Some manuscripts the new.” Greek) includes “new.” Jesus (Jesus’ blood was not for the old is referring to the “new cov­ covenant. It had to be for the (“Some manuscripts”? No. The enant,” which, as specifically “new” covenant—an eternal prom­ overwhelming majority—more mentioned in Hebrews 8:6ise replacing a temporary one!) than 99 percent of total extant 13, explicitly replaces the old manuscripts. The translators do not covenant as being a better (“Other ancient authorities”? want to “confuse the readers with one! Only six extant Greek Rather, nearly all authorities, peri­ the facts”!) od.) uncials, P37, and few others, omit “new”! And again, “some manuscripts” is wrong! NIV: Reads “wine” rather than “vinegar,” then makes no foot­ note reference to the Majority text reading.

“Oinon,” fermented drink, is incorrect . “Oxos,” rather, is sour wine—vinegar. “Vineg­ ar” fulfills prophecy in Psalm 69:21: “They also gave me (See note after NRSV reading, at gall in my food; and in my left.) thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.” Support for oxos is (Supporting the critical text are the overwhelming: vast majority Armenian, Ethiopic, Sahidic and of Greek; 18 significant un­ Bohairic, a few of the Old Latin, cials; the Peshitta and Harc­ and more.) lean; others. Against are seven Greek, some of Famil­ ies 1 & 13; a few of the Vul­ gate; others.

KJV

NRSV

Mark 1:1 — “The beginning of Reads: “The beginning of the the gospel of Jesus Christ, the good news of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; . . .” Son of God.” Footnote reads: “Other ancient authorities lack the Son of God.”

NASB

Reads: “The beginning of the Reads: “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” Footnote reads: God.” “Some manuscripts do not have the Son of God.” (Again, extreme deception by modern translators perpetrated be­ cause of their argument that a paltry minority of older manu­ scripts outweighs the vast majority of extant witnesses. Their opinion, they think, simply trumps another valid circumstance and evidence.)

(Why do modern textual critics cast doubt on the overwhelming majority of manuscripts by adding this confusing tidbit? Shameless.)

Mark 1:2 — “As it is written in the prophets, ‘Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way be­ fore thee.’”

NRSV reads: “As it is written in the prophet Isaiah,c ‘See, I am sending my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way; . . .’” Footnote reads: “c Other ancient authorities read in the prophets.”

NASB reads: “As it is written in Isaiah the prophet: ‘Behold, I send My messenger ahead of You, Who will prepare Your way.’”

(No footnote appears to mention any other reading. This is decep­ (The NA Greek reading “Isaiah the tion, and the translators probably prophet” is incorrect according to did not include the Byzantine the manuscript evidence. Correct reading because of their favorite is en tois prophatais, “in the pro- evidence: Aleph, B, and D. To moderns, Aleph and B are phets.”) tantamount to absolute truth!)

Mark 1:14 — “Now after that John was put into prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, . . .”

NRSV: “Now after John was ar­ rested, Jesus came to Galilee, proclaiming the good news of God.”

NIV

PROBLEM At least 4,400 of the extant 5,300-plus (79%) NT Greek manuscripts contain “Son of God”! Also containing these words are the first corrected version of Aleph (“Aleph-1”) and 20 other significant un­ cials, including Codex Vatic­ anus (B). (The modern schol­ ars’ second cornerstone docu­ ment, Aleph (Sinaiticus), is their only documented recourse —along with a few other Greek manuscripts, and Codex Theta (8th or 9th).

This prophecy appears in Mala­ chi 3:1. However, in the mod­ ern critical edition and the minority manuscripts on which it is based, the reading is “the prophet Isaiah.” This difference is accounted for by scribal error or modern uncertainty. The (Despite the appearance of idou [“behold,” “lo,” “see,” “surprise”] Majority is joined by 17 signi­ ficant Greek uncials, Family in the Greek, the translators re­ move the English equivalent from 13, the Harclean, and others. the beginning of the quote. Why?) The critical text is supported by six main uncials (including A, B, and D), some of Family 1, the Vulgate and Peshitta, the Coptic and Gothic.

NIV reads: “It is written in Isai­ ah the prophet: ‘I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way’”b— Foot­ note reads: “1:2 Mal. 3:1.”

NASB: “Now after John had NIV: “After John was put in pris­ been taken into custody, Jesus on, Jesus went into Galilee, pro­ came into Galilee, preaching the claiming the good news of God.” gospel of God.” (“Good news” and “gospel” have the same meaning, according to (“. . . Taken into custody” is (Obviously, “kingdom of God” is the Greek evaggelio [ee-vang-gelsomething of a stretch from the (What is missing in these modern omitted here. Furthermore, the Greek paradothevai (para-doth-a- ee´-ō]. Nevertheless, the gospel of translations is the clarifier “king­ word here translated “arrested” dom of God,” which is specifically comes from the Greek paradidomi nahee). The translators have unne­ Jesus Christ is a sacred thing, so to the type of “good news” or “gos­ [here paradothamai], meaning “to cessarily substituted some words replace it with the pedantic “good news” certainly seems irre­ pel” being preached!) commit,” “to deliver up,” “to put for what evidently, in their opin­ ion, are required for clarity. This is sponsible and disrespectful. Where in prison,” “to give over or give an immense disservice to a more- is the sense of godly reverence in up.” Hence, the Greek has not these translators?) capable readership.) been transmitted literally here.)

“. . . Gospel of the kingdom of God” is the reading in the pro­ found majority of mss: a vast majority of the Byzantines; 20 significant uncials (including A, D, and E); a few of the Old Latin (50-55 existing, total); the Vulgate; the Syriac Peshitta (2nd cent.); the Gothic (4th); the Ethiopic (4th or 6th); and others. Opposing are Sinaiticus (Aleph) and D among the un­ cials, L and Theta, plus Famil­ ies 1 & 13, the Harclean, the Armenian, the Sahidic, the Sinaitic (4th), and some others.

KJV Mark 3:15 — “And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils: . . .”

NRSV NRSV reads: “. . . and to have authority to cast out demons.”

NASB

PROBLEM

(Excluding “to heal sicknesses”— without footnote, especially—is extremely irresponsible in the least and, more likely, a modernistic ef­ fort to revoke Jesus’ power over bodily afflictions—for whatever reason. Most moderns manipulate the source texts, centrally using the “NU,” but also using Byz. readings when essential and/or convenient.)

Some scribe(s) made a seri­ ous error of omission here, leaving out a key phrase in (No footnote appears to acknow­ (See the NASB footnote at imme­ this verse. It does not appear in the minority Greek—here ledge the Majority reading! The diate left.) less than 1 percent of extant NASB translators are being NT mss. But the Majority text selective about their footnoting. includes “to heal diseases,” as Have they attempted to denigrate do the overwhelming number the divinity of Christ by failing to of other manuscripts: 21 sig­ footnote, here—“power to heal nificant uncials and five oth­ sicknesses”? Are only our physi­ ers; most Old Latin; the Latin cians, with modern technology, able to heal sicknesses? Have Vulgate (common); the Pe­ God’s chosen vessels no power to shitta and Harclean; the Goth­ do so?) ic; the Armenian; and others.

Mark 3:29 — “But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal dam­ nation: . . .”

Reads: “. . . but whoever blas­ phemes against the Holy Spirit can never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin.”

Reads: “. . . but whoever blas­ phemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin.”

Mark 6:11b — “Verily I say unto you, It shall be more toler­ able for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.”

NRSV: This last portion of verse NASB: Verse 11b, at far left, is 11 is completely omitted from omitted without footnote. the NU text, without any foot­ (Omission without at least the typ­ note. ical designation “other mss” is negligence! This exclusion evid­ (This is done despite the paltry MSS evidence against the Major­ ently is based on “harmonization,” ity reading, etc.: moderns’ sacred or “parallel influence,” the theor­ “old uncials,” Aleph, B, C, and D, etical scribal practice of copying plus four other uncials and several Scripture from one Gospel—in this case from Matthew, in 10:15 other lesser witnesses.) —to another to ensure consistency. Moderns uphold this theory.)

(In this particular case, the KJV translators chose the best Greek word, daimonion (demon), but op­ ted for the less-appropriate English word, “devils,” rather than “de­ mon.” The Greek daimon also could have been used.)

(Also see Matthew 10:15.)

(No footnote here about “other ancient authorities” including “to heal sicknesses.”)

(The minority Greek source reads aionion amartematos, “eternal sin,” rather than aionion kriseos, “eternal damnation,” or “eternal judgment.”)

NASB reads: “. . . and to have authority to cast out demons.”

NIV NIV reads: “. . . and to have au­ thority to drive out demons.”

Again the modern versions mit­ igate the severity of the sense, using “eternal sin” rather than the frightening truth: “eternal damnation”—different Greek (No footnote for the Majority (Again, no footnote for the Major­ words. The Majority text is supported by: 12 significant reading. Solid manuscript evid­ ity reading.) uncials; seven other Greek mss; ence supporting the NA apparatus the Syriac Peshitta and Harcare Aleph, B, C, L, W, Delta and lean; the Old Latin; Family 1; Theta, plus four Family 13 curothers. Modern scholars’ sives. Others are several scattered second-favorite MS., Aleph, mss, the Vulgate, the Syriac Sineven opposes their adopted aitic [4th], the Gothic, the Armenreading. But damnation doesn’t ian, and some of the Bohairic sell their “Bibles.” [southern Egyptian].)

Reads: “. . . but whoever blas­ phemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin.”

NIV: Verse 11b is omitted without footnote.

Among extant Greek NT ma­ nuscripts, only eight significant uncials of the 5,300-plus omit (Supporting the NA text are only this portion, plus several Old Latin, the Vulgate and Sahidic, Aleph, B, C, D, L, W, Delta, and more. Again, this omission Theta, a “pauci” [“pc”—a few] of reduces the severity of the other Greek mss, several of the sense—judgment against those Vulgate, the Syriac Sinaitic, the ignoring the gospel. (The Pe­ Sahidic [also “Thebaic”], the Bo- shitta and Harclean “versions,” hairic [also called “Memphitic— 17 significant uncials, part of the witnesses (“pt”)], and Caesarean Families 1 and 13, several others.) plus others, also support the KJV.)

KJV Mark 9:29 — “And he said unto them, ‘This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.’” (Also see Matthew 17:21.)

Mark 9:42 — “And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is bet­ ter for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.” (The KJV translators took liberty with word order [“. . . shall offend”] here.)

NRSV

Omits “and fasting.”

Omits “and fasting,” and foot­ note reads, “Some manuscripts prayer and fasting.”

NRSV: “If any of you put a stum­ bling block before one of these little ones who believe in me,a it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea.” Footnote reads: “a Other ancient authorities lack in me.”

NASB: “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe to stumble, it would be better for him if, with a heavy millstone hung around his neck, he had been cast into the sea.”

NIV: “And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck.”

(The Greek omission of eis èmē, “in me,” is founded upon only uncials Aleph, C and D, the cursive Delta [9th], and just four Latin manuscripts.)

(The NIV translators have done the right thing by not footnoting with a reference to “some mss,” “early mss,” or “the earliest mss” excluding “in me.” Rare wisdom for the translation committee.)

PROBLEM

On the basis of only three ex­ isting manuscripts, “. . . and fasting” is removed from this (The vast majority of the Byz­ verse by nearly every modern antine [Majority] text includes “Bible” version. Is fasting now “and fasting,” as do 17 significant (Only most modern “scholars’” unfashionable? Is it no longer uncials, Families 1 and 13, most of ancient duo of Aleph and B op­ deemed important? The an­ (Again, the NRSV’s opposition to the Old Latin, the Vulgate, the pose, along with one other uncial swers seem obvious. (The sig­ the vast majority of manuscripts is Syriac Peshitta and Harclean, and and a few cursives. Contemporary nificance of fasting is self-sac­ less confusing and suspicious than others.) textual critics’ lynch pin is the rifice to focus on and enhance these other contemporary transla­ Aleph/B combo. The modern crit­ spiritual growth by whole­ tions. But it still is wrongful ical apparatus’ foundation is upon heartedly interacting with and submitting to our Savior.) —“other.”) these two.) The Majority text reads “to stumble” (or “to entice to sin,” “to offend,” “to entrap”—skan­ dalise).The NASB omits “in me” after “believe”; this is in­ correct, again, according to the vast majority. Once more, the translators have defied their own Greek source text, which includes “the ones who believe in me . . .” A recent interlinear by Zondervan inserts the words “to sin” underneath the NA Greek that excludes them!

Translators distort the truth in the NASB footnote: These words are not found in two MSS of the fourth century (Aleph, B), but they are found in two Greek MSS of the fifth (A, D). Also, the words appear in the Peshitta and Old Latin, (The translators write “the early the Majority text, and in 14 sig­ (Essentially, modern critics have MSS” in reference to only the (The NIV committee chose to be nificant uncials. The translators foregone the true Greek reading— “five old uncials”—again appeal­ even more irresponsible than that seem to disapprove of the “re­ in the face of enormous evidence ing to moderns’ liberalistic futility. of the NASB by deleting the verse petition” of this phrase, as well against it—because of their two A paltry minority of manuscripts is entirely—more deceptive and sin­ as of the foreboding tone. Some early scribes also took most-beloved MSS, Aleph and B. leveraged against the overwhelm­ ister activity by the NIV translat­ liberties in their copying by Another of their revered sources, ing Byzantine text copied in the ors. Removal here, in effect, min- “removing repetition.” Satan is C, opposes, as do four other un­ Antiochian region.) imizes the penalty of eternal a master of partial truths— cials, Families 1 and 13, and a few damnation.) what has been manifested here! others.)

Based on the modern Greek crit­ ical apparatus, the “NU” text, the NRSV completely deletes verses 44 and 48. The footnote after v. 42 reads: “Verses 44 and 46 (Parenthetical material, above, ad­ (which are identical with verse 48) are lacking in the best ancient au­ ded by author.) thorities.” (Emphasis mine.) (Also see Matthew 17:21.)

NIV

Reads: “He said to them, ‘This kind can come out only through prayer.’”a Footnote reads: “Other ancient authorities add and fast­ ing.”

(The Greek and English are cor(Also see Matthew 18:6 and Luke rect. But a NRSV interlinear brackets eis èmē, “in me,” based 17:2.) only on several manuscripts.)

Mark 9:44 — “Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.” (Also repeated in verses 46 and 48.)

NASB

NASB reads: “[where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.] Footnote reads “Vv 44 and 46, which are identical to v 48, are not found in the early MSS.” (Emphasis mine.)

NIV omits the verse, then adds the footnote: “44where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched. 45Some manuscripts hell, where their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.”

KJV

NRSV

Mark 10:21 — “. . . One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up thy cross, and follow me.”

NRSV: “Jesus, looking at him, loved him and said, ‘You lack one thing: go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.’”

(Note that the KJV does transpose the final two clauses, “follow me,” and “taking up thy cross,” also changing the tense.)

(“The money” simply was added in the English. The independent clause “take up thy cross . . .” is omitted, not appearing in Greek.)

(See Matthew 16:24, Luke 9:23.)

Mark 10:24 — “And the dis­ ciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Chil­ dren, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!”

Reads: “And the disciples were perplexed at these words. But Je­ sus said to them again, ‘Children, how hard it isb to enter the king­ dom of God.’” Footnote reads: “b Other ancient authorities add for those who trust in riches.”

(Also see Matthew 19:24, Mark 10:25, and Luke 18:25.)

(The editor has removed this crit­ ical part of the verse with no indic­ ator but a tiny letter, and a decept­ ive explanation. The only basis for this omission is their hallowed Aleph and B, plus two other un­ cials and a few other manuscripts.)

Mark 11:26 — “But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.”

This verse is omitted by the NRSV. The footnote reads: “Oth­ er ancient authorities add verse 26, ‘But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father in heav­ en forgive your trespasses.’”

(Also see in Matthew 6:15, and similar in Proverbs 21:13.)

(The NA-UBS exclude this verse despite its critical doctrine: The Father will not forgive one’s sins until he/she first forgives those of others against him/her.)

NASB

NIV

PROBLEM

The independent clause “take up The independent clause “take up Despite the vast majority of manuscripts (90-95 percent) thy cross . . .” is omitted. thy cross . . .” is omitted. supporting the inclusion of “taking up thy cross” after “and (The minority Greek omits the key (The minority text’s opposition: phrase apas ton stauron, “taking eight uncials—including Aleph, B, follow me,” modern versions have omitted the former. Omis­ up the cross.” The cross is the C and D—the Vulgate (5th cent.), sion reduces the burden of dis­ daily burden of obedience to God’s the Bohairic, a few MSS of the cipleship. How convenient for word—a command most unwel­ Sahidic, and several other manu­ the modernistic critical translat­ come to today’s “lukewarm” scripts.) ors and their readers. Support­ believers!) ing the Byz. text are 19 signi­ ficant uncials, Family 13 (13 mss), the Harclean, the Gothic, the Sinaitic, and more. Reads: “Children, how hard it is Reads: “Children, how hard it is The Majority text (not some manuscripts) reads, “for the to enter the kingdom of God!” to enter the kingdom of God.” ones having put confidence in (The basis for the omission of the (Jesus mentions money and riches riches (chré-ma) to enter into the kingdom of God. . . .” clause “. . . for them that trust in at least 31 times in the New Testa­ Again the translators fail to fol­ riches” are only Aleph, B, Delta ment—one of His most-emphas­ low their own Greek source [9th], Psi [8th or 9th], the Sahidic ized topics. Yet, in a critical verse, text. Three of the oldest five Coptic [3rd or 4th], and a few of the here, a modernistic textual appar­ extant MSS include “for them Bohairic Coptic [3rd or 4th].) atus based on a minority of corrupt who trust in riches,” as well as manuscripts is used to defy one of 21 significant uncials, the Pe­ the most-profound points in Scrip­ shitta and Harclean, and much of the Old Latin (2nd), plus ture—that a preoccupation with wealth often precludes salvation.) more. Including the omitted portion would indeed offend today’s wealthy. The true read­ ing wouldn’t sell. Verse 26 is bracketed to indicate suspicion about validity. Foot­ note reads: “Early mss do not contain this v.” (The minority text is supported only by seven uncials—including Aleph and B—and portions of the Armenian and Ethiopic, plus a few other manuscripts.)

This verse is omitted from the NIV. The footnote reads: “Some manuscripts add verse 26, But if you do not forgive, neither will your father who is in heaven for­ give your sins.”

Only 14 manuscripts and/or versions extant do not include this verse. The two earliest ma­ nuscripts (ca. 325-360 A.D.), excluding “fragments,” do not include this verse. However, three of the earliest five manu­ scripts include the verse. Again, “some manuscripts” is major distortion of the truth! Also supporting the Byz. text are 20 major uncials (incl. A), Families 1 &13, the Peshitta and Harclean, the Gothic, plus some Old Latin MSS, and still more.

KJV

NRSV

NASB

NIV

Mark 13:33 — “Take ye heed, NRSV reads: “Be aware, keep watch and pray: for ye know not alert;a for you do not know when when the time is.” the time will come.” Footnote reads: “a Other ancient authorit­ (The KJV actually is a bit idiomat­ ies add and pray.” ic here. The literal translation from the Majority text is: “Be watchful, (“Add” in the footnote very well— stay awake, and pray; for you do as often is done by moderns— suggest that the translators believe not know when the time is.”) some scribes inserted this word as a “late interpolation”: a wrongful addition no earlier than the 10th century or so.)

NASB reads: “Take heed, keep on the alert; for you do not know when the appointed time will come.”

NIV reads: “Be on guard! Be alert! You do not know when that time will come.” Footnote reads “Some manuscripts alert and pray.”

(The translators, evidently out of their own personal preference, simply took the liberty of adding “appointed” here. It does not ap­ pear in the Majority or NU Greek. Why do these “scholars” think they have the authority to tamper with the Word of God?)

(The Greek blēpete [blay´-peh-tay] means “behold,” “beware,” “see,” “take heed,” “perceive,” or “look on” [or “to”], not “be on guard.” Agrupnite means “to keep awake,” or “to watch.” The NU does not contain proseuchesthe, “to pray.”)

Mark 15:28 — “And the Scrip­ ture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.”

The NRSV omits this verse, just placing a footnote, despite the fact that the verse fulfills the prophecy of Isaiah 53:12. Foot­ note reads: “b Other ancient au­ (Modern critics argue that this thorities add verse 28, And the verse is an interpolation, an inser­ scripture was fulfilled that says, tion by a misled scribe. But the ‘And he was counted among the verse fulfills prophecy!) lawless.’”

NASB contains the verse, with question: “[And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, ‘And he was numbered with trans­ gressors.’] Footnote reads “Early mss do not contain this v.”

NIV omits the verse, then adds the footnote: “27Some manu­ scripts left, 28and the scripture was fulfilled which says, ‘He was counted with the lawless ones.” (Isaiah 53:12)

Mark 16:9-20 — This passage details the appearance of Jesus after His resurrection: first to Mary Magdalene, then to Cleo­ pas and another disciple, fol­ lowed by to the disciples on three occasions.

The NASB includes the passage The NIV also includes the pas­ but adds the footnote: “Later mss sage, but questions its authenti­ add vv 9-20.” city by placing the following content in brackets, between (“Add” refers to moderns’ belief verses 8 and 9: “The earliest that some scribe[s] inserted the manuscripts and some other an­ words into manuscripts dating cient witnesses do not have Mark back no further than about the el­ 16:9-20.” eventh century.)

The NRSV includes the entire passage, but inside brackets, to seriously question its validity. A footnote marker immediately fol­ lows verse 8. The footnote reads: “a Some of the most ancient au­ thorities bring the book to a close at the end of verse 8. One author­ (Without this “longer ending,” the ity concludes the book with a shorter ending; others include the Gospel of Mark would end with, shorter ending, then continue with “. . . (they) fled from the sep­ verses 9-20. In most authorities ulchre; for they trembled and were verses 9-20 follow immediately amazed; neither said they any after verse 8, though in some of thing to any man; for they were these authorities the passage is afraid”!) marked as being doubtful.” (“Some” manuscripts are two.)

(Yes, the few “earliest” extant— existing and usable—manuscripts, from the second and fourth centur­ ies [papyry and uncials], do not contain this verse. But the Byz­ antine majority dates back to at least the fourth century!)

PROBLEM The Majority text under girds the KJV, as do 25 significant uncials, Families 1 & 13, the Vulgate, several Old Latin, and, once again, the Peshitta and Harclean. Thus, “some” is out­ right deception! “Most” would be correct. The sordid NU (NA/UBS) critical apparatus sides with the modern translat­ ors. Do these committees and their corporate owners not want people to pray? (Minority defense? Only in codices B and D, plus several other MSS) Two significant Greek MSS, some Old Latin, several other Greek, some Coptic, the Sinait­ ic, the Sahidic, and several oth­ er MSS, do not contain this verse. But the Majority text (90-95%), 19 significant un­ cials, Families 1 & 13, the Pe­ shitta and Harclean, the Gothic, and two other versions, do in­ clude this verse. Moderns ac­ knowledge the reference to prophecy, yet argue against its fulfillment. What is to be made of this? The fact is, yes, the two oldest manuscripts (excluding frag­ ments) do not include this pas­ sage. But out of the extant 5,300-plus NT Greek wit­ nesses, only Aleph and B, one cursive, the Sinaitic, and sever­ al other MSS, do not have this passage. What is more, three of the earliest five manuscripts do include the passage! “Earliest manuscripts” refers to what conservative biblical scholars (for 500 years) have labeled, in fact, as two of the three mostcorrupt extant “old uncials”— Aleph and B. Aleph and B are the only uncials omitting these verses.

KJV

NRSV

NASB

NIV

Luke 1:28 — “And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.”

NRSV reads: “And he came to her and said, ‘Greetings, favored one! The Lord is with you.’” Footnote reads: “Other ancient authorities add Blessed are you among women.”

NASB reads: “. . . Greetings favored one! The Lord is with you.”

NIV reads: “. . .Greetings you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you.”

Luke 2:14 — “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.”

Reads: “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace among those whom he fa­ vors!”a Footnote reads: “a Other ancient authorities read peace, goodwill among people.”

Reads: “. . . Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace among men with whom He is pleased.” Footnote reads “Lit of good pleasure; or of good will.”

Reads: “. . . Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom his favor rests.”

The Majority text reads: “. . . Rejoice, favored woman, the Lord is with you, blessed are you among women.” Three of the earliest MSS (codices A, C, (No footnote for any other reading (The minority texts’ only recourse D), plus 17 other significant —especially the Majority!) are Aleph, B, L [9th], Psi [8th or uncials, the Peshitta and Harc­ 9th], Family 1 [five mss], several lean, the Gothic and Ethiopic, other Greek manuscripts, and the plus the Vulgate and several of (The Greek chaire means “be Sahidic, Bohairic, and Armenian the Old Latin, read as above. well,” “God speed,” “greeting,” Modern translators are pro­ versions.) “hail,” or “rejoice.” But it is ducing “ecumenical” “Bibles,” obvious that, within this context, yet evidently are defying “hail” or “rejoice” clearly are more (rightfully) historical vener­ appropriate. “Greetings” to the ation of Mary and “holy relics” woman God choose to bear His by Catholics, hence ostensibly son hardly is worthy.) reasoning for omission—a compromise.

(The overwhelming evidence against the NU text not only in­ cludes 90-95 percent of the extant Greek, but also 12 significant un­ cials, Families 1 and 13, the Pe­ shitta, and more.)

Luke 2:43 — “And when they had fulfilled the days, as they re­ turned, the child Jesus tarried be­ hind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it.” (Also in verse 33.)

PROBLEM

(Supporting the NA-UBS appar­ atus are only Aleph, A, B, D, W, (No footnote for any other reading the Gothic and Vulgate, several Old Latin, and the Sahidic Coptic —especially the Majority!) [3rd or 4th Egyptian].)

Firstly, the majority of mss have Greek text closely matching the KJV reading. secondly, the “modern” read­ ing, derived from four of the earliest five MSS, is nonsens­ ical, because God wishes good will to ALL PEOPLE! (This is widely attested in Scripture! It is only against those who finally reject Christ that God releases His eternal wrath.)

The “Majority text” (also “Byzantine,” “Traditional,” “Antiochian,” “Constantino­ politan,” or “Ecclesiastical”) reads “Joseph and his mother , . . .” as it should. Joseph was (The NU text reads goneis, “par­ NOT Jesus’ real father! God the (The NA, UBS and Majority (The NU Greek oi goneis autou, ents,” but the Byz. text, 90-95 Father is Jesus’ father! (“Par­ “the parents of him,” simply is Greek texts all read the same, yet percent of extant Greek, holds the ents” is probably a ruse to es­ technically wrong and nonsensical. the modern translators evidently fort, plus: 18 significant uncials; cape controversy, as some vari­ Neither is “. . . The festival was have inserted “feast” in verse 43 to the Peshitta [2nd] and Harclean ants read “father.”) Mary ended” correct according to the clarify the circumstances—not the [7th]; the Gothic and Ethiopian; birthed Jesus. Joseph was an minority Greek. The NU text meaning. As often is the case in earthly surrogate father. He did several of the Old Latin; and reads, “and when they had com­ the NASB, no footnote is provided more.) not provide the “seed” of pleted the time [of the feast] . . .”) for any other reading.) Christ; the Holy Spirit did!

NRSV: “When the festival was ended and they started to return, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but his parents did not know it.”

The NASB, also relying on co­ dices Aleph and B (plus only el­ even others), provides another loose “translation”: “But his par­ ents were unaware of it.”

The NIV is equally divergent from its own source texts: “After the feast was over, while his par­ ents were returning home , . . .”

KJV Luke 4:4 — “And Jesus an­ swered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.” (Also see Matthew 4:3, 4.)

Luke 9:35 — “And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.” (Also see Matthew 3:17.)

NRSV

NASB

NIV

NRSV reads: “Jesus answered NASB reads: “And Jesus an­ him, ‘One does not live by bread swered him, ‘It is written, “MAN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD alone.’” ALONE.”’” (Not even a more footnote appears (The absence of “but by every to credit a variant reading. And word of God” possibly might be with no support but the modern­ an error of haplography—a scribal istically critically acclaimed MSS error of omission because of Aleph [Sinaitic] and B [Vatican], distraction from copying, or plus L and W, some Greek curs­ simple fatigue. Otherwise, it is ives, the Syriac Sinaitic [4th], the either a direct copying from a Sahidic, the Sinaitic and some of corrupt scribal exemplar [source the Bohairic, the remainder, never­ mss], or a scribal interpolation [insertion] based on belief.) theless, is omitted.)

NIV reads: “Jesus answered, ‘It Two of the oldest five extant is written: “Man does not live on Greek NT MSS omit “but by every word of God.” However, bread alone.”’” another two of the earliest five include the phrase. The Major­ (Again, the footnote only attributes ity text includes the phrase. the quotation to its scriptural ori­ Without these words the mean­ gin in Deuteronomy 8:3.) ing is incomplete: What else does he live by? Man certainly must live by the Word of God, lest he be hopelessly lost. Also supporting the Majority are 17 other significant uncials, plus the Peshitta and Harclean, the Gothic and Armenian, and some Old Latin.

Reads: “Then from the cloud came a voice that said, ‘This is my Son, my Chosen;c listen to him!’” Footnote reads: “Other ancient authorities read my Be­ loved.”

Reads: “. . .This is my Son, My Chosen One; listen to Him.”

Reads: “. . .This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him.”

NRSV: “Thenb they went on to another village.” Footnote reads: “b . . . Other ancient authorities read . . . for the Son of Man has not come to destroy the lives of human beings but to save them.”

NASB: Questions the authenti­ city of the last portion of verse 55 and all of verse 56 by sur­ rounding with brackets. No foot­ note exists even to explain the full significance of the bracket­ ing.

Only five significant Greek un­ cials, P45 and P47, plus Family 1 (Gk./five mss), the Vulgate, Syriac Sinaitic and Curetonian, (No footnote for any other reading. the Sahidic and Bohairic, and As always, the modernistic transla­ (No footnote for any other reading. the Armenian, replace “be­ tion committees do not wish to As always, the modernistic loved” with some variation of confuse the readers with the facts translation committees do not wish “chosen.” The Majority text, along with 22 significant un­ (It may be that many modern crit­ —only to present the Word of God to confuse the readers with the cials and six other Greek, plus based on their own skewed theor­ facts—but only to present the ics view this scribal error as a ref­ ies, beliefs and preferences.) Word of God based on their own Family 13, the Peshitta and erence to Isaiah 42:1 [“. . . my Harclean, and more, read “be­ skewed theories, beliefs and chosen one in whom my soul de­ loved.” Two of the oldest ex­ preferences.) lights”], but Matt. 3:17, Mk. 1:11, tant manuscripts, codices A and C, much more reliable than Lk. 3:22 and 1 Peter 1:17 refer to modern scholars’ favorites Jesus as “beloved Son.”) (Aleph, B), also support the Byz.

NIV: “. . . dand they went to an­ other village.” The footnote reads: d 55, 56 Some manuscripts them And he said, ‘You do not know what kind of spirit you are of, for the Son of Man did not (Also see Matthew 18:11 and Luke (Many among the Byzantine textcome to destroy men’s lives, but 19:10.) type of mss—not an overwhelm­ (Single bracketing by modern 56 ing majority—include this verse in “scholars” denotes suspicion about to save them.’ And” its entirety, plus: the TR; seven un­ verse/passage validity. Double bracketing means the material in­ (Also note the context of this cials; families 1/13; several Old nd Latin (2 ); the Peshitta and Harc­ side is considered “highly doubt­ verse, which clearly justifies its appearance.) lean; the Armenian, and others.) ful” in validity.) Luke 9:56 — “For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.. And they went on to another vil­ lage.”

PROBLEM

Again, “some manuscripts” is a profound understatement. Verse 56 exists in the Majority text. The minority text does, how­ ever, have the support of 16 significant uncials, plus two pa­ pyri (P45 and P75—both 3rd cent.), many of the Greek, the Ethiopic, the Sinaitic (4th), the Sahidic, and a few of the Old Latin and Bohairic. (Among the NU text’s uncial support are all five of the “old uncials”: Aleph; A; B; C; and D.)

KJV

NRSV

Luke 11:2a — “And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.”

NRSV: “He said to them, ‘When you pray, say: Father,a hallowed be your name.’” Footnote reads: “a Other ancient authorities read Our Father in heaven.”

(Also see Matthew 6:9.)

(“Other ancient authorities”? No. “The vast majority of authorities, including some ancient ones”!)

Luke 11:2b — “Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.”

Reads: “Your kingdom come.”b Footnote reads: “b A few ancient authorities read Your Holy Spirit come upon us and cleanse us. Other ancient authorities add Your will be done on earth as in heaven.”

NASB

NIV

NASB: “And he said to them, ‘When you pray, say: “Father, hallowed be your name. Your kingdom come . . .”’” Footnote reads “Later mss add phrases from Matt 6:9-13 to make the two passages closely similar.”

NIV: “He said to them, ‘When you pray, say: “Father, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come . . .”’” Footnote reads “a 2 Some manuscripts Our Father in heaven.”

Reads: “Your kingdom come.” Footnote reads: “11:2 1 Later mss add phrases from Matt 6:9-13 to make the two passages closely similar.”

Reads: “. . . your kingdom come.”b b 2 Some manuscripts come. May your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.”

The Majority text reads “Our Father in the heavens . . . Let your kingdom come, let Your will be done as in heaven also upon the earth.” Not some ma­ nuscripts—the vast majority! Furthermore, 21 significant un­ cials—including A and C—and (“Some manuscripts” is highly Family 13 (13 cursives), some (This subjective remark in the deceptive, as the clear majority of of the Old Latin, plus the Pe­ footnote is little more than mod­ ernistic conjecture—nothing more manuscripts, and of nearly every shitta (2nd), Harclean (7th) and type, include “Our Father who art Ethiopic (4th or 6th), and others, than an unproven theory regarding in heaven . . . .”) support the Byzantine (Major­ gospel “harmonization”!) ity) text.

(Again, “some manuscripts” is a monumental understatement.)

(Which authorities read “Your Holy Spirit . . .”? Most texts read “. . . as in heaven, also upon the earth.”)

(A theory commonly held by modern biblical scholars—“har­ monization.” Modernists have invented an entire vernacular in defense of their clearly corrupted manuscript base.)

Luke 18:28 — “And Peter said, NRSV reads: “Then Peter said, Lo, and we have left all, and fol­ ‘Look, we have left our homes lowed thee.” and followed you.’”

NASB reads: “And Peter said, ‘We have left all we had to fol­ low you!’”

NIV reads: “Peter said to him, ‘We have left all we had to fol­ low you!’”

(Also see Matthew 19:27.)

(No footnote for any other reading. Minority evidence stands in only four uncials, a few other Greek MSS, a few of the Sahidic Coptic, and the Bohairic and Armenian.)

(No footnote for any other reading. The overwhelming manuscript evidence supporting the vast ma­ jority of the Greek are 20 signific­ ant uncials, the Vulgate, the Syriac Peshitta and Harclean, the Gothic, and the Ethiopic.)

(This translation committee’s Greek source text reads, “Look, we have left what was ours [or “our own”] and followed you.” Note that the English translation is stylized and not literal from their own text. Furthermore, the essen­ tial difference here is the use of idia [“our own”] in the NU Greek versus panta [“all”] in the Major­ ity.)

PROBLEM

The vast majority of manu­ scripts support the KJV read­ ing: Majority text; 23 signific­ ant uncials; Family 13 (curs­ ives); several Old Latin (2nd cent.); the Peshitta, and Harc­ lean; the Ethiopic; Family 13. Only uncials B and L, P75, Family 1, the Armenian, some Greek cursives, the Vulgate and Armenian, others, oppose. Note that “later” uncials (6 th9th) support the KJV by a mar­ gin of 80.2% to 19.8%!

The NASB and NIV, though close to their underlying Greek sources, still are not entirely accurate (“styliza­ tion”). The Majority reads, “And Peter said, ‘See, we have left all and followed you.’” Supporting the critical text are Aleph-2 (2nd correc­ ted), B, D, and L, plus a few other Greek, a few Old Latin, much of the Coptic, and the Armenian.

KJV

NRSV

NASB

NIV

Luke 21:36 — “Watch ye there­ fore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to es­ cape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.”

NRSV reads: “Be alert at all times, praying that you may have the strength to escape all these things that will take place, and to stand before the Son of Man.”

NASB reads: “But keep on the alert at all times, praying that you may have strength to escape all these things that are about to take place, and to stand before the Son of Man.”

NIV reads: “Be always on the watch, and pray that you may be able to escape all that is about to happen, and that you may be able to stand before the Son of Man.”

Reads: “[[Then an angel from heaven appeared to him and gave him strength. In his anguish he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat became like drops of blood falling down on the ground.”]]b Footnote reads: “Other ancient authorities lack verses 43 and 44.”

Verses are included without note. Verses are included and the foot­ note reads: “Some early manu­ (Nevertheless, the NASB still uses scripts do not have verses 43 and the Greek osei, meaning “like,” or 44.” “as”—a metaphorical reference rather than literal—concerning (Other minority support are the Christ’s blood falling to the Sinaitic [4th], Sahidic [3rd or 4th], a ground; gon—“ground,” “earth,” few Bohairic [3rd or 4th], and one “dirt,” etc.) Old Latin manuscript.)

(“Be accounted worthy . . .” means that the redeemed, the children of God, should live sanctified lives which exude the “fruit of the spir­ it”—a signal to the world that they already have been justified and re­ deemed through God’s grace. These should be lives ordered after Christ’s—lives consistent with God’s requirements for those already justified through faith in His Son. —Ephesians 2:8, 9)

Luke 22:43, 44 — “And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.” (“As it were,” in this context, does not signify that the intensity of Christ’s angst compares his sweat drops to blood, as a simile, based on the subjunctive tense. Rather, the Greek word egeneto (from ginomai) means His sweat literally “became” blood. )

PROBLEM

The minority Greek sources for the modern versions support their readings but are incorrect. The Majority text reads, “Watch therefore in every time praying that you may be ac­ counted worthy to escape all (The Greek agrupneite [ag-roopthe things being about to hap­ knit-ay] means “be awake,” and (Note that this particular reading (Once again, the source Greek pen, and to stand before the “watch,” so “be alert” is an accept­ nullifies the pre-tribulational rap­ here nullifies the pre-tribulational Son of Man.” The NRSV, NASB and NIV nullify the preable English translation—though ture! The implied result is, as this rapture! The NIV reading also probably not preferred. “. . . Have verse reads in the NASB, that misrepresents the source text with tribulational rapture, seeming to indicate that ardent prayer the strength to escape” appears in those saved before the Great “. . . that you may be able to and watchfulness may—it is only about 45 of the extant NT Tribulation still must endure it! Al­ stand,” possibly indicating that Greek uncials.) ternatively, the implication is that, some meritorious human behavior hoped—deliver believers from the Antichrist’s deadly persecu­ through prayer, the redeemed may lead to believers’ redeemed tion. But the pre-tribulational through Christ may be able to appearance before Christ. Notice rapture is biblical! See these “hide themselves” from the Anti­ the difference in the KJV: “and to passages: Luke 17:34-36; 1 christ’s wrath.) stand , . . .” rather than “. . . may Corin. 15:51, 52; 1 Thess. be able to stand.”) 4:15-17; Rev. 3:10. It is scrip­ tural fact that those accepting Christ as Savior before the Tribulation begins will be taken to heaven “to meet the Lord in air” (1 Thess. 4:17). Over­ whelming evidence supports the Byz.

(Double brackets, [[ ]], are used to intimate that the material inside is particularly doubtful. These and the footnote render the content es­ pecially dubious to the reader— wrongfully so!)

Yes, some early manuscripts, including at least four of the oldest (including two ancient papyrus fragments), omit these verses—among a total of nineplus Greek in opposition to the Byzantine. But the vast major­ ity include the verses, including two of the earliest five Greek MSS. Jesus was God, but He also was such in human form: 100% divine and 100% human. In His humanity, he felt angst and needed strength. This did not render Him less than God. Other support comes from 21 main uncials, the Syriac Pe­ shitta and Harclean, and the Ar­ menian and Ethiopic.

KJV Luke 22:64 — “And when they had blindfolded him, they struck him on the face, and asked him, saying, Prophesy, who is it that smote thee?” (Also see Matthew 26:68 and Mark 14:65.)

Luke 23:34a — “Then said Je­ sus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”

NRSV Reads: “They also blindfolded him and kept asking him, ‘Prophesy! Who is it that struck you?’”

NASB

Reads: “. . . And they blindfolded Him and were asking Him, say­ ing, ‘Prophesy, who is the one who hit You?’” (The Zondervan Greek and Eng­ (“Also” does not appear in the NU lish Interlinear New Testament Greek apparatus; neither does any [NASB/NIV], which is based on reference [“kept”] to persisting in the NA Greek, does not renounce querying Jesus. This is implied in the Majority or TR readings dir­ the Greek text.) ectly, by including this footnote: “a autou to prosopon, kai in­ cluded by TR after eparoton” [“on the face, and” . . . after “were asking . . .”]. Hence, the translators did not deny the reading out­ rightly. However, they footnoted it using Greek, making it both cryptic and almost unnoticeable to almost anyone not fluent in Greek.)

NRSV: [[“Then Jesus said, ‘Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.’”]]b Footnote reads: (NKJV footnote reads: “NU-Text “b Other ancient authorities lack brackets the first sentence as a lat­ the sentence Then Jesus . . . what er edition.” NU refers to the cur­ rent, naturalistic “critical text,” an they are doing.” apparatus containing editorial (The vast majority of extant [exist­ changes incorporated into the ing and usable] manuscripts, Byz­ Scriptures by modernists of the antine and otherwise—about 99 18th, 19th,, 20th, and 21st centuries.) percent overall—include this verse! So why is it considered so dubious by modern liberal critics? Simply because it opposes their venerated Aleph [“1”—first-cor­ rected] and B, plus the fourth of their “old uncials,” Codex D [Western text-type], and B’s pre­ cursor, P75. Others among the paucity of minority support are un­ cials W, Theta and 0124 [6th], a few Byzantines and a few others.)

NIV

PROBLEM

The NRSV, NASB, and NIV Reads: “They blindfolded him and demanded, ‘Prophesy! Who omit any reference to the actual contact point [the face] of the hit you?’” beating. The Majority text reads, “And covering him, they (In the interlinear referred to at were striking His face and were immediate left, underneath the asking Him, saying . . .” Only Greek“proφήτευσον” (proeight specified Greek uncials of phēteunson — prof-ay΄-toon-sun), the 5,300-plus extant support the modern reading, plus many meaning “prophesy,” the translators chose the word “tell”—how Greek cursives, and the Bohair­ ic. Seventeen significant un­ pedestrian and inappropriate. cials, the Peshitta and HarcWithin this context the English lean, plus the Ferrar group 13 word prophesy is clearly the (Caesarean), the Armenian and correct translation.) Ethiopic, and the Vulgate, support the Majority. The NA’s central support are P75 (3nd), some of Aleph, and B. For moderns, the corrupt P75 is the decisive underpinning of Co­ dex Vaticanus (B).

NASB: “But Jesus was saying, NIV: “Jesus said, ‘Father, forgive ‘Father, forgive them; for they do them; for they do not know what not know what they are doing.’” they are doing.’” Footnote reads: “Some early manuscripts do not (Note the consistency, by absence, have this sentence.” between this verse and Mark 11:26: The modern versions omit (The footnote indicates the entire the Luke 23:34a reference to Je­ first part of verse 34 is lacking in sus’ forgiveness of His murderers, some manuscripts. The result is as well as omit Mark 11:16, God’s that only the “b” portion, the charge for humans to forgive one second half, “And they divided up another.) his clothes by casting lots,” exists in these aforementioned manuscripts. This is a heinous omis­ sion!)

The translators in modern ver­ sions claim that this portion of the verse may have been later added to some . Modern trans­ lators also are mitigating God’s command for forgiveness—first by eliminating Jesus’ forgive­ ness for His murderers, then by omitting a reference to biblical human forgiveness of one an­ other. Casting doubt on any of God’s Word is a very serious offense, and some scribes of long ago have done this here— with compliance from modern liberals. The overwhelming lot of the Majority text here is sup­ ported by 24 significant uncials and five other Greek, the Vul­ gate, the Peshitta and Harclean, Families 1 & 13, the Armenian and Ethiopic, and more.

KJV Luke 24:12 — “Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in him­ self at that which was come to pass.” (The KJV is a bit idiomatic, here, with “and stooping down he be­ held,” rather than “and stooping to look in,” but the phraseology is inconsequential to the meaning. Nevertheless, the English translation should be more accurate!)

NRSV NRSV reads: “But Peter got up and ran to the tomb; stooping and looking in, he saw the linen cloths by themselves; then he went home, amazed at what had happened.”a Footnote reads: “a Other ancient authorities lack verse 12.” (Once again, a senseless deviation from what appears in the Majority Greek source text: translators us­ ing the English “went home” des­ pite the Greek reading apelthen, “to go off,” or “to depart.” The UBS [the NT source for the NRSV], as translated by Paul R. McReynolds, reads, “. . . having stooped down . . . he went off to himself.” But a better translation is as reads above, because the Greek parakupsas means both “to stoop down” and “to look into.”)

Luke 24:40 — “And when he Reads: “And when he had said had thus spoken, he shewed them this, he showed them his hands his hands and his feet.” and his feet.”b Footnote reads: “b Other ancient authorities lack (Also see John 20:20.) verse 40.’”

NASB NASB reads: “But Peter got up and ran to the tomb; stooping and looking in, he saw the linen wrappings only; and he went away to his home, marveling at what had happened.”

NIV

PROBLEM

NIV reads: “Peter, however, got up and ran to the tomb. Bending over, he saw the strips of linen lying by themselves, and he went away, wondering to himself what had happened.” Footnote reads “Some manuscripts do not in­ clude this verse.”

The Majority text reads: “and stooping to look in . . . and he went off to himself marveling . . .” The problem with the modern versions, here, is that their readings simply are incorrect! Supporting the Ma­ jority reading are moderns’ fa­ (The Greek parakupsas means vorite manuscripts, Aleph and B, plus their highly esteemed both “to stoop down” and “to look 75 In addition, co­ into.”) (“Some manuscripts”? No. All but P papyrus. th dices A (5 ), E (6th), F (9th), G about 25 mss or fewer of any kind th th (9 ), H (9 ), K (9th), L (9th), M —period.) th th (8 ), S (10 ), U (9th), V (9th), W (5th) and X (10th) support the Majority reading, as well as nine other specified Greek mss, plus the Peshitta and Harclean, Families 1 and 13, the Armenian, and the Ethiopic, among others. Only “some” source MSS, led by Codex D, oppose the Byzantine reading. Moderns have abandoned their revered “earliest manuscripts.” Why—external pressure, per­ haps? They want it both ways —whatever suits their particu­ lar fancy in a context.

Reads: “And when He had said Reads: “When he had said this, this, He showed them His hands he showed them his hands and and His feet.” feet.”

(The NASB translators’ source texts, the NU [NA27 and UBS4], do (Three of the “old uncials,”Aleph, not include verse 40, as indicated A and B, even support the Major­ in the Zondervan Greek and English Interlinear New Testament ity. Still more, the Vaticanus [B] [NASB/NIV]. But from the foundation, P75, contradicts the translators’ own English reading! virtually identical Greek edition (UBS), the NRSV interlinear ed­ They include verse 40 in their itor, P. McReynolds, does include Greek interlinear [Word Study verse 40. Some deception procee­ Greek-English New Testament] despite that it defies their corner­ deth here. Inconsistency among modern liberal critics is one of stones, then they cast suspicion their most-prominent signposts.) with a footnote.)

Only the corrupt Codex D (Beza) represents the Greek minority text! In addition, just six of the Old Latin (2nd), and the Syriac Sinaitic (4th) and Curetonian (5th) versions, omit this verse. Among those which include it are the Majority, 22 significant codices (including Aleph and B) and six other Greek, P75, and the Peshitta and Harclean, plus more. Regarding the other modern versions cited here, they are similar to the Majority text, but their source text does not contain Verse 40 —a shameful contradiction!

KJV Luke 24:47 — “And that repent­ ance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” (The Byzantine Text and Textus Receptus each read kai, “and,” in this context.)

NRSV NRSV: “. . . And that repentance and forgiveness of sins is to be proclaimed in his name to all na­ tions beginning from Jerusalem.” (This is a perfect translation of the NU Greek, which mirrors the Byz­ antine text precisely. “. . . Is to be proclaimed” is exactly right based on the fact that the Greek kηrucθñnai (kēruchthēnai — kay-ruhk-thay´-nahee) is in the aorist passive infinitive verbal form.)

NASB NASB: “. . . And that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerus­ alem.”

NIV NIV: “. . . And repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all na­ tions, beginning at Jerusalem.”

(It is interesting that the NU text, used by all but the KJV here, reads (In the Byzantine text [essentially eis, “for,” rather than kai, “and,” the Majority text], accurate trans­ yet the NRSV and NIV read “and” lation of the Greek is “is to be pro­ in the English translation. This claimed” [or “preached”], yet only probably means that these two the NRSV herein is correct. The translation committees realized the KJV’s “should be” is close.) Greek error and abandoned their own source for this single word. Again, the moderns vacillate between Greek texts, not believing in the pure sanctity of either.)

PROBLEM Although the Greek source un­ derlying all of these modern versions is the same, notice how the NASB deviates. Without repentance and re­ mission of sins, the intimation is that “acts of penance,” apart from forgiveness of sins, can achieve salvation. Repentance and remission are separate. The Majority, 22 significant uncials and five other specified Greek, Families 1/13, several Old Latin, the Vulgate, the Harclean, the Armenian, and the Ethiopic dominate. Only Aleph, B, P75, the Peshitta, and the Sahidic and Bohairic op­ pose.

NRSV reads: “No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son,b who is close to the Father’s heart,c who has made him known.” Footnote reads: “b Other ancient authorities read It is an only Son, God, or It is the only (The Greek, monogenes, means “only-born” or “only,” specifically Son. c Gk bosom.” in the sense referring to the unique (Which other MSS have either of identity of God’s Son—p. 2116, the above readings? A paltry few, Strong’s Complete Word Study and none of the “old uncials” [A, Concordance.) Aleph, B, C, D]. The Greek source texts read kolpon (bosom, breast] rather than kardia [heart], as above. The NRSV reading is none other than a modern stylization!)

NASB reads: “No one has seen God at any time; the only begot­ ten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.”

NIV reads: “No one has ever seen God, but God the one and Only, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.” Foot­ notes read: “14,18 Or the only begotten. 18 Some manuscripts (“ . . . God” is incorrect here. As but the only (or only begotten) for the Byz. reading, most editions Son.” of the Majority text err here by us­ ing the term “explained” rather (The only opposition to the Ma­ than “revealed.” The KJV’s “de­ jority and its supporters here are clared” is closer to correct. How­ P66, P75, Aleph, Aleph-1, B, C, L, ever, in this unique context, ac­ the Peshitta, a few Harclean, the cording to the Theological Dic­ Bohairic, and some Ethiopic. This tionary of the New Testament [one against not only the Byz., but also volume, abridged], only here is the 19 significant uncials, Families 1 correct usage “revealed” [no ob­ & 13, some Old Latin, the Harcject].) lean, and others.)

The Majority text reads “only begotten Son.” Four of the earliest five MSS read “only begotten God,” plus two moreancient fragments. No. 1: “Only Son” ignores reference to Jesus’ unique status as God’s incarnate Son in the flesh (ac­ cording to Greek). No. 2: “Only begotten God” originates from early Gnostic heresy about various types/levels of deities (“aeons”) and the belief that Jesus was a “created deity.” No. 3: “God the one and Only” does not uniquely refer to Jesus as God the Father’s Son (Gk. monogenes).

John 3:13 — “And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.”

Reads: “No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descen­ ded from heaven: the Son of Man.”

The minority Greek removes reference to the fact that since His ascension, Jesus has been and will remain in heaven forevermore. Support for the KJV: majority of Greek; 18 significant uncials; the Vulgate; Families 1/13 (Caesarean— hybrid); the Syriac Peshitta and Harclean; the Armenian, and several Old Latin.

John 1:18 — “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begot­ ten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.”

Reads: “No one has ascended into heaven except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.”a Footnote reads: “Other ancient authorities add who is in heaven.” (Removing the last verse portion ignores the fact that Christ eternally remains in heaven.)

Reads: “No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.d ” Footnote reads: “ d 13 Some manuscripts Man, who is in (Only nine Greek MSS support heaven.” this reading [led by P66, P75, Aleph (The NU Greek reads anābebaken, and B], plus some of the Byz., the “ascended,” and katabas´, “descen­ Ethiopic, and portions of the Bo­ ded,” yet the English is so pedantic hairic.) —“gone” and “came.”)

KJV

NRSV

John 3:15 — “That whosoever believeth in him should not per­ ish, but have eternal life.”

NASB

NRSV reads: “. . . That whoever believes in him may have eternal life.”b Footnote reads: “b Some interpreters hold that the quota­ (“Should,” “may” or “will” [have] tion concludes with verse 15.” —Gk. έχω (ekh´-ō)— are used variously in different versions of (What does this cryptic footnote the Textus Receptus, Majority text mean? This is very suspicious. and NA/UBS [“NU”].) Now modernism shows its true colors: Modernistic scholars are more than translators—also inter­ preters.)

NASB reads: “So that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.” Footnote reads: e 15 Or believes may have eternal life in him.”

John 5:4 — “For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.”

Omission of verses 3 and 4 is followed by this footnote: “c Other ancient authorities add, wholly or in part, waiting for the stirring of the water; 4for an an­ gel of the Lord went down at cer­ tain seasons into the pool, and stirred up the water; whoever stepped in first after the stirring of the water was made well from whatever disease that person had.”

The last portion of v. 3b and all of v. 4 are bracketed to indicate suspicion about validity. Foot­ note reads: “5:3 Early mss do not contain the remainder of v 3, nor v 4.”

John 6:47 — “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.”

Reads: “Very truly, I tell you, whoever believes has eternal life.”

NIV NIV reads: “That everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life.” (No footnote for any other vari­ ant.)

This verse omitted. Footnote reads: “Some less important manuscripts paralyzed—and they waited for the moving of the waters. From time to time an an­ gel of the Lord would come down and stir up the waters. The (This notorious omission, depend­ first one into the pool after each ent largely upon the five “old un­ such disturbance would be cured cials,” plus P66 and P75, is a fortuit­ of whatever disease he had.” ous opportunity for theological modernists simply to deny the mi­ raculous in the Bible. Many con­ (The footnote not only denies God’s divine power, but also refers temporary biblical scholars and theologians embrace this unbeliev­ to the Majority text as “less important manuscripts”!) ing position.)

Reads: “Truly, truly, I say to you, Reads: “I tell you the truth, he he who believes has eternal life.” who believes has everlasting life.” (No footnote for any other vari­ (The Greek eỉs èmé, “into me,” “in (No footnote appears in the NRSV ant.) (No footnote for any other vari­ me,” or “on me,” is lacking in the regarding this egregious omission. ant.) modern versions.) Why are the words “on me” not in­ cluded? Mostly because moderns’ beloved Aleph, B, C and D op­ pose, plus P66. This in the face of more than 95 percent of extant Greek manuscripts—and nearly all other existing evidence.)

PROBLEM The modern versions’ Greek source text reads: “So that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life.” The ab­ sence of the words “should not perish . . .” mitigates the sense, seeming less harsh for those who do not believe in Christ. Only 13+ of the extant 5,300plus Greek mss support this reading, led by P75, Aleph and B. Others are Family 1, two Vulgate, the Sahidic and Bo­ hairic versions, and some of the Armenian and Ethiopic. Four of the oldest five MSS, plus two still-older fragments, and three other specified Greek, plus Vulgate, Bohairic and Armenian portions, as well as two other versions, do not include these words. But the vast majority do include them, including one of the earliest and a revision of a second among the oldest five. Nineteen significant uncials do support the Majority, plus Families 1/13, the Peshitta and Harclean, and much more. Omission of these words removes the divine miracle in the healing of those immersed in the pool!

The Majority text reads, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the one be­ lieving in me has eternal life.” Without the words “in me” the verse does not refer to that in which belief must be held! Only nine extant, specified Greek and others, one Vulgate MSS, one Syriac, four Old Latin, and a few of the Armeni­ an have a false variation of the modern reading. The KJV is supported by the Majority, 17 significant uncials, the Syriac Peshitta and Harclean, the Gothic, the Ethiopic, others.

KJV John 8:59 — “Then they took up stones to cast at him: but Je­ sus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.” (Also see Luke 4:30.)

John 13:32 — “If God be glori­ fied in him, God shall also glori­ fy him in himself, and shall straightway glorify him.”

NRSV

NASB

NRSV: “So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.”

NASB: “Therefore they picked up stones to throw at Him, but Jesus hid Himself and went out of the temple.”

NIV: “At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.”

NRSV reads: “If God has been glorified in him,a God will also glorify him in himself and will glorify him at once.” Footnote reads a Other ancient authorities lack If God has been glorified in him.”

NASB reads: “. . . if God is glorified in Him, God will also glorify Him in Himself, and will glorify Him immediately.”

NIV reads: “If God is glorified in him,c God will glorify the Son in himself, and will glorify him at once.” Footnote reads: “c 32 Many early manuscripts do not have If God is glorified in him.”

PROBLEM

Majority text reads: “Therefore they picked up stones so that they might throw at Him; but Jesus was hidden and went out of the temple, having gone through their midst; and passed (No footnote appears to represent (Essential opposition to the Ma­ (As with the NASB, here, no by thus.” The removal of the any variant, including the Majority jority comes from Greek P66, P75, footnote is mentioned for any clause in question omits the di­ text, which finishes the verse with Aleph, B, D, W [5th], and Theta other reading—nor any footnote at vine miracle of Jesus’ super­ “. . . having gone through their all.) natural power (invisibility?). [9th]. Ten Old Latin, the Vulgate, th Lower Christology. The Major­ midst; and passed by thus.”) the Armenian, the Sinaitic (4 ), the ity is supported directly by 16 Sahidic and some of the Bohairic significant uncials and six other also are among the minority. But Greek, Families 1 & 13, and they are outweighed by the vast the Harclean, the Gothic, the majority of NT Greek mss.) Ethiopic, and more.

(Both the NA Greek and the Eng­ lish of the NASB are, essentially, identical to the Majority text.)

(Credit is due to the translators, here, for being fairer than those of most other modern “Bibles.” Nev­ ertheless, the NRSV remains a corrupt translation.)

Acts 2:30 — “Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, ac­ cording to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne.”

NIV

(The translators here use “many early” in an attempt to offset the overwhelming majority of manu­ scripts opposing their minority text.)

Reads: “Since he was a prophet, he knew that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would put one of his descendants on his throne.”

Reads: “But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne.”

Reads: “But he was a prophet and knew that God promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne.”

(The corrupt Greek underlying this translation centrally is based upon (This verse is a reference to 2 the five “old uncials.” Other sup­ Samuel 12—God telling David port includes the Peshitta, Armeni­ the Messiah will emerge from his an and Ethiopic, but, again, the bloodline. “Loins” signify “procre­ vast majority of mss dominate ative power,” according to against it.) Strong’s Complete Word Study Concordance, p. 2125.)

(The omission of “raise up Christ” is traced to the ancient argument that Christ will return in the flesh —a great divide between light and darkness . . . between good and evil . . . between God and Satan. It also is interesting that in the 1881 ERV, based on the Westcott-Hort Greek text, only “according to the flesh” was removed.)

(The corrupt Greek underlying this translation centrally is based upon four of the five “old uncials.” Other support includes some Byz., three Old Latin, the Peshitta, the Armenian and Ethiopic, and more. But, again, the vast majority of Greek mss dominate against it— 90% or more extant Greek, plus others.)

The use of “many early” in the NIV footnote is used in an at­ tempt to offset the majority factor. The modern “Bibles” largely rely on eight significant uncials, P66, some of Family 1, the Harclean and Sinaitic, a few of the Ethiopic and Bohair­ ic, the Gothic, and some others. The Majority reads “If God has been glorified in him . . .” The KJV also is supported by 17 main uncials, Family 13, the Peshitta, Gothic, Vulgate, and others. Four of the earliest five MSS plus several versions or por­ tions of them, omit the under­ lined portions. But the Majority text includes them, as do six other specified Greek mss, plus the Harclean. Most of the early church fathers oppose. But, Tertullian (Latin, d. 220), whose extant writings number 36-8 (82%) for the Textus Re­ ceptus, was for the Byz. Only Tatian (77) has more extant writings. Early fathers (pre400) favored the Byzantine 3 to 2—60% to 40%.

KJV

NRSV

Romans 5:6 — “For when we NRSV reads: “For while we were yet without strength, in due were still weak, at the right time time Christ died for the unChrist died for the ungodly.” godly.” (The NRSV English reading is (The Majority text, from the Byz­ fine. However, the English in the running interlinear center column antine Greek, reads, “For yet reads “irreverent,” which, it gener­ Christ, while we were weak, in due time on behalf of the ungodly ally may in many contexts—but not correctly here. Some interlin­ died.”) ear editors like to use multiple translations in the same place to show different shades of meaning. But here, this is incorrect—obvi­ ously by the context, which refers to lost sinners.)

NASB

NIV

PROBLEM

NASB reads: “For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.”

NIV reads: “You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the un­ godly.”

(Only in this instance, in the New Testament, may the Greek word asthenes—note at far right—be properly used, in this context. As for “right time,” this is a mis­ translation to accommodate a wanton public.)

(The NIV mistranslates from the NA Greek: “right time” and “still powerless.)

What doesn’t appear here is that Codex B, the most-beloved MS of most modern scholars, actually reads “If indeed . . .” rather than “For when . . .” Modern translators have been careful to abandon this reading here. The Greek word asthenes means “without strength,” “weak,” “sick,” “impotent,” “more feeble,” and, parallel to a lost sinner, “helpless.” The NIV reading, “still powerless,” is incorrect here. The Greek as­ thenes does not refer to impot­ ency in any instance in the NT. The Majority text, codices Aleph, A, C, D [Greek only in “diglott”—two languages], K, P, and Psi, plus the Syriac Harclean (7th), represent the true reading.

(The paucity of minority support comprises just Codex B, two specified Greek cursives [“minis­ cule”] and some more Greek, the Peshitta [2nd], and the Egyptian Coptic in the Sahidic [3rd or 4th] and Bohairic [3rd or 4th].)

Romans 8:1 — “There is there­ fore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.”

Reads: “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.”

Reads: “Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.”

Reads: “Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.” Footnote a reads, “ 1 Some later manu­ scripts Jesus, who do not live ac­ cording to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.”

Romans 10:15b — “. . . As it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gos­ pel of peace, and bring glad tid­ ings of good things.”

NRSV: “. . . As it is written, ‘How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!’”

NASB: “. . . Just as it is written, ‘HOW BEAUTIFUL ARE THE FEET

NIV: “. . . As it is written, ‘How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news.’”

Again, observe the NIV foot­ note referring to “some later manuscripts . . .” Most of the mss incorporating the last clauses of the verse are later (Not even a footnote serves to in­ (The minority text has substantial than the authorities supporting support in six Greek manuscripts, (Thomas Holland explains that Al­ form readers that more than 90 its absence, but it is the Major­ exandrians believe[d] that “ditto­ percent of extant mss oppose this and the Ethiopian, Sahidic, and ity text which includes this por­ graphy”—the repetition of text— reading. No “Other ancient author­ Bohairic versions, plus two MSS (The NA27 also lists the Greek mss tion. Also including these accounts for the final 10 words: a ities . . .” note. This is miserable of the Old Latin. Spearheading the 6, 1506, 1739, 1881, and a “few clauses are five significant un­ duplication of the words from verse deception! [But then, Aleph, B, C Greek are early uncials Aleph, B, others,” plus the Egyptian and cials (two from the 4th and 5th), Ethiopic, and Origen [d. 254], as and five other specified Greek, 4. But why move backward from v. and D read as above.]) C, and D.) supporting the minority.) 4 to v. 1—a major slip?) plus the Harclean.

(Reading precisely as the NIV, the NRSV here equals its lack of dig­ (The Greek agathos´, at the end of nified expression. Incomplete, this this verse, literally means “good inaccurate rendering from a flawed things.” The final independent Greek reading fails to even include clause is repetitious, but, again, the NASB’s “of good things.” And Greek is a language of redundancy the Greek is identical.) and repetition!)

OF THOSE WHO BRING GOOD NEWS OF GOOD THINGS.’”

(The footnote only provides the (No footnote whatsoever appears source of the quotation, Isaiah after this abbreviated verse! This 52:7.) despite the fact that more than 90 percent of extant NT Greek manu­ scripts oppose it!)

Majority reading: “. . . just as it is written, ‘How beautiful are the feet of the ones preaching the gospel of peace, of the ones proclaiming the gospel of the good [things/news]!’” The modern versions’ Greek source combines the last two phrases to summarize them as one. Only four significant uncials, one fragment [P46], some Greek cursives, and the Coptic ver­ sions, support the moderns.

KJV

NRSV

NASB

Romans 14:10c — “For we shall all stand before the judg­ ment seat of Christ.”

NIV

PROBLEM

NRSV reads: “For we will all NASB reads: “. . . judgment seat stand before the judgment seat of of God.” God.”b Footnote reads: “b Other ancient authorities read of Christ.” (Christ will be performing both judgments. Rev. 20:11, 12 de­ (Note that John 5:22 reads, “For scribes the “Great White Throne the Father judgeth no man, but (“Other ancient authorities”? hath committed all judgment unto Rather, the vast majority of author­ Judgment,” that for the con­ demned. It details how earth and the Son.” Modern translations in­ ities.) heaven will flee from Jesus. Re­ clude this verse, unchanged, yet miniscent of unbelievers hiding at they omit the above reference to the Second Coming.) Christ!)

NIV reads: “. . . judgment seat of The vast majority of extant mss read “of Christ.” Modern trans­ God.” lators adopt the minority read­ ing because it is upheld by four (No footnote exists to apprise the of their five beloved “old un­ reader of alternative variants— cials”: codices Aleph (4th ), A such as those of the Textus Re­ (5th), B (4th), and C (5th). This may originate from lower ceptus and the Majority text.) Christology’s genesis in first century Gnosticism. Backing the Majority are eight signific­ ant uncials, the Peshitta and Harclean, the Vulgate, Gothic (4th), Armenian, others.

1 Corinthians 7:39 — “The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.”

Reads: “A wife is bound as long as her husband lives. But if the husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, only in the Lord.”

Reads: “A wife is bound as long as her husband lives; but if her husband is dead, she is free to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.”

Reads: “A woman is bound to her husband as long as she lives. But if her husband dies, she is free to marry anyone she wishes, but he must belong to the Lord.”

(What is missing in the modern versions is the Greek nomon [nom´-own], “regulation,” “law,” “principle.”)

(In the translators’ collective opin­ ion, the testimony of four of the five “old uncials” outweighs the Greek Majority and overwhelming overall witness.)

1 Corinthians 9:22 — “To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.”

NRSV: “To the weak I became weak, so that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that I might by all means save some.”

NASB: “To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some.”

NIV: “To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have be­ come all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.”

1 Corinthians 11:24b — “And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you; this do in remembrance of me.”

Reads: “This is my body that is for you.a Do this in remembrance of me.” Footnote reads: “a Other ancient authorities read is broken for.”

Reads: “This is my body, which is for you . . . .”

Reads: “This is my body, which is for you; . . .”

The Majority text reading is as the KJV. Others supporting it are the venerable Syriac Pe­ shitta and the Harclean, correc­ ted versions of Aleph (2) and D (1), and more. Omitting “bound by the law” complies with most of those “earliest readings,” in­ cluding P46 (papyrus). But omitting “bound by the law” removes a specific reference to God’s law.

The Majority reads “as weak,” plus a corrected Aleph (2), C, and the Greek of D (“Dgr”), seven significant Greek uncials and four others. Aleph, A, B, and P46 oppose. (Paul became (The simple omission of os [as] (“Possible” is not in the Greek. with the weak to (The spiritually unregenerate may Did the committee or stylists think like-minded here, most probably, is an acci­ relate to them; he did not back­ dental scribal error, but it changes not comprehend the difference that without this word readers slide to become weak!) Joining meaning dramatically! Also notice between “weak” and “as weak.”) would confuse the meaning with the Majority are the Peshitta, no footnote for the Majority read­ the common phrase used to convey Harklean, Armenian, Ethiopic, ing.) and more. a modern sense of certainty?)

(“Other ancient authorities”? No. The vast majority of Greek and nearly all of the versions!)

The vast majority (Byz.) read “broken.” “Broken” is a dual reference to the bread and (God’s Word was corrupted early (In both Greek source texts, the Christ’s person. Only Aleph, A, by scribal incompetence and word uper [hoop-er´] appears, but B, C, and P46 oppose, plus more gnostic teachings. It then was scru­ a clearly poor contextual transla­ Greek. The third Aleph writer pulously attended and purified for tion is made by moderns: “for” is (of three), and correctors three 1,500 years. Then some “authorit­ used, rather than “on the part of” and two of C and D, respect­ ively, agree with the Majority. ies” located Aleph and B.) or “for the sake of.”)

KJV

NRSV

NASB

NIV

1 Corinthians 11:29 — “For he that eateth and drinketha unwor­ thily, eateth and drinketh damna­ tion to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.”

NRSV reads: “For all who eat and drink without discerning the body,b eat and drink judgment against themselves.” Footnote reads: “a Other ancient authorities add in an unworthy manner | b Other ancient authorities read the Lord’s body.”

NASB reads: “For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judg­ ment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly.”

NIV reads: “For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.”

2 Corinthians 5:17 — “There­ fore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.”

Reads: “If anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new.”

Reads: “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature: the old things passed away; behold, new things have come.”

Reads: “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come!”

(The translators have added “everything” twice, despite no testimony in their Greek, and the NU Greek does not include ta tanta, “all things,” as is should.)

2 Corinthians 12:9 — “And he said to me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me.”

The Majority text reads “un­ worthily” and “body of the Lord.” Partaking of the ele­ ments does not evoke God’s judgment, obviously, but parti­ cipating without due reverence (Opposing the Majority reading (Additional Majority support for Christ, and without forgive­ 46 are only P , Aleph, A, B and C, comes from the Syriac Peshitta ness of one’s fellow man. The plus the Sahidic and Bohairic, and [2nd] and Harclean, the Gothic [4th] vast majority support the KJV, portions of the Ethiopic [4th or 6th], and Armenian [5th], plus more.) plus Aleph-2, C-3, D, and plus additional Greek.) much more.

(Just as the NIV, following, no (Supporting the five “old uncials” footnote exists for any other read­ of the NA apparatus are four other ing.) Greek MSS, several Vulgate, and a few of the Peshitta, Bohairic [Coptic], Armenian, and Ethiopic.)

NRSV: “. . . but he said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for power a is made perfect in weakness.’ So, I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me.” Footnote reads: (Note the Greek word “episkenoo” “a Other ancient authorities read has unique meaning in this NT my power.” context, according to the Theolo­ gical Dictionary of the New Testa­ ment [Abridged], p. 1043.)

NASB: “And He has said to me, ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weak­ ness.’ Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weak­ nesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me.”

Galatians 3:1 — “O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?”

Reads: “You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?”

Reads: “You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly exhibited as crucified.”

PROBLEM

NIV: “But he said to me ‘My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.’ Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest upon me.”

(Omission—the most common scribal error—of just the Greek mon [“my”] between “for” and “power” makes all the difference.)

(Omitting the clause “that you should not obey the truth” is a critical blunder, here!)

Again, the Majority text reads “all things,” but modern com­ mittees are infatuated with Aleph, A, B, C, D, and P46. “All” firmly accentuates that Christ has spiritually regener­ ated and redeemed each believ­ er from the otherwise eternal ramifications of his/her de­ praved nature. In the regenerate person, all is new! Supporting the Byz. are the Harclean, Gothic, five significant uncials and seven others, and more. The NU has substantial testi­ mony, yet is clearly over­ whelmed by 95+ percent of ex­ tant Greek mss. The NRSV and NASB are absolutely erro­ neous: Not any power “is made perfect in weakness,” but only Christ’s power! (Greek epi­ skenόō in this unique context means “to enter or take up res­ idence”—not “rest upon” or “work through.”) Even two published versions of the Ma­ jority are wrong here.

The vast majority of the extant 5,300-plus Greek NT mss in­ clude the clause omitted in the modern versions, as well as six significant Greek, and more. (The Greek proegráphe means One of Satan’s chiefest inten­ “evidently set forth,” “announctions is to separate believers ed,” or “written afore,” not “exhib­ from the truth—hence only par­ ited” or “clearly portrayed.”) tial truth presented here!

Reads: “You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified.”

KJV Galatians 3:16, 17 — “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed be­ fore of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thir­ ty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.”

NRSV NRSV reads: “Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring;e it does not say, ‘And to offsprings,’f as of many; but it says ‘And to your off­ spring,’e that is, to one person, who is Christ. My point is this: the law, which came four hun­ dred thirty years later, does not annul a covenant previously rati­ fied by God, so as to nullify the promise.” Footnotes read: “e Gk seed | f Gk seeds.” (After substituting “offspring” and “offsprings”—the latter not a legit­ imate word in English—the NRSV implements “to one person” rather than again using “offspring.” Why? Variety? And why not en­ courage learning, rather than pur­ veying palatability, by using “seed” and “seeds” in the text, then footnoting with “offspring”? This is about selling “Bibles”!)

Galatians 4:7 — “Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.” (Here, “heir of God through Christ” is used similarly in Ro­ mans 8:17, “joint-heirs with Christ”—from the Greek sugklero­ nomai [soong-klay-ron-om´ahee].)

Reads: “So you are no longer a slave, but a child, and if a child then also an heir, through God.”e Footnote reads: “d Other ancient authorities read an heir of God through Christ.” (The NU text has substantial sup­ port, but still pales, by numerical testimony, in comparison to the vast majority of Greek, including D and, interestingly enough, the second-corrected Aleph [Aleph-2] and the third-corrected C [C-3].)

NASB

NIV

PROBLEM

NASB reads: “Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, ‘And to seeds,’ as referring to many, but rather to one, ‘And to your seed,’ that is, Christ. What I am saying is this: the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the prom­ ise.”

NIV reads: “The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say ‘and to seeds,’ meaning many people, but ‘and to your seed,’ meaning one person, who is Christ. What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.”

The Majority reading in v. 17 is “God in Christ.” The mod­ ern Greek critical apparatus (NU), based largely on devi­ ant manuscripts Sinaiticus (Aleph) and Vaticanus (B), omits the entire portion span­ ning “And this I say . . . God in Christ.” No explanation ac­ companies this serious omis­ sion. John 1:3 says that “All things were made through [Christ],” signifying also that Jesus existed before the world was created. Many modern “Bible” translators, much like the Gnostic Docetists and Ad­ optionists— largely of the first through third centuries— don’t seem amenable to the concept that Jesus is, in fact, God. Opposing the majority evidence also are A, C, P, Psi, and P46, both Coptic versions, the Vulgate (5th), the Ethiopic (4th or 6th) version, and a few Old Latin.

(Notice “in Christ” is omitted from the phrase “God in Christ,” again (Notice how “in Christ” is omitted wrongfully dissociating God’s from the phrase “God in Christ,” Son. Christ is the promised seed again wrongfully dissociating only through whom salvation God’s Son from the process. Christ comes! This omission is incongru­ is the promised seed only through ous with the previous reference to Christ. Also note that the words whom salvation comes! This omission is incongruous with the “people” and “person” do not ap­ previous reference to Christ here. pear in the NU Greek, but, rather, In addition, no footnote appears to have been added by the translators [or their “stylists”]. These terms acknowledge any other reading.) are unnecessary clarification. Nei­ ther is “The Scripture” necessary for clarification. Finally, “set aside” incorrectly translates akur­ oi, which means “to disannul,” “to invalidate,” or “to make of none effect.”)

Reads: “Therefore you are no Reads: “So you are no longer a longer a slave, but a son; and if a slave, but a son; and since you son, then an heir through God.” are a son, God has made you also an heir.” (Minority support exists in uncials Aleph, A, B, C, F, and G, plus (Conversely, the vast majority of some additional Greek MSS, as mss are supported by Aleph-2, C3, D, K, and L. “God through Je­ well as in P46, several Old Latin [2nd], the Vulgate, and the Bohair­ sus Christ” appears in six other Greek MSS, plus the Syriac Pe­ ic, Armenian, and some of the shitta and Harclean, and a few of Ethiopic.) the Ethiopic.)

Omitting “through Christ” is a profound distortion of the doctrine that all believers are heirs to God through Jesus Christ—ONLY through Christ! Five other NT verses state this directly or imply it. Believers are, indeed, “coheirs” with and through Christ, but it is only through Christ that we receive our heirship. “Through Christ” clearly establishes this doc­ trine here.

KJV Galatians 6:15 — “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircum­ cision, but a new creature.”

NRSV

NASB

NIV

NRSV reads: “Ford neither cir­ cumcision nor uncircumcision is anything; but a new creation is everything!” Footnote reads: “d Some ancient authorities add in Christ Jesus.”

NASB reads: “For neither is cir­ NIV reads: “Neither circum­ cumcision anything, nor uncir­ cision nor uncircumcision means cumcision, but a new creation.” anything; what counts is a new creation.” (Again, translators justify using this reading based largely on the (Again, a loose and undignified authority of Codex B. They also translation. The Majority/TR/KJV 46 rd leverage the antiquity of P [3 read that neither circumcision nor (The translators are well aware cent., Pauline epistles], the Syriac uncircumcision—also metaphors th th that something is missing—“in Harclean [7 ], the Gothic [4 ], Christ Jesus”—in their Greek, be­ and a scattered few others. Oppos­ for a purificational distinction within the OT dispensation—have cause, in this case, they add ing are not only the Majority any spiritual significance among “everything,” which is not suppor­ Greek, but also nine significant believers.) ted by their Greek.) uncials, the Vulgate, and others. Even four of the five “old uncials” oppose B here.)

PROBLEM The Majority text, nine signi­ ficant uncials, the Old Latin, and others under gird the KJV reading. A paltry minority of MSS and versions have the “modern” reading. Removing “in Christ Jesus” nullifies the meaning of the verse because the essence of it is that, plainly, in Christ, circum­ cision has no true signific­ ance; it is a ritual entirely dis­ associated from eternal king­ dom applicability. It is in Christ only that our lives have true significance.

The Greek in the source texts for modern versions is “phōs” (luminousness—heavenly bod­ ies, splendor around God’s (The NU text is consistent in (All Greek source texts compared (Note that agathosune [goodness] wrongfully using “light,” utilizing (Note that the only version among throne) rather than “pneuma” (spirit). But the Majority text herein, the Byz. Majority, the Tex­ is translated as “good,” and some form of phōs [abstract light] those discussed herein, the NIV, still leads the way, plus four tus Receptus, and the NU, do not dikaiosune [righteousness] as removes kai, “and,” from between in several locations of the New significant uncials, seven other “right.” This is translational delib­ include a verb after “Spirit” or Testament—rather than the correct “goodness” and “righteousness.” 46 erateness in replacing traditional pneuma [spirit, wind, life, breath]. The NIV is noted for its frequent Greek, P , and the Harclean. “light, so the respective translation Galatians 5:22 lists the “fruit of theological terms within what Also, because the Holy Spirit is committees have selected their omission of conjunctions [and, the Spirit,” and it is the (Holy) the “agent” of activity in the be­ but, or, etc.] to improve “readafeigns being God’s Word. This own preferences. However, the Spirit which produces the liever, “Spirit” must be correct! most appropriate form probably is caters to alleged “easier reading,” bility.” Again, this committee “light” of Christ’s righteous­ Christ is the “light” of godliness in and, worse still, a deprecation of the simple being form “is.”) thinks it is rightful in altering ness in believers’ lives. (See us, but the Spirit directs and enabbiblical majesty.) God’s Word!) later—1 John 1:7.) les our righteousness.)

Ephesians 5:9 — “(For the fruit Reads: “. . . for the fruit of the of the Spirit is in all goodness light is found in all that is good and righteousness and truth);” and right and true.”

Reads: “(for the fruit of the Light Reads: “. . . for the fruit of the consists in all goodness and light consists in all goodness, righteousness and truth) . . .” righteousness and truth) . . .”

Ephesians 5:30 — “For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.”

NASB: “. . . Because we are members of His body.”

(Note: This statement outrightly identifies believers with Christ’s full humanity, and His passion, death and resurrection. It is not in­ tended to be interpreted literally, as in Roman Catholicism’s celeb­ ration of the mass.)

NRSV: “. . . because we are members of his body.” Footnote reads: “d Other ancient authorit­ ies add of his flesh and of his bones.” (The NU Greek source text—un­ derlying all versions herein except for the KJV—reads, “. . . for [or ‘because’] we are members of his body,” omitting the remainder.)

(Like the NIV following, the NASB does not acknowledge the Majority reading, citing no other readings at all.)

NIV: “For we are members of his The KJV stays with the Ma­ body.” jority text again. The alternate (Modern textual authority for this reading found in minority MSS probably was an early reading only comprises three of 46 the five “old uncials,” P , uncial scribal attempt to remove an 048 and more Greek, the Ethiopic, indication of Christ’s human­ and the Sahidic and Bohairic. This ity. The Majority reading against the Majority, Aleph-2, D, does more than simply refer to believers as the “body of Codex Psi [8th or 9th], five other Christ.” This is the process of major Greek and six others spe­ cified, plus the Peshitta, Harclean, sharing in Christ’s death and resurrection! Armenian, and Vulgate)

KJV

NRSV

NASB

NIV NIV reads: “Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing; . . .”

Philippians 2:6, 7 — “Who, be­ ing in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: . . .”

NRSV reads: “. . . Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness.”

NASB reads: “Who although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself . . .”

Colossians 3:6 — “For which things’ sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of dis­ obedience.”

Reads: “On account of these the wrath of God is coming on those who are disobedient.”d Footnote reads: d Other ancient authorities lack on those who are disobedient (Gk the children of disobedience).”

Reads: “For it is because of these things that the wrath of God will come upon the sons of disobedi­ ence.” Footnote reads “Two early manuscripts do not contain upon the sons of disobedience.”

NRSV: “Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, to the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace.”

NASB: “Paul and Silvanus and Timothy, to the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace.”

(Note that the NASB does cor­ rectly translate the word ekenose (Based upon the use of “exploited” [ek-en´-oce] here—“emptied.”) (The Majority and TR both use the for the Greek arpagmon here, it seems that editor P. McReynolds word ekénose (from kenóō), “to may have realized that some empty or abase,” in verse 7, but might not be comfortable with the KJV committee produced a “seized” or “grasped,” neither of more idiomatic translation.) the latter correct even in the NU.)

(The footnote casts doubt—only two manuscripts—on the validity (The minority Greek even reads “children of disobedience.” Yet the of the reading. Wrongfully confus­ English is modified. Is the differ­ ing!) ence not understood here, or is this deception, as well?)

1 Thessalonians 1:1 — “Paul and Silvanus, and Timotheus, unto the church of the Thessalo­ nians which is in God the Father and in the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.”

(The UBS3 Greek does not include “from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. The editor then (The 1550 Robert Estienne TR, succeeding the Majority, reads “. . . clearly exposes the moderns by us­ from God our Father and the Lord ing “Master” [same Gk.] within Jesus Christ.” Erasmus [1516] the running interlinear, hence den­ penned this before Tyndale.) igrating Christ’s divinity.)

PROBLEM

The underlying Greek is differ­ ent, as usual—remarkably dis­ parate source texts based upon NT mss divergent in 8,000 places (J. A. Moorman). The Majority text under girds the KJV. Note that the KJV makes (No! God’s Son, Jesus Christ, did two critical points in this text: claim equality with God—because 1) Christ is co-equal with God He is co-equal to God—and He the Father; yet 2) He willingly abased (Gk. “kenόō”) Himself did not need to “cling to” or while God in bodily form, ac­ “grasp” it: He already had it! As cepting the despised shame in for “nothing” here, this is a con­ textual misuse of the Greek keno- the flesh. The New Testament is a testimony to Jesus’ divinity, ´ō. Christ “emptied himself” by yet the minority text denies it taking “the form of a servant.” ) here!

Reads: “Because of these, the wrath of God is coming.” Foot­ note reads, “Some early manuscripts coming on those who are disobedient.” (Not many MSS. [See right.] But the Majority also is supported by Aleph, A, C, D-1, F, G, K, L, P, and Psi, and six other specified uncials, as well as by the Syriac Peshitta and Harclean, the Gothic and Armenian, and more.)

NIV: “Paul, Silas and Timothy, to the church of the Thessaloni­ ans in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace and peace to you.” Footnotes read: “a1 Greek Silvanus, a variant of (NA-UBS are supported only by Silas. b1 Some early manuscripts Greek MSS B, F, G and Psi, sever­ you from God our Father and al Old Latin, the Peshitta and Ar­ the Lord Jesus Christ.” menian, plus some of the Coptic Sahidic [northern Egypt] and Ethiopic.)

The Majority reading is “chil­ dren of disobedience.” (Greek for children and sons is the same: “uihos” [hwee´-os].) This same phrase also appears in Eph. 2:2 and 5:6. “Children of disobedience” are unbeliev­ ers who thus habitually behave egregiously against God’s will —the class of the lost doomed to hell. The only opposing MSS are B, D, P46, the Sahidic, and some Ethiopic, plus some of the Byz. text.

The Majority has the greeting “. . . from God the Father and Jesus Christ the Son.” Three of the earliest five MSS, Aleph, A and D (however cor­ rupt, in places), also read so. The villainous Vaticanus (B) supports the minority variant. This may have been an early scribal attempt to “eliminate repetition,” as has been done, historically, by scribes, some Fathers, and by many modern translators.

KJV

NRSV

NASB

1 Timothy 3:16 — “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, be­ lieved on in the world, received up into glory.”

Reads: “Without any doubt, the mystery of our religion is great: Hec was revealed in flesh, vin­ dicatedd in spirit,e seen by angels, proclaimed among Gentiles, be­ lieved in throughout the world, taken up in glory.” Footnotes read: “c Gk who; other ancient authorities read God; others, which | d or justified | e or by the spirit.” (This is riddled with errors: euse­ beias means “godliness,” or “holi­ ness.” “Without doubt” is abysmal; “vindicated” is incorrect for edikaiothe [justified]; “throughout” is wrong [“in the”].)

Reads: “By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, was vindicated in the Spir­ it, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.”

Reads: “Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindic­ ated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.” Footnote reads “c16 Some (Some other Greek manuscripts read “He who,” as shown here, but manuscripts God. d16 Or in the these are among the fewest extant. flesh.” “He,” in the NIV, has abundant (Not only is “appeared in a body” support in Aleph, D, G and F, a incorrect according to the Greek, paucity of the Byz., plus the Pe­ shitta and Harclean, the Armenian, but it also is plainly ignoble! The Lord of glory “appeared in a and the Gothic, the Coptic, and body” rather than “was manifest in more. But the Greek holds the the flesh”? Detestable.) most weight.)

As usual, the Majority text re­ bukes nearly all modern “Bible” versions, reading “God.” The Greek for “He,” “God” and “Christ” each is a different word. “Who” and “which” are the same word in Greek. Notice how the meaning is different, among the variants, within this context. The third copies of Aleph and A, C-2, and D-2 also read “God.” Elev­ en other specified Greek MSS read “God,” plus a few of the Vulgate. This is one of the fore­ most passages clearly estab­ lishing God’s manifestation in the flesh in the form of His Son, Jesus Christ!

1 Timothy 4:10 — “For there­ fore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.”

Reads: “For to this end we toil and struggle,c because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe.” Footnote reads: “c Other ancient authorities read suffer reproach.”

The NASB, also milder than the The NIV also mitigates the KJV, reads “strive.” connotation with “strive.” (Aleph, A, and C, plus the Greek (The minority Greek source reads, in F [9th] and G [9th], support the “toiling [kop-ee-ah´-ō] and strug­ minority text, as do Psi [8th] and K gling [a´-gonid´-zo-mahee]” rather [9th], and many other Greek. than “labour and suffer reproach.”) Joining the Byz. are Aleph-2, D, eight other specified Greek, the Peshitta and Harclean, the Coptic, the Armenian, and much more.)

The Majority reading supports “suffer reproach,” as do Aleph2, and Codex Beza (D), three major uncials and six others, plus much more. “Suffer re­ proach” places the rightful bur­ den of discipleship and sub­ sequent receipt of rebuke, etc., on the believer. Jesus said that faithful believers will be re­ proached.

NRSV: “. . . and wrangling among those who are depraved in mind and bereft of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain.”a Footnote reads: “a Other ancient authorities add Withdraw yourself from such people.”

NASB: “. . . and constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain.”

(See 1 Peter 4:14.)

1 Timothy 6:5 — “. . . Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.”

(The Greek apesterémenōn means both “destitute” and “deprived”— the compound root words being apo, “to separate,” and steréo, “to (“Other ancient authorities”? Not deprive.” Hence, combining the the vast majority? Omitting the words, in effect, enhances the last sentence nullifies the doctrine potency of the Greek word. Greek of separation, upon which believ­ is a language of emphasis through ers are to center their lives!) repetition and the use of double positives and double negatives.)

NIV

PROBLEM

The Majority reading supports “from such withdraw thyself,” as does the Greek of D-2 (2nd corrected), and five other major Greek, plus the Syriac Peshitta and Harclean, others. Defying are largely Aleph, A, D, F, G, and 048, plus the Coptic, Vul­ gate, and some Byz. Some (“Robbed” is both a legitimate meaning and a suitable application miffed scribe(s) was/were of­ of the word apesterémenōn in this fended by the separatist doc­ trine prescribed by God context.) through Paul—“Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you.” —2 Corinthians 6:17

NIV: “. . . and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godli­ ness is a means to financial gain.”

KJV

NRSV

NASB

NIV

Reads: “And He is the radiance of His glory and exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power. When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high . . .”

Reads: “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact rep­ resentation of his being, sustain­ ing all things by his powerful word. After he had provided pu­ rification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.”

Hebrews 1:3 — “Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high . . .”

NRSV reads: “He is the reflec­ tion of God’s glory and exact im­ print of God’s very being, and he sustainsb all things by his power­ ful word. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, . . .” Footnote reads: “b Or bears along.”

Hebrews 1:5a — “For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?”

Reads: “For to which of the an­ gels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son; today I have begotten you?’”

NASB: “For to which of the an­ gels did He ever say, ‘You are My Son, today I have begotten You?’”

NIV: “For to which of the angels did God ever say, ‘You are my Son; today I have become your Father?’” Footnote reads “Or have begotten you.”

Hebrews 7:21 — “(For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the or­ der of Melchisedec . . .)”

NRSV: “. . . but this one became a priest with an oath, because of the one who said to him, ‘The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, “You are a priest forever”’”—

Omits “after the order of Melchisedec.”

Omits “after the order of Melchisedec.”

PROBLEM

Majority text supports KJV reading, “by himself purged our sins,” plus ancient papyrus P46, D, H-c, and nine other Greek, plus the Peshitta, Harclean, and more. What is missing in mod­ ern versions is that Christ alone expiated our sins through His vicarious, bloody sacrifice. This variant could be the result (Sinaiticus [Aleph], Alexandrinus (“Word of his power” and “power­ of early Gnosticism, promoting the Catholic doctrine that (“Reflection” [apaugasma] is okay [A] and Vaticanus [B] support this ful word” differ. “The Word” is from the Son’s authority: It is not works are part of salvation. in this exclusive instance; “God’s reading, along with many other Greek, several of the Old Latin, just a “powerful word,” but also a Some of the “revered” early very being” is not in the Greek.) the Vulgate, and the Armenian.) “Word of His power.” —JFB Bible Church Fathers believed in this —an evolution into the early Comm., Vol. 3, p. 527.) Romish Church. Majority text reads “begotten thee.” The Greek gennao (ghen-nah´-ō) means “to bear, beget, bring forth, conceive, father.” “Spoken of the rela­ tionship between God and the (According to the oft-corrupt UBS (According to the often-corrupt Messiah, called His Son” (Heb. Greek text, “God,” is not included NU Greek text, “God,” in fact, is (The Greek gennao does mean, here, but, rather, “he.” The Greek not included here, but, rather, 1:5, et. al.), according to lastly, “to father,” but the NIV eipen means “he said” rather than “he.” The Greek eipen means “he reading is passive, almost indicat­ Strong’s Complete Word Study “God said.” In the Word Study Concordance. (God had always ing that some event occurred to Greek-English New Testament “he said” rather than “God said.” In been Jesus’ father, but had “be­ multiple interlinears the word also somehow “make God Jesus’ gotten” Him in the flesh at His said” appears in the interlinear portion. “God” is in the English.) “God” is inserted into the Greek.) father.”) earthly birth).

(Melchisedec was Abram’s and the people’s first high priest, and he represented all people—just as Christ has replaced him to repres­ ent all believers now! Jesus’ “ante(No footnote for the Byzantine reading; the omission is obvious: type,” Melchisedec, here is simply (Remember God’s warning, in Revelation, against “adding to” or The English acknowledges incom­ left out of the priestly line that ends with Christ.) “taking away from” God’s words. pletion by adding the long dash. The translators know about the op­ The Scriptures are God’s words posing evidence, yet yielded again “breathed out” to elected men being His chosen instruments.) to Aleph, B, C, and P46.)

The Majority text includes “after the order of Melchizedek,” as do codices Aleph-2, A, D, nine other Greek MSS, (Only some Aleph copies with 46 slight variants, B, C, and P , one the Peshitta and Harclean, the Old Latin manuscript, the Vulgate, Ethiopic, and more. It seems clear, here, that some scribe the Armenian, the Sahidic, and some Bohairic [Coptic], testify to simply committed the error of the minority textual apparatuses.) haplography: accidentally omitting words that he thought absent from the “exemplar” (copyist’s source)—or that he disagreed with the source read­ ing and omitted it.

KJV

NRSV

NASB

NIV

Hebrews 9:11 — “But Christ be­ ing come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; . . .”

NRSV reads: “But when Christ came as a high priest of the good things that have come,c then through the greater and perfectd tenta (not made with hands, that is not of this creation), . . .” Foot­ notes read: “a Or tabernacle | c Other ancient authorities read good things to come | d Gk more perfect.”

NASB reads: “But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come . . .” Foot­ note reads, “Two early mss read that have come.”

NIV reads: “When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here . . .” Foot­ note reads, “Some early manu­ scripts are to come.”

(Actually, the Byzantine Greek and the Textus Receptus do not read “more perfect,” but, rather, “complete,” or “perfect.” The Greek teleioteras does not carry the modifier “more.” This was an idiomatic translation by the KJV, reflecting characteristics of thencurrent English.)

PROBLEM

Majority text reads, “good things coming . . .” In the NIV, “some,” again, is outright de­ ception—most being correct (majority)! The Greek apparat­ us supporting modern versions reads, “good things that have (Against the majority of extant now come . . .” The “good (“Two early MSS”?—likely Aleph manuscript evidence, the NIV things” to which the author of and B. Usually, when modern ver­ translators have chosen this sions refer to “early manuscripts,” abysmal reading. Undoubtedly this Hebrews refers clearly—based they mean the five “old uncials.”) represents a deplorable liberal ob­ on context and biblical doctrine —are believers’ eternal heav­ session with two of those corrupt enly inheritance received (The minority Greek [UBS3] uses “old uncials”—mostly likely genomenon, essentially “to cause through acceptance of Christ, Aleph and B, based on the foot­ to be,” “to become”; the Majority and rewards for godly deeds reads mellonton, here “to be about note wording above. And note the done on Earth. Only two early to be.” This seems very likely to Greek MSS support the NIV misleading “some” rather than have been a scribal error.) reading. “two.”)

The Majority text supports the existence of “in heaven” (“in the heavens”), which certainly is different from the less-spe­ cific “eternity,” and from “last­ ing possessions.” Again, on the basis of the older but corrupt (Egyptian) manu­ (The modern versions have relat­ Alexandrian 46 scripts P , Aleph and D, plus (The NU Greek apparatus also re­ ively substantial support; yet they the more-reliable Codex A, the places “For indeed in my bonds (The KJV reading does transpose (Note that the modern textual ap­ remain overwhelmingly out­ “critical text” reigns supreme the Majority text’s “and remaining paratus reads “. . . and waiting and you suffered with me” with “And numbered by the Majority, second- in the modern versions. Other possession” and “in the heavens.”) knowing” that you, yourselves will with the prisoners you cheerfully corrected copies of Aleph and D, modern support is from P13, suffered. . . .” Note that none of have better and lasting seven other major uncials, and the one cursive, some of the Byz., these modern versions accurately Peshitta, Harclean, and Armenian, several of the Old Latin, some possessions.”) Ethiopic, more. represents its own Greek.) plus more.)

Hebrews 10:34 — “For ye had compassion of me in my bonds, and took joyfully the spoiling of your goods, knowing in your­ selves that ye have in heaven a better and an enduring sub­ stance.”

Reads: “For you had compassion for those who were in prison, and you cheerfully accepted the plun­ dering of your possessions, knowing that you yourselves possessed something better and more lasting.”

Hebrews 11:11 — “Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.”

NRSV: “By faith he received power of procreation, even though he was too old—and Sarah herself was barren—because he con­ sidered him faithful who had promised.”

Reads: “For you showed sym­ pathy to the prisoners and accep­ ted joyfully the seizure of your property, knowing that you have for yourselves a better posses­ sion and a lasting one.”

NASB: “By faith even Sarah her­ self received ability to conceive, even beyond the proper time of life, since she considered Him faithful who had promised.”

Reads: “You sympathized with those in prison and joyfully ac­ cepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions.”

NIV: “By faith Abraham, even though he was past age—and Sarah herself was barren—was en­ abled to become a father because he considered him faithful who had made the promise.” Footnote (The Zondervan NASB/NIV inter­ reads, “Or By faith even Sarah, (The Greek source [UBS3] actually linear inserts into the running in­ who was past age, was enabled to terlinear English “Abraham was bear children . . .” mirrors the Majority reading.) enabled to become a father . . . ,” despite the NA Greek’s reference (The NU text here breaks from the only to Sarah! Then, in the English Byz. and TR by emphasizing Ab­ column, only Sarah is mentioned!) raham’s role rather than Sarah’s.)

Majority supports the KJV reading. The NU text reads “By faith Abraham was enabled to become a father , . . .” yet the NASB defies the same source text. Why the divergence, here? Modern translators vacillate among their apparatuses and MSS—whatever suits them. They are attempting to “recon­ struct the original Scriptures,” yet have not decided which texts are pure—absolute folly!

KJV

NRSV

NASB

NIV

Hebrews 11:37 — “They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormen­ ted; . . .”

Reads: “They were stoned to death, they were sawn in two, they were killed by the sword; they went about in skins of sheep and goats, destitute, persecuted, tormented—”

Reads: “They were stoned, they were sawn in two, they were tempted, they were put to death with the sword; they went about in sheepskins, in goatskins being destitute, afflicted, ill-treat­ ed . . .” Footnote reads, “One early ms does not contain they (The UBS3 Greek adds “to death,” were tempted.” unlike the NA27, the combination of which [NU] supports most mod­ (The Greek kakouchoumenoi means “to maltreat,” “to suffer ad­ ern “Bibles.”) versity,” “to torment.” But surely “tormented” is the most suitable English here! Also, despite its ab­ sence from the NA Greek, epeir­ ásthesan, “they were tempted,” has been added in English.)

Reads: “They were stoned; they were sawed in two; they were put to death by the sword, They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated . . .” Footnote reads, “Some early manuscripts stoned; they were put to the test; . . .”

James 2:20 — “But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?”

NRSV: “Do you want to be shown, you senseless person, that faith apart from works is barren?”

NASB: “But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is use­ less?”

NIV: “You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?” Footnote reads “Some early manuscripts dead.”

James 4:4 — “Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is en­ mity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.”

NRSV reads: “Adulterers! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world be­ comes an enemy of God.”

NASB reads: “You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.”

NIV reads: “You adulterous people, don’t you know that friendship with the world is hat­ red toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.”

PROBLEM

The Majority text supports the KJV. Although the NU Greek source text supporting most modern versions excludes “were tempted,” the NASB in­ cludes it anyway. Again, why are the translators defying their own source text? Probably be­ cause they know that doing so is correct. Also note the NASB footnote—probably referring to (Because the Byzantine manu­ Aleph or B. Most moderns do script tradition dates back to at not believe in “verbal” inleast the fourth century [and likely spiration—the actual words of earlier still], “some” probably is God in the pure Scriptures. incorrect—with “early” referring This allows them to manipulate to MSS of the 7th century or and mix texts—even denigrate before.) the supernatural.

The Majority reading is “dead” (Gk. “nek-rōs´”), in­ cluding one of the modern “critical text” keystones, Co­ dex Sinaiticus (Aleph). A and (The Gk. kene´ [here “senseless”] (Out of 5,300-plus Greek mss, (Only two of the “earliest” [or C-3 (3rd corrected) also sup­ only the abominable B, plus C is correctly used in both major “early”] manuscripts, codices B port the Majority reading, source texts, but the English trans­ support the minority text. Also, a and C, read the Gk. “argōs´,” un­ plus six other major uncials, few Vulgate, several Old Latin, lation is a stretch here. “Kene” profitable or inactive. Only 11 oth­ and much, much more. Note means “vain” or “empty.” The Gk. and the Sahidic, plus some Greek er MSS, families and versions read that dead and useless have arge [“useless,” “barren,” “idle”] uncials, pay misguided homage to “useless.”) very different meanings! the wretched Vaticanus.) is incorrect here.)

(The minority Greek omits kai moichalides, “and adulteresses.” The UBS3 Greek also reads boulethe, “might plan,” rather than “wishes.”)

The Majority supports “adulter­ ers and adulteresses,” as does Aleph-2. Also supporting the Majority are seven other Greek uncials, and the Syriac Harclean (7th). Note how only the NIV agrees with the KJV and the Byzantine text-type. Min3 (The UBS Greek also reads bouority Greek support exists in lethe, “might plan,” rather than (Minority Greek support exists in Aleph, A, B, several Old Latin “wishes.”) Aleph, A, B, several Old Latin and and one Vulgate, and the Pe­ one Vulgate, and the Peshitta [2nd], shitta (2nd), Armenian (5th), Armenian [5th], Ethiopic [4th or Ethiopic (4th or 6th), and Coptic [two versions], plus some of 6th], and Coptic [two versions], plus some of the Byzantine mss.) the Majority manuscripts.

KJV

NASB

NIV

PROBLEM

Reads: “Now that you have puri­ fied your souls by your obedi­ ence to the trutha so that you have genuine mutual love, love one another deeplyb from the heart.”c Footnote reads: “a Other ancient authorities add (“Fervently” was added by the the Spirit | b Or constantly KJV translators for emphasis—un­ through | c Other ancient authorities read a necessarily.) pure heart.”

Reads: “Since you have in obedi­ ence to the truth purified your souls for a sincere love of the brethren, fervently love one an­ other from the heart.” Footnote reads: “Two early mss read a clean heart.” (The minority has excellent sup­ port in five significant uncials and many Byz. Greek, P72, the Peshitta and Harclean, the Vulgate, and the Coptic, plus portions of the Old Latin and Armenian.)

Reads: “Now that you have puri­ fied yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from the heart.”

Though the most-ancient ma­ nuscript evidence (five of the oldest extant MSS—P72 [3rd century papyrus], Aleph, A, B, C) supports the omission of “through the Spirit,” the Major­ ity text includes it, as do six major uncials, and some of the Armenian. Katharas kardias, “from a pure heart,” also is in the Byzantine text. Remember that the Greek always holds the greatest weight because it is the original NT source language.

1 Peter 2:2 — “As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby.”

NRSV: “Like newborn infants, long for the pure, spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow into salvation.”

NASB: “. . . Like newborn ba­ bies, long for the pure milk of the word, so that by it you may grow in respect to salvation.”

NIV: “Like newborn babies, crave pure spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow up in your salvation.”

(The Majority text and the Textus Receptus each read “by it you may grow.” That is, grow spiritually. Note that according to the NT Greek texts of Erasmus [1516], Theodore Beza [1598], Tyndale [1526], and even the Majority text —all partial sources for the KJV— the Authorized Version [1611/ 1769/probably others] is some­ what incorrectly translated, as above, in the first independent clause. Each of the aforementioned Greek sources reads—almost pre­ cisely—“desire [or ‘long for’] the pure [or ‘unadulterated’] spiritual [logikon] milk . . . ”)

(The UBS3 Greek text reads “. . . by it you may grow to ( or “into”) salvation.” The NRSV translators are consistent with their Greek source, here, obviously suggesting that Peter’s readers were not yet saved, but might be if hearkening to the Gospel and other Christian teachings. The problem here is, these Gentiles already had become converts to Christianity. They already were saved!)

(The NA text reads “. . . by it you may grow up to (or “into”) salva­ tion.” The translators appear to be unsure as to the spiritual state of Peter’s listeners, hence substitut­ ing “in respect to” for “up in your . . .” Furthermore, the English trans­ lation does not match the minority Greek source apparatus. Also, the translators appear to have reached a hybrid compromise with “in re­ spect to” substituted for “up to” or “up into,” bridging the gap between the Byz./TR and minority readings.)

(The NA Greek text reads “. . . by it you may grow up to (or “into”) salvation.” The English is a somewhat sensible reading [“up in your”], but it still is incorrect, the words “to salvation” apparently having been added by some scribe[s] for unnecessary clarifica­ tion. [See KJV reading.] And a believer does not “grow up to” salvation—only an unbeliever; and this still would represent an awkward reading. These translators, too, have reached a compromising reading.)

Reads: “Yet do it with gentleness and reverence.b Keep your conscience clear, so that, when you are maligned, those who abuse you for your conduct in Christ may be put to shame.” b (“Behavior” inserted by author for Footnote reads: “ Or respect.” clarification of antiquated term “conversation.”)

Reads: “And keep a good con­ science so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame.”

NRSV

1 Peter 1:22 — “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently.”

1 Peter 3:16 — “Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildo­ ers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conver­ sation (behavior) in Christ.”

(Footnote reads: “Some early manuscripts from a pure heart.”)

Majority reads, “. . . by it you may grow.” Writes J. A. Moor­ man of the contorted modern renderings resulting from nu­ merous of the earliest MSS: “A classic salvation by works alteration which despite its un­ cial and versional support can­ not possibly be right. The NIV/ NASV translators did not trans­ late literally here!” Indeed, the NU text reads, “. . . by it you may grow up to salvation.” The translators did not do so liter­ ally because they knew the Greek to be non-doctrinal. (Sal­ vation is a one-time event at a fixed moment —not a process!) The Byz. text, L (9th) and three other Greek uncials are correct. NU support are seven major uncials and much of the Greek cursives, Old Latin, Vulgate.

Inclusion of “as of evildoers,” as in the Majority, accentuates the significance of the right­ eous believer being falsely ac­ cused. Three of the five “old uncials” (Aleph, A, and C), six (Only P72 and Psi, many Greek cur- (The NA actually reads “. . . so that significant uncials, the Bohairic in the very thing in which you are (3rd), the Peshitta, and the sives, plus three of the Old Latin [2nd], the Vulgate [5th], Harclean, and being slandered, those who are re­ Ethiopic, support the Byz. Note Armenian, and the Sahidic, represent viling your good conduct in Christ how the NRSV diverges from will be put to shame.”) its source. (See NASB/NIV.) the minority text apparatuses.)

Reads: “. . . keeping a clear con­ science, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.”

KJV

NASB

NIV

PROBLEM

NRSV reads: “Since therefore Christ suffered in the flesh,a arm yourselves also with the same in­ tention (for whoever has suffered in the flesh has finished with sin), . . .” Footnote reads: “a Other ancient authorities add for us; others, for you.”

NASB reads: “Therefore, since Christ has suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same purpose, because he who has suf­ fered in the flesh has ceased from sin.” (The Greek ennoian means “intent,” “mind,” “thought,” “will,” etc., not “purpose.”)

NIV reads: “Therefore, since Christ suffered in his body, arm yourselves also with the same attitude, because he who has suffered in his body is done with sin.” (The Greek pépautai means “to cease,” “desist,” or “refrain,” not “be done”—a bit of a stretch.)

The Majority text, Aleph-2, A, and five other significant un­ cials, plus the Harclean, Ar­ menian, and Ethiopic, include “for us.” The chief opponents are P72 (3rd), B, and C. For whom did Christ suffer and die? Was it for the flora and fauna? No—for His greatest creation: mankind!

Reads: “Because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” Footnote reads: b Other ancient (“. . . Came not in old time” does authorities read but moved by the not appear in the Byz. text or most Holy Spirit saints of God spoke.” TR. Erasmus was the origin.)

Reads: “For no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”

Reads: “For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”

Again, the vast majority of ex­ isting Greek mss contain “holy”—including codices A and C, plus seven other major uncials, the Syriac Philoxenian (6th), and more. But the essen­ tial modern-version pillar, Co­ dex B, omits the word—as do P72, P (9th), many Greek curs­ ives, the Harclean, and more.

2 Peter 2:4 — “For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; . . .”

NRSV: “For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into hella and commit­ ted them to chainsb of deepest darkness to be kept until the judgment; . . .” Footnote reads: “a Gk Tartaros | b Other ancient authorities read pits.”

NASB: “For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, re­ served for judgment; . . .”

NIV: “For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment; . . .” Footnote (The Greek seirais zophou means reads, “Some manuscripts into “chains of darkness”—period. Yet some modernists opt for the Greek chains of darkness.” reading appearing in the partial (According to the Greek text pre­ source of the 1881 ERV—Westcott (“Chains of gloom . . .” would be ferred, authorities differ on seirais’ & Hort’s own Greek, which reads correct.) seirois, the masculine form. The meaning here. Orthodox scholars agree that it means “chains,” while ERV reads so, with many allies, including M. Vincent [1888]. But some moderns claim “pits.”) the NA text reads seirais—Byz.)

The Majority reads, “gave them over to chains of darkness . . . .” The NA source reads, “commit­ ting them to chains [or ‘pits’] of thick (utter) darkness , . . .”— similar to the Byz. Some mod­ erns write such things as, “. . . In prof. writ. is a pit” (Thayer). Vin­ cent wrote, “The best texts . . . substitute . . . pits or caverns.” The NA Greek does not include tartarosas, “cast down to hell.” Tartarus is not “lower than Hades,” but the lower part of it.

2 Peter 3:10b — “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.”

Reads: “But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and everything that is done on it will be disclosed.”b Foot­ note reads: b Other ancient au­ thorities add will be burned up.”

Reads: “. . . in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.” Footnote reads, “Two early mss read discovered.”

Reads: “. . . The heavens will disappear with a roar; the ele­ ments will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare.” Footnote reads, “Some manuscripts be burned up.”

(The Greek word rhoidzedon here literally means “loud noise,” and is (“. . . Being burned up will be des­ used uniquely in this context in the New Testament. It also means troyed,” and “. . .will be com­ pletely burned,” are the Byzantine “with a great noise,” “whizzingly readings. The Old Latin, Harclean, [hissing] with a crash,” or “with roaring speed.”) and Ethiopic support.)

(The Greek eurethesetai, meaning “will be discovered/found, ob­ served or gathered,” here is substi­ tuted in the NIV—and other mod­ ern versions—for pareleusontahai, meaning “will/shall pass away, in the KJV, TR and Byz.)

Majority reads, “. . . in which the heavens with roaring speed (rhoidzedon) will pass away, and the elements being burned up by intense heat will be destroyed, and the earth and the works in it will be burned up.” Again, note “some manuscripts” being cited as having different reading, rather than “the majority.” Addi­ tionally, the NU text reads “will be exposed . . . ,” or “will be dis­ covered . . .” Moderns don’t fol­ low their own Greek. The Byz. is supported by six major uncials, the Harclean, Bohairic.

1 Peter 4:1 — “Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves like­ wise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin. . . .”

NRSV

2 Peter 1:21 — “For the proph­ ecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”

(The KJV translators used “great noise” and “shall melt with fervent heat” from the more-refined Textus Receptus, rather than following the shorter Majority text. “Terrible noise” originated from Tyndale.)

(The NA Greek reads thelémati, “will,” “resolve,” “purpose,” or (The Majority text reads agioi “design”—“was ever made” being anthropoi, “holy men.” The NA a poor translation.) simply omits “holy.”)

KJV 1 John 1:7 — “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with anoth­ er, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.” (Understanding “light” properly in this context requires beyond super­ ficial word study, but the answer is found in a good lexicon: “phōs” (SRN 5457)—“(III) Figuratively, moral and spiritual light and knowledge which enlightens the mind, soul or conscience. . . .” p. 2176, Strong’s Complete Word Study Concordance) (About walking in this “light,” Henry Alford [nineteenth century] wrote that it is “. . . an identity in the essential element of our daily walk with the essential element of God’s being.”)

NRSV Reads: “. . . But if we walk in the light as he himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.” (All three of these modern ver­ sions, and others, are without Christou, “Christ,” following Ie­ sou, “Jesus.” This is the result of ancient scribal malice deliberately to dis-join the two terms which completely define Christ’s iden­ tity: Jesus (his name)—“the Lord saves”—and Christ, His purpose: Christ and Messiah [Messias] each meaning “Anointed One.”)

1 John 2:20 — “But ye have an NRSV: “But you have been unction from the Holy One, and anointed by the Holy One, and ye know all things.” all of you have knowledge.”b Footnote reads: “b Other ancient (As in both the Majority text and authorities read you know all the Textus Receptus, translators things.” have added the English word “things” to clarify meaning, but (The UBS3 Greek reads oidate the word obviously is not required pantes, “you know all,” yet the for a complete understanding of skeptical NRSV translators trans­ the verse.) form this into “have knowledge.” Again, modernistic “scholars” evidently think that their where­ withal is greater than that of the ancients. They don’t trust the scribes who have copied their own adopted textual base. Their own “ancient authorities” read “you know all.”)

NASB

NIV

Reads: “. . . But if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Je­ sus His Son cleanses us from all sin.”

Reads: “But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one anoth­ er, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.”

(No footnote appears for any other reading. Again, the NASB with­ holds information that its translat­ ors evidently think may confuse the reader, concerning evidential weight—older manuscripts versus number of manuscripts. That is, the translators hold back informa­ tion because they are sold on the “earliest manuscripts” rather than the overwhelming majority that oppose.)

PROBLEM

This is another of many ex­ amples of lower Christology among the modern versions: “Christ” is separated from “Je­ sus—possibly stemming from early Gnosticism. Note how the NASB committee completely misinterpreted the meaning of (Footnote reads: “b 7 Or every.” [Reference to “all.” —author] The “walk in the light,” which—in this context—is entirely re­ minority text actually has greater moved from some type of overall support [but not in the physical illumination in God’s Greek]: Aleph; B; C; P; Psi; and presence. The NASB commit­ tee mistranslated “light” (God’s some Greek cursives; the Syriac Peshitta [2nd]; the Armenian [5th]; essence) as evidently being a literal manifestation of “phōs”: the Sahidic [3rd or 4th]—northern luminescence. They also capit­ Egyptian].) alized Light, as if to further in­ dicate that it might represent the Holy Spirit, or some mani­ festation thereof, or some other “divine entity.” (Again, Gnosti­ cism?) The Byz. is supported by A and five other Greek un­ cials, plus some Harclean, and the Bohairic.

NASB: “But you have an anoint­ NIV: “But you have an anointing ing from the Holy One, and you from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth.” Footnote all know.” reads, “Some manuscripts and you know all things.” (The NASB translators showed sound judgment and wisdom in this case, not altering “unction,” or (The translators deviated from the NU Greek, which reads kai oidate “anointing”—from the Greek pantes, “and you all know.” In a re­ chris´-ma, meaning precisely cent Zondervan interlinear, they anointing or unction: Strong’s Ref­ simply added the English “the erence Number [“SRN”] 5545. But truth” into both the interlinear and the translating committee switched regular English columns. In the preface, renowned Greek “scholar” the English words to suit their meaning: As at left, oidate means and teacher Bill Mounce writes, “May our work help all of you “you know,” and pantes means using this new interlinear to under­ “all.”)

Some variation of “. . . you all know the truth” may sound more correct, but it is the result of either an inadvertent scribal error or a deliberate alteration. Only Aleph, B, P, and Psi, plus a few Greek cursives, and the Sahidic, support this reading! The meaning of the verse is that, as specified in the Jam­ ieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary (Vol. 3, p. 635), John’s readers knew all things “. . . needful for acting against antichrist’s seductions, and for Christian life.” Again, NIV’s “some” is wholly deceptive: Most, or majority, would be stand the wonderful truths of God’s correct: Byz.; A; six other un­ Word, every word proceeding from cials; the Vulgate; the HarcGod’s mouth. . . . ” Modifying lean; the Armenian and Scripture, then proclaiming verbal Ethiopic; the Bohairic; the Vul­ inerrancy is wretched duplicity!) gate; others.

KJV 1 John 4:3 — “And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.”

NRSV NRSV: “. . . and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. And this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming; and now it is already in the world.”

NIV

PROBLEM

NASB: “. . . And every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.”

NIV: “. . . But every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.”

The Majority reading supports “. . . is come in the flesh.” Modern versions hinge, again, on Aleph and B, which differ from each other 3,036 times in the Gospels alone—aside from spelling, grammar and personal pronouns. (Some wording also is different.) Supporting these are Psi (9th,), some cursives, the Coptic, the Vulgate, and more. What is more, at least one mod­ ern-version interlinear “Bible” shows inclusion of these five words (in the English transla­ tion below the Greek), yet the translators omit them in the ac­ companying text, as well as in their standard versions—as you see at left—of these trans­ lations. Pro-modern usage against overwhelming mss evidence: Byz., six Greek un­ cials, the Peshitta & Harclean.

(The essence of this passage is not (As usual, no footnote exists for only to warn against those proph­ any other reading.) ets who do not acknowledge Christ as the Son of God, but also to warn against such persons and doctrines which do not recognize Him as God in the flesh! This is the spirit of antichrist spoken of here, as well—not just that Christ was not God. From the first century, Do­ cetists held that Christ came as a “phantom” form who was replaced by a separate, fleshy “man” on the cross.)

Revelation 6:17 — “For the Reads: “. . . for the great day of great day of his wrath is come; their wrath has come,” and who and who shall be able to stand?” is able to stand?”

Revelation 22:14 — “Blessed are they that do his command­ ments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.”

NASB

(As usual, no footnote exists for any other reading.)

Reads: “. . . for the great day of Reads: “For the great day of their wrath has come, and who is their wrath has come, and who able to stand?” can stand?”

(This scribal error is so obvious, (No footnote exists for any other that one would expect the correct reading.) reading to take precedence. Whose wrath is coming? Obviously God’s, which will punish the wicked. The unrighteous are not wrathful. Yet modernists use the personal pronoun auton to read “their” rather than “His” [God’s].)

(No footnote exists for any other reading.)

NRSV reads: “Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they will have the right to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates.”

NIV reads: “Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.”

NASB reads: “Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter by the gates into the city.”

(The Vulgate, Sahidic, Ethiopic, (The robes of glorified believers (Probably a reference back to Rev. some Greek cursives, and a few are washed to white in the Lamb’s 7:9 wrongfully repeated here. Old Latin and Armenian support blood, but not of their own merit.) Most likely scribal error.) the minority text.)

The Majority text, joined by A, P, and 046, plus the Bohairic, Armenian and Ethiopic, under gird the KJV reading. The Greek word “autos” (ow-tos´), is a personal pronoun used for both the first- and third-person cases, but note the previous verse, 6:16, which refers to “the wrath of the Lamb” imme­ diately before v. 17 begins. Conclusive. (Defying are Aleph, C, some Greek cursives, plus the Vulgate, Philoxenian, Harclean, and several Old Lat.) The Majority text supports “. . . they that do his command­ ments.” The Byzantine (Major­ ity) reads: “Blessed are those who do his commands. . . .” Aleph and A oppose (B trun­ cated after Hebrews 9:13). Also supporting the Byz. are the Philoxenian and Harclean, the Bohairic, and the Armenian.

KJV Although imperfect, like every other existing NT version (other than originals), the KJV translation is based upon refinements of the Majority text tradition (Textus Re­ ceptus) executed by matchless, spiritually regenerate, orthodox scholars of the 16th and 17th centur­ ies. The lineage of the KJV repres­ ents an overwhelming majority of nearly identical Greek manuscripts outnumbering the modern text base by an 8-to-1 to 9-to-1 ratio. The Byzantine lineage dates back to the fourth century, if not earlier, even according to F. J. A. Hort, hence having a pure heritage ex­ tending back more than 1,600 years.

NRSV

Although promoted as a literal and ecumenical Bible translation known for its high acceptance worldwide among a variety of de­ nominations, the NRSV New Testament has always represented an extension of the ERV of 1881, thus based on a drastically differ­ ent source “critical apparatus.” This “modern critical apparatus” originally was assembled through the singular but similar efforts of naturalistic, unorthodox “scholars” of the seventeenth through nine­ teenth centuries (critical text of Westcott, Hort and Bernhard Weiss [3rd Edition—1901]), all based largely on the corrupt ancient co­ dices Aleph, A, B, C, D, and a few third century fragments. Actual The KJV was based on the content source text is the UBS3. of several earlier Reformation Bibles, including Tyndale’s, The preface “To the Reader” in the Coverdale’s, the Matthew’s (John 1989 copyrighted NRSV contains Rodgers), Taverner’s, the Great typical modernistic concessions Bible, the Bishops, and the and deceptions, as well as copy­ Geneva. Additionally, Theodore right quibbles and political ecclesi­ Beza’s 1598 TR was another astical references. Proliferations of source, plus some of Erasmus’ hundreds of new-age versions are manuscripts (late cursives). justified, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls and their impact upon The entire translation process for the NRSV are acknowledged, and the Authorized Version spanned the role of the National Council of seven years, from 1604 (some Churches (unorthodox teachings) work) to the final editing work in is admitted. 1610. Official work by the appoin­ Also note this version’s pervasive ted translation body began in 1607. The final initial version was avoidance of what the translators presented to James I in early 1611. call “linguistic sexism,” as well as the committee’s liberal and contra­ Note that no copyright ever has dictory translational maxim, “as been established for the KJV— literal as possible, as free as neces­ something uncharacteristic of sary.” (Literal and “free”?) every other Bible version!

NASB

NIV

PROBLEM

Long regarded as one of the “most accurate” and literal translations in existence, the NASB, upon closer examination, proves otherwise: based upon the NU critical text; often “stylized” against its Greek source text and defying it. This version also takes liberties in word and phrase order, based on its own source Greek, and it often fails to footnote significant variant read­ ings, such as those of the Majority text. It frequently has been mis­ translated from its own Greek source, and it represents an “up­ dated” version of the 1901 ASV— the ASV being an “Americanized” version of the corrupt 1881 ERV New Testament.

The most classic, deceptive literaldynamic equivalence version avail­ able, the NIV is a subtly comprom­ ising bridge between devotion to its own vacillating, corrupt Greek source text and its commitment to a stylized, modernistic concession to a wanton, worldly readership. It softens the Bible’s critical warnings and harsh realities, alters biblical doctrine, and aggregately consti­ tutes a vitiated Gospel of positiv­ ism eagerly embraced by both be­ lievers and unbelievers. It is a ver­ sion especially designed for and ap­ pealing to those having “itching ears.” (2 Timothy 4:3) Because of these qualities, the NIV has outsold every other Bible version since 1986—with the KJV second. (Mar­ keting and “stylization.)

Since the first century, heretics have attacked God’s Word, modifying it, adding to it and subtracting from it. Successive infidels established the Roman Catholic Church based on noncanonical doctrine, human constructs and self-serving ma­ nipulation of Scripture. One result was a minority of older manuscripts evolving into a corrupt, false “Bible” based on a “critically edited” textual ap­ paratus forced upon the public by naturalistic scholars and lin­ guistic “stylists.” Bible societ­ ies have become a collective corporate, rich CEO.

First released in 1966 by the Lock­ man Foundation, supposedly a “nonprofit, interdenominational ministry dedicated to the transla­ tion, publication and distribution of the New American Standard Bible, the Amplified Bible . . . ,” the NASB also underwent a signif­ icant update in 1995. According to the Lockman Foundation website, “In 1995 the NASB was updated, increasing clarity and readability. Vocabulary, grammar, and sen­ tence structure were carefully re­ viewed for greater understanding and smoother reading. . . . .” (Author’s underlining.) You can be certain that the changes, be­ ing modernistic, further degraded God’s Word. Just look at the re­ vealing quote.

Note that, according to the “Biblica” web site, now repres­ enting the merged IBS and “Send the Light” organizations, more than 100 scholars repres­ The original NIV Bible was first enting 20 denominations trans­ published in 1978 by the Interna­ tional Bible Society, then in 1984. lated the NIV “Bible.” The Currently, Zondervan—a leader in same source states that for 30 years the Committee on Bible contemporary, modernistic Bible translation (highly commercialized) Translation (CBT) “has labored to bring the Word of God to —uses Bible “databases” owned by people in contemporary Eng­ the International Bible Society lish.” (That is, pedantic, (IBS). The NIV’s modernistic simplistic, diluted and mis­ associations are examples of the translated .) complexity and profit that have Now nearly every modern infiltrated the Bible-publishing business: For more than 200 years translation states it is based on the “most ancient and best ma­ the IBS had been “sharing God’s nuscripts,” and “according to Word around the world.” But in accepted principles of New 2007, the IBS adjoined the STL Testament textual criticism.” (Send the Light) to become Biblica. These modernistic methods yet Space is prohibitive to fully have an opponent in the spir­ describe how commercialized itual form of textual criticism: Zondervan’s and the NIV’s one well-supported since the relationship has become. sixteen century!

he assembler, writer and editor of this document is Edward E. Scott, age 46, a native of Jamestown, N.Y., and a current resident of Jefferson City, Mo. Mr. Scott is a humble, biblically based believer in the Lord Jesus Christ who has exhausted much of the past several years in extensively and intensively researching, reading, and studying the following urgent, complementary issues:

V English and versional (different languages/dialects) Bible history V Bible manuscript history and characteristics (genealogies, paleography, writing and recording materials, etc.) V Textual criticism (“higher” and “lower”) V Christian church history V Early heretical movements V Content of modern Bibles (beginning with the controversial English Revision Version New Testament in 1881) V Biblical and theological scholarship in the modern age V Theological modernism’s early mass movement in the nineteenth century To wit, Mr. Scott has read 32 books and papers during recent years about the above issues, while also undertaking much critical Greek word study. Furthermore, during early stages of the document (87 verses/passages) both Dr. Floyd Nolen Jones, a leading authority on OT chronology and events (The Chronology of The Old Testament), and Dr. D. A. Waite, an eminent Greek scholar and prodigious author, provided encouraging reviews of the work. He currently is a freelance computer graphics specialist and writer, and one who has written published feature articles for online content providers, as well as on professional athletes for newspapers and magazines. Mr. Scott once produced 3D, still and motion graphics for the US Marine Corps, and he has done some post visual effects for film. He has worked with computer graphics in virtually every ap ­ plication since 1995, and he has been a published writer since 1988. It is the writer’s goal—only God willing—to publish further material similar and complementary to that contained in this document. This assemblage partially may represent a capsulization of future bound works exposing the truth behind the translation, emergence, promulgation, and pervasive public use of contemporary “pseudo-Bibles.” All honor and glory go to the Lord Jesus Christ, and I thank Him for implanting the insatiable desire to consume and apply the aforementioned content. God be praised. I am grateful for and indebted to the following publications: The Revision Revised, Centennial Edition [1883-1983] (Fort Worth, Tex.: A.G. Hobbs Publications, 1991); Which Version is the Bible?, 19th ed., rev. and enlarged (Goodyear, Ariz.: KingsWord Press, 2006); Interlinear Hebrew-GreekEnglish Bible, Vol. 4, 2nd ed. (Lafayette, Ind.: Sovereign Grace Publishers, 1985) ; Early Manuscripts, Church Fathers and the Authorized Version (Collingswood, N.J.: The Bible for Today Press, 2005); Faith Vs. the Modern Bible Versions (Port Huron, Mich.: Way of Life Literature, 2005); The Modern Bible Version Hall of Shame (Port Huron, Mich.: Way of Life Literature, 2005); The Majority Text Greek New Testament Interlinear (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2007); Strong’s Complete Word Study Concordance (Chattanooga: AMG Publishers, 2004); Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary, Vol. 3 (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2002); Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Abridged in One Volume (Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1985); and several others. May god richly bless you in all your affairs as you endeavor to please and Honor Him. Yours in Christ,