HOME CHAT ROOM #1 CHAT ROOM #2 Forum Topics Within The Last 7 Days REGISTER ENTER FORUMS BIBLE SCHOOL CONTACT US

Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine Christian Family Fellowship Forums
(formerly Maritime SDA OnLine)
Consisting mainly of both members and friends of the Seventh-day Adventist Church
Welcomes and invites other members and friends of the Seventh-day Adventist Church to join us!

Click Here To Read Legal Notice & Disclaimer
Suggested a One Time Yearly $20 or Higher Donation Accepted Here to Help Cover the Yearly Expenses of Operating & Upgrading
Donations accepted: Here
ShoutChat Box
Newest Members
MrAbdullaQodiriy, ByronS, TruthinTypes, LoveGodsWord, Freth
1316 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums118
Topics9,030
Posts192,884
Members1,316
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
Seventh-day Adventist Church In Canada Links
Seventh-day Adventist Church in Canada

Newfoundland & Labrador Mission

Maritime Conference

Quebec Conference

Ontario Conference

Manitoba-Saskatchewan Conference

Alberta Conference

British Columbia Conference

7 Top Posters(30 Days)
Daryl 9
kland 6
Rick H 2
July
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31
Member Spotlight
Kevin H
Kevin H
New York
Posts: 497
Joined: November 2004
Show All Member Profiles 
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Live Space Station Tracking
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
Last 7 Pictures From Photo Gallery Forums
He hath set an harvest for thee
Rivers Of Living Water
He Leads Us To Green Pastures
Remember What God Has Done
Remember The Sabbath
"...whiter than snow..."
A Beautiful Spring Day
Who's Online
3 registered members (Daryl, Karen Y, Kevin H), 376 guests, and 8 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Re: Bible Doctrines affected by Modern Versions [Re: Rick H] #194180
06/23/21 12:36 AM
06/23/21 12:36 AM
Matthew 10vs8  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2021

Regular Member
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 85
Ili Ili, AS
Mar 9:44?KJB Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.?

Let's now consider the NWT Mark 9:44, and show that it too follows Vaticanus and Sinaiticus:

Mark 9:44 NWT - 44 ??

"... Some manuscripts read here ?where their maggot does not die and the fire is not put out,? but these words do not appear in important early manuscripts. Similar words do appear in verse 48, where there is no uncertainty regarding the text. Evidence suggests that a scribe or scribes repeated the words from verse 48 in verses 44 and 46.?See App. A3. ..." - https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/study-bible/books/mark/9/#v41009044

Again, that which is stated is a lie, not only referring to Mark 9:48 which does have the words, the NWT notation again falsely says, "... Some manuscripts ... but these words do not appear in important early manuscripts ..."

Mark 9:44 NIV:

" 44 [a]

[a] Mark 9:44 Some manuscripts include here the words of verse 48." - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+9%3A44&version=NIV

The words do not occur in the following corrupted texts:

Aleph (Sinaiticus), B (Vaticanus), C, L, W, Delta, Psi, pc, fam 1, sin, Coptic: sa, bo, fay, Arm-zoh,mss

So when the WTS/JW notation says, "... these words do not appear in important early manuscripts ...", they are attempting to negate the vast extant literature which has the text in it:

"... A, D, E, F, G, H, K, M, N, S, U, V, X, Y
Theta, Pi, Sigma, Phi, Omega
Cursives: MAJORITY, fam 13
Old Latin: a, aur, b, c, d, ff2, g2, i, l, q, r1, Vulgate
Syriac: Pes.hitta, Harclean
Gothic, Armenian-usc (apparently), Ethiopic

Also extant in 047?. 055, 0211, 0233?, 0257?, 0274 ..." - A Closer Look: Early Manuscripts & The A.V.; by Jack Moorman, pages 79-80;

Additionally:

"... TATIAN, Diatessaron (I 10:82)

GREGORY OF NAZIANZEN, Orations (III 7:373) ... There are no indications in the ANPF indices of a pre-400 Father skipping from verse 43 to 45 in his quotation. ..." - Early Church Fathers And The Authorized Version, by Jack Moorman, page 43

More:

"... Berry's Greek text supports this passage. ..." - Manuscript Evidence for Disputed Verses - http://ecclesia.org/truth/manuscript_evidence.html

More:

"... the Latin Vulgate and the Clementine Vulgate, the Syriac Palestinian, Harclean, the Ethiopic, Slavonic and the Gothic ancient versions. It is the reading in the Modern Greek Bibles used throughout the Greek speaking world in the Orthodox churches today. ...

The verses are included in the Anglo-Saxon Gospels Corpus Christi Mss. 140 circa 1000 A.D. Though we cannot read it, it was obviously in this predecessor to the English Bibles - Mark 9:44 ?ar hyra wyrm ne swylt & fyr ne bi? acwenced;

Mark 9:45 And gif ?in fot swica? ?e ceorf hine of. betere ?e is ?t ?u healt g?. on ?c? lif ?onne ?u h?bbe twegen fet & si aworpen on helle un-acwencedlices fyres. Mark 9:46 ?ar hyra wyrm ne swylt ne fyr ne bi? adw?sced ...

...

354-430 A.D. Early Church Fathers - Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers - First Series - Volume 2 - St. Augustin: City of God, Christian Doctrine - City of God - Book XXI - Of the eternal punishment of the wicked in hell, and of the various objections urged against it. - Chapter 9 - Of Hell, and the Nature of Eternal Punishments.

?It is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched; WHERE THEIR WORM DIETH NOT, AND THEIR FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.? Similarly of the foot: ?It is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched; WHERE THEIR WORM DIETH NOT, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.? So, too, of the eye: ?It is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: WHERE THEIR WORM DIETH NOT, AND THE FIRE IS NOT QUENCHED.?

HE DID NOT SHRINK FROM USING THE SAME WORDS THREE TIMES OVER IN ONE PASSAGE. And who is not terrified by this repetition, and by the threat of that punishment uttered so vehemently by the lips of the Lord Himself?"
" - https://brandplucked.webs.com/mark94446.htm

Also:

"Ruckman (2) p 122, states that A, D, K, X, Theta, Pi and the majority of Receptus Greek manuscripts support this passage. The verses were omitted in the manuscripts of Origen and Eusebius (i.e. Aleph and B). Berry's Greek text supports this passage." - http://ecclesia.org/truth/manuscript_evidence.html

Removing this text, as in the emended and corrupted texts, breaks the parallelism and structure. The phrase must be there to complete the structure:

Mar 9:43? And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:?
Mar 9:44? Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.?
Mar 9:45? And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:?
Mar 9:46? Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.?
Mar 9:47? And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire:?
Mar 9:48? Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.?

It is given in an A B, A B, A B, pattern

[A.] vs 43 main response (hand)
[B.] vs 44 citation of Isaiah 66:24
[A.] vs 45 main response (parallel) (foot)
[B.] vs 46 citation of Isaiah 66:24 (parallel)
[A.] vs 47 main response (parallel) (eye)
[B.] vs 48 citation of Isaiah 66:24 (parallel)

Last edited by Matthew 10vs8; 06/23/21 12:39 AM.
Re: Bible Doctrines affected by Modern Versions [Re: Rick H] #194185
06/23/21 11:10 PM
06/23/21 11:10 PM
Matthew 10vs8  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2021

Regular Member
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 85
Ili Ili, AS
The greatest doctrine affected by modern versions is the doctrine of 'preservation' (Psalms 12:6-7, &c), for they deny it in practicality, which is really an attack/assault upon the promises of God, and His own unchanging character.

Last edited by Matthew 10vs8; 06/23/21 11:11 PM.
Re: Bible Doctrines affected by Modern Versions [Re: kland] #194187
06/24/21 12:47 PM
06/24/21 12:47 PM
Matthew 10vs8  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2021

Regular Member
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 85
Ili Ili, AS
Originally Posted by kland
Again, should those verses be included in the Bible or not? ...
1 John 5:7.

My stated goals, is to rescue the perishing, care for the dying, to snatch them in pity from sin and the grave; and so I weep over the erring one, and now must attempt to lift up the fallen, and re-tell them of the true and everlasting Jesus, who is mighty to save.? Jesus is merciful, Jesus will save.

There are those advocating the "trinity" of Romanism by this passage (1 John 5:6-8) and/or verse (1 John 5:7) of which the scripture neither intimates, or teaches. The SoP/ToJ also denies the "trinity" of Romanism, as do the vast majority of the pioneers themselves. As Seventh-day Adventists we do not accept the "trinity" of Romanism (definition upon request), neither do we accept Credalism (Summa of Aquinas, Aquiliean, Apostles, Nicene, Athanasius, etc), but we accept the Bible (word of God) as the final authority in all matters of faith and practice.

There are also those these days denying the [1] eternality of the Person/Being the Son, and [2] the Person/Being of the Holy Ghost/Spirit, teaching that there are only 'two beings' and 'three personalities'.

Such things are grievous error, and against the most plainly stated texts within the scripture [the preserved word of God in English, the King James Bible [KJB], aka the common Bible or AV (Authorized Version)] and against the SoP/ToJ and even certain pioneers, such as sister White in her personal materials, James White in his later mature materials, Joseph Bates, A. T. Jones, and others.

Truth:

"... The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, the eternal Godhead ..." - Ms 45, May 14, 1904, par. 16; May 14, 1904

[Please note, that it does not say "the eternal God", but rather "the eternal Godhead".? The word Godhead is used differently than the word God.]

"... There are three living persons of the heavenly trio; in the name of these three great powers?the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit?those who receive Christ by living faith are baptized, and these powers will co-operate with the obedient subjects of heaven in their efforts to live the new life in Christ. ..." - Ms 21, 1906 (November 1905) par. 11

[please note the difference between merely "three" and "trio" [three working together in one accord, at-one-ment, "chord", etc], proof upon request of the differing definition.]

"... Here is where the work of the Holy Ghost comes in, after your baptism. You are baptized in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. You are raised up out of the water to live henceforth in newness of life?to live a new life. You are born unto God, and you stand under the sanction and the power of the three holiest beings in heaven, who are able to keep you from falling. You are to reveal that you are dead to sin; your life is hid with Christ in God. Hidden ?with Christ in God??wonderful transformation. This is a most precious promise. When I feel oppressed and hardly know how to relate myself toward the work that God has given me to do, I just call upon the three great Worthies, and say: You know I cannot do this work in my own strength. You must work in me, and by me, and through me, sanctifying my tongue, sanctifying my spirit, sanctifying my words, and bringing me into a position where my spirit shall be susceptible to the movings of the Holy Spirit of God upon my mind and character. Ms95-1906 (October 20, 1906) par. 29

And this is the prayer that every one of us may offer. ..." - Ms 95, 1906 (October 20, 1906) par. 29 [there are multiple carbons of the original, this is untampered]

[please note the "three ... beings", not 'two beings', and capital "W" in "three great Worthies", which all of whom are called upon unitedly in a prayer by sister White.]

I have many, many more, all citations upon request, in their orderly years, and in all their known instances and forms, capitals, lowercase, varied forms, etc. Ask, and you shall receive. One may also simply see this link - https://www.christianforums.com/thr...quick-references-three-trio-etc.8060685/

See also the complete evidence for 1 John 5:7 here - https://www.christianforums.com/thr...-the-evidence-for-1-john-5-7-kjb.8060173

See also the complete meaning of Proverbs 8:22-31 KJB - https://www.christianforums.com/thr...meaning-of-proverbs-8-22-31-kjb.8060316/

One of the assaults, by such in error, upon the word of God today, is the doubt ["Yea, hath God said ..."; Genesis 3:1 KJB] instilled in others about the validity of 1 John 5:7 KJB.? Instead of reading the text and accepting what it means contextually, there is instead an assault to remove it out of the way at the beginning, in spite of the solid evidence for it.? It is claimed all in the name of good.

What follows is a lengthy evidence, take your time.? It is a resource tool. citing in part:

The Manuscriptural evidence:

[1] Manuscripts [MSS]

Cursives [Greek lowercase]:

[01] #61 [aka Codex Montfortianus] - 16th Cent.
[02] #88 [aka Codex Regis [margin, 16th Cent.]] - 12th Cent.
[03] #177 [BSB Codex graeci 211 [margin, 15th Cent.] - 11th Cent.
[04] #221 [margin, 15th/16th Cent.] - 10th Cent.
[05] #429 [aka Codex Wolfenbuttel, margin, 16th Cent.] - 14th Cent.
[06] #629 [aka Codex Ottobonianus] - 14th Cent.
[07] #535 - 11th Cent.
[08] #636 [margin] - 15th Cent.
[09] #918 - 16th Cent.
[10] #2318 - 18th Cent.
[11] #2473 - 18th Cent.​

Latin:​

[01] c [aka Codex Colbertinus, aka 6, 12th/13th Cent. [1200]]
[02] dem [aka Codex Demidovianus, aka 59, 13th Cent. [1250]]
[03] div [aka Codex Divionensis, aka ?, 13th Cent. [1250]]
[04] l [aka Codex Legionensis, aka 67, 7th Cent. [750]]
[05] m [aka Codex Speculum, aka ?, 4th-9th Cent.]
[06] p [aka Codex Perpinianensis, aka 54, 12th/13th Cent. [1150]]
[07] q [aka Codex Frisingensis, aka 64, 7h Cent. [650]]
[08] r [aka Codex Frisingensis, aka 64, 5th/6th Cent.]
[09] Vulgate [Clementine edition]
[10] La Cava Bible [aka Codex Cavensis [9th Cent.]]
[11] Codex Ulmensis [9th Cent.]
[12] C [aka Codex Complutensis, 10th Cent.]
[13] T [aka Codex Toletanus, 10th Cent.]
[14] Θ [Codex Theodulphianus, 10th Cent.]
[15] S 907 [aka Codex Sangallensis 907, 8th Cent.]
[16] S 63 [aka Codex Sangallensis 63, 9th Cent.]​

?testimonium dicunt [or dant] in terra, spiritus [or: spiritus et] aqua et sanguis, et hi tres unum sunt in Christo Iesu. [8] et tres sunt, qui testimonium dicunt in caelo, pater verbum et spirtus.?​

[2] ?Church Fathers? [so-called]

[01] Tertullian [circa. AD 220]

[02] Cyprian of Carthage [circa. AD 258], Treatises (I 5:423): ?... and again it is written of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 'And these three are one.' ...?

[03] Priscillan [circa. AD 358]

[04] Idacius Clatus [4th cent.]

[05] The Speculum [5th Cent.], Pseudo-Augustine

[06] Creed ?Esposito Fidei [5th/6th Cent.]

[07] Old Latin [5th/6th Cent.]

[08] Confession of Faith of Eugenius, Bishop of Carthage [circa. AD 484]

[09] Cassiodoris of Italy [circa. AD 480-570] in Complexiones in Ionis Epist. ad Parthos.
Thus:? "... Clementine edition of Vulgate translation; Pseudo-Augustine's Speculum Peccatoris (V), also (these three with some variation) Cyprian, Ps-Cyprian, & Priscillian (died 385) Liber Apologeticus. And Contra-Varimadum, and Ps-Vigilius, Fulgentius of Ruspe (died 527) Responsio contra Arianos, Cassiodorus Complexiones in Ioannis Epist. ad Parthos. ..." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma_Johanneum#Manuscripts

?? ?at least four Old Latin manuscripts, over eight ?Church Fathers? (including Cyprian who died A.D. 258), four Syriac editions, Slavic and Armenian manuscripts, over 600 distinct editions of the Textus Receptus from 1522 to 1881, 18 pre-Lutheran Bibles, and thousands of Vulgate manuscripts. Among Greek manuscripts which do omit this verse, 97% are late manuscripts, dated from the 10th century and later.?1 ?? - Ridiculous KJV Bible Corrections - 1 John 5:7 Scams - http://av1611.com/kjbp/ridiculous-kjv-bible-corrections/1-John-5-7-Scams.html

?? Some Syriac Peshitto manuscripts, The Syriac Edition at Hamburg, Bishop Uscan?s Armenian Bible, the Armenian Edition of John Zohrob, the first printed Georgian Bible.

... The evidence is overwhelming for the authenticity of 1 John 5:7-8. Keep in mind that it was Origen who was the father of the false manuscripts who removed this verse as he did verses like Acts 8:37 and Luke 24:40. The Alexandrian school was no friend of the true manuscripts which were taken from Antioch and mutilated according to Gnostic beliefs.? - http://www.scionofzion.com/1 john 5 78.htm

[3] Lectionaries

[01] ?some minority variant readings in lectionaries.?​

The varied Manuscripts [MSS] codices, papyri, palimpsests, etc are not the foundation of proof [for all things require faith in God's word as foundation], but merely further evidence for confirmation.

The Historical evidence:

"... it is found in Codex 61 of the 15-16th century, kept in Dublin and known as the Montfort manuscript, Codex Ravianus (Wizanburgensis) of the 8th century and in the margins of 88 and 629.

The main authorities for the passage are the Old Latin text of the 2nd century, including manuscript r (5/6th cent.) and the "Speculum," a treatise containing the Old Latin text, and several fathers. Fuller (4) p 213, citing Wilkinson, states that the passage was found in the Old Latin Bibles of the Waldenses, whose text pre-dated Jerome's Vulgate. See also Ray (15) p 98, who states that this "Italic" Bible dates from 157 AD. The Old Latin text carried sufficient weight to influence the later copies of the Vulgate, most of which from 800 AD onward incorporated the passage.

The fathers who cite the passage are Tertullian (2nd cent.), Cyprian (250 AD), Priscillian (385 AD), Idacius Clatus (385 AD), several African writers of the 5th century and Cassiodorus (480-570 AD).

The combined influence of these authorities, together with grammatical difficulties which arise if the Comma is omitted, was sufficient to ensure its place in most editions of the Textus Receptus-see Berry's text- where it undoubtedly belongs.

See Hills (3) p 209, (38) p 210, the TBS (58) "Notes on the Vindication of I John 5:7" and Ruckman (2) p 128-9, (31) p 334. The omission of the Comma from the majority of the manuscripts most likely stems from the influence of Origen and some of his supporters ..." - http://ecclesia.org/truth/manuscript_evidence.html

"... Here is just a partial list of those who contended for the authenticity of this verse.

Cyprian - 250 AD, Athanasius 350 A.D., Priscillian -385 AD, Jerome 420 AD, Fulgentius (late 5th century), Cassiodorus, Isidore of Seville, Jaqub of Edessa, Thomas Aquinas, John Wycliffe, Desiderus Erasmus, Stephanus, Lopez de Zuniga, John Calvin, Theodore Beza, Cipriano de Valera, John Owen, Francis Turretin, John Wesley, John Gill, Matthew Henry, Andrew Fuller, Luis Gaussen, Frederick Nolan, Robert L. Dabney, Thomas Strouse, Floyd Jones, Peter Ruckman, George Ricker Berry, Edward F. Hills, David Otis Fuller, Thomas Holland, Michael Maynard and Donald A. Waite. ..." - https://brandplucked.webs.com/1john57.htm

For quick details see - https://www.scionofzion.com/why_1_john_5_7_8.htm

For quick details alternate see - https://www.jesus-is-lord.com/1john57.htm

The short historical accounting - https://av1611.com/kjbp/faq/holland_1jo5_7.html

The great detailed historical accounting - https://www.wayoflife.org/reports/a-defense-of-1-john.php

Even John Gill understood these things in regards 1 John 5:7 -

"... "There are three that bear record in heaven"

? ? ... When he says, "These three are one", he refers not to essence, but on the contrary to consent; as though he had said that the Father and his eternal Word and Spirit harmoniously testify the same thing respecting Christ. Hence some copies have εἰς ἓν, "for one". But though you read ἓν εἰσιν, as in other copies, yet there is no doubt but that the Father, the Word and the Spirit are said to be one, in the same sense in which afterwards the blood and the water and the Spirit are said to agree in one. ..." - John Calvin, Commentaries on the catholic epistles, tr. and ed. by John Owen, 1855, p. 258.

A pioneer T. M. Preble understood this text of 1 John 5:7 this way, though he was in error in other ways:

".. Because it is said of Christ that he and his Father are one; it does not mean that Jesus was his own Father! And because they are one in attributes or power; they are not one, numerically! for there are three that bear record in heaven, and these three are one-these three agree in one! 1 John 5:7, 8. TTA 18.3 ..." - The Two Adams, page 18.3

The verse cannot be (correctly) used to support the 'trinitarians', neither the 'unitarians' (though both are two sides of the same coin, ultimately teaching 'singularity').

There are numerous more evidences as to why 1 John 5:7 is original, such as from the linguistical in syntax, structure and language (John uses the word "Word" in reference to the Son).

Re: Bible Doctrines affected by Modern Versions [Re: Rick H] #194207
07/02/21 09:56 PM
07/02/21 09:56 PM
Rick H  Offline
OP
Group: Admin Team
2500+ Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,783
Florida, USA
Here is part of the comparison on the KJV vs NKJV...

"New King James Version Omissions
NKJV omits the word "Lord" 66 times
NKJV omits the word "God" 51 times
NKJV omits the word "heaven" 50 times
NKJV omits the word "repent" 44 times
NKJV omits the word "blood" 23 times
NKJV omits the word "hell" 22 times
NKJV omits the word "JEHOVAH" entirely
NKJV omits the word "new testament" entirely
NKJV omits the word "damnation" entirely
NKJV omits the word "devils" entirely
NKJV ignored the KJV Greek Textus Receptus over 1200 times
NKJV replaced the KJV Hebrew (ben Chayyim) with the corrupt Stuttgart edition (ben Asher) Old Testament

NKJV Demotes Jesus Christ
NKJV -KJV
Luke 13:8 Sir -Lord
Matthew 18:26 before him saying, Master -and worshipped him saying, Lord
Matthew 20:20 kneeling down -worshipping him
Matthew 26:64 right hand of the Power -right hand of power
Genesis 22:8 God will provide for himself the lamb -God will provide himself a lamb
John 8:35 a son -the Son
Colossians 2:2 the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ -the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ (Trinity)
Matthew 8:19 et al. Teacher -Master
Matthew 19:16 Good Teacher -Good Master
Matthew 22:16 Teacher -Master
Matthew 23:8 One is your Teacher, the Christ -one is your Master, even Christ
Matthew 23:10 And do not be called teachers, for One is your Teacher, the Christ -Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ..."

https://www.angelfire.com/la2/prophet1/NKJVOmissions.html

Last edited by Rick H; 07/02/21 09:57 PM.
Re: Bible Doctrines affected by Modern Versions [Re: Rick H] #194208
07/03/21 12:55 AM
07/03/21 12:55 AM
Matthew 10vs8  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2021

Regular Member
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 85
Ili Ili, AS
Originally Posted by Rick H
Here is part of the comparison on the KJV vs NKJV...

"New King James Version Omissions
NKJV omits the word "Lord" 66 times
NKJV omits the word "God" 51 times
NKJV omits the word "heaven" 50 times
NKJV omits the word "repent" 44 times
NKJV omits the word "blood" 23 times
NKJV omits the word "hell" 22 times
NKJV omits the word "JEHOVAH" entirely
NKJV omits the word "new testament" entirely
NKJV omits the word "damnation" entirely
NKJV omits the word "devils" entirely
NKJV ignored the KJV Greek Textus Receptus over 1200 times
NKJV replaced the KJV Hebrew (ben Chayyim) with the corrupt Stuttgart edition (ben Asher) Old Testament

NKJV Demotes Jesus Christ
NKJV -KJV
Luke 13:8 Sir -Lord
Matthew 18:26 before him saying, Master -and worshipped him saying, Lord
Matthew 20:20 kneeling down -worshipping him
Matthew 26:64 right hand of the Power -right hand of power
Genesis 22:8 God will provide for himself the lamb -God will provide himself a lamb
John 8:35 a son -the Son
Colossians 2:2 the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ -the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ (Trinity)
Matthew 8:19 et al. Teacher -Master
Matthew 19:16 Good Teacher -Good Master
Matthew 22:16 Teacher -Master
Matthew 23:8 One is your Teacher, the Christ -one is your Master, even Christ
Matthew 23:10 And do not be called teachers, for One is your Teacher, the Christ -Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ..."

https://www.angelfire.com/la2/prophet1/NKJVOmissions.html
Oh, it is much much worse than that, for it is even subtil (Genesis 3:1).

[1]

Read the Preface to the NKJV, for it mocks the KJB at every opportunity by both the spirit of the King of the North (Alexander Geddes; Roman Catholic scholar, Religious Humanism), and South (Bernard Shaw; Atheist, Secular Humanism), even as satan mocked Christ Jesus upon the Cross. I can show any who desire it in great detail.

Page iii, Paragraph 4 [personal notes in brackets], just take out youor NKJV and read the Preface without my notes first, then read with the notes/comments:

?... In 1786 [This date is a reflection upon 'modern' 'scholarship'?] Catholic [Roman] scholar Alexander Geddes [Why are the Preface writers [which are supposed to be carrying on the ?legacy? of the Protestant [and True] faith, suddenly so interested in what Roman Catholicism's [the Little Horn of Daniel 7 and the first Beast of Revelation 13] faithful would say? We are about to find out.] said of the King James Bible [Wait for the sarcasm and veiled mockery to sink in ...], ?If [said the devil, Matthew 4:3,6, 27:40; Luke 4:3,9] accuracy and strictest attention to the letter of the text be supposed [Whoa, right where every one could see it! Hey, your split tongue is showing ? Psalms 73:9, 109:2, 120:3; Jeremiah 9:5,8] to constitute an excellent version, this is of all versions the most excellent.? [Did you catch all of the sarcasm and veiled mockery? If not, read it again. These Preface writers are either totally ignorant of the true intent and context of the Roman Catholic 'scholar' Alexander Geddes remarks, or they have knowingly, purposefully, presumptuously, boldly and wickedly been accomplice to the broad daylight knifing of the KJB in the ?face?. I could perhaps still vote for ignorance if enough evidence was supplied to that end, but in such a case, it immediately does not present a very educated front for those which say they are ?scholars?, for if they cannot even get the plain meaning of everyday English, why would I trust them in translation of any foreign and/or ancient tongues into English?] George Bernard Shaw [Now, they're citing an avowed atheist ...] became a literary legend [Legend? To whom? Certainly not any [KJ] Bible believing person. Simply amazing, is the fact, that the Preface writers of the NKJV cite the very two elements/spirits [being one at the root] opposed to the KJB on all fronts, namely the King of the North [Papacy, Religious Humanism] and the King of the South [Atheism, Secular Humanism]:

"...The one withheld from the people the truths of the Bible; the other taught them to reject both the Bible and its Author. ..." - SoP Volume 4, page 192 [but read the surrounding also 190-193, etc]

?14-16 (Ephesians 6:12; see EGW comment on Revelation 5:11). Two Opposing Powers?Two great opposing powers are revealed in the last great battle. On one side stands the Creator of heaven and earth. All on His side bear His signet. They are obedient to His commands. On the other side stands the prince of darkness, with those who have chosen apostasy and rebellion (The Review and Herald, May 7, 1901).? - S.D.A. Bible Commentary Vol. 7, p. 982.8 (1)

and see also:

KJB 1 Corinthians 1:20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?; KJB 1 Corinthians 2:6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:; KJB 1 Corinthians 3:19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.] in the twentieth century because of his severe [Ahem, 'foolish', afterall scripture [KJB] says: Psalms 14:1, 53:1 ?... The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. ...?; Proverbs 30:9 Lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the LORD? or lest I be poor, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain.] and often humorous [Ahem, 'folly', KJB Psalms 49:13 This their way is their folly: yet their posterity approve their sayings. Selah.] criticisms of our most cherished values [KJB Galatians 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.; KJB Psalms 2:4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.; KJB Psalms 37:13 The Lord shall laugh at him: for he seeth that his day is coming.; KJB Psalms 59:8 But thou, O LORD, shalt laugh at them; thou shalt have all the heathen in derision.]. Surprisingly [Not really, since Shaw, is merely admiring a poetic ?form?.], however, Shaw pays the following tribute [Pshaw! John 5:44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?] to the scholars commissioned by King James: ?The translation was extraordinarily well done because to the translators [Indeed, ?to? them, but not to himself.] what they were translating was not [What Shaw really believes coming up...] merely a curious collection of ancient books written by different authors in different stages of culture [Did you notice what he really believes?], but the Word of God divinely revealed through His chosen and expressly inspired scribes [Which Shaw, himself, believes none of.]. In this conviction [And since Shaw does not believe in God, the ?conviction? came from???] they carried out their work with boundless reverence and care and achieved a beautifully artistic [Notice, He didn't say anything about Truth, but rather ?artistic?, ie. ?form?, [ie the 'poetic' structure, and lyrical bounce], as the Preface writers are about to refer to.] result.? History agrees with these [Wow! Some praise that was ? Be honest, is the sarcasm showing?, if so, perhaps it should be tucked in a little further.] estimates [Here is what all should take notice of, in what the Preface writers are really getting at, as they just agreed with a Roman Catholic and an Atheist, in their subtil mockings. Take careful note, that they are not, I repeat not, saying, that the KJB translators had accurate and preserved materials, but merely that they accurately translated what they had available to them, in which they would say were merely a miniscule amount of late manuscripts, with many emendations by scribes who erred here and there, needing to be corrected by the early Alexandrian texts, and thus simply speak about the outward ?form? itself, not the actual texts.]. Therefore, while seeking to unveil [Which means that the Preface writers believe that the KJB is veiled [obscure, dark, needing to be 'enlightened' and/or 'illuminated' [2 Corinthians 11:14]], and needs to be 'unveiled' through the other Alexandrian mss, the so-called LXX, the Latin Vulgate of Jerome, German Socialists ? the Kittel's [Gerhard, Rudolph], Hermann von Soden's personal and haphazard collation, and their own petty ideas, etc] the excellent form [Hey, they italicized it for emphasis, and for specific reason, as has been shown. The Preface writers do not believe that the KJB is the word of God.] of the traditional [Traditional?] English Bible, special care [Oh, indeed!] has also been taken in the present edition to preserve the work of precision [Again, take note of the italics here.], which is the legacy [Simply, ?form? and ?precision?, nothing about the awe-inspiring preservation of God's actual word, or Truth as it actually came down to the KJB translators, etc.] of the 1611 translators. ...?

I can show much more in the entire Preface.

[2]

There are also differing "running changes" of NKJV that they did not tell (notify publicly) of, as for instance:

KJB Zechariah 13:6 ?... What are these wounds in thine hands? ...?

KJB John 20:25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

NKJV [1982 ver.] Zechariah 13:6 ?... What are these wounds in your hands? ...?

NKJV [1994/2011 ver.] Zechariah 13:6 ?... What are these wounds between your arms? ...?

NKJV [1994/2011 ver.] John 20:25 The other disciples therefore said to him, ?We have seen the Lord.? So he said to them, ?Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.?

[3]

The NKJV is bound by copyright:

"... ?The text of the New King James Version ? (NKJV) may be quoted or reprinted without prior written permission with the following qualifications:

(1) up to and including 1,000 verses may be quoted in printed form as long as the verses quoted amount to less than 50% of a complete book of the Bible and make up less than 50% of the total work in which they are quoted;
(2) all NKJV quotations must conform accurately to the NKJV text.

Any use of the NKJV text must include a proper acknowledgment as follows:

Scripture taken from the New King James Version. Copyright ? 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

However, when quotations from the NKJV text are used in church bulletins, orders of service, study lessons, church newsletters, and similar works in the course of religious instruction or services at a place of worship or other religious assembly, the following notice may be used at the end of each quotation: NKJV.

For quotation requests not covered by the above guidelines, write to Thomas Nelson Publishers, Attn: Bible Rights and Permissions, P.O. Box 141000, Nashville, Tennessee 37214-1000.

All Rights reserved.? ..."

They can sue if they so choose, or stop a person from even using it if they desire, and change their stance at any time.

[4]

The NKJV doesn't even use the same mss as the underlying texts as does the King James Bible. I have an entire book, entitled: "When the KJV Departs from the "MAJORITY" Text of Hodge & Farstad, cited by the corrupt NKJV." by Jack Moorman (approx 157 pages). I will cite any portion as needful.

[5]

The NKJV eliminates gender at almost every opportunity, and thus is the most gender exclusive book, and moreso than the 'dreaded' NIV; a small sampling:

[A few OT examples; KJB always first (Esword edition), NKJV second, cited from Biblegateway.com]

Isaiah 5:14 ?Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it.?

NKJV Isaiah 5:14: "Therefore Sheol has enlarged itself
And opened its mouth beyond measure;
Their glory and their multitude and their pomp,
And he who is jubilant, shall descend into it."

Ezekiel 31:16 ?I made the nations to shake at the sound of his fall, when I cast him down to hell with them that descend into the pit: and all the trees of Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon, all that drink water, shall be comforted in the nether parts of the earth.?

NKJV Ezekiel 31:16 I made the nations shake at the sound of its fall, when I cast it down to [a]hell together with those who descend into the Pit; and all the trees of Eden, the choice and best of Lebanon, all that drink water, were comforted in the depths of the earth.

Ezekiel 31:17 ?They also went down into hell with him unto them that be slain with the sword; and they that were his arm, that dwelt under his shadow in the midst of the heathen.?

NKJV Ezekiel 31:17 They also went down to hell with it, with those slain by the sword; and those who were its strong arm dwelt in its shadows among the nations.

There are many more.

[A few NT examples, and a whole book of 1 Corinthians]

Acts 16:1 ?Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek:?

NKJV Acts 16:1 Then he came to Derbe and Lystra. And behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timothy, the son of a certain Jewish woman who believed, but his father was Greek.

Acts 24:24 ?And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ.?

And after some days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, who was Jewish, he sent for Paul and heard him concerning the faith in Christ.

"Jewess" and "Jewish" are not synonymous terms.

1 Corinthians 1:26 ?For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 1:26 For [a]you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called.

1 Corinthians 2:4 ?And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of [b]man's
wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 2:4 And my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of [a]human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power,

1 Corinthians 2:11 ?For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 2:11 For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.

1 Corinthians 2:15 ?But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 2:15 But he who is spiritual judges all things, yet he himself is rightly judged by no one.

1 Corinthians 3:5 ?Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man??

NKJV 1 Corinthians 3:5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers through whom you believed, as the Lord gave to each one?

1 Corinthians 3:8 ?Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 3:8 Now he who plants and he who waters are one, and each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor.

1 Corinthians 3:10 ?According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 3:10 According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder I have laid the foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one take heed how he builds on it.

1 Corinthians 3:11 ?For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 3:11 For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 3:12 ?Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 3:12 Now if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw,

1 Corinthians 3:13 [x2] ?Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 3:13 [x2] each one?s work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one?s work, of what sort it is.

1 Corinthians 3:14 ?If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 3:14 If anyone?s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward.

1 Corinthians 3:15 ?If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 3:15 If anyone?s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.

1 Corinthians 3:17 ?If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 3:17 If anyone [a]defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.

1 Corinthians 3:18 [x 2] ?Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 3:18 [x2] Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise.

1 Corinthians 3:21 ?Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 3:21 Therefore let no one boast in men. For all things are yours:

That one is even more subtil. Read it carefully. Think like they do for just a moment.


1 Corinthians 4:2 ?Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 4:2 Moreover it is required in stewards that one be found faithful.

1 Corinthians 4:3 ?But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 4:3 But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by a human [a]court. In fact, I do not even judge myself.

1 Corinthians 4:5 ?Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 4:5 Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord comes, who will both bring to light the hidden things of darkness and reveal the [a]counsels of the hearts. Then each one?s praise will come from God.

1 Corinthians 4:6 ?And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 4:6 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be [a]puffed up on behalf of one against the other.

1 Corinthians 4:14 ?I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 4:14 I do not write these things to shame you, but as my beloved children I warn you.

1 Corinthians 5:11 ?But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 5:11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner?not even to eat with such a person.

This one is also subtil, as it can be used to now imply that females can be called "brother" in the Masonic use of the scripture in their lodges.

1 Corinthians 7:17 ?But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 7:17 But as God has distributed to each one, as the Lord has called each one, so let him walk. And so I [a]ordain in all the churches.

1 Corinthians 7:18 ?Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.?

NKJV 1 Corintihans 7:18 Was anyone called while circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised. Was anyone called while uncircumcised? Let him not be circumcised.

1 Corinthians 7:36 ?But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 7:36 But if any man thinks he is behaving improperly toward his [a]virgin, if she is past the flower of youth, and thus it must be, let him do what he wishes. He does not sin; let them marry.

1 Corinthians 8:2 ?And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 8:2 And if anyone thinks that he knows anything, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know.

1 Corinthians 8:3 ?But if any man love God, the same is known of him.?

NKJV 1 Corinthins 8:3 But if anyone loves God, this one is known by Him.

1 Corinthians 9:15 ?But I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me: for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 9:15 But I have used none of these things, nor have I written these things that it should be done so to me; for it would be better for me to die than that anyone should make my boasting void.

1 Corinthians 9:25 ?And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 9:25 And everyone who competes for the prize [a]is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a perishable crown, but we for an imperishable crown.

1 Corinthians 10:24 ?Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 10:24 Let no one seek his own, but each one the other?s well-being.

1 Corinthians 10:28 [x2] ?But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 10:28 But if anyone says to you, ?This was offered to idols,? do not eat it for the sake of the one who told you, and for conscience? sake; [a]for ?the earth is the Lord?s, and all its fullness.?

1 Corinthians 11:16 ?But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 11:16 But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God.

1 Corinthians 11:34 ?And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 11:34 But if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, lest you come together for judgment. And the rest I will set in order when I come.

1 Corinthians 12:3 [x2] ?Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 12:3 [x2] Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus [a]accursed, and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:7 ?But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 12:7 But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to each one for the profit of all:

1 Corinthians 12:11 ?But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 12:11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually as He wills.

1 Corinthians 14:2 ?For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 14:2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries.

1 Corinthians 14:20 ?Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men.?

NKJV 1 Corinthins 14:20 Brethren, do not be children in understanding; however, in malice be babes, but in understanding be mature.

1 Corinthians 15:23 ?But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 15:23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ?s at His coming.

1 Corinthians 15:35 ?But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come??

NKJV 1 Corinthians 15:35 But someone will say, ?How are the dead raised up? And with what body do they come??

1 Corinthians 16:11 "Let no man therefore despise him: but conduct him forth in peace, that he may come unto me: for I look for him with the brethren.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 16:11 Therefore let no one despise him. But send him on his journey in peace, that he may come to me; for I am waiting for him with the brethren.

1 Corinthians 16:22 ?If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 16:22 If anyone does not love the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be [a]accursed. O Lord, come!

There are many more examples. But think. Is there any prevailing problem in the world and in the churches about gender identity? Is there any problem with disrespect to the fathers of house/home and in society? The NKJV is a gender exclusive (it excludes gender in many many places) boiok, moreso than the NIV. How many of you knew that?

Remember, sow genderlessness and confusion in gender and they will reap wht they have sown, some 30, some 60 and some 100 fold.

Sow NKJV (etc, NIV) per[b]version
, and reap perverts every time.

[6]

The NKJV (along with all modern "versions") claim to update all the archaic words of the KJB, so that we may now "understand" the word of God, and is no longer locked in ancient language, yet, it like all modern "versions" still retain "archaisms" (which they identify):

I do not know of a single Bible that does not use 'dead words', or archaic words, and words that do not mean the same thing as they did when originally given (and that includes the originals, for those 'original only' people), and neither do I know any persons who do not use dead words, or archaic words (even 'rappers' use them) and words that have changed meaning (ie "gay", "dude", "cool", etc).

For instance:

Archaic/dead words? You supposedly mean like these?

[Row 1]

abode kernels ancients laden aright lance asunder lusty away with mantle beckon mattock begotten naught bier nurtured bewitched odious bowels osprey calved pangs celestial phylacteries coney plowshare confections rend convince respite cormorant rushes decked soothsayer deride spoil distill suckling dung temperate effect tetrarch estate trafficked forevermore unto fowl usury girdle vaunt hallowed vestments haunt vex heresies wanton infamy yokefellow inasmuch insatiable jeopardy

[Row 2]

abase deride heresies pipes temperate abated didst hinds plowshare tenons abode distill importune presbytery teraphim adjure doest impotent principalities tetrarch alms dost inasmuch putrefaction thee ancient doth issue raiment thereon apparel dung jeopardy rampart thine aright effect know ravening thou art eminent laden remission thy asunder engines laud rend timbrel away with estate layer reprobate trafficked backbiting evermore lightness requite travail beget familiar litters riot unto beseech feigned lordly rushes usury bewail fetch lunatic seemly vagabond bewitched firstlings lusty seest valor bondwomen fleshhook mail seethe vaunt bowels footmen maintenance shalt venture breeches forbearance mammon sherd verily brimstone fowl mantle shod vermillion calves fuller maranatha shouldst vex canst gaiety mattock shouldest virtue cleave garners milch smith wanton comely gavest mill solace warp constrains girdle nether soothsayer wayfarers cormorant graven nurtured sore whence couches gross odious speakest wherewith covert guile offscouring stay woof crib handmaid pangs strait wrought dainty harrow paramours suckling yea dearth hast perdition swaddling yonder deck haunt phylacteries tares

[Row 3]

abase daubed henceforth principality vestments abode dayspring heresies prognostication vex alms debased immutable psaltery virtue amiss decks impudent quarter visage anise deride inasmuch rampart wanton apparel dispensation issue rid warp aright disquiet jeopardy rifled wayfaring austere distill jot riotous whence away with dung know rushes whereupon backbiters effect laden satiate whet beckoned epistle laud shamefaced winebibber beggarly eventide laver shod woof begot evermore litters smith wrought bemoan familiar lordly soothsayer yea beseech fan lusty spoil yonder bewail feigned mail straits bewitched fetch mammon suckling bittern flanks mantle tares bondwomen flay mattock temperate brimstone footmen mill tenons calves forbearance mite terrestrial carnal foursquare nativity tetrarch celestial fowl offend therein circumspect fuller offscouring timbrel cloven gad omnipotent tittle comeliness godhead or ever unto concourses graven pangs usury confederacy greyhound paramours vagabond convince gross phylacteries valor covert hallowed pipes vehement crib haunts plowshare verity dainties hemlock potentate vermillion


[Row 4]

abase disquieted henceforth ravening abate dissembles hoarfrost remission abode distill impudent rend adjuration dromedaries inasmuch riotous alms dung isles rushes apparel effect know sacrilege assuaged enjoined laden satiate asunder ensign lance seethe augment ensues laud sherd away with estate laver sloth backbiting eventide litters smith beget evermore lusty solace beggarly execration mail soothsayer bemoan familiar maintenance stay beseech firmament mantle straits bewail firstling mattock stripling bewitched flagon milch suppliants bier flay mill surfeit bowels footmen naught swaddling calving forbear noontide temperate cleft foursquare obeisance teraphim clemency fowl oblation thereupon comely fuller odious thrice coneys gad or ever timbrel constrains garner pangs trafficked cormorant goodly paramours unshod covert gross perdition crib guile phylacteries dainty hallowed pipes debased haltingly plowshare decked harrow pound delectable haunt rampart​

None of those are being cited from the King James Bible [though they exist therein].

Row 1 is the NIV 1973.

Row 2 is the NASB [from revised ASV 1901].

Row 3 is the NKJV 1982.

Row 4 is the NRSV 1999 ["milch", that's pronounced 'milk', as in milch kine (milk cow)].

The KJB uses some of the very words as found in all so-called 'modern' versions

What was that argument from 'archaic' ("dead") again? Tell me please ... Do they complain about the archaisms in all modern versions, as I hear this whining about the KJB? Use the same scales (of the sanctuary; Psalms 77:13) to judge, and not imbalanced ones.

[7]

Subtilties upon subtilties in the parentheses:

Joh 10:35? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;?

NKJV John 10:35 ?If He called them gods, [a] to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken),

Did you catch the subtil [KJB Gen. 3:1] change in the NKJV compared to the KJB? Look again. It merely appears the same, but in fact, carries a whole different meaning. Do not see it yet? It's found in the parentheses. This is usually done, in the modern translations, where it does not appear so in the KJB, to indicate to the reader of the NKJV, that a scribe [or someone] penned the words after the fact of the NT Gospel writer and it was simply attributed to Jesus Christ, though they believe He never actually said it Himself, for instance and comparison, turn to the NKJV, Matthew 24:15, which reads:

NKJV Matthew 24:15 [a] ?Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation.' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place [c] (whoever reads, let him understand),

The NKJV indicates, by doing this and not including the words in red (Matthew 24:15), that Jesus never actually said those words in the brackets and are not to be attributed to Him at all, but were added by a scribe at a later period. Now the words in John 10:35 NKJV are in red, but placed in brackets in the NKJV means that they do not believe Jesus said those words, but were added by another scribe into Jesus' mouth.

The KJB does use parentheses, but in a totally different manner, ie. simply to demonstrate an interjecting thought, or bridging thought, always attributed by the immediate writer [never a later scribe], or the one immediately speaking, as for instance:

KJB Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

Do you see the difference? The KJB, teaches that Jesus actually says those words, even as the words of John 10:35.

[b][8]


The subtil addition of words that never were in the underlying mss, like the koine Greek of the NT, such as found in the NKJV Hebrews 9:12, compared tot he King James Bible:

Heb 9:12? Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.?

NKJV Hebrews 9:12 (1982) Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.

However, I will include a statement by [the now deceased] "Walter Martin", let me show a few errors he made about what he stated, on tv, even the John Ankerberg "show", in regards Hebrews 9:12, in the Koine Greek:

[John Ankerberg Show, with Walter Martin and William Johnsson [Review and Herald], time index 00:33:16-00:33:57] -

"... [George E. Canon reading the [Koine] Greek New Testament, Hebrews 9:12, in the presence of Walter Martin and others at a selective closed meeting of (so-called) 'scholars'] that Jesus Christ entered once into the holiest of all with his own blood, having obtained eternal redemption for us. ...", and I [Walter Martin] asked the question, and 'Canon' did too [to the present persons meeting], "Did this [event of Hebrews 9:12] take place, as [O.R.L.] Crosier said, as Mrs. [Ellen G.] White said, as the early Adventists taught?? Did it [event of Hebrews 9:12] take place in [AD] 1844, or did it [event of Hebrews 9:12] take place at the ascension of Jesus Christ [AD 31]?"? [Walter Martin continues apart from the past quotation and questions asked then]? The [Koine] Greek text says, at the ascension of Jesus Christ [AD 31].? Once into the holiest of all - the Most Holy Place! ..."

The text:

Hebrews 9:12 KJB - Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

Hebrews 9:12 GNT TR - ουδε δι αιματος τραγων και μοσχων δια δε του ιδιου αιματος εισηλθεν εφαπαξ εις τα αγια αιωνιαν λυτρωσιν ευραμενος

There is not a single extant mss, codici or papyrii, [etc] written in Koine Greek [or in any language] that reads "αγια αγιων" [or its equivalent in the language selected, the Most Holy Place, see Hebrews 9:3 KJB, GNT TR] here in Hebrews 9:12, but plainly reads in all known extant mss, etc in any language, "τα αγια" [the sanctuary, ie first apartment, the holy place].
?
the Latin [Jerome's Vulgate] reads, "in sancta",

the Wycliffe 1394 reads "the hooli (holy)", - http://oldebible.com/

the Tyndale 1531 reads, "the holy place",

the Coverdale 1535 reads, "the holy palce",

the Matthew's 1537 reads, "the holye place",

the Great Bible 1539 reads, "the holy place",

the German Luther Bibel 1545 reads, "das Heilige" (the Holy),

Stephanus 1550 reads, "τα αγια",

the Genevan Bible 1560 reads, "the holy place"

the Bishop's Bible 1568 reads, "the holy place"

Scrivener's 1894 reads,?"τα αγια",

and even Westcott's and Hort's 1881 reads, "τα αγια".

the UBS 5th reads, "τὰ ἅγια",

the Novum Testamentum Graece 28th [Eberhard Nestle's / Kurt Aland's, etc] reads, "τὰ ἅγια" without a single footnote in either 'scholars' work indicating any deviation from this reading in any known extant mss, etc.]? Consider:

Hebrews 8:2 KJB - A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

Hebrews 9:1?KJB - Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.

Hebrews 9:2?KJB - For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.

Hebrews 9:3?KJB - And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;

Hebrews 9:7 KJB - But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:

Hebrews 9:8?KJB - The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:

Hebrews 9:24?KJB - For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

Hebrews 9:25?KJB - Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

Hebrews 10:19?KJB - Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,

Hebrews 13:11 KJB - For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp.

Revelation 15:5?KJB - And after that I looked, and, behold, the temple of the tabernacle of the testimony in heaven was opened:

Seventh-day Adventists, including O.R.L. Crosier [Day Star Extra, February 7th, 1846, you may read in full here - http://text.egwwritings.org/publicationtoc.php?bookCode=SANC&lang=en&collection=15§ion=all ], and especially sister Ellen G. White, do/did not teach, and have never taught, that Hebrews 9:12 happened in AD 1844.? We teach that the event, described in Hebrews 9:12, took place in AD 31, at Christ's Ascension from the Mount of Olives, which parallels Psalms 24:1-10, 133:1-3; Revelation 5:5,6, etc.? We do however teach, that the text of Daniel 7:13, and the events therein, took place in AD 1844, based upon the ending of the 2,300 prophecy of Daniel 8:13,14,26, 9:24-27, 11:31-33,40, 12:7-13; Revelation 9:13-15; 10:1-11, etc.

The Great Controversy 1888 & 1911, page 421 -

"... Thither the faith of Christ's disciples followed him as he ascended from their sight. Here their hopes centered, ?which hope we have,? said Paul, ?as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest forever.? ?Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.? [Hebrews 6:19, 20; 9:12.]

For eighteen centuries this work of ministration continued in the first apartment of the sanctuary. The blood of Christ, pleaded in behalf of penitent believers, secured their pardon and acceptance with the Father, yet their sins still remained upon the books of record. As in the typical service there was a work of atonement at the close of the year, so before Christ's work for the redemption of men is completed, there is a work of atonement for the removal of sin from the sanctuary. This is the service which began when the 2300 days ended. At that time, as foretold by Daniel the prophet, our High Priest entered the most holy, to perform the last division of his solemn work,?to cleanse the sanctuary. ..." - http://text.egwwritings.org/publica...&collection=2§ion=all&pagenumber=421

The Desire of Ages, page 166 -

"... The sacrificial service that had pointed to Christ passed away; but the eyes of men were turned to the true sacrifice for the sins of the world. The earthly priesthood ceased; but we look to Jesus, the minister of the new covenant, and ?to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.? ?The way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: ... but Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, ... by His own blood He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.? Hebrews 12:24; 9:8-12. ..." - http://text.egwwritings.org/publica...&collection=2§ion=all&pagenumber=166

Walter Martin [and associates, including John Ankerberg] was/and still are dead wrong, on both counts, and even the (so-called) LXX in Exodus 26:33 disagrees with him [them].

Exodus 26:33 KJB - And thou shalt hang up the vail under the taches, that thou mayest bring in thither within the vail the ark of the testimony: and the vail shall divide unto you between the holy place and the most holy.

Exodus 26:33 (so-called) LXX

The "holy place" is separate [by a second "vail" from and not the same as the "most holy".

The Greek translated "Holy Place" is ta hagia, meaning 'holy places." The reference is to the heavenly sanctuary as a whole. In the Greek Old Testament, the Septuagint (LXX), the singular or plural of hagios, ia, on often refers to the sanctuary as a whole, including both the Holy and Most Holy apartments. For example, see in the Septuagint Exod. 36:1, 3, 4; Lev. 5:15; 10:4; 27:3; Num 3:31, 32; 4:12, 16; 7:9; 18:5.? Thus the word in general simply means entering into the Sanctuary through the First, or Outer, Veil from the Courtyard.

The NKJV adds a word "Most" where no mss evidence has ever been found to support it, and doesn't even have the integrity to place the word in italics or brackets. This NKJV undermines the Seventh-day Adventist position like no other "version" has ever done. It is a wolf in sheeps clothing.

[9]

The "righteousness which is of faith" (doing right, victory over sin in/through Christ), vs "righteousness of faith" (Lord Lord, and not doing, living in sin while claiming Christ):

Rom 10:6? But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:)?

NKJV Romans 10:6 But the righteousness of faith speaks in this way, ?Do not say in your heart, ?Who will ascend into heaven?? ? (that is, to bring Christ down from above)

The King James says in Romans 10:6 that there is a "righteousness" (right doing/living) that comes through the Faith of Jesus, and we can live as He lived on this earth, in the same likeness of sinful (fallen) flesh as He had, and yet have victory over all of it through the Holy Ghost, being born again, born of Heaven.

The NKJV says that "faith" is righteousness itself without doing anything at all. It does this throughout:

Rom 3:22? Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:?

NKJV Romans 3:22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all [a]and on all who believe. For there is no difference;

The King James says "the faith of Jesus" will cause us to be victorious and to live as He lived on this earth without sinning.

The NKJV says that faith merely "in" Jesus (He does everything, and we do nothing but 'believe') gets us to Heaven without victory over our sins.

So much for the Righteousness by Faith of Jesus Christ (1888) messages. If the NKJV is right, Seventh-day Adventism, in verity, along with Ellen G White, Waggoner and Jones (etal.) at that time, were all wrong. Do you (reader) believe that? I do not.

[10]

Course correction:

The NKJV, differs from the KJB, in the NT [alone] in 2289 places, in some versions.

- Christ is removed in the NT in the NKJV ? 1

- Lord is removed in the NT in the NKJV ? 66

- Jesus is removed in the NT in the NKJV ? 2

- God is removed in the NT in the NKJV ? 51

- Godhead is removed in the NT in the NKJV ? 1

- devil(s) is removed in the NT in the NKJV ? 81

- hell is changed/removed in the NKJV OT 14x and in the NKJV NT 10x for a total of 24x

The word ?hell? as found in the King James Bible, is found in: 54 verses, 54 matches, e-sword

KJB OT [31x]: Deuteronomy 32:22; 2 Samuel 22:6; Job 11:8, 26:6; Psalms 9:17, 16:10, 18:5, 55:15, 86:13, 116:13, 139:8; Proverbs 5:5, 7:27, 9:18, 15:11,24, 23:14, 27:20; Isaiah 5:14, 14:9,15, 28:15,18, 57:9; Ezekiel 31:16,17, 32:21,27; Amos 9:2; Jonah 2:2; Habakkuk 2:5.

KJB NT [23x]: Matthew 5:22,29,30, 10:28, 11:23, 16:18, 18:9, 23:15,33; Mark 9:43,45,47; Luke 10:15, 12:5, 16:23; Acts 2:27,31; James 3:6; 2 Peter 2:4; Revelation 1:18, 6:8, 20;13,14.

The English word ?hell? is retained in the NKJV only in the following verses, generally with a footnote attached [exceptions, are Ezekiel 31:17, 32:21,27; Matthew 5:29,30; Luke 12:5, which are without an altering footnote], stating, ?Or Sheol?, or ?Abode of the dead?, ?Gr. Gehenna?, and in the single instance in 2 Peter 2:4's footnote, ?Lit. Tartarus?, and in the single instance of Revelation 1:18's footnote, ?Lit. Unseen; the unseen realm? and/or capitalizing the various words, personifying it [along with the word ?Destruction?, ?Pit?, and ?Death?], possibly even deifying it [them], as such capitalization in the NKJV, is normally used to denote deity, see NKJV Preface, page iv, Section ?The Style?, paragraph 5; and while some passages in the NKJV NT, simply transliterate the underlying Greek word, and leave no footnote at all [ie., NKJV Matthew 11:23, 16:18; Luke 16:23; Acts 2:27,31; Revelation 6:8, 20:13,14 ?Hades?]:

NKJV OT [17x]: Deuteronomy 32:22; Psalms 9:17, 55:15, 139:8; Proverbs 5:5, 7:27, 9:18, 15:11,24, 23:14, 27:20; Ezekiel 31:16,17, 32:21,27; Amos 9:2; Habakkuk 2:5

NKJV OT [17x], compared to KJB OT [31x] [removed 14x]: 2 Samuel 22:6; Job 11:8, 26:6; Psalms 16:10, 18:5, 86:13, 116:13; Isaiah 5:14, 14:9,15, 28:15,18, 57:9; Jonah 2:2.

NKJV NT [13x]: Matthew 5:22,29,30, 10:28, 18:9, 23:15,33; Mark 9:43,45,47; Luke 12:5; James 3:6; 2 Peter 2:4

NKJV NT [13x], compared to KJB NT [23x] [removed 10x]: Matthew 11:23, 16:18; Luke 10:15, 16:23; Acts 2:27,31; Revelation 1:18, 6:8, 20:13,14

- heaven is removed in the NT in the NKJV ? 50

- damned (-able, -ation) is removed/changed in the NKJV NT a total of 15x (totally removed)

- blood is removed in the NT in the NKJV ? 23

- salvation is removed in the NT in the NKJV ? 2

- Word of God is removed in the NT in the NKJV ? 1

- Word of the Lord is added in the NT in the NKJV ? 4

- The phrase ?New Testament? is gone, though the NKJV, does use the words ?testament? and ?testator? in association with ?covenant?, see Hebrews 9:16-17 for example. Yet, there are also footnotes in the NKJV, referring to the NU [alexandrian] texts, which even remove the word ?new?, see Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24.

- "JEHOVAH", the very name of God, is gone from the text of the NKJV. There are at least 7 footnotes (NKJV Genesis 22:14; Exodus 6:3, 17:15; Judges 6:24; Psalms 83:18; Isaiah 12:2, 26:4 NKJV), but in those footnotes, there is also a little doubt placed about "YHWH", saying "traditionally Jehovah" (Ex. 6:3 footnote NKJV).

I have all of the references.

Last edited by Green Cochoa; 07/03/21 05:43 PM. Reason: Enabled HTML in post
Re: Bible Doctrines affected by Modern Versions [Re: Rick H] #194209
07/03/21 01:00 AM
07/03/21 01:00 AM
Matthew 10vs8  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2021

Regular Member
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 85
Ili Ili, AS
Originally Posted by Rick H
Here is part of the comparison on the KJV vs NKJV...

"New King James Version Omissions
NKJV omits the word "Lord" 66 times
NKJV omits the word "God" 51 times
NKJV omits the word "heaven" 50 times
NKJV omits the word "repent" 44 times
NKJV omits the word "blood" 23 times
NKJV omits the word "hell" 22 times
NKJV omits the word "JEHOVAH" entirely
NKJV omits the word "new testament" entirely
NKJV omits the word "damnation" entirely
NKJV omits the word "devils" entirely
NKJV ignored the KJV Greek Textus Receptus over 1200 times
NKJV replaced the KJV Hebrew (ben Chayyim) with the corrupt Stuttgart edition (ben Asher) Old Testament

NKJV Demotes Jesus Christ
NKJV -KJV
Luke 13:8 Sir -Lord
Matthew 18:26 before him saying, Master -and worshipped him saying, Lord
Matthew 20:20 kneeling down -worshipping him
Matthew 26:64 right hand of the Power -right hand of power
Genesis 22:8 God will provide for himself the lamb -God will provide himself a lamb
John 8:35 a son -the Son
Colossians 2:2 the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ -the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ (Trinity)
Matthew 8:19 et al. Teacher -Master
Matthew 19:16 Good Teacher -Good Master
Matthew 22:16 Teacher -Master
Matthew 23:8 One is your Teacher, the Christ -one is your Master, even Christ
Matthew 23:10 And do not be called teachers, for One is your Teacher, the Christ -Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ..."

https://www.angelfire.com/la2/prophet1/NKJVOmissions.html
A lot worse continued:

[11]

The NKJV (avg. 6.9th grade) is harder (more difficult) to read than the King James (avg. 5.8th grade by Flesch-Kinkade):

The Flesch-Kinkaid Grade Level formula, as tested on various English translations:

?... [Page 195] The King James Bible ranks easier to read in 23 out of 26 comparisons. (Their formula is: (.39 x average number of [Page 195-196] words per sentence) + (11.8 x average number of syllables per word) ? (15.59) = grade level. ...? - New Age Bible Versions, An Exhaustive Documentation Exposing The Message, Men and Manuscripts Moving Mankind To The Antichrist's One World Religion, The New Case Against, The NIV, NASB, NKJV, ESV, HCSB, NRSV, NAB, NET, CEV, GNB, CEB, Living, The Message, New Jerusalem, & New Century, The Latest Research Supporting The Authorized King James Version, by Gail Riplinger, Chapter Eleven, King James For Kids, Page 195-196

The NKJV, also uses more difficult and complex words, in the place of more simple words as found in the King James Bible (due to copyright and other machinations), and in some instances, do not mean the same thing, and are therefore not synonyms. For instance, [non-exhaustive overall sampling, and the following words/phrases in the NKJV are never used in the King James Bible]

For intance:

Genesis 9:9

KJB

seed
4 (letters)
1 (syllable)

NKJV

descendants*
11 (letters)
3 (syllable)

* note on the NKJV word ?descendants?, is a plural word, whereas contextually in the King James Bible, especially when dealing with prophetic references to Jesus Christ, the King James Bible uses the singular word ?seed?; for instance: Genesis 3:15; Galatians 3:16; Romans 9:29; Revelation 12:17, of which the NKJV alters. Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit Himself, referring back to an OT texts [Gen. 12:7, 15:18], makes an entire doctrinal argument from this very truth in Galatians 3:16 [KJB], and John, under the same inspiration of God, also refers back to OT texts [Gen. 3:15; Gal. 3:16] in Revelation 12:17 speaking of the singular person, Jesus Christ.

One will also notice, that in the NKJV, there are many more untranslated words, which are left transliterated [English spelling of foreign words], such as, Sheol, Hades, Areopagus, etc.

Therefore, the claim, that the New King James Version [or any other English translation] is easier to read or understand, when compared to the King James Bible, is demonstrably incorrect.

Sometimes, the King James Bible, in various comparisons of texts and words, will indeed have a more lengthy use of words, or more syllables when compared to other English translations, but will generally have an easier understood meaning at simple reading, for instance [non-exhaustive sampling, and the following words in the NKJV are never used in the King James Bible]:

1 Samuel 10:19

KJB

thousands
9 (letters)
2 (syllable)

NKJV

clans*
5 (letters)
1 (syllable)

* note on the word NKJV ?clans?, this is also a hidden reductionism by the NKJV translators, because of their 'critical' [historical] belief that ancient/early Israel was very small in numbers, ie, 10's-100's, per tribe, maybe a thousand here or there, but never 1,000's [upper] to 10,000's and definitely not into the 100,000's to 1,000,000's overall. So it uses a smaller word to obscure the truth.

[12]

According to the Preface, page iv & x, of the NKJV, we read:

?... [page iv] Additionally, capitalization of these pronouns benefits the reader by clearly distinguishing divine and human persons referred to in a passage. Without such capitalizations the distinction is often obscure, because the antecedent of a pronoun is not always clear in the English translation. ...?

?... [page x] PERSONAL PRONOUNS and certain nouns are capitalized when they refer to Deity. ...?

2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

NKJV 2 Thessalonians 2:7 For the [a]mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only [b]He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.

The NKJV by capitalizing the "He" in both places in 2 Thessalonians 2:7 just negated the Papacy being the one to be removed by Christ at His second Advent, and instead makes it the Holy Ghost being removed. A complete reversal of meaning.

Ellen G. White states that the ?let? was Pagan Rome, and the ?Mystery of Iniquity? was indeed, Papal Rome, please notice that she did not say that the ?daily? of Daniel was ?Pagan Rome/Paganism? which was to be ?taken out of the way? in 2 Thessalonians 2:7. Instead, notice, whom she declares is to be removed [?taken away?] and when it was to occur and by whom it was to occur:

?... The mystery of iniquity, which had already begun to work in Paul?s day, will continue its work until it be taken out of the way at our Lord?s second coming. The climax of the working of iniquity will soon be reached. When the land which the Lord provided as an asylum for his people, that they might worship him according to the dictates of their own consciences, the land over which for long years the shield of Omnipotence has been spread, the land which God has favored by making it the depository of the pure religion of Christ,?when that land shall, through its legislators, abjure the principles of Protestantism, and give countenance to Romish apostasy in tampering with God?s law,?it is then that the final work of the man of sin will be revealed. Protestants will throw their whole influence and strength on the side of the Papacy; by a national act enforcing the false Sabbath, they will give life and vigor to the corrupt faith of Rome, reviving her tyranny and oppression of conscience. Then it will be time for God to work in mighty power for the vindication of his truth. ...? [The Signs Of The Times; June 12, 1893, ?Build The Old Waste Places?, by Ellen G. White] - http://text.egwwritings.org/publica...&year=1893&month=June&day=12

It is the ?mystery of iniquity? which is to be ?taken out of the way? at Christ's Second Advent. Thus William Miller, Stephen N. Haskell, Josiah Litch, Joshua V. Himes, Uriah Smith and others are/were incorrect in their point of the ?paganism? being the ?daily?, by incorrectly aligning 2 Thessalonians 2:7's ?taken out of the way?, with the ?taken away? of ?the daily? of Daniel 8, 11, & 12.

Ellen G. White, clearly understood the ?mystery of Iniquity? to be also ?the man of sin?, which is the ?the son of perdition?, the ?Papacy?, that ?Wicked? and ?great Apostasy?:

? ? The apostle Paul warned the church not to look for the coming of Christ in his day. ?That day shall not come,? he says, ?except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed.? 2 Thessalonians 2:3. Not till after the great apostasy, and the long period of the reign of the ?man of sin,? can we look for the advent of our Lord. The ?man of sin,? which is also styled ?the mystery of iniquity,? ?the son of perdition,? and ?that wicked,? represents the papacy, which, as foretold in prophecy, was to maintain its supremacy for 1260 years. This period ended in 1798. The coming of Christ could not take place before that time. Paul covers with his caution the whole of the Christian dispensation down to the year 1798. It is this side of that time that the message of Christ?s second coming is to be proclaimed. ...? [The Great Controversy, by Ellen G. White; Page 356] - http://text.egwwritings.org/publica...niquity+man+of+sin+papacy&resultId=5

?... What was the origin of the great apostasy? How did the church first depart from the simplicity of the gospel? By conforming to the practices of paganism, to facilitate the acceptance of Christianity by the heathen. The apostle Paul declared, even in his day, ?The mystery of iniquity doth already work.? 2 Thessalonians 2:7. During the lives of the apostles the church remained comparatively pure. But ?toward the latter end of the second century most of the churches assumed a new form; the first simplicity [Page 384-385] disappeared, and insensibly, as the old disciples retired to their graves, their children, along with new converts, ... came forward and new-modeled the cause.??Robert Robinson, Ecclesiastical Researches, ch. 6, par. 17, p. 51. To secure converts, the exalted standard of the Christian faith was lowered, and as the result ?a pagan flood, flowing into the church, carried with it its customs, practices, and idols.??Gavazzi, Lectures, page 278. As the Christian religion secured the favor and support of secular rulers, it was nominally accepted by multitudes; but while in appearance Christians, many ?remained in substance pagans, especially worshiping in secret their idols.??Ibid., page 278.

Has not the same process been repeated in nearly every church calling itself Protestant? As the founders, those who possessed the true spirit of reform, pass away, their descendants come forward and ?new-model the cause.? While blindly clinging to the creed of their fathers and refusing to accept any truth in advance of what they saw, the children of the reformers depart widely from their example of humility, self-denial, and renunciation of the world. Thus ?the first simplicity disappears.? A worldly flood, flowing into the church, carries ?with it its customs, practices, and idols.? ...? [The Great Controversy; by Ellen G. White, Pages 384-385; internal page notation in brackets added by myself] - http://text.egwwritings.org/publica...ion=2&section=all&pagenumber=384

2 Thessalonians 2:7, historical quotations:

?...Again, in the second epistle he addresses them with even greater earnestness: Now I beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto Him, that you be not soon shaken in mind, nor be troubled, either by spirit, or by word, that is, the word of false prophets, or by letter, that is, the letter of false apostles, as if from us, as that the day of the Lord is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means. For that day shall not come, unless indeed there first come a falling away, he means indeed of this present empire, and that man of sin be revealed, that is to say, Antichrist, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or religion; so that he sits in the temple of God, affirming that he is God. Do you not remember, that when I was with you, I used to tell you these things? And now you know what detains, that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity does already work; only he who now hinders must hinder, until he be taken out of the way. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-7 What obstacle is there but the Roman state, the falling away of which, by being scattered into ten kingdoms, shall introduce Antichrist ...? [Roman Catholic Online Fathers Of The Church; On The Resurrection Of The Flesh (Tertullian); ?Chapter 24. Other Passages Quoted from St. Paul, Which Categorically Assert the Resurrection of the Flesh at the Final Judgment.?] - http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0316.htm

?... One may naturally enquire, what is that which withholds, and after that would know, why Paul expresses it so obscurely. What then is it that withholds, that is, hinders him from being revealed? Some indeed say, the grace of the Spirit, but others the Roman empire, to whom I most of all accede. Wherefore? Because if he meant to say the Spirit, he would not have spoken obscurely, but plainly, that even now the grace of the Spirit, that is the gifts, withhold him. And otherwise he ought now to have come, if he was about to come when the gifts ceased; for they have long since ceased. But because he said this of the Roman empire, he naturally glanced at it, and speaks covertly and darkly. For he did not wish to bring upon himself superfluous enmities, and useless dangers. For if he had said that after a little while the Roman empire would be dissolved, they would immediately have even overwhelmed him, as a pestilent person, and all the faithful, as living and warring to this end. And he did not say that it will be quickly, although he is always saying it? but what? ?that he may be revealed in his own season,?... But he did not also wish to point him out plainly: and this not from cowardice, but instructing us not to bring upon ourselves unnecessary enmities, when there is nothing to call for it. So indeed he also says here. ?Only there is one that restrains now, until he be taken out of the way?, that is, when the Roman empire is taken out of the way, then he shall come. And naturally. For as long as the fear of this empire lasts, no one will willingly exalt himself, but when that is dissolved, he will attack the anarchy, and endeavor to seize upon the government both of man and of God. For as the kingdoms before this were destroyed, for example, that of the Medes by the Babylonians, that of the Babylonians by the Persians, that of the Persians by the Macedonians, that of the Macedonians by the Romans: ? And these things Daniel delivered to us with great clearness.? [Roman Catholic Online Fathers Of The Church; Homilies On Second Thessalonians (Chrysostom); Homily 4] - http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/23054.htm

?...The impediment is the Roman Empire; the main event impeded is the "man of sin" (most Latin Fathers and later interpreters) ...? [Roman Catholic Online Encyclopedia; ?A?; Antichrist; In The Pauline Epistles; [second option of 4 listed]] - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm

?...I will nevertheless mention such conjectures as I have heard or read.
Some think that the Apostle Paul referred to the Roman empire, and that he was unwilling to use language more explicit, lest he should incur the calumnious charge of wishing ill to the empire which it was hoped would be eternal; ? However, it is not absurd to believe that these words of the apostle, ?Only he who now holds, let him hold until he be taken out of the way,? refer to the Roman empire, as if it were said, ?Only he who now reigns, let him reign until he be taken out of the way.? ?And then shall the wicked be revealed:? no one doubts that this means Antichrist. ...? [Roman Catholic Online Fathers Of The Church; The City of God (Book XX); (St. Agustine); Concerning the last judgment, and the declarations regarding it in the old and new testaments.; Chapter 19.? What the Apostle Paul Wrote to the Thessalonians About the Manifestation of Antichrist Which Shall Precede the Day of the Lord.] - http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/120120.htm


?... I have observed on the Apostle's statement that the Thessalonian Christians knew what the hindrance was that prevented this Man of Sin's development: and we have the consenting testimony of the early Fathers, from Irenaeus, the disciple of the disciple of St John, down to Chrysostom and Jerome, to the effect that it was the Imperial power ruling and residing at Rome. 2 And assuming this to be correct, which we have indeed good reason to do, (for how could so extraordinary a point of knowledge, once received from the apostle have become lost in the age immediately succeeding?) the following striking similarities between this Antichristian power and the Little Horn of Daniel, or its equivalent the Apocalyptic Wild Beast from the abyss and sea, will at once present themselves. ...? - [Hor? Apocalyptic?: OR A COMMENTARY ON THE APOCALYPSE CRITICAL AND HISTORICAL INCLUDING ALSO AN EXAMINATION OF THE CHIEF PROPHECIES OF DANIEL ILLUSTRATED BY AN APOCALYPTIC CHART AND ENGRAVINGS FROM MEDALS AND OTHER EXTANT MONUMENTS OF ANTIQUITY BY THE REV EB ELLIOTT AM LATB VICAR OF TUXFORD AND FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE CAMBRIDGE RORM APOCALYPTIC, by the Rev. Edward. B. Elliott A.M.; Page 85] - http://books.google.com/books?id=1lsGAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

?? 5. The Fathers held that the Roman empire was the "let," or hindrance, referred to by Paul in 2 Thessalonians, which kept back the manifestation of the "man of sin." This point is of great importance. Paul distinctly tells us that he knew, and that the Thessalonians knew, what that hindrance was, and that it was then in existence. The early Church, through the writings of the Fathers, tells us what it knew upon the subject, and with remarkable unanimity affirms that this "let," or hindrance, was the Roman empire as governed by the Caesars; that while the Caesars held imperial power, it was impossible for the predicted antichrist to arise, and that on the fall of the Caesars he would arise. Here we have a point on which Paul affirms the existence of knowledge in the Christian Church. The early Church knew, he says, what this hindrance was. The early Church tells us what it did know upon the subject, and no one in these days can be in a position to contradict its testimony as to what Paul had, by word of mouth only, told the Thessalonians. It is a point on which ancient tradition alone can have any authority. Modern speculation is positively impertinent on such a subject.4 ? From Irenaeus, who lived close to apostolic times, down to Chrysostom and Jerome, the Fathers taught that the power withholding the manifestation of the "man of sin" was the Roman empire as governed by the Caesars. The Fathers therefore belong to the historic, and not to the futurist school of interpretation; for futurists imagine that the hindrance to the manifestation of the man of sin is still in existence, though the Caesars have long since passed away. ...? [Romanism and the Reformation; H. Grattan Guiness; Pg 52-53; or Page 107 (1887) Ed.] - http://www.whitehorsemedia.com/docs/ROMANISM_AND_THE_REFORMATION.pdf

Now compare capitalization that removes Christ and His word from being the "rock". Remember the NKJV preface:

According to the Preface, page iv & x, of the NKJV, we read:

?... [page iv] Additionally, capitalization of these pronouns benefits the reader by clearly distinguishing divine and human persons referred to in a passage. Without such capitalizations the distinction is often obscure, because the antecedent of a pronoun is not always clear in the English translation. ...?

?... [page x] PERSONAL PRONOUNS and certain nouns are capitalized when they refer to Deity. ...?

Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

NKJV Matthew 16:18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not [a]prevail against it.

The NKJV footnote reads: ?[b] [Eph. 2:20]?

NKJV Ephesians 2:20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone,

Which is a Roman Catholic argument, stating that the rock (why they left it lowercase, they do not believe the rock in Matthew 16:18 is Christ nor His word) is really one of the apostles, Peter.

Consider the NKJV Preface remarks, in that when the editors capitalize ?personal pronouns? and ?certain nouns?, they refer to Deity. Yet, notice in this instance, that the editors deliberately refused to capitalize the word ?rock?, thus making the reference of it to [sinful humanity] Peter, and not to [Deity] Jesus Christ. The footnote at ?[b]?, even further misleads the reader to consider that the church must be built upon Peter [the ?rock?], at the very least. This is a specific Roman Catholic alteration. Yet, scripture [KJB] identifies the ?Rock? as God Himself, even Jesus Christ throughout, as well does Peter, in [KJB] 1 Peter 2:6,7,8 [even the same word used in v.8, citing [KJB] Isaiah 8:14, in regards Jesus Christ, identified in [KJB] Isaiah 8:13, ?... the LORD of hosts himself ...?]. See * below. See also Paul in [KJB] Romans 9:33; 1 Corinthians 10:4, and Jesus in [KJB] Matthew 7:24,25; Luke 6:47,48, ?... these sayings of mine ? rock.? and ?... to me ? my sayings ? rock.? See also the contextual identification.

Deuteronomy 32:31 For their rock [is] not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves [being] judges.

There are many more subtil differences, to be demonstrated upon request. There are Italic changes (adds and removals). There are Phrase changes (adds and removals). There is slavery added to the NKJV, and instead of being Servants of God/Christ, we are now reduced to slaves. The God of Love does not own slaves. They purposefully mistranslate and abuse the word 'doulos'. There are many footnotes which place doubt upon the text, and many footnotes which refer the reader to the NU text (Alexandrian texts of Romanism, Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, etc) as being superior. All may be demonstrated upon request. The NKJV transliterates words in part when it suits their doctrines, like "Sheol", but doesn't do the same for "Heaven/s" (Shamayim, Ouranos, etc).

There is more. A lot more.

Last edited by Matthew 10vs8; 07/03/21 01:06 AM.
Re: Bible Doctrines affected by Modern Versions [Re: Rick H] #194210
07/03/21 01:21 AM
07/03/21 01:21 AM
Matthew 10vs8  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2021

Regular Member
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 85
Ili Ili, AS
Originally Posted by Rick H
Here is part of the comparison on the KJV vs NKJV...
...
NKJV replaced the KJV Hebrew (ben Chayyim) with the corrupt Stuttgart edition (ben Asher) Old Testament ...
The sources they (NKJV translators, notes writers, scholars) constantly refer to herein:

[1] the corrupt Alexandrian Codices, Aleph [Sinaiticus], B [Vaticanus], A [Alexandrinus], C [Ephraemi Syrus], D [Bezae in the Gospel and Acts, Claromontanus in the Epistles], etc, [see Preface page ?v?],

as well as:

[2] from the source such as the Ben Asher text [Gerhard Kittel [whose father was Rudolph Kittel], was Hitler's propaganidst 'high priest', who wrote: Die Judenfrage [1934]] Biblia Hebraica [BHK] of 1937, or the German Stuttgart edition, from the singular Leningrad [?L?] Manuscript B19a [ben Asher text], which differs from the KJB, Ben Chayyim/Bomberg texts] of the OT, in as much as 20,000 to 30,000 places, [see Preface page ?v?], and is therefore not the same as the [1st edition] Daniel Bomberg edition [1516-1517], aka the First Rabbinic Bible, or the [2nd edition] [1524-1525] which was edited by Abraham [Jacob???] ben Chayyim [ben Hayyim] iben Adonijah [Ben Chayyim edition, or Ben Chayyim Masoretic text], aka The Second Great Rabbinic Bible, which was the standard for 400 years, and the foundation of the OT for the King James Bible. In Kittel's first two editions [1906, 1912], he had used the Ben Chayyim Masoretic, but in a 3rd edition [1937, by Paul Kahle], it diverged to the Ben Asher Masoretic text, the MS B19a or ?L? text.

along with:

[3] a NT singular collation of about 414 mss of Hermann von Soden [[so-called 'M'; masquerading as 'Majority text', out of a total 88 papyri, 274 uncials, 2,700 cursives, 2,143 lectionaries, or ?the vast field of Patristic and Versional evidence.?, a mere 8% of the Greek sources, and of which he selected for those closely allied to the Alexandrian], which were skewed towards the Alexandrian, and palmed off as the 'Majority text' to the unsuspecting], [see Preface page ?v?],

as well as:

[4] the so-called LXX [Septuagint], which is nothing but the continued platonic gnostic work of Origen in his Hexapla [late 2nd Century AD] passed off as the work of [unknown] Jews in pre-christian times, when it is easily documented as nothing of the sort], [see Preface page ?v?], There really is not such thing as the "LXX". It's a fabricated myth.

'Taint no such thing as "the Septuagint". ?What you are actually referring to is Origen's Hexapla (Catholic).

The so called "Septuagint", really being "septuaginta (plural, with differing translations)" of Origen's Hexapla, Theodotion (6th column), Aquila of Sinope, & Symmachus and really from the sources Vaticanus and Sinaiticus (both of which are not anywhere near 4th C.).
The Septuagint [LXX] as we presently know it, appears first in the writings of Origen [Hexapla] at near the end of the 2nd century AD, and the mention by the so-called "Letter of Aristeas", based on an unfounded and mostly discredited "legend", is seriously problematic.

"... Most of these fables focus on an infamous ?book? 14 called the ?Letter of Aristeas? 15 (hereafter called the Letter) and the alleged claims of the Letter?s documentation by authors who wrote before the first coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the first few centuries following His first sojourn on earth. 16 The only extant Letter is dated from the eleventh century. In addition, there is no pre-Christian Greek translation of the He-brew Old Testament text, which the Letter alleges, that has been found, in-cluding the texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls. ..." - http://www.theoldpathspublications.com/Downloads/Free/The Septuagint ebook.pdf

"... the story of Aristeas appears comparatively rational. Yet it has long been recognized that much of it is unhistorical, in particular the professed date and nationality of the writer. Its claims to authenticity were demolished by Dr. Hody two centuries ago (De bibliorum textibus originalibus, Oxon., 1705) ..." - http://www.bible-researcher.com/isbelxx01.html

De bibliorum textibus originalibus - https://archive.org/stream/bub_gb_Lq6h8A9RvfwC#page/n15/mode/2up

Other sources, identifying the same - http://www.scionofzion.com/septuagint.htm https://www.scionofzion.com/septuagint2.htm

"... Roman Catholics use the idea that Christ quoted the Septuagint to justly include the Apocrypha in their Bibles. ... Since no Hebrew Old Testament ever included the books of the Apocrypha, the Septuagint is the only source the Catholics have for justifying their canon. Many Reformers and Lutherans wrote at great length refuting the validity of the Septuagint. ..." - http://www.wcbible.org/documents/septuagint.pdf

"... [Page 46] Proponents of the invisible LXX will try to claim that Origen didn't translate the Hebrew into Greek, but only copied the LXX into the second column of his Hexapla. Can this argument be correct? No. If it were, then that would mean that those astute 72 Jewish scholars added the Apocryphal books to their work before they were ever written. (!) Or else, Origen took the liberty to add these spurious writings to God's Holy Word (Rev. 22:18). ...

... Is there ANY Greek manuscript of the Old Testament written BEFORE the time of Christ? Yes. There is one minute scrap dated at 150 BC, the Ryland's Papyrus, #458. It contains Deuteronomy chapters 23-28. No more. No less. If fact, it may be the existence of this fragment that led Eucebius and Philo to assume that the entire Pentatuech had been translated by some scribe in an effort to interest Gentiles in the history of the Jews. ... [page 46]

... [Page 47] If there was an Aristeas, he was faced with two insurmountable problems.

First, how did he ever locate the twelve tribes in order to pick his six representative scholars from each. Having been thoroughly scattered by their many defeats and captivities, the tribal lines of the 12 tribes had long since dissolved into virtual non-existence. It was impossible for anyone to distinctly identify the 12 individual tribes.

Secondly, if the 12 tribes had been identified, they would not have undertaken such a translation for two compelling reasons.

(1) Every Jew knew that the official caretaker of Scripture was the tribe of Levi as evidenced in Deuteronomy 17:18, 31:25,26 and Malachi 2:7. Thus, NO Jew of any of the eleven other tribes would dare to join such a forbidden enterprise. ..." - The Answer Book, By Sam Gipp, Page 46-47, selected portions, emphasis [bold] in original.

See also The Mythological Septuagint - https://ia801900.us.archive.org/13/...0-%20The%20Mythological%20Septuagint.pdf

See also The Christians Handbook of Manuscript Evidence - https://archive.org/download/peter-...andbook%20of%20Manuscript%20Evidence.pdf

1 Jones, The Septuagint: A Critical Analysis, op. cit., pp. 10?54. The reader should, in all fairness, be apprised of the fact that very nearly all references in the literature which allude to the Septuagint in fact pertain to Origen's 5th column. That is, the real LXX from all citation evidence as to N.T. references ? indeed, for all practical purposes ? the Septuagint that we actually "see" and "use" is found to actually be only two manuscripts, Vaticanus B and Sinaiticus a. This is especially true of Vaticanus. Although this fact is difficult to ferret out from among the vast amount of literature on the subject, it may be
verified by numerous sources. Among them, the reader is directed to page 1259 in The New Bible Dictionary op. cit., (Texts-Versions) where D.W. Gooding admits this when he relates that the LXX of Jer.38:40 (Jer.31:40 in the MT) as shown in figure 214 has been taken from the Codex Sinaiticus. Thomas Hartwell Horne is even more direct in An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, 9th ed., Vol. II, (London, Eng.: Spottiswoode and Shaw, 1846), fn. 1. p. 282 and fn. 3 p. 288. It has been established that both were produced from Origen's 5th column. Thus, the Septuagint which we actually utilize in practical outworking, the LXX which is cited almost ninety
percent of the time, is actually the LXX that was written more than 250 years after the completion of the New Testament canon ? and by a "Catholicized Jehovah's Witness" at that! Moreover, it must be seen that the testimony of these two corrupted manuscripts is almost solely responsible for the errors being foisted upon the Holy Scriptures in both Testaments by modern critics! - Footnote 1, Which Version?, by Floyd Nolen Jones, 20th edition page 129 [PDF] - https://ia601901.us.archive.org/9/i...20Which%20Version%20Is%20The%20Bible.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBFXozZ_Zhc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-LR4KkPYDo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjGi7w6kPSI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaH1N5PV_7E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNPaPX9mLAc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1mi_RcSLQ8

also:

[5] the Latin Vulgate of Jerome, which he, himself, in print, admits he altered from the Old Itala [Italic; Latin], [see Preface page ?v?],

and finally:

[6] the various opinions, pseudo-guesswork, patchwork Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic and Latin which relied upon various concordances and lexicons of liberals and heretics, and critical methods and biases of the NKJV translators/editors themselves.] ...?

Re: Bible Doctrines affected by Modern Versions [Re: Rick H] #194211
07/03/21 08:43 AM
07/03/21 08:43 AM
Matthew 10vs8  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2021

Regular Member
Joined: Jun 2021
Posts: 85
Ili Ili, AS
Amos 4:4 KJB ?Come to Bethel, and transgress; at Gilgal multiply transgression; and bring your sacrifices every morning, and your tithes after three years:?

NKJV Amos 4:4 ?Come to Bethel and transgress,
At Gilgal multiply transgression;
Bring your sacrifices every morning,
Your tithes every three [a]days.

Messing with Tithe. The KJB states, "after three years" (See Deuteronomy 14:28, 26:12). The NKJV states, "every three days". What??? Even the NKJV footnote, [a.] states, "Amos 4:4 Or years, Deut. 14:28". Why then not have the text read as the KJB which comes from the Masoretic Hebrew? The NKJV isn't referring to the Masoretic Hebrew here, it draw upon the so called 'lxx' (Origen Hexapla), that's why, "[h]eis ten triemerian ta epidekata umon".

Brenton's so called lxx (English) - Amo 4:4? Ye went into Bethel, and sinned, and ye multiplied sin at Galgala; and ye brought your meat-offerings in the morning, and your tithes every third day.?

1 Corinthians 1:21 KJB ?For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.?

NKJV 1 Corinthians 1:21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe.

See the difference?

2 Corinthians 2:17?KJB For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.?

NKJV For we are not, as [a]so many, peddling the word of God; but as of sincerity, but as from God, we speak in the sight of God in Christ.

[b.] 2 Corinthians 2:17 adulterating for gain

See the difference? The KJB is speaking about altering God's word in any manner for any reason (as shown in this thread), and the other, NKJV, is merely concerned with altering God's word for sales (which they do through copyright, so they condemn themselves).

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

NKJV 1 Timothy 6:5 [a]useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. [b]From such withdraw yourself.

See the difference? The KJB is speaking about those who think that being rich is an approval from God for what they do, like the Pharisees did. The NKJV is speaking about those who think they can use 'godliness' (a form of religion) to obtain gain. The very next verse in contrast proves the validity of the KJB.

1 Timothy 6:6?KJB But godliness with contentment is great gain.?

1 Timothy 6:10?KJB For the love of money is the root of [b]all
evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.?

NKJV 1 Timothy 6:10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

See the difference? The KJB is telling us that "the love of money (selfishness, see SoP/ToJ, ?? selfishness, the root of all evil.?? Child Guidance (1954), page 294.1; also Education (1903), page 225.4, this is no contradiction, proof upon request, or see "Windows - God's Operating System - https://archive.org/download/window...ows%20-%20Gods%20Operating%20System.pptx )" is the root of "all" evil, while the NKJV is saying it is only the root of "all kinds" of evil, not all evil at their base.

There are many more subtil changes, and some completely alter doctrines in the scripture, or place doubt into ones that exist therein:

Mark 7:19?KJB Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?

NKJV Mark 7:19 because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, [a]thus purifying all foods??

NKJV Footnote [a.] Mark 7:19 NU sets off the final phrase as Mark?s comment that Jesus has declared all foods clean.

That just put into the minds of the reader that Jesus negated the food/health laws of clean and unclean/abomination which is a doctrine of devils.

Every reference will be provided as needful.

There is even a Cosmic Christ, "the Christ" in the NKJV.

Last edited by Matthew 10vs8; 07/03/21 08:51 AM.
Re: Bible Doctrines affected by Modern Versions [Re: Rick H] #194212
07/03/21 05:35 PM
07/03/21 05:35 PM
Green Cochoa  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2021

5500+ Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,003
The Orient
Matthew, regarding Amos 4:4, the Hebrew word "yowm" , made plural in this text, i.e. "yamim" (יָמִ֖ים), can mean day, time, or year. It is usually translated as day, but there are times when it definitely should mean year. In Hebrew, context is very important. Translators could be challenged on a text like this to know whether the context meant days or years. When ambiguities like this exist, marginal notes are appropriate to help the reader understand it.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Last edited by Green Cochoa; 07/03/21 05:36 PM.

We can receive of heaven's light only as we are willing to be emptied of self. We can discern the character of God, and accept Christ by faith, only as we consent to the bringing into captivity of every thought to the obedience of Christ. And to all who do this, the Holy Spirit is given without measure. In Christ "dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. And ye are complete in Him." [Colossians 2:9, 10.] {GW 57.1} -- Ellen White.
Re: Bible Doctrines affected by Modern Versions [Re: Rick H] #194222
07/12/21 02:57 PM
07/12/21 02:57 PM
K
kland  Offline
SDA
Active Member 2022

5500+ Member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,211
Midland
Matthew, I'd like to hear your response to Green's comment.

Three years or three days?

It is quite apparent there is a difference. But as much as you like showing differences, I don't believe that was ever under question. Easy to show differences, but kind of pointless. Show me someone who thinks there is no literal difference between any of the versions.

I believe the question was ever to do with, How do we know which is correct? Would you say the committee members who were translating other versions were dishonest and the KJV members were honest? How do we know that? Why not consider both were honest but considered their translation the most accurate and the possibility exists that either may be wrong or right? That all translators do the best they can given the knowledge they have available and all strive for accuracy. That there may continue to be questions, that we as readers should make for ourselves availability of multiple versions and take the Bible as a whole rather than any specific verse for understanding it.

Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderator  dedication, Rick H, Will 

Sabbath School Lesson Study Material Link
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
Most Recent Posts From Selected Public Forums
Seven Trumpets reconsidered
by Karen Y. 07/04/22 11:26 AM
Meaning of Lazarus and the Rich Man
by kland. 06/28/22 01:09 PM
Most Recent Posts From Selected Private Forums of MSDAOL
LLU Endorses Gay Pride Month!
by Rick H. 07/01/22 04:23 PM
Seventh Day Sabbath Apologetics
by kland. 06/28/22 12:09 PM
Cancelled Delegate to GC Session
by ProdigalOne. 06/25/22 12:10 AM
Link To 2022 June General Conference Session
by Daryl. 06/07/22 04:54 PM
General Conference Session 2022 Threads
by Daryl. 06/07/22 08:13 AM
Forum Announcements
Visitors by Country Since February 11, 2013
Flag Counter
Google Maritime SDA OnLine Public Forums Site Search & Google Translation Service
Google
 
Web www.maritime-sda-online.com

Copyright 2000-Present
Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine (formerly Maritime SDA OnLine).

LEGAL NOTICE:
The views expressed in this forum are those of individuals
and do not necessarily represent those of Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine,
as well as the Seventh-day Adventist Church
from the local church level to the General Conference level.

Maritime 2nd Advent Believers OnLine (formerly Maritime SDA OnLine) is also a self-supporting ministry
and is not part of, or affiliated with, or endorsed by
The General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists headquartered in Silver Spring, Maryland
or any of its subsidiaries.

"And He saith unto them, follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men." Matt. 4:19
MARITIME 2ND ADVENT BELIEVERS ONLINE (FORMERLY MARITIME SDA ONLINE) CONSISTING MAINLY OF BOTH MEMBERS & FRIENDS
OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH,
INVITES OTHER MEMBERS & FRIENDS OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD WHO WISHES TO JOIN US!
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1