Sunday, March 10, 2013

False Bibles Bring Deception

Found here

One can tell directly that false theology is advanced via false bible versions. When I was a new Christian I compared a few Bibles, this is just one example. The below graphic changes, showing different verses that have been altered and changed between bibles.




Many will claim that the KJV is too hard to read, I always found the newer versions harder to read, that is a false claim to lead people to false deceiving bibles.

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

Joy

I do not own a KJV. I was raised in NIV, and have many many bible verses memorized in that version. I do have a New King James Version, have been reading it a lot and like it. I have been keeping my eyes open at a local thrift store for a KJ bible, but have not seen one yet. What do you think of New King James?

The Holy Spirit has still convicted me and helped me to learn using other translations. I am not opposed to King James, just do not own one and was not raised with it. Also, like I said, I have so many verses memorized in another translation.

Interested in others thoughts on this, and others who have switched to King James. Did you re-memorize in King James?

Bible Believer said...

Try and buy a KJV from a used bookstore. I have acouple I got for a dollar each even. I am glad you have been looking out for one. With NKJV, stay away from that Bible as well, on the surface it is not as severe as NIV, but I have compared it to KJV and there are subtle things they have changed in there.

One can still be saved and convicted via a false bible version, even reading a lousy Catholic bible, I figured out the book of Hebrews did not match what I was being taught in the RCC, but things are far better with the KJV where things have not been changed or adulterated.

I would google KJV vs NKJV, there are websites that show the difference in verses.

I am poor at memorization. I "know" and have read vast parts of the bible, and have studied many books intensely but being able to recite word for word, brainwise I am not good at this. I couldn't remember poetry at school either. Sad to admit this, I do have some bible verses in my head, probably you can see this when I write but I have only used KJV since I became a born again Christian.

Christian Canuck said...

I am a KJV only person. I was saved with a KJV gideon bible and never used another version. I have read other versions and found the corruption to be great. The problem I often find if you say you are KJV only is that they will tag you as a follower of Peter Ruckman and immediately discredit you. However discrediting you is a usual tactic to get off the true subject at hand.

The message bible is the worst of all (not a bible imho) and for the fact Rick Warren uses quotes from it in his Purpose Driven Life should be a huge red flag to anyone who reads/uses/follows his stuff or him.

Bible Believer said...

I only use the KJV though I do own a few of other Bibles, I can't stand reading them, they all read wrong. Even when I visited churches and heard the false versions, it was painful, and if one has studied the Bible enough you can pick up the changes immediately that have been done. The corruption is horrendous. The message is one of the worse, watered down, editions, I guess I am not surprised Warren uses it. I remember the "bible" quotes in purpose driven" years ago, they all read wrong. Ruckman I consider a full blown deceiver meant to discredit and confuse those who are warning about false bible versions and know that the KJV is God's Word in the English language. I've dealt with Ruckmanites online, and the confused theology, doctrines and rest were horrible.

http://galatiansfour.blogspot.com/2010/07/warning-about-ruckman-i-do-not-think.html

Anonymous said...

The New King James is still corrupt. Not as corrupt as the NIV or ESV. But the NKJ is still from the wrong strain.

The KJV is the way to go.

Great article, and very good material here. Looking at the difference between say the NIV/ESV and the KJV, it should be obvious to anyone that loves the Word of God, that the NIV/ESV/NASB and such were from a tampered-with false strain called the "alexandrian" which is heretical and not the Word of God.

Anonymous said...

Please help me out with this. I looked up 1Cor.9:27 in the Greek. The first four words from the Greek are, "I beat my body". Do you ever go back to the original to see which version is the closest to it?

Anonymous said...

"Do you ever go back to the original to see which version is the closest to it?"

There is no "original" to go check. That is why we go with the KJV which is 100% accurate.

Bornagain Soldier said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

"Please help me out with this. I looked up 1Cor.9:27 in the Greek. The first four words from the Greek are, "I beat my body". Do you ever go back to the original to see which version is the closest to it?"

Paul never beat himself. The KJV is right because he is not being literal. He is keeping himself , his flesh from sin.

According to Strong's greek lexicon:

ὑπωπιάζω to strike

ὑπωπιάζω to hit under the eye (buffet or disable an antagonist as a pugilist), i.e.
(figuratively) to tease or annoy (into compliance), subdue (one's passions)

Derivation: from a compound of G5259 and a derivative of G3700;
KJV Usage: keep under, weary. G5259 G3700

Again, we see that the KJV is correct because it is not a literal beating of one's body. You are keeping your body in subjection. The body is an enemy because of sin, one must subdue it. The KJV writers knew that it was figurative.

Bible Believer said...

BAS I haven't studied Strong, but I have found myself wondering if it is an infiltrated source. I would not doubt it. One thing I think about is for all the pastors who go to seminary, they go heavy on teaching them "GREEK" how much of the translations are valid, because we know they are teaching them other deceptions there. Even the Strongs on this one yes has SUBDUE, subduing the body doesn't mean beating it. It is a much different meaning.

I found this website for Greek translations.

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm

Anonymous said...

This is the online bible translation site I use. But I don't know anything about Greek, just what the word by word translation show.

http://biblos.com/

Anonymous said...

Have you ever read anything about King James I? How do you suppose he rendered a one and only reliable translation? I would appreciate if someone would look at his life and tell me how that is possible.

Anonymous said...

Someone wrote: "Have you ever read anything about King James I? How do you suppose he rendered a one and only reliable translation? I would appreciate if someone would look at his life and tell me how that is possible."

How can you prove that ANYTHING you read about his life, is true or not? You weren't there, so how can you prove anything you've read?

I don't trust James, or those who wrote whatever. I trust the Lord Jesus Christ who promised to preserve His Word, and He has done so in the King James Version, since it comes from the Received Text (the wescott/hort came from the garbage can literally and it is the source of the NIV/NASB/NKJV/ESV and all other "modern" versions).

Bornagain Soldier said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bornagain Soldier said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bornagain Soldier said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
VPilot said...

I just did a check of the claim on Luke 4:8 (KJV) using the greek lexicon on both Blue Letter Bible and Bible Gateway online. Both agree the "Get thee behind me Satan" is not nor ever was in the original text. It was imported from Matthew's account in Mt 4:10.

If that is true - Why can't we then say that the KJV may also contain some error, or additions unique to it's translation? I guess what I am really asking is why it seems so plainly that so many KJV-only apologists seem to treat that translation as if it were the original text and language? I have long hoped one in that camp would be willing to give a cogent answer to the honest question.

William Sculley said...

Vpilot, KJV onlyists will never admit their error. They live in a land where language doesn't develop and God only loves English speaking people, since no other language has a perfect translation.

They also don't spend time with real people because they think the KJV can be read by your average 6th grader. That's so hilariously wrong that comedians might use it for a comedy sketch.