"New" King James Version Parts 1 and 2

IN THE "NEW KJV," THERE ARE:
22 omissions of "hell",
23 omissions of "blood",
44 omissions of "repent",
50 omissions of "heaven",
51 omissions of "God",
66 omissions of "Lord".

There are three changes to the KJV since 1611.
1. 1612: Typography ( from Gothic to Roman type).
2. 1629 & 1638: Correction of typographical errors.
3. 1762 & 1769: Standardization of spelling. The 'Board of Managers' of the American Bible Society in 1852 determined that "The English Bible as left by the translators has come down to us unaltered in respect to its text..."

Continued - "With the exception of typographical errors and changes required by the process of orthography [spelling] in the English language, the text of our present Bibles remains unchanged, and without variations from the original copy as left by the translators. (Report of the Committee on Versions to the Board of Managers of the American Bible Society, 1852, pp. 7,11 as cited by George T. Crabb)


BIBLE VERSION COMPARISON
http://www.av1611.org/biblecom.html

BIBLE VERSES REMOVED
http://www.av1611.org/biblevs.html

BIBLE WORDS REMOVED
http://www.av1611.org/biblewrd.html

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• John
• Wycliffe
• Hus
• Johann
• Gutenberg
• Thomas
• Linacre
• Colet
• Erasmus
• William
• Tyndale
• Martin
• Luther
• Myles
• Coverdale
• Rogers
• Cranmer
• King
• Henry
• VIII
• Great
• Bible
• Queen
• Bloody
• Mary
• Foxe's
• Book
• of
• Martyrs
• Foxe
• Geneva
• Shakespeare
• Puritans
• Pilgrims
• Bishop's
• James
• Version
• Rheims
• New
• Testament
• Douay
• Old
• Eliot
• Noah
• Webster

[josacra]

@pianobomber They are not spreading lies, but truth. Oh I have been praying for a pure translation from original texts without the influence of religions but people of YHWH. Jesus did not found a religion but salvation,relationship and revelation of YHWH to those who believe through Yashua Ha' Massiach..

[pianobomber]

@BereanBeacon1 I support the Textus Receptus, you do not need to convince me of the problems that modern translations present with their missing versus, words, and concern over authenticity of certain passages, such as Mark 16:9-20. I am well aware those, but thank you otherwise. Please view this link, though, regarding the NKJV. It is very important:

h t t p://watch.pair.com/TR-nkjv-mis­repr­esentation.html

[BereanBeacon1]

@pianobomber BIBLE VERSION COMPARISON

h t t p://w w wDOTav1611DOTorg/biblecom.html

BIBLE VERSES REMOVED

h t t p://w w wDOTav1611DOTorg/biblevs.html

BIBLE WORDS REMOVED

h t t p://w w wDOTav1611DOTorg/biblewrd.html

[pianobomber]

@BereanBeacon1 It is not nice to spread lies about the NKJV. Those are misrepresentations of Gail Riplinger who does not realize the word "lord" was not always used in reference to Jesus, or that the word "God" was often added into the text for purposes of expressions. Sometimes instead of "blood", the NKJV will use "bloodline" or "bloodthirsty". It is best to do your own research and not trust apostates, such as GAR, otherwise you can easily be carried about the wind, as Jude warns about.

[BereanBeacon1]

@pianobomber All cults and false religions appreciate your position on final authority which lends credence to their multiple authorities. Muslims say they have the perfect book while the Christian Bible is full of errors and prove it by using commentaries and the modern translations. Catholics have their Catechism. IN THE "NEW KJV," THERE ARE

22 omissions of "hell",

23 omissions of "blood",

44 omissions of "repent",

50 omissions of "heaven",

51 omissions of "God",

66 omissions of "Lord".

[pianobomber]

@BereanBeacon1 You cannot rely on reports from various committees. There are still vocabulary differences between the various editions of the KJV. How can a KJVO have the final authority if these editions do not agree? The reality is that we cannot achieve 100% of what the translators wrote, though we can get very close. But using your rhetoric, things that are different can be the same, therefore the NKJV is an equally viable translation.

[BereanBeacon1]

@pianobomber There are three changes to the KJV since 1611.

1. 1612: Typography ( from Gothic to Roman type).

2. 1629 & 1638: Correction of typographical errors.

3. 1762 & 1769: Standardization of spelling. The 'Board of Managers' of the American Bible Society in 1852 determined that "The English Bible as left by the translators has come down to us unaltered in respect to its text..."

[BereanBeacon1]

@pianobomber Continued - "With the exception of typographical errors and changes required by the process of orthography [spelling] in the English language, the text of our present Bibles remains unchanged, and without variations from the original copy as left by the translators. (Report of the Committee on Versions to the Board of Managers of the American Bible Society, 1852, pp. 7,11 as cited by George T. Crabb)

[pianobomber]

So which edition of the KJV is the true Word of God? I have three different editions and they all have slight variations. Clearly not every KJVO has the preserved Word of God since some have the 1900 PCE and others may have the 1769 or 1873. KJVOs like to remind us, "things that are different are not the same." C'mon now, let's not be hypocritical.

[IWantToKnowChrist]

@TheotherPrometheus the problem isn't about the translation or language, it's abotu the base text, some are based on the textus receptus like the KJV which is thousands of manuscripts and copies of the bible that add up, most of the newer versions are from the alexandrian text which is a handful of copies that don't match the majority text. or else they are supposedly from the textus receptus, but require a certain amount of variance so Greedy men can get a copyright and control of use.