The Spirit of the Antichrist

ThirstyforTruth

Changing The Word of God - Why They Changed The Bible

Three Angels Messages

Battle Of The Bibles - Why They Changed The Bible

Three Angels Messages

A Lamp In The Dark The Untold History of the Bible

amy2x

A Lamp in the Dark is an exciting new documentary that unfolds the fascinating "untold" history of the Bible, revealing critical information often overlooked in modern histories. Enter into a world of saints and martyrs battling against spies, assassins and wolves in sheep's clothing.

Throughout the Middle Ages, the Papal Inquisition forbade biblical translation, threatening imprisonment and death to those who disobeyed. Learn the stories of valiant warriors of the faith, such as John Wycliffe, William Tyndale, Martin Luther, the ancient Waldenses, Albigenses and others who hazarded their lives for the sake of sharing the Gospel light with a world drowning in darkness.

Once the common people were able to read the Bible, the world was turned upside down through the Protestant Reformation. The Reformers subdued whole kingdoms by preaching the grace of God, and exposing the unbiblical doctrines of Rome. In response, the Vatican would launch a Counter Reformation to destroy the work of the Reformers, including the bibles they produced.

Battle of the Bibles

It is interesting to note that of late there seems to be an imputation of inferiority upon the KJV version of the Bible. The truth is that this rejection of the KJVs standing as the "authoritative" English Bible translation is not new at all but originated at the same time that the KJV was translated by those who despised what the KJV represented.
In fact this dislike of the KJV predates even the KJV itself and arose from the disfavor shown to the text from which it originates even though this text composes the vast majority (89%) of all ancient texts in existence and has been in use as the most correct text since the third or fourth century at the latest.
Those who oppose the status of the KJV and the text it originates from commonly known as the majority text or the received text, argue that there is in existence a (very) few superior texts which should be accorded greater credence for a few reasons. Namely because the actual parchments are older. When analyzed however this ceases to be a compelling argument in their favor.
In order to arrive at an informed understanding of the real issues behind the discussion of Bible manuscripts and not be caught up in empty assertions lets look at the testimony of history on this topic.
Lucian lived from 250 - 312 and was born in Syria. He was the editor of the Received Text (also known as the traditional text, or, Textus Receptus). This is (essentially) the text on which the King James Bible is based. Lucian didn't create this text, he just selected the good versions of the Scriptures from those that were in circulation. At that time there were many variations of the Bible. There were at least eighty heretical sects. Each did not hesitate to remove or add pages to the Bible. Thus it required care to select among the many versions.
Lucian and his school gathered and edited a complete Bible, from Genesis to Revelation. Well-known writers including Jerome, Erasmus, Luther, John Burgon, and Fenton J.A. Hort agree that Lucian was the editor of the Received text. Of course, this implies that this text was in existence from the early fourth century or earlier.
Another evidence of the early date of the Received Text is the Peshitto. It is generally agreed that the Bible was translated into Syrian about 150 A.D. This version is known as the Peshitto. This Bible even today generally follows the Received text.
One authority writes that:

" The Peshitto in our days is found in use amongst the Nestorians, who have always kept it, by the Monophysites on the plains of Syria, the Christians of St. Thomas in Malabar, and by the Maronites, on the mountain terraces of Lebanon." (Burgon and Miller, The Traditional Text p. 128)

About the time when the Emperor Constantine "converted" to Christianity around 330 AD as a political tool for establishing his reign, paganism began to enter the church in the form of Sun worship and other such manifestations. Proof of this fact can be found in one of Constantine's decrees in 321 A.D.:

"On the venerable day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed. In the country however persons engaged in agriculture may freely and lawfully continue their pursuits because it often happens that another day is not suitable for grain-sowing or vine planting; lest by neglecting the proper moment for such operations the bounty of heaven should be lost. (Given the 7th day of March, Crispus and Constantine being consuls each of them the second time." Codex Justinianus, lib. 3, tit. 12, 3; translated in History of the Christian Church, Philip Schaff, D.D., (7-vol.ed.) Vol. III, p.380. New York, 1884

Dr. A. Chr.. Bang says regarding this Law :

"This Sunday law constituted no real favoritism to Christianity..... It is evident from all his statutory provisions that the Emperor during the time 313-323 with full consciousness has sought the realization of his religious aim: the amalgamation of heathenism and Christianity." Kirken og Romerstaten (The Church and the Roman State) p.256. Christiania, 1879

This period was ripe for Gnostics such as Origen and Eusebius who flourished during this era. These men set out to write a Bible that was more in line with their own philosophical understanding of things. Until this time there had only been one Bible version.
Origen's view of Scripture was "The Scriptures are of little use to those who understand them as they are written" McClintock and Strong, Origen. Historians know that Origen was infatuated with Greek philosophy and Plato.
 

TWO COMPETING BIBLES

From this point in time the history of Bible manuscripts takes two separate paths. One path that of the Textus Receptus and the other path of the few variant manuscripts.
That these variant manuscripts are very few in number is an unquestionable fact. In fact there are only two principal manuscripts in this class, the Siniaticus and the Vaticanus otherwise referred to as Codex Aleph and Codex B.
Sidney Collett in his "The Scripture of Truth" when writing about the Siniatic manuscript that was found by Dr. Tischendorf stated :

"Dr. Tischendorf believed that this and the Vatican manuscript were two of the fifty copies of the Bible which were made in Greek by command of emperor Constantine about the year AD 331, under the supervision of Bishop Eusebius, the historian of Ceasarea." p.28

There is a host of authorities which share the conviction regarding the origin of these two MSS. Eusebius was a disciple of Origen and these texts were largely the result of Origen's work. It is from the version of Eusebius that Jerome produced the Vulgate.
Abbo Martin, a well known Catholic textual critic claims that the Vaticanus and the Siniaticus were "fabricated" by Origen and others. (see Schaff, Companion to the Greek Text)
In fact these two manuscripts where largely unknown for over one thousand years until they were discovered. The Siniaticus was found on a trash heap outside a monastery in Sinai, and the Vaticanus, in the Vatican. That the Vulgate originates directly from the Vaticanus should be of no surprise.
At any rate Bibles were suppressed during the dark ages that ensued and it was not until the reformation that the Bible came back into public attention. For example, in 1490, Torquemada caused many Hebrew Bibles and more than six thousand volumes to be burnt in an Auto da fé at Salamanca. In view of this, it is a marvel that so many copies of the Received Text have survived to the present day.
Erasmus the most illustrious scholar of his age set out the compile the definitive Bible manuscript, in the original language (Greek) rejecting the corrupt manuscripts which were about. In essence what Erasmus collated was the Textus Receptus. He's job was not one of creating the Textus Receptus but of clearing away the filth that had accumulated through the dark ages and making the text publicly accessible to all scholars.
Many people today wish to prove that the Textus Receptus is merely a recent invention. The falsehood of this assertion is easy to demonstrate by noting that many church fathers when quoting from Scripture quote from the Textus Receptus. For example when quoting Rev 22:14 the church fathers, Tertullian (AD200) Cyprian (248-258) and Tertonius (390) quote "do His commandments" and not "wash their robes" as in found in the variant texts. The first time "wash their robes" is quoted is by Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria (326-373) so the Textus Receptus reading predates even the earliest manuscripts in existence.
John William Burgon, author of The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels and Causes of Corruption in the Traditional Text who did an extensive study of the quotations of the church fathers says:

"As far as the fathers who died before 400 A.D. are concerned, the question may now be put and answered. Do they witness to the traditional text as existing from the first or do they not? The results of the evidence, both as regards the quantity and the quality of the testimony, enable us to reply not only that the traditional text was in existence, but that it was predominant during the period under review." (p. 116)
"Besides establishing the antiquity of the traditional text, the quotations in the early fathers reveal the streams of corruption which prevailed in the first ages, till they were washed away by the vast current of the transmission of the text of the gospels." (p. 117)
" The original predominance of the traditional text is shown in the list given of the earliest fathers. Their record proves that in their writings, also in the church generally, corruption had made itself felt in the earliest times, but that the pure waters generally prevailed." (p. 121)
" Not the slightest confirmation is given to Dr. Hort's notion that a revision or recension was definitely accomplished at Antioch in the middle of the fourth century. There was a gradual improvement as the traditional text gradually established itself against the forward and persistent intrusion of corruption." (p. 129)
" It is well known that the Peshitto is mainly in agreement with the traditional text." (p. 130)

In other traditions, for example in the Greek Church, the traditional text (Textus Receptus) held sway from about 312-1453 AD. In the eastern texts (Syriac) in Aramaic, which is the language in which most of the NT was spoken, generally confers with the Textus Receptus as also does the Coptic version.
Others say that if Erasmus had been aware of the variant readings now flaunted as more accurate he would have used them in preference to the Textus Receptus. That Erasmus was aware of the variant readings of the Vaticanus (codex B) we read:

"A correspondent of Erasmus in 1533 sent that scholar a number of selected readings from it (Codex B) as proof of its superiority over the Received Greek Text" Sir Fredrick Kenyon, "Our Bible" p133.

This correspondent was none other than Professor Paulus Bombasius at Rome. [S.P. Tregelles, On the printed Text of the Greek test., p.22]
One can not claim that these "older and more reliable" texts were unknown to either Erasmus or the KJV translators, they knew them, and rejected them.
What matters anyway? The vast majority of the manuscripts in Greek are practically all the Received Text. The Textus Receptus did not originate with Erasmus all he practically did was publish it and make it accessible. The Textus Receptus which Erasmus published was not the fruit of his own hands, it was the dominant and principle text at the time and had been since at least 350AD. It is from the Textus Receptus that the KJV originates from.
As for the nature of the available manuscripts, the following is taken from Which Bible? edited by David Otis Fuller, D.D., 1970.

" The vast majority of these extant Greek New Testament manuscripts agree together very closely, so closely, indeed that they may fairly be said to contain the same New Testament text. This Majority Text is usually called the Byzantine Text by modern textual critics. This is because all modern critics acknowledge that this was the Greek New Testament in general use throughout the greater part of the Byzantine period (312-1453)."

I would like to add that the manuscripts that do not agree with the traditional text are not only a small minority, about 11 percent of the total, but they also have significant differences with one another. Therefore, if one were to decide that they were correct, it would still be a difficult matter to determine the text of the Scriptures. In addition, some of these manuscripts are missing many chapters of the Bible. This does not argue well for their quality, unless one believes that these chapters were not in the original manuscripts, which seems unlikely. Dr.F.C. Cook (Chaplain to the Queen of England (who was invited to sit on the revision committee, but refused), has this to say regarding the translation of the KJV.

"That Textus Receptus was taken in the first instance, from late cursive manuscripts; but its readings are maintained only so far as they agree with the earliest and best Greek and Latin Fathers, and with the vast majority of uncial and cursive manuscripts." Revised Version of the first three Gospels, p226.

Both Erasmus' edition and more so the KJV gave a major impetus to the reformation. Naturally the enemies of the reformation would set out to destroy the influence of this work. The impact that the KJV and the Textus Receptus made can be appreciated by the following testimony of Dr. Kenrick, Catholic Bishop of Philadelphia says in his preface to an English translation of a Catholic Bible in 1849

"Since the famous manuscripts of Rome Alexandria, Cambridge, Paris and Dublin were examined...A verdict has been obtained in favor of the Vulgate. At the reformation the Greek text as it then stood, was taken as a standard, in conformity to which the versions of the reformers were generally made; whilst the Latin Vulgate was depreciated, or despised as a mere version."

 

REVISIONISM

That many would want to "rectify" this situation is obvious and the best way to do this was by "revising" the KJV so that it would be more in line with the Vaticanus and Siniaticus. In fact the hatred felt towards the Textus Receptus and KJV by some of the revisers is undeniable. Hort himself wrote :

"Think of that vile Textus Receptus" Life of Hort Vol.1, p.214.

Dean Burgon (an eminent authority) says,

"The one great FACT, which especially troubles him, (Dr, Hort), and his joint Editor, -(as well it may)- is the traditional Greek text of the New Testament Scriptures. Call this text Erasmian or Complutensian., --the Text of Stephens, or of Beza, or of Elzevirs, -- call it the 'Received', or the traditional Greek text, or what ever other name you please; --the fact remains, that a text has come down to us which is attested by a general consensus of ancient Coptics, ancient fathers, ancient versions....Our readers cannot have yet forgotten his (Dr Hort's) virtual admission, that beyond all question the Textus Receptus is the dominant Graeco-Syrian Text of A.D. 350 to A.D. 400." in Revision Revised, p.269.

That Westcott and Hort principally used the Vat. and Sin. MSS for the RSV is easy to prove. Dr. Cook's testimony is particularly relevant since he was chosen to sit on the review committee and he refused, later publishing his views in his book "Revised Version of the First three Gospels." He writes:

"But it is precisely on this ground that I have throughout maintained the wrongfulness of the innovations introduced into the Revised Version, so far as they affect leading facts and great words recorded in the first three gospels. The reader need but look at the passages enumerated in the classification given above, p.136 seq., to be convinced that so far from resting upon the consentient testimony of ancient manuscripts, Versions, and Fathers by far the greater number of innovations, including those which give the severest shocks to our minds, are adopted on the authority of two manuscripts (Vaticanus and Siniaticus), or even of one manuscript, against the distinct testimony of all other manuscripts, uncial and cursive." p.227

The cursive MSS were those written in a cursive style and typically date later than the uncial ones which were written in capital letters.

"The popular notion seems to be, that we are indebted for our knowledge of the true texts of Scripture to the existing uncial entirely; and that the essence of the secret dwells exclusively with the four or five oldest of those uncials. By consequence, it is popularly supposed that since we are possessed of such uncial copies, we could afford to dispense with the testimony of the cursives altogether. A more complete misconception of the facts of the case can hardly be imagined. For the plain truth is THAT ALL THE PHENOMENA EXHIBITED BY THE UNCIAL MANUSCRIPTS ARE reproduced by the cursive copies." [emph. mine] Burgon and Miller, " The Traditional Text." p.202.

Dr. Scrivener says regarding this,

"A Judge is not impartial if he rejects the testimony of eighty-nine out of a hundred witnesses. It is a law of evidence that the very few are to be suspected rather than the very many." "Bibliotheca Sacra" p.35

 

NEW TRANSLATIONS

It can be simply shown that the other new translations are also derived from Westcott and Hort's Greek text simply by comparing the variant readings. If they agree with this text then they are derived from it because all the other MSS disagree with many of the variant readings it contains. This can be further demonstrated by taking note of the omissions, if a version omits the same text as the Westcott and Hort text then it is derived from it.
For example the NIV has a note after Mark 16:8 it says

"The two most reliable early manuscripts do not have Mark 16:9-20"

Which two MSS do we think these are ? Well we are not left to ponder too much because if we go to the Note in the NKJV alongside this same passage we read

"They are lacking in Codex Siniaticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other manuscripts of Mark contain them."

As you can judge for yourselves these modern translations omit these verses solely on the authority of the Vat. and Sin. MSS. rejecting all other evidence Do you think that is good enough a reason to "take away the words of this book"?
So that you, the common reader can make up your own judgment regarding the quality of the new versions which are almost all based on these two MSS. Let us see what else these two "superior and more reliable" manuscripts contain, or omit which is more often the case.
 

Facts about he Vaticanus

Although it includes the Apocrypha, It omits : Gen 1:1 to Gen 46:28 Ps 106 to Ps 138 Matt 16:2-3 Heb 9:14-13:25 All of Revelation It leaves out of the gospels : 237 words 452 clauses 748 whole sentences (2556 omissions in all)

That these appear to be oversights of the scribe is evident from the fact that the "same scribe has repeatedly written words and clauses twice over." (Dr. Scrivener, "Introduction", Vol.1, p.120) Obviously this piece of writing was not considered to be of major importance unlike the Textus Receptus which was painstakingly copied and verified.
Dr. Hskier says

"That B (Codex B = Vaticanus) is guilty of latches, of a tendency to 'improve,' and of 'sunstroke' amounting to doctrinal bias. That maligned Textus Receptus served in large measure as the base which B. tampered with and changed, and that the Church at large recognized all this until the year 1881 -- when Hortism, in other words Alexandrianis, was allowed free play." "Codex B and Its Allies", part 1, p.465

 

Facts about the Siniaticus

It contains almost all of the N.T. but added to it is the "Shepherd of Hermes" , "Bel and the Dragon", and the Epistle of Barnabas" (which I think has been shown to be a forgery). It has been heavily altered, changes "brought in by at least ten different revisers....the greater part belonging to the sixth or seventh century." Dr. Scrivener "A Full Collation of the Codex Siniaticus," p.XIX, Introduction
Mr. Philip Mauro adds " Thus there are internal evidences that lead to the conclusion that it was the work of a scribe who was singularly careless, or incompetent or both..." Which Version, p.45
It appears to be very unreliable and is deemed so by many authorities.
Why is it that the editors of the new Bible version and those who push them on the people don't tell them of these facts ?
Just so you can get an idea of the quality of these "most reliable and oldest texts" I want to quote to you a little from them found in the Epistle of Barnabus

"But he adds neither shalt thou eat the hare. To what end? To signify this to us: thou shalt not be an adulterer; nor liken thyself to such persons. For the hare every year multiplies the places of its conception; and so many years it lives, so many it has. Neither shalt thou eat of the hyena; that is again, be not an adulterer, nor a corrupter of others; neither be like such. And wherefore so ? Because creature every year changes its kind and is sometimes male and sometimes female." Epist. Barnabus 8:7-8

You can make up your own minds as the reliability and superiority of these manuscripts. They don't seem to be so reliable to me.
Another example the NIV which leaves out Mark 16:9-20 on the evidence of these two MSS however every single other uncial MSS contains these verses except these two manuscripts. How much evidence does one need.
Dean Burton says

"The impurity of the Texts exhibited by Codices B and Aleph is not a matter of opinion, but a matter of fact. These are two of the least trustworthy documents in existence" Revision Revised, p.315

Both MSS are well preserved and little used, obviously indicating the little confidence with which they were held.
Here are some of the Verses omitted by the NIV based on the Vaticanus text ignoring all the evidence to the contrary.
 

Matt 18:11 Matt 17:21 Matt 23:14 Mark 7:16 Mark 9:44 Mark 9:46 Mark 11:26 Mark 15:28 Luke 17:36 Luke 23:17 John 5:3,4 Acts 8:37 Acts 15:34 Acts 24:7 Acts 28:29 Rom 16:24

The Bible makes some strong claims for itself which should make one especially wary of cutting parts out of it.
"Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you neither shall ye diminish from it." Deut 4:2
"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book or this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life" Rev 22:19
"Every word of God is pure and is a shield unto them that put their trust in Him" Prov 30:5
The newer translations (NIV, RSV, etc) like to flaunt their textual accuracy over the supposedly "out moded" and "flawed" KJV. The simple fact is that these supposedly more reliable translations are just new versions of the old Latin Vulgate. This is easy to prove.
The Douay is more or less a direct translation of the Vulgate. We can go through a modern translation comparing it to the Douay (Vulgate) and show where it differs from the KJV is does so to agree with the Vulgate. For example the NIV basically parallels the Douay. It is important to note that the alterations significantly affect the doctrine of the Bible.
Look at these parallel translations where the meanings are clearly different.
 

---

Matt 5:44

KJV

"But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them That curse you, do good to them that hate you, pray for those that despitefully use you, and persecute you."

DOUAY

"But I say unto you, Love your enemies, ***************************, do good to them that hate you, pray for them that persecute and calumniate you."

NIV

"But I tell you, Love your enemies, ***************************, and pray for they that persecute you."

ASV

"But I say unto you, love your enemies, ********************** ************************ and pray for them ***************** that persecute you;

The phrase bless them that curse you is omitted from the ASV Douay and NIV.

---

Luke 2:33

KJV

"And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him."

DOUAY

"And his father and his mother were wondering at those things which were spoken concerning him."

NIV

"The child's father and his mother marvelled at what was said about him"

ASV

"And his father and his mother were marvelling at the things which were spoken concerning him;

Once again the NIV and the ASV follow the Douay and gives Jesus a human father!
 

---

Luke 4:8

KJV

"And Jesus answered and said unto him, get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."

DOUAY

"And Jesus answering him said to him, ************************ It is written, Thou shalt adore the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."

NIV

"Jesus answered, ******************* ******************* It is written, Thou shalt adore the Lord your God, and serve him only."

ASV

"And Jesus answered and said unto him, ******************* It is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."

The Douay, ASV and the NIV omit the words get thee behind me, Satan. This is obviously advantageous for those who wish place Peter on a pedestal.

---

1 Cor 15:47

KJV

"The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven."

DOUAY

"The first man was, of the earth, earthly: the second man ********* from heaven, heavenly."

NIV

"The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man ********* from heaven."

ASV

"The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is ************ of heaven.

Again these other three versions omit the Lord and thereby preferred by the Arian view that Jesus is a created being.

---

Eph 3:9

KJV

"And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ."

DOUAY

"And to enlighten all men that they may see what is the dispensation of the mystery, which has been hidden from eternity in God, who created all things *************."

NIV

"And to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God who created all things *****************.

ASV

"and to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages hath been hid in God who created all things; ***************"

Again by Jesus Christ is omitted by the Douay, ASV and NIV. Leaving the identity of the creator uncertain!

---

  I could go on there are many more examples like this, but I think the point is suitably demonstrated.

CONCLUSION

After all the facts are laid out before you, the picture becomes quite clear. The arguments against the KJV in favor of the newer versions supposedly based on "more reliable" manuscripts is nothing more than the age old conflict between only two Bible versions: the Textus Receptus in the form of the KJV and the Latin Vulgate in the form of a plethora of new translations.
We have many evidences for the early date of the Received Text:

1. Quotes in the early church fathers, a majority of which appear to conform to the Received Text, and some (possibly many) of these in the second century.
2. The Peshitto, which generally agrees with the Received Text, and is thought to have been translated in the second century.
3. The fact that Lucian lived in the late third century and is generally regarded as the editor of the Received Text, which was in existence before then but was selected by him and compiled into a Bible.
4. The much larger number and better agreement of the manuscripts representing the Received Text.

Instead of being more reliable the manuscripts which form the basis for both the Vulgate and the new translations have been shown to be at worse the work of singularly careless, or incompetent scribes and at worse a conscious attempt to alter the Scriptures according to various biases. In light of this the preference given to these flawed manuscripts by many is, at best, hard to understand.
The KJV stands out as the only version to be true to the vast majority of ancients texts. It is also the version that restored the Bible to the common people. The Textus Receptus has been the mainstay of Christianity for almost two millennia. To reject its superiority is to retrograde back into the middle ages.

Source

448 Reasons Why I Cannot Trust Any Modern Bible Version!

A Long List of Scripture Alterations

Dr. Ken Matto
June 20, 2012
Printer Friendly Version

Three of the most conspicuous characteristics of the modern versions of the Bible is the omission of complete Bible verses, the omission of key parts of many verses, and the changing of the text thus changing it‘s meaning completely. When one uses a modern version, they are using a seriously corrupted version which has been handed down to modern day scholarship by the Gnostics of the 2nd and 3rd century. These modern versions are nothing but counterfeits and have brought nothing but confusion into the church and the Christian. A Christian who uses multiple versions for their study is basing their study on corruption. I want to focus on the egregious omissions in the modern versions. If you have a modern version, I urge you to make the comparison between your modern version and the King James Bible. You will see that what is missing in your modern version, is not missing in the King James Bible. Who is the author of confusion? (1 Cor 14:33 KJV) For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. According to this verse it definitely is not God, so then why would you want to use a counterfeit version devised by the enemy of Christ?

(Up to 461 Entries as of 6/4/12)

Matthew
1:25-------------“Firstborn” is omitted
5:22-------------“Without a Cause” is omitted
5:44-------------”bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you” is omitted
6:13-------------”For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.” is omitted
6:33-------------”of God” is omitted
8:29-------------”Jesus” is omitted
9:13-------------”to repentance” is omitted
9:18-------------”worship” is changed to “knelt or bowed”
11:29-----------”learn of me” is changed to “learn from me”
12:15-----------”multitudes” is omitted
13:36-----------”Jesus” is changed to “him”
13:51-----------”Lord” is omitted
15:8-------------”draweth nigh unto me with their mouth” is omitted
15:14-----------”of the blind” is omitted
15:30-----------”Jesus” is omitted
16:3-------------”O ye hypocrites” is omitted
16:4-------------”the Prophet” is omitted
17:4-------------”let us make” is changed to “I will make” (plural to singular)
17:20-----------”Jesus” changed to “he” - “unbelief” omitted
17:21----------- Entire verse omitted
18:2------------”Jesus” is omitted
18:11----------- Entire verse omitted
18:35----------- “their trespasses” is omitted
19:9-------------”and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery” is omitted
19:17-----------”that is, God” is omitted
19:20-----------”from my youth up” is omitted
20:7-------------”and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive.” is omitted
20:16-----------”for many be called, but few chosen.” is omitted
20:22------------”and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?” is omitted
20:23------------”And” is omitted - “and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with:” is omitted
21:12------------”of God” is omitted
22:32------------”God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.” is changed to “He is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”
23:8--------------”even Christ” is omitted
23:14------------Entire verse omitted
24:2--------------”Jesus” is omitted
25:13 -----------”wherein the Son of man cometh.” is omitted
25:31------------”holy” is omitted
25:44------------”him” is omitted
26:3--------------”and the scribes” is omitted
26:28------------”new” is omitted
26:60------------”yet found they none.” is omitted - “false witnesses,” is omitted
27:4--------------”the” before “innocent blood” is omitted
27:24------------”just” is omitted
27:35------------”that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.” is omitted
28:2--------------”from the door” is omitted
28:6--------------”the Lord” is omitted
28:9--------------”And as they went to tell his disciples,” is omitted

Mark
1:2---------------”the prophets” is changed to “Isaiah the prophet”
1:14-------------”of the kingdom” is omitted
1:31-------------”immediately” is omitted
1:42-------------”And as soon as he had spoken,” is omitted
2:17-------------”to repentance” is omitted
3:15-------------”to heal sicknesses, and” is omitted
3:29-------------”damnation” changed to “sin”
4:24-------------”and unto you that hear” is omitted
5:6---------------”worship” is changed to “fell, bow, or knelt”
5:13-------------”forthwith Jesus” is omitted
5:36-------------”As soon as” and “heard” is changed to ignored or overheard
6:11-------------”Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.” is omitted
6:16-------------”from the dead” is omitted
6:33-------------”and came together unto him.” is omitted
7:2--------------”they found fault” is omitted
7:8--------------”as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.” is omitted
7:16------------Entire verse omitted
7:27------------”Jesus” is omitted
8:26------------”nor tell it to any in the town.” is omitted
9:24------------”and said with tears, Lord,” is omitted
9:44------------Entire verse omitted or placed in brackets
9:46------------Entire verse omitted or placed in brackets
9:49------------”and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt.” is omitted
10:21----------”take up the cross” is omitted
10:24----------”for them that trust in riches” is omitted
11:10----------”that cometh in the name of the Lord:” is omitted
11:14----------”Jesus” is omitted
11:19----------”he” is changed to “they” (third person singular is changed to third person plural)
11:26----------Entire verse omitted or placed in brackets
12:23----------”therefore, when they shall rise” is omitted
13:14----------”spoken of by Daniel the prophet.” is omitted
13:33----------”and pray” is omitted
14:22----------”Jesus” and “eat” are omitted
14:24----------”new” is omitted
14:27----------”because of me this night” is omitted
14:68----------”and the cock crew” is omitted
14:70----------”and thy speech agreeth thereto.” is omitted
15:28----------Entire Verse omitted or placed in brackets
16:9-20-------Placed in brackets and authenticity questioned in footnotes. This section of Scripture has many ancient witnesses and is found either in full or part in 618 manuscripts along with early Patristic evidence such as Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian of the second century.

Luke
1:28-----------”blessed art thou among women.” is omitted
2:22-----------”her” is changed to “their”
2:33-----------”Joseph” is changed to “father”
2:43-----------”Joseph and his mother” changed to “parents”
2:49-----------”about my Father’s business” is changed to “in my father’s house”
4:4-------------”but by every word of God.” is omitted
4:8-------------”Get thee behind me Satan” is omitted
4:18-----------”to heal the brokenhearted” is omitted
4:41-----------”Christ” is omitted
5:33-----------”Why do” and “?” omitted thus changing the verse from a question to a declarative statement.
5:38-----------”and both are preserved” is omitted
6:10-----------”as the other” is omitted
6:48-----------”founded upon a rock” is omitted
7:10-----------”that had been sick” is omitted
7:19-20------”art thou he that should come” is replaced by the new age title “Are you the Coming One in the NKJV
7:22----------”Jesus” is omitted
7:28----------”prophet” and “the Baptist” are omitted
7:31----------”and the Lord said” is omitted
8:45----------”and they that were with him” and“and sayest thou, Who touched me?” are omitted
8:48----------”be of good comfort” is omitted
8:54----------”and he put them all out” is omitted
9:1-----------”his” is changed to “the” and “disciples” is omitted
9:35---------”beloved” is omitted
9:54---------”even as Elias did” is omitted
9:55---------”and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.” is omitted
9:56---------”For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them.” is Omitted
9:57---------”Lord” is omitted
10:39-------”Jesus” is changed to “Lord’s”
11:2---------”Our” - “which art in heaven,” - “Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.” are omitted
11:4---------”but deliver us from evil” is omitted
11:11-------”If a son shall ask bread of any of you” and “will he give him a stone?” are Omitted
11:29-------”the prophet” is omitted
11:44-------”scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!” is omitted
11:53-------”And as he said these things unto them” is changed to “Jesus leaving, Jesus left, or He left?
11:54-------”that they might accuse him” is omitted
12:25-------”stature one” is changed to “one hour or single hour”
12:31-------”of God” is omitted
12:39-------”he would have watched” is omitted
13:19-------”great” is omitted
13:25-------”Lord, lord” is omitted
14:5---------”ass“ is changed to ”son”
17:3---------”against thee” is omitted
17:36-------Entire verse omitted or placed in brackets
19:5---------”and saw him” is omitted
19:45-------”and them that bought” is omitted
20:23-------”why tempt ye me?” is omitted
20:30-------”took her to wife,” omitted in some - “and he died childless.” omitted in all
21:4---------”cast in unto the offerings of God:” is omitted
22:14-------”twelve” is omitted
22:31-------” And the Lord said” is omitted
22:64-------”they struck him on the face” is omitted
22:68-------”nor let me go” is omitted
23:17-------Entire verse omitted or placed in brackets
23:23-------”and of the chief priests” is omitted
23:25-------”unto them” is omitted
23:38-------”in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew” is omitted
23:42-------”Lord” is omitted
23:45-------”was darkened” is changed to “sun stopped shining or sun failed”
24:1---------”and certain others with them” is omitted
24:42-------”and of an honeycomb” is omitted
24:49-------”of Jerusalem” is omitted

John
1:27---------”is preferred before me” is omitted
1:42---------”a stone” is changed to “Peter”
2:22---------”unto them” is omitted
3:13---------”which is in Heaven” is omitted
3:15---------”should not perish” is omitted
3:16---------”only begotten son” is changed to “one and only son”
4:16---------”Jesus” is omitted
4:42---------”the Christ” is omitted
4:46---------”Jesus” is omitted
5:3----------”waiting for the moving of the water” is omitted
5:4----------Entire verse is omitted or placed in brackets
5:16--------”and sought to slay him” is omitted
5:30--------”the Father” is changed to “him”
6:11--------”he distributed to the disciples, and the disciples” is omitted
6:39--------”Father’s” is changed to “him”
6:47--------”on me” is omitted
6:65--------”my” is changed to “the”
6:69--------”that Christ, the Son of the living” is changed to “Holy one”
7:8----------”yet” is omitted
7:53-8:11-Placed in brackets and doubt is placed upon it in the footnotes. This section has much evidence for its authenticity going back to the originals. The Old Latin Vulgate Bible (170 A.D.), the Greek Vulgate Bible (150 A.D.), and the Byzantine Text (450-1450 A.D.) all contain these passages. Manuscript D 05 from the Fifth Century contains it.
8:9----------”being convicted by their own conscience” is omitted
8:20--------”Jesus” is omitted
8:59--------“going through the midst of them, and so passed by.” is omitted
9:4----------”I” is changed to “we”
9:11--------”the pool of” is omitted
9:35--------”God” is changed to “Man”
9:38--------Footnote in 1901 ASV states that Christ was a created being. “The Greek word denotes an act of reverence, whether paid to
                 a creature (as here) or to the Creator.”
10:29-------”my” is changed to “the”
10:32-------”my” is changed to “the”
11:41-------”from the place where the dead was laid” is omitted
12:1--------”which had been dead” is omitted
12:41------”when” is changed to “because”
16:3--------”unto you” is omitted
16:16------”because I go the Father” is omitted
17:11------”those whom’ is omitted
17:12------”in the world” is omitted
19:38------”of Jesus” omitted both times in this verse
20:29------”Thomas” is omitted

Acts
2:1---------”one accord” is omitted
2:7---------”all” and “one to another” are omitted
2:23-------”have taken” is omitted
2:30-------”according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ” is omitted
2:41-------”gladly” is omitted
2:47-------”to the church” has been changed to “to them or being saved”
3:6---------”rise up and” is omitted
3:11-------”lame man which was healed” is omitted
3:20-------”which before was preached” is changed to “appointed or prepared”
3:25-------”our” is changed to “your”
3:26-------”son Jesus” is changed to “servant”
4:24-------”thou art God” is omitted
5:24-------”the high priest and” is omitted
5:34-------”apostles” changed to “men”
6:3---------”Holy Ghost” is changed to “the Spirit”
6:13-------”blasphemous” is omitted
7:30-------”of the Lord” is omitted
7:37-------”him shall ye hear” is omitted
8:18-------”Holy” is omitted
8:37-------Entire verse is omitted or placed in brackets
9:5---------”it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.” is omitted
9:6---------”And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him,” is omitted
9:29--------”spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and” is omitted
10:6--------”he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do.” is omitted
10:21------”which were sent unto him from Cornelius;” is omitted
10:30------”fasting” is omitted
10:32------”who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee.” is omitted
12:4--------”Easter” is replaced by “Passover”
13:42------”the Jews” replaced by “Paul and Barnabas” - “the Gentiles” is omitted
15:11------”Christ” is omitted
15:18------”unto God are all his works” is omitted
15:24------”which went out” and “saying ye must be circumcised, and keep the law” are Omitted
15:34------Entire verse omitted or placed in brackets
16:31------”Christ” is omitted
17:5--------”which believed not” is omitted
17:18------”unto them” is omitted
18:7-------”Justus” is replaced with “Titius Justus”
18:21-----”I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem:” is omitted
19:4-------”Christ” is omitted
19:10-----”Jesus” is omitted
20:25-----”of God” is omitted
20:32-----”brethren” is omitted
21:25-----”and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only” is omitted
22:9-------”and were afraid” is omitted - “of him” is replaced with ‘the One”
22:16-----”of the Lord” is omitted
22:20-----”of his death” is omitted
23:9-------”let us not fight against God” is omitted
23:15-----”tomorrow” is omitted
24:6------”and would have judged according to our law.” is omitted
24:7------Entire verse omitted or placed in brackets
24:8------”Commanding his accusers to come unto thee” is omitted
24:14----”are written in the law” is replaced with “agrees or according to the law”
24:15----”of the dead” is omitted
25:6-----”more than ten days” is replaced with “eight or ten days”
25:16----”to die” is omitted
26:30----”And when he had thus spoken” is omitted
28:16----”the centurion delivered the prisoners to the captain of the guard: but” is omitted
28:29----Entire verse omitted or placed in brackets

Romans
1:16------”of Christ” is omitted
1:29------”fornication” is omitted
1:31------”implacable” is omitted
3:22------”and upon all” is omitted
6:11------”our Lord” is omitted
8:1--------”who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” is omitted
8:16------”itself” is changed to “himself”
9:28------”and cut it short in righteousness” is omitted
9:31------”of righteousness” is omitted
9:32------”of the law” is omitted
10:15----”of peace” is omitted
11:6------”But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.” is omitted
13:9------”thou shalt not bear false witness” is omitted
14:6------”and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it.” is omitted
14:9------”and rose” is omitted
14:10----”Christ” is changed to “God”
14:21----”or is offended, or is made weak.” is omitted
15:29----”of the gospel” is omitted
16:18----”Jesus” is omitted
16:24----Entire verse omitted or placed in brackets

1 Corinthians
1:21------”foolishness of preaching” is omitted
2:4-------”man’s” is omitted
2:13-----”holy” is omitted
5:4-------”Christ” is omitted
5:5-------”Jesus” is omitted
5:7-------”for us” is omitted
6:20-----”and in your spirit, which are God's.” is omitted
7:1-------”touch” is changed to “marry” or “sexual relations”
7:34-----”There is difference also between a wife and a virgin.” is omitted
7:39-----”by the law” is omitted
9:1------”Christ” is omitted
9:18-----”of Christ” is omitted
9:22-----”as” is omitted
10:9-----”Christ” is changed to “Lord”
10:11----”all” is omitted
10:28----”for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof:” is omitted
11:24----”take eat” and “broken” are omitted
11:29----”unworthily” and “Lord’s” are omitted
14:25----”and thus” is omitted
15:47----”the Lord” is omitted
15:55----”grave” is changed to “death”
16:22----”Jesus Christ” is omitted
16:23----”Christ” is omitted

2 Corinthians
2:15------”are” is changed to “are being”
2:17------”corrupt” is changed to “peddle”
4:6-------”Jesus” is omitted
4:10------”the Lord” is omitted
4:14------”by” is changed to “us” (change give implication that Christ will be raised on the last day when the Christians will be raised. It denies the resurrection of Christ on the Third day.)
5:18-------”Jesus” is omitted
6:9--------”chastened” is changed to “beaten or punished”
7:4--------”Great is my boldness of speech toward you, great is my glorying of you” is changed to “I have confidence in you or great is my pride in you”
8:4--------”that we would receive” is omitted
10:4------”through God” is omitted
10:7------”Christ’s” second usage is omitted
11:31----”our” is changed to “the” - “Christ” is omitted
12:11----”in glorying” is omitted
13:2------”I write” is omitted

Galatians
1:3-------”our” is changed to “the”
2:20-----”nevertheless I live” is changed to “I do not live” or “I no longer live”
3:1------”that ye should not obey the truth” is omitted
3:17----”In Christ” is omitted
4:7------”through Christ” is changed to “through God”
4:24----”the” before two covenants is omitted
5:12----”even cut off which trouble you” is changed to “emasculate or castrate”
5:21----”murders” is omitted
6:15----”in Christ Jesus” is omitted
6:17----”the Lord” is omitted

Ephesians
1:18----”understanding” is changed to “heart”
3:9------”by Jesus Christ” is omitted
3:14----”of our Lord Jesus Christ” is omitted
4:6------”you” is omitted
4:9------”first” is omitted
5:9------”Spirit” is changed to “light”
5:30----”of his flesh, and of his bones” is omitted
6:10----”my brethren” is omitted
6:18----”all prayer” is omitted

Philippians
1:16-17-Order is reversed in the modern versions - Verse 16 is 17 and verse 17 is 16.
3:3------”worship God in the Spirit” is changed to “worship in or by the Spirit of God”
3:16----”let us mind the same thing” is omitted
4:13----”Christ” is omitted
4:23----”our” is changed to “the” - “you all” is changed to “your spirit” - “Amen” is omitted

Colossians
1:2------”and the Lord Jesus Christ” is omitted
1:14----”through his blood” is omitted
1:28----”Jesus” is omitted
2:2------”and of the Father” is omitted
2:11----”of the sins” is omitted
2:18----”not” is omitted (reverses meaning of passage)
3:6------”on the children of disobedience” is omitted
3:13----”Christ” is changed to “Lord”
4:8-----”he might know your estate” is changed to ”know things about us or our circumstances” thus reversing the meaning of this passage
4:15---”Nymphas” and “his” are changed to “Nympha” and “her” - (A masculine name in the Greek is changed to feminine name in the modern English texts.)

1 Thessalonians
1:1-----”from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.” is omitted
2:3-----”deceit” is changed to “error”
2:15---”their own” is changed to “the
2:19---”Christ” is omitted
3:11---”Christ” is omitted
3:13---”Christ” is omitted
5:27---”holy” is omitted

2 Thessalonians
1:8-----”Christ” is omitted
1:12---”Christ” is omitted

1 Timothy
1:1-----”Lord” is omitted
1:17----”wise” is omitted
2:7-----”in Christ” is omitted
3:3-----”not greedy of filthy lucre” is omitted
3:16---”God” is changed to “he”
4:12---”in spirit” is omitted
5:4----”good and” is omitted
5:16---”man or” is omitted - “them” is changed to “her”
5:21---”Lord” is omitted
6:5-----”from such withdraw thyself” is omitted
6:7-----”it is certain” is omitted
6:19---”eternal” is omitted

2 Timothy
1:11---”of the Gentiles” is omitted
2:19---”Christ” is changed to “Lord”
4:1-----”therefore” and “Lord” are omitted
4:22---”Jesus Christ” and “Amen” are omitted

Titus
1:4----”the common faith” is changed to “a common faith” giving the suggestion there is more than one specific faith - “mercy” is omitted -  “the Lord” is omitted
2:7----”sincerity” is omitted

Philemon
6--------”Jesus” is omitted
12 ----- “thou therefore receive him” is omitted

Hebrews
1:3-----”by himself” and “our” are omitted
2:7-----”and didst set him over the works of thy hands:” is omitted
3:1-----”Christ” is omitted
3:6-----”his own house” is changed to “God’s house” - “firm unto the end” is omitted
3:16----”howbeit not all” is omitted
6:10----”labor of” is omitted
7:21----”after the order of Melchisedec” is omitted
8:12----”and their iniquities” is omitted
10:9----”O God” is omitted
10:30---”saith the Lord” is omitted
10:34---”in heaven” is omitted
11:11---”was delivered of a child” is omitted
11:13---”and were persuaded of them” is omitted
11:37---”was tempted” is omitted
12:20---”or thrust through with a dart” is omitted

James
1:26----”among you” is omitted
2:19----”there is one God” is changed to “God is one”
2:20----”dead” is changed to “useless”
4:4------”adulterers and” is omitted
4:12----”There is one Lawgiver” is changed by adding to the text in the Greek to “There is one Lawgiver and Judge”
5:16----”faults” is changed to “sins”

1 Peter
1:16----”be ye holy” is changed to “ye shall be holy” (change makes it to be a future action when the Christian is made holy at the moment of salvation)
1:22----”through the Spirit” and “pure” are omitted
1:23----”for ever” is omitted
2:2------”that ye may grow thereby” is changed to “grow into salvation” (makes the verse teach that a person is saved by studying the Scriptures instead of grace)
4:1------”for us” is omitted
4:14----”on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.” is omitted
5:8------”because” is omitted
5:10----”Jesus” is omitted
5:11----”glory and” is omitted
5:12----”wherein ye stand” is changed to “stand ye fast therein” (the believer stands or abides in the true grace because that is where God has placed us but the verse in the modern versions is reversed making it a suggestion to stand therein)
5:14----”Jesus. Amen” is omitted

2 Peter
1:21----”holy” is omitted before “men of God”
2:4-----”into chains” is omitted
2:17----”for ever” is omitted
3:2-----”us the” is changed to “your” (removes the authority of Peter and the other eleven Apostles and shifts the focus to some one else)
3:9-----”us-ward” is omitted
3:10---”in the night” is omitted - “burned up” is replaced with “laid bare or judgment” in some of the versions.
3:12----”hasting” is replaced by “hastening”

1 John
1:4----”unto you” is omitted and “your” is changed to “our”
1:7----”Christ” is omitted
2:7-----”from the beginning” is omitted
3:5-----”our” is omitted (making the verse sound like universal salvation)
3:14---”his brother” is omitted
3:19---”we know” present tense is changed to “shall we know” future tense
4:3-----”Christ is come in the flesh” is omitted
4:9-----”begotten” is omitted
4:19---”him” is omitted
5:7----”in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.” is omitted
5:8----”And there are three that bear witness in earth” is omitted
5:13---”and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.” is omitted

2 John
3------”Lord” is omitted
9------”of Christ” second usage is omitted

Jude
1-------”sanctified” is omitted
4-------”Lord God” is omitted
25-----”wise” is omitted

Revelation
1:5-----”washed” is changed to “loosed”
1:8-----”the beginning and the ending” is omitted
1:9-----”Christ” is omitted twice in this verse
1:11---”I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and” is omitted
1:17---”unto me” is omitted
1:20---”which thou sawest” is omitted
2:9-----”works and” is omitted
2:13----”I know they works” is omitted
2:15----”which thing I hate” is omitted
3:11----”Behold” is omitted
5:4------”and to read” is omitted
5:5------”to loose” is omitted
5:6------”and lo” is omitted
5:10----”us” is changed to “them” - “kings” is changed to “kingdom” - “we” is changed to “they” (the modern versions take away the reality that the Christians will be made kings in God’s Kingdom. By changing “us” and “we” to third person plural words, it gives the idea that someone else, rather than “us” are going to be the kings.
5:14----”four” and “twenty” and “him that liveth forever and ever” are omitted
6:1------”see” is omitted
6:3------”see” is omitted
6:17----”his” is changed to “their” (denying the wrath is emanating from the Lamb)
7:5-8---”sealed” is omitted 10 or 12 times out of 12 readings.
8:7------”the third part of the earth” was added to the corrupt Greek text by means of Codex Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus but it is not in the Textus Receptus.
8:13----”angel” is changed to “eagle”
11:17---”and art to come” is omitted - “and has reigned” is changed to “begun to reign” (this change in the modern versions makes it sound like Christ was not already reigning)
12:12---”the inhabiters of” is omitted
12:17---”Christ” is omitted
13:1-----”I stood upon the sand of the sea” is changed to “the dragon stood on the shore of the sea”
14:5----”before the throne of God” is omitted
15:3----”saints” is changed to “ages or nations”
16:5----”O Lord” is omitted
16:17---”of Heaven” is omitted
18:20---”holy apostles and prophets” is changed to “ye saints, ye apostles, and ye prophets” (this change takes the fact that the apostles and prophets were holy men)
19:1----”the Lord” is omitted
19:2----”at her hand” is omitted
19:8----”righteousness” is changed to righteous acts” (this change gives the appearance that works will get a person to Heaven)
20:9----”God out of” is omitted
20:12--”God” is changed to “throne”
21:4----”God” is changed to “he”
21:24--”of them which are saved” is omitted
22:6----”holy” is omitted
22:14--”do his commandments” is changed to “wash their robes or cleanse their garments”
22:19--”book” is changed to “tree”
22:21--”our” is changed to “the” - “Christ” is omitted - “you all” is changed to “saints or holy people” - “Amen” is omitted in some versions

Source

Perversions in the NIV & NASB

Can God Lie?

Mark 1:1-3

NIV

The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

It is written in Isaiah the prophet: "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way"

"a voice of one calling in the desert, `Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight paths for him.'"

NASB

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

As it is written in Isaiah the prophet: ""BEHOLD, I SEND MY MESSENGER AHEAD OF YOU, WHO WILL PREPARE YOUR WAY;

THE VOICE OF ONE CRYING IN THE WILDERNESS, "MAKE READY THE WAY OF THE LORD, MAKE HIS PATHS STRAIGHT.'''

But wait!

"Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me"

is not found in Isaiah! It is found in Malachi 3:1!!

"The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord..." is found in Isaiah 40:3

Even the NIV and NASB footnotes admit this! Click here to see.

But what does the KJV say?

"As it is written in the prophets..." (Mark 1:2)

Isaiah + Malachi does not equal "Isaiah the prophet."

Isaiah + Malachi equals "the prophets."

Apparently the modern scholsrs can't tell the differnece between "Isaiah" and "the prophets."  

If they didn't they wouldn't have made this contradiction in their translations.

But, what if the manuscripts they used are in error?

What if they really do say "Isaiah the prophet?"

Can these manuscripts be trusted?

Can God lie?

"Thy word is TRUE" Psalm 119:160        "...God, that CANNOT LIE..." Titus  1:2

Another lie in the NASB:

John 7:6-11

6 So Jesus said to them, " My time is not yet here, but your time is always opportune.

7 " The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me because I testify of it, that its deeds are evil.

8 "Go up to the feast yourselves; I do not go up to this feast because My time has not yet fully come.''

9 Having said these things to them, He stayed in Galilee.

10 But when His brothers had gone up to the feast, then He Himself also went up, not publicly, but as if, in secret.

11 So the Jews were seeking Him at the feast and were saying, "Where is He?''

In verse 8, Jesus is saying that He is not going to the feast, but in verse 10, He went anyway.

This makes it appear that Jesus lied.

The King James says:

6 Then Jesus said unto them, My time is not yet come: But your time is alway ready.

7 The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.

8 Go ye up unto this feast:

I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come.

9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee.

10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.

11 Then the Jews sought him at the feast, and said, Where is he?

It is only a one-word difference, but in the KJV, the Lord Jesus is NOT made a liar.

If debating this minor change seems unimportant to you,

one new Christian almost lost his faith over it.

See http://www.balaams-ass.com/journal/resource/lie-dice.htm

Is Jesus in Danger of Judgment?

Matthew 5:22

"But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment..." KJV

"But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment..." NIV

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

The newer versions omit "without a cause."

Another "minor" change, right?

Read Mark 3:5

He [Jesus] looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts..." NIV

After looking around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, He said to the man..." NASB

In this verse, Jesus was angry, but he had a reason, "the hardness of their hearts."

In the NIV and NASB, anyone who is angry is in danger of judgment, period.

This would make our Lord Jesus in danger of judgment!!!

Blasphemy in the new Bible versions:

NIV calls Satan "Jesus!!!"

Lucifer is another name for Satan.  It is found once in the Bible:

Isaiah 14:12:

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!

how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! KJV

But the NIV and the NASB (and others) leave it out:

How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn!

You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! NIV

How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn!

You have been cut down to the earth, You who have weakened the nations! NASB

But wait? Who is the "morning star?"

The NIV reveals that the morning star is none other than Jesus Christ:

 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star." Revelation 22:16,

But wait!  Didn't the NIV say that the morning star is an evil creature that is fallen from heaven?

Didn't the NIV replace "Lucifer" with "morning star?"

Jesus and Satan are one in the NIV!

But wait, you say.  The Isaiah 12:14 "morning star" is not capitalized, but the Revelation 22:16 one is.  

They have to be different then, because of this.

Wrong.  The NIV also calls Jesus, "morning star" with all lower case letters:

And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 2 Peter 1:19,

I will also give him the morning star.  Revelation 2:28--

What about the NASB?  

The NASB changes "Lucifer" to "star of the morning" which is means the exact same thing as "morning star." They are gramatical equivalants.  The NASB, in effect, makes Satan Jesus. too!  This is much more subtle than the NIV, but it is still there.

Another thing about this confusion over the identity of "morning star" the Bible says that God is not the author of confusion (1 Corintians 14:33).  If God is not the author of confusion, then who is behind these new "Bible" versions? Who would want us to believe that Jesus and Satan are one?  

Source