Open Debate Challenge on My Defending the KJV as the Perfect Word for Today in English

[Grailhunter]

(19) Acts 8:37​

KJV: And Philip said, "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest." And he [the Eunuch] answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."​

Discrepancy: This verse is an addition to the scriptures….not found in earlier manuscripts.​

(20) Acts 9:5–6​

KJV: And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.
Discrepancy: The bolded part of this scripture is an addition and does not appear in the older manuscripts.

(21) Acts 15:34​

KJV: Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts and is worded differently between newer manuscript. The bolded area is a modification to the scripture and does not appear in older manuscript.

(22) Acts 13:42​

KJV: And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.​

NASB: As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath.
Discrepancy: A modification to the scripture, removing the names of Paul and Barnabas and changing the present and past tense and adding the Gentiles into the scripture. Not in older manuscripts.

(23) Acts 15:34​

KJV: Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts and is worded differently between newer manuscript.

(24) Acts 24:6–8​

KJV: Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, Commanding his accusers to come unto thee: by examining of whom thyself mayest take knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him.
Discrepancy: This verse has been completely reworded but why? The meaning was not changed.

(25) Acts 28:29​

KJV: And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.
Discrepany: This verse is an addition and does not appear in the older manuscripts.

(26) Romans 13:9
KJV: For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not bear false witness,” “You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
Discrepancy: Although “You shall not bear false witness” was part of the Commandments…it was not part of this verse….it was added.

(27) Romans 16:24
KJV: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
Discrepancy: This verse occurs twice in the KJV in this chapter; once as the conclusion to verse 20 and again as verse. But both are an addition to the scriptures not occurring in older manuscripts.

(28) Colossians 1:14
KJV: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Discrepancy: The KJV added the words “through his blood” to this scripture. Not in the earlier manuscripts.

(29) 1st Timothy 6:5
KJV: useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself.
Discrepancy: “From such withdraw yourself” the KJV added this to the scripture. Does not appear in earlier manuscripts.

(30) 1st Peter 1:22
KJV: Ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit.
Discrepancy: “through the Spirit” was added by the KJV. Does not appear in the earlier manuscripts.

(31) Revelation 5:14
KJV: And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.
Discrepancy: Should read; And the four living creatures kept saying, “Amen.” And the elders fell down and worshiped. Him who lives for the ages and the ages.

The words “And the four and twenty” where added to the scripture and it does not appear in the earlier manuscripts. Part of this is a mis-translation.

(32) Revelation 21:24
KJV: And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
Discrepancy: Should read; The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring glory and honor of the nations of them into it.

Ding ding ding! The KJV is not the only one that got this one wrong.

 

[Grailhunter]

The history of the Comma Johanneum Addition
1. The Comma Johanneum Addition as it is referred to, originated as a common literary explanation or formula for the Trinity. It first appeared in the 3rd century in some of the literature, not the Bible, which debated the oneness concepts of the Trinity. Even though this formula would become very popular, at the time, very few Church Fathers agreed with it.

At some point this short summary of the Trinity made its way into the margin notes of some of the Bibles that were written after the 5th century. Unlike other examples of popular margin notes that made their way into the scriptures, the Comma Johanneum found its way into the verses of the Bible by way of another avenue. After the 6th century, the Byzantines begain to recopy and retranslate the available Greek texts of the New Testament. At this point some of these copies became known as the “Textus Receptus.” It was in some of these that the formula was added and then later included in some of the Bibles. Most notably the King James Version, which relied heavily on these texts. As it happened the Comma Johanneum Addition was much more than a retranslation, or an addition, but rather a replacement of the original scriptures with a popular theological explanation for the Trinity. They kept the verse numbers in sequence so that it would not be as noticeable.

The scriptures involved are 1st John 5:7&8. The original scriptures read as follows... (Quoting 6 through 8, so it can be read in context)

“6. This is the one who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. 7. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8. And it is the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.”

This was replaced with what came to be called the Comma Johanneum Addition. Verses 7 and 8 are the added lines.

6: This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7: For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8: And there are three that bear witness in Earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

As one can see there is no chance that these are simply a different translation, but rather a removal of the scriptures and an insertion of a theological statement for an intended purpose. Still and it is important to note, that this corruption of the scriptures occurred centuries before the King James Version, the King James Version just adopted the corruption.

 

[Christian Soldier]

I did explain how it was false. Man of God is in context in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 when referring to how all Scripture is profitable (beneficial) for doctrine, reproof, and instruction in righteousness. You have not really refuted how Man of God is the context and is referring to every believer. You have not refuted to how this is in reference to ALL SCRIPTURE. You are rejecting the Word of God as being applicable to you by saying the letters of Timothy anre only for pastors, elders, and teachers. You are judging another for rejecting the Word when you are doing the very same thing because of your odd interpretation that has no clear basis or support in the text. You are merely leaping to conclusions and ignoring other verses. Your interpretation would not hold up in a court of law among normal English speaking people.

I also pointed out Colossians and Acts which also refer to the regular believer in general in how they are to learn or look at God’s Word in study. You seem to have just skipped over these points and act like I did not say anything. This was pointed out in my post #57.

As for running with the crowd:

Well, you are running with the crowd when it comes to Modern Scholarship or your siding with the Modern Bible Movement (Which is all about the money and not strictly charity alone). You cannot have members of a church read from the NIV without violating copyright law. You cannot create a Bible app from a Modern Version without paying huge fees to them. You have shoot your conscience when you fight for your Modern Bible when in reality many lose their faith because of them as a result of Textual Criticism that they learn in Bible school and or the doubt producing footnotes. You might be alright with not knowing what the Word of God precisely says, but others are not okay with that (seeing it is contradictory) and thereby they abandon the faith (Seeing God does not know how to keep His own words for us to trust them).

The problem with your understanding had nothing to do with all those unrelated scriptures. They are irrelevant, so you can't twist their meaning to fit your false doctrine.

You have demonstrated your inability to deal with a single verse of scripture, let alone running to list a bunch of unrelated scriptures. That just exposes you as being desperate and ignorant, because you refuse to deal with one verse, while you jump to try and misuse unrelated scriptures. Then you falsely accuse me of not believing Gods Word, you're just digging a deeper hole from which you can never climb out of.

You never answered my question regarding the word "worker", I asked if dumb sheep were workers (Shepherds) and you were dumbfounded and clueless so you just ignored the question hoping it would go away. This further exposes your false religious opinions.

Why do you falsely accuse me of not believing Gods Word, when I told you I live by every Word that proceeds from Gods mouth.

You don't even have the capacity to understand the difference between rejecting Gods Word and rejecting your interpretation of Gods Word. I never denied to the truth of any of those scriptures you listed but I reject your private interpretation of them because you have proven yourself unable to deal with a single verse of scripture, let alone a bunch of the.

Your opinion of the 900 modern versions of the English Bible, is born out of ignorance. You didn't find a single thig wrong with the modern versions. You just pleaded ignorance and rubbished them all without bringing a singe charge against the. Can you see how this exposes you as a false accuser, Satan is the accuser of the brethren, I don't know what has possessed you to emulate Him. I will pray for you, because I believe you have come under strong Demonic Delusion.

 

[Christian Soldier]

A SHORT LIST OF ERRORS, MODIFICATIONS, ADDITIONS THAT APPEAR IN THE KJV FOR THE NEW TESTAMENT ONLY … MANY MORE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT.

As a matter of perspective all of these discrepancies do not originate from the King James Version of the scriptures…many of them were adopted from the Jewish Vulgate Translation, the William Tyndale Bible and the Geneva Bible. At times the translators of the KJV played the Amplified Bible thing LOL where they would add words that they thought clarified the meaning of the verse….

(1) Matthew 9:13​

KJV: But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”
Discrepancy: The KJV added “to repentance”..ie come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”

(2) Matthew 17:21​

KJV: Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition and not found in earlier manuscripts.

(3) Matthew 18:11
KJV: For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition and not found in earlier manuscripts. But a longer version of this appears in Luke 19:10.

​

(4) Matthew 20:16​

KJV: …. for many be called, but few chosen.
Discrepancy: An addition and a duplication of Matthew 22:14 and not found in earlier manuscripts.

(5) Matthew 23:14​

KJV: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts. And is an expansion of similar verses in Mark and Luke.

(6) Mark 7:16
KJV: If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
Discrepancy: This verse is nearly identical with verses 4:9 and 4:23. But this verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts.

(7) Mark 9:44 - 46​

KJV: Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. .. (Both verses identical to each other, and to 9:48, which is still in the main text)
Discrepancy: Both verses 44 and 46 are duplications of verse 48. These verses are additions and not found in earlier manuscripts.

(8) Mark 11:26​

KJV: But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.
Discrepancy: This verse is very similar to Matthew 6:15 but this verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts.

(9) Mark 15:28​

KJV: And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, "And he was numbered with the transgressors."
Discrepancy: This verse is similar to Luke 22:37. But this verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts. It does not appear in any manuscript until the 6th century.

(10) Mark 16: 9-20

KJV Eleven verses added to the ending of the Gospel of mark.
Discrepancy: The KJV adds eleven verses to the end of the Gospel of Mark. Not found in earlier manuscripts.

(11) Luke 4:4
KJV: And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
Discrepancy: The KJV added the words; but by every word of God.

(12) 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.
NASB: Jesus replied to him, “It is written: ‘YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD AND SERVE HIM ONLY.’”
Discrepancy: The KJV reworded this verse and added the phrase “Get thee behind me, Satan:”

Discrepancy: This is an addition and a reworking of the scriptures. Also get behind me, Satan, does not appear in the earlier manuscripts.

(13) Luke 17:36
KJV: Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.
Discrepancy: This verse is obviously a rewording of Matthew 24:40. This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts.

(14) Luke 23:17​

KJV: For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.
Discrepancy: The same verse or a very similar verse appears in Matthew 27:15 and Mark 15:6. But in Luke they are additions. Not appearing in older manuscripts.

(15) Luke 24:40
KJV: And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and his feet.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition and does not occur in older manuscripts.

(16) 1 John 5:7–8
The infamous Comma johannine Addition

KJV: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
Discrepancy: This is a well known reworking of the scriptures to support a theological belief of the time period.

(17) John 8:1-11​

KJV: The story of the Adulterous Woman brought before Christ​

Discrepancy: This is an addition and no part of it appears in older manuscripts.​

​

(18) The words witch witchcraft and bewitched in the KJV​

KJV​

Exodus 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live. Sorceress here pointed directly women.​

Deuteronomy 18:10 The phrase here is practice magic.​

1st Samuel 15:23 The word here is divination.​

2nd Kings 9:22 The word here is sorcery.​

2nd Chronicles 33:6 This verse is reworded from the original. The words here are sorcery and divination and mediums….the words wizards, enchantment, and familiar spirits were added.​

Acts 8:9 The word here is amaze or astonish, not bewitched.​

Acts 8:11 The word here also is amaze or astonish, not bewitched.​

Galatians 3:1 Now this one is interesting, It appears once in the scriptures. Scholars do not agree on its use here or its meaning. Just that bewitched is not in the scriptures…. something like….cast a spell or enchanted.​

​

Galatians 5:20 The word here is socery.​

Discrepancies: The word witch, witchcraft, and bewitched cannot be in the scriptures because the words did not exist at that time. These insertions contributed to the horrible torture and deaths of millions. The word witch has it own mean(s) and imagery and superstitions associated with them, that are not biblical. The atrocities of the Church, both Catholic and Protestants that were associated with the witch-hunts and inquisitions are so horrible that we cannot discuss them on this forum. Most of the women and men that died were killed for their property, because they would charge them for the torture and executions. Most of the inquisitions were politically motivated or they were killing people of other faiths, not necessity none Christians. The word witch is mostly associated with women. The Catholic Church produced a book called the Malleus Maleficarum …Latin for the Hammer of Witches which was an instruction manual on how to locate and torture and execute witches, mostly female. A lot if the information in the Malleus Maleficarum was a collection of superstitions which eventually made its way into Christianity. First step, strip them and inspect them.​

Now in perspective, there are witches….mostly nature witches and satanic witches. The new age beliefs dabble in this. I know Satan witches exist because I have had run in’s with them.​

(18) John 9:4​

KJV: I must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is day; the night is coming when no one can work.​

Discrepancy: Should be; We must work the works of Him who sent Me….​

​

Continued…​

What you failed to realize is the truth of the mater.

All of those additional text in the list were added after the discovery of many manuscripts dating back to the second century. So when the they found the complete manuscripts, they were able to add them to the Bible and that made it complete. So it was a very good thing, to add all those missing parts to make the Bible complete.

I don't get these trouble makers, why do they have to gain by making false accusations. All can think of is, they are working for the enemy (Satan) to cause division in the Church. Satan has always been a master of deception, and there's no shortage of people willing to serve Him.

 

[Grailhunter]

What you failed to realize is the truth of the mater.

All of those additional text in the list were added after the discovery of many manuscripts dating back to the second century. So when the they found the complete manuscripts, they were able to add them to the Bible and that made it complete. So it was a very good thing, to add all those missing parts to make the Bible complete.

I don't get these trouble makers, why do they have to gain by making false accusations. All can think of is, they are working for the enemy (Satan) to cause division in the Church. Satan has always been a master of deception, and there's no shortage of people willing to serve Him.

None of what you said is true.
I missed nothing.
The verses I pointed out that were not in any of the older manuscripts stands as facts.

The versus in the newer manuscripts were inserted, as in made up out of thin air and added to the newer manuscript and the KJV included them.

As far as those involved with the KJV most of these errors were not malicious attempts to deceive. At that time they were using inaccurate references. What else could they do? The sin or wrong was for those that added or modified versus in the newer manuscripts. Strong feelings about what should be there so they added them….or popular stories like the adulterous woman brought before Christ, some one chose to add it.

It is not like I do not like the KJV. I have quite the collection. I collect old KJV Bibles as far back as the 1800’s. Hoping to find some of the valuable Bibles that are early misprints….like the Adulterers Bible, the Vinegar Bible, the Wife Haters Bible, and the Murmurs Bible.

The KJV reads like scriptures set to poetry and sounds great when read in public…like ceremonies. And some of the family and table top editions are beautifully illustrated. But as far as serious study of the scriptures, that is not the Bible to use.

 

[Christian Soldier]

None of what you said is true.
I missed nothing.
The verses I pointed out that were not in any of the older manuscripts stands as facts.

The versus in the newer manuscripts were inserted, as in made up out of thin air and added to the newer manuscript and the KJV included them.

As far as those involved with the KJV most of these errors were not malicious attempts to deceive. At that time they were using inaccurate references. What else could they do? The sin or wrong was for those that added or modified versus in the newer manuscripts. Strong feelings about what should be there so they added them….or popular stories like the adulterous woman brought before Christ, some one chose to add it.

It is not like I do not like the KJV. I have quite the collection. I collect old KJV Bibles as far back as the 1800’s. Hoping to find some of the valuable Bibles that are early misprints….like the Adulterers Bible, the Vinegar Bible, the Wife Haters Bible, and the Murmurs Bible.

The KJV reads like scriptures set to poetry and sounds great when read in public…like ceremonies. And some of the family and table top editions are beautifully illustrated. But as far as serious study of the scriptures, that is not the Bible to use.

None of what you said it true, it's nothing more than your own private opinion.

The fact is, the modern versions are far more accurate and more complete. Nothing was plucked out of thin air and added, that's a flat out lie and you know it is.

The additions came from the oldest Greek manuscripts in existence, they were only discovered in 1850 and then they were used to revise the old incomplete inferior version.
You're trying to suggest that the old incomplete inferior version was better and that's a silly suggestion, it shows how little you know about the subject.

It's not wise to ignore new information for the sake of pride, the new information exposed the errors of the old and corrected them. I know it hard to accept correction but the bible says "a fool hates to be corrected, but a wise man loves you for it"

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The problem with your understanding had nothing to do with all those unrelated scriptures. They are irrelevant, so you can't twist their meaning to fit your false doctrine.

This s not an explanation of the verses I brought up.

Let’s go over the big ones I mentioned.

Acts 17:11
"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

Colossians 3:16
"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord."

2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."

Okay, so the Bereans were more noble because they searched the Scriptures to see whether the spoken word of God by Paul was true or not. Nothing is said that these were pastors, teachers, or elders only. They were just Berean believers. So obviously if somebody searches the Scriptures to see if what another says is in line with the Word of God, then it takes some form of studying to accomplish that task.

Then there is Colossians 3:16. We are to let the word of Christ dwell in us richly in all wisdom. This again is accomplished if we study the Word of God (Scripture), which is the Bible. This is talking to all believers because Paul is addressing the church at Colossae. Nothing is said that this is only to the leaders of that church alone.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 is also another significant piece of Scripture that weighs in heavily here. As I said before, this passage is stating that ALL Scripture is profitable (beneficial) for doctrine, reproof, and instruction in righteousness so that the man of God may be perfect unto every good work. The man of God. That is who it is referring to here and not just elders, teachers, and pastors.

So unless you refute these points I brought up, you are simply in error and going lone wolf.

You have demonstrated your inability to deal with a single verse of scripture, let alone running to list a bunch of unrelated scriptures. That just exposes you as being desperate and ignorant, because you refuse to deal with one verse, while you jump to try and misuse unrelated scriptures.

One thing at a time. I was addressing the beginning of your post because it gets to the heart of the matter involving your erroneous view on the letters of Timothy.

Then you falsely accuse me of not believing Gods Word, you're just digging a deeper hole from which you can never climb out of.

Right, because there is nothing in the letters of Timothy that specifically says it is written only for the benefit of Timothy, elders, and teachers only. That is a false narrative that has crawled into your brain and has not allowed you to apply these letters to your own life.

You never answered my question regarding the word "worker", I asked if dumb sheep were workers (Shepherds) and you were dumbfounded and clueless so you just ignored the question hoping it would go away. This further exposes your false religious opinions.

Analogies only go so far in the Bible. Does Jesus have hinges and a lock on him seeing He is called the door? We are said to be born again but does that mean we have a spiritual mother and we had to have an operation done whereby the umbilical cord was cut by a doctor? We are called the Bride of Christ. Does that make us females? Surely not. It is a metaphor or loose analogy.

Anyway, believers of Jesus are workers according to the Bible.

1. We are labourers together with God (1 Corinthians 3:9).
2. Servants of righteousness (Romans 6:18).
3. We are workers together with God (2 Corinthians 6:1).
4. Builders (1 Corinthians 3:10-15).
5. Fishers of men (Matthew 4:19).

Why do you falsely accuse me of not believing Gods Word, when I told you I live by every Word that proceeds from Gods mouth.

You don't even have the capacity to understand the difference between rejecting Gods Word and rejecting your interpretation of Gods Word. I never denied to the truth of any of those scriptures you listed but I reject your private interpretation of them because you have proven yourself unable to deal with a single verse of scripture, let alone a bunch of the.

Again, you have not proven to me by the words of the Bible itself that the letters of Paul to Timothy are only for pastors, elders, and teachers. Nothing is said in these letters that it was only for these individuals. You have not made any biblical case for this false interpretation or view on the letters of Paul to Timothy.

Your opinion of the 900 modern versions of the English Bible, is born out of ignorance. You didn't find a single thig wrong with the modern versions. You just pleaded ignorance and rubbished them all without bringing a singe charge against the. Can you see how this exposes you as a false accuser, Satan is the accuser of the brethren, I don't know what has possessed you to emulate Him. I will pray for you, because I believe you have come under strong Demonic Delusion.

Let the unbiased reader check out the truth for themselves here:

#1. Changed Doctrines in Modern Bibles (Part 1).
#2. Changed Doctrines in Modern Bibles (Part 2).
#3. New Age Teachings in Modern Bibles
#4. Fourteen Changes in Modern Bibles that Favor the Catholic Church (See Page 21 of this PDF).

This is just the tip of the iceberg, as well.
I have more than this in my KJV write-up.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The history of the Comma Johanneum Addition
1. The Comma Johanneum Addition as it is referred to, originated as a common literary explanation or formula for the Trinity. It first appeared in the 3rd century in some of the literature, not the Bible, which debated the oneness concepts of the Trinity. Even though this formula would become very popular, at the time, very few Church Fathers agreed with it.

This is just your false narrative of history.
No documents in history actually confirms your claim that the Comma was not in the Holy Scriptures.
We know it is in the Scriptures because there are two grammar errors in the text if the Comma is not present (To learn more, see the PDF included at the end of this post).

At some point this short summary of the Trinity made its way into the margin notes of some of the Bibles that were written after the 5th century. Unlike other examples of popular margin notes that made their way into the scriptures, the Comma Johanneum found its way into the verses of the Bible by way of another avenue. After the 6th century, the Byzantines begain to recopy and retranslate the available Greek texts of the New Testament. At this point some of these copies became known as the “Textus Receptus.” It was in some of these that the formula was added and then later included in some of the Bibles. Most notably the King James Version, which relied heavily on these texts. As it happened the Comma Johanneum Addition was much more than a retranslation, or an addition, but rather a replacement of the original scriptures with a popular theological explanation for the Trinity. They kept the verse numbers in sequence so that it would not be as noticeable.

This is the scholarly fairy tale that is told often enough, but it simply is not the case. Even the context demands that it must be there, otherwise it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Then again, Critical Text advocates do not always take context under consideration when dealing with such verses. The real reason is that they have Vaticanus and Sinaiticus primacy.

The scriptures involved are 1st John 5:7&8. The original scriptures read as follows... (Quoting 6 through 8, so it can be read in context)

“6. This is the one who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. 7. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is the truth. 8. And it is the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.”

This was replaced with what came to be called the Comma Johanneum Addition. Verses 7 and 8 are the added lines.

6: This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 7: For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8: And there are three that bear witness in Earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

The Geneva Bible was the first Bible to have Bible verses. It had the Comma in 1 John 5:7.
Only when the Revised Version came out did they deceptively move the last sentence in verse 6 to replace where the Comma normally goes in verse 7. Then, a few years later, Modern Bibles started to reword a few words in verse 8 and move that to replace the Comma in verse 7. So they employed deception. Instead of just keeping the verse blank, they moved the words in the verses to not alert the new reader to the missing words for verse 7 (that obviously teaches a major truth about God’s nature).

Folks should check out my 4 page PDF here on a Defense of the Comma.
The YouTube videos are very informative.
Note: Simply click on the image below to view.



Note: This write-up is a work in progress and so some links have not been added yet. But the YouTube videos in this PDF are really informative if you are a truth seeker. If you simply do not like the Trinity in the Bible and you don’t care for the evidence, then you can simply take the blue pill and believe whatever you want to believe.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

(19) Acts 8:37​

KJV: And Philip said, "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest." And he [the Eunuch] answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."​

Discrepancy: This verse is an addition to the scriptures….not found in earlier manuscripts.​

(20) Acts 9:5–6​

KJV: And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.
Discrepancy: The bolded part of this scripture is an addition and does not appear in the older manuscripts.

(21) Acts 15:34​

KJV: Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts and is worded differently between newer manuscript. The bolded area is a modification to the scripture and does not appear in older manuscript.

(22) Acts 13:42​

KJV: And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.​

NASB: As Paul and Barnabas were going out, the people kept begging that these things might be spoken to them the next Sabbath.
Discrepancy: A modification to the scripture, removing the names of Paul and Barnabas and changing the present and past tense and adding the Gentiles into the scripture. Not in older manuscripts.

(23) Acts 15:34​

KJV: Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.
Discrepancy: This verse is an addition….not found in earlier manuscripts and is worded differently between newer manuscript.

(24) Acts 24:6–8​

KJV: Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law. But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands, Commanding his accusers to come unto thee: by examining of whom thyself mayest take knowledge of all these things, whereof we accuse him.
Discrepancy: This verse has been completely reworded but why? The meaning was not changed.

(25) Acts 28:29​

KJV: And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.
Discrepany: This verse is an addition and does not appear in the older manuscripts.

(26) Romans 13:9
KJV: For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery,” “You shall not murder,” “You shall not steal,” “You shall not bear false witness,” “You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, are all summed up in this saying, namely, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”
Discrepancy: Although “You shall not bear false witness” was part of the Commandments…it was not part of this verse….it was added.

(27) Romans 16:24
KJV: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
Discrepancy: This verse occurs twice in the KJV in this chapter; once as the conclusion to verse 20 and again as verse. But both are an addition to the scriptures not occurring in older manuscripts.

(28) Colossians 1:14
KJV: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Discrepancy: The KJV added the words “through his blood” to this scripture. Not in the earlier manuscripts.

(29) 1st Timothy 6:5
KJV: useless wranglings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain. From such withdraw yourself.
Discrepancy: “From such withdraw yourself” the KJV added this to the scripture. Does not appear in earlier manuscripts.

(30) 1st Peter 1:22
KJV: Ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit.
Discrepancy: “through the Spirit” was added by the KJV. Does not appear in the earlier manuscripts.

(31) Revelation 5:14
KJV: And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.
Discrepancy: Should read; And the four living creatures kept saying, “Amen.” And the elders fell down and worshiped. Him who lives for the ages and the ages.

The words “And the four and twenty” where added to the scripture and it does not appear in the earlier manuscripts. Part of this is a mis-translation.

(32) Revelation 21:24
KJV: And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
Discrepancy: Should read; The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring glory and honor of the nations of them into it.

Ding ding ding! The KJV is not the only one that got this one wrong.

The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are corrupt manuscripts. They disagree with each other in thousand of places in the gospels alone. They have corrections all over Vaticanus. In fact, in the Vaticanus, one scribe says to another, “fool, and knave, keep the old reading.” Sinaiticus was found at the fake Sinai location (St. Catherines). Vaticanus was in the Vatican library. It is no wonder that the Revised Version teaches Catholic ideas. It is even more strange that these Catholic ideas grow in later Modern Bibles. Then there is the Liberalism, Unitarianism, and Spiritism in the Modern Bible Movement, as well. Modern Bibles is a billion dollar industry and you have to pay big money if you want to do a Bible app with a popular Modern Bible. You cannot dodge all of this darkness. Well, I think cognitive dissonance does set in on this topic because folks like the idea of the Bible being like silly putty in their hands. People like shape shifter Bibles or Bibles that have errors in them. They get to become the real authority when they find an error in God’s Word.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Hi brother-all good here and I find this very interesting.

The Waldenses, also known as the Waldensians, were a Christian movement that emerged in the 12th century in the region that is now part of France and Italy. They sought to adhere closely to the teachings of the Bible and opposed certain practices and doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church at that time. One significant aspect of their faith practice was the use of the Bible in the vernacular, which was uncommon in medieval Europe, where Latin was predominantly used for Scripture.

The Waldensian Bible (Vetus Latina)
The term "Vetus Latina" refers to the "Old Latin" versions of the Bible, which predate the Vulgate, the Latin translation completed by St. Jerome in the late 4th century. The Vetus Latina is not a single translation but rather a collection of various Latin translations of the Bible used by Christian communities before the Vulgate became widely adopted.

Key Points about the Waldensian Bible:
Translation: The Waldensian Bible was an early vernacular translation based on the Vetus Latina manuscripts. This translation was in the Romance languages spoken by the Waldenses, specifically in their regions, likely in Occitan (the language of southern France) or other regional dialects.

Usage: The Waldenses highly valued Scripture and sought to make it accessible to laypeople. They believed in personal piety and the authority of the Bible over church traditions and hierarchy. This led them to translate and distribute the Bible in the vernacular, ensuring that ordinary people could read and understand it.

Preservation and Impact: The Waldensian Bible translations played a crucial role in the preservation and dissemination of biblical texts in vernacular languages during a time when the Roman Catholic Church restricted access to the Scriptures in languages other than Latin. Their commitment to scriptural accessibility influenced later movements, including the Protestant Reformation.

Waldensian Bible and the Reformation
The Waldensians were precursors to the Reformation in their emphasis on returning to the Bible as the sole authority for faith and practice. Their use of vernacular translations prefigured the Reformation's push for translating the Bible into common languages, as seen with figures like Martin Luther and William Tyndale.

Conclusion
The Waldensian Bible, based on the Vetus Latina manuscripts, represents an early effort to make the Scriptures accessible to ordinary people in their own languages. This movement predated and influenced the broader push for vernacular translations that became a hallmark of the Protestant Reformation. The Waldenses' dedication to the Bible and its teachings underscores the enduring importance of scriptural access and understanding in the Christian faith.


Now for the big question--can we find a Vetus Latina in English? I use my KJV Bible for studying and doing searches such as on the Godhead, occurring only 3x.
A lot of information here brother and appreciate the hard work.
Johann.

“The Reformers held that the Waldensian Church was formed about 120 A.D., from which date on,
they passed down from father to son the teachings they received from the apostles. The Latin Bible,
the Italic, was translated from the Greek not later than 157 A.D. We are indebted to Beza, the
renowned associate of Calvin, for the statement that the Italic Church dates from 120 A.D. From the
illustrious group of scholars which gathered round Beza, 1590 A.D., we may understand how the
Received Text was the bond of union between great historic churches. …”

Source:
(See page 4):

https://d3hgrlq6yacptf.cloudfront.net/5f4766d57c3ad/content/pages/documents/1430943497.pdf

 

[Grailhunter]

None of what you said it true, it's nothing more than your own private opinion.

The fact is, the modern versions are far more accurate and more complete. Nothing was plucked out of thin air and added, that's a flat out lie and you know it is.

The additions came from the oldest Greek manuscripts in existence, they were only discovered in 1850 and then they were used to revise the old incomplete inferior version.
You're trying to suggest that the old incomplete inferior version was better and that's a silly suggestion, it shows how little you know about the subject.

It's not wise to ignore new information for the sake of pride, the new information exposed the errors of the old and corrected them. I know it hard to accept correction but the bible says "a fool hates to be corrected, but a wise man loves you for it"

Again you are talking junk.

The people here can check it out for themselves.

Lies do not hold up to the truth.

A religion based on denial......is a false religion. The truth is better.

 

[Grailhunter]

This is just your false narrative of history.
No documents in history actually confirms your claim that the Comma was not in the Holy Scriptures.
We know it is in the Scriptures because there are two grammar errors in the text if the Comma is not present (To learn more, see the PDF included at the end of this post).


This is the scholarly fairy tale that is told often enough, but it simply is not the case. Even the context demands that it must be there, otherwise it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. Then again, Critical Text advocates do not always take context under consideration when dealing with such verses. The real reason is that they have Vaticanus and Sinaiticus primacy.


The Geneva Bible was the first Bible to have Bible verses. It had the Comma in 1 John 5:7.
Only when the Revised Version came out did they deceptively move the last sentence in verse 6 to replace where the Comma normally goes in verse 7. Then, a few years later, Modern Bibles started to reword a few words in verse 8 and move that to replace the Comma in verse 7. So they employed deception. Instead of just keeping the verse blank, they moved the words in the verses to not alert the new reader to the missing words for verse 7 (that obviously teaches a major truth about God’s nature).

Folks should check out my 4 page PDF here on a Defense of the Comma.
The YouTube videos are very informative.
Note: Simply click on the image below to view.



Note: This write-up is a work in progress and so some links have not been added yet. But the YouTube videos in this PDF are really informative if you are a truth seeker. If you simply do not like the Trinity in the Bible and you don’t care for the evidence, then you can simply take the blue pill and believe whatever you want to believe.

I call my ministry the Johnny Appleseed of Truth. I am an educated Theologian, educated in 5 countries. As a Theologian I do not have a denomination to defend. I am only interested in the Truth and I do not care what the Truth is.

The neat thing is that the Truth has power and false beliefs and lies cannot stand up to Truth.

This topic is a good example…..I do not even have to debate it. I can just say, don’t believe me and don’t believe him….go look it up for yourselves. I posted a long list of scriptures, go look them up and you will know the truth. People that say what is not true, know they are lying and preying on the unknowledgeable and are fighting a losing battle because the Truth will put them to shame.

A person that is lying to you will never tell you to go look it up for yourself …..instead they will spew a log dialog of confusion.

 

[Grailhunter]

The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are corrupt manuscripts. They disagree with each other in thousand of places in the gospels alone. They have corrections all over Vaticanus. In fact, in the Vaticanus, one scribe says to another, “fool, and knave, keep the old reading.” Sinaiticus was found at the fake Sinai location (St. Catherines). Vaticanus was in the Vatican library. It is no wonder that the Revised Version teaches Catholic ideas. It is even more strange that these Catholic ideas grow in later Modern Bibles. Then there is the Liberalism, Unitarianism, and Spiritism in the Modern Bible Movement, as well. Modern Bibles is a billion dollar industry and you have to pay big money if you want to do a Bible app with a popular Modern Bible. You cannot dodge all of this darkness. Well, I think cognitive dissonance does set in on this topic because folks like the idea of the Bible being like silly putty in their hands. People like shape shifter Bibles or Bibles that have errors in them. They get to become the real authority when they find an error in God’s Word.

I listed the error.....argue with the facts.

 

[Christian Soldier]

This s not an explanation of the verses I brought up.

Let’s go over the big ones I mentioned.

Acts 17:11
"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

Colossians 3:16
"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord."

2 Timothy 3:16-17
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."

Okay, so the Bereans were more noble because they searched the Scriptures to see whether the spoken word of God by Paul was true or not. Nothing is said that these were pastors, teachers, or elders only. They were just Berean believers. So obviously if somebody searches the Scriptures to see if what another says is in line with the Word of God, then it takes some form of studying to accomplish that task.

Then there is Colossians 3:16. We are to let the word of Christ dwell in us richly in all wisdom. This again is accomplished if we study the Word of God (Scripture), which is the Bible. This is talking to all believers because Paul is addressing the church at Colossae. Nothing is said that this is only to the leaders of that church alone.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 is also another significant piece of Scripture that weighs in heavily here. As I said before, this passage is stating that ALL Scripture is profitable (beneficial) for doctrine, reproof, and instruction in righteousness so that the man of God may be perfect unto every good work. The man of God. That is who it is referring to here and not just elders, teachers, and pastors.

So unless you refute these points I brought up, you are simply in error and going lone wolf.


One thing at a time. I was addressing the beginning of your post because it gets to the heart of the matter involving your erroneous view on the letters of Timothy.


Right, because there is nothing in the letters of Timothy that specifically says it is written only for the benefit of Timothy, elders, and teachers only. That is a false narrative that has crawled into your brain and has not allowed you to apply these letters to your own life.


Analogies only go so far in the Bible. Does Jesus have hinges and a lock on him seeing He is called the door? We are said to be born again but does that mean we have a spiritual mother and we had to have an operation done whereby the umbilical cord was cut by a doctor? We are called the Bride of Christ. Does that make us females? Surely not. It is a metaphor or loose analogy.

Anyway, believers of Jesus are workers according to the Bible.

1. We are labourers together with God (1 Corinthians 3:9).
2. Servants of righteousness (Romans 6:18).
3. We are workers together with God (2 Corinthians 6:1).
4. Builders (1 Corinthians 3:10-15).
5. Fishers of men (Matthew 4:19).


Again, you have not proven to me by the words of the Bible itself that the letters of Paul to Timothy are only for pastors, elders, and teachers. Nothing is said in these letters that it was only for these individuals. You have not made any biblical case for this false interpretation or view on the letters of Paul to Timothy.


Let the unbiased reader check out the truth for themselves here:

#1. Changed Doctrines in Modern Bibles (Part 1).
#2. Changed Doctrines in Modern Bibles (Part 2).
#3. New Age Teachings in Modern Bibles
#4. Fourteen Changes in Modern Bibles that Favor the Catholic Church (See Page 21 of this PDF).

This is just the tip of the iceberg, as well.
I have more than this in my KJV write-up.

I'm not interested in any of those verses, because you're abusing them to deflect from my original charge against you.

You have not answered what the word "worker" means in the context of 2 Tim 2:15

There's no point in unloading a truck load of unrelated verses and hope they muddy thew water enough for you to escape the charge.

To counter the false teachers who were misapplying and undermining the truth of God’s Word, the apostle Paul urged Timothy to work hard and study diligently to be sure that he had God’s approval when handling the Scriptures: “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15).

Nobody cares if a Sheep doesn't rightly divide the word of God, it's no skin of anybody's nose, so if 2 Tim 2:15 was meant for Timothy as he was about to become a paid preacher/worker. An ordinary dumb Sheep is not a worker, yes even Sheep are encouraged to study the scriptures as all those verses you listed
confirm, but this is not what 2 Tim 2:15 is talking about. It was directed to Timothy and not a general exhortation to everyone including dumb Sheep.

We have been stuck on one verse for so long and the penny still hasn't dropped for you. Since when have dumb Sheep been referred to as workers. My Shepherd encourages bible study in groups, with at least one Shepherd present in every group of dumb Sheep, otherwise the dumb sheep will all come away with different interpretations.

The bible doesn't spell things out everything in the infantile ABC format, which you demand. If you don't have the gift of discernment (only given to Shepherds) and not dumb Sheep, you will never divide Gods Word rightly. Your foolish pride will always deceive you.

Those lists you attached about the various bible versions, are one mans opinion. Sadly he failed to consider the most important factors, (like the discovery of 2nd century Greek Manuscripts) in 1850, into account, so I dismiss him because I don't believe what ignorant people write.

 

[Rockerduck]

I'll take the 300 yrs old, never updated KJB over the constantly updating modern bibles. If you base your ministry on the KJB, your ministry will be constant. If you based it on the 1984 NIV, well, you know what happened.

 

[St. SteVen]

I would never commit spiritual fornication with anyone who holds to false unbiblical doctrine.

But you would commit spiritual fornication with anyone who holds to your false unbiblical doctrine? - LOL

Is your church service online?

[

 

[Johann]

“The Reformers held that the Waldensian Church was formed about 120 A.D., from which date on,
they passed down from father to son the teachings they received from the apostles. The Latin Bible,
the Italic, was translated from the Greek not later than 157 A.D. We are indebted to Beza, the
renowned associate of Calvin, for the statement that the Italic Church dates from 120 A.D. From the
illustrious group of scholars which gathered round Beza, 1590 A.D., we may understand how the
Received Text was the bond of union between great historic churches. …”

Source:
(See page 4):

https://d3hgrlq6yacptf.cloudfront.net/5f4766d57c3ad/content/pages/documents/1430943497.pdf

Excellent, excellent work here brother and have bookmarked the links provided and may our Lord Christ Jesus richly bless you in your endeavors to rightly divide the word of truth.

When you study brother, what dictionaries or sources are you using and on commentaries, which one would you recommend?

--and I had to smile when I read this!

Another tactic of the "Greekmongers" is to reveal "shades of meaning of the original
Greek text" or "nuggets" which are "impossible" to find in the English text. The
quintessential passage to "prove" this is John 21:15-17 where they contrast one
Greek word for "love" with another Greek word. The game here is they claim
the Greek word "agapao" (#25) means a deep, selfless, divine love while the term
"phileo" (#5368) refers to a weaker friendly or affectionate type of love. The Greeklovers" build a dramatic and "powerful" message contrasting these two (self-defined)
Greek terms, "enlightening" the ignorant, common believer of their grasp of the
"original text." There is only one problem in their elaborate exposition, it is based on
nothing but pure speculation!
Here is how it works. First here is John 21:15-17:
15 "So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon,
son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him,
Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed
my lambs.
16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas,
lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord: thou knowest that I
love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest
thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third
time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest
all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him,
Feed my sheep."
After reading the passage the "scholar" then identifies the difference in the Greek
words for "love" and then defines these two terms as mentioned above (almost
always referring to something he read or heard, not to personal study). [Often the
entire basis for this "exposition" is a small commentary or radio "scholar," the
pseudo scholar simply believes their contention without checking it out and then
uses the new found "truth" himself. ] His delivery goes something like this:
"Once we get to John 21:15 the constraints of the English language
unfortunately conceal a great lesson from our Lord. We must consult the
original Greek text to realize the full meaning of this bountiful passage. In
verse 15 the Lord actually asks Peter,
"Peter ... lovest ("agape") thou me. (With a deep, intimate, selfless love)
more than these" (vs. 15)?
Then Peter responds, "Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love ("phileo")
thee." (With a casual, friendly type of love.)
The Greek "expert" then points out that the Lord, not receiving the answer
that He desires, asks again.
"Simon, son of Jonas, lovest ("agape") thou me" (vs. 16)?
Peter, it is then pointed out, is unwilling to commit himself to such a deep
relationship so he responds again.
"Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love ("phileo") thee."
At this point the "Greek expert" points out that a saddened Saviour gives in
to Peter's lack of commitment and changes His own choice of Greek words
to "phileo," questioning even Peter's casual "devotion."
"Simon, son of Jonas, lovest ("phileo") thou me" (vs. 17)?
This sudden change supposedly shocks Peter into seeing his own spiritual
infidelity to the Lord. Thus, saddened he answers. "... thou knowest that
I love ("phileo") thee."
Our false teacher then points out to his audience that there is no way to
attain such depth of meaning from this passage using only the feeble
English. Only the "wonderful Greek" can provide such insight.
Now, after having been "enlightened," lets examine these lofty claims in light of the
Scriptures.
"Phileo," supposedly the weaker "love," is found several times in the gospel of John.
If it only refers to "affection" or a "fondness" type of love as the Greek-junkies claim,
then surely it is used as such elsewhere, isn't it? Let's see. Its first use is in John 5:20,
"For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself
doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may
marvel.

 

[Johann]

I listed the error.....argue with the facts.

I believe @Bible Highlighter is doing just that!

 

[St. SteVen]

The only way Christians can have unity and fellowship, is if they both believe in the same God. But the problem is, most Christians invent a god in their head and idolize it.

That saw cuts both ways.
I don't believe in the god you have created.
A god that would burn people in hell for eternity with no hope of escape. That's what your Bible tells you, right?

]

 

[St. SteVen]

If you base your ministry on the KJB, your ministry will be constant.

Constant? Do you mean in constant decline?

If you based it on the 1984 NIV, well, you know what happened.

Tell us what you think happened. Thanks.

[