9,900 changes

[placebofactor]

Check it out for yourselves. Today’s modern Bible translators rejected many verses in the Received Text of the K.J.B. In most modern Bibles, more than 9900 Greek words have been added, subtracted, or changed from the words of the K.J.B. That’s more than 15 words per page or 7% of the total 140,521 words of the New Testament. Also, there are approximately 1950 omissions, 467 additions, and 3100 other changes, plus 4300 more words, a total of 9,900 + changes in the New Testament.

Following are important verses in the K.J.V., that are not found in the N.W.T. N.I.V. N.A.S.V. CSV., and others. These Bibles use the so-called oldest manuscripts, the A. and B. I am not passing judgment, only presenting information to those who may not be aware of these changes. Each of you may judge for yourselves.

K.J.V. published 1611.
N.I.V. published, 1973.
N.W.T., 1961.
R.S.V. N.T. copyright 1946. O.T. section copyright, 1952.
N.A.S.V. copywrite, 1971.
We can see that most modern Bibles are only recent publications, their foundations are founded on the A. and B. manuscripts. Over the past 200 years, they have passed through many hands. They are claimed to be superior, but they differ in many verses even though they use the same manuscripts.

An O.T. prophesy in Mark 15:28 is quoted from Isaiah 53:12.

K.J.V. Mark 15:28. "And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, and he was numbered with the transgressors."

N.W.T. and N.I.V. and others removed the verse but left the # 28 in.

A portion of the verse in Isaiah 66:24, has been left out.
K.J.V. Isaiah 66:24, "For the worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched." This verse is quoted twice in Mark 9:44 and 46.

N.W.T. and N.I.V. have removed the verse but left the numbers 44 and 46 in. These verses support and witness to the doctrine of eternal damnation in the fires of hell.

K.J.V. John 5:3, "In these lay a great multitude of impotent (sick) folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water."
.
N.W.T., N.I.V., and others have removed, "Waiting for the moving of the water."

K.J.B. John 5:4, “For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.”

N.W.T., N.I.V., and others have removed the whole verse.

Why is this important? The people who were blind, paralyzed, or lame believed that an angel came and stirred it, and the first to go into the water would be healed. Archeologists have discovered this pool in Bethesda.

John 5:5, tells the story of a man who had no one to help him get into the pool, Jesus intervenes, and the man is healed.

See how the corrupted manuscripts like the A. and B. can confuse a verse.
K.J.B. John 1:14, “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.”

N.W.T. John 1:14, “So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we have a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father; and he was full of undeserved kindness and truth.”

What caught my eye is the phrase, "son from a father" son both in lowercase. Are they implying Jesus is from Joseph, not “The Father” from heaven? I would like a Witness to clarify what they are implying.

Changed from “grace and truth” to "kindness and truth.”

Now the N.I.V. writes John 1:14, “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.”
Only begotten changed to “One and Only.” So the N.W.T. and the N.I.V. use the same manuscripts but have different ideas concerning Jesus. Can it be because of the 9,900 changes made in the original document have caused this confusion?

[servant1]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #2]



Yes the New world translation is correct.

[Base12]

If I wanted to create a new translation, I would constantly have to avoid copyright violations.

Thus, in order to create a new translation, I would have to change so many words that I would most likely end up with something that would have a lot of mistakes and contradictions in it.

This is one of the major issues I see with the current batch of translations. It is all about selling books and making money.

[historia]

If I wanted to create a new translation, I would constantly have to avoid copyright violations.

Thus, in order to create a new translation, I would have to change so many words that I would most likely end up with something that would have a lot of mistakes and contradictions in it.

What you're describing here sounds more like revising an existing English translation than creating a truly new translation of the Bible from the original languages. If your goal was to create a new translation from scratch, it is unlikely you will produce one identical to existing translations.

This is one of the major issues I see with the current batch of translations. It is all about selling books and making money.

This is certainly true. We don't need anywhere near the number of English translations that exist. And several of the newer translations appear to have been produced simply so that certain publishers didn't have to license a translation from other publishers.