Another King James Bible Believer

Subtitle

"Science" of Textual Criticism - 1 and 2 Corinthians



When the Bible Agnostics ask Stupid Questions - 1 Corinthians 3:17

 

A man with whom I have had several interchanges and whom I know for a fact does NOT believe that any bible in any language is now or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God, and whose sole purpose seems to be to try to cast doubt on the accuracy of the King James Bible and find some kind of provable error, posted the following question.

 

Mr. Fox asks: “1 Corinthians 3:17, KJV translates identical Greek words into: "defile" & "destroy", why?”  

 

 

My Response:


Keep in mind that this man is NOT asking this question out of a sincere desire to know why the KJB does this and to understand the reasons behind it.  He no doubt picked up this example (I’m sure he did not find it on his own) from some other Bible Critic like himself who thinks the KJB dropped the ball here and did not translate the verse right.


So, let’s look at the verse, and we shall see that there are very good reasons why the King James Bible (and many others as we shall soon see) gave two different meanings to the same Greek word.


1 Corinthians 3:17 reads: “If any man DEFILE the temple of God, him shall God DESTROY; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.”



The underlying Greek text looks like this - ει τις τον ναον του θεου φθειρει φθερει τουτον ο θεος ο γαρ ναος του θεου αγιος εστιν οιτινες εστε υμεις


The verb used twice here is the same verb (as he pointed out) - φθειρει  (phthiro).  


First, an obvious truth that apparently escapes our Bible critic, is that sinful man CAN "DEFILE" the temple of God, either through false teaching or open sin, but he cannot possibly DESTROY it.  


And God is not going to DEFILE the rebel who does this, because he already IS defiled. But God can and will DESTROY him.


Secondly, the Greek word in question here can mean such varied things as “to corrupt, to defile and to destroy.”


The NASB itself translates this same word as “to corrupt” (4 times), “to lead astray” (1 time) and as “to destroy” (4 times).


The NASB  has “destroy” right here in 1Corinthians 3:17. It reads: “ If any man DESTROYS the temple of God, God will DESTROY him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are.”

 

So also read the ESV, NIV, NET, Holman, Jehovah Witness NWT, and the Catholic Versions.



This versions are wrong, of course, because sinful man cannot destroy the temple of God.


The NASB translates this same Greek word as “to corrupt” in places like 1 Corinthians 15:33 “Bad company CORRUPTS good morals”, as CORRUPTED in 2 Corinthians 7:2 and Ephesians 4:22 and as “CORRUPTING” in Revelation 19:2 “CORRUPTING the earth with her immorality.”


Likewise, the NIV 1984 edition translates this same Greek word φθειρει as “corrupt” (4 times), “led astray” (once), “perish” (once) and as “destroy” (3 times).  


And the ESV does the same thing, variously translating this word as “corrupt” (Eph. 4:22; Revelation 19:2), “to destroy”, “to ruin” and “to lead astray”.


Agreeing with the King James Bible’s - “If any man DEFILE the temple of God, him shall God DESTROY; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.”, are  The Wycliffe Bible 1390, Tyndale 1524, Coverdale bible 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, The Bill Bible 1671, Whiston’s N.T. 1749, The Revised Translation 1815, Webster’s Bible 1833, The Longmont Version 1841, The Commonly Received Version 1851, The Boothroyd Bible 1853, The Clarke N.T. 1913, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta - "And whoever DEFILES the temple of God, God will DESTROY; for the temple of God is holy, and that temple is you.", J.B. Phillips New Testament 1960-1972 “God will DESTROY anyone who DEFILES his temple”, The Living Bible 1971, the NKJV 1982, the KJV 21st Century Version 1984, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, The Third Millennium Bible 1998, God’s First Truth 1999, The New Simplified Bible 2009, the Jubilee Bible 2010, The Hebrew Transliteration Bible 2010 - “If any man DEFILE Beit haMikdash of Elohim (אלהים), him shall Elohim (אלהים) DESTROY”, The Voice 2012, The Bond Slave Version 2012, and The Modern English Version 2014 - “If anyone DEFILES the temple of God, God will DESTROY him. For the temple of God is holy. And you are His temple.”


Other Versions


Thomas Haweis N.T. 1795 - “If any man PROPHANE the temple of God, him will God DESTROY”


The Thomson Bible 1808, Darby Translation 1890  - “If any one CORRUPT the temple of God, him God will DESTROY”


The Worldwide English New Testament 1998 says: “God will PUNISH anyone who SPOILS his house. His house is holy, and you are the house.”


Bible in Basic English 1961 - “If anyone MAKES the house of God UNCLEAN, God will PUT AN END to him; for the house of God is holy, and you are his house.”


The Conservative Bible 2010 - “If any man DESECRATES the temple of God, God will DESTROY him”  


The Work of God’s Children Bible 2011 - “ But if any man VIOLATE the temple of God, him shall God DESTROY.” 


The King James Bible is always right, and the Bible critics are always wrong.  Accept No Substitutes.






Corinthians 4:17 "...Timotheus...shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in CHRIST, as I teach every where in every church."


Here the word "Christ" stands alone in the Majority and Vaticanus. So read the NKJV, NASB, RSV, and ESV. However Sinaiticus add the word 'Jesus' and so the NIV, NRSV, ISV and Holman say: "my ways which are in CHRIST JESUS."

We will see a whole lot more of this type of thing in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ because Sinaiticus and Vaticanus both differ from each other numerous times.


In fact, already in 1 Corinthians Vaticanus omits "Christ" in 1:7 and 10, while Sinaiticus includes it. In 2:16 Vaticanus reads "the mind of THE LORD", while Sinaiticus has "the mind of CHRIST." In 1 Corinthians 5:4 "In the name of our Lord Jesus CHRIST", Vaticanus omits "Christ" and so do most modern versions, but "Christ" is found in the Majority, Sinaiticus and the oldest one we have which is P46.


1 Corinthians 5:5 "that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord JESUS." Here the word "Jesus" again is in the Majority and Sinaiticus, and so read the KJB, NASB, RV and ASV. However Vaticanus omits the word "Jesus" and so do the NIV, NRSV, ESV and the ISV.

 

1 Corinthians 6:20 KJB - “For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, AND IN YOUR SPIRIT, WHICH ARE GOD’S.”


ESV (NIV, NASB, Holman, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT, Catholic Versions) - “for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.”


The words “AND IN YOUR SPIRIT, WHICH ARE GOD’S.” are found in the Majority of all remaining Greek manuscripts as well as C and D corrections, K, L, P, Psi. They are found in the Syraic Peshitta and Harclean, The Armenian and Slavonic ancient versions.


The words are omitted mainly in the Egyptian manuscripts of P46, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Alexandrinus.  The Latin Vulgate also omits these additional words.


Bibles that read like the King James Bible are the Reformation Bibles in all languages.  The Vatican Versions omit them.


The words “AND IN YOUR SPIRIT, WHICH ARE GOD’S.” are found in Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Beza N.T. 1599, John Wesley’s N.T. 1755, The Revised Translation 1815, Webster’s Bible 1833, The Revised N.T. 1862, The Revised English Bible 1877, Young’s 1898, The translations from the Syriac Peshitta by Etheridge, Murdock and Lamsa 1933, J. B. Phillips N.T. in Modern English 1972, the NKJV 1982, The Word of Yah 1993, The Koster Scriptures 1998, The Lawrie N.T. 1998, God’s First Truth 1999, World English Bible 2000, The Tomson N.T. 2002, The Apostolic Polyglot Bible 2003, Green’s literal 2005, The Pickering N.T. 2005, The Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, The Mebust Bible 2007, The Jubilee Bible 2010, The Conservative Bible 2010, The New European Version 2010, The Hebraic Transliteration Scriputures 2010 - “and in your spirit, which are Elohim (אלהים)’s.”, The Bond Slave Version 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013, The English Majority Text N.T. 2013, The Far Above All Translation 2014, The Hebrew Names Version 2014, The Modern Literal N.T. 2014, The Modern English Version 2014 and The Hebraic Roots Bible 2015.


Foreign Language Bibles 



Foreign Language Bibles that include the words “AND IN YOUR SPIRIT, WHICH ARE GOD’S.” in 1 Corinthians 6:20 are Luther’s German Bible 1545 and the German Schlachter Bible 2000 - “und in eurem Geist, die Gott gehören!”, the French Martin bible 1744, French Ostervald 1996 and the Louis Segond 1910 and 2007 editions - “et dans votre esprit qui appartiennent à Dieu”, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, and the Reina Valera 2011 - “y en su espíritu, los cuales son de Dios.” and the Spanish La Biblia de las Américas 1997, the Italian Diodati 1649, La Nuova Diodati 1991 and the Italian Riveduta 2006 - “e nel vostro spirito, che appartengono a Dio”, the Dutch Staten Vertaling bible, The Czech BKR, the Russian Synodal bible, the Tagalog Ang Salita ng Diyos 1998, the Afrikaans bible 1953, the Hungarian Karoli Bible, the Polish Updated Gdansk Bible 2013, the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida 2009 - “e no vosso espírito, os quais pertencem a Deus.” and the Romanian Fidela Bible 2014.


It is also the reading found in the Modern Greek Bible - Διοτι ηγορασθητε δια τιμης· δοξασατε λοιπον τον Θεον δια του σωματος σας και δια του πνευματος σας, τα οποια ειναι του Θεου.


And the Modern Hebrew Bible - כי במחיר נקניתם על כן כבדו את האלהים בגופכם וברוחכם אשר לאלהים המה׃


This is the traditional reading in all Reformation Bibles, and in many modern ones as well,  in a multitude of languages.


Or you can  go with the traditional Catholic and the new Vatican Versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET and Holman.  


But God did not both inspire these words and not inspire them in the same verse.  


I along with many thousands of other Bible believers choose the only Bible seriously believed to be the inerrant words of God - the Authorized King James Holy Bible.

 

 The "science" of Textual Criticism Merry-Go-Round, Where it stops nobody knows.



1 Corinthians 10:9 "Neither let us tempt CHRIST, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents."  


The reading of "let us not tempt CHRIST" (τον χριστον) is  that found in the Majority of all remaining Greek manuscripts including P 46 which predates Sinaiticus and Vaticanus by about 150 years. It is also the reading found in D, F, G, L, Psi, the Old Latin ar, b, d, dem, e, f, g, q, x as well as the Latin Vulgate and the Syriac Peshitta.  It is also so quoted by such early church writers as Irenaeus, Clement, Theotecnus, Eusebius, Ambrosiaster, Ambrose, Chrysostom, Pelagius, Augustine and Theophylact.


But Sinaiticus,  Vaticanus and C read "kurios" (τον κυριον) = the LORD instead of Christ.  


When Westcott and Sort first came out with their Critical text they also went with the reading of THE LORD instead of CHRIST.  Likewise the Nestle 4th edition 1934 and the Nestle 21st edition 1975 also read "kurios". 

And so read the Revised Version 1881, the ASV 1901, RSV 1946-1971, Living Bible 1971, Good News Translation 1992, God's Word Translation 1995, the NASB 1963-1995 - "let us not try THE LORD", Names of God Bible 2011, The Voice 2012, The ISV 2014, Tree of Life Version 2015, International Children's bible 2015 (they must not have gotten the memo)  


BUT sometime between the 21st edition and the 27th edition our Vatican supervised textual "scholars" suddenly changed their minds (NO new textual evidence was discovered; they just changed their minds) and now they reject the reading found in both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, and have gone back to the reading which was always found in the KJB and the Reformation bibles.  

The more modern Nestle-Aland Critical texts now read "let us not tempt CHRIST."


And so too do the NIV, NRSV 1989, ESV, NET and Holman versions but NOT the NASB 1995 nor The Passion Translation 2017. They still read "THE LORD"  


NIV confusion


Even though the English NIV "bibles" now read CHRIST, yet the NIV in Spanish, La Nueva Versión Internacional of 2015 reads "the LORD" - "Tampoco pongamos a prueba al SENOR"  and so does the NIV Portuguese edition of 2000 called Nova Versão Internacional - "Não devemos pôr o Senhor". So much for the textual consistency of the NIVs.

 

The Catholic Connection  


We see the same type of fickle changes in the text of the Catholic versions.  Both the Douay-Rheims of 1582 and the Douay 1950 read "let us not tempt CHRIST", but the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 read "let us not tempt THE LORD."


"Let us not tempt CHRIST"


This is the reading of Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1534, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, The Beza N.T. 1599, Mace N.T. 1729, Wesley N.T. 1755, Worsley Version 1770, The Revised Translation 1815, Websters 1833, The Pickering N.T. 1840, Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, the NKJV 1982, Green's Literal 2005, New Century Version 2005, The Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, Conservative Version 2011, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011 - "neither let us tempt CHRIST, as they also tempted and perished by the serpent.", Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust), World English Bible 2012, the Modern English Version 2014 and The New Matthew Bible 2016..  


Foreign Language Bibles = CHRIST


Reading Christ are Luther's German bible 1545 - Christum", and the German Schlachter Bible  2000, the Spanish Cipriano de Valera 1602, the French Martin 1744, French Ostervald 1998 and the French Louis Segond 2007 - "Ne provoquons pas Christ", the Italian Diodati 1991 and the Italian Nuova Riveduta 2006 - "E non tentiamo Cristo", the Portuguese Almeida  Corrigida bible 2009 - " E não tentemos a Cristo", the Tagalog Ang Salita ng Diyos bible 1998,  the Hungarian Karoli Bible, the Polish Gdansk  bible 2013, the Russian Synodal Bible, and the Romanian Fidela Bible. 

This is also the reading of the Modern Greek Bible - Μηδε ας πειραζωμεν τον Χριστον


and the Modern Hebrew Bible - ולא ננסה את המשיח כאשר נסוהו מקצתם ויאבדום הנחשים׃

 

John Gill Commentary - "Neither let us tempt CHRIST as some of them also tempted; that is, as some of the Israelites tempted, which they did more than once; but what is referred to here, is the time they spake against God and Moses, in Numbers 21:5 as appears from the punishment annexed, their being destroyed by serpents.  For Christ was the angel that went before the Israelites in the wilderness, the angel of God's presence, that bore, and carried, and saved them; HE IS THE JEHOVAH THEY TEMPTED at Massah and Meribah, and elsewhere, AND GOD THEY SPAKE AGAINST AT THIS PLACE REFERRED TO; HENCE IT IS CLEAR THAT OUR LORD EXISTED BEFORE HIS INCARNATION, AND THAT HE IS TRULY AND PROPERLY GOD."  

 

The King James Bible is always right, and it exalts and honors the Lord Jesus Christ like no other bible out there.

 

 


In 1 Corinthians 13:3 we read in the KJB -  "and though I give my body to BE BURNED, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing”.


ινα καυθησωμαι


This is the reading found in the Majority of all Greek texts, the Textus Receptus, K, Psi, the Old Latin ar, b, d, dem, e, f, g, m, o, t, tx, the Syriac Peshitta (Lamsa), the Gothic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and Slavonic ancient versions. 


 It is also quoted like this by such early church writers as Tertullian, Methodius, Cyprian, Ambrosiaster, Zeno, Basil, Pacian, Gregory-Nyssa, Theodoret, John-Damascus and Jerome.


But the so called “oldest and best” manuscripts of P46, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and A, as well as the constantly changing Nestle-Aland, UBS Critical Greek texts, have put on a dizzying display of continuous change and absurdity.


These “oldest and best” mss. actually say “If I give my body THAT I MAY BOAST, and have not charity it profits me nothing.”


ινα καυχησωμαι . kauXEEsomai.  


This was the original reading put in the text by Westcott and Hort in 1881.  BUT not even the Revised Version of 1885 nor the ASV 1901 followed it.  Instead, both rejected this reading and continued to read just like the KJB and all earlier Bibles with “if I give my body TO BE BURNED.”


However, just a few years later they changed the Nestle Greek text to read “if I give my body TO BE BURNED, and have not charity…”


I have hard copies of the Nestle 4th edition 1934 and the Nestle 21st edition 1975 and they both read this way - ἵνα καυθήσομαι - kauTHEEsomai.  It is an irregular form to follow the word “hina” (ἵνα)  but it translates the same way as found in the KJB - If I give my body TO BE BURNED. - ινα καυθησωμαι


This is the reading - καυθήσομαι - found in C, D, F, G and L and it is still the reading found in the SBL (Society of Biblical Literature) Greek New Testament of 2010.


However, in recent years the Nestle-Aland Critical text has now once again changed their text, and have gone back to read as Westcott and Hort first had it. The Nestle-Aland Critical text now reads “If I give my body THAT I MAY BOAST, and have not love, it profits me nothing.” 


This means that so far the Critical Greek text has had THREE different readings in it for this one single Greek word.


BUT, this reading is so absurd, that many of the modern versions still do not follow it.


The NASB 1995 does not, nor does the ESV 2001-2011.  The NASB reads: “If I deliver my body TO BE BURNED, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.”  Then it footnotes: “Some ancient mss. read THAT I MAY BOAST.


And the ESV 2011 has: “If I give away all I have, and if I deliver up my body TO BE BURNED,  but have not love, I gain nothing.”  


It then Footnotes “Some manuscripts - THAT I MAY BOAST”


However the NIV DOES keep changing its TEXT.  The NIVs 1973, 1978 and 1984 editions say: “If I give all I possess to the poor and SURRENDER MY BODY TO THE FLAMES, but have not love, I gain nothing.”


Then they footnote: “Some early manuscripts - THAT I MAY BOAST.”


BUT now the NIV 2011 has come out and it changed its text and now reads; “If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body THAT I MAY BOAST, but do not have love, I gain nothing.”  


And this time it footnotes: “Some manuscripts BODY TO THE FLAMES.”  


The “Reliable” NIVs.


Even though the recent NIV English version of 2011 has changed its TEXT to read “THAT I MAY BOAST”, yet the NIV Spanish edition, La Nueva Versión Internacional of 2015 still reads like the KJB and the TR reading.  


It says “y si entregue mi cuerpo para que LO CONSUMAN LAS LLAMAS…. = TO BE BURNED.  


And so also does the NIV Portuguese edition of 2000 - “e entregue o meu corpo para ser queimado” = TO BE BURNED.


The Holman Standard.


The Holman Christian Standard Bible has done the same thing as the NIV. I have a hard copy of the Holman Standard 2003.  The Holman Standard has already come out with different editions in 1999, 2000, 2003, 2009 and now they are working on another one with great Fanfare.


The 2003 Holman “Standard” (I guess the new “Standard” with today’s Bible Babble Buffet Carousel is one of “constant change”) reads: “…and I give MY BODY TO BE BURNED…”


BUT the Holman “Standard” of 2009 now says: “and if I give my body IN ORDER TO BOAST, but do not have love…”


Also following this most recently changed Critical text reading is (big surprise) Dan Wallace’s NET version 2006 - “if I give over my body IN ORDER TO BOAST…”  


“IN ORDER THAT I MIGHT BOAST”


Other bibles that follow this latest textual change in the Critical (Condition) versions are THE JEHOVAH WITNESS New World Translation 1961 edition and the 2013 Revised Jehovah Witness NWT - “and if I hand over my body SO THAT I MAY BOAST”, Rotherham’s 1902 (thus following the original Westcott-Hort reading), the NRSV 1989, New Living Translation 2015 (even though the “old” Living Translation 1971 said “to be burned”)


The brand new International Standard Version 2014 just made up their own translation that says: “Even if I give away everything that I have AND SACRIFICE MYSELF, but have no love, I gain nothing.” 


THEN it gives this very misleading Footnote, saying:  “Other mss. read sacrifice my body to be burned; or myself so that I may boast.”


By saying “other manuscripts read…..” they are implying that THEY actually followed SOME manuscript, when in fact they just MADE THIS UP out of thin air.  NO manuscript reads “and sacrifice myself”  



Those Bibles that read like the King James Bible (and many of these are themselves Critical Text versions)  with “and though I give my body TO BE BURNED” are Tyndale, Bishops’ Bible, the Geneva bible, Darby, Youngs 1898, R.V. 1885, ASV 1901, Weymouth 1902, Living Bible 1971, Revised Standard Version 1972, J.B. Phillips 1972, NKJV 1982, NASB 1995, Complete Jewish Bible 1998, God’s Word 2000, The Message 2002, New Century Version 2005, The Conservative Bible 2010, ESV 2011, the Names of God Bible 2011, Mounce N.T. 2011, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, Lexham English Bible 2012, The Voice 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013, The Modern English Version 2014, The Modern Literal N.T. 2014, The Pioneers’ N.T. 2014 and the International Children’s Bible 2015.



If you think the Vaticanus manuscript is the best to follow here, you should take note of the fact that in 13:5, just two verses later, instead of reading "charity...seeketh not her own", Vaticanus reads: "charity does not seek that which is NOT her own". 


As for Sinaiticus, among its many other blunders, in 1 Corinthians 15:51 instead of saying: "We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed" Sinaiticus actually says: "we shall sleep but we shall NOT all be changed." 


These are the "oldest and most reliable manuscripts" the modern scholars are so fond of, that form the Vatican supervised, ever changing Greek text that is the basis of versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman, the Jehovah Witness New World Translation and the modern Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985.  


Their ever changing “Science” of Textual Criticism is about as scientific as playing the Lottery or throwing darts at a dartboard in a drunken stupor.


Get yourself the King James Bible and stick with it. You will never go wrong.


 

Here are the details on the Vaticanus reading of 1 Corinthians 15:54-55 provided by fellow KJB defender Teno Groppi.


1 Corinthians 15:54-55 - "So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in VICTORY. 55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy VICTORY?


         There is a minor difference in the Greek between the word of victory and the word for controversy. The Greek word "nikos" means victory whereas "neikos" means controversy. The difference between the two Greek words is just the letter 'e'.


         Vaticanus has neikos (controversy) and the TR has nikos (victory). Just to show it wasn't an inadvertent typo (before they had typewriters) Vaticanus makes the blunder TWICE in a row in verses 54 and 55, virtually contradicting itself while disagreeing with the KJB and common sense at the same time.


1 Corinthians 15:54 ... Death is swallowed up in CONTROVERSY. 55 O grave, where is your CONTROVERSY?


         We don't have to take the opinions of biased KJV proponents. The Alexandrian supporters themselves admit it readily:


Bruce M. Metzger, The Text Of The New Testament, 3rd Edition, p 191. -


"This kind of error, which is commonly called itacism, accounts for several extremely odd mistakes present in otherwise good manuscripts. For example, in 1 Cor. xv. 54 the statement 'Death is swallowed up in VICTORY (nikos)' appears in P46 and B as 'Death is swallowed up in CONFLICT (neikos)'."


Kurt & Barbara Aland, The Text Of The New Testament, p 286. - "The sounds ei and i were also identical: in 1 Cor. 15:54-55 P46 B D 088 twice read neikos for nikos, so that death is swallowed up by controversy instead of victory, and the question is asked where the controversy of death is."


         Of course, what the textual critics fail to divulge is that both B and Aleph and P46 are literally bursting at the seams with itacisms and outright gross misspellings, along with all their other manifest inaccuracies.


         One wonders how an educated man who realizes that a text contains "several extremely odd mistakes" could consider it an "otherwise good text". If it wasn't for the odd fact of all the people he killed, Al Capone might have been an otherwise nice guy.


        That's not all. 1 Corinthians 15:54 is supposed to be a quotation of Isa 25:8. It's one of the verses the LXX proponents think shows the New Testament quotes from an already-existing Greek Old Testament. Let's look at that verse:


Isaiah 25:8 He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces ...


        The Vaticanus LXX (from Brenton's LXX) renders the first part of that verse: Isa 25:8 Death has prevailed and swallowed men up ...

        In the LXX, DEATH WINS! Death (and the grave) gets the victory over us and over Jesus Christ. DEATH swallows us up instead of death being swallowed up in victory. I guess that should be a controversy. What is not at controversy is the fact that the modern versions turn the VICTORY of the KJB and Jesus Christ into CONTROVERSY and DEATH.


Brother Teno Groppi makes a very good point when he comments on the English translation of these verses as well. He says: 1 Corinthians 15:55 O death, where is thy sting? O GRAVE, where is thy victory?


        The KJB asks where DEATH'S sting is, but it also asks where the GRAVE'S victory is - right after it speaks of the rapture in the preceding verses. This is consistent with the 1 Thessalonians 4 passage on the rapture that has the DEAD in Christ rise separately from those who are ALIVE and remain at the time of the trump.


        The dead in Christ are already in the grave. At the rapture, they would taunt the GRAVE for not getting the victory over them (it did sting them). Those alive have not, and will not, go to a grave, so they taunt DEATH for not even stinging them.


        The modern versions remove the word GRAVE and redundantly replace it with DEATH. We see this in the NIV, ESV, HCSB, NASB, CEV, ASV, TNIV, and NLB. The NKJV substitutes hades for grave, which is not a translation at all. It is the Greek word for grave in this passage, and is a different word than the Greek word for death.


        ALL those modern versions miss the connection and concordance of the scripture, and translate the word wrongly despite all the obvious reasons the KJB did it right. (end of Teno's comments)

 

        It's a shame they have to kill trees to print those modern versions.



Second Corinthians



2 Corinthians 1:12-14: "For our REJOICING is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in SIMPLICITY (haplotnti) and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our CONVERSATION in the world, and more abundantly to you-ward...(14) As also ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your REJOICING, even as ye also are ours in the day of THE Lord Jesus.”


There are several issues to be addressed in these two verses; some are translational and others are textual.

First of all, the word "simplicity" is found in the Majority of all texts, D, and Sinaiticus correction, as well as the Old Latin and the Syriac. It is the reading found in Wycliffe, Tyndale, Bishops's, Coverdale, the Geneva Bible, Darby, Young's, Douay, the Spanish Reina Valera, and the Complete Jewish Bible 1998.


It is also the reading of the newer Nestle-Aland Greek text and of the NKJV, NRSV, TNIV 2005, and the 2001 ESV. The ISV has tried to combine the earlier and the newer reading by saying "pure motives", but no Greek text actually says this.


The older Nestle-Aland Greek critical texts used to read “that in HOLINESS” (hagiotnti) following Vaticanus and Alexandrinus, and so read the RV, ASV, NIV, NASB, and RSV. The Holman Christian Standard also continues to follow this older reading in spite of the fact that the newer Greek texts (UBS 4TH edition, and Nestle 27th) have gone back to the KJB reading. So, apparently once again the NASB, NIV and Holman are now out of date with “the latest in scholarly findings” yada, yada, yada.


Notice that the new TNIV has rejected the previous NIV reading, and the ESV has rejected the previous RSV. Even Daniel Wallace's NET version has now adopted the reading found in the King James Bible, but his footnotes has one of the dumbest textual remarks I have ever seen. 


After arguing back and forth between these two different Greek words, he says: "This diversity of mss. provides excellent evidence for authenticity, but because of the internal evidence listed above, haplotnti (the KJB reading) is to be preferred, albeit only slightly." 


How in the world does diversity of manuscripts provide "excellent evidence for authenticity", and then one is to "prefer" one reading above another but "only slightly"? Is this the new double-minded, weak-kneed, milk-sop standard for the "authenticity" of the Bible?


As for the second textual difference, again we see the ever changing nature of the so called “art and science of textual criticism” in action. The vast Majority of all texts as well as P46, A, C and D read “THE Lord Jesus Christ”, whereas Sinaiticus and Vaticanus read “OUR Lord Jesus Christ”.



The older Nestle-Aland critical texts confidently put the word OUR in their text, but then later on the newer ones have now placed the word “our” in brackets.


The NASB and ESV read “OUR Lord Jesus”, but the RSV, NRSV, NIV, TNIV and NKJV read “THE Lord Jesus.” Daniel Wallace’s NET version also omits the word “our” and has gone back to the former KJB reading of “THE Lord Jesus”. He even notes: “It is probably best to consider the shorter reading as authentic. NA27 places the pronoun in brackets, indicating doubt as to its authenticity.”


Actually, if a Christian blindly chooses to follow the ever changing modern critical text that is behind most versions such as the NASB, NIV, ESV, Holman and ISV versions, all they get is a text that is in constant flux and has HUNDREDS of words in BRACKETS indicating doubt as to its authenticity! This is the very nature of the beast and why more and more Christians no longer believe that any Bible in any language is the inspired and inerrant word of God.


 

Are Pride and Boasting Christian Virtues?


One of the more serious and far reaching translational perversions found in most modern versions (NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV, Holman) is to make Pride and Boasting into Christian virtues rather than the abomination that it really is.


2 Corinthians 1:12-14 - The King James Bible, as well as Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible, 1599, Mace’s N.T. 1729, Wesley’s translation 1755, Webster’s 1833, Lamsa’s 1936 translation of the Syriac, the KJV 21st Century version 1994 and the Third Millennium Bible 1998 all read: “For our REJOICING is this, the testimony of our conscience...we have had our conversation in the world...we are your REJOICING, even as ye also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus.”


(Side Note: A common complaint brought against the King James Bible by those who do not believe that ANY bible in any language is the complete and inerrant word of God is the use of this old word “conversation”. Even they themselves know perfectly well that it means “manner or life or pattern of living”, but they suggest we toss out the “archaic” King James Bible and use some other “new and improved” modern version, that not even they consider to be the inerrant word of God.


Not only does the Authorized King James Holy Bible use the word conversation in this way but so also do the following Bible versions: Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Bishop's Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, the Douay-Rheims Bible 1950, John Wesley's translation of the N.T. 1755, Darby's translation 1890, and Young's literal translation. Webster's 1833 translation also uses the word "conversation" in Philippians 3:20 as does the King James Bible and several others.)


For a further discussion on the use of the word “conversation” and why it is not at all an error in the King James Bible, please see:

 http://brandplucked.webs.com/phil320romans76.htm


Rejoicing or Boast?


However when we begin to read the “new and improved” modern versions we find a radical change in meaning - we go from “rejoicing” in what God has done in our lives and the lives of others to “reason to be proud” and “boasting”.


NKJV - “that WE ARE YOUR BOAST AS YOU ALSO ARE OURS, in the day of THE Lord Jesus."


NIV - “YOU CAN BOAST OF US JUST AS WE WILL BOAST OF YOU in the day of THE Lord Jesus."


NASB - “WE ARE YOUR REASON TO BE PROUD as you also are ours, in the day of OUR Lord Jesus.”


ESV - “on the day of our Lord Jesus YOU WILL BOAST OF US AS WE WILL BOAST OF YOU.”


NO, emphatically No. Nobody will be “boasting” or “proud” in the day of the Lord Jesus Christ. We will all be flat on our faces in the dust where we belong and ALL the glory and praise will be His and His alone.

For a fuller discussion of this change from "rejoicing" to "boast" see:


http://brandplucked.webs.com/mvsprideasvirtue.htm 


 

The choice is clear. You can either stick with the King James Bible, which has a few “archaic” words that even its critics understand, and is The Bible God has used and honored above all others, and the only one seriously believed and defended as the true, complete and inerrant word of God, OR you can decide to go for the ever-changing, textually aberrant and doctrinally impure Bible of the Month Club versions that nobody believes are the inerrant and totally true words of God.



2 Corinthians 4:6 "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of JESUS Christ."


The word JESUS is found in the Majority of all texts, as well as Sinaiticus and P46. "the face of JESUS Christ" is found in the NKJV, RV, ASV, NRSV, ESV, ISV, and the Holman Standard.


However Vaticanus omits the word "Jesus" and has only "Christ" and so read the NASB, NIV and the RSV. Again, the Nestle-Aland text continues to change. It used to omit the word "Jesus" but not they have put it back in their texts.

 

The so called "oldest and best" manuscripts constantly disagree with each other, and so too do the Vatican supervised Critical Text versions.


ALL of grace, believing the Book - the King James Holy Bible,


Will Kinney


Return to Articles - https://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm