EASIER THAN "JESUS WEPT"?

KJB John 11:35 Jesus wept

Can't get much easier than that. I wonder how the easy, modern versions improve on that verse, and make it "easier to understand" than the "difficult and archaic" KJB? They might not change the meaning much, but to change this at all can only make it harder.

NLT: Then Jesus wept.

CEV: Jesus started crying,  (That's the Contemporary English Version! Contemporary English must be harder than the King's English!)

NLB: Then Jesus cried. (New Life Bible, old life must be easier.)

The Message: Now Jesus wept. (The Message is harder than the scripture.)

NRSV: Jesus began to weep. (The Old RSV got it right, scholars can't have that!)

DRV: And Jesus wept. (Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible.)

BBE: And Jesus himself was weeping. (That's the Bible in Basic English. Once again, harder than the King's English.)

HNV: Yeshua wept. (Hebrew Names Version, Hebrew is easier than the King's English?)

ISV: Jesus burst into tears. (Int'l Standard Version, possibly NIV)

NIRV: Jesus sobbed. (NIV Reader's version. Isn't the NIV for readers?)

Maybe there's no great doctrinal significance here, but it's dumfounding how versions claiming that the KJB is archaic and difficult have to complicate the simplest verse in the KJB.

VATICANUS CAN'T COUNT TO THREE!

Neither can Westcott and Hort

 

Remember the earlier post where the modern versions couldn't count to ten? Well, the manuscripts they were based on can't even count to seven - or to three!

Acts 10:19-20 KJB While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, Behold, three men seek thee.

The Received Text underlying the KJV as well as Sinaiticus, A and C all have the number three, and "three men seek thee" is the reading found in the KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, RSV, ESV, and Douay.

However, Vaticanus says there were TWO men seeking Peter. Westcott and Hort actually followed Vaticanus, which is the ONLY text that so reads. You see how unbiased and scientific their methods were?

You see how heavily they weigh the corrupt Vaticanus?

Their Greek text reads: "idou andreV duo zhtounteV se"  - the word duo being the number two. However the recent UBS, Nestle's texts have since changed this number and gone back to the "three men". (andreV treis). As always, when they wanted to get the TRUTH, they had to go to the King James Bible.

*******************************************

ALEXANDRIAN LXX CAN'T COUNT TO SEVEN

Two must be their limit.

An even more striking blunder is found in Acts 19:16. There we read about the SEVEN sons of Sceva:

Acts 19:14-16  And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so. 15 And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye (plural)? 16 And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame THEM, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded.

This is the reading of the majority of all texts and the TR.

However both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus tell us that the evil spirit "overcame BOTH OF THEM, (amphoteros autwn) and prevailed against them." The word for "both" is amphoteros, and always means "both". Yet

the word "both" can only refer to the number TWO, not the SEVEN sons of Sceva. In fact, the NASB of 1960 and 1972 reads "BOTH OF THEM", and so do the RV and ASV. Then in 1977 and again in 1995 the NASB changed their versions to read that the evil spirit overcame "ALL OF THEM" instead of "both of

them". The NIV, RSV, ESV also say "all of them". Actually, the word "all" is not found in any texts at all, but the NIV, NASB, RSV put it in anyway.

Again, Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus and Vaticanus are clearly wrong. The UBS (United Bible Society) text still says the evil spirit overcame BOTH of them, with no footnotes telling of the true reading found in the vast majority of all texts and versions. Funny place to forget to include a footnote detailing the manuscript evidence.

The NKJV notes in its footnote that the Nestle and UBS text says "both of them" instead of "overcame them". Why would the NotKJV even need to mention what those corrupt texts say?

(adapted from article by Will Kinney)

BOY GEORGE VERSION

Some interesting items from the androgynous TNIV:

 

On the TNIV website, they make the following, definite statement:

"Without exception, the TNIV retains gender-accurate, masculine terminology for references to God. This is a theological understanding and commitment that the Committee on Bible Translation, standing in concert with the Church throughout the ages, considers inviolable." (TNIV: Clarity in Contemporary English, www.tniv.info/story/clarity.php)

That's pretty plain. ... "Without exception, the TNIV retains gender-accurate, masculine terminology for references to God. ..." Let's look at a few very, very, enlightening verses in the TNIV.

Open your eyes real wide ­ because what you're about to read is alarming ­ to say the least. It looks like the TNIV is a LIAR.

#1) Likeness of what?

The King James Bible, in Philippians 2:5-8, clearly confirms that Jesus Christ is God, "thought it not robbery to be equal with God." 

 

Again, the deity of our Lord Jesus is openly and clearly affirmed.

Phil 2:5-8 KJB 5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of MEN: 8 And being found in fashion as a MAN, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Remember the emphatic words from the TNIV website, "Without exception, the TNIV retains gender-accurate, masculine terminology for references to God."

The TNIV changes the "masculine terminology" of Philippians 2 while referring to the Lord Jesus. They change the masculine "man" to the neuter "human being".

Phil 2:5-8, TNIV  5 In your relationships with one another, have the same attitude of mind Christ Jesus had: 6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own

advantage; 7 rather he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. 8 And being found in appearance as a human being, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross!

#2) Was Adam a man? How about Jesus?

1 Cor 15:21-22, KJB For since by MAN came death, by MAN [Jesus] came also the resurrection of the dead For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Again, the TNIV change the "masculine" [man] to the neuter "human being".

1 Cor 15:21-22, TNIV For since death came through a HUMAN being, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a human being [Jesus]. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

And they do this many times! They replace the masculine "man" with the "gender-blender" "human being". And the reference is, without question, to God ­ the Male, Masculine, Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

Remember the emphatic words from the TNIV site, "Without exception, the TNIV retains gender-accurate, masculine terminology for references to God."  Oh yeah?

#3) The MAN Christ Jesus emasculated!

1 Tim 2:5, KJB For there is one God, and one mediator between God and MEN, the MAN Christ Jesus;

And again, the TNIV drops the masculine [man] for the sexless, neuter "human beings" and "human".

1 Tim 2:5, TNIV 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and human beings, Christ Jesus, himself human,

"Without exception, the TNIV retains gender-accurate, masculine terminology for references to God."  In a pig's eye!

#4) Prophetesses?

Mat 13:57, KJB And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in HIS own country, and in HIS own house.

Matt 13:57, TNIV (see also Luke 4:24) And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, "Only in their own towns and in their own homes are prophets without honor."

#5) God is that?

John 6:33 KJB (a clear reference to the Lord Jesus Christ) For the bread of God is HE which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

John 6:33 TNIV For the bread of God is THAT which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.

#6) Sistren?

In Hebrews 2:17, the TNIV starts wading in some very treacherous water. Some very treacherous and very polluted water.

Heb 2:16-17 describes how the Lord Jesus physically came through the seed of Abraham. Verse 17 says that the Lord Jesus, was physically "... made like his brethren [Jews]..." 

 

The TNIV translators, without any Greek evidence, in any manuscript, inserts the female gender "sisters" into the verse. This is a flagrant disregard for the Greek text and adding to God’s Word. And it opens the door for some serious satanic feminist and new age teaching. Namely, that Jesus Christ was androgynous ­ both male and female.

Heb 2:16-17 KJB For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his BRETHREN, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

Heb 2:16-17 TNIV For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. "For this reason he had to be made like his brothers and SISTERS in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people"

"... made like his brothers and sisters IN EVERY WAY..."

Notice the TNIV translators addition of "IN EVERY WAY". Why in the world did they "add" the words "in EVERY way"? What in the world do they mean "in EVERY way"?

#7)  Liars deny CHRIST.

The TNIV replaces Christ with Messiah 69 times in the following verses: (snip)

1 John 2:22, KJB: Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the CHRIST? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

How does the TNIV translators respond to this warning ­ simple. They change the verse! That’s right. They change the verse and wipe off their fingerprints and cover up the incriminating evidence. I guess the antichrist is a reference to the Jewish Messianic Kingdom.

1 John 2:22, TNIV: Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Messiah. Such a person is the antichrist — denying the Father and the Son.

#8) Is it a child?

You complained about the "archaic" characterization "with child", which the TNIV replaced with "pregnant". The KJV specifies that the woman is with CHILD - the "pregnancy material" is a CHILD. The TNIV doesn't recognize it as a child. Wonder which versions abortionists will prefer?

#9) Group salvation?

John 10:9 KJB I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

John 10:9 TNIV I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. They will come in and go out, and find pasture.

John 10:9, in the TNIV, is no longer addressing the individual person [any man, he], but now a group [whoever, they]. God’s message of salvation is to the individual, not a group, not a church ­ but a single, individual, person. And the simple effects of these hundreds of perverse, mis-translations to appease the radical feminists could be devastating.

#10) Jesus doesn't know pronouns?

John 11:25 KJB Jesus said unto *her*, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

John 11:25 TNIV Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Anyone who believes in me will live, even though they die;

#11) Female and neuter bishops!?

1 Tim 3:1, KJB This is a true saying, If A MAN desire the office of a bishop, HE desireth a good work.

1 Tim 3:1, TNIV Here is a trustworthy saying: WHOEVER aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task.

#12) Women in the military?!

2 Tim 2:4, KJB No MAN that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that HE may please HIM who hath chosen him to be a soldier.

2 Tim 2:4, TNIV No ONE serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs; rather, THEY try to please THEIR commanding officer.

#13) Does He overcome the world?

1 John 5:5 KJB Who is HE that overcometh the world, but HE that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

1 John 5:5 TNIV Who is IT that overcomes the world? Only the ONE who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.

#14) Adamic man?

1 Cor 15:45, KJB: And so it is written, The first MAN Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

1 Cor 15:45, TNIV: So it is written: "The first Adam became a living BEING"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.

#15) Was Jesus a perfect man? Or a mature neuter?

Eph 4:13 KJB Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect MAN, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Eph 4:13 TNIV until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become MATURE, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

#16) Paul the neuter

Rom 3:5 KJB But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance? (I speak as a MAN)

Rom 3:5 TNIV But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a HUMAN argument.)

#17) Deaconesses?

In Acts 6:3, the TNIV includes "sisters", among the church leaders, in the choosing of Stephen. I’m sure Senator Hillary and the feminists love this one.

Acts 6:3, KJB Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.

Acts 6:3, TNIV Brothers and SISTERS, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them

MODERN VERSIONS ARE BROKEN

1 Cor 11:24 (KJB) And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

This verse contains the word "broken" ("klwmenon" in Greek). This word has been omitted by Tischendorf (8th edition), Westcott-Hort and the Critical texts of our day (i.e. UBS/N-A text). And as usual it is omitted by nearly every modern English version:

NSAV and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me."

ISV gave thanks for it, and broke it in pieces, saying, "This is my body that is for you. Keep doing this in memory of me."

RSV and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me."

NIV and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."

As one reads through these translations it is quite obvious that something is missing and what is left is a worthless sentence. "This is my body that is for you" is an utterly ridiculous sentence. It was the fact that Jesus' body was "BROKEN" for us that we are to "do this"! In fact the Holy Ghost is seeking to relate to us the relationship between the 'bread' and Jesus' 'body'. The lack of the word "broken" destroys the correlation between the "bread", which was broken and His body, which was also"broken". The "broken" body also reminds us of the prophecy that "not a BONE of him shall be broken", though His body was. Once again we see that the SPECIFIC WORDS are absolutely imperative.

In closing I wish to deal with the reading of the New Living Translation - "and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, 'This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.'" The footnote reads, "Some manuscripts read broken." There are NO Greek mss. that read "given"!

Marty Shue

ABORTION BIBLES

Here are examples from the Contemporary English Version and Today's English Version. It is a great comfort to know that even feticidal feminists can have a bible that they will "read and study," all the while feeling justified in aborting as many of their progeny as they like.

Exodus 21:22-

[CEV]  [22] Suppose a pregnant woman suffers a miscarriage as the result of an injury caused by someone who is fighting. If she isn't badly hurt, the one who injured her must pay whatever fine her husband demands and the judges approve. [23] But if she is seriously injured, the payment will be life for life,

[TEV] [22] If some men are fighting and hurt a pregnant woman so that she loses her child, but she is not injured in any other way, the one who hurt her is to be fined whatever amount the woman's husband demands, subject to the approval of the judges. [23] But if the woman herself is injured, the punishment shall be life for life,

...and now the KJB

[22] And if men strive together, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart, and yet no mischief follow; he shall be surely fined, according as the woman's husband shall lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. [23] But if ANY mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

Big difference, folks. Both the CEV and TEV minimize [actually eliminate] concern for the babies involved, while the KJB makes it clear that penalties may be brought on the perpetrators if the babies are harmed in any way. If the baby is born safely, the perpetrator is accountable only for harming the woman, but if the baby is harmed, he is also accountable for the baby.

TAKE THE MV CHALLENGE!

Put your money where your mouth is - literally!

Do you people realize what were talking about? The WORDS of the ALMIGHTY CREATOR GOD! How DARE some of you take it so cavalierly that any old version will do so long as it has the 'message' fairly close.

You don't treat your mortgage or your car loan as carelessly as you treat the WORDS of the LIVING GOD! Here's a test to prove it - your mortgage and car loan say if you pay several hundred dollars, you can stay in your home and drive your car for about thirty days. That's the"message".  Here's the challenge: Try paying just $100 LESS on each payment and using the house/car for five days longer each period. Hey, the "message" is still the same.

How come you won't treat your mortgage like that, but you'll treat the word of God like that? Shows which one you're more concerned about being accurate with. You'll never take that challenge because you esteem the words of your mortgage more than you esteem God's words. Suddenly the "basic message" is not satisfactory. Now the EXACT TERMS are vital.

 

When it comes to scripture - EVERY WORD is vital.

Matt 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Matt 12:36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.

Matt 18:16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

Luke 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

2 Cor 13:1 This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

PROPHETS OF NO PROFIT

God's word gives a very clear sign, by which anyone would be able to recognize a true prophet of God:

Deut 18:21-22 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

I bring this up for a very good reason! Most of the new bibles give a Messianic prophecy (I'm sure this isn't the only one), that has no fulfillment in the New Testament! One such instance is the Messianic prophecy found in:

Zech 13:6 And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.

This prophecy was fulfilled when Thomas doubted our resurrected Lord was, in fact, Jesus Christ in the flesh!

John 20:25-27 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.

Now, look at the Zechariah prophecy in some of the new bibles:

And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds between thine arms? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends. Zech 13:6 (ASV, NASB, NKJV)

"And if someone asks, 'Then what are these scars on your chest and your back?' he will say, 'I got into a brawl at the home of a friend'! Zech 13:6 (Living)

But someone will ask, 'What are the deep cuts on your body?' And each will answer, 'I was hurt at my friend's house.' Zech 13:6 (NCV)

If someone asks him, 'What are these wounds on your body?' he will answer, 'The wounds I was given at the house of my friends.' Zech 13:6 (NIV)

And if someone asks, 'Then what are those scars on your chest?' he will say, 'I was wounded at the home of friends!'  Zech 13:6 (NLT, NRSV)

And if one asks him, 'What are these wounds on your back?' he will say, 'The wounds I received in the house of my friends.'" Zech 13:6 (RSV)

And one must say to him, 'What are these wounds [on your person] between your hands? And he will have to say, "Those with which I was struck in the house of my intense lovers." Zech 13:6 (NWT - PORNOGRAPHY!)

Looks pretty confusing, doesn't it? What's even MORE confusing, is NONE of the modern bibles quoted above have a fulfillment of Zech 13:6 in the New Testament! It's supposed to be John 20:25-27, but in NONE of the above new bibles, does Jesus comfort Thomas, by telling him to look at the "scars on Jesus's back and chest," nor is he told to look at the "wounds between Jesus's arms," etc, etc! We all know who the author of confusion is, but let us watch all the Bible correctors try to defend what I just posted here, clear evidence that the new bibles are tainted!

"...a little leaven leaveneth the WHOLE LUMP!"

Read the sure sign of a prophet, as given by God Himself, again:

"...if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken..."

Accordingly, either the LORD hath not spoken in ANY of the new bibles, or Zechariah was a false prophet! Which do YOU think it is?

Deu 18:20  But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not  commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.

That means it is entirely appropriate to use the modern versions as kindling or toilet paper. Please don't use a modern version to line your bird cage, however. Your poor parakeet might pick up some of that perversion and heresy.