30 Reasons why the KJV is the Divine and Pure Word of God for Today (Update: KJVO Posters Only)

[Bible Highlighter]

Nah, according to my grandmother, God rest her, the Korean translation of the Bible is the only true one, as the others are written in the ghastly languages that foreigners speak.

We are not talking about a differences of languages here, friend; But a difference of content. Based on the information you gave me, it appears she did not base her decision on the fact that her Bible was more pure by comparison to other ones by doing a side by side comparison.

Modern Versions not only water down doctrine (like the deity of Christ, the blood atonement, the incarnation, holy living, etc.), but they also attack key important doctrines like the Trinity (1 John 5:7), the 1 John 4:3 test, the real truth about not being condemned in Christ Jesus in Roman 8:1, and other doctrines. Certain NT commands are changed in Modern Translations. Modern Translations make Jesus appear to sin. Modern Translations have the devil's name in the place of Christ and other holy things.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

If the Bereans were still here searching the Scriptures, they wouldn't find one word supporting the KJVO myth.

I showed you ABSOLUTE PROOF that the AV makers believed Ps. 12:7 is about PEOPLE ! I hope you have a copy of the AV 1611 so you can see that proof for yourself.

And the KJV is NOT God's PURE word. it has human goofs & booboos in it, and you can't refute any of them.

Again, you've chosen to believe the quax & mountebanks who publish pro-KJVO material, without checking out the VERACITY of their claims.

You should realize that, since you've been shown irrefutable proof the KJV isn't perfect, every time you speak in favor of the KJVO myth, you're TELLING A LIE, & GOD said all liars will have their part in the LOF.

Sorry. You have not proven anything except your own opinion.
Oh, and no. I am not lying, dear sir. It's simply a thing called “faith in God's Word.”

 

[robycop3]

Sorry. You have not proven anything except your own opinion.
Oh, and no. I am not lying, dear sir. It's simply a thing called “faith in God's Word.”

No, the KJVO myth is a PROVEN LIE !
GOD IS NOT LIMITED to the KJV. Can you prove the NKJV, NASV, ESV, Geneva Bible, or Bishop's Bible are not just-as-much God's word in English as any other ?

I've posted much more than opinion. Can you find any MANUSCRIPT SOURCE for the words "and shalt be" in the KJV's Rev. 16:5 ???????????????

And how about the PROOF I posted from the AV 1611 itself that Psalm 12:7 is about PEOPLE ?

And how about any SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for the KJVO myth ? I posted the man-made, cultic, dishonest origin of the current edition of this myth, but there's not one quark of SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for it, a fact that automatically makes it FALSE.

If it's false, it's a LIE, right ? And what is anyone who deliberately tells something he/she KNOWS is a lie, but a LIAR ? So, do you REALLY wanna persist in telling a proven lie, knowing God's penalty for that ? Please think it over !

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Are you referring to Sinaiticus and Vaticanus? People have already pointed out to you that Sinaiticus was from an Eastern Orthodox monastery. You even acknowledged this, if I recall correctly. Why are you still claiming it's Catholic even after admitting it isn't?

I believe the Orthodox church is a spin off church from the Catholic church. It's why the monastery sounds like a Catholic church in name (i.e. Saint Catherine’s Monastery).

As has again already been pointed out to you, an assassination of James would have done nothing to stop the Bible from being in the hands of the common man because it was already in their hands. The Bible was already in English and was already available--I believe in Scotland they even passed a law requiring people to purchase the Geneva Bible if they had the money.

It would be a new translation (not hindered by any notes in the Geneva Bible), and not based on some issues found in the Bishop's Bible. This new translation was to meet new beginnings in the printing process to get it more into the hands of more common men (Such as the men in New England).

The assassination was done because the conspirators wanted policies more favorable to Catholics and thought that getting rid of James might accomplish that. It had nothing to do with, as you claim, trying to stop the Bible from getting into the hands of the common man because the common man already had it. If you are asserting that was still the goal despite it making no sense, then show some support for this idea, e.g. quoting statements by the conspirators demonstrating that the KJV was actually in view in any way.

Those behind the gunpowder plot against King James were Catholic and they embraced the idea that only the special holy men were allowed to read the Scriptures. So at that time, their defense of Catholicism included this belief. At that time: The idea of Protestantism encouraged Bible reading in the hands of the common man. Catholics at that time did not agree with this.

Until the twentieth Century, it was only Protestants who actively embraced Scripture study. That changed after 1943 when Pope Pius XII issued the encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu. This not only allowed Catholics to study Scripture, it encouraged them to do so.

Before this time, it was not like that.
The Bible (Catholic Bible) was kept in possession and study by the special holy "yes" men.

Source used:
Changes in Catholic Attitudes Toward Bible Readings
(Note: I do not agree with this website's Catholic beliefs; I am only quoting it as a source so as to make a point).

Now, it is possible that had they succeeded in their plan, plans for the KJV would be cancelled.

This was definitely the devil's goal. To stop the Word of God getting into more hands of the common man.

Maybe; it would depend on if the next monarch chose to cancel it or not. But that wasn't their goal, and would have simply been an incidental effect. And it would have, again, not prevented the Bible from being in the hands of the common man because the common man already had it.

Again, your loyal Catholics during that time were against the idea of the common man having a Bible. They knew what the Protestants were doing. Their plot to kill the King would stop Protestantism in New England (Which would include the spread of the Bible into the hands of the common man in New England in a more profound way).

Even if everything worked out perfectly for them, and the bomb somehow set off a chain of events that led to England returning to Catholicism, England would've most likely just adopted the Douay-Rheims Bible, the English translation done by Catholics that came out before the KJV did.

Good thing that didn't happen.
God cares about His Word.
The Douay-Rheims Bible actually subtly favors Catholic beliefs (Which is wrong).
In fact, in American History, when Bibles were accepted to be read in schools: Catholics wanted to have their bibles in school, but at the time the King James Bible stood as the Bible to be read in schools instead. Riots broke out on this issue. Surely folks who knew their King James Bible knew the differences between these two Bibles. Today, it is like people are in a fog and you show them the differences and they cannot see it.
This is because they don't want to see it. Plus, there is a spirit at work behind them not seeing it, as well.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

No, the KJVO myth is a PROVEN LIE !
GOD IS NOT LIMITED to the KJV. Can you prove the NKJV, NASV, ESV, Geneva Bible, or Bishop's Bible are not just-as-much God's word in English as any other ?

I've posted much more than opinion. Can you find any MANUSCRIPT SOURCE for the words "and shalt be" in the KJV's Rev. 16:5 ???????????????

And how about the PROOF I posted from the AV 1611 itself that Psalm 12:7 is about PEOPLE ?

And how about any SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for the KJVO myth ? I posted the man-made, cultic, dishonest origin of the current edition of this myth, but there's not one quark of SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for it, a fact that automatically makes it FALSE.

If it's false, it's a LIE, right ? And what is anyone who deliberately tells something he/she KNOWS is a lie, but a LIAR ? So, do you REALLY wanna persist in telling a proven lie, knowing God's penalty for that ? Please think it over !

I believe the caps lock key should be used sparingly.
An overuse of using cap locks on words can make it appear like you are shouting, and most people do not want to listen to a person who is shouting.
At least, that is my opinion, anyways. You are free to do as you wish. Just know that is a deterrent for many.

Peace, and blessings be unto you in the Lord.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Nah, according to my grandmother, God rest her, the Korean translation of the Bible is the only true one, as the others are written in the ghastly languages that foreigners speak.

Please consider checking out 30 points I created in this thread. Many of them are based on Scripture.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I will say it again and no more, there was killing from both sides. Neither side is innocent.

Again, I believe Christians who are truly following Christ hold to Christ's teaching on Non-Resistance.

See this thread here to learn with Scripture on the NT teaching on Non-Resistance:

Nonresistance as Taught in the New Testament is Moral and Good.

In other words, Non-Resistant Christians (at that time) did not fight back, and they were martyred by Catholics. So Christ following Christians were innocent and they were killed by Catholics. The Catholics started the crusades, and they were ultimately to blame for them. They killed innocent Christians. That is what you are not getting. Sure, there were Protestants who fought back, but they were doing so in self defense (Even though they were disobeying the teachings of Christ by doing so). But the Catholics were ultimately in the wrong for the Crusades and not the Protestants. The Protestants did not start the Crusades.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

They did compile what you have in your hands today. They compiled the canon of scripture. The books that go into the Bible that you read from.

That is my point.

While you may believe documents in history written by men as your authority, I don't believe the Catholics compiled the canon of Scripture. I believe faithful men of God did so. Why? Because most of Scripture is written by faithful men of God.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Did the translators of the KJV, in England, in 1611, more than 1600 years after the Bible was written, grow up and know these language intimately for them to truly know them with 100% certainty? Or did they form their own Word of God by their own interpretation on the Biblical Greek, and or Biblical Hebrew? How do you know?

Observable Evidence of the Bible itself being divine in origin.

Love Branch: Evidences for the Word of God

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Just like you're never going to compare the NIV and KJV with the Greek, in case it clearly shows that the KJV is wrong.

The NIV is a horrible translation. Even many Modern Translation folk will admit this fact. Go to Google and type in the keywords “KJV vs NIV” and you will see many changes for the worse and not for the better. If you don't care about the changes for the worse, then you simply do not care about the truth of God's Word on the same level as I do. I care about fasting to cast out persistent demons. I care about Jesus not sinning. I care about the Trinity. I care about the true test as it is given to us in 1 John 4:3 (Which is a defense of the Incarnation).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

How do you know?



I would imagine that translation is only "guessing" if it does not agree with what you want it to say.
If it could be proved that the KJV agreed perfectly with the Greek, you would not be saying that - at all. You'd be shouting it from the rooftops and rubbing my nose in it at every opportunity.



There are people, even on these forums, who understand, and have studied, Koine Greek.
If one of them was a KJV only person, I've no doubt you'd listen to them.



No, I have Koine Greek dictionary and trust those who have studied, and translated, the Greek.
You won't trust them, because they might prove that in some cases the KJV has got it wrong - so you just bad mouth the language itself by calling it a dead language.

Guess what? KJV English is dead too.



No, of course you won't.
The only scholars you'll believe are those who say, "on this point, the KJV is more accurate/a better translation" or who teach that generally it is the best thing ever.

The NT was written in GREEK, not KJV English.
Scholars translated the KJV from the Greek - i.e from a "dead" language. But there's no way you would tell them that they were only guessing; that they needed a time machine to go back and prove what the Greek said.
So isn't it slightly daft to insist that no one can understand what a dead language says, when you, yourself, read a Bible that was translated, by scholars, from a dead language?

No. The KJV English is not dead. It lives in the hearts of cherished believers today who hold to the KJV as the perfect Word of God.

 

[robycop3]

No. The KJV English is not dead. It lives in the hearts of cherished believers today who hold to the KJV as the perfect Word of God.

Actually, it only lives in the hearts of Shakespearean actors/actresses, who practice it so it sounds natural, as if that was all they spoke. I have such an actor as a friend, so I know what I'm talking about. He useta practice with me, as I have no prob understanding that archaic speech.

A KJVO preacher doesn't talk/write that way in everyday conversation, same as a lawyer who may cite a Latin phrase while working doesn't speak Latin in everyday communication.

And we've REPEATEDLY PROVEN to you that the KJV is NOT pure, perfect, or faultless ! God only inspired men to make it, same as He did ALL valid English translations, older or newer. He did NOT grant those translators the ability to be error-free ! The KJV is no-more-inspired than is the "Great Bible" or other well-known older English translations, or the ESV or NKJV among newer ones.

And it's been PROVEN to you that the KJVO myth is a BIG FAT LIE ! I believe you're trying God's patience by repeating that LIE. I hope it doesn't come back to bite you on the seat !

 

[robycop3]

I shall prove most of your 30 points false. I shall copy them as quotes so there'll be no doubt nor confusion:

#1. A person will be for "the KJV as their final word of authority alone" if they believe these 3 biblical truths apply today:

(a) Psalms 12:6, (Is your Bible the pure words of the Lord?)
(b) Psalms 12:7, (Is your Bible preserved today?)
(c) Habakkuk 2:2 & 2 Corinthians 3:12 KJV
(Is your Bible using plainness of speech?)

a.) Same verse is found in all valid versions.
b.) V7 is about PEOPLE, as the AV1611 itself proves ! !
c.) One's OWN language is plainer speech than some archaic form of it.

#2. Comparing the KJV vs. Modern Translations shows changes for the worse and not for the better.

MMRRPP ! WRONG !
Most MVs correct some glaring goofs in the KJV such as "Easter" in Acts 12:4.

#3. Biblical Numerics confirm both the original languages and the KJV as being the divinely inspired Word of God.

Numerology is among the forms of witchcraft & sorcery Scripture condemns.

{quote]#4. The KJV has had more attacks against it than any other Bible.[/quote]

That's because of the pushing of the false KJVO myth.

#5. Certain men who worked on Modern Translations have mysteriously received the frog in the throat plague from the Bible

I dealt with that absurdity in another post.

#6. While certain doctrines have been unaffected, there are certain unique major doctrinal changes;

ACTUALLY, they're more-correct translations.

#7. Modern Translations can on occasion cause confusion in a Bible study

Only with KJVOs.

That's enuff for one post! More to follow ![/I][/B]

 

[Der Alte]

Observable Evidence of the Bible itself being divine in origin....

Such as? Saying this does nothing to answer my question. The translators of the KJV in the preface of the KJV made no such claims.
A brief quote from the preface of the KJV.

Neither did wee thinke much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrewe, Syrian, Greeke, or Latine, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch; neither did we disdaine to revise that which we had done, and to bring backe to the anvill that which we had hammered: but having and using as great helpes as were needfull, and fearing no reproch for slownesse, nor coveting praise for expedition, wee have at the length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the worke to that passe that you see….

Yet for all that it cannot be dissembled, that partly to exercise and whet our wits, partly to weane the curious from loathing of them for their every-where-plainenesse, partly also to stirre up our devotion to crave the assistance of Gods spirit by prayer, and lastly, that we might be forward to seeke ayd of our brethren by conference, and never scorne those that be not in all respects so complete as they should bee, being to seeke in many things our selves, it hath pleased God in his divine providence, heere and there to scatter wordes and sentences of that difficultie and doubtfulnesse, not in doctrinall points that concerne salvation, (for in such it hath beene vouched that the Scriptures are plaine) but in matters of lesse moment, that fearefulnesse would better beseeme us then confidence, and if we will resolve, to resolve upon modestie with S. Augustine, (though not in this same case altogether, yet upon the same ground) Melius est dubitare de occultis, quàm litigare de incertis, it is better to make doubt of those things which are secret, then to strive about those things that are uncertaine.

​

 

[robycop3]

#8. The Historical Uniqueness of the King James above any other translation.

EVERY translation is unique! They are each different from any other ! Common Sense !

#9. An Attack on God's Word by Satan is consistent with his strategies as we read in God's Word.

And that's why we have the pox of the false KJVO myth. It's an invention of Satan's.

#10. "The Anti-One Perfect Word in Today's Language View" cannot be seen in Scripture.

Nor can any "perfect word" requirement ! God allowed for human translators to make human errors.

#11. The devil's name is replaced either for a name of Christ, or other holy things in many Modern Translations where they do not belong.

That absurdity was dealt with in other posts.

#12. The Dark Origins of the Modern Translations.

Remember, God caused Nebuchadnezzar, a pagan king, to write some Scripture!

#13. God Translates Things and He does so Perfectly.

But He did NOT translate the KJV ! See any claims of such translation among its makers ? If He had, they woulda known the meaning of "re'em", translated 'unicorn', a mythical critter, & written whatever a re'em really is.

#14. The Simple Way of Faith, vs. the Complicated Way of Faith:

ALL valid versions contain the same verses.

#15. The Living Word vs. the Communicated Word:

The fact that God's word IS alive, as is its Author, shows it's NOT frozen in time, as Shakespeare's or Milton's works are. Thus, we have MODERN translations in MODERN languages.

#16. The Time in History in Which It Was Translated:

Not germane to this discussion. Wycliffe's translation was at a more-momentous time, when the RCC was in power in Britain, & had condemned any & all translations of the Latin Vulgate into common languages, or the possession of copies of Scripture by anyone not of their clergy. The KJV men worked without fear of govt. persecution.

And the "7 church ages" doctrine is as phony & false as the KJVO myth is !

More in next post !

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Such as? Saying this does nothing to answer my question. The translators of the KJV in the preface of the KJV made no such claims.
A brief quote from the preface of the KJV.

Neither did wee thinke much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrewe, Syrian, Greeke, or Latine, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch; neither did we disdaine to revise that which we had done, and to bring backe to the anvill that which we had hammered: but having and using as great helpes as were needfull, and fearing no reproch for slownesse, nor coveting praise for expedition, wee have at the length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the worke to that passe that you see….

Yet for all that it cannot be dissembled, that partly to exercise and whet our wits, partly to weane the curious from loathing of them for their every-where-plainenesse, partly also to stirre up our devotion to crave the assistance of Gods spirit by prayer, and lastly, that we might be forward to seeke ayd of our brethren by conference, and never scorne those that be not in all respects so complete as they should bee, being to seeke in many things our selves, it hath pleased God in his divine providence, heere and there to scatter wordes and sentences of that difficultie and doubtfulnesse, not in doctrinall points that concerne salvation, (for in such it hath beene vouched that the Scriptures are plaine) but in matters of lesse moment, that fearefulnesse would better beseeme us then confidence, and if we will resolve, to resolve upon modestie with S. Augustine, (though not in this same case altogether, yet upon the same ground) Melius est dubitare de occultis, quàm litigare de incertis, it is better to make doubt of those things which are secret, then to strive about those things that are uncertaine.

​

If you were to look at the link, and the evidences provided, it would answer what you proposed. God's Word is holy and perfect 100%. It's not a holey bible (a bible full of holes, but a Holy Bible, that is holy or divine, i.e. perfect). The Bible is not holy by 70%, or 90%, or 98%. God's true Word (Bible) is a Holy Bible by 100%. Evidences of God's Word shows that fact. His Word is perfect like He is perfect. Of course many seek to change God's Word. This is nothing new. This change on God's Word began even back at the Garden of Eden.

Side Note:

Oh, and bringing up type font differences is silly and highly illogical. That is not a change of the actual word itself. I believe in the 1900 circa. Cambridge Edition as the final purified edition of the KJV.

The 1611 is not another translation from the 1900 circa. Cambridge. It is an edition. Not an entirely new translation. It's why you will see 1611 in the place where the copyright section portion of the book (if it has one) in later KJV editions (Note: Yes, the KJV is not copywritten here in the US, but is in the UK). No offense, but knowing these differences is pretty basic if you studied this kind of topic before.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

EVERY translation is unique! They are each different from any other ! Common Sense !


And that's why we have the pox of the false KJVO myth. It's an invention of Satan's.


Nor can any "perfect word" requirement ! God allowed for human translators to make human errors.


That absurdity was dealt with in other posts.


Remember, God caused Nebuchadnezzar, a pagan king, to write some Scripture!


But He did NOT translate the KJV ! See any claims of such translation among its makers ? If He had, they woulda known the meaning of "re'em", translated 'unicorn', a mythical critter, & written whatever a re'em really is.


ALL valid versions contain the same verses.


The fact that God's word IS alive, as is its Author, shows it's NOT frozen in time, as Shakespeare's or Milton's works are. Thus, we have MODERN translations in MODERN languages.


Not germane to this discussion. Wycliffe's translation was at a more-momentous time, when the RCC was in power in Britain, & had condemned any & all translations of the Latin Vulgate into common languages, or the possession of copies of Scripture by anyone not of their clergy. The KJV men worked without fear of govt. persecution.

And the "7 church ages" doctrine is as phony & false as the KJVO myth is !

More in next post !

Not all bibles say the same thing. God is not the author of confusion.
There has to be one nailed down perfect Word of God that we can know today that is not overly complicated like with trying to know a dead language that nobody can truly know with 100% certainty. For example: A man named Rick could put a gun to Bob's head and say, “I want you to perfectly translate John 1:1-7 from the Greek into English next month without flaw or your dead.” However, such a request would be unfair because Bob cannot perfectly do so because he did not grow up speaking and writing Greek perfectly in that culture. That culture or world is gone. So to do so perfectly would be impossible.

 

[robycop3]

#17. “OAO (Original Autographs Only) Position” Goes Against Scripture & Logic:

EVERY accurate Bible translation was/is made from the ancient Scriptural mss. GOD preserved for us to use. While He allowed the originals to crumble to dust, lest they become icons like the "Holy Grail", He has preserved over 5K mss & fragments for us. We have what GOD wanted us to have. If a translation doesn't follow those ancient mss, it's not accurate, simple as THAT !

#18. In the Bible: We can see a pattern of God preserving copies of His Word, and not the original autographs.

I explained why. This is redundant.

#19. God cannot lie, and The Scriptures cannot be broken:

You finally said something correct ! And there's absolutely NO SCRIPTURE supporting the KJVO myth whatsoever !

#20. 1 Thessalonians 2:13 says that we received the Words not as the words of men, but as the very words of God.

And that includes all valid translations, not just ONE !

#21. God’s Commands are changed:

HORSE FEATHERS ! MVs have BETTER translations of them. For instance, the KJV poorly renders Ex. 20:13, "Thou shalt not KILL", then the CORRECT translation would be "Thou shalt not MURDER". "Kill" means to end the life of any living thing, plant or animal. To follow the KJV's version of that command would mean we couldn't eat, as we kill something with every bite.

#22. Modern Bible Versions Are Always Under Construction to Be Fixed.

The KJV has had more alterations than any other English version !

#23. Giant Sections of Scripture are Cast into Doubt With Footnotes.

The AV 1611, the original KJV, has more footnotes than any other version made after it !

#24. Modern Versions make Jesus appear to sin.

More Horse Feathers!

#25. Your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men:

YOURS does! You place faith in the work of the AV makers, & the editors who re-did their work.

#26. Words of Jesus are taken away by Modern Translations.

That's cuz they weren't originally HIS words, but were added in the KJV or its sources by men

#27. Modern Translations Are Not Inerrant:

And neither is the KJV ! ALL Bible translations are the products of God's perfect word being handled by imperfect men.

#28. The Consistency of faith in God’s Word and Romans 10:17.

Romans 10:17 is in every valid Bible version.

#29. The KJV was Prophetically Chosen Ahead of Time in a Language That Fulfills the Great Commission Today:

COMPLETE ABSURDITY ! Nowhere in Scripture is the KJV even hinted at !

#30. The Superior Characteristics of the The Translation of the KJV Itself over Modern Translations:

It's not a bit superior; in fact, it's INFERIOR, due to archaic language, & the many goofs & booboos it contains.

So much for your "30 Points ". They've been shown to be rubbish. (No insult to you, personally, meant !)

 

[robycop3]

Bible Highlighter, I addressed all your points, but you have not addressed some very-important ones I posted, such as :

1.) There's no ancient Greek Scriptural manuscript of revelation containing the Greek for the words "and shalt be" in Rev. 16:5. The KJV ADDED those words to GOD'S word !

2.) The KJV OMITS the words "through our Lord Jesus Christ" from Jude 25.

3.) There's NO Scriptural support whatsoever for the KJVO myth. Since only GOD can make true doctrines of faith/worship, this makes the KJVO myth automatically false.

You've made a building with no foundation!

 

[Strong in Him]

The NIV is a horrible translation.

The NIV proclaims Jesus and teaches and explains the Gospel every bit as much as the KJV does.
I have been saved and blessed big time through the NIV.

Go to Google and type in the keywords “KJV vs NIV” and you will see many changes for the worse and not for the better.

Unless you show us the Greek so we can see what was written, I refuse to believe they are changes. Differences from the KJV, yes - but then your firm belief is that the KJV is perfect and you won't consider, even for a moment, that you could be wrong.
Show us the Greek and we'll be able to see where any changes have occurred.

I care about fasting to cast out persistent demons. I care about Jesus not sinning. I care about the Trinity. I care about the true test as it is given to us in 1 John 4:3 (Which is a defense of the Incarnation).

I care about Jesus not sinning - because he didn't. I care about the Trinity. I care about the incarnation. All these are taught in the NIV.
I don't care for people who tell me that I am reading a horrible, corrupt version of God's word - even though I am saved just as much as you are.