Why the King James Bible is Still the Best and Most Accurate

[Strong in Him]

What I see in these pictures are men in long flowing robes. Jesus said, “Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;”

It wasn't the long robes that were wrong; it was that the scribes loved to be greeted by their title - I was told that "Rabbi" means, "my great one - and they loved the most important places at banquets.
Jesus possibly wore a long robe himself.

What I also see in these pictures is iconography. No offense, but I believe this to be idolatry (although I am sure you disagree).

So I find such pictures to be offensive spiritually

That's your choice - but what's that got to do with liturgy?

because we do not clearly see these things in the Holy Bible.

There are lots of things we don't see in the Bible - like computers, audio-visual systems, Sunday schools, pianos and so on; it doesn't mean they are wrong.

They are traditions added to God’s Word;

No one's added them to God's word; they are just things that some find helpful in worship.
They are not my personal taste, to be honest - but they are not wrong.

And we are told to not add or take away from His Word (See: Revelation 22:18-19).

i) They have not been added to God's word.
ii) I am pretty sure that that verse applies to the book of Revelation. The Bible had not been compiled then; there was no one book that was known as God's word.

 

[pescador]

It's important to realize (although it's obvious) that the KJV is not the original Bible, it is a translation made many centuries after the source documents were created. It is impossible to produce a word-for-word translation of the early documents into English because there are many differences -- vocabulary, verb tenses, idioms, etc. Additionally, nobody in the world speaks/reads/writes in the dead form of English that was used more than 400 years ago.

I cannot in any way understand why the KJVOs can't understand that their preferred version is not the original Word of God; it is a translation. Additionally, IMHO the KJV Englyshe must be constantly re-translated in the minds of modern readers. I have not seen a single person, including the KJVO crowd, that communicates in this archaic form of English. Why not? Because it is a dead language.

Additionally, I have heard people re-translate the KJV over and over and over, saying "now what this means is..." in order to make God's perfect Word conform to their imperfect doctrine.

KJVOs might sound authoritative to some, especially people who like to think of themselves as the only ones who understand "the truth" but to me it's nothing but self-deception.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It’s the KJV that has the incorrect translation because the Hebrew Bible doesn’t say the Son of God it says the son of the gods. Your Bible has the translator’s interpretation added into it which is why the translation is incorrect.

Do you believe Jesus was the fourth one in the fire? How do you know this if such is the case? It is because the Bible tells us in Daniel 3:25. But Vatican Modern bibles takes this truth away. You believe something but not by the Bible. The same with the Trinity. You believe the Trinity but it is not because the Bible tells you so with 1 John 5:7 (Which is removed in Modern Vatican bibles). I find this too be odd.

What is also odd is folks want me to believe that Lucifer has not tried to be like Jesus in Modern Bibles. Daniel 3:25 is just one testimony. But of course people just don’t want to believe that a perfect Bible exists today that they can hold in their hands.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

I am not keeping up, so I am skipping around.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Do you believe Jesus was the fourth one in the fire? How do you know this if such is the case? It is because the Bible tells us in Daniel 3:25. But Vatican Modern bibles takes this truth away. You believe something but not by the Bible. The same with the Trinity. You believe the Trinity but it is not because the Bible tells you so with 1 John 5:7 (Which is removed in Modern Vatican bibles). I find this too be odd.

What is also odd is folks want me to believe that Lucifer has not tried to be like Jesus in Modern Bibles. Daniel 3:25 is just one testimony. But of course people just don’t want to believe that a perfect Bible exists today that they can hold in their hands.

We don’t know who the fourth person in the fire is. What we can be sure of is that it was God’s intervention that saved them. Nebuchadnezzar wouldn’t say that he was the Son of God because he had no idea who the Son of God was. Nebuchadnezzar was a pagan so it makes perfect sense that he might say he looked like a son of the gods. I prefer to read what was actually written over what someone things the author meant.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It's important to realize (although it's obvious) that the KJV is not the original Bible, it is a translation made many centuries after the source documents were created. It is impossible to produce a word-for-word translation of the early documents into English because there are many differences -- vocabulary, verb tenses, idioms, etc. Additionally, nobody in the world speaks/reads/writes in the dead form of English that was used more than 400 years ago.

I cannot in any way understand why the KJVOs can't understand that their preferred version is not the original Word of God; it is a translation. Additionally, IMHO the KJV Englyshe must be constantly re-translated in the minds of modern readers. I have not seen a single person, including the KJVO crowd, that communicates in this archaic form of English. Why not? Because it is a dead language.

Additionally, I have heard people re-translate the KJV over and over and over, saying "now what this means is..." in order to make God's perfect Word conform to their imperfect doctrine.

KJVOs might sound authoritative to some, especially people who like to think of themselves as the only ones who understand "the truth" but to me it's nothing but self-deception.

I completely agree, I see so many people comparing versions to the KJV instead of comparing all of them to the older Greek and Hebrew texts. You can’t determine which is more accurate by comparing modern translations to one another without referring to the older texts. It seems like people actually think that the KJV is the original text. Like the prophets and apostles actually wrote the KJV. None of the biblical authors spoke or wrote English. Well ok the apostles actually might’ve been able to after Pentecost but they didn’t.

 

[Strong in Him]

The same with the Trinity. You believe the Trinity but it is not because the Bible tells you so with 1 John 5:7 (Which is removed in Modern Vatican bibles). I find this too be odd.

I believe in the Trinity because the Bible teaches it.
Scripture teaches that the Father, the Son and the Spirit are God yet there is ONE God, not three.
The words of John 1:1, which say that the Word, who is Jesus, is God, are exactly the same in the NIV as in the KJV.

Sorry, but there are many Christians who believe in the Trinity who do not read, and have not read, the KJV - which means that we learned about it from other translations of the Bible.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

We don’t know who the fourth person in the fire is. What we can be sure of is that it was God’s intervention that saved them. Nebuchadnezzar wouldn’t say that he was the Son of God because he had no idea who the Son of God was. Nebuchadnezzar was a pagan so it makes perfect sense that he might say he looked like a son of the gods. I prefer to read what was actually written over what someone things the author meant.

Jesus said, “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.” (John 5:39).

The OT is all about Jesus.
For not only are there tons of Messianic prophecies, but Jesus made many pre-incarnate appearances in the Old Testament, as well. You can check that out at this CF thread here (If you are unaware of this or you would like to check out a reference in Scripture you might have missed on the topic).

Anyways, there are several problems with taking the popular Critical Text view (or Modern Bible position) on Daniel 3:25.

Problem #1. We see a pattern of the devil placing his name in the Bible where it does not belong in Modern Bibles that comes from the critical text (Isaiah 14:12, cf. Revelation 22:16, Revelation 13:1). If Daniel 3:25 was the only place where this happened, then you might be on to something; But like good detectives will do, they will piece together a crime scene by looking at a pattern of evidence to solve a crime. In this case, we as Bible believers must look at the pattern of the testimony in Scripture. By doing so, it will make it obvious that the Modern Bible rendering on Daniel 3:25 is yet another corruption upon the true line of manuscripts (the Textus Receptus, which led to the King James Bible).

Problem #2. The context (Part 1). By reading the context even in Modern bibles, Nebuchadnezzar refers to the most high God (singular), and not one of many gods in the immediate context when talking about the God of the Hebrews.

(a) who is that God that shall deliver you out of my hands? (Daniel 3:15).
(b) ye servants of the most high God, (Daniel 3:26).
(c) Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, (Daniel 3:28).
(d) because there is no other God that can deliver after this sort (Daniel 3:29).

Problem #3. The context (Part 2).

“Then Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him,” (Daniel 3:28) (KJB).

Then Nebuchadnezzar said, “Praise be to the God of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, who has sent his angel and rescued his servants! They trusted in him and defied the king’s command and were willing to give up their lives rather than serve or worship any god except their own God.” (Daniel 3:28) (NIV).

“Nebuchadnezzar answered and said, “Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who has sent his angel and delivered his servants, who trusted in him, and set aside the king’s command, and yielded up their bodies rather than serve and worship any god except their own God.” (Daniel 3:28) (ESV).

This verse is all we need to refute the false thinking by OAO Proponents (Original Autograph Only Believers or Only the originals were inspired and perfect). Daniel 3:28 also says the same thing in Modern Bibles in that Nebuchadnezzar says that the God (singular) of Daniel’s three friends had sent his angel (messenger) to deliver his servants that trusted him. In order to make your view work, you would have to make me believe Nebuchadnezzar had a split personality at this point in time of his life (Whereby he was confused about reality and said things that contradicted himself). For Nebuchadnezzar clearly refers to God as singular in Daniel 3:28 in reference to the angel that delivered Daniel’s three friends. This shows the obvious error in Modern Bibles on Daniel 3:25. Not even the Modern rendering lines up with the context. That’s clearly bad scholarship and a corruption upon God’s Word. To not see this is to simply bury one’s head in the sand to the truth here.

Problem #4. The Vatican influence on most Modern Bibles.

Again, unlike the KJB, most of all your Modern Bibles comes from the Critical Text.

This constantly changing Critical Greek Text is under the direct supervision of the Vatican. They come right out and tell you this. They aren't even trying to hide it. Here is a photo of page 45 from right out of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition.

Source:
The KJB Only versus the Latin Vulgate Only Argument by: Another King James Bible Believer

But Guess which Bible the Roman Catholic Church does NOT want you to read -

Source:
Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT etc. are the new "Vatican Versions" by: Another King James Bible Believer

Note: I am aware this forbidden book of the Catholic church is an older version, and they have updated it. But the point here is that at one time, they considered the KJB to be a forbidden book.

Very interesting.

Side Note:

Oh, and yes, I know about Erasmus, but he was not exactly in agreement with many Catholic doctrines, and he was later rejected by the Catholic church and he died among his Protestant friends.

To learn more about Erasmus, check out this article here.​

I could list more problems as to why we should not trust the Modern Bible rendering on Daniel 3:25, but if you need more reasons, you can simply check out the following CF thread here.

30 Reasons for the King James Bible.

So if this does not crumble your belief in Modern scholarship or the Modern bibles wrong rendering on Daniel 3:25, I don’t know what will do so, my friend.

In any event, may God bless you (even if you continue to disagree).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I completely agree, I see so many people comparing versions to the KJV instead of comparing all of them to the older Greek and Hebrew texts. You can’t determine which is more accurate by comparing modern translations to one another without referring to the older texts. It seems like people actually think that the KJV is the original text. Like the prophets and apostles actually wrote the KJV. None of the biblical authors spoke or wrote English. Well ok the apostles actually might’ve been able to after Pentecost but they didn’t.

There are a few KJB only folk who are seriously uneducated or who have a limited redneck worldview on reality whereby they say dumb things like the KJB was something that the apostles even used. Clearly that is not the case. The KJB was the first major Bible that went out to the common man (Which was against what the Catholics wanted at that time for they desired to kill King James and his translation with a super bomb).

I would encourage you to read up on the history of the King James Bible.
At least watch the documentary here.

KJB: The Book That Changed the World:

Trailer:

Watch Kjb - The Book That Changed The World | Prime Video

Anyways, Christians have faith to believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ and a host of a bunch of other great miracles in the Bible, but they don’t have enough faith to believe that God is powerful enough to preserve His own words for all generations as Psalms 12:6-7 says (Which is a passage that is corrupted of course n Modern bibles). Christians who love Jesus and want to follow Him are obviously not agnostic in general, but when it comes to the Bible, they have an agnostic position. They are Bible agnostics (and not agnostics in general). An agnostic (in general) is a person who believes in the possibility that there is a God, but they simply do not know if He exists. The same is true with Christians in regards to their position on the Bible. They believe that a perfect Bible may exist somewhere, but they don’t have one. For it is one thing to know God exists and be a believer, vs. the possibility that He exists. The same is true with the Bible. A Christian can take an agnostic position with their approach to the Bible by their denial that God did not preserve His Words whereby we can hold a perfect Bible or at least a trustworthy Bible that will lead us to be perfect unto all good works according to 2 Timothy 3:16-17. For all Scripture is profitable for doctrine and instruction in righteousness so that the man of God may be perfect unto all good works (See: 2 Timothy 3:16-17). But if Scripture is tainted, or says contradictory things like in Modern bibles, then how can something like that make one perfect unto all good works if God’s Word is not perfect? For something imperfect cannot make a person perfect.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

A Brief Look at
the KJV vs the Modern Translations
in American History:​

Abraham Lincoln had used and quoted from a King James Bible.
Old school literary authors quoted from the King James Bible.
It's influence here in America can never be forgotten.

Riots broke out here in America over their desire of having the Catholic version of the Bible in public schools. One took place in 1844 in Philadelphia. Others took place at a later date in Cincinnati, Ohio.

What Bible were Catholics up against being used in school?

The King James Bible.

In 1852, the King James Bible was ruled in court fit for use in public schools since it was common to all Christians.

It wasn't until 1872 that the state of Ohio banned mandatory Bible reading in public schools. However, the United States Supreme Court did not ban the practice of reading the bible in public schools on a national level until 1962.

While these riots were one reason that resulted in the ultimate banning of Bible reading in public schools, another reason was the declining favor for the King James Bible over the slight rising increase of interest in Modern Translations.

In New England: The first major departure from the King James Bible (Textus Receptus) took place in 1881 with Westcott and Hort's Greek New Testament based on two Catholic manuscripts (The Codex Sinaiticus, and the Codex Vaticanus).

This English Revised Translation of the Old Testament done in 1885 (ERV) (Also known as the Revised Version - RV). The ERV or RV (Revised Version) was copyrighted in the United States in 1885 for publication here in America.

Note: No Modern Translation existed here in America before 1885.

The ERV was based on supposedly more advanced scholarship, but it sold poorly here in the United States.

So an effort was created to bring in the American Standard Version (ASV). It was launched in 1901. This version also was faced with a lack of success.

Then the Revised Standard Version (RSV) came out in 1947, and then the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) followed in 1971.

However, the perception of the “New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)” at this time was that it leaned more towards liberalism and ecumenism.

The last in line of these Modern Translations (mentioned here) was an implicit eucumenical translation that was intended to look good to Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox Christians equally.

It was the NIV.

The NIV (The New International Version) released in 1973 was designed supposedly to return to the Protestant distinctiveness of the King James (Which was not true). The NIV was also designed with advances in supposedly trusted Biblical scholarship.

The NIV became the most popular Bibles ever with the American public, whereas all other versions up to this point attempted word for word translation, the NIV relied less on former translations that would be easier to understand for the average reader.

This is why the boom of Modern Bible movement went mainstream in the 1970's. It was because of the NIV. Then all the other popular candy coated Bible versions followed.

 

[seeking.IAM]

... The KJB was the first major Bible that went out to the common man (Which was against what the Catholics wanted at that time for they desired to kill King James and his translation with a super bomb)...

I suspect the Catholics weren't going to be fond of anything commissioned by the Church of England, whether made available to the common man or not. Schism will do that do you.

 

[Strong in Him]

The KJB was the first major Bible that went out to the common man

So?
That is not a reason for saying that it is the only word of God and all other Bibles are "corrupt".

but they don’t have enough faith to believe that God is powerful enough to preserve His own words for all generations

God HAS preserved his word for all generations.
No one has changed the Gospel or the way of salvation.
No one has decided to update certain stories, give people, like David, new personalities, or delete bits of the Bible that they don't like, like the Jewish food laws or the OT wars.
Mankind has still sinned against God.
The wages of sin is still death.
Mankind has still sinned against God and needs to be forgiven and reconciled.
The way to forgiveness, reconciliation and eternal life is still through the cross and trusting in Jesus.
The Holy Spirit can still live in us and give us power and strength to teach and live Jesus' teachings.

None of this has been updated/replaced by successive generations and cultures. The Gospel, the cross, the resurrection, Pentecost and Jesus' return are still as true now as they ever were.

as Psalms 12:6-7 says (Which is a passage that is corrupted of course n Modern bibles).

No, it hasn't been "corrupted", and it hasn't "of course" been corrupted.
The words may differ slightly from the KJV - which in your thinking means they are corrupted because, for you, the KJV can be nothing less than perfect.
And your interpretation of those verses is way off. But, to you, it is a prophecy about the KJV, so, again, it is true and cannot be challenged.

Christians who love Jesus and want to follow Him are obviously not agnostic in general, but when it comes to the Bible, they have an agnostic position. They are Bible agnostics (and not agnostics in general). An agnostic (in general) is a person who believes in the possibility that there is a God, but they simply do not know if He exists. The same is true with Christians in regards to their position on the Bible. They believe that a perfect Bible may exist somewhere, but they don’t have one.

Every Christian that I know or have ever met believes that the Bible is God's holy word; inspired, true and inerrant.
Every Christian I know or have ever met is also wise enough to know that ALL Bibles are translations and may contain textural differences - due to changes in language etc. This includes the KJV. None of these changes affect, or alter, the Gospel.
A really wise Christian will study several translations and/or try to discover what the changes mean, and why they might have been made - and you once quoted the verse about studying to show one to be approved by God, so I thought you might have agreed with that.

But if Scripture is tainted, or says contradictory things like in Modern bibles, then how can something like that make one perfect unto all good works if God’s Word is not perfect?

God's word IS perfect.
Sorry, but it's you who doesn't seem to understand that the Gospel is the same in ALL Bibles; that God's word has NOT been changed and if you have Bibles that differ in small ways, it does not mean that the whole of God's message has been tainted, corrupted and is false.

For something imperfect cannot make a person perfect.

JESUS makes us perfect.
Jesus is THE Word of God - the only, perfect Word.
If you are saying that a man made translation is equal to Jesus, you may want to consider again.

 

[Davy]

One truth and one truth alone that debunks KJV being the most accurate. The source text used on other translations is older than the source text used in KJV. Therefore, it wasn't NIV, NASB, ESV, or any other that changed up anything, it was the scribes over time that added their own tidbits into the source text that KJV was based on that added to the scripture. However, I will say this, does the few verses that were added change anything, or were they necessarily wrong? No. However, these verses are of very minor significance. They take nothing away from the overall message, nor do they really add anything or mess with doctrine in any sort of way. It's not a matter of newer translations taking away or the KJV translators adding to, it's just the simple fact that the newer translations are based on older manuscripts than the Textus Receptus and are therefore, in theory, thought to be more accurate since they were copied down earlier. Either way, if you like KJV, cool, if you don't, cool. My only issue is with those KJV onlyists who want to try and ignorantly proclaim judgement that one who was not saved "under" the KJV Bible is not truly saved and that you're not really a Christian if you don't use KJV.

The Wescott and Hort crowd love to claim their New Testament version is more accurate just because the Greek texts they used are older than the Majority Texts used for the KJV New Testament.

Older is Better is a fallacy!

The Greek texts Wescott and Hort used in the 1880s for their new Greek NT version are from the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Siniaticus. Older than the Textus Receptus which they hated, but the Greek texts they used were not as well used by the early Church. And the quotes from the early Church fathers follow the Majority Texts and its translations. The Majority Texts the KJV uses are called that because they make up the majority of Greek manuscript texts of the New Testament. But they only go back mostly to the 3rd century A.D.

1. So which Greek text seems more accurate, the ones that were mostly used by the early Church like the Textus Receptus, which the condition of those manuscripts also show wear in wide usage, and make up the Majority of Greek New Testament texts? or...

2. an older Alexandrian Greek text which copies are few in number, and do not show much usage wear, and was not widely quoted by the early Church fathers?

 

[GreekOrthodox]

The KJB was the first major Bible that went out to the common man (Which was against what the Catholics wanted at that time for they desired to kill King James and his translation with a super bomb).

Cough... Martin Luther published the German NT in 1522 and OT & Apocrypha published in 1534. By the time Luther died in 1546, over 200,000 copies had been printed.

According to Philip Schaff, "The richest fruit of Luther's leisure in the Wartburg, and the most important and useful work of his whole life, is the translation of the New Testament, by which he brought the teaching and example of Christ and the Apostles to the mind and heart of the Germans in life-like reproduction. It was a republication of the gospel. He made the Bible the people's book in church, school, and house."

 

[pescador]

So?
That is not a reason for saying that it is the only word of God and all other Bibles are "corrupt".



God HAS preserved his word for all generations.
No one has changed the Gospel or the way of salvation.
No one has decided to update certain stories, give people, like David, new personalities, or delete bits of the Bible that they don't like, like the Jewish food laws or the OT wars.
Mankind has still sinned against God.
The wages of sin is still death.
Mankind has still sinned against God and needs to be forgiven and reconciled.
The way to forgiveness, reconciliation and eternal life is still through the cross and trusting in Jesus.
The Holy Spirit can still live in us and give us power and strength to teach and live Jesus' teachings.

None of this has been updated/replaced by successive generations and cultures. The Gospel, the cross, the resurrection, Pentecost and Jesus' return are still as true now as they ever were.



No, it hasn't been "corrupted", and it hasn't "of course" been corrupted.
The words may differ slightly from the KJV - which in your thinking means they are corrupted because, for you, the KJV can be nothing less than perfect.
And your interpretation of those verses is way off. But, to you, it is a prophecy about the KJV, so, again, it is true and cannot be challenged.



Every Christian that I know or have ever met believes that the Bible is God's holy word; inspired, true and inerrant.
Every Christian I know or have ever met is also wise enough to know that ALL Bibles are translations and may contain textural differences - due to changes in language etc. This includes the KJV. None of these changes affect, or alter, the Gospel.
A really wise Christian will study several translations and/or try to discover what the changes mean, and why they might have been made - and you once quoted the verse about studying to show one to be approved by God, so I thought you might have agreed with that.



God's word IS perfect.
Sorry, but it's you who doesn't seem to understand that the Gospel is the same in ALL Bibles; that God's word has NOT been changed and if you have Bibles that differ in small ways, it does not mean that the whole of God's message has been tainted, corrupted and is false.



JESUS makes us perfect.
Jesus is THE Word of God - the only, perfect Word.
If you are saying that a man made translation is equal to Jesus, you may want to consider again.

Great post!

 

[Strong in Him]

Great post!

Thank you.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Cough... Martin Luther published the German NT in 1522 and OT & Apocrypha published in 1534. By the time Luther died in 1546, over 200,000 copies had been printed.

According to Philip Schaff, "The richest fruit of Luther's leisure in the Wartburg, and the most important and useful work of his whole life, is the translation of the New Testament, by which he brought the teaching and example of Christ and the Apostles to the mind and heart of the Germans in life-like reproduction. It was a republication of the gospel. He made the Bible the people's book in church, school, and house."

I was referring to how the King James is the first pure Word being made available to the common man. Luther’s German bible does not have verses that the KJB has.

 

[Strong in Him]

I was referring to how the King James is the first pure Word being made available to the common man. Luther’s German bible does not have verses that the KJB has.

No, because it could be that those verses were not in the originals.
But you're never going to accept that.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

When the modern version promoter tells you that No Fundamental Doctrines Are Changed:

Many modern version proponents tell us “No Fundamental Doctrines Are Changed”

But this is not true at all.

In direct contrast to the King James Bible, many modern versions teach the following false doctrines -

God can be DECEIVED by men (NASB, NET, Legacy Standard Bible)
https://brandplucked.webs.com/ps7836deceivegod.htm

The Son of God had “ORIGINS from ancient times” (NIV, ESV, NET)

http://brandplucked.webs.com/micah52heb211origin.htm

The KJB teaches that "Messiah (was) cut off, but NOT FOR HIMSELF”,
but versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB teach that “the anointed one shall be cut off AND SHALL HAVE NOTHING."
http://brandplucked.webs.com/dan926messiahcutoff.htm

Jesus LIED about what he was going to do. (ESV, NASB, NIV)
http://brandplucked.webs.com/john78didjesuslie.htm

There was a day when Jesus BECAME the Son of the Father (NIV, NET, Holman)
http://brandplucked.webs.com/acts1333thisdaybegotte.htm

The KJB teaches - Revelation 13:8 KJB - "And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him (the beast) whose names are not written in the book of life of THE LAMB SLAIN FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD."

But the ESV - (LSB, NASB, NET, Holman, Catholic St. Joseph, New Jerusalem bible) teach something quite different
- "and all who dwell on the earth will worship it, everyone WHOSE NAME HAS NOT BEEN WRITTEN BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD IN THE BOOK OF LIFE of the Lamb that was slain."
http://brandplucked.webs.com/rev138lambslain.htm


Man can SPEED UP the coming of the day of God (NIV, ESV, LSB)
http://brandplucked.webs.com/2peter312hastingunto.htm

Pride and Boasting are Christian virtues (ESV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, LSB)
http://brandplucked.webs.com/mvsprideasvirtue.htm


Ghosts do exist (NKJV, ESV, NASB, NIV)
http://brandplucked.webs.com/ghosts.htm

We should have nothing to do with a DIVISIVE person, (and Jesus himself was divisive.)
http://brandplucked.webs.com/hereticordivisive.htm



God does not take away life.(and yet he does)
http://brandplucked.webs.com/2sam1414respectpersons.htm

The KJB teaches that idol worshippers are too SUPERSTITIOUS, but many modern versions say they are VERY RELIGIOUS. (NKJV, NIV, ESV, NASB, LSB)
http://brandplucked.webs.com/acts1722superstitious.htm

There are different races of men and some races are MONGREL RACES races (NASB, NIV)
http://brandplucked.webs.com/mvsandracism.htm

To see some other examples, go to
“For ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the LORD of hosts our God.” Jeremiah 23:36
https://brandplucked.webs.com/fakebiblesdoctrine.htm

"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." Luke 8:8

Source:
Another King James Bible Believer

 

[Bible Highlighter]

To all:

When comparing Modern bibles vs. the King James Bible, I also provided my own list of doctrines changed within Modern Translation in this post here in another CF thread. I also list commands by God that were changed here.

These changes are for the worse and not for the better.

I hope this helps someone today.

May God bless you all.