Many so called "preachers and pastors" are network satanic plants, placed in modern churches to make sure the faithful are kept in a state of confusion and are kept focused on trivial, unimportant bologna. Mega churches are the worst, but even local small churches do it. Where I live, practically every single church teaches from an NIV bible (corrupted) and most bible studies have nothing to do with the spirit and teaching of truth, but of the trivial and mundane. And, of course, its about collecting money. Most churches teach false satanic doctrine and make it the focus of their ministries.
So be careful out there. The CIA and monarchs are well placed and churches are high priority for their black hand.
“Mystery, Babylon the Great, The Mother of Harlots and Abominations of the Earth..is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit...and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication...Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins” Revelation 17:2-5; 18:2-4
Bible critics (none of whom believes that any Bible in any language IS the complete, inspired and 100% historically true words of God) often attack King James Bible believers for using a Bible with "Roman Catholic" roots. For example Doug Kutilek's article “Is the King James Version a Roman Catholic Bible?” Recently I was at a Christian Forum on Facebook and I got more than a couple of remarks like: “Well, we can thank the Catholic church for the King James Bible” or “you wouldn't have the KJV without the RCC. They sponsored Erasmus (RC scholar) who rushed the manuscripts which are the basis for the the KJV.”
Their argument goes something like this: the Textus Receptus Greek text was edited by Erasmus, the King James New Testament was based upon the Textus Receptus. Erasmus was a loyal Roman Catholic so the King James Bible has strong Catholic roots.
As usual, the KJB critics’ argument is misinformed, deeply biased and misapplied. Learn more about the man Erasmus and his theology here:
Please read the entire article, but briefly some of relevant points that should be noted are: Erasmus examined hundreds of Greek manuscripts from all over Europe. He was familiar with virtually every variant reading we know of today. He was NOT limited in his knowledge of Greek readings by the alleged nine manuscripts he used to put together the New Testament Greek text. His Greek text, along with the minor revisions of Stephanus and Beza became the basis for the New Testament texts of all Reformation Bibles .
What is called the Textus Receptus was NOT the basis for the Catholic Bibles, but rather for the Reformation Bibles like Luther’s German Bible, the French Olivetan, the Italian Diodati, the Portuguese Almeida, the Spanish Reina Valera, the English Geneva Bible and of course the King James Holy Bible. The Catholic church never did approve of the Textus Receptus. In fact, the Council of Trent (1545-1564) branded Erasmus a heretic and prohibited his works. In 1559, Pope Paul IV placed Erasmus on the first class of forbidden authors, which was composed of authors whose works were completely condemned.
The King James Bible translators themselves did not even primarily use the Greek text of Erasmus for their magnificent translation, but rather the Greek texts of Stephanus and Theodore Beza, though all three are in basic agreement.
So, what exactly is the primary basis for such modern bibles as the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV and Daniel Wallace’s NET versions etc? It’s the United Bible Society’s ever changing and evolving “nothing is settled or sure” Greek text based primarily on the VATICANUS manuscript found in the Vatican library, and put out by a joint effort of Evangelicals and the Catholic Church! Hello?... Is any body home? I like to call this ever changing Greek text used by many of today’s “No Bible is inerrant” crowd the Textus Corruptus.
Do these modern day "Evangelical/Catholic" bibles like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET always follow those so called "oldest and best manuscripts" like Vaticanus? Of course not. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus both entirely omit 12 whole verses from Mark 16:9-20 and another 12 entire verses from John 7:53 to John 8:11. Yet they hypocritically cease to use "the oldest and best" in these 24 entire verses and put them in their "bibles" because all these verses ARE found in the Majority of all Greek texts, the Latin Vulgate and the Catholic bible versions like the Douay-Rheims, the 1950 Douay and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 - and not even in [brackets]! If you want to see what these so called "oldest and best manuscripts" of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are REALLY like, take a look at this revealing study here:
The basis for the modern day Catholic bibles and the textually identical "Catholic" bible versions like the ESV, NIV, NASBs etc. is not even the Latin Vulgate New Testament. Of the 17 entire verses omitted by today's Catholic versions, 9 of the 17 entire verses were found in the Latin Vulgate! You can see one of the Vulgate bible versions (there are several of them) here and check it out for yourself.
This particular Latin Vulgate contains Matthew 12:47, Matthew 17:21 (in verse 20 - their numbering system is a bit different than ours), Matthew 18:11; Mark 7:16; Mark 9:44 and 46 (located in Mark 9:45, 47); Mark 11:26; Mark 15:28 and Luke 23:17 are all found in the Latin Vulgate! Even the older Catholic bible versions like the Douay-Rheims and the Douay of 1950 contained most of the verses that are now omitted by today's "United" Bible Societies ever changing versions.
You can see the Douay-Rheims Catholic bible here. Compare the verses and see how many of them were IN the previous Catholic bible versions! To me, this is absolutely mind blowing how today's United Bible Society is churning out this new unified bible that differs so much from even the previous Catholic Bibles, all in the name of "Christian unity". Here is the previous Catholic Douay-Rheims bible.
You can look up the verses and see for yourself in black and white that it contains in its New Testament text the following verses that are entirely omitted by the UBS Evangelical/Catholic Combine that is churning out the now popular ESV, NIV and NASB "bibles". The Douay-Rheims bible of 1582 and the Douay Version of 1950 both contained all of Matthew 12:47; 17:21 (v.20); 18:11; all of 23:14!, Mark 7:16; 9:44 and 9:46 (v.45,47); Mark 11:26; 15:28; Luke 23:17, John 5:4!, Acts 8:37!!; Acts 24:6b through 8a; Acts 28:29; Romans 16:24 and even 1 John 5:7 "And there are three who give testimony in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost. And these three are one."!!! Absolutely Amazing, isn't it? So, who is coming up with this new Evangelical/Catholic Connection bible and why?
The hundreds of textual differences between the Traditional Text Reformation bibles and the modern UBS Catholic/Evangelical bible versions is that there is a concerted effort between the Catholics and modern apostate Christianity to create "a new bible" that will be accepted by both camps. It doesn't matter to them whether it is the complete, inspired and inerrant Bible or not. Neither the Evangelicals nor the Catholics believe such a thing exists! Their continuing mantra is that "ONLY the originals WERE inspired" and nobody knows for sure what the originals said, so we no longer have an inerrant bible anyway. Apparently what is important to them is that both their "bibles" agree, even though not one of them believes it IS the inerrant words of God nor our final authority. If the Bible is not the inerrant words of God, then the Bible is not our final authority and we will then need to look elsewhere. And where might that final authority be found? the "scholars"? (Evangelicals' modern day "priestcraft"), "the Pope"? or the next world religious leader (the Anti-Christ)? But you can bet it sure won't be their "bible".
Guess why the UBS (United Bible Society) Greek texts are the basis for all these new versions? It's because Catholics and Evangelicals were united to produce this text. One of the 5 chief editors was the New Age Catholic Cardinal Carlos Martini, who believed god was in all men and in all religions. Just open a copy of the UBS New Testament Greek and turn to the first page. There you will see a list of the 5 chief editors who put this abomination together. The 4th name on the list, right before the inerrancy denying Bruce Metzger, is Carlo M. Martini. In his book "In the Thick of His Ministry" the Jesuit Cardinal Martini writes: “The deification which is the aim of all religious life takes place. During a recent trip to India I was struck by the yearning for the divine that pervades the whole of Hindu culture. It gives rise to extraordinary religious forms and extremely meaningful prayers. I wondered: What is authentic in this longing to fuse with the divine dominating the spirituality of hundreds of millions of human beings, so that they bear hardship, privation, exhausting pilgrimages, in search of this ecstasy?" (In The Thick Of His Ministry, Carlo M. Martini, page 42.) Jesuit Cardinal Martini served on the editorial committee for the United Bible Societies' 2nd, 3rd and 4th editions. These are the "bibles" most modern Christians are using today when they pick up the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET or modern Catholic "bibles".
King James Bible defender David Cloud writes: “It is also important to note that there is no comparison between the situation with Erasmus and what we find in the field of modern textual criticism and the modern Bible versions today. Erasmus edited the Greek New Testament on his own. He was not doing that work in any official capacity in the Catholic Church nor did he have Rome’s backing but rather was criticized for it and his work was condemned in the strongest terms. On the other hand, the Roman Catholic Church has accepted modern textual criticism and the modern Bible versions with open arms. In 1965, Pope Paul VI authorized the publication of a new Latin Vulgate, with the Latin text conformed to the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament (Michael de Semlyen, All Roads Lead to Rome, p. 201). In 1987 a formal agreement was made between the Roman Catholic Church and the United Bible Societies that the critical Greek New Testament will be used for all future translations, both Catholic and Protestant (Guidelines for International Cooperation in Translating the Bible, Rome, 1987, p. 5). Most of the translations produced by the United Bible Societies are “interconfessional,” meaning they have Roman Catholic participation and backing.”
It is interesting to note that the latest United Bible Societies Text, descended from the Westcott and Hort family, boasts, "the new text is a reality, and as the text distributed by the United Bible Societies and by the corresponding office of the Roman Catholic Church it has rapidly become the commonly accepted text for research and study in universities and church." - Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm B Eerdmans, 1995), 35.
This comes from The Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity site. (PCPCU) Here is their site -
Here is their own Vatican statement regarding translations - Collaboration for the Diffusion of the Bible
Following the responsibility undertaken by the then Secretariat for the preparation of the dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, the PCPCU was entrusted with promoting ecumenical collaboration for the translation and diffusion of Holy Scripture (Dei Verbum, n. 22). In this context, it encouraged the formation of the Catholic Biblical Federation, with which it is in close contact. Together with the United Bible Societies it published the Guidelines for Interconfessional Cooperation in Translating the Bible (1968; new revised edition 1987).
I have a copy of the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece 27th edition right here in front of me. It is the same Greek text as the UBS (United Bible Society) 4th edition. These are the Greek readings and texts that are followed by such modern versions as the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard AND the new Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985.
If you have a copy of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition, open the book and read what they tell us in their own words on page 45 of the Introduction. Here these critical Greek text editors tell us about how the Greek New Testament (GNT, now known as the UBS) and the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece grew together and shared the same basic text.
In the last paragraph on page 45 we read these words: "The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and following an agreement between the Vatican and the United Bible Societies it has served as the basis for new translations and for revisions made under their supervision. This marks a significant step with regard to interconfessional relationships. It should naturally be understood that this text is a working text: it is not to be considered as definitive, but as a stimulus to further efforts toward defining and verifying the text of the New Testament."
There it is folks, in their own words. They openly admit that this text is the result of an agreement between the Vatican and the UBS and that the text itself is not "definitive" - it can change, as it already has and will do so in the future, and is not the infallible words of God but merely "a stimulus to further efforts".
The United Bible Societies Vice-President is Roman Catholic Cardinal Onitsha of Nigeria. On the executive committee is Roman Catholic Bishop Alilona of Italy and among the editors is Roman Catholic Jesuit Cardinal Martini of Milan. Patrick Henry happily claims, "Catholics should work together with Protestants in the fundamental task of Biblical translation …[They can] work very well together and have the same approach and interpretation ... This signals a new age in the church." - Patrick Henry, New Directions in New Testament Study (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1979), 232-234.
The St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 says in its Preface: "The translators have carried out the directive of our predecessor, Pius XII, in his famous Encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu, and the decree of the Second Vatican Council (Dei Verbum) which prescribed that..."with the approval of Church authority, these translations may be produced in cooperation with our separated brethren so that all Christians may be able to use them." From the Vatican, September 18, 1970
Here in my study I have a copy of the 1970 St. Joseph New American Bible translated by Members of the Catholic Biblical Association of America. This Catholic bible version says on page 44 of the Introduction : "In general, Nestle’s-Aland’s Novum Testamentum Graece (25th edition, 1963) was followed. Additional help was derived from The Greek New Testament (editors Aland, Black, Metzger, Wikgren) produced for the use of translators by the United Bible Societies in 1966.” - The St. Joseph New American Bible, Catholic Book Publishing Co. New York.
Guess which bible versions match the Catholic bibles today. Check out any modern Catholic bible version today like the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 or the New Jerusalem bible 1985 and compare the following New Testament verses: Matthew 6:13 "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen" (gone), all of verses Matthew17:21 (gone), Matthew 18:11 (gone), Matthew 23:14 (gone), Mark 9:44, 46 (gone); Mark 11:26 (gone), Mark 15:28 (gone), Most of Luke 9:55-56 (gone) Luke 17:36 (gone), Luke 23:17 (gone) John 5:4 (gone), Acts 8:37 (gone), Acts 15:34 (gone), Acts 24:6b - 8a (gone), Acts 28:29 (gone), Romans 16:24 (gone) and 1 John 5:7-8 missing are the words "in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth". Then check your modern versions like the NIV, ESV, RSV, NET, NASB and the Jehovah Witness version called "The New World Translation". Surprise! What’s missing? Why... it’s the same verses!
You can buy the NIV at your local Catholic book stores -
The ESV is now published with the Apocryphal books included and you can pick up a copy at the Catholic book stores, but you won't find the King James Bible there. Here is the Catholic site -
Luke 9:54-56 present an interesting case. In the King James Bible we read: "And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, EVEN AS ELIAS? But he turned, and rebuked them, AND SAID, YE KNOW NOT WHAT MANNER OF SPIRIT YE ARE OF. FOR THE SON OF MAN IS NOT COME TO DESTROY MEN'S LIVES, BUT TO SAVE THEM. And they went to another village." All the words I have capitalized in these three verses are found in the Majority of all Greek texts, and are found in many ancient versions like the Syriac Peshitta, Curetonian, Palestinian, Harkelian, Georgian, Gothic, Coptic Sahidic and Boharic, Ethiopian and the Old Latin. They are also in the Modern Greek and the Modern Hebrew bibles as well as Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the King James Bible, the French Martin 1744, French Ostervald 1996, Italian Diodati 1649 and New Diodati 1991, Luther's German Bible 1545 and 1951 German Schlachter, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569 and the Reina Valera 1909, 1995 and even the older Catholic bibles like the Douay-Rheims of 1582 and 1899 and the Douay of 1950. You can see the 1582 Catholic Rheims Bible, as well as Wycliffe, Tyndale, Cranmer and Geneva bibles for yourself here -
The NASBs reveal their fickle nature in that when it first came out in 1963 they completely omitted all these words from the text, and they did so again in the 1972 and 1973 editions. I have these NASBs right here in my study and all these words are omitted from their texts. Then in 1977 and again in 1995 they put them back in [but in brackets] indicating doubt as to their authenticity. What is happening here is that Vaticanus and Sinaiticus omit all these words, as do the Westcott-Hort and UBS Greek texts and so all these words are now omitted by such versions as the NIV, RSV, ESV, Holman Standard, the J.W. New World Translation, Daniel Wallace's NET version AND (you guessed it) the Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985. As a result, these Catholic Connection versions read like the ESV - "...Lord, do you want us to tell fire to come down from heaven and consume them? But he turned and rebuked them. And they went on to another village."
By the way, ALL of 1 John 5:7 “the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one” are found in Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible (John Rogers) 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the King James Bible 1611, John Calvin’s translation, the French La Bible de Geneva 1669, the French Martin 1744, French Ostervald 1996, the Portuguese de Almeida 1681 -"Porque três säo os que testificam no céu: o Pai, a Palavra, e o Espírito Santo; e estes três säo um. ", the Italian Diodati 1602, 1649, the New Diodati 1991, the Spanish Reina 1569, the Reina Valera of 1602, 1909, 1995, and the NKJV of 1982, plus a multitude of other foreign language Bibles. Believe it or not, but 1 John 5:7 as it stands in the King James Bible and all these others was also the reading of the previous Catholic bibles. It was in the Douay Rheims of 1582 (See the link above), the Douay-Rheims of 1899 and even in the Douay of 1950. It wasn't till the St. Joseph New American Bible of 1970 that the Catholic bibles began to remove "the three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one" from their translations. For more information on why these words are inspired Scripture see -
Modern versions like the ESV, NASB, NIV, RSV, NET and Jehovah Witness NWT are for the most part Catholic bibles, not Reformation bibles. They aren't even like the previous Catholic bibles. They are headed in the wrong direction and getting worse, not better. As for the ESV, I believe it is for the most part just like the liberal RSV, of which the ESV is a revision. The ESV rejects even more whole verses than the NASB, NIV. The ESV omits Matthew 12:47 too, just like the Catholic New Jerusalem bible of 1985, but it is still found in the NASB, NIV.
The ESV often rejects the Hebrew readings (as do the NASB, NIV, RSV, NET and the New Jerusalem bible), and they have already come out with the 2nd ESV in 2007 which changed over 350 verses from the previous ESV of 2001. The so called "science" of textual criticism is a joke and a fool's game. If you want to see more concrete information about the ESV, check out this study I did on my own of this new version that is now beginning to grow in popularity. The NASB has virtually disappeared from the scene and is now dead in the water and the ESVs are growing in popularity. The "old" New International Version is no longer being printed and the "new" New International Version has now come out in 2011 in which, by their own admission, they have changed some 10% of the verses from the previous NIV, and have altered some of the Hebrew and Greek texts they used in the previous NIVs. The shelf life of these modern versions is not very long.
For Proof that versions like the NASB, NIV, ESV all often reject the clear Hebrew readings and not even in the same places see these two articles I have put together by my own comparative studies. This is not empty theory and innuendo, but concrete facts you can see and verify for yourself.
Most Evangelical Christians today do not believe that any Bible in any language IS the inerrant words of God. In spite of the lame, signifying nothing, recent Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, they did get one thing right. It’s found in Article XII - “We deny that Biblical infallibility and inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes, exclusive of assertions in the fields of history and science.” Every true Bible believer should agree with this statement. IF the Bible is not 100% historically true, then at what point does God start to tell us the truth? If we cannot trust God's Book when it comes to specific numbers and names when it tells us of past historical events, then how can we be sure He got the other parts right?
It is devastating for the modern version promoter to see where the New Jerusalem Catholic bible lands on these verses. Also notice how the previous Catholic Douay-Rheims read. It was a whole lot closer to the historical truth than are these more modern translations.
The following short list is just a sampling of the divergent and confusing readings found among the contradictory modern bible versions. There are numerous other examples, but these are just a few to make you aware of what is going on here with "the late$t in $cholar$hip Finding$".
Among these “historic details” are whether Jeremiah 27:1 reads Jehoiakim (Hebrew texts, RV, ASV, NKJV, KJB, ISV, Douay-Rheims, St. Joseph New American Bible 1970) or Zedekiah (RSV, NIV, NASB, ESV, NET, Holman, Catholic New Jerusalem 1985)
whether 2 Samuel 21:8 reads Michal (Hebrew texts, KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, Douay-Rheims) or Merab (RSV, NIV, NASB, ESV, NET, Holman, ISV, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)
or 70 (NASB, NKJV, RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, Holman, ISV, KJB) being sent out by the Lord Jesus in Luke 10:1 and 17 or 72 (NIV, ESV, NET, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)
or in Matthew 18:22 does the Lord say to forgive your brother not “until 7 times, but unto 70 times 7 times” (= 490 times - KJB, RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, RSV, ESV, ISV, Douay-Rheims, St. Joseph NAB, ALL Greek texts) or 77 times (NRSV, NIV, Catholic New Jerusalem)
or the 7th day in Judges 14:15 (KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, Douay-Rheims) or the 4th day (RSV, ESV, NASB, NIV, NET, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem) or "the NEXT day" ISV (they just made this up!)
Or Hannah taking young Samuel to the house of the LORD with THREE bullocks in 1 Samuel 1:24 (KJB, Hebrew texts, RV, ASV, JPS 1917, NKJV, Youngs, NET, Douay-Rheims) or “A THREE YEAR OLD BULL: (LXX, Syriac RSV, ESV, NIV, NASB, ISV, Holman, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)
or God smiting 50,070 men in 1 Samuel 6:19 (KJB, RV, ASV, NASB, NET, ISV, Douay-Rheims) or 70 men slain (RSV, NIV, NRSV, ESV, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem), or “70 men- 50 chief men” (Young’s), or “70 MEN OUT OF 50,000 Holman Standard
or there being 30,000 chariots in 1 Samuel 13:5 (KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, ESV, ISV, Douay-Rheims) or only 3000 (NIV, NET, Holman, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)
or 1 Samuel 13:1 Here we read: “Saul reigned ONE year; and when he had reigned TWO years over Israel, Saul chose him three thousand men of Israel.” reading - ONE/TWO years (NKJV, KJB, Geneva, Judaica Press Tanach), or 40/32 (NASB 1972-77) or 30/42 (NASB 1995, NIV), OR 30 years/ 40 years (NET) or _____years and.______and two years (RSV, NRSV, ESV, St. Joseph New American Bible 1970, Catholic New Jerusalem 1985), or "was 30 years old...ruled for 42 years" ISV, or even “32 years old...reigned for 22 years” in the 1989 Revised English Bible!
2 Samuel 15:7 “forty years” (KJB, Hebrew, Geneva, NKJV, NASB, RV, Douay-Rheims) OR “four years” (NIV, RSV, ESV, NET, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem). The ISV ADDS words to the Hebrew text to make it say what they think it means, saying: "And so it was that forty years after Israel had demanded a king, Absalom asked the king..."
or whether both 2 Samuel 23:18 and 1 Chronicles 11:20 read “chief of the THREE” (KJB, Hebrew texts, RV, ASV, NKJV, NRSV, Holman, NIV, NET, Holman, NET, Douay-Rheims) or THIRTY from the Syriac (NASB, RSV, ESV, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem) The ISV completely omits any number and just makes up their own text saying: "in charge of the platoons"
or 2 Samuel 24:13 reading SEVEN years (KJB, Hebrew, ASV, NASB, NKJV, NET, ISV, Douay-Rheims) or THREE years (LXX, NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Holman, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)
or whether 1 Kings 4:26 reads 40,000 stalls of horses (Hebrew, KJB, RV, ASV, NASB, ESV, NKJV, ISV, Douay-Rheims) or 4,000 stalls (NIV, NET, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)
or whether 1 Kings 5:11 reads 20 measures of pure oil (Hebrew texts, Geneva, KJB, ASV, RV, NASB, NRSV, ISV, Douay-Rheims) or 20,000 (RSV, NIV, ESV, NET, LXX and Syriac, St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)
or in 2 Chronicles 31:16 we read "males from THREE years old" (Hebrew texts, KJB, Geneva Bible, Wycliffe, LXX, Syriac, RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV, NKJV, Holman, NET, Douay-Rheims) or "males from THIRTY years old" (NASB - ft. Hebrew “three”, ISV -"every male 30 years old and older", St. Joseph NAB, Catholic New Jerusalem)
or where 2 Chronicles 36:9 reads that Jehoiachin was 8 years old when he began to reign (Hebrew texts, KJB, NASB, NKJV, RV, ASV, KJB, RSV, NRSV, ESV 2001 edition, ISV, Douay-Rheims) or he was 18 years old (NIV, Holman, NET, ESV 2007 edition!!! and once again the Catholic St. Joseph NAB and the New Jerusalem)
or that when God raised the Lord Jesus from the dead it is stated in Acts 13:33 “this day have I begotten thee” (KJB, NASB, NKJV, RV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Douay-Rheims, St. Joseph NAB) or “today I have become your Father” (NIV, Holman, NET, ISV, Catholic New Jerusalem).
If you go back and read through this list of just some of the numerous very real differences that exist among these Bible of the Month Club versions, ask yourself Which (if any) are the 100% historically true words of God. IF "the Bible" is not 100% historically true in the events it narrates, then when does God start to tell us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
If you wish to see more about this recent "Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy" please see
One of the typical objections the bible agnostics, Bible critics and those who do not believe in the inerrancy of any Bible often bring up is Why did the King James Bible originally contain the Apocrypha books? Here is a good answer that provides a lot of information about all bibles of that time, why it was originally in the King James Bible and how the KJB translators viewed the Apocrypha
Another word of explanation. I am not against the Catholic people. I have known a few Catholics personally whom I believe to be true Christians who love the Lord Jesus Christ and are trusting in Him for their salvation, even though they still follow many erroneous teachings of Rome. Likewise there are many "Protestants" who are not true Christians either but just follow the outward, religious forms. But the Catholic Church and its doctrines of the perpetually repeated "sacrifice" of the Mass, the veneration of Mary and the saints, the doctrine of Purgatory, the good works treadmill to earn grace and salvation, the confession of sins to a "priest" and the infallibility of the Pope are all abominable false doctrines from the whore of Babylon. I believe (as did all the Reformers) it is primarily the Roman Catholic Church that is depicted as the "Mystery Babylon, the Mother of harlots and Abominations of the earth" in Revelation chapters 17 and 18, and God says in Revelation 18:4 "Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues." Some of God's people are in this false religious system and God commands them to come out of it.
The King James Bible is right, and the Bible critics are wrong, as always.
“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” Matthew 11:15
Return to Articles - http://brandplucked.webs.com/articles.htm
For more Proof that versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET etc. are in fact Catholic bible versions, see this study on Matthew 6:13 and Luke 11:2-4 in what is commonly called the Lord's Prayer. Pay special attention to the section dealing with Luke 11:2-4. You cannot honestly deny that these modern versions are identical to the modern joint effort Evangelical/Catholic Connection bible versions.
For a much more in depth look at just how identical to the modern Catholic bible versions the ESV, NIV, NASBs really are, be sure to take a look at Part Two seen here. It is an incredible eye opener and removes all lingering doubt. -