The first basic reason is that it’s obvious that the KJV and other bibles have diffrences is that they are translated from different manuscripts!

Intro To Lesson :

We can say with confidence that God intends us all to study His Word. But which one is truly His?
[2Ti 2:15 KJV]
“Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”

Want to see 100’s of differences easily? 

We are excited to introduce you a site that helps to quickly reveal differences between the KJV and other bible ‘versions’.  

Everything is found at KJVCompare.com

We first came across this information at their YouTube page is : Truth Is Christ.  

We are displaying their work and we hope you will subscribe to them and follow and support their ongoing work.  All credit to them.  

Link Here : https://www.youtube.com/@TruthisChrist

KJVcompare.com is a very quck, powerful, helpful tool that is super efficient to compare and contrast various versions of the bible. 

It’s a must have when discussing differences between the bibles and is being added to as we speak.  

Bravo, once again, Brandon & everyone involved.  Thank you!

Some of the fundamental deceptions promoted ( though not always true ) by modern bible publishers are that ‘modern’ bibles are simply: 

• Updated words & styles of writing

• Easier to read than the KJV

• They claim that nothing is being changed or removed

We will demonstrate that these claims are misleading at best and lies at worst.  We will prove: 

• Major differences in doctrines

• Words and Verses Missing

• Words and Verses Opposite 

• Scriptures Affecting Salvation, Christ’s Deity, and Much More

We hope your choice to depend on and always share the KJV will be easy to make after this presentation.

When salvation is on the line every word matters.  In fact you can’t be saved by being born again without the Word of God.  No Word, no re-birth.  

Romans 10:17 KJV – So then faith [cometh] by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

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

1 Peter 1:23 KJV – Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Modern bibles since the KJV are have errors, contradictions, changes and other issues by changing, adding, or simply removing words.  When you study diffrences between these bibles in more depth, you can understand how dangerous some of these versions truly must be. 

Proverbs 30:5 KJV – Every word of God [is] pure: he [is] a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

Of course God has warned those that would presume to add or subtract from His Word.

Revelation 22:19 KJV – And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.

The basic reason is that “Authorized Version” which years later became know as the KJV has differences is that it has been derrived from different manuscripts!  

The KJV is based on : 

1. The Textus Receptus ( TR )  

   • a.k.a. in modern English : The Recieved Texts

   • contains over 5,400 compiled Greek Manuscripts 

Virually ALL Other Modern Bibles since the NKJV have been derrived incorporating other texts Are Based On : 

The manuscripts used to created almost all newer versions of the Bible are not the same, and have passages missing, added, and other differences.  

This may be a core problem obviously if you believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God.  It should at least get you to study and know why and what the differences are.

We will link various sites, articles & samples below to help you see that not all versions really say the same thing.

Why is this important? 

It is simple: if two books say different things they cannot both be God’s word. 

Why the King James?

from article here: 

Introduction

It is common for people to mistakenly conflate the Received Text position with some version of King James Onlyism. This is somewhat understandable, as most people in the Received Text position exclusively read the King James. The first important distinction to make is that “KJVO” is only an error if somebody believes the King James was re-inspired, or is inspired by virtue of itself. The Confessional starting point is that translations are mediately inspired insofar as they set forth the immediately inspired original texts which have been “kept pure in all ages.” The immediately inspired text is that which God inspired, and a mediately inspired text is that which mediates accurately the immediately inspired text in any “vulgar tongue.”

This means that according to the TR position, any translation that sets forth the correct text accurately is perfectly acceptable. The argument for the King James then, is not that the King James should be used because it is perfect by virtue of itself. The argument is that it accurately sets forth the correct original texts. So if other translations are available to this doctrinal position, why is it that the King James enjoys the readership and defense of most people within the TR camp?

The KJV Sets Forth the Correct Text

This is the first of two arguments that really matter if we are discussing the KJV against a bible built on the Modern Critical Text. It does not matter how beautiful or easy to read a translation is if it does not set forth the correct text into a target language. I have often seen arguments made for the ease-of-use of the ESV, and that argument may be valid, but the ESV is still not an adequate translation if it does not have the correct textual foundation. The primary motivation for a Christian to read a bible translation should be that it translates the right thing.

The KJV is Accurate

This is the most important in terms of practicality and the second argument that matters in this discussion. A bible can use the correct text and also have places where it simply translates the original wrong or perhaps deviates from the correct text in certain places. The KJV accurately sets forth the original and uses a translational methodology that doesn’t interpret the text in its translational choices. This does not mean that the KJV translators used the best possible English words in every place, simply that they used correct words in every single place. In other words, if you can understand the English of the KJV, you can understand what was set forth in the underlying text just fine. The standard for what makes a translation “good” should be that it translates the correct text accurately.

The KJV as a Standard Text

The only objective qualities that matter have been satisfied in the KJV. It is a translation that uses the right original texts and translates those texts accurately. Everything else is simply preference. In terms of preference, there are many reasons to choose the KJV as a translation of the Received Text.

First, it is not subject to the changes in society or the whims of a publishing house. It is set in stone and has been for quite a long time. This ensures that the Bible you read when you’re 7 will be the Bible you read when you’re 70. That means that the Scripture you memorize in your youth will be the same as the Scripture that lives in your head when you die. Additionally, this means that you will not have to buy the latest revision to your Bible every time a publisher decides to release a new edition. This is especially problematic for ESV and NASB readers.

Second, since it is not changing, and there is one standard version of the KJV, it allows a congregation to have the exact same text as each other. When I was a critical text advocate, I had three editions of the ESV, which were all different from each other. My friends who read the ESV had a different ESV than me, depending on which one I brought to church or to Bible study. An ESV pastor could be preaching from a different version of the ESV than the people in the pew, who also had the ESV. This happened to us every Lord’s Day. It engenders confusion, especially if the pastor happens to preach from a text that is different between the 2012 and 2016 editions of the ESV.

Third, it retains first and third person pronouns, which allows the reader to distinguish better what the text is saying. We have dropped this distinction in today’s vernacular, but it’s nice to have with a text as specific as the Holy Bible.

Fourth, it does not include the uncertainty of the scholars in the footnotes, brackets, and margins. Even in modern versions, this is distracting and confusing for people that aren’t steeped in the textual discussion. Without the all of the white noise, it is easier to simply focus on the text and read the Bible as it’s translated.

The last two reasons are minor, but reasons nonetheless. The King James is beautifully crafted and is designed to be read and memorized.

Conclusion

The only two criteria that ultimately matter from an objective standpoint are that the KJV sets forth the correct original texts, and does so accurately. Could the translators of the KJV employed better words in some places? Sure, they could have. Regardless, they employed accurate words that allow the English reader to access what is communicated in the original text.

It is for this reason that those in the Received Text camp choose it over and above modern versions, including the MEV and the NKJV. There are countless subjective reasons such as the beauty of the language, but those are secondary. When viewed simply, it shouldn’t be a surprise that the King James is the crowd favorite among the Received Text camp. One of the most confusing assumptions I see on a daily basis is that the only reason one would read the KJV is due to being a “KJV Onlyist,” as if it’s not an amazing translation without Ruckman’s strange doctrine.

Even if there was no discussion over the TR vs. the Critical Text, many people would still choose to read the KJV over the ESV because the ESV really isn’t that great of a translation (That’s for you Nathan Beatty). The NASB 2020 is so bad that MacArthur created his own translation so he didn’t have to use it. The NIV is incredibly loose in its translation methodology and loses its value quickly in its lack of precision. The NKJV has places where the translation methodology is sub par. Even if the modern versions were viewed without respect to the KJV, they have enough issues to warrant disregarding them. All of the modern versions can be easily evaluated as “just okay,” even if we don’t consider the textual discussion.

There is a reason the modern scholars suggest reading all of them together, and it’s because of the translational weaknesses of each modern version. This is inevitable when you take a subject matter as precise and complex as the Bible and try to make every line accessible to a third grader. I’m sure the translational quality of the ESV would be far better if the translation methodology excluded this feature. There are places in our Bible that are advanced simply because the concepts set forth in the original languages are advanced, and there is very little a translator can do to change that without compromising the meaning of the original text. Since most modern translations compromise precision for readability, it is inevitable that there will be places where you have to “go back to the Greek” or consult another translation to get a full picture of what’s being said.

If we add the textual discussion into our decision-making process, the choice becomes abundantly clear which Bible translation comes out on top. There is a reason modern translations use the “tradition of the King James” as a selling point for their bibles. Even in 2021, modern publishing houses still appeal to the value of the KJV to sell bibles. It is a fantastic translation regardless of one’s view on textual criticism, and most people will happily agree on that point. Add in the theological convictions of the Received Text position, and the choice is really quite easy to make.

https://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/logsdon-repudiates-nasb.html

Until the KJV 1611 there was no complete bible that contained BOTH the New Testament & Old Testament in an English bible that distinctly translated Jehovah ( YHVH / LORD ) vs. Adonai ( Lord ) from the original Hebrew.

When King James gave his seal to the order to have the Bible translated it was giving permission & authority to go ahead with the translation openly and publicly, as less than a year before this men such as William Tyndale was being executed for attempting to do just this.  

• The King James Version (KJV) of The Bible was published in 1611 and was based upon analysing multiple previous copies of Bibles and manuscripts available at the time.  

• Fifty four (although only 47 finished) of the most highly respected theologians, linguists and academics were given this task of publishing the most accurate and comprehensive version of the Bible.

• Each member of the “task-force” was arranged in six groups. 

• Each group individually and collectively analysed every available manuscript (of which there are currently about 5,200 separate documents in the world – known as the “Textus Receptus” or ‘RECEIVED TEXTS’ ) and created what is accepted as the most comprehensive Biblical document available.

• The bible that was settled upon by the sholars and theologians of the day was known as the “Authroized Version”.  

• For some 200 years King James’ name was not connected to it ; it was simply referred to as the HOLY BIBLE.  

Therefore, since 1611 the King James Version has been the benchmark for what the bible is and should include.

The Greek Recieved Texts ( Textus Receptus ) Used In The KJV & Very Few Other Bibles.

About 5,200 separate documents in the world – known as the “Textus Receptus” or ‘RECEIVED TEXTS’ that were invovlved in transmitting the KJV from Greek to English.

The Alexandrian text is shorter and less polished than those of other types. Of nearly 6,000 surviving manuscripts, about 30 or so are of the Alexandrian type, which tends to be the most concise. The earliest surviving witnesses are Papyrus 46 and Papyrus 66, both dating to about 200 CE

In textual criticism of the New Testament, the Alexandrian text-type is one of the main text types. It is the text type favored by the majority of modern textual critics and it is the basis for most modern (after 1900) Bible translations. Over 5,800 New Testament manuscripts have been classified into four groups by text type. Besides the Alexandrian, the other types are the Western, Caesarean, and Byzantine. Compared to these later text types, Alexandrian readings tend to be abrupt, use fewer words, show greater variation among the Synoptic Gospels, and have readings that are considered difficult. That is to say, later scribes tended to polish scripture and improve its literary style. Glosses would occasionally be added as verses during the process of copying a Bible by hand. From the ninth century onward, most surviving manuscripts are of the Byzantine type.[1]

The King James Version and other Reformation-era Bibles are translated from the Textus Receptus, a Greek text created by Erasmus and based on various manuscripts of the Byzantine type. In 1721, Richard Bentley outlined a project to create a revised Greek text based on the Codex Alexandrinus.[2] This project was completed by Karl Lachmann in 1850.[3] Brooke Foss Westcott and F. J. A. Hort of Cambridge published a text based on Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus in 1881. Novum Testamentum Graece by Eberhard Nestle and Kurt Aland, now in its 28th edition, generally follows the text of Westcott and Hort.

1.  “Reasoned Eclecticism” or the “Critical Text” Theory

This method applies a series of rules to the various manuscripts we’ve found (we’ll look at those rules in a moment).  Using these rules – and a healthy dose of scholarly input – they decide what was likely added, removed, or changed, and therefore what’s likely original.  The result is called a “Critical Text”.  This is the position held by a majority of New Testament Scholars, and nearly all modern Bible are translated from the Critical Text.

Majority Text scholars take a more mathematical approach to deciding what the original text of the New Testament was.  Their approach is to take all the manuscripts we have, and find which Textual Variant has support among the majority of manuscripts, and given that reading priority.  This is based on the assumption that scribes will chose to copy good manuscripts over bad ones, and thus better readings will be in the majority over time.  There are good mathematical reasons (which we’ll look at) for this method.  Because most of our New Testament manuscripts come from the Byzantine Text family (which we’ll explain lower down), the document that results is often called the “Byzantine Majority text”

This position takes its name from where it starts: a “confession of faith”.  The Confessional view holds that God must have preserved the scriptures completely without error. (We’ll look at the verses they use to support this statement lower down.)  They believe that God kept one particular text completely free of error, and that text is the Textus Receptus.  The Textus Receptus is a 16th century Greek New Testament on which the King James Bible is based (in the New Testament).  They will typically only use the King James Bible (KJV) or New King James Bible (NKJV) as an English translation, but some will only accept the KJV.

When was the Codex Vaticanus discovered?

The manuscript has been housed in the Vatican Library (founded by Pope Nicholas V in 1448) for as long as it has been known, possibly appearing in the library’s earliest catalog of 1475 (with shelf number 1209), but definitely appearing in the 1481 catalog.

In 1844, 43 leaves of a 4th-century biblical codex (a collection of single pages bound together along one side) were discovered at St. Catherine’s Monastery at the foot of Mount Sinai ( NOTE: NOT TRUE MT. SINAI, BUT NAMED THAT IN EGYPT  (hence the name Sinaiticus).  

Codex Sinaiticus, the earliest known manuscript of the Christian Bible, compiled in the 4th century ce.

The German biblical scholar Konstantin von Tischendorf (1815–74) found several hundred additional leaves, constituting the majority of the present manuscript, at the monastery in 1859. Tischendorf persuaded the monks to give the precious manuscript to Tsar Alexander II of Russia in exchange for needed protection of their abbey. Tischendorf subsequently published the Codex Sinaiticus at Leipzig and then presented it to the tsar. The manuscript remained in the Russian National Library until 1933, when the Soviet government sold it to the British Museum for £100,000. Additional fragments of the manuscript were subsequently discovered at St. Catherine’s. In July 2009 the reunified Codex Sinaiticus was digitized and placed online.

Codex Sinaiticus consists mostly of the text of the Septuagint, the Greek-language Bible. Some 800 of the original 1,400 handwritten vellum pages remain. Though about half of the Hebrew Bible is missing, a complete 4th-century New Testament is preserved, along with the Letter of Barnabas (c. mid-2nd century) and most of the Shepherd of Hermas, a 2nd-century Christian writer. There were probably four scribes who contributed to the original text. Later corrections representing attempts to alter the text to a different standard probably were made about the 6th or 7th century at Caesarea.

Here sixteen whole verses: It is important to read the surrounding scriptures to get an understanding of the impact the omission of the above verses really have.

Matthew 17:21: “Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.”

Matthew 18:11: “For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.”

Matthew 23:14: “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.”

Mark 7:16: “If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.”

Mark 9:44: “Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”

Mark 9:46: “Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”

Mark 11:26: “But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.”

Mark 15:28: “And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.”

Luke 17:36: “Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.”

John 5:4: “For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.”

Acts 8:37: “And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”

Acts 15:34: “Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.”

Acts 24:7: “But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,”

Acts 28:29: “And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.”

Romans 16:24: “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.”

I John 5:7: “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”