THIS IS WHAT KING JAMES( FAMOUS ILLUMINATI) ADDED IN BIBLE (EZEKIEL 23) is this word of "GOD" or word of SATAN WORSHIPER king james ?

...YOU HAVE BEEN PROVED WRONG...why did king James change the name Josiah in -Hebrews 8:4 and Acts 7:45- into the name Jesus if the KJV is correct???...here's your answer>and king james says"hey scribes everywhere you see that jewish name change it....heres the scribes when they get to the same name of both leaders in the old and new testament>"its talking about the Josiah in the old testament"...heres the head scribe>"you heard the king, change the Josiah jewish name everywhere in the new testament or its off with our heads"...old testament Josiah led them into milk and honey land,new testament Josiah leds you into the promised land too..since there no letter J in Hebrew it was Yosiah bin yosef or bin=son,yosef=josef....you... have... been... proven... wrong...the new king james corrects these mistakes...

It is interesting KJ was FM, and as such was a Templar Knight. He was also Order of the Garter.
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Order of the Garter was founded by the Templars soon after they were dissolved.
[link to www.theinsider.org]

The royals of Europe served the pope and ran the empire along with the Templars financing wars and trade. So this new Order had to be created. All the royals are members today and members of the Crown Temple.

I believe what KJ did for the pope was to expel the Puritans to the Americas. He also published the KJB removing the reformer notes that were so popular with the Geneva translation. Some even believe he was in on the gunpowder plot to blow up parliament who he was not getting along with - see link.

Still the KJB is the best translation there is.

ORIGINAL BIBLE IS "DEAD SEA SCROLLS" WHICH IS AT ISRAEL MUSEUM ---- BUT CATHOLIC CHURCH OR NO CHRITIAN LEADERS DEMANDING TO MAKE THEM PUBLIC --- I SAY WHY?

...YOU HAVE BEEN PROVED WRONG...why did king James change the name Josiah in -Hebrews 8:4 and Acts 7:45- into the name Jesus if the KJV is correct???...here's your answer>and king james says"hey scribes everywhere you see that jewish name change it....heres the scribes when they get to the same name of both leaders in the old and new testament>"its talking about the Josiah in the old testament"...heres the head scribe>"you heard the king, change the Josiah jewish name everywhere in the new testament or its off with our heads"...old testament Josiah led them into milk and honey land,new testament Josiah leds you into the promised land too..since there no letter J in Hebrew it was Yosiah bin yosef or bin=son,yosef=josef....you... have... been... proven... wrong...the new king james corrects these mistakes...


The NT was never in Hebrew - it was in GREEK.

The translation Jesus comes from the Greek Iesous

KJV

Hebrews 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
[link to www.apostolic-churches.net]
Acts 7:45 Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drove out before the face of our fathers, to the days of David;
[link to www.apostolic-churches.net]

NT written in GREEK as the Gospel went to the world

[link to www.youtube.com]

YES BUT kjb was member of "secret scociety" and dont trust his intention

The NT was never in Hebrew - it was in GREEK.

The translation Jesus comes from the Greek Iesous

KJV

Hebrews 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
[link to www.apostolic-churches.net]
Acts 7:45 Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drove out before the face of our fathers, to the days of David;
[link to www.apostolic-churches.net]

NT written in GREEK as the Gospel went to the world

[link to www.youtube.com]
King James – The Founder of Freemason Lodges
The KJV – A Freemason Bible
The history of King James’ role in the formation of Freemasonry is mandatory reading in the Hiram Key book of Masonic scrolls attempting to link Christ with the Pharaohs.

Freemasonry, in its present form, came into being through the Lodge system, established under the auspices of King James VI of Scotland, (later King James I of England), the only son of Roman Catholic Mary Queen of Scots. At the age of 37, two years after becoming a Mason, James became the first Stuart king of England and immediately began to persecute the Puritans, rejecting their petition to reform the Church of England along biblical lines.

James was initiated into Freemasonry, into the Lodge of Scoon and Perth in 1601, at the age of 35. Fifteen years after taking active control of Scotland and five years before becoming English monarch, he ordered that the Masonic structure be given leadership and organisation. He made a senior Mason, named William Schaw, his General Warden of the Craft, and instructed Schaw to revamp the entire structure of Freemasonry into what it became today. Schaw commenced this project on 28th December 1598, on the orders of James.

To this day, the 1611 edition of the King James Bible remains the Freemason Bible and is the edition conventionally used in secret Masonic temple rituals.

Moriel does not, however believe that the Masonic association with the KJV or the Freemasonry of King James, founder of the Masonic Lodge system, detracts from the validity of this outdated but valid translation of the Bible. Nonetheless, it is the Freemason Bible and has been from its inception, commissioned and authorised by the same Freemason King who commissioned and authorised the Masonic Lodge structure. We can only speculate how many members of the KJV Only cult are in fact Freemasons.

After the KJV 1611 was published the DSS 1947 were discovered. These DSS matched perfectly and confirmed the KJV Hebrew Masoretic OT.


"In modern times the Dead Sea Scrolls have shown the MT to be nearly identical"
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

the Latin Bibles do not use the Masoretic Hebrew.

DEAD SEA SCROLLS MENTION JESUS AS PROPHET ONLY NOT AS GOD OR SON OF GOD

I've looked at the FM angle of KJ. The KJB when it was first published contained in the front cover the calender of pagan holidays; christmas easter st val day, which the Puritans had rejected. This calender has since been removed. There is no other corruptions in the KJB other than what was in the front cover (and the Apocrypha - also correctly removed). The KJB corrected a couple of errors found in the Geneva 1560. Otherwise either Bible are excellent translations. I own three Geneva 1560 which KJ had nothing to do with yet is near identical to the KJB 1611.

The 1611 KJB today still comes with the Apocrypha and the pagan calender in the cover, and old english. It's interesting history, but for the best translation the later editions are better (1780?).

Not sure what your point is but KJ did not translate or corrupt the Bible and you will not be convincing anyone who owns one of this.

Hahaha, the OT?

He as second person of God did not become "Jesus" the man until NT.

The OT book of Daniel contains the prophecy of the coming Messiah (Daniel 9:24-27) giving the exact year he would come, be baptized and die on the cross.
[link to biblelight.net]


Now, if the thing comes to pass--and it did--then he is God, for only God knows the future.

The NT was never in Hebrew - it was in GREEK.

The translation Jesus comes from the Greek Iesous

KJV

Hebrews 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
[link to www.apostolic-churches.net]
Acts 7:45 Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drove out before the face of our fathers, to the days of David;
[link to www.apostolic-churches.net]

NT written in GREEK as the Gospel went to the world

[link to www.youtube.com]
.............................................................​.............................................................​.....................................................the men were jewish they had jewish names,just as Chinese have Chinese names,Germans have German names,french have french names,romans had roman names and etc.etc...WE never said the entire story was in Hebrew...where your born and the language you speak determines your given -birth name- of what your go by their your life...want to explain the 2 mistakes???

YES but my point is king james was freemason--- i doubt his work of gathering bibles and compiling into one bible --- gospel og mathew,mark.luke and john are not same too

.........................................................​.............................................................​.........................................................the men were jewish they had jewish names,just as Chinese have Chinese names,Germans have German names,french have french names,romans had roman names and etc.etc...WE never said the entire story was in Hebrew...where your born and the language you speak determines your given -birth name- of what your go by their your life...want to explain the 2 mistakes???
.....that was hebrews 4:8 slight miscalulation,lol....the name jesus in both KJV verses are supposed to read -josiah-...look these 2 verses up in the new king james and compare them...

PROOF THE NEW KING JAMES VERSION
OF THE BIBLE IS CORRUPTED





When the New King James Bible
departs from the underlying Greek text of the King James Bible.


Matthew 18:35 ³if ye from your hearts forgive not everyone his brother THEIR trespasses². Majority and C have ³their trespasses², but the Sinaticus & Vaticanus omit, so not in the nasb or niv. However the nkjv says: ³HIS trespasses². ³his² is not found in any manuscript. ³Their² trespasses is found in other Bibles which are based on the Textus Receptus of the KJB, as Tyndale, Geneva and Young¹s translation.

Matthew 22:10 ³THE WEDDING was furnished with guests². The ³wedding² is Œo gamos, and is found in the majority, D, B(2) Tyndale and Geneva, but Sinaticus says Œo numphon, the ³wedding hall² (or bridechamber- KJB). The nkjv follows the nasb/niv with ³wedding hall².

Matthew 24:40 ³THE one shall be taken, and the other left², there is a definite article before ³the one² which is in the majority and TR but is omitted in N (Sinaticus) and B (Vaticanus) and the njkv also omits it.

Matthew 26:45 is a statement in the majority, even in the original Wescott/Hort text, the ASV, Revised Version, Tyndale, Geneva and Douay. But the UBS (United Bible Society) has changed this to a question, and now the nkjv follows the nasb/niv in making it a question. The KJB reads: ³Sleep on now and take your rest² while the nkjv has: ³Are you still sleeping and resting?².

Mark 9:25 presents an oddity that defies explanation. All the texts describe the spirt that piano helped a father¹s son from his youth as ³Thou DUMB and DEAF spirit, I charge thee come out of him.² ³to alalon kai kophon² Even the RV, ASV, RSV and Nrsv besides Tyndale, Geneva read as does the KJB, ³dumb and deaf² spirit. But the nkjv, niv and nas have reversed these two words and say: ³you DEAF and DUMB spirit². This is not even following their own UBS texts.

Luke 1:35 ³that holy thing which shall be born OF THEE (ek sou) shall be called the Son of God.² ³Of thee² is found in the TR of th KJB, C, Theta, f1, many cursives, the Old Latin, Lamsa¹s 1933 translation from the Syriac Peshitta, the Geneva Bible and the Italian Diodati, which precedes the KJB. It is so quoted by many church fathers, as Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Athanasius, Origen, Agustine and others. Yet the nkjv, niv and nas omit these two little words from their translations.

Luke 5:7 ³they beckoned unto their partners WHICH (tois) were in the other ship. Tois (which) is found in the majority, A.C. and TR, but is omitted in N & B, and the nkjv also omits this word as do the nasb/niv.

Luke 6:4 ³It is not lawful to eat but for the priests ALONE (monous). ³ALONE² is found in all texts, and is in the nasb too, but the nkjv unites with the niv in omitting this word. The nkjv reads: ³it is not lawful for any but the priests.²

Luke 6:9 ³Is it lawful on the Sabbath DAYS to do good or to do evil?². Here the majority, A and TR have ³days² plural, but N & B have the singular. The nkjv follows nasb/niv and says: ³on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil?²

Luke 12:49 is a question in the Textus Receptus of the KJB, and also a question in the R.V, and ASV, Tyndale, Geneva and even the Douay. However, the UBS has once again changed and the nasb, niv and nkjv unite in making it an exclamation. The KJB says:² I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?² But the nkjv says: ³and how I wish it were already kindled!²

John 10:6 ³This parable spake Jesus UNTO THEM², autois - to them, is in all texts and even in the nasb, but the nkjv unites with the niv in omitting it and says: ³Jesus used this illustration².

John 18:20 ³I always taught in THE SYNAGOGUE². The TR has en TE sunagogee, singular, but the other texts omit the definite article, and the nkjv says ³I always taught in synagogueS², along with the nasb/niv.

John 18:24. Here the nkjv, niv, nas create a contradiction, not because of the text but by the way they have translated it. The KJB, as well as the Spanish, Diodati, Webster¹s, 21st Century KJB and Geneva Bible, have correctly translated the phrase as: ³ Now Annas HAD SENT him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest.² The fact that Annas had already sent Jesus to Caiaphas can be seen from verses 13 and 19 of this same chapter, as well as from Mat.26:57, Mark 14:55 and Luke 22:54. The nkjv,nas and niv blunder here in saying: ³THEN Annas SENT Him bound to Caiaphas the high priest.²

Acts 10:7 ³And when the angel which spake UNTO CORNELIUS (tw kornelio) was departed, HE called two of his household servants...² This is the reading of the majority and TR, but N & B omit ³unto Cornelius² and have ³to him² (auto). The nkjv follows N & B and makes up its own text by saying: ³when the angel who spoke TO HIM had departed, CORNELIUS called two of his household servants². Here the nkjv tries to combine all of the divergent texts into one, and ends up creating a whole new reading not found in any single manuscript.

Acts 15:23 ³And they wrote letters by them AFTER THIS MANNER² After this manner is found in the majority, C,D,TR, Tyndale and Geneva, and even the Revised Version, but the nkjv unites with the nasb/niv, N & B and omits these words.

Acts 17:14 ³the brethren sent away Paul to go AS IS WERE (ws) to the sea.² is the reading of the majority and TR, Tyndale and Geneva. But the N & B have ³TO the sea² (ews). And the nkjv unites with the nasb/niv in reading so, thus departing from the KJB text.

Acts 18:6 ³And when they opposed THEMSELVES (autwn) and blasphemed...² That is, they put themselves in the way, to block the preaching of Paul. All the texts here are the same and even the ASV reads as does the KJB, but the nasb omits ³themselves², the nkjv says ³they opposed HIM² which in not in any text, and the niv says ³the blips opposed PAUL², again, neither blips nor Paul is in any text.

Acts 19:9 ³disputing daily in the school OF ONE (tinos) Tyrannus. This little word, tinos, is found in the majority and TR. but not in N or B. The nkjv unites with the nasb/niv and omits it.

Acts 19:39 ³but if ye enquire any thing CONCERNING OTHER MATTERS, (peri Œeteron) it shall be determined in a lowful assembly.² This is the reading of the majority, A,D and even Sinaticus and the Geneva Bible as well as the ASV, but it is not found in B. The nkjv omits this phrase and says: ³But if you have any other inquiry to make, it shall be determined in the lawful assembly.²

Acts 21:23 ³We have four men which have a vow ON THEM² On them is Eph Œeauton. This is found in all texts, and in the ASV, but the nkjv unites with the niv and nasb to omit them. The nkjv reads ³We have four men who have taken a vow.²

Acts 25:17 ³When they were come HITHER...² (enthade) This is in all texts, even in the nasb and niv, but the nkjv alone has omitted it. The nkjv says: ³When they had come together..²

Acts 27:14 ³But not long after there arose AGAINST IT (kat¹ autns) a tempestuous wind.² All texts read ³against it², referring to the island of Crete. But the nkjv omits this phrase and says: ³ a tempestuous head wind arose², the nasb paraphrases as ³from the land² and the niv as ³swept down from the island².

Romans 7:6 ³But now we are delivered from the law, THAT BEING DEAD, wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.² This refers to the contextual analogy of the husband having died, and the wife can be married to another. The law died and was put to death by Christ who blotted out the ³handwriting of ordinances that was against us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.² Col.2:14. Here the TR of the KJB reads ³apothanontOS² masculine singular. The law died. This is the reading of Green¹s interlinear,the 21st Century KJB, Websters Bible of 1833, the Geneva Bible, the Modern Greek translation, Youngs translation, the Diodati, which preceded the KJB, and the Latin of Calvin. So it is a very ancient reading. The other Greek texts have a different reading. They say ³we died² apothanontES, which is masculine plural. The truth that we died is also taught in other passages, but not in this one. The nkjv joins the nasb and niv in saying: ³ We have been delivered from the law, HAVING DIED to what we were held by...²

I Corinthians 6:4 is a statement or a command in the KJB, the Majority, the TR. Tyndale, Geneva and even the Douay. But the Wescott/Hort text has this verse as a question, and the nkjv follows the nasb and Westcott Hort. The KJB says: ³If then ye have judgements of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.² In other words, the Christians were already guilty of judging others in their own congregation, as the context shows, so, he says, set the lowliest of the saints to judge these matters. Paul is using irony. But the nkjv and nas say:²do you appoint those who are least esteemed by the church to judge?² While the niv has ³appoint as judges even men of little account in the church!². An exclamation in the niv. Well, they say variety is the spice of life.

II Cor. 3:14 ³for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; WHICH vail is done away in Christ.² The reading ³which² (literally that which- 2 words- Œo ti) is found in the TR of Green, Berry, and Trinitarian Bible Society. It is the reading of Tyndale, Geneva, Darby, Young, Spanish, the Revised Version and even Douay. But the other Greek texts and Westcott & Hort have produced the reading found in he nkjv, nas & niv. The nkjv says: ³the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, BECAUSE the veil is taken away in Christ.² This is a little change from Œo ti (2 words) to Œoti (one word) and the nkjv follows the Westcott and Hort text here and not the TR.

II Corinthians 4:14 ³Knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jrsus shall raise up us also BY (dia) Jesus, and shall present us with you.² The word ³by² is in the majority, and N correction, but B says sun or ³with² instead of ³by². The nkjv reads ³will also raise us up WITH Jesus, and will present us with you.² Is Jesus going to be raised up again? Or is Jesus the person by whom we shall be raised? Here the nkjv clearly does not follow the TR reading.

Philippians 2:9 ³God also hath highly exalted him, and given him A name which is above every name². There is no definite article here in the majority or TR, but the Wescott-Hort text adds it. Bibles that read as the KJB with ³a name² are Geneva,Tyndale, Young, Darby etc., while those that follow N & B and the nkjv have ³given him THE name². I mention this only to point out that the nkjv does not always follow the Greek text of the KJB, but frequently follows the Wescott Hort text.

While here in Phillipians, notice that the nkjv is not the same from year to year. In just the first 10 chapters of Matthew, the changes from the 1979 nkjv, to the 1982 nkjv would fill up an entire page. In Phil.2:6 the 1979 nkjv said Christ ³did not consider equality with God something to be grasped² but in 1982 they changed it back to ³did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.² In Galations 4:24 the 1979 nkjv said ³which things are an allegory² while the 1982 says ³which things are symbolic², and in blips 12:13 the 1979 said ³so that what is lame not be turned from the way, but rather be healed² but the 1982 edition says: ³so that what is lame may not be dislocated, but rather be healed². The 1982 Nkjv has this word in italics, as though it is not in the text. But it is in the Greek and the KJB is correct and the nkjv is worse than it was before in 1979.

blips 3:16 ³For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.² The Textus Receptus of the KJB is clearly a statement here. With the KJB are Tyndale, Geneva, Webster¹s Bible, the 21st Century KJB, the Italian Diodati, the Spanish of 1602 and 1909, the Third Millenium Bible, Youngs translation and even the Catholic Douay of 1950. However, the nkjv follows the W/H text and reads as do the nasb and niv. The nkjv says:² For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses?² This is very wrong. Not all who came out of Egypt rebelled. Caleb and Joshua did not rebel, but believed God and entered the promised land. This is the whole point of the passage. We are exhorted to believe God and enter into His rest, just as Caleb and Joshua did. The nkjv not only does not follow the Greek text of the KJB here, but creates a contradiction as well.

blips 13:6. ³So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, AND I will not fear what man shall do unto me.² Here the little word ³and² kai is in the TR. majority, A and P46. But N & B omit the word ³and² and so does the nkjv. Also in the TR, and Tyndale, Geneva, Spanish and even Douay, this verse is a statement of fact. However Westcott-Hort have made it a question and so it stands in the nkjv, niv and nasb. The nkjv says: ³The Lord is my helper; I will not fear. What can man do to me?² Do you see the differences?

II Peter 2:15 ³Balaam the son on BOSOR². Bosor is the reading of the majority, P72, N correction,A, and C. It is the reading of Tyndale, Geneva, Darby, Young, Spanish and Douay. However, Vaticanus reads Beor instead of Bosor and the nkjv reads as the niv and nasb with ³Balaam the son of BEOR.²

II John 7 ³for many deceivers ARE ENTERED into the world² Here, the majority, other uncials, and the TR of the KJB read EISnlthon - ³entered², while N, B and A read EXnlthon, ³went out². One word means to enter into, and the other means to go out. The nkjv again departs from the KJB text and follows Wescott and Hort with its ³many deceivers have GONE OUT into the world.². Remember, the devil is in the details.

Jude 3 ³I gave all diligence to write unto you of THE common faith². The TR and majority have THE common faith, but N & B say OUR common faith, and so does the nkjv, agreeing with the niv, nasb.

Jude 19 ³These be they who separate THEMSELVES, sensual, having not the Spirit.² The TR, and C read apodiorizontes ŒEAUTOUS. The Wescott Hort text does not have ³themselves². Separate themselves is found in Geneva, Latin Vulgate, Darby, Young, 21st Cent. KJB, Webster¹s Bible and Douay. The nkjv says: ²These are sensual persons, WHO CAUSE DIVISIONS, not having the Spirit² , thus reading as the nasb. The niv says ³these are men who divide YOU². The ³you² is not found in any text, and the whole meaning is changed. In the KJB they separate themselves from the others as a special class with superior knowledge, while the niv says they divide you, the Christians. Not the same meaning.

Revelation 6:11 ³And white ROBES WERE given unto every one of them². Here the TR reads plural ³white robes were given². Both the noun and verb are plural. The W/H text reads singular ³ A WHITE ROBE WAS given². The nkjv again joins the nasb/niv and reads: ³ And a white robe was given to each of them.²

Rev. 16:16 ³And HE gathered them together into a place called in the blip tongue Armageddon.² All texts here read ³he² referring to God. The nkjv reads: ³ And THEY gathered them together to the place...² The niv and nasb are also in error here, because even their Greek texts read suvngogen singular, not suvngogon plural. Tyndale, Douay, World English Bible, Webster¹s, Green, Berry, Spanish and Darby agree with the KJB.

Rev. 16:21 ³and the plague THEREOF (Œautns) was exceeding great.² The word ³thereof² or its, is in all texts, including the nasb, but the njkv has joined the niv in omitting this word. The nkjv says: ³that plague was exceeding great.²

Rev. 18:9 ³shall bewail HER, and lament for her.² Here the first ³her² is Œautnv. It is in the TR, and many other mss. But the njkv again has omitted it by following Sinaticus and the nasb/niv. It says ³will weep and lament for her.²

Revelation 19:2 ³and hath avenged the blood of his servants AT HER HAND². Here, ³at her hand² is ek tns xeipos Œautns. Four words in Greek. They are found in all texts, and though they are in Tyndale, Geneva,the RV, the ASV, World English Bible, Webster¹s, Spanish and Douay, the nasb and niv have shortened it and changed the meaning by saying ³has avenged the blood of his bond servants ON HER², and the nkjv has ³the blood of His servants shed BY HER² (omits hand).

I have personally gone through the book of Revelation, comparing every word between the KJB and the nkjv. The nas and niv follow a very different text in Revelation, and hundreds words are missing from their texts. However, though the nkjv claims to follow the same text as the KJB in Revelation, I found that the nkjv adds some words like ³some² in 2:17; ³sick² in 2:22; ³there² in 4:3; ³more² in 9:12; ³their² in 20:4 and ³as² in 21:16.

The nkjv also omits some 91 words. Eighty of these words are the little word ³and² or kai in Greek. That¹s eighty times omitted when in the Greek text that underlies the KJB just in one book! For example in 18:12,13 the word ³and² is omitted 8 times in just two verses.

The nkjv also omits ³the same² houtos in 3:5; ³nor² (mnte) twice in 7:1,3; ³called² (legetai) in 8:11; ³for her² Œautnv in both 16:21 and 16:18 ³so² (Œuto), as in ³so great²; the word ³for² (gar) in 21:25 ³FOR there shall be no night there.², and the verb ³shall be² (estai) in 22:12. The KJB has ³to give every man according as his work SHALL BE². The ³shall be² is in the majority and TR, but the nkjv merely says: ³to give every one according to his work.²

I will keep adding to this list as I study more of the nkjv, but in light of Rev.22:18,19 where we are told not to add to nor take away from the words of this book or God will take away his part out of the book of life, I would not recommend the nkjv to anyone. Stick to the King James Bible, and you will not go wrong.

Greek does not have the same "sounds" for alphabets. They do not transliterate. You can see this even today ion poor example but "Stalin" is not his Greek name. There are many examples.

Hebrew to English, - yes

Hebrew to Greek - no

Yeshua in English is Joshua.

The point is moot as there is no salvation in pronunciation. Names are different among different languages/cultures. He is the Creator GOD of the 7th day Sabbath who came to earth as a man 2000 years ago and died on the cross, whom we have all known.

yes,,, and you can spell joshua>josiah OR joshua>yosiah or yeshua>yosiah because hebrews sounded a Y sound instead of a J sound...

their were no J sound in the old testament...it would matter what your birth name was and what the people at the time called each other...if my name was chuck and someone yells charles in a crowd, chuck would ignore the caller...if it was james and someone called out the name john,james would ignore the caller.

the name the disciples called him would be his given at the time birth name which was the same as the old testament name of the old testament leader of israel's army.

in arabic "jesus" is issa or isso

Haha

Muzies are bad because they worship Mohammad, and the Moon god.
They deny the true God, Jesus Christ.
There is NO truth in your words and you know it.

Muslim never worship Moon good, they never worship any prophets unlike u pagans ----u need to read "Quran" do some research angry old men

There are this many changes done by Illuminati "king James". ----> it became from gods book to man made book

How I Know The King James Bible
is the Word of God




There are many good works that one can read on the authority of the King James Bible, and this particular effort offers nothing really new. However, it does attempt to explain the issue in a simple and brief manner for all to understand. Over the years I have learned a great deal about this issue, and I believe that a truth worth learning is a truth worth telling.


Many preachers and teachers across our land talk about "preferring" and "using" the KJV, but I haven't heard them speak much about BELIEVING it. Many prefer it and use it, because that's what their congregations prefer and use, but they do not BELIEVE it to be the infallible words of God. They are taught in college to USE, PREFER, and RECOMMEND the KJV, but they are NOT taught to BELIEVE it. Most "Christian colleges" teach that the King James Bible is only a translation, and that NO translation is infallible. Consequently, the average minister today uses a Book which he doesn't even believe.


Now, I thank God that I don't have that problem. I don't have to play make-believe with anyone about the word of God. I believe it. I believe the King James Bible is the preserved and infallible words of God. It doesn't merely "contain" the word of God: it IS the word of God. I'm absolutely sure of it, and I'd like to give a few reasons why. Here are twelve reasons how I know that the KJV is the word of God:



God Promised to Preserve His Words

Psalm 12:6-7 says, "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever." Then we read in Psalm 100:5 that ". . . . his truth endureth to all generations," and Jesus said in John 17:17 that God's WORD is truth.

These words state very clearly that God's preserved word MUST be available to us today, because God PROMISED to preserve it for us. There MUST be an infallible Book somewhere.


You say, "But ALL translations are God's word, not just one." That's impossible, because the various translations contain different readings, and God is not the author of confusion (I Cor. 14:33). Besides, if all of the versions are the word of God, then where are the "corrupt" and "perverted" versions that we are warned about in II Corinthians 2:17 and Jeremiah 23:36? If everyone is innocent, then where are those who are said to be GUILTY of subtracting from and adding to the word of God (Rev. 22:18-19)? God wouldn't have warned us about Bible perversion if it wasn't going to be a reality. According to the scriptures, there must be a single Book that is the word of God, and there must be MANY which are involved in CORRUPTING the word of God.


Now, if the Authorized Version isn't the infallible word of God, then WHAT IS? There has to be a Book somewhere in "all generations" which is God's word; so what book is it? Those who "use" the new versions believe that these are good and reliable translations, but they do NOT believe these to be INFALLIBLE translations. However, I know MANY people who believe the King James Bible to be an infallible Book. Why? Because they know that the One True God has ONE TRUE BOOK. He promised to preserve His words, and we believe that He has done just that. Jesus said, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away" (Matthew 24:35). If His words didn't pass away, then where are they? I want to read them. There has to be a perfect volume somewhere. I know the King James Bible is the word of God because God promised to preserve His words.



The Authorized Version Was Translated Under A God-Ordained English King

The main subject of the Bible is the kingdom which God intends to give to His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, Who will be crowned "KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS," according to Revelation 19:16. Ecclesiastes 8:4 says, "Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?" Unlike the modern versions, the KJV was translated under a king. In fact, the king's name was "James," which is the English word for "Jacob," whom God renamed "Israel," because he had power with God and with men (Gen. 32:28).


The new versions have been translated in America, which is not a monarchy. God's form of government is a theocratic monarchy, not a democracy. Therefore, it makes perfect sense that His word would be translated for the English speaking people under a monarchy with an English king. I know the King James Bible is the word of God because it was translated under a king.



Because It Has No Copyright

The original crown copyright of 1611 does not forbid anyone today from reprinting the Authorized Version. It was only copyrighted then for the purpose of allowing the printer to finance the publication. For nearly four hundred years now we have been printing millions of copies of KJV's without requesting permission from anyone. Over eight-hundred million copies of the Authorized Version have been printed without anyone paying royalties. This cannot be said of any of the new translations.


The new "bibles" are the work of MEN, but the KJV is a divine work of the Holy Spirit. The term "Authorized" has traditionally been applied to the King James Version alone, for this is the one Book which the Holy Spirit has blessed and used for so long. The fact that it bears no copyright allows printing ministries throughout the world to print millions of copies each year for the mission field. I know the King James Bible is the word of God because it has no copyright.



Because God Always Translates Perfectly

The words "translate" and "translated" occur three times in the Bible, and GOD is the Translator each time. The scholars insist that the KJV cannot be infallible, because it is "only a translation." Do you suppose that such scholars have checked II Samuel 3:10, Colossians 1:13, and Hebrews 11:5 to see what GOD has to say about translating?


In II Samuel 3:10 we are told that it was God Who translated Saul's kingdom to David. We are told in Colossians 1:13 that Christians have been translated into the kingdom of Jesus Christ, and Hebrews 11:5 tells us that God translated Enoch that he should not see death. God was the One doing the translating each time. What's the point? The point is that a translation CAN be perfect, if God is involved in the translating.


When the New Testament writers would quote the Old Testament (Mt. 1:23; Mk. 1:2; Lk. 4:4; Jn. 15:25; Acts 1:20; 7:42; I Cor. 2:9; Gal. 3:13, etc.), they had to TRANSLATE from Hebrew to Greek, because the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, but THEY wrote in Greek. So, if a translation cannot be infallible, then EVEN THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE "ORIGINAL GREEK" ISN'T INFALLIBLE, because it contains translations from the Hebrew text!


Obviously God assisted them in their translating by the leadership of the Holy Spirit, and He assisted the King James translators as well. The scholars will never understand this, for most of them have QUENCHED the Holy Spirit in their own lives by looking to higher education for truth, rather than seeking the Lord's leadership (Jn. 16:13).


The Holy Spirit Who inspired the word of God through "holy men of God" (II Pet. 1:21) is quite capable of guiding His servants to KEEP the words which Jesus told us to keep (Jn. 14:23). In essence, the KJV translators were merely INSTRUMENTS which God used in translating and preserving His word. In fact, they said this themselves in the Dedicatory to the Authorized Version: ". . . . because we are poor instruments to make God's holy truth to be yet more and more known to the people. . . "


I know the King James Bible is the word of God, because God is very capable of using anyone He pleases as His very own instruments of righteousness in order to preserve His word.



Because It Produces Good Fruit

The Lord Jesus said that every good tree will bring forth good fruit, and we can know them BY their fruits (Mt. 7:17-20).


God had the KJV translated for the purpose of bringing forth fruit, and it has been very obedient to the call. The greatest preachers of the past four centuries have been King James Bible believers. Billy Sunday is said to have led over one million people to Christ, and he was a KJV believer. Spurgeon, Moody, Whitfield, and Wesley were all KJV men, and the list goes on. God has richly blessed the ministries of such men as these because they stayed busy OBEYING His word rather than questioning its authority.


The KJV produces good fruit. I was led to Christ with a King James Bible. Nearly every Christian I know was led to Christ with a KJV. Why? Because it produces good fruit.


The new translations produce EVIL fruit. The modern perversions of scripture are producing infidels who do not even know what the word of God is, much less where to find it. The new translations produce spiritual babies who are totally incapable of discussing Bible doctrine. The new versions produce NEWER versions, which produce MONEY for the publishers, and I Timothy 6:10 tells us that the love of MONEY is the root of all EVIL.


The Holy Spirit doesn't bear witness to the modern translations, but He DOES bear witness to the King James. I've always believed the KJV to be God's word, even before I was saved. No one ever told me to believe this, but the Holy Spirit just bore witness to the King James--not the others. After being saved, I spent several years of my Christian life not being aware of the big debate going on these days between King James Bible believers and New Age Version believers. The whole time I believed only ONE BOOK to be God's word, and even then I was suspicious of the new versions, although no one had told me to be. When I discovered that over eighty percent of the "Christian" schools in our nation do not believe the KJV to be the word of God, I was shocked.


How is it that one comes to believe the KJV naturally, but must be EDUCATED OUT of his belief in it? Why is it that King James believers are accused of following men when GOD is the One Who led them to believe it? Why do opponents of the KJV accuse us of following men, when THEY are the ones who allowed MEN to talk them out of believing the KJV?


The KJV produces good fruit, because the Holy Spirit bears witness to it like no other book in the world. It's easier to memorize than any new version, and the beautiful old English language gives the reader the impression that he is reading a Book very different and far superior to the rest. It reads different because it IS different, and it IS different because it has a different Author. We shall know them "by their fruit", and I know the King James Bible is the word of God, because it produces GOOD fruit.



Because the King James Translators Believed They Were Handling the Very Words of God

One can see this truth by reading the Prefatory and Dedicatory remarks in the Authorized Version. These men didn't believe they were handling "God's message" or "reliable manuscripts." They believed they were handling the very words of God Himself. As I Thessalonians 2:13 says, they ". . . . received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe."


Like the serpent of Genesis 3:1, modern translators approach the scriptures in skepticism, saying, "Yea, hath God said?" This was the first recorded sin in the Bible, and it still runs rapid through the hearts and minds of most scholars and new version promoters.


God has always allowed such people to be DECEIVED because of the IDOLS in their hearts (Ezek. 14:1-9; II Thess. 2:10-12; I Kings 22). A man who lacks faith in God's word is in no condition to translate it. This eliminates every revision committee in the past one hundred years, because these committees have consisted mostly of highly educated men who were heady, high-minded, and proud, thinking that their intelligence qualified them to tamper with the pure words of God.


The KJV translators were not like this. Their scholarship FAR EXCEEDED that of modern translators, yet they remained humble and allowed God to use them in order to produce an infallible masterpiece. They didn't set out to "judge" and "correct" the word of God. Their purpose was to translate God's word for the English speaking people, as they were told to do by their appointed king. I know the King James Bible is the word of God because the KJV translators believed it themselves.



Because the King James Translators Were Honest In Their Work

The critics of the KJV enjoy making a fuss about the words in italics, which were added by the translators, but the argument is entirely unnecessary and unfair.


The italic words in the KJV actually PROVE that the translators were honest in their work. When translating from one language to another, the idioms change, thus making it necessary to add certain words to help the reader grasp the full meaning of the text. When the KJV translators added such words they set them in italics so that we'd know these words were added, UNLIKE we find it in so many new versions today, which do NOT use the italics.


Besides, no one has ever PROVEN that the italic words are not the words of God, because no one has "the originals" to check them with. In fact, we know for sure that the translators were led by the Holy Spirit to add at least some of the italicized words.


One good example of this is found in II Samuel 21:19. When the translators came to this verse in the Hebrew text, they noticed that an exact translation would give Elhanan credit for slaying Goliath, but we know from I Chronicles 20:5 that he actually slew THE BROTHER OF Goliath. So the KJV translators added the words "the brother of" to II Samuel 21:19. If the Lord had not led them to do so, then II Samuel 21:19 would contradict I Chronicles 20:5 (as it DOES in the New World Translation!).


Another fine example is I John 2:23. The last half of the verse was missing at the time, but the KJV translators inserted it anyhow (in italics), feeling that it was necessary. This naturally disturbed many people, but since that time new manuscripts have been found which CONTAIN the last half of I John 2:23. The translators were RIGHT in adding the italicized words.


One last example of the Holy Spirit's guiding influence on the KJV translators is found in Psalm 16:8, which says, "I have set the LORD always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved." As you can see, the words "he is" are in italics. According to many scholars they should be omitted, but according to the Apostle Peter they should NOT be omitted. Peter quotes Psalm 16:8 in Acts 2:25, and he USES the italicized words! How did the translators know this if the Lord didn't lead them?


The italics in the King James Bible are the marks of an HONEST translation, for no one added these words to mislead us, or to change the word of God. They added the words to help us, and they set the words in italics so we'd know they were added. That's honesty. I know the KJV is the word of God, because the translators were more honest in their work than any of the modern Bible translators.



Because All New Translations Compare Themselves to the KJV

The new versions do not compare themselves with each other, because they're too busy comparing themselves with one Book--the King James Bible. This fact alone proves that there is something very special and unique about the KJV.


Why does everyone line up in opposition AGAINST the King James Bible? Why not attack one another? That's easy: Satan has no desire to divide his own kingdom (Mt. 12:26). His desire is to discredit the word of GOD, not himself; so he attacks only one Book, God's Book, the KJV.


Those who oppose the KJV are unsure of themselves, for they have no Final Authority; so they despise those of us who DO have an Authority. They're unstable, insecure, dishonest, and very inconsistent. They're all TERRIFIED of One Book, the KJV, and they'll stop short of nothing in their efforts to rid the Body of Christ of that Book.


I know the KJV is the word of God, because it's the standard which all others use for comparison.



Because of the Time in History in Which It Was Translated

The King James Bible was not translated during the apostate and lukewarm Laodicean church period, like the new translations. The Laodicean period is the last church period before the Second Coming of Christ. It is the last of the seven church periods in Revelation chapters two and three. One can clearly see that we are living in the Laodicean period today by simply comparing modern churches to the church of Revelation 3:14-22. This lukewarm period began toward the end of the 1800's and will continue until Christ returns. The new versions fit well into the lukewarm churches, because they are lukewarm "bibles."


The Authorized Version, however, was translated LONG BEFORE the Laodicean churches appeared. It was translated during the Philadelphia church period, which is the best church period of all. It was this church that the Lord Jesus COMMENDED for KEEPING HIS WORD( Rev. 3:8-10)!


In 1611, when the King James Bible was completed, the scourge of lukewarm Laodicea had not yet swept over the world. There was no "scientific" crowd around in 1611 to put pressure on the translators. There was no civil rights movement going on at this time to influence the work of these men. The women were not screaming for "equal rights," and the humanists and socialists had not yet taken control. The massive army of liberal and modernistic preachers had not yet been assembled. The open public denial of God's word and the Deity of Christ was practically unheard of among ministers. It wasn't until the twentieth century that professing Christianity became flooded with lukewarm preachers who would be willing to compromise the word of God for self gain.


The greatest missionary work in church history occurred between 1700 and 1900, so it makes perfect sense that God would have a Bible ready for this great work, and He did - the KJV. Unfortunately, the new translations appeared a bit LATE on the scene! Think about that. I know the KJV is the word of God because of the time in history in which it was translated.



>Because No One Has Ever Proven That the KJV is Not God's Word

Any honest American should know that innocence is supposed to prevail in our land until guilt is proven. The KJV should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Has anyone proven it guilty? No. Has any scholar actually PROVEN that there are errors in the King James Bible? No. Enemies of the KJV delight in IGNORING the facts about the Authorized Version, while never PROVING anything. All apparent "errors" in the KJV can be explained through prayer and a careful study of the scriptures, but the opponents of the KJV aren't interested in looking for TRUTH; they're interested attacking God's word, while never proving anything. I know the KJV is the word of God, because, over nearly four hundred years, no one has proven otherwise.



Because of the Manuscript Evidence

Only a very deceived individual could believe that the new versions are equal to the King James Bible. Ninety-five percent of all evidence SUPPORTS the text of the King James Authorized Version. The new versions are supported by the remaining five percent evidence.


The new "bibles" are supported by two very corrupt fourth century manuscripts, known as the "Vaticanus" and the "Siniaticus." These manuscripts are filled with many text alterations to meet the demands of Roman Catholic tradition. They also include the Apocrypha, which the Lord Jesus Christ EXCLUDED from the Old Testament in Luke 24:44. All new versions contain readings from these corrupt manuscripts, and all new versions use their tiny five percent evidence to attack the ninety-five percent majority text of the King James Bible.


The Textus Receptus (received text) from which the King James Bible came can be traced clear back to Antioch, Syria, where the disciples were first called Christians and where Paul and Barnabas taught the word of God for a whole year (Acts 11:26). The other "bibles" do not come from Antioch. They come from Alexandria, Egypt, and from Rome. We don't need an Egyptian version, for Egypt is a type of the WORLD in the Bible. God called His people OUT of Egypt (Exod. 3-14), and God called His Son out of Egypt (Hos. 11:1 with Matt. 2:13-15). Why, the Bible says that "every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians" in Gen. 46:34, and the Lord Jesus Christ is called a SHEPHERD in John chapter ten. Alexandria, Egypt, is associated with SUPERSTITION in Acts 28:11, and Aquilla and Pricilla had to set an Egyptian straight on his doctrine in Acts chapter 18. Alexandrians are also found DISPUTING WITH STEPHEN in Acts 6:9. So we don't need a "bible" from Alexandria, Egypt.


Then there's the Roman text, also called the "Western Text." We can also do without a Roman "bible", because it was ROMAN soldiers who nailed our Lord to the cross. The harlot of Revelation 17 is a perfect description of the Roman Catholic Church, which has persecuted Christians for thousands of years. Romans persecuted the Christians in Acts18:2, and in 70 A.D. the Romans destroyed Jerusalem. Rome is the "dreadful and terrible" beast of Daniel chapter seven, and Christ will destroy the "Revised Roman Empire" at the Second Coming (Dan. 2; 7; and Rev. 13). It has been estimated that Rome is guilty of the blood of some 200 million people who have rejected her corrupt system. A "bible" from Rome is another thing we can live without.


There's only one line of manuscripts that we can trust, and this is the line from Antioch, called the "Syrian" or "Byzantine" type text. The word of God speaks POSITIVELY of Antioch, and NEGATIVELY of Rome and Egypt. We should TAKE THE BEST AND DUMP THE REST! I know the King James Bible is the word of God because of the manuscript evidence.



Because It Exalts the Lord Jesus Christ

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.


A REAL Bible will testify of the Lord Jesus Christ. The true word of God will always EXALT Jesus Christ, and it will NEVER attack Hid Deity, His Virgin Birth, His Blood Atonement, His Bodily Resurrection, His Glorious Second Coming, or any other doctrines concerning His Person. However, the new versions attack ALL of the fundamental doctrines concerning the Lord Jesus Christ at one time or another.


By perverting the many important verses of scripture which deal with the fundamental doctrines of Christ, the new "bibles" have a CONTINUOUS ATTACK launched against our beloved Savior, and this is NOT an overstatement! His Virgin Birth is under attack in Isaiah 7:14, Luke 1:34, and Luke 2:33. His Blood Atonement is under attack in Colossians 1:14, Acts 20:28, Ephesians 1:7, and Revelation 1:5. The Bodily Resurrection is under attack in Acts 1:3, Luke chapter 24, and the last twelve verses of Mark. His Deity is under attack in Acts 10:28, John 9:35, and I Timothy 3:16. The new versions attack the Second Coming in Revelation 11:15, and Titus 2:13, and the list goes on, because the new versions have an extreme bitter HATRED toward the Authorized Version and the way it gives the Lord Jesus Christ the preeminent place.


If the reader doubts this, we challenge you to take whatever version you want and compare the above verses in it to the same verses in the King James Bible. If you still doubt it, after checking the verses, then write us and we will send you a great many more references to check. The new "bibles" have a very consistent record of attacking the Lord Jesus Christ; so they cannot possibly be "the scriptures" that He said would testify of Him in John 5:39. They testify AGAINST him.


The King James Bible NEVER attacks our Lord. More than any book in the world, the Authorized Version of the Protestant Reformation EXALTS the Lord Jesus Christ. If we had no other reason for receiving the Authorized Version as the word of God, this reason alone should be enough to convince any true believer, for how could we not become suspicious of the new versions for making such changes? I know the King James Bible is the word of God because it always exalts the Lord Jesus Christ.




-------------------------------------------------------------​-------------------

Satan didn't add anything to any Bible.

Now, the NIV is owned by Rupert Murdoch, the biggest seller of gay porn, and a manufacturer and seller of the Satanic Bible.
So, I stay away from the NIV version of the Bible, out of principle.

well said - we have to know that what we can find like a "BIBLE" today is not the 100% real BIBLE

cuz you see.. BLIBLE..


B-asic
I-nstructionS
B-efore
L-eaving
E-arth


that's the ORIGINAL thing and purpose !!

OP is a fucking moron on such a grand scale, it's pathetic.