Welcome! Start here!

Welcome! Start here!

See what the blog “Bible Differences” can provide and how it may be of use to you. I focus mainly on the New Testament, but occasionally look at something from the Old Testament.

A list of Scriptures already studied can be found at “Scriptures“.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments

117 Was it Herod, or his informants that said that John the Baptist had risen from the dead?

Mark 6:14

Herod said, or others said; elegen, or elegon

An interesting variation occurred when an epsilon (e) was confused for an omicron (o) or visa versa, causing some manuscripts to read elegen; “he said” while others read elegon; “they said”. In the uncial letter type, these two letters can easily be confused with one another. Continue reading

Posted in Causes for Variations, Context | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

116 Was it an angel or an eagle that John saw flying through heaven? (Revelation 8:13)

In Revelation 8:13 we are confronted with a variation that merits our full attention.

Was it an angel or an eagle that John saw flying through heaven and making the announcement that the last three angels were about to blow their horns?

KJV: “As I watched, I heard an eagle that was flying in midair call out in a loud voice: ‘Woe! Woe! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth, because of the trumpet blasts about to be sounded by the other three angels!’ ”

NIV: “And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!’ ”

Was it an angel or an eagle? Continue reading

Posted in Context, External Criteria, Internal Criteria, Intrinsic Criteria | Leave a comment

115 Why is “evil spoken” of the Spirit and “He is glorified” removed from 1 Peter 4?

In the manuscripts available on 1 Peter, the clause: “…on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.” is lacking in some. How could this variation originated and how can we discern which would render the original autograph?

KJV: 1Peter 4:14: “If you are reproached for the name of Christ, happy are you; for the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.”

NIV: 1Peter 4:14: “If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you.” Continue reading

Posted in Ancient Translations | Leave a comment

114 Did Jesus say: “I must be about my Father’s business?” or did He say: “I have to be in my Father’s house?” Luke 2:49.

In Luke 2:49 we have an interesting situation. The different translations reveal the two possibilities stated above. Yet there is no confusion or different versions in the source texts or any of the manuscripts. If both the KJV and the NIV use the same words in Greek, why this great difference? As a matter of fact, the very word translated by the one as “business” and the other as “house” is absent from the text. Continue reading

Posted in Context, KJV/NIV Controversy | Leave a comment

113 Why is “After the order of Melchizedec” left out of Hebrews 7:21?

Why would such an important indication as “after the order of Melchizedec” be left out of Hebrews 7:21 in most modern versions of the Bible? When there is an important departure from the King James Version, there should be a good reason for. In the King James Version we read how Jesus became priest: ”For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord swore and will not repent, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek:

Continue reading

Posted in Causes for Variations, Desiderius, Erasmus | Leave a comment

112. My body to the flames? (1 Cor.13:3)

A verse that troubled me since my childhood days was 1 Corinthians 13:3.

To me the problem was this: Directly preceding this statement, Paul mentions quite a few achievements that could be deemed reachable and really plausible, contributing to the overall growth of Christianity. To speak with tongues, and prophesy, and have faith, and care for the less privileged would all contribute to the growth of the congregation, and its esteem in the world. Even giving up one’s body, meaning one’s life, rather than disown one’s faith during persecution, is plausible. But why the stipulation that it should be by the burning of one’s body? I could make no sense out of this, whether with love, or without. In my mind I could not fathom a person stepping forward and announcing: “here I am, you may give me up to the flames!” For what reason? To achieve what? It just made no sense to me.
On the other hand, if this had to do with being threatened with persecution and possible execution for one’s faith, could you have any say in the method? “Okay, so I am to be executed. In my case, you give me up to the flames!” Does one have any say in the way one would be executed if condemned to death due to one’s faith? Or were people executed that way reckoned of a higher esteem than those beheaded or crucified? Why did Paul add this stipulation? Continue reading

Posted in Dynamic Equivalence | Tagged , | Leave a comment

111. Should we withdraw from difficult people? 1Tim. 6:5

According to the King James Version, Paul gives the direct advice to Timothy to withdraw from difficult people. (1Tim. 6:5) Modern versions do not include this order. What would be the reason?

1Tim. 6:3 – 5  “If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings. Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.” Continue reading

Posted in Ancient Translations, Context | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment