Welcome! The blog with the facts concerning the differences between the King James Version, and the New International Version!


On this blog all the reasons for the major differences between older translations like the KJV and modern translations like the NIV are given in plain English. All differences have logical explanations, but rather have the real naked facts! The only difference I found in more than 130 Scriptures studied that touches on a Biblical conviction is Revelation 22:14.

A list of Scriptures already studied can be found at “Scriptures“. If you miss something that is important to you, e-mail me (bibledifferences@gmail.com) and I will provide the facts.

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 | 8 Comments

149 Sodom and Gomorrah left out of Mark 6:11?

A careful study of the synoptic gospels clearly reveals that Matthew and Luke made use of Mark when they compiled their gospels. Therefore the three gospels correspond nearly word for word in a huge amount of material. But Matthew and Luke had another source called “Q” (Quelle, German for a well) in which they both correspond, but is not found in Mark. And then each of them also did their own unique research, adding material that is unique to that gospel only.

In Mark 6:11 we are confronted with a variation where the clause in uppercase (KJV) is not found in the modern Bibles like the NIV.

“And whoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when you depart from there, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. TRULY I SAY TO YOU, IT SHALL BE MORE TOLERABLE FOR SODOM AND GOMORRAH IN THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT THAN FOR THAT CITY.” Continue reading

Posted in External Criteria, Internal Criteria, Intrinsic Criteria | 1 Comment

148 Teacher to the Gentiles? 2 Timothy 1:11

It was customary for a writer to introduce himself to his addressee. Paul introduced himself in 2 Timothy 1:1. But when Paul comes to the essence of this letter, he emphasizes his position of authority with which he comes to Timothy. For this reason he was appointed. But here in 2 Timothy 1:11 we find two variations in the manuscripts.
The first variation indicates Paul in a general ministry to all:
“Of which I was made a preacher and an Apostle and a teacher;” (BBE)

But the second variation indicates Paul as an apostle and teacher specific to the gentiles: “to which I am appointed a preacher and an apostle and a teacher OF THE NATIONS.” (MKJV)

So how did Paul introduce himself here in the second epistle to Timothy? Continue reading

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

147 The Muratorian Fragment

The Muratorian Fragment and early canon.

This post is copied and posted with permission from Alisa Childers’ blog. (http://www.alisachilders.com) Do visit her blog and read firsthand what this fine apologetic is doing.

This is what she had to say:

Why the Muratorian Fragment is a Big Deal and What You Need to Know About It

Continue reading

Posted in Canon, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

146 ghost

146 Give up the ghost, John 19:30

This post is mainly taken from Tim Challies (www.challies.com).

Sometimes we use an expression without thinking of where it comes from, or what its deeper meaning or implications might be. Continue reading

Posted in Context, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

145 Dead or Useless, James 2;20

If our faith is not confirmed by our deeds, does that mean our faith is dead, leaving us lost? Or that our faith is useless, of no value to the congregation? Does this statement reflect on the salvation of the Christian, or on the practical implementation of his faith? These are the two versions found in the manuscripts we have. Which one would be what had been written in the original autograph?

James 2:20, KJV: “But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?”
NIV: “You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?” Continue reading

Posted in Context, External Criteria, Internal Criteria, Intrinsic Criteria, KJV/NIV Controversy | 1 Comment

144 Do Manuscripts of Q Still Exist?

This article by Prof Dan Wallace is absolutely superb. Do enjoy his sound reasoning and the logical outcome. Isn’t it wonderful to have a Gamaliel in this field at whose feet we may sit!
In the end it is all about the glory of God and the reliability of His Word coming to us through the ages.
Thank you Prof. Wallace.

Daniel B. Wallace

A favorite argument against the existence of Q is simply that no manuscripts of Q have ever been discovered. No more than this bare assertion is usually made. But a little probing shows that this argument has some serious weaknesses to it. In particular, three come to mind: (1) If Matthew and Luke swallowed up Q in their writings, why would we expect to find any copies of Q? Or to put this another way, Luke says that he used more than one source, presumably more than one written source. If so, why haven’t we found it/them? The fact that we haven’t surely doesn’t mean that Luke was not shooting straight with us, does it? (2) Even the Gospel of Mark has few copies in the early centuries, yet it was endorsed as an official Gospel by Ireneaus. Yet this is a canonical Gospel, which apparently was regarded in some…

View original post 1,278 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

143. Because I go to the Father. John 16:16

The final clause of John 16:16 found in the King James Version of the Bible, is lacking from most modern versions of the Bible. Words printed in bold:

“A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.

NIV: “A little while, and you will see me no more; and then after a little while, you will see me.” Continue reading

Posted in Context, External Criteria, Internal Criteria, Intrinsic Criteria, KJV/NIV Controversy | 2 Comments