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 (email@example.com) and I will provide the facts.
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“.
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.
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
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
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
Prof. Bill Mounce (http://zondervanacademic.com/blog/whats-a-janus-1-john-319-mondays-with-mounce/) acquainted me to another interesting concept in the New Testament. He writes: “Every once in a while we come across a phrase that can either look back to the previous or forward to the next.
Sometimes the phrase or verse is truly a Janus, looking both directions. But other times it only goes one way or another.
Bruce Waltke introduced me to the expression ‘Janus’. It refers to a mythical god with two heads, one looking forward and the other looking back. Wikipedia comments, ‘In ancient Roman religion and myth, Janus is the god of beginnings, gates, transitions, time, doorways, passages, and endings. He is usually depicted as having two faces, since he looks to the future and to the past.’ Continue reading
I recently came across this explanation by prof. Larry Hurtado of how ancient papyri are dated. I liked to share it with the readers of my blog.
You may read the full report with comments at: https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2016/06/24/dating-ancient-papyri/
Prof. Hurtado says:
“Further to my recent posts about recent proposals for the dating of certain NT papyri, let me briefly clarify the process of dating papyri, which might well seem a mystery to those not familiar with it.
There are two main types of papyri: “documentary” (letters, official documents such as land-transfers, marriage contracts, shipping bills, etc.) and “literary” (treatises, poetry, history, fiction, etc.). Documentary texts are often/typically dated by the writer, which makes dating the manuscript fairly straightforward. But literary texts are hardly ever dated. So in their case the only way forward is by estimating the approximate time-frame of the handwriting (often referred to as the “hand” of the manuscript). Continue reading