“Modern Versions Leave out the Most Crucial word denoting “Jesus Thou” Son of God. The Verse in the Modern Versions doesn’t sound Right. Like it’s Missing the Fullness of its Rendering. Like the Devil’s don’t want to make a Connection with the Son of God being Jesus in its Entirety. So many Subtle Deficiencies and Deletions. The KJB is your only Reliable Source of Truth. Get Back to It!” Matthew 8:29 “doesn’t sound right” in modern versions because they don’t have, “Jesus”. They simply have “Son of God. The wild assertion made by the author of this post above is that, “the Devil’s don’t want to make a Connection with the Son of God being Jesus in its Entirety”. But is this true? Let’s see what modern versions have to say. I’m going to pick one that everyone likes to pick on. I am not a fan of the NIV, but let’s just use it since KJVO definitely do not like the “not inspired version”.

CONTACT INFORMATION:
WAYS TO DONATE: 
https://forthemaster.org/donations/donation-form/
https://www.buymeacoffee.com/jonathanburris
https://www.patreon.com/jonathanburris
WEBSITE: https://jonathanburris.com
PODCAST: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theoveropinionatedpastor
FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/dr.jonathan.burris
TWITTER: https://twitter.com/thepastorburris
EMAIL: drburris@icloud.com

Tags:

3 Responses

  1. “Do modern versions remove the deity of Christ” ?

    Yes. See Hebrews 2:9 in the NRSVue.

    NRSVue – but we do see Jesus, who for a little while was made lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God[b] he might taste death for everyone.

    [b] Other ancient authorities read “apart from God”

    1. “Other ancient authorities” means it is a possible or valid reading of the critical text.
    2. If this reading is true, Christ did not die as God, but died as man.

    • Did you really just make your argument based on a marginal note rather than the actual reading of the text? With all the different versions and all the changes to the text in order to comply with copyright laws (your argument), you presented a marginal note as defense of your position? My brother, I have shown my willingness to engage with you on this issue. Please make good use of both of our time. And for the sake of our sanity, can you limit our scope to the KJV, LSB, NASB, ESV, CSB, NIV, and the NLT? I am not a fan of all of these, especially the NIV and the NLT, but these attempt to be faithful translations. I would remind you, again, that I do not believe all translations are created equal. And I reject your assertion that believing one is “better” in some way than another makes one an “onlyist”. That’s called a preference.

      • “Did you really just make your argument based on a marginal note” — Yes, and the reason being is the NRSVue is stating “Other ancient authorities” thus it should be considered as a possibility of the true original. The NRSVue is leaving it up to you to make the determination if the reading is justified.

        limit our scope – That is fair.

        “the NIV and the NLT, but these attempt to be faithful translations” — I would strongly dispute these two specifically based on a number of factors, but discussion for another day.

        “And I reject your assertion that believing one is “better” in some way than another makes one an “onlyist”. That’s called a preference.” – Nope, a preference could be how a passage is worded, but when you have a change of meaning in a passage a judgement has to be made as to correctness. For example, we could have “preference” on how Micah 5:2 reads between the KJV, NKJV, NASB, LSB and that would be fine, but the NLT, NIV, and CSB introduce “origin” which based on the plain English is simply a change of meaning. 2 Peter 1:20 is another good example of of this. Then you have Gen 3:16, which has differences in meaning all over the board depending on version.

        While the copyright protection requires rewording from other extant versions under copyright, this theoretically does not cause changes in meaning, but from a practical standpoint it has.

        For example, Gen 3:13 –
        CSB2017 – “What is this you have done?”
        CSB2020 – “What have you done?”

        The CSB has zippo in textural support for making this change, and zippo from a “readability” standpoint, the appearance at least is entirely to re-word because they got a copyright notice from someone. I can go so far as to state this is for copyright purposes, and the problem a modern version person has is you simply can’t refute my statement because bible publishers will not make the FormTX public.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *