Let's see how the bible is extremely accurate:
Which Bible verses did the NIV delete?
This is a very long list I will list some:
Matthew 17:21 -- COMPLETELY removed
Matthew 18:11 -- COMPLETELY removed
"For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."
Mark 7:16 -- COMPLETELY removed
Mark 9:44 -- COMPLETELY removed
Mark 11:26 -- COMPLETELY removed
Mark 16:9-20 (all 12 verses) -- There is a line separating the last 12 verses of Mark from the main text. Right under the line it says: [The two most reliable early manuscripts do not have Mark 16:9-20] (NIV, 1978 ed.)
Luke 17:36 -- COMPLETELY removed
John 5:4 -- COMPLETELY removed
Acts 8:37 -- COMPLETELY removed
"And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
Acts 28:29 -- COMPLETELY removed
I John 5:7 -- Vitally important phrase COMPLETELY removed
What are you NIV readers missing? What does the real Bible say?
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
Here is something else I copied from a website but don't have the link for it:
Another good example of a verse that can be found in the KJV but which is missing from almost every other English translation of the Bible is 1 John 5:7/8
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one.
The NRSV has only the words: “There are three that testify:....” and then goes straight into verse 8. Why would such an extremely important affirmation of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity be lacking in our modern versions? Well, it’s certainly not because we reject the doctrine! Scriptural support for the doctrine of the Holy Trinity can be found in multiple locations throughout the Scriptures. We are not dependent upon any one verse to support this core doctrine of our faith. No, these words have been removed for one simple reason: not a single copy of the Greek New Testament, from the oldest up until the early 1500s have the verse! Yes, that is correct, it is missing from the body-text of every ancient Greek manuscript of the New Testament.
Let me give you a few examples of what I am talking about. In the KJV, Acts 8:37 says the following:
And Philip said if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
If you will check almost any modern translation, however, you will notice that the entire verse is missing from the text. The NRSV goes straight from verse 36 to verse 38, and the only way one would know that there is a difference (besides versification and, perhaps, memory) is that the editors of the NRSV have supplied a marginal note which informs the reader that “other ancient authorities add....” verse 37.
Why has verse 37 been left out of the text of the Acts of the Apostles’ in most modern translations? The answer is very simple: there are absolutely no examples of Acts 8:37 to be found in any copy of the New Testament prior to the year 550 AD. Our oldest copy of The Acts of the Apostles dates from around the 180s AD, and it lacks these words. Verse 37 is also missing from many other copies, some dating to as late as 1350 AD. This can only mean one thing: verse 37 is an addition, one which is probably dependent upon the Baptismal liturgies of the time.
Now let's check the most reliable old texts of the bible:
The Schofeild Bible's (1998 ed) footnote for this passage gives us the answer: "Verses 9-20 are not found in the two most ancient mss., the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. . ." They are claimed to be very relieble, but are they?
Sinaticus and Vaticanus disagree with about 90-95% of all known manuscripts, and they even disagree among themselves. Both have a long history of corruption and obscurity.
Omissions of Sinaticus and Vaticanus
Vaticanus omits:
a.) Everything from Genesis 1:1 to 46:28.
b.) Psalms 106-139
c.) All of First Timothy
d.) All of second Timothy
e.) All Titus
f.) All of Revelation
g.) All of Hebrews after Chapter 9:14 to the end of the book
h.) Our Lord's agony and blood like sweat in the Garden of Gethsemane. Luke 22:43- 44
i.) Our Lord's prayer for his adversaries. Luke 23:34 "Father forgive them; for they know not what they do."
j.) Mark 16:9-20. There is a significant blank space in the manuscript where this passage would have gone, testifying for it's inclusion in the Bible.
k.) The story of the women taken in adultery John 7:53 - John 8:11"
l.) Heb 9:15 to the end of the book.
m.) 2 Kings 2:5-7, 10-13
Vaticanus adds the Apocrypha to the OT.
Sinaticus omits:
a.) John 5:4, 8:1-11
b.) Matthew 16:2-3
c.) Romans 16:24
d.) Mark 16:9-20 Again, there is a significant blank space where these verses should have gone.
e.) Acts 8:37
f.) 1 John 5:7
Sinaticus adds: The Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas to the NT and the Apocypha to the OT.
Corrections of Sinaticus and Vaticanus
Sinaticus was corrected at least 15,000 times by multiple correctors. Most of these corrections were made in the seventh century, but some of these corrections were made as late as the twelfth century. (Sure sounds like the "oldest" reading, doesn't it?) The writing quality is very poor; many times words or whole phrases are repeated in succession. The original writing is completely written over in parts, and the original writer even corrected some of his mistakes. Vaticanus also shows very sloppy penmanship
.
So now as you can see, even the oldest copies are declared to be corrupted, and the ancient greece copies don't contain many of the things translated into the english bible. So the bible is always being edited every time an ancient manuscript is found and is also being edited when revised to be compatible with the oldest greece versions.The funny thing is that Jesus never spoke greece, he spoke Aramaic which could also result in translation errors.Or one can say that the church in those days ordered every copy of the hebrew aramaic bible to be burned down and only greece ones to survive. What hint does that give you now?