As Kevin H is also a member here under the same username, ask him by PM, by email, or whatever, to come here and post his own thoughts here.

I see your claim is made that those who created Non-KJVs intended to:

• To destroy the meaning
  
• Made changes to have an intended expressed and implied evil purpose
  
• Deleted text supporting the truth, correct doctrine, and understanding

Do you agree that I listed your claims correctly?

Looking back at the beginning of the thread, I did a search for the word, "destroy", but that word was not found. Neither was the word, "express".

But I did find that you claimed they had a "chief purpose" and said you showed the "plain purpose". However, I failed to see where you showed such. I also found where I objected to your claim then. It's gone on for many pages and as of yet, I have found no one to substantiate anything of the sort. You wrote a lot, and maybe sorting through the irrelevant stuff, I missed support of those claims. Could you show specifically where you supported those claims? If you cannot show that it is true, this is a great defamation on your part towards those other translators.

You need to show that their intent is to destroy the meaning, with an express purpose to delete text supporting the truth, correct doctrine, and understanding. Otherwise, I see no reason why those holding the rights to those other versions could not take you to court.

Do a little work for yourself and dig below the surface and read the whole thread, post by post. Then ask any questions you want and I will answer them.

Or he can post his thoughts directly, but I dont think the post above really relates to the discussion from my take.

It certainly does, because it relates to how we use the Bible, which to Ellen White seems more important than which version we use.

So as long as we 'use' the Jehovah Witness Bible 'correctly', then in your view that makes those changes ok? I have to say I cant agree with that logic, can you clarify.

The real point is that there seem to be certain faults in all Bible translations. Therefore the method we use a Bible is to see the total picture of Jesus Christ and His salvation, and then under the guidance of the Holy Spirit we see the meaning of words and phrases and it is easier to detect faults in the translation.

In the writings of Ellen White you see her mention quite a number of different Bible translations, both before and after the KJV, and in all of the cases where I recall she points out what a blessing these various editions have been to the people. I have never noticed her pointing out any version as worthless.

I have discovered that when I deal with Jehovah's Witnesses it is not difficult to present Jesus Christ as God and Savior much greater than the way he is presented in their teachings. I do this by using their own Bible. From their own Bible it is easy to point out the translation mistakes in John 1, but there is no sense in starting there. You start out by presenting a total picture of Jesus Christ and then the mistakes in John 1 are obliterated. Rather present Jesus Christ as found in the three letters of John and some of the foundations of their teachings is shattered.

Greek Text	King James Version	Other Versions
καὶ ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς πρὸς αὐτὸν λέγων, Γέγραπται ὅτι Οὐκ ἐπ᾽ ἄρτῳ μόνῳ ζήσεται ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ παντὶ ῥήματι Θεοῦ [Luke 4:4, Greek]	And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. (Luke 4:4, KJV) And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every [word] that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live. (Deuteronomy 8:3)	Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man does not live on bread alone.’ ” (NIV)
		And Jesus answered unto him, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone. (ASV)
		And Jesus answered him, “It is written, ‘MAN SHALL NOT LIVE ON BREAD ALONE.’” (NASB)
		And Jesus answered him, "It is written, 'Man shall not live by bread alone.'" (ESV)
		But Jesus told him, “No! The Scriptures say, ‘People do not live by bread alone.’” (NLT)
		Jesus answered by quoting Deuteronomy: "It takes more than bread to really live." (MSG)
Some versions are more flippant in their handling of the Word of God than others, but all of those shown on the right have omitted the “punchline” of the verse. They've left out the principal meaning. Sure, we're not to live by bread alone...upon what then? They leave the reader hanging, without the benefit of Christ's full message. They accept just a truncated version of His words, as if the rest of it weren't important anyway. The trouble is, the rest of it was the chiefest part! If they have no respect for “every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God,” how should we expect them not to have innumerable other alterations?

This is but one example of hundreds. They would not want to take me to court. It would end up revealing far more about their Bibles to the public eye than they would wish to have publicity for.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Interesting table you present. You know just how to do that, something I have not tried.

Certainly you have a point, but is that all?

You failed to mention that many of the Greek manuscripts do not have the final part of the verse, making some translators feel it indicating that Jesus might only have quoted the first part, so perhaps the last part has been added by copyists. You may not agree to this, and you might be right.

I noticed that the translators do make a reference to Deut. 8:3, so they are not eliminating the truth that you are emphasizing. So it is difficult to say "that their intent is to destroy the meaning, with an express purpose to delete text supporting the truth, correct doctrine, and understanding" like kland is saying. The whole truth may not be found in a single verse of Scripture. You need all of the Bible, like Ellen says, here a little and there a little.

There could be many things in connection with this that many people are not aware of. If I remember right Erasmus was in a great hurry to get his Textus Receptus published. This resulted in a great number of errors, some of which were corrected later on.

One of the great problems of Erasmus was that he had no Greek manuscript of the last part of Revelation. Seems like he then just translated on his own a Latin text back to Greek, and placed that in his Textus Receptus.

So when you are praising the work of this Roman Catholic scholar who never had the courage to take his stand for the Reformation, you fail to mention that the Greek text we have today of the last part of Revelation stems from those manuscripts you are condemning, because that was not a part of the Textus Receptus.

Through all of these "problems" the Lord God of Heaven kept a watch on His Word, and He has seen to it that we have in it His message of salvation. Why should we confuse His work for us by finding all kinds of faults in various translations? Is that a good excuse not to follow His will for us?