Assault on the word - Part 6

TNIV & The LORD JESUS:

Luke 6:11 And they were filled with madness; and communed one with another what they might do to Jesus.
 

John 14:6 says: Jesus saith unto him, I AM the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but BY ME.
 

If there's one doctrine that Christians should guard and protect it surely is the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. The FACT that Jesus Christ was God manifest in the flesh is the foundation of the Christian faith.

For years the new Bible versions have been continually chipping away at the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Timothy 3:16 is the clearest verse in the Bible proclaiming Jesus Christ as "God manifest in the flesh". In 1 Timothy 3:16, the King James Bible is unmistakable – "God was manifest in the flesh".

1 Timothy 3:16, KJB And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

In 1 Timothy 3:16, virtually every new version replaces the clear, emphatic "God" with the generic "he".

The "original" NIV reads in 1 Timothy 3:16:

Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.
1 Timothy 3:16, NIV

The NIV [and the other versions] changes "God" to "he". "HE appeared in a body"? So What? Everyone has "appeared in a body". "He" is a pronoun that refers to a noun or antecedent. There is no antecedent in the context. The statement does NOT even make sense. The NIV distorts I Timothy 3:16 into grammatical nonsense. Of course, daughter TNIV reads as mommy NIV, "He appeared in a body."

I find it ironic and very disturbing, that the TNIV (and the new versions) invent ways and mis-translations to remove the "generic he" in hundreds of places to appease the feminist – and yet, they insert the "generic he" in 1 Timothy 3:16 when the reference is the clearest reference to the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ in all the Bible! That's curious. . . Who is REALLY writing these new versions?

Make no mistake about it – there is an attack on the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Much more could be documented on the attack upon the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ by the new versions.

But what about the TNIV?

On the TNIV website, they make the following, definite statement:

"Without exception, the TNIV retains gender-accurate, masculine terminology for references to God. This is a theological understanding and commitment that the Committee on Bible Translation, standing in concert with the Church throughout the ages, considers inviolable."
(TNIV: Clarity in Contemporary English, www.tniv.info/story/clarity.php)

That's pretty plain. . . "Without exception, the TNIV retains gender-accurate, masculine terminology for references to God. . ."

Let's look at a few very, very, enlightening verses in the TNIV.

Open your eyes real wide – because what you're about to read is alarming – to say the least.

The King James Bible, in Philippians 2:5-8, clearly confirms that Jesus Christ is God, ". . . thought it not robbery to be equal with God. . ." Again, the deity of our Lord Jesus is openly and clearly affirmed. And again the new versions attack the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ in Philippians 2:5-8

Philippians 2:5-8, KJV

(5) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
(6) Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
(7) But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
(8) And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Philippians 2:5-8, NIV

(5) Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
(6) Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
(7) but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
(8) And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death – even death on a cross!

The "original" NIV [as do all the new versions] completely re-word the verse to DENY the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

And the TNIV goes even further. . .

Remember the emphatic words from the TNIV website, "Without exception, the TNIV retains gender-accurate, masculine terminology for references to God. . ."

Notice, the KJV, correctly, use the "masculine terminology"- "man" when referring the Lord Jesus Christ in Philippians 2.

Philippians 2:5-8, KJV

(5) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
(6) Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
(7) But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
(8) And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

The TNIV changes the "masculine terminology" of Philippians 2 while referring to the Lord Jesus. They change the masculine "man" to the neuter "human being".

Philippians 2:5-8, TNIV

(5) In your relationships with one another, have the same attitude of mind Christ Jesus had:
(6) Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
(7) rather he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.
(8) And being found in appearance as a human being, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross!

1 Corinthians 15:21, is another "masculine" [man] reference to the Lord Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 15:21-22, KJB

For since by man came death, by man [Jesus] came also the resurrection of the dead
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Again, the TNIV change the "masculine" [man] to the neuter "human being".

1 Corinthians 15:21-22, TNIV

For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a human being [Jesus].
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

And they do this many times! They replace the masculine "man" with the "gender-blender" "human being". And the reference is, without question, to God – the Male, Masculine, Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

Remember the emphatic words from the TNIV site, "Without exception, the TNIV retains gender-accurate, masculine terminology for references to God. . ."

I'd say that pretty well sums up the TNIV and company's beliefs about the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. Either that, or they haven't got the slightest idea what they are talking about. Either way, they have no business publishing the words of God! And may I remind you, once again. . . these are the same people, same beliefs and according to their own words – the same methodology used to publish the New International Version (NIV).

The Greek text, without any doubt, affirms the KJB masculine translation.

1 Timothy 2:5 is one of the greatest verses in the Bible. It tells of our mediator between God and men - the "God-man" – the Lord Jesus Christ.

The King James correctly, contains the masculine terminology [man] of the God-inspired Greek text.

1 Timothy 2:5, KJB
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

And again, the TNIV drops the masculine [man] for the sexless, neuter "human beings" and "human".

1 Timothy 2:5, TNIV
5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and human beings, Christ Jesus, himself human,

"Without exception, the TNIV retains gender-accurate, masculine terminology for references to God. . ."

Here's some other verses where the TNIV drops the "masculine terminology" when referring to God the Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.

Matthew 9:6-8, KJB (again a clear reference to the Lord Jesus)

(6) But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house.
(7) And he arose, and departed to his house.
(8) But when the multitude saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men.

Matthew 9:6-8, TNIV

6 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins." So he said to the paralyzed man, "Get up, take your mat and go home."
7 Then the man got up and went home.
8 When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to human beings

John 15:13, KJB (clearly referring to the Lord Jesus and Calvary)

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

John 15:13, TNIV

Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.

Matthew 13:57, KJB

And they were offended in him. But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country, and in his own house.

Matthew 13:57, TNIV (see also Luke 4:24)

And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, "Only in their own towns and in their own homes are prophets without honor."

John 6:33, KJB (a clear reference to the Lord Jesus Christ)

For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.

John 6:33, TNIV

For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world."

The Androgynous (neutral) JESUS:

In Hebrews 2:17, the TNIV starts wading in some very treacherous water. Some very treacherous and very polluted water.

Hebrews 2:16-17, describes how the Lord Jesus physically came through the seed of Abraham. Verse 17 says that the Lord Jesus, was physically ". . . made like his brethren [Jews]. . ." The TNIV translators, without any Greek evidence, in any manuscript, inserts the female gender "sisters" into the verse. This is a flagrant disregard for the Greek text and adding to God’s Word. And it opens the door for some serious satanic feminist and new age teaching. Namely, that Jesus Christ was androgynous – both male and female.

Hebrews 2:16-17, KJB

For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

Hebrews 2:16-17, TNIV

For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants.
"For this reason he had to be made like his brothers and sisters in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people"

". . . made like his brothers and sisters IN EVERY WAY. . ."

Notice the TNIV translators addition of "IN EVERY WAY". Why in the world did they "add" the words "in EVERY way"? What in the world do they mean "in EVERY way"?

That’s opening the door for some serious false doctrine. Serious. . . Wicked. . . Blasphemous. . . Errors.

In the popular new-age book, The Coming of the Cosmic Christ, author Matthew Fox, writes of this, "made like his brothers and sisters in every way", Christ the TNIV translators have tapped into.

"The Cosmic Christ can be both female and male, . . ."
(Matthew Fox, The Coming of the Cosmic Christ)

 

Feminist Rosemary Radford Ruether, in Sexism and God-Talk, also describes this "made like his brothers and sisters in every way" Christ. Ruether, says ". . .we can encounter Christ in the form of our sister". That’s almost identical to the perverted claims of the TNIV translators in Hebrews 2:17 – ". . . made like his brothers and sisters in every way. . ."

"Christ is not necessarily male, nor is the redeemed community only women, but a new humanity, female and male. . . In the language of early Christian prophetism, we can encounter Christ in the form of our sister"
(Rosemary Radford Ruether, Sexism and God-Talk)

Radical feminist and lesbian author, Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, was stylistic consultant for the "original" New International Version (NIV). Mollenkott is also a major player in the push for gender-inclusive Bibles [such as the TNIV]. In fact, Mollenkott was a team member of the very first gender inclusive scriptures ever published, An Inclusive Language Lectionary. Not surprising, Mollenkott, also promotes the "male-female" Christ [". . .made like his brothers and sisters in every way. . ."]

"the combination of Wisdom/Christ leads to a healthy blend of male and female imagery that empowers everyone and works beautifully to symbolize the One God who is neither male nor female yet both male and female".
(Mollenkott, Virginia Ramey. The Divine Feminine. P. 104).

"The creation story begins by affirming that God is neither male nor female, but both. The first chapter of Genesis emphasizes that both male and female are made in the image of the creator God."
(Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, Gender Diversity and the Christian Community, www.theotherside.org/archive/may-jun01/mollenkott.html)

NIV member and homosexual activist, Mollenkott, seems to have no respect for the Lord Jesus. As she even perverts the Lord Jesus Christ into an effeminate, "gender-bender", "fairy":

"Jesus, whom Paul refers to as the second Adam, also defied gender norms. He didn't marry, although he had the religious obligation to do so at eighteen. He performed acts like cooking or washing the feet of his disciples – acts culturally assigned to wives or slaves, not to a free male, . . ."
(Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, Gender Diversity and the Christian Community, www.theotherside.org/archive/may-jun01/mollenkott.html)

NIV consultant, Mollenkott also stated in a news conference, that Jesus Christ was "chromosomally female":

"You might be interested to know that. . . Jesus remained chromosomally female throughout life."
(Virginia Mollenkott, National Council of Churches news conference, cited in The Language of the King James Bible, Gail Riplinger, p. 114)

Researching the TNIV, I kept asking myself, "What happened to the fear of the Lord?" How can the TNIV translators (CBT), publisher (Zondervan) and copyright holder (IBS) intentionally add, delete, change and distort the words of God? How can they intentionally add words that clearly pervert the Lord Jesus Christ?

Where is the fear of God?

Where is the "trembling at his words"?

Isaiah 66:2 ". . . but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word."
 

Are these new version translators and publishers not aware of the serious warnings, the Lord gives on tampering, adding and taking away from His words?

Deuteronomy 4:2 "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you."
 

Proverbs 30:6 "Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."
 

Revelation 22:18,19 God’s last warning is in :

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

I would not be the people behind these new Bible versions for all the money, wealth, fame and fortune in the whole world. They have a lot, and I mean A LOT, to answer for when they meet the Lord, whether they are saved or lost. It’s not going to be pretty.

No wonder, WorldNetDaily referred to the TNIV as "Today's New International Perversion" and a World magazine's headline called it "The NIV's Twisted Sister" (www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/004/10.30.html)

THE DAMAGE DONE. . .

Even if these Bibles never sell a single copy, the damage done to the authority and trustworthy of the words of God is insurmountable. CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX, newscast after newscast, reported on the confusing changes in the TNIV Inclusive Bible. All this does is add more doubt, more confusion, more excuses for the lost world to doubt the accuracy of the words of God – ". . . yea, hath God said. . .?"

Genesis 3:1 And he [Satan] said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said,. . .?"
 

What’s the next step?

The ultra-liberal, pro-feminist, pro-homosexual and VERY popular, author John Spong, writes of this new inclusive Christianity. Spong says the inclusive Church, ". . . must unite Christ with Antichrist, Jesus with Judas, male with female, heterosexual with homosexual. . . "

"[The Church of tomorrow must] incorporate all of our reality. It must be able to allow God and Satan to come together in each of us. . . . It must unite Christ with Antichrist, Jesus with Judas, male with female, heterosexual with homosexual."
(John Shelby Spong, A New Christianity for a New World, p. 167)

The super-inclusive ". . . God with Satan. . . Christ with Antichrist. . . Jesus with Judas. . ." – is this the next step in the "inclusive Bibles"? Is this the New Inclusive Christianity that is emerging that as Spong describes?

Don’t be too sure. . .

Who would have dreamed 20 years ago, Bible translators and publishers would be doing what they are doing today?

Luke 6:11  And they were filled with madness; and communed one with another what they might do to Jesus.

2 Corinthians 11:4 . . . he that cometh preacheth another Jesus,. . .

Matthew 27:22  . . . What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ?. . .
 

Another deliberate and confusing mistranslation is the Greek word "Christos". The Greek word "Christos" is always translated (or actually transliterated) as "Christ". In fact, the Lord Jesus Christ is referred to as "Christ" by preachers, teachers, Christians and people worldwide more than either Lord or Jesus. People who follow the Lord Jesus Christ are call Christians. It is the "de facto" standard when referencing the Lord Jesus Christ and His followers.

Acts 11:26 ". . . And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. . ."

69 times the translators of the TNIV intentionally, mis-translate "christos" as "messiah".

It’s interesting that the ultra-liberal, ecumenical, Roman Catholic [which includes the Apocrypha] supported, National Council of the Churches copyrighted, feminist-approved, gender-inclusive, New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) also mis-translates "Christ" as "messiah" 66 times. " Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?"

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that Zondervan also publishes the feminist-gender-inclusive, New Revised Standard Version (NRSV).

Why did the TNIV translators use "Messiah" rather than the obvious and accurate "Christ"?

In the Preface to the TNIV, the following reason is given:

"Two changes of special note in the TNIV New Testament are the frequent substitution of ‘Messiah’ for the more traditional ‘Christ’ . . . where the term is clearly used to designate the God-sent deliver of Jewish expectation (primarily in the Gospels and Acts), it was judged more appropriate to use ‘Messiah.’ However, where this sense seems less prominent (primarily the Epistles), the transliteration of the Greek word (Christ) has been retained."
(TNIV, Preface, p. vii)

First of all the statement, ". . . the more traditional ‘Christ’. . ." is misleading. It has nothing to do with "tradition". The simple fact is, the Greek word is Christos or Christ. Plain and simple. . .The correct translation (transliteration) is Christ.

Second, the TNIV translators "judged more appropriate to use Messiah" – despite the clear Greek text? This is "par for the course". The TNIV translators "judge" to throw out the Greek and replace it with whatever "wind is blowing" (see Ephesians 4:14).

The two terms; Christ and Messiah are both found in the New Testament. The word Messiah is found in only two places; John 1:41 and John 4:25 [this is true in the KJB, NIV, RSV, NCV, NASB, et al].

And why is Messiah found in John 1:41 and 4:25?

Simple. The Greek word is "messias". These are the only times the Greek word "messias" is in the New Testament.

A look at John 1:41 and John 4:25 is very enlightening. Remember, John 1:41 and John 4:25 are the only two verses in the New Testament that ACTUALLY contain the Greek word "messias".

John 1:41, KJB
He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ.

John 4:25, KJB
The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.

In BOTH cases, the Greek word "messias" [Messiah] is qualified and clarified with the Greek word "christos" [Christ]. God is clearly explaining a difference. The New Testament term is NOT Messiah – but Christ. Could the Lord have made it any plainer? The simple fact is, "Christ" is 555 times in the NT in King James Bible – because the underlying Greek word is "Christos". And for nearly 400 years all the English Bibles correctly translated the word "Christ".

It has nothing to do with "tradition" – it has to do with "thus saith the Lord".

On their web page "Clarity in contemporary English", under the subtitle "Increased Understanding: Jesus and Messiah", the TNIV translators state the following reason:

"When used as the Messianic title for Jesus, especially in Matthew, John and Acts, the translators used the title of ‘Messiah.’ In other passages, where the title does not reflect a particularly Messianic overtone, translators utilized the Greek ‘Christ.’"
(TNIV: Clarity in Contemporary English, www.tniv.info/story/clarity.php)

The title "Messiah" is a Messianic Jewish term, that is recognized primarily by the Jewish people. Most people, especially today’s Bible illiterate generation, have no idea who or what "Messiah" refers to. The TNIV translators claim the TNIV mission is, " . . . to reach today’s generation with a translation of the Bible that is undeniably accurate and clearly communicates the meaning of the original Scriptures".

They do not ". . .clearly communicates the meaning of the original Scriptures". The "original scriptures CLEARLY SAYS "Christos".

The overwhelming majority of "today’s generation" have not the slightest clue who or what Messiah means. But very few, if any, do not know who is Christ.

The translators also claim, "When used [Christos] as the Messianic title for Jesus, especially in Matthew, John and Acts, the translators used the title of ‘Messiah’".

NOT SO. . .

Of the 69 times the word "Messiah", I quickly identified at least 18 places where they misapplied a Jewish Messiah with the clearly accurate Christ.

For example:

The TNIV incorrectly translates the popular Luke 2:11

"Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord." (Luke 2:11, TNIV)

The KJB correctly reads:

Luke 2:11, KJB "For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:11, refers to the Lord Jesus Christ as the "Saviour". The "Saviour" is not a Jewish Messianic reference. Thank God – the Saviour is for all the world – not just the Jews! Nothing could possibly be clearer from the scriptures.

Notice, how the following verses vigorously present the "Saviour of the world" and "the Saviour of all men".

John 4:42, KJB:
And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world. (John 4:42, KJB)

1 Timothy 4:10, KJB:
For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe. (1 Timothy 4:10, KJB)

1 John 4:14, KJB:
And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.

Mark 1:1 contains another misapplied "Messiah":

Mark 1:1, in the TNIV reads:

"The beginning of the good news about Jesus the Messiah," (Mark 1:1, TNIV)

The KJB, correctly reads:

Mark 1:1 KJB: The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;

Notice, the intent of Mark 1:1 – "the beginning of the GOSPEL. . ." The GOSPEL of Jesus Christ is NOT a "Messianic title". How far off the truth can you get? The gospel of Jesus Christ is for the whole world! Notice also, the TNIV takes a quick swipe at the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ by removing the "the Son of God".

Thank God – the TNIV is wrong – the gospel is for EVERY creature – not just the Jews.

Mark 16:15, KJB
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to EVERY creature. [not the Jewish, Messianic, etc.]

Ephesians 3:6, distinctively declares the "gospel of Christ" is for the Gentiles, not a Jewish Messianic application.

Ephesians 3:6, KJB
That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:

The gospel, a Jewish Messianic Kingdom term – NEVER – God Forbid!

The gospel of Jesus Christ is for "whosoever will". John 3:16, called the gospel in a nutshell, begins with "For God so loved the WORLD, that he gave his only begotten Son, that WHOSOEVER believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

With such a blatant disregard for major Bible doctrine – I ask, have the TNIV crew ever REALLY read the Bible? And I say that not in jest. Seriously. . . Do they just sit around "twiddling and piddling over the Greek and Hebrew" and never simply pick up a King James Bible and read it?

They SERIOUSLY need to heed the words of the Lord Jesus in Matthew 24:15:

Matthew 24:15  ". . .whoso readeth, let him understand:"
 

But perhaps Matthew 16:16 [also in Mark 8:29, Luke 9:20] contains the most haphazardly mis-translation of "Messiah":

The KJB in Matthew 16:13-18:

(13) When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men [notice the inclusive plural MEN – not Jews] say that I the Son of man am?
(14) And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
(15) He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
(16) And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
(17) And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
(18) And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
 

The TNIV Matthew 16:16 reads:

(13) When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?"
(14) They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
(15) "But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
(16) Simon Peter answered, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
(17) Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.
(18) And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of death will not overcome it.

 

The context and content of Matthew 16:13-18 is crystal clear. Look at verse 18. The reference is NOT the Jewish Messianic Kingdom but "the church". With such gross errors, how in the world can anyone take the "sloppy, clumsy" translation work of the TNIV serious?

Notice also, the glaring mistranslation in verse 18, "the gates of hell. . ." is now the "the gates of death", matching the liberal RSV, NCV translations. The "church" is not battling [hence ‘not prevail’] the "gates of death", but the "gates of hell". Ridiculous. . .

May I remind you. . . This is the same group and the same methodology, that translated the NIV and USA-banned, NIV Inclusive version?

Direct from the TNIV web site:

"The fully independent body that translated the highly acclaimed NIV is the same eminent group that undertook the work on the TNIV. . .
The widely respected translation methodology that drove the scholarship of the NIV was maintained in the development of the TNIV. . ."
(Faithfully Produced by CBT, www.tniv.info/story/cbt.php)

And according to the TNIV translators themselves – the TNIV is MORE ACCURATE than the NIV.

"The NIV is an extremely accurate Bible text, the best the CBT could produce as of 1984. The TNIV is an even slightly more accurate Bible text, the best the CBT could produce as of 2001."
(TNIV FAQS, www.tniv.info/QandA.php)

A FRIGHTENING CONCLUSION. . .

The false and deliberate removal of "Christ" leaves the fingerprints of the antichrist, as forewarned in 1 John 2:22:

1 John 2:22, KJB:
Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the CHRIST? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

How does the TNIV translators respond to this warning – simple. They change the verse!

That’s right. . .They change the verse and wipe off their fingerprints and cover up the incriminating evidence. . . I guess the antichrist is a reference to the Jewish Messianic Kingdom.

1 John 2:22, TNIV:
Who is the liar? It is whoever denies that Jesus is the Messiah. Such a person is the antichrist — denying the Father and the Son.

 

A FEMALE ANTICHRIST?

Notice also in 1 John 2;22, the TNIV-NIV group replace the masculine pronoun, "he" with the neuter "person" in reference to the antichrist. The Greek text is specifically and only masculine singular [outos] or "he". A female antichrist. . . Hmm. . . Now, that really ought to really make Hillary, NOW, GLAD, Barbra Streisand, Virginia Mollenkott, and the militant feminists jump for joy. . .

The TNIV replaces Christ with Messiah 69 times in the following verses:

Matthew: (16 times)
1:1, 1:16, 1:17, 2:4, 11:2, 16:16, 16:20, 22:42, 23:10, 24:5, 24:23, 24:24, 26:63, 26:68, 27:17, 27:22

Mark: (8 times)
1:1, 8:29, 9:41, 12:35, 13:21, 13:22, 14:61, 15:32

Luke (12 times)
2:11, 2:26, 3:15, 4:41, 9:20, 20:41, 22:67, 23:2, 23:35, 23:39, 24:26, 24:46

John (16 times)
1:20, 1:24, 3:28, 4:29, 7:26, 7:27, 7:31, 7:41(2), 7:42, 9:22, 10:24, 11:27, 12:34, 20:31, 21:31

Acts (12 times)
2:36, 3:18, 3:20, 5:42, 8:5, 9:22, 17:2, 17:3(2), 18:5, 18:28, 19:23

Romans (1 times)
9:5

1 John (2 times)
2:22, 5:1

Revelation (2 times)
11:15, 12:10,

1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the CHRIST? He is antichrist. . .

Isaiah 49:1 . . . The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name.

For the last 25 years the baby-killing, pro-abortion, feminists, have spewed forth their crusade of propaganda and lies. Since Roe v. Wade (1973) over 40 million innocent, babies have been murdered. It's interesting 1973, happens to be the date the "original" New International Version New Testament [NIV] was published. . . hmm . . . (Matthew 7:20 by their fruits ye shall know them.)

That's more innocent little babies murdered than the COMBINED total of 23 states!

1 John 2:22 Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.

Matthew 19:4 . . . Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

By far the most extensive damage performed by the inclusive-perversions is the extermination of the "generic" masculine pronouns, such as "he / him / his".

Known as the "generic he", generic masculine pronouns are the standard method used in the English language when addressing an "indefinite" or "undefined" individual. Masculine pronouns, such as "he / him / his" are utilized to address both male and female when the gender is unknown. The "generic he" has been the accepted method literally, since the beginning of the English language.

The Preface to the TNIV states:

"While a basic core of the English language remains relatively stable, many diverse and complex cultural forces [as in the feminists ‘cultural force’?] continue to bring about the subtle [see Gen 3:1] shifts in the meanings and/or connotations of even old, well-established words and phrases. Among the more programmatic changes in the TNIV is the removal of nearly all vocative ‘O’’s and the elimination of most instances of the generic use of masculine nouns and pronouns."
(TNIV, Preface, p. vii, emphasis and bracketed comments added)

Boy. . . the NIV translators weren’t just kidding when they declared ". . .the elimination of most instances of the generic use of masculine nouns and pronouns." With the exception of referring to specific male individuals, virtually every masculine pronoun is removed from the TNIV!

The NIV translators justify their zapping of over 3000 masculine pronouns by claiming "diverse" and "complex cultural forces" are "bringing about the subtle shifts in the meanings and/or connotations of even, old, well-established words and phrases". The NIV translators also state in the Preface, "the so-called singular ‘they/their/them,’ which has been gaining acceptance among careful writers and which actually has a venerable place in English idiom, has been employed to fill in the vocabulary gap in generic nouns and pronouns referring to human beings. . ."

Reading the Preface to the TNIV, one would think no respectable journalist would dare use the "generic he". After all, the Preface states, the "careful writers" are using the "so-called singular ‘they/their/them’".

Well, aren’t they. . .? Hum. . . . .

The acclaimed Strunk and White’s, The Elements of Style, is by far the most recommended and respected concise handbook for writers in existence. Amazon.com lists many accolades and praises for Strunk and White’s The Elements of Style:

"No book in shorter space, with fewer words, will help any writer more than this persistent little volume." — The Boston Globe

". . . Should be the daily companion of anyone who writes for a living, and for that matter, anyone who writes at all." — Greensboro (N.C.) Daily News

"This excellent book, which should go off to college with every freshman, is recognized as the best book of its kind we have." — St. Paul Dispatch – Pioneer Press

How does Strunk and White advise concerning that mean, sexist, "generic he"?

"Do not use they when the antecedent is a distributive expression such as each, each one, everybody, every one, many a man. Use the singular pronoun [he, his, him]."
(William Strunk, Jr., and E.B. White, The Elements of Style, Fourth Edition, 2000, p. 60)

Strunk and White then lists the following "correct and incorrect" examples:

[incorrect] Every one of us knows they are fallible.
[correct] Every one of us knows he is fallible.
[incorrect] Everyone in the community, whether they are a member of the Association or not, is invited to attend.
[correct] Everyone in the community, whether he is a member of the Association or not, is invited to attend.

"The use of he as a pronoun for nouns embracing both genders is a simple, practical convention rooted in the beginnings of the English language."
(William Strunk, Jr., and E.B. White, The Elements of Style, Fourth Edition, 2000, p. 60)

It should be mentioned, this is from the 2000 edition of Strunk and White’s, The Elements of Style. An edition clearly aware of the feminist agenda to eliminate the use of the "generic he", and over 8 years [1992] after the start of the gender-inclusive NIV.

Strunk and White also states concerning the ‘generic he’:

"It [the generic he] has no pejorative [derogatory, or belittling effect, negative, sexist] connotations; it is never incorrect."
(William Strunk, Jr., and E.B. White, The Elements of Style, Revised Edition, 1979, p. 60)

The highly esteemed Associated Press Stylebook and Libel Manual, boasts of over 1.6 million copies sold. In fact, the AP Stylebook is the number one selling and most widely used journalism reference book in the world.

How does the AP Stylebook instruct the journalists on the "generic he"?

"Use the pronoun his when an indefinite antecedent may be male or female: [Example] A reporter attempts to protect his sources."
(Norm Goldstein, The Associated Press Stylebook and Libel Manual, 2000 edition, p. 114)

Probably, the two most respected and utilized journalists reference books in the world, approve and even recommend the "generic he". And yet, according to their own words, the NIV translators goal is "the elimination of most instances of the generic use of masculine nouns and pronouns."

Nearly every Dictionary in existence, both old and new, will list the "generic he" as a valid definition for "he":

he, pronoun of the third person;
1. A pronoun, a substitute for the third person, masculine gender, representing the man or male person named before.
2. It often has reference to a person that is named in the subsequent part of the sentence. He is the man.
3. He is often used without reference to any particular person, and may be referred to any person indefinitely that answers the description.
4. He, when a substitute for man in its general sense, expressing mankind, is of common gender, representing, like its antecedent, the whole human race.

 

The Grosset Webster Dictionary of 1966:

he pronoun 1. The male person mentioned previously. 2. Anyone.
(The Grosset Webster Dictionary, 1966, p. 281)

The current Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary:

he 1 : that male one who is neither speaker nor hearer
2 – used in a generic sense or when the sex of the person is unspecified <one should do the best he can>
(Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary)

Every dictionary I found, listed the "generic he" as a valid definition. The following dictionaries all defined a "generic he":

The following "real life" examples illustrate the "generic he" masculine pronoun in action:

"To graduate to the second stage, the novice must pass a road test and have no moving violations or at-fault accidents. If he does, he remains at the first stage while he takes a driver-education refresher course."
(Reader’s Digest, Dec., 1999, p. 129)

"Even a moderate phone user should be able to save 25 percent of his monthly bill by shopping around."
(Reader’s Digest, Feb., 1999, p. 135)

"Nobody comes off a trans-Atlantic flight looking better than when he got on it"
(Chicago Tribune, Aug. 22, 1999, Sec. 8, p. 3)

Many of our most treasured speeches and documents use the "generic he".

Martin Luther King’s famous "I Had A Dream Speech":

One hundred years later, the Negro is still languishing in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. . .
There will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. . . .
One hundred years later, the Negro is still languishing in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land . . .
We can never be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. . .

The US Constitution utilizes the "generic he" throughout:

For instance, Article 1, section 2, which lists the requirements of the House of Representatives:

"No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the age of twenty five years, and been seven years a citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state in which he shall be chosen."

For instance, Article 1, section 3, which lists the requirements of a Senator:

No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of the United States and who shall not, when elected, be an inhabitant of that state for which he shall be chosen.

Did the "generic he" in the U.S. Constitution keep Hillary Clinton, the feminist "poster child", from running for Senator? Did Hillary read the "generic he" and say, "Well, I guess I can not run for Senate". Of course, not. In fact over 70 women are currently serving in Congress.

So, why are the NIV translators (CBT), publisher (Zondervan) and copyright holder (International Bible Society) so determined to eliminate the generic masculine pronouns?

Surely, the reason must be the Greek text demands the extermination of the English generic masculine pronouns.

I’m sure as we examine the underlying Greek text, we’ll clearly see why the NIV translators are bound and determined to root out every "jot or tittle" of the "generic he".

What saith the Greek?

Matthew 10:24 is a good place to start:

The KJB reads in Matthew 10:24
The disciple is not above his master, nor the servant above his lord.

The TNIV reads in Matthew 10:24
"Students are not above their teacher, nor servants above their master.

Does the Greek text match the singular masculine KJB or the plural neuter TNIV?

Without ANY doubt, without ANY debate – WHATSOEVER. . .

The Greek is SINGULAR and is MASCULINE. . .

Here’s briefly the Greek evidence. . .

is estin {singular IS}
disciple maqhthV {singular A DISCIPLE}
servant douloV {singular A SERVANT}
his autou {HIS LORD}
 

The TNIV incorrectly and intentionally MIS-translate the following:

Why? The Greek CLEARLY is singular and masculine. Going completely defiant to the "God-breathed" Greek text found in ANY and EVERY manuscript in the world, the NIV translators change the subjects, the verbs, the pronouns – for ONE reason – and ONE reason ONLY – to remove the masculine pronoun. And they do this hundreds and hundreds of times!

Now, may I ask – who would be so upset about the generic masculine pronoun? What single "cultural forces" (as the TNIV Preface ‘reasoning’ admits) would desire a MIS-translation to remove the "generic he"? Only One and One and Only – the radical, extremist, militant, feminist! And clearly that is ‘cultural force’ the TNIV team (and the other gender-inclusive MIS-translations) pleases by removing the generic masculine references. The greatest books in print on English journalism approves and recommends the generic masculine pronoun. God, who inspired and wrote the Greek text, clearly desires the generic masculine pronouns. And yet, the NIV translators ignore the Greek text and distort hundreds and hundreds of verses – because of ‘cultural forces’!

According to Word Magazine, the "gender inclusive" New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) changed over 3,400 verses just to remove the generic use of "he-him-his". (Comparing the two NIV, Wayne Grudem, World Magazine, April 19, 1997)

Remember where we previously read in the TNIV Preface about "the so-called singular ‘they/their/them,’ which has been gaining acceptance among careful writers and which actually has a venerable place in English idiom, has been employed to fill in the vocabulary gap in generic nouns and pronouns referring to human beings. . ."

The ". . . so-called SINGULAR ‘they/their/them. . ."?

What first grade elementary student doesn’t know "they/their/them" are third person PLURAL pronouns? You can "call" them "so-called SINGULAR" till the cows come home but they are still PLURAL pronouns. They are PLURAL pronouns today. . . And they will be PLURAL pronouns tomorrow – despite the feminist "cultural force". The TNIV’s claim of, ". . . gaining acceptance among careful writers and which actually has a venerable place in English idiom. . ." is just another way of saying – because the radical, extremist, militant, feminists despise the generic masculine pronouns, and they have "yelled so loud and so long" some spineless writers, academia, media and Bible translators have cowered down and perverted the PLURAL third person pronouns [they, their, them] into SINGULAR neuter pronouns to please the militant feminists.

I have a good question for the TNIV translators and their "so-called SINGULAR ‘they/their/them"?

If they are indeed, "so-called SINGULAR ‘they/their/them" – then why do you change the SUBJECTS and VERBS to PLURAL? Hum. . . .

The ". . . so-called SINGULAR ‘they/their/them. . ."?

You’ve got to be kidding. . .

May I remind you. . . this is the same group, the same mindset, the same beliefs and the same methodology that translated the "original" New International Version (NIV)?

Here it is from the "horses mouth" (a.k.a. from the TNIV web site):

"The fully independent body that translated the highly acclaimed NIV is the same eminent group that undertook the work on the TNIV. . .
The widely respected translation methodology that drove the scholarship of the NIV was maintained in the development of the TNIV. . ."
(Faithfully Produced by CBT, www.tniv.info/story/cbt.php)

May I also remind you. . . This is also the same group, the same mindset, the same beliefs, the same methodology, the same philosophy, the same agenda, that MIS-translated the British-bound New International Version Inclusive (NIVI) that was so corrupted with the extreme, radical, feminist agenda it was banned from sale in the USA!

The "Joke of the Century" is on the TNIV web site:

"Revisions were checked for accuracy against the original languages and reviewed one by one for faithfulness, communication and style. Only when a revision in English matched the accuracy of the original languages did it make its way into the TNIV."
(Faithfully Produced by CBT, www.tniv.info/story/cbt.php)

"ONLY when a revision in English matched the accuracy of the original languages did it make its way into the TNIV."

Yeah. . . Right. . . And the moon is made of blue cheese.

But then again, the following statement on the International Bible Society’s (IBS) web site might win the "Joke of the Century" award. The IBS own the copyright (and are a major financial supporter) of the NIV, NIVI and the TNIV. Commenting on the TNIV, the IBS state on their website:

"We believe that earnest Christians want total accuracy in translation, with no bowing to a feminist agenda, no compromise with the biblical text. That is precisely what IBS [a.k.a. TNIV] has been and is totally committed to as well."
(NIV FAQ, www.gospelcom.net/ibs/niv/niv_faq.php)

Yes. Christians certainly do want ". . .total accuracy in translation, with no bowing to a feminist agenda, no compromise with the biblical text." And that's EXACTLY the reason to avoid the TNIV and these new versions like a "rabid pit bull with AIDS".

The TNIV translators dig a bigger hole of deceit with the following absurd quote:

"The TNIV is in fact 'gender-accurate.' Gender neutrality suggests the removal of specific male or female attributes. The TNIV does not remove these attributes or "neuter" any passages of Scripture."
(TNIV: Questions and Answers, www.tniv.info/QandA.php)

It is NOT "gender-accurate". We have seen many times, and we’ll see many more, where the TNIV, completely ignores the clear, masculine Greek text and neuters the verse. Not once. Not twice, but hundreds and hundreds of times.

Unbelievable. . .

Most translators (even the worst) at least attempt to correctly TRANSLATE the Greek text. But the FACT is, the TNIV (and other gender inclusive versions) invent ways to INCORRECTLY TRANSLATE the Greek text to remove the "God Breathed" generic masculine pronouns! And that’s a FACT – JACK. That’s the TRUTH – RUTH! And that’s for REAL – BILL!

Knowing the disrespect and intentionally, mis-translation of the "God breathed" Greek text, the following statement written on the TNIV website, is truly a very alarming and eye-opening statement:

"The NIV is an extremely accurate Bible text, the best the CBT could produce as of 1984. The TNIV is an even slightly more accurate Bible text, the best the CBT could produce as of 2001."
(TNIV FAQS, www.tniv.info/QandA.php)

Well. . . well . . . well. . . That ought to wake some people up. . .

If the TNIV is more accurate (with hundreds and hundreds of PROVEN deliberate mis-translations) than the "original" NIV – what does this say ‘loud and clear’ about the NIV? It says EXACTLY what we and others have documented for years – the "original" New International Version (NIV) is a distorted, faulty, mis-translation.

For more info on the errors and mis-translations in the NIV:

That’s just a few of the many sources documenting the inaccuracies in the "original" New International Version (NIV).

Besides not being true to the Greek text. . . Besides intentionally mis-translating "thus saith the Lord" – there is an inherent danger of removing the singular masculine pronoun – you confuse the reader’s focus from an ‘individual’ to a ‘group’.

By replacing the direct, singular third person pronoun [he, his, him] with the indirect, plural third person pronoun [they, them, those] or with the indirect, second person neuter pronoun [you, your] the individual responsibility and focus of the reader is blurred. That essential relationship and communication between the individual and God is missing.

Author William Zinsser, in the best-selling, On Writing Well, warns of the effects of converting the singular "he" with the plural "they":

"A style that converts every ‘he’ into a ‘they’ will quickly turn to mush. . . I don’t like plurals; they weaken writing because they are less specific from the singular, less easy to visualize."
(William Zinsser, On Writing Well, p. 123)

Strunk and Whites’, highly respected, The Elements of Style, also cautions against replacing the singular "he" with the plural "they":

"Alternatively, put all controversial nouns in the plural and avoid the choice of sex altogether, you may find your prose sounding general and diffuse [not concentrated, indirect]"
(Strunk and Whitle, Elements of Style, p. 61)

The clear "he" becomes a muddled, hazy "they".

Compare John 10:9 in the King James Bible (KJB) with Today’s New International Version (TNIV), notice how the individual audience is lost with the plural they:

John 10:9, KJB
I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

John 10:9, TNIV
I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. They will come in and go out, and find pasture.

John 10:9, in the TNIV, is no longer addressing the individual person [any man, he], but now a group [whoever, they]. God’s message of salvation is to the individual, not a group, not a church – but a single, individual, person. And the simple effects of these hundreds of perverse, mis-translations to appease the radical feminists could be devastating.

As that old song affirms:

Not my mother, not my father,
but it's me O Lord standin' in the need of prayer.
Not the deacon, not the elder,
but it's me, O Lord, standin' in the need of prayer.
Not my sister, not my brother,
but it's me, O Lord, standin' in the need of prayer.

 

Salvation is an individual accountability. You’d better believe Satan would love to confuse the individual’s attention and accountability. By replacing the direct, singular pronoun with the indirect, plural is a very effective method to obscure the individual’s accountability.

The following is some verses where the "generic" masculine pronoun is eliminated. And in every case, the Greek text is singular, masculine and correct in the King James Bible. And in every case, the TNIV intentionally, mis-translates the Greek text.

As you read through the verses, notice the amount of rewording, changes, etc. the TNIV invent for the sole purpose to remove any masculine reference. Most of the time they will convert the verse to use plural pronouns [they / them / their]. Some times the TNIV translators will transform the verse from third person singular [he / him / his] to the second person neuter [you / your]. Other times they may change the voice from active to passive and simply remove the pronouns in the process – but somehow, someway – that mean, nasty, sexist masculine pronoun has got to go. Notice, also how hazy and murky the distorted verses can become. In fact, some are down right silly.

Dr. Wayne Grudem, professor of Biblical and Systematic Theology at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, and president of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (www.cbmw.org) warns of the consequence in removing the masculine pronouns:

". . .the generic use of "he-him-his" has consistently been changed to "we" or "you" or "they." The result is that whenever readers of this inclusive-language NIV read the words "we" and "you" and "they," they will never know whether what they are reading is what God originally caused his Word to say, or what the translators have decided his Word should say instead. In hundreds and probably thousands of places, readers will never know whether these are the words of God or the words of man.

Such revisions are not the words God originally caused to be written, and thus they are not the words of God. They are human words that men have substituted for the words of God, and they have no place in the Bible."
(Wayne Grudem, Comparing the two NIVs, World Magazine. Apr. 19, 1997)

This is a small sample of the hundreds of verses that are clearly mis-translated:

Matthew 10:38, KJB
And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.

Matthew 10:38, TNIV
Those who do not take up their cross and follow me are not worthy of me.

Matthew 12:30, KJB
He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.

Matthew 12:30, TNIV
Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters.

Mark 8:36-37, KJB
For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?
Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

Mark 8:36-37, TNIV
What good is it for you to gain the whole world, yet forfeit your soul?
Or what can you give in exchange for your soul?

Luke 9:23, KJB
And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.

Luke 9:23, TNIV
Then he said to them all: "Those who would be my disciples must deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me.

John 3:21, KJB
But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

John 3:21, TNIV
But those who live by the truth come into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

John 3:36, KJB
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

John 3:36, TNIV
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them.

John 6:47, KJB
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

John 6:47, TNIV
Very truly I tell you, whoever believes has eternal life.
(NOTICE: The "on me" is left out of the TNIV, also left out in the less accurate NIV.)

John 7:38, KJB
He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

John 7:38, TNIV
Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within them."

John 10:9, KJB
I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

John 10:9, TNIV
I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. They will come in and go out, and find pasture.

John 11:25, KJB
Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

John 11:25, TNIV
Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. Anyone who believes in me will live, even though they die;

John 14:23, KJB
Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

John 14:23, TNIV
Jesus replied, "Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them.

1 Corinthians 2:15, KJB
But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

1 Corinthians 2:15, TNIV
The person with the Spirit makes judgments about all things, but such a person is not subject to merely human judgments,

Galatians 6:7, KJB
Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Galatians 6:7, TNIV
Do not be deceived: God cannot be mocked. People reap what they sow.

1 Timothy 3:1, KJB
This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.

1 Timothy 3:1, TNIV
Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task.

2 Timothy 2:4, KJB
No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier.

2 Timothy 2:4, TNIV
No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs; rather, they try to please their commanding officer.

1 John 5:5, KJB
Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

1 John 5:5, TNIV
Who is it that overcomes the world? Only the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.

1 John 5:12, KJB
He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

1 John 5:12, TNIV
Those who have the Son have life; those who do not have the Son of God do not have life.

Revelation 3:5, KJB
He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

Revelation 3:5, TNIV
Those who are victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will never blot out their names from the book of life, but will acknowledge their names before my Father and his angels.
 

Revelation 3:20, KJB
Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

Revelation 3:20, TNIV
Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with them, and they with me.

Revelation 21:7, KJB
He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

Revelation 21:7, TNIV
Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children.

Jeremiah 23:36 . . for ye have perverted the words of the living God,

Ezekiel 22:30  And I sought for a man among them, . . . but I found none.