Recovery Bible = Corrupted Word Of God!

[Paul Vusik]

I was thinking for a while if I should start this thread or not. We live in the time, when the words and the meaning of words has been completely obliterated by these groups of people, who will do anything to the Bible in order to fit their scams into it. Money, greed, self-exaltation, leading people after themselves, prophecy buffs, countless predictions of upcoming events and signs, that have lead to partial and in some cases total corruption of the Word of God.
How many times you have heard a message or sermon, where the person will use 4-5 different Bible versions to be able to twist it into a pretzel the word of God, so that they can fit their ideologies into the text? Or even worse, in the case of recovery bible, they just went ahead and changed the text and words to fit their scam, not to be just like all others who use 4-5 versions to make things fit. It was “mis-translation”, or “it wasn’t fully recovered” at the time those versions were written, they claim.

So the point of this thread, is to expose the verses from the Bible, where the words and meaning were partially or completely changed to fit their system. I use KJV Bible in comparison, since I believe it’s the oldest and most accurate translation, so all my posts will be comparing the two. Just remember, recovery bible is copyrighted version, meaning they had to change / eliminate / add, at least 10% of the content in order to get it. However, at least for me, I could care less about any copyright laws or restrictions when it comes to exposing them, their bible, their teachings or any writings of these man. Truth has no copyrights, and doesn’t get bend and subverted by the laws of man! There is no man in this world that has copyrights on the truth or is an “Authority Having Jurisdiction” in any matters related to the Bible or teachings thereof.

I’ll start by posting the most known verse in the Bible, in which these man managed to screw it up, in order to fit their agendas.

John 3:16
KJV

16*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.

RV text:

“16For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone who believes into Him would not perish, but would have eternal life.”

It’s obvious that these people had an agenda to make everything some kind of “high, emotional, mindless exercise”, because believing IN Jesus, is just not enough, you need to take a step further and “deeper”, you need to “get into, believe into”. And guess who will tell you what/how is to be done?

Here is another one:
John 3:36
King James Version

36*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.

RV text:

“36 He who believes into the Son has eternal life; but he who disobeys the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides upon him.”

This verse has been butchered by almost all modern day translations, because it eliminates the man-made authoritarian approach. They want you to “obey”, “subject” yourself to their definition of “jesus”, their understanding, experience. It becomes a gospel of working your way into “jesus”, which they can control and direct as they see fit. These man will do anything to keep people under tabs of their own scams, even going as far as changing the meaning and teachings of the Bible.

[Paul Vusik]

John 1:17
King James Version

17For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

RV text:

“17For the law was given through Moses; grace and reality came through Jesus Christ.”

Well, here is their Biblical definition of “Truth matters but life matters more”. What’s reality today, is not what it was 50 years ago, and what will be the reality tomorrow? Please send your questions to the “blended”, located in Anahiem CA, they are currently working hard on recovering the reality of tomorrow. And for a mere $5.00, you can have it in the form of HWMR! You can even save $14.99 on shipping, by asking them to send it to your local social club! But hey, if that sounds a lot, it’s also available in iBooks for only $3.99. Good luck!

[gr8ful]

Paul, these may be unconventional English translations, but they do have a basis in the Greek manuscripts.

Eis, "in or into" : https://biblehub.com/greek/1519.htm

Alethia: "Truth or reality" : https://biblehub.com/greek/225.htm ("truth, but not merely truth as spoken; truth of idea, reality, sincerity...")

You can certainly fault TLR for many things, but sometimes a translation is just a translation, not a corruption.

I urge caution in accusing people of things that can be objectively shown to be untrue, or at least open to interpretation. Keep punching on the main problems, the clear issues. Keeps the focus on the big picture.

[Paul Vusik]

Originally Posted by gr8ful

Paul, these may be unconventional English translations, but they do have a basis in the Greek manuscripts.

Eis, "in or into" : https://biblehub.com/greek/1519.htm

Alethia: "Truth or reality" : https://biblehub.com/greek/225.htm ("truth, but not merely truth as spoken; truth of idea, reality, sincerity...")

You can certainly fault TLR for many things, but sometimes a translation is just a translation, not a corruption.

I urge caution in accusing people of things that can be objectively shown to be untrue, or at least open to interpretation. Keep punching on the main problems, the clear issues. Keeps the focus on the big picture.

Gr8full,

I appreciate your input, and I do to some extent see your point of view. I stated this thread not as a accusation of sorts, but more of just a comparison between the two versions. I should have probably put a few question marks after my title of the thread, but it is what it is.

I for one have a very hard time believing that you can read two different bible and get very different meanings from text. Can the Word of God be so different? Can it sometimes mean opposite or close to that? I just cannot see how that’s possible. Both cannot be right, or we just don’t have anything to rely on. So I apologize that this might offend someone. They can compare for themselves and see if they can make it out the difference.

I’m also am aware that they have been translated from different manuscripts, as far as I understand. You can correct me if I’m wrong on this. But I’m pretty sure of it. I know the manuscripts that were used to translate KJV, and you can also get a lot of the people, names, processes, that went into that translation, but there is really no information or very little besides “Lee and LSM staff”.
I know there are a lot of people out there that denounce KJV Bible, because it has association with King James, but I’m not one of those. I spend a lot of time studying about the manuscripts, comparing which Bibles are translated from where, and prayed for the Lord to show me and lead me to the right one. I feel that it’s something that people need to do. All Bibles are not equal as I was told before, and after spending 12 years using recovery version, I can safely stand on that statement.

Again, I will reiterate that’s ether it’s corrupt or purposely translated to mislead people, to me makes no difference. All that I’m trying to do is to show how big of the difference there is between the two. I was recently reading Bible with my wife, and while I was reading out of KJV, and she was out of RV, I couldn’t believe how many times we stopped and compared the two on how much different it is.

[Bible-believer]

I believe KJV is God's preserved word. Even though I am still in LC, I don't use the RV.

Just share a quote from Bible study class, "... we are not primarily interested in word analysis which throws up a smoke cloud over the revelation of truth. We are interested in comparing Scripture with Scripture to find what God wants us to know. A history of the Hebrew and Greek meanings of the word “... “ does nothing for the reader but convince him that he knows the history of the way people used ancient words."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

I believe KJV is God's preserved word. Even though I am still in LC, I don't use the RV.

If the KJV is “God’s preserved word,” then too bad for Spanish, Chinese, Ghanese, or any one else who never learned Shakespearean English from a half millennium ago. I am hard pressed to consider why God would place such a demand on mankind. Remember that the KJV was the “authorized” version by decree of the king of England and his flunkies after him. I’m not dissing the version, just providing perspective.

Please - ”Suffer the little children …”

But if you desire to claim any version is “God's preserved word,” then please select the Greek, since God wrote in Greek. Also, you can then read the Septuagint, which is oft quoted in the NT, rather than the Hebrew OT.

[Paul Vusik]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

I believe KJV is God's preserved word. Even though I am still in LC, I don't use the RV.

Just share a quote from Bible study class, "... we are not primarily interested in word analysis which throws up a smoke cloud over the revelation of truth. We are interested in comparing Scripture with Scripture to find what God wants us to know. A history of the Hebrew and Greek meanings of the word “... “ does nothing for the reader but convince him that he knows the history of the way people used ancient words."

Bible-believer,

Good for you, I have a very hard time processing the concept on how that’s possible, but I guess you found a way. I used a NKJV before, and I was reading out of it couple times in my home Bible group with people from LC, and I was getting “o Lord jesus” calls every time it was my turn to read.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Paul Vusik

I use KJV Bible in comparison, since I believe it’s the oldest and most accurate translation, so all my posts will be comparing the two.
.

The KJV is not based on our best manuscripts, neither is it modern English. If you want to critique the Recovery Version, it might be better to have a working knowledge of the Greek New Testament and compare the RecV to a modern translation like the NASB, the NIV, or the NLT.

Frankly the KJV was “authorized” by the King of England, and not by any real spiritual authority. While Shakespearean English has a literary lure to a certain segment of society, it should not in any way be accepted as the de facto standard of truth.

[Paul Vusik]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The KJV is not based on our best manuscripts, neither is it modern English. If you want to critique the Recovery Version, it might be better to have a working knowledge of the Greek New Testament and compare the RecV to a modern translation like the NASB, the NIV, or the NLT.

Frankly the KJV was “authorized” by the King of England, and not by any real spiritual authority. While Shakespearean English has a literary lure to a certain segment of society, it should not in any way be accepted as the de facto standard of truth.

Ohio,

I will just clarify this before this thing goes of the rails, I don’t believe that there is 100% accurate translation, and that includes KJV or AKJV. Do I think it’s the most accurate? Yes I do. To be even more precise, I say that what matters is where and from what was it translated from. KJV is one of only a handful of Bibles, that was translated from “Majority Text”, which has over 5000 manuscripts that have been preserved over 100s of years, and 95% of them agree in what’s written in them. I don’t want to take time to do someone’s homework, so each person is responsible for figuring that out on their own with God.

The point you make about “Shakespearian English”, is incorrect. The English used in KJV is called “Early Modern English”, and really has nothing to do with Shakespeare. Is it slightly different from what is the “modern diluted English” we use here in USA? sure. Even people in other parts of the world that speak “English” will say so. I’m not a linguist by any stretch, but anytime I pick up any classical writings pre 1900, it’s pretty much existed for a long time, and will continue to do so.
Also, to your point about other people around the world; first, people that live in this country don’t realize that majority of the world today speaks English, besides their native language. I have family that live in Germany, Russia, Kazakhstan, distant family in Bulgaria, Georgia, they speak English. Some places like China, and the tyrannical regimes in Africa and Middle East who don’t want their people to be exposed to other cultures and languages for the sake of total control, probably not so much. But I would say that any Bible that’s translated from the “Majority Text”, and does not include any of the Alexandrian manuscripts would be the most accurate translation in any language. It’s just my opinion and belief, so not telling anyone to do the same.

It’s also interesting that quite often today, the Bible’s that are translated by current modern day “scholars”, are translated from English versions, and other English versions are just derived from some editions of already translated Bible.

Here is an example, this is from Wikipedia (not a trustworthy source, but that’s all I can find now when it comes to RV). The Old Testament was translated from:
OT: Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS; revised 1990 edition
The New Testament:
NT: Novum Testamentum Graece (Nestle-Aland 26th edition) Released in 1975.
Recovery version Derived from:
American Standard Version (ASV).

So, the Bible that claims to be “The Best, the most accurate translation”, used 1990 text which was already on its 4th edition for OT, and 1975 text that was edited 26 times for NT??? Really? Give me a break.


Again, I’m just going of the information that’s can be found, since it’s so secretive on who actually did translated the RV. I personally don’t believe that it was even a translation, more like heavenly edited/redacted/relabeled English version like maybe ASV as stated above. I think that in the copyright paperwork, one can get true details on what was used to come up with this version, however I don’t really no if that’s accessible anywhere to see.

[Ohio]

Ok, it’s your thread.

[Zezima]

Can you post an example? I know your posted early but the thread got derailed

[Paul Vusik]

Deuteronomy 5:20
KJV
“20*Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour.”

RV text:
“20 Neither shall you testify as a vain witness against your neighbor;”

Here are the definitions of vain:
-having or showing undue or excessive pride in one's appearance or achievements.
-marked by futility or ineffectualness.
-having no real value.

And here is definition of false:
-not genuine
-intentionally untrue
-adjusted or made so as to deceive
-intended or tending to mislead

Well, no other Bible that’s out there dismissed this concept of “bearing a false witness” as did RV. (Even some of the worst versions). Is removing false witness as it should be translated based on all other translations makes any difference? What is vain witness anyway? Is it that when you confront the false teachings and you told, “you not in your spirit”, all that is vanity? I’m interested to see how vain is the same as false in any language. I guess when you have no value in telling the truth, you also have no problem in promotion of false.