Home

Why is Acts 8:37 not in all translations

Acts 8:37. You're in church for worship, and your pastor is preaching through the book of Acts. The day's text is Acts 8, the part about Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch. Your pastor is reading from the ESV, and you're following along in your NKJV. The translations are a little different, but you can usually follow. The pastor reads Acts 8:37 is not included in many Bible translations because it is not found in the oldest and best translations of Acts. There is no attempt to cover it up, as you can find it (with an explanation) in the footnotes of most Bibles. In fact, the Catholic Douay-Rheims New Testament includes Acts 8:37: And Philip said: If thou believest with. It's not an easy task, which is why the work is done by teams of highly educated professionals. Below we will discuss the evidence for and against the authenticity of Acts 8:37, which is removed in almost all modern Bibles, with the exception of just a few. The newer translations that do retain the passage, such as the NKJV, NASB, or the HCSB.

Why Is Acts 8:37 Omitted from Some Translations and not

  1. This type of situation happens in more places than just Acts 8:37. If you compare the King James and New King James Versions with the newer translations (e.g. the New International Version, New American Standard, New Living Translation, etc.)—you will notice that several verses are entirely missing from the newer translations
  2. Acts 8:37 is a verse that comes up often in King James Only discussions. KJV Only advocates charge modern translators with having removed' this verse from the Bible, often asserting conspiratorial motives.Many modern translations, of course, have moved this verse from the main text to a footnote with an explanation that it is not in the earliest or even the later majority of manuscripts
  3. The higher the vote, the further up an answer is. Actually, Acts 8:37 is in my KJV and Phillip answered said, If thou believest with all your heart you mayest. I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.. In the NKJV v37 Than Phillip said, If you believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus.

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 8:37 (KJV) Why don't some versions of Bibl Examples of missing verses and passages are John 5:4, Acts 8:37, and 1 John 5:7. Another example is Mark 16:9-20, although that passage is always placed in the text or in footnotes. In addition to the few missing verses, there are numerous words and phrases that are missing from newer translations Why are verses missing in some of the newer translations of the Bible? In comparison with the King James Version and New King James Version of the Bible, most modern translations omit several verses. These include John 5:4, Acts 8:37, 1 John 5:7 (partial), and in some cases, Mark 16:9-20 (though included in footnotes) 5. The ancient Sahidic (2nd century) and Bohairic (4th century) Coptic translations do not have Acts 8:37. These very early translations of the Bible logically would be missing Acts 8:37 if based upon the Greek family lack such in the early Eastern Church. The ancient Syriac Peshitta (2nd century) translation also does not have Acts 8:37

Why Is Acts 8:37 Omitted from Many Bible Translations

In the same chapter as the question, read Acts 8:32-33 and then read Isaiah 53:7-8 (the verse it is quoting). Even then, translations were not precise and were based on intention and, often, on the views of the person copying it down. This is why most versions include things in the footnotes about translational issues ACts 8:37 is an interesting choice to include OR Omit. In Acts 8: 26 An Angel of the Lord tells Philip to on a desert road that goes from Jerusalem to gaza, there Philip meets a man reading the Hebrew Scripture, he is an ethiopian eunch

- Acts 8:37 There are many theories surrounding the omission of Acts 8:37 from several versions of the Bible, including the NIV and ESV. The official reason listed in most Bibles that omit it is that it was not present in early versions of the manuscript, that it was added to versions such as the KJV but that it wasn't found in original Bibles Acts 8:37 - Is it inspired Scripture or not? Acts 8:37 - 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. - completely omitted in many modern versions In order to see the importance of this verse we need to look at the surrounding contex I so appreciate your taking the time to answer all questions offered to you. I love your site!!! Last night I felt the need to check a reference in the Bible, Acts 8:37 to be exact. I was reading the NIV and low and behold it wasn't there. It skips from 8:36-8:38. The RSV is the same. It is however in the KJV The Mysterious Case of Missing Scripture. No book is more important than the Bible. God's perfect, inspired, inerrant Word is loved, treasured, and protected by His people. From the first prophets who put the Word of the Lord into writing until now, God's people have taken the utmost care to keep, copy, and preserve the Word of God

Acts 8:37, KJV: 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 8:26-40 completes the story of Philip's early ministry. Driven out of Jerusalem by persecution, he first travels north into Samaria and spreads the gospel to a people Jews had. ACTS 8:37: NOT FOUND IN OLDER TRANSLATIONS. Most modern translations omit verse 37, because it is not found in the older and more reliable manuscripts. Apparently a later scribe was troubled by the omission of a confession of faith by the eunuch, so he added one. As found in the King James Version, verse 37 reads, And Philip said, If thou. Acts 8:37. And Philip said, if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest Intimating, that if he did not believe, he had no right to that ordinance; though he was a proselyte to the Jewish religion, a serious and devout man, and was employed in a religious way, when Philip came up to him, and was very desirous of being instructed in the knowledge of divine things; and yet notwithstanding. Book of Hebrews Manuscript Acts 8:37 And Philip said, If you believe with all your heart, it is permitted. And he answering, said, I believe that יהושע Messiah is the Son of Elohim {Acts 8:37 does not appear in the Aramaic manuscripts nor does it appear in many Greek manuscripts} . This verse does not exist in the earliest manuscripts of the Brit Hadasha (Nazarene Writings also. Reasons: This phrase, which also appears in Acts 5:39, does not appear in the earliest and best resources - p 74, א,A,B,C (original hand),E,Ψ. Latin, Syriac, and others - and does not appear until H,L, and P (all 9th century). As the original verse ended with a question, it is suspected that this phrase was taken from 5:39 to serve as an answer

Why Is Acts 8:37 Missing From Modern Bibles? - Dust Off

Acts 8:37 King James Bible - 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. ESV, NIV, [NASB], Catholic St. Joseph NAB, New Jerusalem bible 1985, Jehovah Witness New World Translation Acts 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. It is also omitted in the Syriac and Ethiopic versions. It is not easy to conceive why it has been omitted in almost all the Greek mss. unless it is spurious. If it was not in the original copy of the Acts , it was probably inserted by some early transcriber.

Acts 8:37 Read verse in New Living Translation. Please enter your email address associated with your Salem All-Pass account, then click Continue NIV (Acts 8:37) Verse omitted. KJV (Acts 8:37) 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 8:37 Amplified Bible (AMP). 37 [] [Philip said to him, If you believe with all your heart, you may. And he replied, I do believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. But it's not ok to use other translated versions that are written in a more comprehensible modern English. When the guy translated it he just translated it into *his* modern English, so why shouldn't they be allowed to do the same and update the English and the translation. If it's all about the 'original' then no translation should be ok

Most scholars agree with the KJV version which says: Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. (KJV) Som.. Why is Acts 8:37 omitted from many Bible translations? The answer begins with: Acts 8:37 is not included in many Bible translations because it is not found in the oldest and best translations of Acts. Can you please tell me what those early or older translations are? I would like to be able to inform a co-worker about this but I'm not sure how. And many of them are indeed very shocking, like Acts 8:37: 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. - missing or watered down in most versions Acts 8:37. KJV: 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. NIV: If you believe with all your heart, you may. The eunuch answered, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Acts 15:3 I have long known about the Eunuch's missing confession in modern translations. Acts 8:37 is missing in most modern translations of the New Testament. 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 8:37 KJV) Th

I believe the verse in question is Acts 8:37 Most modern versions include it in brackets or other distinguishing punctuation or markings. It was omitted for this reason The verse is not found in the oldest and most reliable manuscripts. I have a list of these verses, and not a single one of them changes any Christian established doctrine For example, Matthew 17:21 is included in the DR as well as in the King James Version (and all other English-language Bibles at that time). The same is the case with Acts 8:37. Most newer versions, such as the New Jerusalem Bible and the Revised Standard Version, remove Acts 8:37, Matthew 17:21, and a handful of other verses The Amplified Bible does make a note when a verse or words are not in all manuscripts. An example is Acts 8:37, where it notes that Many manuscripts do not contain this verse. Another example is 1 John 5:7-8, where it says The italicized section is found only in late manuscripts

Acts 8:37, Was it removed from modern Bibles? carm

Acts 28:29 is missing in the all the oldest Greek manuscripts containing this section of Acts, e.g. the Papyrus P74, the Sinaiticus (א) ‎ (4th century), A, B and E. The oldest witness for the verse is P (from the 6th cent). Modern critical studies of the NT are virtually unanimous in rejecting it. It is found in at least some copies of the. God's word is immutable, and unchangeable, though the type of translation (all translations are inherently flawed and imperfect) matters. It depends on the audience and whether a person is wanting to get the idea or wants to know the literal translation of the words, barring any subtle context and cultural clues inherent in any. God said not to add or delete from His Word, but look what man has been done to it! New versions change and remove God's commandments: (KJV): 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 8:37 (NIV): Verse removed and footnote Acts 8:37 it has been removed from the NIV and why is that? 88% of the Greek manuscripts, including the best line of transmission, do not have the verse. Pickering . The NIV is based on the Alexandrian Nestle-Aland 26th/27th edition. However the verse is preserved in every TR source and TR translation (YLT in italics

At any rate, all of this drew our attention to 1 Corinthians 7:5, where the modern translations are certainly correct over against the KJV, thus refuting the KJV Only position regardless. Still, considering the compelling manuscript data on both sides of our main gospel texts here, it is not impossible that Matthew 17:21 and the long form of. Acts 8:37 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 is omitted by the RV, Ne, NIV, NKJV marg., RSV, GN, LB marg., NEB, NWT, JB Acts 8:37 Philip said, If you believe with all your heart, you may. The eunuch answered, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. . Another example is. Mark 16:9-20 9 When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 10 She went and told those who had been. 8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Bible in Basic English 8:37 . Darby's English Translation 8:37 . Douay Rheims 8:37 And Philip said: If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest The clearest Trinitarian verse, 1 John 5:7, is absent from modern Bibles. Modern Bibles also omit Acts 8:37, Matthew 18:11, and Romans 16:24. Modern Bibles eliminate without a cause from Matthew 5:22 to make Christ a sinner in Mark 3:5. Philippians 2:6 and 1 Timothy 3:16 in modern Bibles deny Christ's deity

Why is Acts 8:37 missing from some versions of the Bible

That is not to say the KJV is a horrible translation. It was amazing in its day. The point is there is no perfect translation. I am not sure if you are aware of this but there are many versions of the KJV. It was revised over and over again. Why revisions? It had problems. So I am not sure why people push for the KJV to be the perfect translation The simple answer. The simple answer is this: any difference between Bible translations that is significant enough for you to notice is almost certainly not due to a textual variant. Most differences between Greek and Hebrew texts are excessively minor. For example, can you guess which difference between the KJV and ESV at Matthew 1:18 is due to a difference between the Greek texts underlying. 11. Acts 8:37: 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. 12. Acts 15:34: Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still. 13. Acts 24:7: But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands. The article stops with the end of the Acts, but I know that a list of affected verses goes well beyond that. I used to collect KJVO (KJV Onlyist) propaganda and these are crammed with lists (usually the same in all publications) of phrases or verses found in the KJV and not found in some or most (or all) modern versions Aren't newer translations based on a better Greek text? Should the Bible include Acts 8:37: 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.? It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt.

It includes readings from the Critical Text and the Majority Text in the margins; but the main text (the part that everybody reads) is the Received Text. If you compare it with the AV on any disputed text (Acts 8:37; 1 John 5:7, etc.), you will find this to be the case. I say this as one who only uses the AV Philip did not hinder the Ethiopian from his wish to be baptized, nor did he try to delay it. If the Ethiopian believed with all his heart what Philip had preached to him, then Philip was ready to baptize the Ethiopian there and then. The Ethiopian confessed faith in Christ saying, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (Acts 8:37) Summary of eRumor: NIV Bible publisher HarperCollins has cut more than 64,000 words, or 45 complete verses, from the NIV Bible. The Truth: It's true that there are differences between the King James Bible and the NIV (New International Version) Bible, but parts of this rumor are misleading or disputed. Claims that the NIV Bible has cut 64,000 words, or 45 complete verses, have been around. The NIV and ESV and other versions have also now removed 45 complete verses. Most of us have the Bible on our devices and phones. Try and find these scriptures in NIV or ESV on your computer, phone or device right now if you are in doubt: Matthew 17:21, 18:11, 23:14; Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46; Luke 17:36, 23:17; John 5:4; Acts 8:37. you will not. But, when it comes to the Bible, we just believe the scholars and assume all versions have the same history, the same reputation. Modern research techniques have discovered otherwise. Hints have been there all along. Do we know why Acts 8:37 is missing in some Bibles

textual criticism - Why is Acts 8:37 omitted in some

Another update! I just opened the JW Bible, the New World Translation (1961 ed.), and looked up all the verses that the NIV completely deletes. THE JEHOVAH'S WITNESS BIBLE DELETES THE EXACT SAME ONES!!!! I mean ALL of them! The only difference between the NIV and the New World Translation deletions is that the JW Bible does not include any. For example, in most modern translations, the text goes directly from Matthew 17:20 to 17:22. There is no verse 21. This can also be noticed in places like John 5:4 and Acts 8:37. In each case, there is a footnote that says that some manuscripts add before listing the words that are not in the main text. This does seem a little confusing Before explaining why Matthew 17:21 is not included in the gospel of Matthew in modern Bible versions, we will review the context in which Jesus made this statement. First, Matthew 10:5-8 tells us that Jesus had given His disciples power to cast out demons. But sometime later in Matthew 17, we are told that they could not cast out a demon that.

Philip: According to Ac 8:1, all except the apostles were scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria.Therefore, the Philip mentioned here is not the apostle Philip. (Mt 10:3; Ac 1:13) Rather, it is apparently the Philip who was among the seven reputable men appointed to organize the daily distribution of food among the Greek-speaking and Hebrew-speaking Christian widows. Favourite Bible Translations. Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can. Acts 8:37, 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. Removed to the footnotes: Acts 8:37 teaches one must first believe before one can be baptized. It stops him from getting saved Myth 1: the KJV translators used Easter to refer to a pagan festival. The first myth to refute is the claim that the KJV uses Easter at Acts 12:4 to refer to a pagan holiday celebrated by king Herod. This myth is propagated by some KJV apologists who may be well-intentioned in upholding the inerrancy of the KJV

Bible Love Notes: 7 Things We Learn From Acts 8:26-39

Why are the newer translations of the Bible missing verses

The following verses are omitted from the ESV Bible in their entirety but are found in the Textus Receptus Greek New Testament, the text which underlies the New Testament of Reformation-era translations: Matthew 17.21, 18.11, 23.14 Mark 7.16, 9.44, 9.46, 11.26, 15.28 Luke 17.36, 23.17 John 5.4 Acts 8.37, 15.34, 28.29 Romans 16.2 If you read predominantly any Bible besides the above KJV-line Bibles I just mentioned (such as the NIV, the CSB, the NLT, the (N)RSV, the ESV), do me a favor and look up Acts 8:37. Go ahead, I'll wait. Actually, I'll do it too. Here is a picture of my most-used ESV showing Acts 8:37, but it takes two photos to show you Now all of a sudden over the past 125 years, literally hundreds of different Bible versions have been published, and they keep coming! The Lord plainly taught that no man can serve God and mammon (making a living). Look at the pastors who won't take a stand and you'll see that they're all getting paid. They have their reward

Why is Acts 8:37 missing from some versions of the Bible? Acts 8:37 • 1 Votes Q. Is there any pre-requisite for baptism besides believing/confessing that Jesus is Lord? Acts 8:36 - 38 • 0 Votes Questions from this section. Q What was Phillip's position in the Bible? A minister or a deacon?. At Acts 14:10, the Lamsa Bible has the phrase in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ which is not found there in the KJV. At Matthew 10:8, the Lamsa Bible and Bauscher's translation do not have raise the dead, which is also not found in the Greek Majority Text Acts 2.47 And the Lord added to the church PDF (36.77 KB) Administration 12/08/2017 Notes on Acts 8.37 PDF (519.26 KB) Administration 06/09/2017 The Use of Easter in Acts 12.4 Link Administration 28/01/2020 And as many as were ordaine

Gospel of Luke Synopitic Gospels and Authorship Bible Study

Why are verses missing in some of the newer translations

Various Contradictions and Omissions in Bible Translations. This table compares various verses in the KJV, NIV, NASB, and NWT. The term OMITTED is used when either the phrase or the verse in question is omitted. This table is a very small sampling of contradictory verses, not an exhaustive one ACTS 8:37 (KJV) 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. REMOVED from NIV and BRACKETED in NASB ACTS 28:29 (KJV) And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves. REMOVED from NIV and BRACKETED in NAS Why It's Good to Use Multiple Bible Translations. When I preach a sermon in English, which is the only language I can preach in, and I had three people translating it into Spanish, each one would translate it differently. To get the big picture you would not choose one translation and throw the rest away. You would put all three together to. ANSWER: If you compare the King James and New King James Versions with the newer translations (e.g. the New International Version, New American Standard, New Living Translation, etc.) - you will notice that several verses are entirely missing from the newer translations.Examples are John 5:4, Acts 8:37, and 1 John 5:7. Mark 16:9-20 is another example, although it is always placed in the text.

NJAB - Does Acts 8 verse 37 belong in the Bible? Why is

In fact, we had a sermon series which used the creed as an illustration not too long ago. Not all versions of the creed include the decended into hell statement or the exact wording one holy catholic church--though this is not referring to the Roman Catholic church, but rather it's referring to all Christians as a church Interpret every passage in light of all others Acts 2:21 explained by Rom 10:9, 2 Tim 2:19 8. One passage will often explain another 1 Thess 4:15-17 Is there room for a rapture here? 2 Pet 3:11-13 Harmonize Prov 26:4 and Prov 26:5 Harmonize Ex 20:5-6 with Ezek 18:20 Harmonize Prov 13:25 with Psalm 73:1-5 9

Translations like ESV are nice because it incorporates Dead Sea Scroll readings into the running text in places. But ESV has its problems, too. ALL translations have strengths and weaknesses, which is why Bible students dependent on English should compare translations in their study I even gathered together a collection of modern corruptions in order to write against them (my little daughter did not even want to touch them and I threw them away as they had served their purpose). Look up Acts 8:37 in an NIV. It is not there at all. See this article about specific Bible verses that the NIV deletes For extended treatment of all the translations of the New Testament in the first millennium A.D., see Bruce M. Metzger, The Early Versions of the New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977). 19 . Analysis of these and many other variant readings are thoroughly treated in Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament.

bible translation - Why is Acts 8:37 missing in the NIV

Acts 8:37,.Why is it missing in the New World Translation

4 Although the believers were scattered by persecution, they preached the wonderful news of the word of God wherever they went. 5 Philip traveled to a Samaritan city # 8:5 Or the main city of Samaria. Many believe this was the Samaritan city of Sebaste. and preached to them the wonderful news of the Anointed One. 6 The crowds were eager to receive # 8:6 As translated from the Aramaic. Acts 8:37 — The New King James Version (NKJV) 37 Then Philip said, If you believe with all your heart, you may.. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Luke 17:36, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, Acts 15:34, Acts 24:7, Acts 28:29, Rom 16:24, 1 John 5:7 Modern versions make thousands of changes to verses that affect key doctrines like the virgin birth: 'The child's father and mother marvelled at what was said about him. 'Luke 2:33 (NIV The Ethiopian had faith. According to some translations, he confessed, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (Acts 8:37). If justified by faith only, why not keep the chariot wheels rolling down the Gaza road? If baptism is not necessary for salvation. Many have been made to believe that baptism is not essential to salvation

Video: Acts 8:37 - The missing verse in many Bible

The facts are that these added words are not quoted by any Greek Fathers of the early church and are absent from all the early versions. They were not in the text of the original Latin Vulgate made by Jerome but were inserted later. There can be no doubt today that the words are not a part of the original text of 1 John. V. KJV Problems . 1 Please note that these are only WHOLE verses that the NIV deletes. This list does not include the many words and phrases that were completely deleted from the NIV-it deletes over 64,000 words including words like mercyseat, Jehovah, and Godhead. It removes meaningful, well-known Bible words like Calvary, Lucifer, new testament, regeneration, etc

Acts 8:37. To Be or Not To Be? - Grace thru fait

Acts 8:36. 36 And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, See, here is water! yWhat prevents me from being baptized?5. Some manuscripts add all or most of verse 37: And Philip said, If you believe with all your heart, you may.. And he replied, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 1 Timothy 3:16 (NIV) 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. 2. By changing Christ to God they deny that Jesus is God NIV. 1 After this there was a feast of the Jews; and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 2 Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches. 3 In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water Not all copies of ancient Bible manuscripts contain identical wording. How, then, can we know what the original text contained? The situation could be likened to that of a teacher who asks 100 students to copy a chapter of a book. Even if the original chapter was later lost, a comparison of the 100 copies would still reveal the original text

The Mysterious Case of Missing Scriptur

—Acts 13:52 NIV Key Thought The Holy Spirit's presence in God's people is accompanied by joy! Jesus was full of joy because of the Spirit (Luke 10:21), and the same is also true of his disciples (Romans 14:17; Galatians 5:22)..