The Lost Verses: Bible Mystery Unveiled

There are around 17 verses missing in the New Testament of most Bibles. Why are they missing? Why are the following verses missing from most Bibles?
Mathew 23:14, Matthew 17:21, Matthew 18:11, Mark 7:16, Mark 9:44, Mark 9:46, Mark 11:26, Mark 15:28, Luke 17:36, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, Acts 15:34, Acts 24:7, Acts 28:29, Romans 16:24.
Are major doctrines at stake? Is there a conspiracy to change the bible?
Book recommendation: amzn.to/4bzDFBG
To dig in deeper to the Byzantine Text I recommend watching this video next: • Why this EXPERT change...
At 2:15 I use an image from oneinmessiah.net/niv17.htm. I don’t necessarily endorse anything on this website but their list is instructive to see the differences between the older versions and the modern versions.
Want to watch this video without music: • Lost Verses: No music

[@brucermarino]

Well done! I want to encourage your followers. I studied under the famous textual critic, Gordon Fee and others, so I learned both sides of this debate from the best. During 30+ years of teaching theology at university, my wonderful colleagues and I have often debated this. It seems they and much of evangelical scholarship is moving closer to our position. Thank you for a well researched, balanced, and explained position. Blessings, my friend!

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

Thanks so much! Very encouraging!

[@brucermarino]

@@BiblicalStudiesandReviews As are you!

[@anthonypolonkay2681]

My biggest issue with critical text is how few manuscripts they have to support much of it. The biggest issue with the alexandrean manuscript line they use is that its very few in number, AND is is no geographically diverse. The variations they rely on come from more or less one place, and in any other anaylsis that is always a dead giveaway for an unorigional abberation to a text, but soley based on the fact those few isolated manuscripts happen to be our oldest as well they just ignore that standard, and go with this very simple logic of "its the oldest we have so thaf means its right" .

[@markmcpherson9325]

Great video Stephen! I will be sharing this with my students.

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

That is very encouraging. Thank you!

[@AJMacDonaldJr]

A great video on a very important subject. Well done brother! 🙂

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

Thank you very much!

[@bartleby1807]

Thank you very much! But the background music is disturbing. Better not to use this.

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

Later today I’ll upload a version without background music and put in the description. Thanks for watching

[@bartleby1807]

Thank you very much!

[@JonStallings]

Great video Stephen. I really appreciate your insight

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

Thanks for watching, Jon!

[@OrthodoxPhilip]

Question for you: Are the Byzantine texts taken into those ~5,000 manuscripts used to form the critical text? Or is the Byzantine text pool excluded from those used for the critical text?

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

Yeah great question. They are technically supposed to be included, but in practice they have been considered of secondary value. When a reading has only Byzantine support, scholars have historically viewed those readings as extremely suspect. The tide is shifting ever so slightly however.

[@OrthodoxPhilip]

@@BiblicalStudiesandReviews Very interesting. Thank you for the quick answer!

[@Official_Random_Guy]

This is why I am subscribed to this channel in the first place, is because you aren't afraid to defend this position and you have plenty of receipts to back up this claim. Great video once again.

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

Thanks so much!

[@Dwayne_Green]

Great video Stephen, I think this is one of your best !

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

Thanks my friend!

[@davidlafleche1142]

@@BiblicalStudiesandReviews The Bible has exactly 66 books. Absolutely nothing was ever "lost."

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

@@davidlafleche1142 I agree that there should be only 66 books in the canon.

[@davidlafleche1142]

@@BiblicalStudiesandReviews The title of your video threw me off. There's a lot of kooks out there who are screaming, "This fake scripture supports my heresy, but the KJV translators 'banned' it!"

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

@@davidlafleche1142 I changed the title. Hopefully that helps. Sorry about that.

[@sorenpx]

I'm curious, did you actually put your hand over your mouth in shock before you made this video?

[@e.m.8094]

Which version originally included "cleanliness is next to godliness"? 😄

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

😂

[@jomerorobia4140]

when I read the letters of the apostles I don't mind the verse or the number, it's only distracted the reader. The important is not the numbers but the message of their letters.

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

Right. And the problem here is that the content of those verses are missing as well, not just the number.

[@jomerorobia4140]

@@BiblicalStudiesandReviews I think even some content is missing it will not hide the truth.

[@mattandkim17]

My favorite example of this phenomenon is Matthew 23:14. I find it ironic that while Jesus is scolding the Jewish scribes for being hypocritical, it is the Christian scribes whom are molesting the very words of Jesus.

[@treybarnes5549]

. The authors of the NIV actually added verses to the OLD TESTIMENT. Like they don’t know exactly what they say. ?!? The NIV is just a complete mess. But it was the ESV made me KJVO. The NIV is an obviously a joke, but people actually take the ESV seriously, when it’s based on the rejected RSV.

[@karldegroot1800]

that's fine for it wont matter - anyway the 100'ds of versions including the KJV are corrupt. This is THE absolute main theme in prophets - and only ends when Christ removes the seals [=corruptions] of God's scroll. In the mean time that cursed [=yes He calls it 'a curse' in prophets] will have caused all of Jacob into the Trib -- what exactly was the goal of Esau "who will change My words" .

[@e.m.8094]

Do you have any favorite Bible scholars?

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

On this topic I like Dr. Maurice Robinson. Of a previous generation, FHA Scrivener.

[@olegig5166]

WARNING! If you keep comparing the versions and studying doctrine in-depth, you might get to a point of only using the KJB.😮

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

I am not KJVO but I’m KJVL. Lover of the KJV.

[@olegig5166]

@@BiblicalStudiesandReviews I understand completely because under man's religion it's not acceptable to be "only" anything. I do hope some day you come to believe God has indeed preserved His word for us today and you figure out which version you feel it is so you can devote all your time to studying the word rather than searching for it. Needless to say, I've spent very little time studying with the modern versions so I may have missed something. Please tell me of any doctrinal truth you have found in a modern version which is hidden in the KJV.

[@BiblicalStudiesandReviews]

@@olegig5166 I think doctrine is established on many scriptures. And for me nothing major hangs on any single translation. I’m happy for you to use only the KJV, I wouldn’t want to steer you another way, if that’s working for you.

[@olegig5166]

@@BiblicalStudiesandReviews but you did not answer my question. What doctrine has been revealed through a new version? And I’m assuming you do not believe Christ had Faith that God would indeed raise Him from the dead and then gift that same Faith to believers. Please tell us what is the gift of Eph 2:8 if not Faith.

[@olegig5166]

@@BiblicalStudiesandReviews I reread your reply and let me add in reply to your statement that it takes many scriptures to formulate a doctrine. I sure hope those doctrines to which you refer are not dependent on some of those missing scriptures.

[@TroyLFullerton]

What an awesome explanation... and congratulations on managing to offend just about everyone! 😂 I'm kidding, of course. I grew up in a staunch KJO background. While I still love and study from the KJV, I lost my "reverent awe" of the KJV when I learned to read the Bible in another language and found myself (after literally YEARS of studying the KJV) saying, "oh, so THAT'S what that scripture means!" Now, I don't bat an eyelash at looking up verses in other formal translations, realizing that there may be some ambiguity and being okay with that.