Editing God: Textual Criticism and Modern Bibles Analyzed

I originally read the KJV, then as a teenager I loved the NIV, but I was troubled by footnotes that said some verses are not found in the "oldest and best" manuscripts. But I believed that the "experts" knew what they were doing. Several decades later, as a researcher, journalist, and historian, I learned that most modern Bibles were translated from a Greek master-text different from the Greek text used for the KJV. The KJOnly (KJO) group accuses modern Bibles of being corrupt because they remove many words and phrases and even whole verses, removing enough text to equal 1st and 2nd Peter, and make many other changes. So I investigated the issue. The question I set out to answer was, are the claims of the KJO group accurate, or are the modern Bibles more accurate than the KJV? I have never been a KJV advocate, and actually prefer the wording of modern Bibles, especially the NIV, and have used it as the primary text in several of my other books. But it is plagued by the same issues as most other modern Bibles; many words, phrases, and whole verses removed and even more changed. For those of you who are just learning about this subject, I will present a concise history of how we got the KJV and our modern Bibles, what textual criticism is and how the textual critics often engage in faulty reasoning.Westcott and Hort, the creators of the corrupted Greek New Testament text, were both liberal Anglican bishops who despised evangelicals and their literal view of Scripture. I have many quotes from them proving their unbelief. Hort, especially, was an unbeliever who said there was more truth in Greek philosophy than in "revelation," meaning the Bible. Though they were officially Anglican bishops, they were actually secret Unitarians because only members of the Church of England could be college professors or hold a government job. So they kept their liberal unbelief a secret, but it was revealed after their deaths by the publication of their private letters.

Their purpose was to produce a liberal Bible that Unitarians, then and today, love. The advocates for the modern Bible versions want us to believe that all the modern Bibles are the authentic Words of God, even though they are all different. The modern translations pretty much include or leave out what they want, since that was how the Greek master-text was created. One Bible includes a particular verse, another Bible leaves it out, one says one thing another says something else. It causes people to doubt the reliability and veracity of the Bible, and to doubt the truth of Christianity. Apparently, God cannot make up his mind what he wants to say, so he says whatever these "experts" want him to say, and it changes with each new edition of the Greek master-text, and each new translation that comes out.Some people have actually lost their Christian faith because of it (examples are given). Even though supporters of the corrupted Bibles dominate the field, a few scholars with multiple degrees have written against the WH text for 150 years, but their words have been ignored by the Christian seminaries and Bible publishers. Therefore, I am compelled to write yet another book on the subject, because it is of eternal importance. I never expected my investigation to turn into a book, because there are already several books supporting both sides. However, my skill-set is thinking outside the box and figuring things out, as seen in my other books. As such, I have some new insights and surprising discoveries to offer. The reader will learn that the TR is not as corrupt as we have been told and that modern Bibles are far more corrupt than you would have ever imagined.