In spite of its problems, I like the KJV. It was well done for its day. You're doing a disservice by casting such sweeping doubts about "Modern Bibles"
With all due respect Deputy Dog , I don't see how your examples rise to the level of doctrinal watering down or ambivilence like the examples I've provided at the beginning of this thread on Atonement.
When Rome couldn't kill all the Christians in the first couple of centuries, the State and the "Church" merged, thus violating the radical vision of separation of Church and State that Jesus outlined in a very simple statement of paying caesars things to caesar, and God's things to God. At that time society became sacral and not composite. Not until the emergence of the United States did Christ's vision again become a reality.
When the Roman society became sacral instead of composit....things got muddied. To be a Christian became geographic (living in a Roman province) instead of personal. When that change occured, the number of actual Christians didn't change, but the number of geographic Christians did.
The Donatists were the first to compalin and rebel against this as early as the 3rd century. They were of course persecuted. The different readings in the minority texts and the majority texts became extremely important to determine what was and what was not a Christian.
For the catholics, they promoted the sacraments, and the real flesh and the real blood of Christ being injested by the believer, along with ritual, praying to saints etc. Ironically, when Roman society became monolithic, then worshipping the traditional gods was then illegal. In other words, less freedom for all, not more.
For the born again believer, it just meant more persecution. The inquisitor would show up and ask if you believed in the transsubstatiation and then pronounce you a heretic if you could not answer in the affirmative. The catholics taught a works based salvation and a progressive salvation.
The specific readings at the beginning of this thread leaves the door of interpretation open for Catholic teaching. Also, we are well aware that these readings strengthen the spin on the Ransom doctrine by the WT many centuries later as well.
Salvation by faith alone, in Christ substituting for us...taking OUR punishment is biblical and none other.
Here's a You Tube on the Subject:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rx8PdvOELvY
You're doing a disservice by casting such sweeping doubts about "Modern Bibles"
I don't see it that way DD. The Majority readings became very important in determining what did and did not constitute a Christian for many hundreds of years until the Reformation.
Now, with the proliferation of modern bibles, based on the same erroneous texts used centuries before, history is repeating itself. Today, sodomites are on bible translating committies and are again watering down the Word. Many "Christians" believe sodomy to be within God's will based on those new readings. Many apologetic threads dealing with "Christian Sodomy" have been offered right here on this board.
They are shocking. No, not the sin. In the end, they're all pretty much the same. The heretical teachings on this subject are what is shocking. I usually have nothing personal against anyone engaging in any act that God says is wrong.
But, I parrallel the rise of Secular Humanism (philosophy/religion), including its sodomite component with the rise of the RCC in the 4th century. The brave new world we are heading into is no longer a composite society originally fostered by Jesus. It is monolithic, and abusive and totalatarian.
The new litmus test for orthodoxy will not be Christ's Real Presence but will be things like this:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61342 Fail the test, and you are a heretic to the new blend of religion and state..... hence, subject to your property being confiscated and worse.