Missing texts... between translations

[Alithis]

The idea that they are missing rather than that the ones in the KJV are added comes from assuming that the KJV represents the pinnacle of biblical scholarship but it doesn't.

NJB says Matthew 18:11 [For the Son of man has come to save what was lost.]

I wouldnt consider that inclusion to exclusion to be of consequence..
As the next verse says almost the same thing. So no meaning is added or subtracted by it either way.

What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go out to search for the one that is lost?

 

[Rens]

I have the impression that the O.T. is more accurate than the New. Ah see, the Jews were more accurate, well 99.5 % ain't that bad lol.
While the quality of the Old Testament manuscripts is excellent, that of the New Testament is very good.

https://bible.org/article/how-accurate-bible

 

[MoreCoffee]

I wouldnt consider that inclusion to exclusion to be of consequence..
As the next verse says almost the same thing. So no meaning is added or subtracted by it either way.

What do you think? If a man has a hundred sheep and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go out to search for the one that is lost?

Many people believe that the KJV is perfect or nearly perfect consequently they do not trust other bibles. I am quite happy to use the KJV but I do not think of it as the pinnacle of biblical scholarship.