For follow-up discussion and general commentary on the topic. Comments are sorted chronologically.
I have noticed that NIV or Good News Bible have verses that have been removed or read completely different from the KJV or NKJV. The NIV or indeed the Good News Bible have certain verses missing. I outline a few that you will not find in the NIV or Good News Bible below:
Matthew 17:16, 18:11, 23:14
Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46
1 John 5:7-8
Thank you for your guidance why these have been removed.
It's not a matter of verses being removed, but rather that the Byzantine sources the KJV used in translation had 'added' verses in them. As Bible scholars review older and more reliable manuscripts, they can refine what original scripture said. 'Doubtful' verses are then removed as authentic scripture and moved to footnotes. Often these 'verses' were copied over from a parallel passage, or were scribal notes in the margins that made their way into the text over the years.
Matthew 17:16: Appears to be in all translations including NIV and GNB.
Did you mean Matt 17:21? Matt 17:21 is omitted in many older manuscripts as well as Codex Vaticanus B; Codex Sinaiticus has Matt 17:21 as a 'scribal correction' note in the margin, and manuscripts including the note trace back to this 'note' - so it is not original scripture.
Matt 18:11: The verse is “Omitted in the earliest witnesses of the Alexandria, pre-Caesarean, Egyptian, and Antiochene text types” (The Expositor's B8ible Commentary, Vol. 8, p. 401). Probably not original scripture, but Luke 19:10 says the same thing.
Matt 23:14: Not included in some of the oldest manuscripts, so quite possibly a later addition by a scribe.
Mark 7:16; "This verse has some good authority, but not sufficient to be retained in the text. The Revisers of 1881 have placed it in the margin." - Pulpit Commentaries on Mark 7:16
Mark 9:44 and 9:46; A quote from Is 66:24 that was likely added by a copyist either by error or for emphasis.
Luke 5:4: Are you sure you meant this verse? Appears to be in all translations. John 5:4 is often omitted at is generally considered to be a later addition, not being found in any of the manuscripts prior to about 500AD.
Acts 8:37: This verse is probably original scripture, found early on and in many manuscripts (including the second century Old Latin) and supported by quotes from Tertullian, Irenaeus and other early church fathers who uphold it as existing before the time of any of the manuscripts we have. However, it is omitted in many other manuscripts and from the Received Text, which leads many to relegate it to a footnote.
1 John 5:7-8: Missing from most of the Greek manuscripts, found in the margins (an added note) of a couple, but found in the Old Latin of the second century. This was cited by Tertullian (2nd century) and some other 3rd-5th century writers. This is perhaps the most controversial and debated of verses that may-or-may not be scripture.
The current practice is 'when in doubt' to move the verse to a footnote. This preserves it for the reader to see (in case it is scripture), but warns that the verse may not be authentic.
Here is a site with some more information:
I appreciate this conversation so much. I am hearing much teaching on the basis that we have a new covenant..
The terminology brings me (as a in and out follower) to trust the words I believe it is because I can relate more to more simplified
teachings. I don't make excuses or shy away from my trust to believe it's truth. I did not grow up in the church however I was invited by my best friends family when I was 10 on occasion. I never discussed it with my parents but I did come to be baptized on my own decision at that time. I have heard the word taught in several denominations visiting as I got older. I had many doubts come as I seeked to feel the scripture over power some of the misrepresentation I experienced.