Top Ten Deleted Bible Verses That Were Not in the Original Text

When I was in my mid-teens I was handed my first Bible-conspiracy pamphlet (See examples 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6). This pamphlet spoke of the great dangers posed to Christianity by a large group of lesbian bible scholars that had fought their way into biblical societies and now were working deviously to corrupt the Bible. Part of their notorious lesbian agenda was the secret removal of bible verses that for thousands of years had contained Gods word! (Another part was making the language gender neutral, so that the New World Government can one day eradicate the sexes, or something like that.) This pamphlet warned that vital Bible verses were being secretly deleted and erased, our new Bibles were being printed missing God’s words! I was aghast, and spent many months discussing with my friends the impending satanic incursion in our world, this Verse-Removal-Conspiracy was surely a sign of the end times.

Ten years later, having learned a few things about the transmission, corruption, and restoration of the New Testament, I can slowly laugh at myself. There has never been a satanic conspiracy against the bible , in fact this “conspiracy” was perpetuated by the most conservative evangelical scholars who translated the NIV in order to try to save the Bible! The very conservative NIV translators often mistranslated and obscured the text to hide contradictions, problems, or other issues. The reason is that during the hundreds of years of biblical studies, academics have amassed irrefutable textual evidence that the Bible we have was heavily modified, edited, and miscopied on thousands of occasions.

Today, it is the job of biblical scholars to go through the thousands of manuscripts, align the differences/similarities, and try to estimate what was likely the original reading. In many cases what scholars have found is that a later copy of a particular passage includes extra phrases or sentences, while an earlier copy, dated to a few hundred years earlier, is missing those sentences. Because of this scholars have been forced to admit that for the last two millennia, we have been treating many verses, which are interpolations (additions of phrases to the text by a scribe), as thought they were the very words of God. As a result, scholars have been removing some of these passages. These passages were never original to the text, they were later additions.

While there are quite a few textual variants, alterations, interpolations, and etc, here is my personal “Top Ten” list of bible verses that that were never in the original text of the Bible.

1. “There are three that bear witness in heaven, the father, the word, and the holy spirit, and these three are one.” (1 John 5:7)

Interestingly enough this is the only passage in the Bible that clearly articulates the Trinity. While there are other passages that may hint at the Trinity this particular passage distilled hundreds of years of theology by the early church into a Bible verse added into the text. This is literally one of the more fascinating manuscript stories as it exists in our modern Bibles in part because the Catholics created a forged Greek text to provide to an 16th century scholar, Erasmus.

2. “But this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting.” (Matthew 17:21)

This whole verse is omitted from most modern Bible translations, while the Mark 9:29 has the word “fasting” removed from it based on the earliest manuscripts. I have personally seen people testify of fasting for prolonged periods of time, to wage war with demons. I have also heard testimonies where this process did not work, and the preacher had to embellish another element to the story (“I wasn’t holy enough, etc.”) Ironically enough the whole command, which people devote days and weeks to, was never in the Bible.

3. “Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery… said to Him… the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do you say?… Jesus said “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.”

This particular story has become one of the defining portraits of Jesus yet, all 12 verses have been removed or footnoted in new translations. If there is one story that is most commonly associated with Jesus, it is, hands down, this one.  Everyone I know loves to quotes from these passages about Jesus. One of the most important doctrines regarding how to treat others who are sinners (“don’t judge them because you are not without sin”) is found only in this passage. Except it was never in the Bible but is a later addition, written down almost four hundred years after the death of Jesus.

4. “And being in agony He was praying very fervently; and His sweat became like drops of blood, falling down upon the ground.” (Luke 22:44)

I have witnessed countless preachers motioning triumphantly with agony and emotion on their face as they read these words. It’s as if they experience this exact sensation while they read about it. Some have even spoken of a possible medical condition where a person experiences so much stress that they sweat blood. Except, this was never in the original bible, so all the emotional sermons focusing on this were due to a passage that was almost certainly not biblical.

5. “These signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons and they will speak with new tongues.” (Mark 16:17)

Pentecostals have only one mention of Jesus teaching about the act of speaking in tongues in the Gospels, this passage is Mark 16:17. However, most of this chapter in Mark is an interpolation, for the original text of Mark (the earliest Gospel to be written, about 10-20 years before Luke/Matthew) ended at 16:8. What is fascinating about this is that millions of Pentecostals have frequently preached that Jesus predicted their glossolaic speech in the Gospels. Unfortunately, this is not the case, it was merely secondary addition of a scribe who later added to the text what wasn’t there.

6. “And they will take up snakes in their hands, and if they drink any poison it will not harm them, and they will lay their hands on the sick and they will become well.” (Mark 16:18)

Another passage from the unoriginal ending to the Gospel of Mark. Unfortunately, people have literally died because of this interpolation. There have been hundreds of Pentecostal churches that have engaged in snake-handling, though today they are a dying breed.

7. “For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.” (Matthew 6:13)

The Lord’s Prayer has been repeated by billions of people, trillions of times. It is probably the most repeated series of words in the history of the world (perhaps second only to the Shahada). And besides the fact that there are already two version of the Lord’s Prayer in the original texts, Matthew version (v6:9–13) has 65 words while Luke’s version (v11:2–4) only has 36 words, the ending (a doxology) of Matthew’s version, the one memorized by billions, was a later interpolation but not the original.

8. “And in the same way after supper Jesus took the cup and said, “This cup that is poured out for you is the new covenant in my blood.” (Luke 22:20)

This is a primary Gospel witness of the atoning intent (“for you”) of the crucifixion as well as the promise of a “new covenant.” These are essential Christian teachings that are found in most faith statements. Today most Bibles mention with a footnote that this passage is not found in the most ancient manuscripts, however a couple conservative scholars attempt to defend the idea that the original text had these words, then a scribe removed them and the original was lost, finally another scribe re-added it to explain why it’s missing from the earliest copies. Today we have six different versions of this passage, and only one supports the theological reading that conservatives want, but there is very strong evidence this was a later interpolation.

9. “And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation.” (Mark 16:15)

The first of two Christian texts that command what is called “The Great Commission” to preach the gospel to all nations is certainly a later scribal interpolation, part of the “longer ending of Mark” that was not in the original. There is one more passage that commands the Great Commission, Matthew 28:19, so this whole doctrine of evangelism and missions is not completely lost once we remove Mark 16:15. However, when it comes to Matthew 28:19, there has been much debate whether this is an original text, some scholars have argued the whole text is not original. Others just say a part of the text was a later addition. Eusebius of Caesarea, and early church father, quoted this passage without the Trinitarian formula or request for baptism, so this is very strong evidence that, at the very least, “baptizing in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost”, is a later addition, absent from the original Gospel. This means that the Great Commission is absent from the earliest Gospel, and the version present in a later gospel was uttered without a command to baptize people or a Trinitarian formula.

10. Many (not all) passages relating to the Substitutionary Atonement are interpolations.

Okay I cheated, this is more than ten verses, but it’s my blog so I’m the only one who can fire myself. Anyway, the phrases removed in newer Bible translations include “through his blood” in Colossians 1:14; “broken for you” in 1 Corinthians 11:24; “sacrificed for us” in 1 Corinthians 5:7; “suffered for us” in 1 Peter 4:1; “by himself purged our sins” in Hebrews 1:3. Others were edited (to reflect the earliest manuscripts) making changes from “purchased possession” to just “possession” in Ephesians 1:14 or from “that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ” to “what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions” in Colossians 1:24, and etc.

In each of these cases, the verse in question, in traditional English translations, has said something like “Jesus was sacrificed for us” but manuscript tradition changes this into “Jesus was sacrificed. [the end]” or “Christ suffered for us” to “Christ suffered [the end].” Today the doctrine of substitutionary atonement is the dominant doctrine of the Cross in the Christian world, yet this doctrine was not prominent in the early church. While many passages are not originals, there are a handful that are likely authentic, like Ephesians 1:7, but this means the all-important doctrine of the substitutionary atonement is barely mentioned a few times, and is not present everywhere in the New Testament, which is strange for those who claim that it is, in fact, the whole point of the Gospel.

14 responses

  1. Пару вопросов: Вы являетесь специалистом в области иврита и древнегреческого? Или понравились чьи-то измышления на заданную тему? Какую цель преследуете, уважаемый?

    • Howdy, nope I am not a specialist in Hebrew, and my Koine is very minimal. In any case, this is not an issue of translation from a printed Greek/Hebrew text whatsoever, nor am I performing an exegetical analysis. This has to do with textual criticism that attempts to reconstruct the original text, if such a construction is indeed possible (most textual critics say its not) based on the best in manuscript tradition.

      However, because I am using standard biblical scholarship by referring to verses removed in most translation committees, based on the best publications in textual studies, my lack of textual criticism specialization is not an issue. The vast majority of textual critics from the conservative Dan Wallace, to the moderate/mainstream Alands, Ehrmans of academia.

      As far as my aim, I find this fascinating.

      • Dear Yuriy:

        In order to understand properly this issue you needs to know some basic things:

        a) There are two kind of Bible´s Version: The catholic Bible and the non-catholic Bible

        The catholic version is the short version of the Word of God. This point is key, specially when we take in account the rol of Constantine when he got 50 Bible from Egypt, Alexandria.

        The Trinity doctrine was developing with a different Bible: it lacked of 1 John 5:7

        The catholic version of this topic never reveals this point. Six year after the Nicea Council, the 50 Bibles of Constantine arrived to Rome to strong doctrinally the new church actually named Catholic Church,

        This book is a must to understand in a balanced way the whole scenary:

        http://www.amazon.com/In-Defense-Authenticity-Of-John/dp/1615077669

        Short version and expanded version: the position of the Textual Criticism.

        The “short” versión (literrarly is true) was dominating over Europe during more than 1000 years….the expanded version (Pure and Preservated) was the protagonist, the hero of the Reform

        While the short version was as the unique option, Europe was was blind and in total darkness: no saved souls

        The true and preserved version was the instrument of God to save soul with the Everlasting Life.

        Please check the commentary of Erasmus in the introduction dedicated to Leon X:

        !I perceived that that teaching which is our salvation was to be had in a much purer and more lively form if sought at the fountain-head and drawn from the actual sources than from pools and runnels. And so I have revised the whole New Testament (as they call it) against the standard of the Greek original… I have added annotations of my own, in order in the first place to show the reader what changes I have made, and why; second, to disentangle and explain anything that may be complicated, ambiguous, or obscure.[9]

        [9] “Epistle 384” in Collected Works of Erasmus. Vol. 3: Letters 222 to 223, 1516 (tr. R.A.B. Mynors and D.F.S. Thomson; annotated by James K. McConica; Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976).

        You say: “his has to do with textual criticism that attempts to reconstruct the original text”

        R= the “original text” is the Vulgata: the Bible of Trent Council

        You say: “if such a construction is indeed possible (most textual critics say its not) based on the best in manuscript tradition.”

        R= You need to know the Promise of God where He Promise to preserve His Word. The place where He fulfilled His Promise is the editions (sic) of Textus Receptus.

        You say:”However, because I am using standard biblical scholarship by referring to verses removed in most translation committees,

        R= This “biblical scholars” are catholic. Check the Commitee of the UBS-NTG: so you will find to Carlos María Martini, an erudit and catholic priest that some years ago he was near to be a pope.

        You say: “based on the best publications in textual studies, my lack of textual criticism specialization is not an issue.

        R= you are guided by catholic people to sure in your mind the short and catholic version of the Word of God

        You say: “The vast majority of textual critics from the conservative Dan Wallace, to the moderate/mainstream Alands, Ehrmans of academia”

        R= There are around 6000 different mms: the 99.99% contain the True and Preservated Word of God

        The 1% is conformed basically by 3 catholic witness: mss Vaticanus, mms Sinaiticus, mss Alexandrinus (+ Bodmer collection)
        The power of Rome has been able to create a powerful system to delete of the field or scenario our preserved word of God and replace it with its Egyptian -corrupted – version.

        After the NTG of Erasmus, a “new” New Testament appears to change spiritually the World

        With the familiy of Textus Receptus, all nations and idioms were benefited with a pure content doctrinally different than the short and catholic option

        This link will help you to know this point

        I wish be useful for you.

        Thank you for your attention,

        Best regards:

        Luis Mendoza
        Caracas, Venezuela

        Facebook: MYLSTECH

        • Yes. Jesus (pbuh) is one of the mightiest messenger of all might god. Don’t be confuse In this. Simply You people See how many Interpolations In the bible. Fallow the true god, The god all might Is ONE AND ONLY……!

    • I patently said “Pentecostals have only one mention of Jesus teaching about the act of speaking in tongues in the Gospels, this passage is Mark 16:17”

      The book of Acts is written by a different group of people than Jesus, at a different time. My point still stands.

  2. Is there a reasonable version of the bible which leaves out verses of questionable authenticity, particularly John 8:3-11 and Mark 16:9-20?

  3. Dear Yuri, I came across your blog looking for a list of interpellations. Thank you very much for those listed and for your explanations.
    I am not a formal Bible student just a Christian of many years looking for the truth of the word of God. It is my belief that many false doctrines came about because of the interpellations that you mentioned and others.
    Thank you

  4. In my possession are both the Greek Interlinear and the Geneva 1560 Bible. Both of these translations of the original manuscripts were written before the King James 1611 Bible translation.

    In both the Greek Interlinear and Geneva 1560 Bible, all verses are there that you have stated were not in the original manuscripts. In fact everything you stated, all verses or words, that you state were not in the original manuscipts, and that Mark ended after only 8 chapters was found Not to be correct, according to these much earlier Bible traslations.

    Although some words may differ in the KJV, Geneva 1560 Bible, and Greek Interlinear, everything you stated is not correct according to any of these Bible translations.

    As far as verses being added hundreds of years later, I would need unbiased proof on that.

    The Greek Interlinear is a translation into english of the original Received Text.

    • It is a way for the adversary to manipulate and create doubt in the authenticity of the truth, therefore justifying reading a book that does not contain proper doctrinal knowledge. It is that simple.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *