II. The changes are because they found a new Greek text!
Many of God's people assume that all Bible translators use one Greek Text to translate from. This was true until the Revised Version was placed in the Churches in 1881 AD when According to modern day Bible translators this new Greek Text is older, and more faithful to the original manuscripts. They all exalt this new Greek Text to a higher authority than the Greek Textus Receptus that the Bible has always been translated from since the Reformation. This is a "radical Greek Text," which was introduced to the Revision Committee in 1870 AD. by Dr. F. A. Hort. "By the middle of the 19th.century Tischendorf and Tregelles had convinced many British scholars that the Textus Receptus was a late and inferior text and that therefore a revision of the King James was highly necessary."
A. This "radical Greek Text," is the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus This text deviated "the fartherest from the Received Text."  (i.e. The Textus Receptus, the Greek Text of the Reformation (1517 AD) up to the King James Version (1611 - 1880 AD) After the King James Version (KJV) these footnotes have appeared in the in all the Modern translations
B. Where did this Greek Text come from?
In order to understand where this new Greek Text came from, there needs to be a understanding of how the Bible became the Bible as we know it today.
1. To understand this we must beginning with the original scriptures
The original scriptures were letters (epistles) written to the Churches "by the inspiration of God." (2Tim.3:16) These "inspired" letters (epistles) were hand copied and distributed amongst the Churches, because there was no printing press invented yet. (It was not invented until 1450 AD. It was in thehands of the people,not the Scholar, Intellectual, Seminary or College Professor. This was according to the pattern that God gave the Levitical priesthood, the "shadow of good things to come." (Heb.10:1) The priests the sons of Levi were charged with protecting, guarding, teaching, supervising the copying of God's Word. (Deut.17:18; 24:18; 31:9-11, 2Chron.15:3; 34:15, Neh.8:2, Mal.2:7, 1Peter.2:5-9, Rev.1:6; 5:10) This responsibility continued in the hands of the people of the 1st.Century Church as "a royal priesthood." (1Peter.2:5, Rev.1:6; 5:10) The same is true today because we are the priesthood.
2. The apostle John put the first canon of scripture together.
(Canon meaning, what belongs in the Bible and what does not) This was done again in 367 AD. and
382 AD with the same results.
3. After the death of John(approx.100 AD.)
A spiritual decline began to happen in the Church and they began to "turn aside" from God's Word. (Review: Samson / Church History) God did not turn aside, they turned aside from His truth! God did not stop "giving gifts to men" (Eph.4:7-16) Man put them aside. 4. Within a 100 years corrupt manuscripts began to "leaven" the Church.
The Church was reaping this "notorious" corruption because they "turned aside" from the truthof God's Word. Agreement between copies was hopeless, and each one was claiming to be correcting the manuscripts. Sounds like today! (Review: Samson)
Note Church History - was declining fast. (30-100 AD. The ministries of the apostle and prophet (Eph.2:20-21; 4:11) were gone. (130 AD?) The laying on of hands (Acts.13:2, Heb,6:1-3, 1Tim.4:14) had become a ritual. (150 AD?) The Baptism of the Holy Ghost and the Gifts of the Spirit (Acts.2;1-17;8:5-17;10:1-48; 19:1-6) gone. (160 AD?) The plurality of eldership in the local Church (Acts.14:23, 1Tim.3:1, Col.1:17-18) replaced with monarchical bishops. No leading of the Spirit, therefore man began to lead. By this time many Churches were looking to Rome for direction. By (185 AD?) infant baptism replaced Water Baptism by immersion. (Matt.28:19, Acts.2:37-38, Rom.6:1-11) By (200 AD?) a gap began to form between doctrine and experience. This was the time of Origen and Clement,Arius (Arianism - The denial of The Deity of Christ, and His bodily resurrection. With this decay of truth came alsothe corruption of God's Word. The Greek manuscripts were corrupted within 100 years and agreement between them was hopeless. What is interesting, they were claiming to be correcting them just as the modern translations do today.
Compare this period of time with the Church at Ephesus(Rev.2:1-7) and the parable of the Sower. (Matt.13:1-23)
5. This gave prominence (notoriety) to the "Ebonite" and Gnostic" heresies
(The denial of Christ's Deity and His bodily resurrection) which came from Origen and Clement. (202-325 AD) 6. Who was Origen?
Origen was the "most important theologian and biblical scholar of the early Greek Church." A early (foremost) Christian Theologian, a celebrated Christian writer teacher of antiquity.[8, 11]
Origen and Clement were "two of the most prominent fathers...chief representatives of the School of Alexandria, the great melting pot of Greek philosophy and Judaism."[8, 11] Origen was much in demand as a preacher because of his reputation' [8, 11] Origen was a Platonist He believed that Jesus was "subordinate to the father in power and dignity." He taught that Jesus was created, not eternal.  Origen believed that if Satan fell by will, even he can repent. (Encyclopedia Britannica, "Origen")
Origen was influenced by a semi-Gnostic writing andbelieved that Hell cannot be an absolute since God cannot abandon any creature. After Origen's death opposition steadily mounted, respectful in the Greek Christian Methodius of Olympus' criticism of his spiritualizing doctrine of the Resurrection.
Note: Ambrose provided Origen with short hand writers a wealthy Christian named Ambrose, whom Origen converted from the teachings of the heretical Valentinus and to whom he (Origen) dedicated many of his works, provided him with shorthand writers. This resulted in a "stream of treatises and commentaries that began to pour from Origen's pen." and altered manuscripts in accordance with his belief's.
Note: The Church was declining fast(30-100 AD.) The ministries of the apostle and prophet were gone. (130 AD.) The laying on of hands had become a ritual. (150 AD) The Baptism of the Holy Ghost and the Gifts of the Spirit gone. (160 AD) The plurality of eldership in the local Church replaced with monarchical bishops. No leading of the Spirit, therefore man began to lead. By this time many churches were looking to Rome for direction. By (185 AD) infant baptism replaced Water Baptism by immersion. By (200 AD) a gap began to form between doctrine and experience. This was the time of Origen and Clement, Arius (Arianism) The denial of The Deity of Christ, and His bodily resurrection.
This was the time of the altering of God's Holy Word! Compare this period of time to The Church at Smyra(Rev.2:8-11) and (Matt.13:24-30, 36-43) The Tares amongst the Wheat
This was the time of the altering of God's Holy Word!
8. By325 AD.This corruption was so "notoriously corrupt" Constantine who was by that time, ruler of the Roman Empire and the Church called for theCouncil of Nicaea.(325 AD) and those corrupt manuscripts were thrown out!  Then Arius the Christian priest of Alexandria Egypt (whose teachings / Arianism) gave rise to this corruption was denounced by the early church as a heretic.
Note: One of the chief accusations against Origen's teaching was that he was making the Son inferior to the Father and thus being a precursor of Arianism (Arius) ____________________________________________________________________________________________
Constantine rejected Arius (Arian) and his doctrine under pressure of the Nicaean Council.  Constantine was not a born again believer, he "chose Christianity as the best of possible religions". He was the "wolf of paganism openly assumed the sheep's clothing of the Christian religion." The Emperor Constantine II, Constantine's son supported Arianism, as did Valens, one of his successors.
9. The solution of Constantine was to make fiftyofficial Bibles
This was to eliminate the "notoriously" corrupt manuscripts. The individual that Constantine selected to bring uniformity of the manuscripts was Eusebius. (Remember there was the "canon" of scripture, but not a printed Bible as we have today)
10. Who was Eusebius
a. Eusebius was a Christian theologian, most learned man of his age. b. He wrote the most ancient history of the Christian Church and was called the father of Church History  c. He was a chief figure at theCouncil of Nicaeaand stood with Constantine d. Eusebius was classified as an Arian. e. Eusebius selected manuscripts from Origen's 5th.column out of Origen's "Hexapala," as text for the 50 offical Bibles that Constantine ordered. This was because he was a great admirer of Origen and a student of his philosopy. (Arianism) He also used alternative readings from the other columns in the Hexapala, and material from the Apocryphal tradition. Also used the legendary Hegesippus.
Note: How all this corruption is coming from within the Church, and not from the outside. The apostle Paul warned the Church saying, "For I know this, that after my departure shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them"(Acts.20:29-30)
Needless to say, the doctrine of Justification by faith in Christ's Redeeming Blood was no longer emphasized by 350-392 AD By 484 AD the Church was into the "dark ages" for a thousand years. (500-1500 AD)
1. The Amplified Bible - Explanation of Arbitrary Punctuation. Italics 2. God Only Wrote One Bible, J.J. Ray, p.23 / English Revised Version, Preface, pp.9-10 / Westscott. History of the English Bible, pp.321- 325 3. Evaluating Versions of the New Testament, E.W. Fowler, p.13 4. Samuel Hemphill - History of the Revised Version, p.54-55 / Evaluating Versions of the New Testament, p.4 5. The King James Defended - E. F. Hills, Chap.8,6.(a),p.225 6. Funk & Wagnalls Encyclopedia, Vol.21, p.288 7. Eusebius. Ecclesiasstical History, Book 3, Chap.24 8, 9, 10. Funk & Wagnalla, Vol.19. p,441 11. Encyclopedia Britannica, (Origen) 12. Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol.1, pp.434-435 13. Present day Truths - Iverson, p.14-15 14. Compton's Interactice Encyclopedia, "Constantine" 15. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Book 5, Chap.8 / Encycloptian Tatian 16. Encyclopedia Britannica. "Arius" Arius was a ascetical, moral leader of a Christian community in the area of Alexandria, and attracted a large following through a message integrating Neoplatonism, which accented the absolute oneness of the divinity as the highest perfection, with a literal, rationalist approach to the New Testament texts. 17. Constantine - Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia, 1996 18. Sir Robert Anderson, L.C.B.L.D. p.48, The Church and the Bible / E. H. Broadbent - The Pilgrim Church, pp.21-22 19. Dr. Ira M. Price - Ancestary of the Englisah Bible, p.70 / God Only Wrote One Bible- J.J. Ray, p.18 20. Encyclopedia Britannica, "Eusebius" 21. Dr. Ira M. Price - Ancestry of the English Bible, p.70 / Hurst - History of the Christian Church, Vol.1 pp.36-37 / God Only Wrote One Bible J.J. Ray, p.18 22. Origen - "Platoist." Isaac Newton’s The Chronology of Ancient Kingdoms Amended ( London : 1728),11. The Newton Project—University of Sussex, East Sussex London: 2007, www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.uk. 23. The Traditional Text - Burgon Miller, p.163 / Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol.4, p.86 / The Cannon and Text of the New Testament, p.345 / The Ancestry of the - Dr. Ira M. Price, p.70 / A.T.Robertson , Intro of the New Testament, p.80 / Dr. Phillip schaff. Companion to Greek Testament, p.115. / Intro. to the New Testament - Vol.2, p.270 24. Damnable - To deny Christ's Deity is to deny His Redeeming blood. Hebrews says if we willfully reject Christ's Redemption, "there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins." (Heb.10:25-29) Once again revealing the eternal consequences of removing scripture that creates doubt, or rejecting Christ's Deity. This word has been translated as damnable (-nation), destruction, die, perdition, perish, pernicious ways, waste. Strong's NT #864 25. Crept - Strong's NT #3921 26. Begotten - Strong's Con. NT# 3439 μονογενής monogenḗs, mon-og-en-ace'; from G3441 and G1096; only-born, i.e. sole:—only (begotten, child).
46. The History of the Revised Version - Samuel Hemphil, pp.54-55 47. Wescott and Hort in their theory of the text built the work of several earlier men, such as Griesbach, Lachman, and Tischendorf, who around 1775 AD published texts differing in many places from the Received Text. - E.W. Fowler. Evaluating Versions of the New Testament, p.4 48. The History of the Revised Version - Samuel Hemphil, pp. 54-55 / Evaluating Versions of the New Testament - E.W. Fowler, p.28 49. Evaluating Versions of the New Testament - E.W. Fowler, p.9 50. Core, New Commentary, Part.3, p.721 51. The Life and letters of Fenton John Hort - 2 Vols; London: MacMillan and Co. Ltd., 1896, 1211 52. The King James Defended, E.F. Hills, Chap.8,6, (a), p.225 53. The Traditional Text - Burgon Miller, p.163 / Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol.4, p.86 / The Cannon and text of the New Testament, p.345 / The Ancestry of the - Dr. Ira M. Price, p.70 / A.T. Robertson, Intro of the New Testament, p.180 / Dr. Phillip Schaff. Companion to Greek Testament, p.115./ Intro to the New Testament - Vol.2, p.270 54. Evaluating Versions of the New Testament, E.W. Fowler, p.4 / B.F. Westcott and F.J. Hort. The New Testament in the original Greek, Vol.ii, Introduction and Appendix (New York Harper and Brothers, 1882, p.277 / The King James Defended - E.F. Hills. Chap.3,p.66 55, Evaluating Versions of the New Testament, E.W. Fowler, p.4-5