In the 1500s, there was this German priest who wanted to translate the Catholic bible into German, so the average joe could read it. A century earlier, the Gutenberg printing press had made it possible to mass produce bibles, printing them instead of the meticulous rewriting, by hand, that had previously been used to make more bibles. In the course of his study and translation, this priest realized that what the Church was teaching was not what was in the scripture (scripture being a fancy word for the writings of the bible). He objected to the Church's teachings, going so far as to print a letter about what the Church had wrong. This priest's name was Martin Luthor, and he is credited with starting the Protestant Reformation.
Five centuries and countless denominations later, people are still mis-quoting the Bible, teaching ideas that run absolutely contrary to what the bible says. When modern Christians are told "that isn't what the Bible says" they get offended, responding with statements like "that's what my Preacher said" or "that's what's in my bible".
For example, you might hear many modern Christians (and their preachers) declare that Christ proved he was God by resurrecting himself. That is absolutely not what the Apostles (the guys who followed Jesus and spread his teachings after his resurrection) wrote. Their writings would later be added together to form what is known today as the New Testament--the second half of the Holy Bible. Acts 2:24 specifically states "Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it." Acts 2:32, 3:15, 13:30, Romans 6:4, Romans 8:11, and Hebrews 13:20 are all quite clear on this topic: God raised Jesus from the dead. Resurrection doesn't make you God. Jesus resurrected people. Even the apostles resurrected people. But, this is just one of many examples of how modern Christians refuse to read the scripture, preferring to listen to what someone else tells them... then repeat false teachings like unholy parrots.
Imagine if you were a movie critic and instead of going to see a movie before writing a review, you instead read a short synopsis someone else wrote about the movie... or read the comments movie viewers posted online. Is your review accurate? No.
Before you reach for your bible, though--which one are you grabbing? Four hundred years ago, a group of scholars set out to make the best English translation they could, turning to the original Hebrew and Greek texts, rather than Latin, or other english translations. Today, we know this as the King James Version--which some people will say is inaccurate because "King James just wanted a divorce". Not true. King James never divorced. He had one wife, his entire life.
If you're skeptical that the KJV is accurate is more accurate than the ESV, NIV, NLT, etc. you can actually look at the original Greek and Hebrew at Bible Hub's interlinear bible texts--letting you see the original writings, and literal english translations. For example, in Revelation 10:1, the Apostle John wrote about an angel who's feet were "like pillars of fire". The KJV gets it right, listing "feet", while the ESV, NIV, and NLT all proclaim the angel's legs were like pillars of fire. This might seem like a small change, but there shouldn't be any change. Revelation 22:19 clearly states "And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."
The bottom line here is that you don't know who is right or who is wrong when you listen to someone else tell you what scripture says. Two preachers with different takes, or different Bibles, both can't be correct. See for yourself. Look at the most accurate translation you can, and maybe cross-reference that with an interlinear bible to see how the Apostles themselves wrote it out. If your preacher knew better than the Apostles, his writings would be in the bible.
