Are there problems with the modern versions?

[Bookreader]

Amen Brother. Well said. I too believe that I have a perfect and infallibe Bible in my hands. God is a God of order. And His word, the King James Bible is a Book of Numerical Order. The term "Godhead" appears 3 times in the Authorized Version. Coincedence? I think not. Also. The word "Church" appears 77 times in the Authorized Version. Another Coincedence? Again, I think not. Check out this list of more words and phrases that either appear 7 times or a number that is a multiple of 7:

Are you really serious about this stuff? You think there is numerology in the KJV English translation.
I have to ask because I think what I'm hearing is you saying the monks of 1611 were inspired by God. Is that what you're saying?

And you're saying that only in English is the word of God correctly translated?

Please tell me if these two questions are true.
A simple yes or no is fine - for each, obviously.

 

[RedTent]

I would like to see the credentials of the people who are deciding about what God says in scripture. I have read some of the background and reasons some of the translators of bible since the KJV and most of them seem very reliable to me, yet some on here are saying they are more reliable and can judge God's word better.

I think that true translators are guided by the Holy Spirit, yet the HS has to speak through the knowledge of the men they are. The culture and religious thinking in 1600 had a LOT of false ideas as are shown by what was done at that time. The HS had to reach through these men's understanding. And we are to believe they could clear their minds so completely they only heard straight from the HS pure? Translating from one culture and one language to another is almost impossible, and these men, you say, did it perfectly? I don't think so. The very fact that they were divided by over 1 1/2 thousand years from the people of the NT says they had quite a hurdle. They didn't do this perfectly.

We are closer in understanding of that time now than they were. We have other writings of the culture that is understood now, something they had no idea of. They had no idea of what the world of Abraham and Jesus was like, we do now. We have the same translations they worked from. We have the same HS. When you say that you know and can prove beyond a doubt that you are right and all the rest is wrong, I think that entire concept of yours is wrong.

 

[PilgrimUK]

There are problems with every translation which is why people cannot use just one.
The KJV might be the most accurate but it isn't accurate.

For the KJV only brigade...and anybody else, these two links are worth an hour of anyone's time.
Read how even the "inspired" KJV (incidentally translated by atheists) is full of errors...

"KJV Only" advocates refuted!

Quartz Hill School of Theology

 

[gracethroughfaith]

Would God put trust in the hands and minds of a sodomite (homosexual) (male or female) to properly translate his Words of Life?
Would you put your trust in there hands??
If your answer is NO! But yet you trust the new versions of the bible written since the 1611 King James Bible. Then you are a liar, because these new bibles came about by the hands and minds of sodomites.
If you believe me to be judging you, do your homework before you accuse me of judging.

Research those who were on the bible committees of these new bibles, and see for yourself what kind of spirit they are of.

1 John 2:3-6 (KJV)
[SUP]3 [/SUP]And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
[SUP]4 [/SUP]He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
[SUP]5 [/SUP]But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
[SUP]6 [/SUP]He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

 

[PilgrimUK]

..and so with the inclusion of all the errors in the 1611 KJV, it means no version is safe unless you study the originals - not the English language KJV as the cult would have us believe - but the Hebrew & Koine Greek texts.
Luckily that we have the Spirit to teach us while we prayerfully study our chosen version, as it was before any word was ever written down!

 

[ChosenbyHim]

..and so with the inclusion of all the errors in the 1611 KJV, it means no version is safe unless you study the originals - not the English language KJV as the cult would have us believe - but the Hebrew & Koine Greek texts.
Luckily that we have the Spirit to teach us while we prayerfully study our chosen version, as it was before any word was ever written down!

How can you study something you don't have?

You wouldn't recognize an original autograph if it landed on your desk.
And besides that, you have never seen the "originals" a day in your life. So lay off the loony bin, would you?

There are no errors in God's word. The King James Bible is the perfect and inerrant word of God. If you want to know exactly what God said, then get yourself a copy of the pure and infallible King James Authorized Version.

 

[PilgrimUK]

How can you study something you don't have?

You wouldn't recognize an original autograph if it landed on your desk.
And besides that, you have never seen the "originals" a day in your life. So lay off the loony bin, would you?

There are no errors in God's word. The King James Bible is the perfect and inerrant word of God. If you want to know exactly what God said, then get yourself a copy of the pure and infallible King James Authorized Version.

Thanks! I needed the laugh!
You never read the pages on the links I provided above.
Don't you get it? Nobody has ever read the word as God intended. Translators have messed up areas and wordings in every single version, including your beloved 1611 KJV.
Why does expressing that truth put me in a loony bin? It is the general outlook of the 1611 Cult, to condemn anyone that doesn't read their version, it reminds me of the Pharisees, saved by law, regulation, anything but trust in Christ and love for others.
Sorry , but the KJV is most certainly not free from errors (just click the links above) and how you can call anything infallible except God alone is beyond me; it is a human translation of what started out as perfect texts and then humans got their hands on them.

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

from the message from 'the translators to the reader' in the original 1611 king james version...

"Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God."

 

[Andrew1]

..and so with the inclusion of all the errors in the 1611 KJV, it means no version is safe unless you study the originals - not the English language KJV as the cult would have us believe - but the Hebrew & Koine Greek texts.
Luckily that we have the Spirit to teach us while we prayerfully study our chosen version, as it was before any word was ever written down!

Question: if there is no way to know if we have an accurate Bible, and we can simply rely on the Holy Spirit to tell us the truth, then what do we need a Bible for anyway. Is God not able to preserve his word, and if he is then why didn't he?

 

[HollyLoree]

[SUP]"[/SUP]The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever" ISAIAH 40 : 8

It does stand. If there are verses missing, we know about it. However! There were a few verses added to the original texts, from what I've heard. I'm careful with those too. The NIV isn't my favorite because I'm aware they've done what you say. I prefer the Amplified, the English Standard, and the American Standard. Those are my favorites, though I do like others. I like to read different versions side by side. Gives the text more clarity to read them all.

 

[Andrew1]

Thanks! I needed the laugh!
You never read the pages on the links I provided above.
Don't you get it? Nobody has ever read the word as God intended. Translators have messed up areas and wordings in every single version, including your beloved 1611 KJV.
Why does expressing that truth put me in a loony bin? It is the general outlook of the 1611 Cult, to condemn anyone that doesn't read their version, it reminds me of the Pharisees, saved by law, regulation, anything but trust in Christ and love for others.
Sorry , but the KJV is most certainly not free from errors (just click the links above) and how you can call anything infallible except God alone is beyond me; it is a human translation of what started out as perfect texts and then humans got their hands on them.

I welcome anyone to point out supposed "errors" in the KJV in this thread so that we can examine them.
By the way calling people who hold to the KJB as the inerrant word of God in English as a "Cult" is an ad hominem attack and serves only to scare people away for fear of being associated with that view point.
To your statement "...and how you can call anything infallible except God alone is beyond me;..." Let me simply quote John 1:1:
'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.'

 

[HollyLoree]

from the message from 'the translators to the reader' in the original 1611 king james version...

"Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God."

Is that suppose to mean something? Those were mere men that translated that Bible. Jesus never directed us to the King James Bible as the only translation we are to read. You're just quoting someone's opinion about a Bible translation their putting out. That's all that is.

 

[HollyLoree]

I welcome anyone to point out supposed "errors" in the KJV in this thread so that we can examine them.
By the way calling people who hold to the KJB as the inerrant word of God in English as a "Cult" is an ad hominem attack and serves only to scare people away for fear of being associated with that view point.
To your statement "...and how you can call anything infallible except God alone is beyond me;..." Let me simply quote John 1:1:
'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.'

There are so many translation errors in the KJV, I couldn't possibly post them all here. There are pages and pages of them. I'll just post a site that lists some.

ERRORS in the Bible

p.s. These are just translation errors. When translated correctly, the verses made good sense.

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

Is that suppose to mean something? Those were mere men that translated that Bible. Jesus never directed us to the King James Bible as the only translation we are to read. You're just quoting someone's opinion about a Bible translation their putting out. That's all that is.

what it means is that the translators of the king james version wouldn't have approved of the 'king james only' cult that has elevated their work beyond anything they intended for it to be...

 

[Vestarena]

what it means is that the translators of the king james version wouldn't have approved of the 'king james only' cult that has elevated their work beyond anything they intended for it to be...

That's very good to know. I would say it's God's message that's inerrant, not some translation. God's message gets through, one way or another. We have amazing tools nowadays that help us determine for ourselves what the original texts said. I just love e-sword so much.

 

[ChosenbyHim]

Thanks! I needed the laugh!
You never read the pages on the links I provided above.
Don't you get it? Nobody has ever read the word as God intended. Translators have messed up areas and wordings in every single version, including your beloved 1611 KJV.
Why does expressing that truth put me in a loony bin? It is the general outlook of the 1611 Cult, to condemn anyone that doesn't read their version, it reminds me of the Pharisees, saved by law, regulation, anything but trust in Christ and love for others.
Sorry , but the KJV is most certainly not free from errors (just click the links above) and how you can call anything infallible except God alone is beyond me; it is a human translation of what started out as perfect texts and then humans got their hands on them.

Let me ask you PilgrimUK, who penned the Original Autographs?

Was it perfect men or was it imperfect men?

God used imperfect men to write down His inspired words. And just as God was able to move these men to write down His perfect and pure words in the original Autographs. God is also able to use imperfect men down through history to preserve His pure and perfect words.

And your statement about "nobody has ever read the word as God intended." Chapter and Verse please? Where can you show me that in Scripture?

Paul did not have the Original Autographs, James did not have the original Autographs. Jesus did not have the original Autographs, but whenever He quoted the Old Testament, He did it with power and authority. When the Apostle Paul quoted the Old Testament, he did it with confidence. What they all had were copies and translations of the Old Testament Scriptures.

Paul commanded Timothy to preach the word.

He did not tell him to preach the original autographs.

[SUP]2 [/SUP]Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. - 2 Timothy 4:2 (King James Bible)
To give you another example, let us see how the Apostle Paul regarded these copies and translations of the Scripture which they had:

[SUP]15 [/SUP]And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
[SUP]16 [/SUP]All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
[SUP]17 [/SUP]That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. - 2 Timothy 3:15-17 (King James Bible)

Timothy did not have the original Hebrew Autographs. What Timothy had in his possession was copies and translations of the Old Testament Hebrew Scriptures. And Paul referred to these copies, these hand written copies which Timothy had as Holy Scripture.

So again, your statement about "nobody has ever read the word as God intended" is totally unscriptural and unfounded.

And God's word, which is the King James Bible has no errors in it. There are absolutely no errors in the Authorized Version. The King James Bible is perfect, pure, inerrant and infallible.

God cannot lie, and that is why there cannot be any errors in His true word.

And when you say that His word has errors in it, you make Him out to be a liar.

So stop believing the Alexandrian cult. And convert over to the pure words of the Living God. Get yourself a King James Bible. Read it, study it, rightly divide it, and believe it.

 

[ChosenbyHim]

That's very good to know. I would say it's God's message that's inerrant, not some translation. God's message gets through, one way or another. We have amazing tools nowadays that help us determine for ourselves what the original texts said. I just love e-sword so much.

How can the message be inerrant if the words are not inerrant?

Simply trust that God's word is inerrant and perfect. And believe that He kept His promise to preserve His words.

[SUP]6 [/SUP]The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
[SUP]7 [/SUP]Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. - Psalm 12:6-7 (King James Bible)

Notice it says: The words of the LORD are pure words.

So not just the message is inerrant and pure, but the very words of God are pure and inerrant.

 

[Andrew1]

There are so many translation errors in the KJV, I couldn't possibly post them all here. There are pages and pages of them. I'll just post a site that lists some.

ERRORS in the Bible

p.s. These are just translation errors. When translated correctly, the verses made good sense.

Your no fun here let me try, it says in Acts 12:4 :

And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

OH NO how can the Bible say Easter, isn't the Greek word here 'pascha' meaning passover?
Answer:
Firstly: the word 'pascha' came to refer to both Easter and Passover do to the proximity of the two the events.
Secondly: It says in verse 3 that Peter was apprehended during the days of unleavened bread which occurs after Passover and can be proven from Numbers 28:16,17:

16 And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the LORD.
17 And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast: seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten.

There is a clear distinction here between the passover and the days of unleavened bread which occurs after the passover. Herod was a Pagan and was waiting for the Pagan festival of Ishtar to be over before he executed Peter.The KJB is therefore the only Bible we have today to get it right.

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

Your no fun here let me try, it says in Acts 12:4 :

And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

OH NO how can the Bible say Easter, isn't the Greek word here 'pascha' meaning passover?
Answer:
Firstly: the word 'pascha' came to refer to both Easter and Passover do to the proximity of the two the events.
Secondly: It says in verse 3 that Peter was apprehended during the days of unleavened bread which occurs after Passover and can be proven from Numbers 28:16,17:

16 And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the LORD.
17 And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast: seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten.

There is a clear distinction here between the passover and the days of unleavened bread which occurs after the passover. Herod was a Pagan and was waiting for the Pagan festival of Ishtar to be over before he executed Peter.The KJB is therefore the only Bible we have today to get it right.

actually herod was a jew...and easter is not connected with ishtar...

the name 'easter' didn't exist in herod's time...this is plainly a sloppy anachronistic mistranslation in your idolized version...

 

[Andrew1]

actually herod was a jew...and easter is not connected with ishtar...

the name 'easter' didn't exist in herod's time...this is plainly a sloppy anachronistic mistranslation in your idolized version...

If the Jewish Passover is meant in this place then you have a real problem, how can the Passover occur after the Passover? It was the days of unleavened bread which occurred after the Passover, when Peter was apprehended.
By the way I don't worship the KJB, I worship the Word, who is Jesus. But by faith I believe in Gods promise that he would preserve his words unadulterated.