Biblical Errors - Why Haven't They Been Fixed?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
That is interesting. I did not catch that. He says this is a possibility in the accusative case as it relates to a time or place. This might be a good question I can pose to the guys on Bgreek.
Agreed, especially since in the hand is a place.
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
613
113
70
Alabama
So back to the Strong's definition. Strong says it's a primary preposition properly meaning superimposition.... I understand that. He also mentions that it could also mean before, wherefore and specifically "in". If epi means superimposed then why did he use "in" as one of the possible meanings of epi?

ἐπί
epi
ep-ee'
A primary preposition properly meaning superimposition (of time, place, order, etc.), as a relation of distribution [with the genitive case], that is, over, upon, etc.; of rest (with the dative case) at, on, etc.; of direction (with the accusative case) towards, upon, etc.: - about (the times), above, after, against, among, as long as (touching), at, beside, X have charge of, (be-, [where-]) fore, in (a place, as much as, the time of, -to), (because) of, (up-) on (behalf of) over, (by, for) the space of, through (-out), (un-) to (-ward), with. In compounds it retains essentially the same import, at, upon, etc. (literally or figuratively).
If this is correct then this is what it would mean in Revelation 13:16. Here is how the KJV translates this verse.
"And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:"
This would mean they may possibly have it right in the second but wrong in the first, if I am correct in thinking the first is dative and the second in accusative.
 
Last edited:

Yet

Banned
Jan 4, 2014
3,756
69
0
I'm trying. I'm really trying but most of the house of God couldn't care less.
 

Nick01

Senior Member
Jul 15, 2013
1,272
26
48
Before you break out the flaming torches and the pitchforks, first I want to clarify something. I believe the God's Word is His ultimate written authority to us. I believe the Bible is perfect. I believe the whole Bible is written FOR us, but that not every part is written TO us. I believe God is absolute truth and His ways don't change with the times. I believe we need to conform to Christ's image and not try and make Him conform to our image (it had to be said!) I believe we need to understand Law to understand Grace and the Old Covenant to understand the New Covenant. I believe we are saved by grace through faith alone. I even believe those wacky first 11 chapters of Genesis are history.

That said, I believe the Bible has errors. I'm not talking about doctrinal issues, I'm talking simple scribal errors. Spelling, grammar, people's names, little inventory details. Like how many chariots went to war or Cainan in the genealogies. Does anyone know why these errors haven't been corrected? The Church has known about them for a long time. Just curious. Thanks. :)
Usually because there are differences in opinion about whether they are actually errors or not. There are plenty of scribal errors that are cleaned up as a part of textual criticism, already, but usually because that's part of arriving at what is the authoritative text.

The reason is probably also partially that we don't necessarily know what the original number was supposed to be. How many chariots actually went to war? We can't be sure, so let's just leave it, is the thinking.

I think the other reason is - where do we draw the line about what the church should 'fix' and what it shouldn't? If we have no documentary evidence for a reading, and we start making decisions based on conjecture, where does it end? Who gets to the draw the line about what should and shouldn't be there, and on what basis should we make those kinds of decisions?
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
If this is correct then this is what it would mean in Revelation 13:16. Here is how the KJV translates this verse.
"And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:"
This would mean they may possibly have it right in the second but wrong in the first, if I am correct in thinking the first is dative and the second in accusative.
If the second is accusative then wouldn't the first have to be also? I mean the transitive verb in that sentence is "receive" and the direct object is the same for both.
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
9,144
613
113
70
Alabama
If the second is accusative then wouldn't the first have to be also? I mean the transitive verb in that sentence is "receive" and the direct object is the same for both.
I think I will pose this to the guys on Bgreek and get some professional opinions.
 
G

GaryA

Guest
ἐπί
epi
ep-ee'
A primary preposition properly meaning superimposition (of time, place, order, etc.), as a relation of distribution [with the genitive case], that is, over, upon, etc.; of rest (with the dative case) at, on, etc.;


of direction (with the accusative case) towards, upon, etc.: - about (the times), above, after, against, among, as long as (touching), at, beside, X have charge of, (be-, [where-]) fore, in (a place, as much as, the time of, -to), (because) of, (up-) on (behalf of) over, (by, for) the space of, through (-out), (un-) to (-ward), with. In compounds it retains essentially the same import, at, upon, etc. (literally or figuratively).


Forgive my ignorance, but have I separated the above correctly? In other words with the accusative case does epi mean towards, upon, etc.: - about (the times), above, after, against, among, as long as (touching), at, beside, X have charge of, (be-, [where-]) fore, in (a place, as much as, the time of, -to), (because) of, (up-) on (behalf of) over, (by, for) the space of, through (-out), (un-) to (-ward), with. In compounds it retains essentially the same import, at, upon, etc. (literally or figuratively).
ἐπί
epi
ep-ee'

a primary preposition; properly, meaning superimposition (of time, place, order, etc.), as a relation

of distribution (with the genitive case), i.e. over, upon, etc.;

of rest (with the dative case) at, on, etc.;

of direction (with the accusative case) towards, upon, etc.:


--about (the times), above, after, against, among, as long as (touching), at, beside, X have charge of, (be-, (where-))fore, in (a place, as much as, the time of, -to), (because) of, (up-)on (behalf of), over, (by, for) the space of, through(-out), (un-)to(-ward), with. In compounds it retains essentially the same import, at, upon, etc. (literally or figuratively).

:)
 
G

GaryA

Guest
So back to the Strong's definition. Strong says it's a primary preposition properly meaning superimposition.... I understand that. He also mentions that it could also mean before, wherefore and specifically "in". If epi means superimposed then why did he use "in" as one of the possible meanings of epi?

ἐπί
epi
ep-ee'
A primary preposition properly meaning superimposition (of time, place, order, etc.), as a relation of distribution [with the genitive case], that is, over, upon, etc.; of rest (with the dative case) at, on, etc.; of direction (with the accusative case) towards, upon, etc.: - about (the times), above, after, against, among, as long as (touching), at, beside, X have charge of, (be-, [where-]) fore, in (a place, as much as, the time of, -to), (because) of, (up-) on (behalf of) over, (by, for) the space of, through (-out), (un-) to (-ward), with. In compounds it retains essentially the same import, at, upon, etc. (literally or figuratively).
before
wherefore


in a place
in as much as
in the time of
into


:)
 
G

GaryA

Guest
The genitive would be 'upon'; i.e., "on the surface of"...

:)
 
G

GaryA

Guest
"Hmmmmmmmmmm --- interesting..."

:)
 
1

1Mind1Spirit

Guest
Well, I have gotten pretty familar with being wrong, I oughta write a song, and call it the It don't matter if I,m wrong cause the Son is always right....:cool:
Lev 11:6
6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
Then there is Barnabas who was actually there.


Epistle of Barnabas

Chapter 10


11 Moses says again, "Eat of every animal that is cloven hoofed and ruminant." What does he mean? That he who receives food knows him who feeds him, and rests on him and seems to rejoice. Well did he speak with regard to the commandment. What then does he mean? Consort with those who fear the Lord, with those who meditate in their heart on the meaning of the word which they have received, with those who speak of and observe the ordinances of the Lord, with those who know that meditation is a work of gladness, and who ruminate on the word of the Lord. But what does "the cloven hoofed" mean? That the righteous both walks in this world and looks forward to the holy age. See how well Moses legislated.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
Just because Tintin has not pointed out an error in the KJV, does not mean a translation error has not occurred there. The KJV is not infallible, the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts are. God bless. :)
You say the KJV is not infallible, what errors have you found?
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
Try 1 Samuel 13.1 where the true text reads, 'Saul was one year old when he began to reign and he reigned two years over Israel.'

This indicates that he began to reign in the first stage of life (below 20), and reigned on into middle age (the second stage of life).

There were no recorders in Saul's day
I'm not sure what you mean by "Saul was one year old". It says Saul reigned one years.

1Sa 13:1 Saul reigned one year; and when he had reigned two years over Israel,