Is KJV the only real bible version?

  • 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
Thanks for explaining... well, it sounds like then that the seventh revision in any language would be the pure words of God... also, if a friend and I take, say, the World English Bible, engage in intense debate and scrutiny about it, make revisions to it, on the seventh pass it will be the word of God.
You left out one person... God needs to be in it.
 
May 2, 2014
1,060
12
0
I'm addressing both of your posts in this response.

The writer of Hebrews was quoting Psalm 40:6 and Psalm 139.

Psa 139:13 For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb.
Psa 139:14 I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.
Psa 139:15 My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
Psa 139:16 Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

The body in Psalm 139 is the body of Christ... the church. This is the body the writer of Hebrews was talking about.

The Septuagint disagrees with KJV in several places, But you can't say the writer of Hebrews was quoting Deuteronomy just because it's in the Septuagint. I don't know what he was quoting, but I guarantee you it's hidden some where in the bible just like the body prepared for him is hidden.
What you said about Psalm 139 doesn't address the problem that the KJV doesn't match what Paul quoted. A study of church history will show that Jesus and the Apostles used the Septuagint as their OT, not the Masoretic text. The text the KJV is translated from is from around the 700's AD. There are quite a few places that the KJV OT differs from the NT. If it was the pure word of God it wouldn't wrongly quote the OT. The argument that the KJV is the pure word of God doesn't hold water when it's got errors.


New Testament
1 Peter 4:18 ( KJV ) [SUP]18[/SUP]And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?
Peter quotes Proverbs 11:31

Masoretic text
Proverbs 11:31 ( KJV ) [SUP]31[/SUP]Behold, the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth: much more the wicked and the sinner.

Septuagint
Proverbs 11:31 If the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?


New Testament
Matthew 15:7-9 ( KJV ) [SUP]7[/SUP]Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, [SUP]8[/SUP]This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. [SUP]9[/SUP]But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Here Jesus quotes from Isaiah 29:13

Masoretic text
Isaiah 29:13 ( KJV ) [SUP]13[/SUP]Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Septuagint,
Isaiah 29:13 And the Lord has said, This people draw nigh to me with their mouth, and they honour me with their lips, but their heart is far from me: but in vain do they worship me, teaching the commandments and doctrines of men.

New Testament
Matthew 21:16 ( KJV ) [SUP]16[/SUP]And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?
Masoretic text
Psalms 8:2 ( KJV ) [SUP]2 [/SUP]Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger.
Septuagint,
Psalms 8:2 Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou perfected praise, because of thine enemies; that thou mightest put down the enemy and avenger.

There are more.
 
May 2, 2014
1,060
12
0
Deu 32:30 How should one chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight, except their Rock had sold them, and the LORD had shut them up?
Deu 32:31 For their rock is not as our Rock, even our enemies themselves being judges.
Deu 32:32 For their vine is of the vine of Sodom, and of the fields of Gomorrah: their grapes are grapes of gall, their clusters are bitter:
Deu 32:33 Their wine is the poison of dragons, and the cruel venom of asps.

How exactly does this pertain to translations of the Bible?
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
What you said about Psalm 139 doesn't address the problem that the KJV doesn't match what Paul quoted. A study of church history will show that Jesus and the Apostles used the Septuagint as their OT, not the Masoretic text. The text the KJV is translated from is from around the 700's AD. There are quite a few places that the KJV OT differs from the NT. If it was the pure word of God it wouldn't wrongly quote the OT. The argument that the KJV is the pure word of God doesn't hold water when it's got errors.


New Testament
1 Peter 4:18 ( KJV ) [SUP]18[/SUP]And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?
Peter quotes Proverbs 11:31

Masoretic text
Proverbs 11:31 ( KJV ) [SUP]31[/SUP]Behold, the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth: much more the wicked and the sinner.

Septuagint
Proverbs 11:31 If the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?


New Testament
Matthew 15:7-9 ( KJV ) [SUP]7[/SUP]Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, [SUP]8[/SUP]This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. [SUP]9[/SUP]But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Here Jesus quotes from Isaiah 29:13

Masoretic text
Isaiah 29:13 ( KJV ) [SUP]13[/SUP]Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Septuagint,
Isaiah 29:13 And the Lord has said, This people draw nigh to me with their mouth, and they honour me with their lips, but their heart is far from me: but in vain do they worship me, teaching the commandments and doctrines of men.

New Testament
Matthew 21:16 ( KJV ) [SUP]16[/SUP]And said unto him, Hearest thou what these say? And Jesus saith unto them, Yea; have ye never read, Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected praise?
Masoretic text
Psalms 8:2 ( KJV ) [SUP]2 [/SUP]Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou ordained strength because of thine enemies, that thou mightest still the enemy and the avenger.
Septuagint,
Psalms 8:2 Out of the mouth of babes and sucklings hast thou perfected praise, because of thine enemies; that thou mightest put down the enemy and avenger.

There are more.
I see what you're saying Butch and I agree the New Testament writers quoted the Septuagint but that doesn't mean everything in the Septuagint was right. My opinion is that the New Testament writers quoted it because that's what most of the people knew as scripture, but I don't know that for a fact either.

I know you see that as an error, and I can respect that view. You believe that in order to be inerrant, it must match the original. When I say the KJV has no errors that's not what I mean. I mean that every word in the bible is put there to help us understand God's word, not one verse will contradict another. Are the righteous scarcely saved yes they are. No matter where Peter quoted it from, it is true. I have to go to work now, but I want to come back and finish later.
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
I agree, only God can translate His word, and He did.
So you already said your worship this translation of men...and now you make them equal with God? Your an idol worshipper!
 
May 2, 2014
1,060
12
0
I see what you're saying Butch and I agree the New Testament writers quoted the Septuagint but that doesn't mean everything in the Septuagint was right. My opinion is that the New Testament writers quoted it because that's what most of the people knew as scripture, but I don't know that for a fact either.

I know you see that as an error, and I can respect that view. You believe that in order to be inerrant, it must match the original. When I say the KJV has no errors that's not what I mean. I mean that every word in the bible is put there to help us understand God's word, not one verse will contradict another. Are the righteous scarcely saved yes they are. No matter where Peter quoted it from, it is true. I have to go to work now, but I want to come back and finish later.
Ok, but my point is, when the apostles quote the OT and we go to the OT and it doesn't say what they quoted, there are times when we cannot know what they are talking about. When Paul quotes the OT and says 'a body thou hast prepared for me' and we go to the OT to look at the context that Paul is trying to import into his letter and don't find it it we don't know what he is trying to point out. He uses that phrase to make his point, yet, that phrase isn't in the KJV. Unless one knows to go to the Septuagint they could easily come away with a wrong understanding of what Paul is saying.

In addition to that, there times when the writers say, 'it is written.' That seems odd if we go to there and it's not written.

If there was an argument to be made for an inspired translation, I think the evidence for the Septuagint is much stronger than that of the KJV.
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
9,054
1,051
113
Really, I'm surprised you don't think the same way, after all the bible says we are to magnify the Word above his name. At least that's what it say's in the KJV, maybe the other translations don't.

Psa_138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

When Jesus said he would be with us always even till the end of the word, he meant it. Every time I open up my KJV, there He is, without fail every time. He shows me Him on almost every page, he reveals the deep and secret truths through the pages of the bible. You see when the bible says that Jesus is the Word, I believe it... I know Jesus is the Inerrant Word of God.

Mat_28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
in that passage, I think it says the God (not us) has magnified his word above his name... no question that God's word is important... the thing that people dispute is that the kjv is that word.

I think the parts about Jesus being with us refers to the spirit, that's my interpretation.
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
9,054
1,051
113
By New Testament writers I assume you mean translators and not Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Paul.
well, actually I did mean Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul or whoever else wrote books in the nt.
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
9,054
1,051
113
I see what you're saying Butch and I agree the New Testament writers quoted the Septuagint but that doesn't mean everything in the Septuagint was right. My opinion is that the New Testament writers quoted it because that's what most of the people knew as scripture, but I don't know that for a fact either.

I know you see that as an error, and I can respect that view. You believe that in order to be inerrant, it must match the original. When I say the KJV has no errors that's not what I mean. I mean that every word in the bible is put there to help us understand God's word, not one verse will contradict another. Are the righteous scarcely saved yes they are. No matter where Peter quoted it from, it is true. I have to go to work now, but I want to come back and finish later.
Very true! Now, as Butch has pointed out with several excellent examples, the lxx (Septuagint) translators weren't careful about translating the hebrew*... yet, the nt writers quote it a lot... this situation says to me that God doesn't care a lot about exact wording... that the idea of the 'word of God' must be something other than printed words on a page...


* or, they were working from a different text than the masoretic, a very real possibility... and who can say which is more accurate?
 
U

Ukorin

Guest
Very true! Now, as Butch has pointed out with several excellent examples, the lxx (Septuagint) translators weren't careful about translating the hebrew*... yet, the nt writers quote it a lot... this situation says to me that God doesn't care a lot about exact wording... that the idea of the 'word of God' must be something other than printed words on a page...


* or, they were working from a different text than the masoretic, a very real possibility... and who can say which is more accurate?
On a scholastic level, the Dead Sea Scrolls support the Septuagint.

On a spiritual level, the Word of God is not letters on a page,
but is the Spirit of Christ that moved the Prophets to write,
and the Spirit of Christ within believers that helps them understand the Prophets.

Jesus is the Word raised up above all else, not a translation of letters.
We follow the Spirit, not the Letter.

God has not bound Himself to obey the words of translators,
but He is who the Spirit says He is, and who Christ said He is,
and the three agree in One.
God does not change Himself just because people have changed the the wording of the Bible,
because the Word made flesh is unchanging.

The original manuscripts were inerrant, and the Word within us is inerrant.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
U

Ukorin

Guest
As He promised, it is written upon the hearts of His People.
 
U

Ukorin

Guest
We don't need confidence in the work of human hands, but need confidence in Christ.
We do not need to trust translators and translations, but need to trust the Author.

If the world tried to burn every copy of Scripture they could find, they would not succeed,
because the Author is still alive and active in the world,
and His Word is written inerrently on the hearts of His People
 
Jun 5, 2014
1,750
6
0
On a scholastic level, the Dead Sea Scrolls support the Septuagint.
As opposed to the Hebrew?

I don't think so.

83% of the Dead Sea Scroll documents are Hebrew. 3% are Greek.
 

CS1

Well-known member
May 23, 2012
12,508
4,121
113
We don't need confidence in the work of human hands, but need confidence in Christ.
We do not need to trust translators and translations, but need to trust the Author.

If the world tried to burn every copy of Scripture they could find, they would not succeed,
because the Author is still alive and active in the world,
and His Word is written inerrently on the hearts of His People
I have to say.......... Amen
 
U

Ukorin

Guest
As opposed to the Hebrew?

I don't think so.

83% of the Dead Sea Scroll documents are Hebrew. 3% are Greek.
And they do not agree with the Masoretic text, but with the Septuagint.
This leaves us confident that the early Greek translation of the OT is more faithful to the original than the later transcription of the Hebrew.

Translation between Greek and Hebrew isn't the issue. Distortions over time due to scribal error and editing are the issue. The Masoretic text does not match the Dead Sea scrolls as accurately as the LXX.

Being written in Hebrew doesn't make it line up with an earlier Hebrew rendering. They have to say the same thing.
Being written in Greek doesn't make it not line up with an earlier Hebrew rendering, if they are saying the same thing.

Good translation and preservation > (greater than) scribal editing and errors.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
May 2, 2014
1,060
12
0
Very true! Now, as Butch has pointed out with several excellent examples, the lxx (Septuagint) translators weren't careful about translating the hebrew*... yet, the nt writers quote it a lot... this situation says to me that God doesn't care a lot about exact wording... that the idea of the 'word of God' must be something other than printed words on a page...

* or, they were working from a different text than the masoretic, a very real possibility... and who can say which is more accurate?
Hi Dan,

That is likely the case. There apparently is what is called a proto Maseretic text that was used when translating the Septuagint. The Septuagint was the Bible for Greek speaking Israelites. However, the Christians began using it so effectively to prove that Jesus was the Christ that the leadership finally rejected it and called it a flawed version. Somewhere along the line the Hebrew texts were changed, whether intentional of accidental I don't know.
 
U

Ukorin

Guest
Hi Dan,

That is likely the case. There apparently is what is called a proto Maseretic text that was used when translating the Septuagint. The Septuagint was the Bible for Greek speaking Israelites. However, the Christians began using it so effectively to prove that Jesus was the Christ that the leadership finally rejected it and called it a flawed version. Somewhere along the line the Hebrew texts were changed, whether intentional of accidental I don't know.
That would make sense. I hadn't heard that before.
Is there any record to back up a rejection of the LXX by Jewish leaders? That would be some very solid evidence in favor of LXX, imo.
 

Dan_473

Senior Member
Mar 11, 2014
9,054
1,051
113
Ok, but my point is, when the apostles quote the OT and we go to the OT and it doesn't say what they quoted, there are times when we cannot know what they are talking about. When Paul quotes the OT and says 'a body thou hast prepared for me' and we go to the OT to look at the context that Paul is trying to import into his letter and don't find it it we don't know what he is trying to point out. He uses that phrase to make his point, yet, that phrase isn't in the KJV. Unless one knows to go to the Septuagint they could easily come away with a wrong understanding of what Paul is saying.

In addition to that, there times when the writers say, 'it is written.' That seems odd if we go to there and it's not written.

If there was an argument to be made for an inspired translation, I think the evidence for the Septuagint is much stronger than that of the KJV.
If I remember right, the lxx was held to be inspired by the 'greek' side of the church... probably still is by some in those areas.