Why the king james?
- Thread starter Blain
- Start date
-
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.
Luke 22:31-32, you have miss out on the Lord Jesus telling Peter that He will pray for him, and when he, Peter, is converted, to strengthen his brethren.
KJV, "And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren."
NASB, “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat; 32 but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.”
KJV, "And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren."
NASB, “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat; 32 but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.”
SO If I can not change the word Dung to Manure, then how important are these words? Surely then it must be that important that we must have the right spelling as well, which brings me back to the question, Which spelling of the words Colour and Honour etc, is right? Color or Colour? If Spelling variation is allowed, then surely this is dangerous as different words can be subtly spelt differently or punctuated differently, so please tell me, if I produced a King James version, which spelling would be correct and satisfy you?
Sorry but both of those verses say the same thing. Maybe you care to explain why
"I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.”
Is different from
" I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren."
Sorry but both of those verses say the same thing. Maybe you care to explain why
"I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.”
Is different from
" I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren."
Notice at first, Jesus tells Simon that Satan has desired to have them, the disciples, that Satan may sift them, the disciples. Then Jesus tells Simon He will pray for thee Simon, that Simon's faith fail not and when Simon is converted to strengthen his brethren.
Without the thee's and thou's you cannot tell who the Lord is addressing. Without making the distinction, it sounds like is speaking of Simon alone the entire time and He's not.
Without the thee's and thou's you cannot tell who the Lord is addressing. Without making the distinction, it sounds like is speaking of Simon alone the entire time and He's not.
So, your KJV... is it the original 1611 printing, or is it one of the many revised editions which came out in the century which followed, or is it the 1769 revision?
"Remember the KJV translators criticized their own version and corrected it in many places. Then they came out with new editions, in 1613 and 1629. Some people accuse me of blasphemy when I point out errors in the KJV. I am doing the same thing the KJV translators did when they corrected their own version. Also, people condemn the NASB or the NIV for revising and correcting, just like the KJV translators did."
- WHY NEW VERSIONS ARE NEEDED
"For God is not vnrighteous, to forget your worke and labour of loue, which yee haue shewed toward his Name, in that yee haue ministred to the Saints, and doe minister." (Hebrews 6:10, 1611 edition).
That, sir, is an excellent question. Once you ask it of yourself, then you may ask it of others.
"Remember the KJV translators criticized their own version and corrected it in many places. Then they came out with new editions, in 1613 and 1629. Some people accuse me of blasphemy when I point out errors in the KJV. I am doing the same thing the KJV translators did when they corrected their own version. Also, people condemn the NASB or the NIV for revising and correcting, just like the KJV translators did."
- WHY NEW VERSIONS ARE NEEDED
"For God is not vnrighteous, to forget your worke and labour of loue, which yee haue shewed toward his Name, in that yee haue ministred to the Saints, and doe minister." (Hebrews 6:10, 1611 edition).
That, sir, is an excellent question. Once you ask it of yourself, then you may ask it of others.
Show me where the differences between 2016 and 1611 are. Both say exactly the same thing... no language update.
Hebrews 6:10 KJV
For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister. (E-sword 2016)
"For God is not vnrighteous, to forget your worke and labour of loue, which yee haue shewed toward his Name, in that yee haue ministred to the Saints, and doe minister." (Hebrews 6:10, 1611 edition).
Hebrews 6:10 KJV
For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister. (E-sword 2016)
"For God is not vnrighteous, to forget your worke and labour of loue, which yee haue shewed toward his Name, in that yee haue ministred to the Saints, and doe minister." (Hebrews 6:10, 1611 edition).
OBSERVATIONS FOR THOSE SO CALLED BIBLE CORRECTORS
1. They are the ones that try to correct or criticize the KJV and finding “errors” that cannot be proven.
1 Thessalonian 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
2 . They that were programmed clones with an Alexandrian mentality that on the surface, they look logical, they look deeper but were found untrue.
Psalms 62:9 …and men of high degree are a lie:
Acts 6:9 Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.
3. They mostly operate in an emotional level.
Proverbs 14:12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
4. They force the Bible to contradict itself. If one could use Greek to do this with, he would do it.
2 Timothy 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
5. They are bias in their judgment against the KJV. Absence of the Greek word is nothing to Bible Correctors except where it occurs in the KJV. In other words the criteria of criticizing the KJV are not applied the same to other Modern Versions.
The question is WHY?
1. They are the ones that try to correct or criticize the KJV and finding “errors” that cannot be proven.
1 Thessalonian 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
2 . They that were programmed clones with an Alexandrian mentality that on the surface, they look logical, they look deeper but were found untrue.
Psalms 62:9 …and men of high degree are a lie:
Acts 6:9 Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.
3. They mostly operate in an emotional level.
Proverbs 14:12 There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.
4. They force the Bible to contradict itself. If one could use Greek to do this with, he would do it.
2 Timothy 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
5. They are bias in their judgment against the KJV. Absence of the Greek word is nothing to Bible Correctors except where it occurs in the KJV. In other words the criteria of criticizing the KJV are not applied the same to other Modern Versions.
The question is WHY?
No I do not have a problem with newer translations mentioning "son of the gods" in Daniel chapter 3 v25. The King James is in error, the translators have not translated the original Aramaic text correctly which clearly states "son of the gods", the translators of the King James have changed the meaning of the event. This is why it is dangerous to rely on just a single translation.
Lets read shall we. this is the verse in question, this is the so called offending verse which you claim is in error, but we shall see the King James version is in error.
[SUP]24 [/SUP]Then King Nebuchadnezzar leaped to his feet in amazement and asked his advisers, “Weren’t there three men that we tied up and threw into the fire?”
[SUP]25 [/SUP]He said, “Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods.”
What is wrong with this? NOTHING AT ALL. You claim to the fact about perfect words and use of English being perfect, yet you always overlook context and see to fail to understand what Double Quotes mean.
In this passage we see that King Nebuchadnezzar is speaking and the author of this text, writing in Aramaic was quoting him direct, which we get that from the previous verses, you know, the part where it says HE SAID ".....son of the gods", you never like to read things in context it seems.
King Nebuchadnezzar was a pagan, he did not know about Jesus being the Son of God, instead he sees and recognises that the other person in the furnace is a divine being, which makes the text and the account even more amazing, if anything the King James ruins this moment and dilutes the fact that Nebuchadnezzar is suddenly realising that there is only one true God.
Lets read shall we. this is the verse in question, this is the so called offending verse which you claim is in error, but we shall see the King James version is in error.
[SUP]24 [/SUP]Then King Nebuchadnezzar leaped to his feet in amazement and asked his advisers, “Weren’t there three men that we tied up and threw into the fire?”
[SUP]25 [/SUP]He said, “Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods.”
What is wrong with this? NOTHING AT ALL. You claim to the fact about perfect words and use of English being perfect, yet you always overlook context and see to fail to understand what Double Quotes mean.
In this passage we see that King Nebuchadnezzar is speaking and the author of this text, writing in Aramaic was quoting him direct, which we get that from the previous verses, you know, the part where it says HE SAID ".....son of the gods", you never like to read things in context it seems.
King Nebuchadnezzar was a pagan, he did not know about Jesus being the Son of God, instead he sees and recognises that the other person in the furnace is a divine being, which makes the text and the account even more amazing, if anything the King James ruins this moment and dilutes the fact that Nebuchadnezzar is suddenly realising that there is only one true God.
Last edited:
Ronald Reagan was a KJV only guy. He describes it in the following short speech:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08_KByUwH6c
Enjoy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08_KByUwH6c
Enjoy
verse 26, "Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace, and spake, and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, ye servants of the most high God, come forth, and come hither. Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, came forth of the midst of the fire."
The pagan king didn't have to be told who was in the fire with them. He didn't believe it to be some pagan god.
The pagan king didn't have to be told who was in the fire with them. He didn't believe it to be some pagan god.
Stop taking things out of context and trying to rework things to fit your claims and agenda, of Course King Nebuchadnezzar says that at this point, seriously, read the account as it happened, not trying to play lawyer and come up with silly technicalities.
That verse you posted, is 26, which comes after 24 and 25 does it not? Therefore 26 comes AFTER the quote"son off the gods", King Nebuchadnezzar is instantly twigging that these guys have it right, after all they have now come out of furnace unscathed, so of course he says "servants of the most high God", out of respect and the jaw dropping moment and realisation that what they claim is real deal. Seriously some men come out of the fire alive untouched and King is going to say what "its a trick I still think your god is silly?"
NO! after all he has just seen that God comes up with the goods and saves these people he put to death, and not only that he notices that a spiritual being has been sent to save them, so of course after seeing that undeniable proof King Nebuchadnezzar is going to say that "ye servants of the most high God"
Another thing, at that time no one knew really Jesus, it could have also just been an angel in with them. The original text clearly states son of the gods, a direct quote from the king.
That verse you posted, is 26, which comes after 24 and 25 does it not? Therefore 26 comes AFTER the quote"son off the gods", King Nebuchadnezzar is instantly twigging that these guys have it right, after all they have now come out of furnace unscathed, so of course he says "servants of the most high God", out of respect and the jaw dropping moment and realisation that what they claim is real deal. Seriously some men come out of the fire alive untouched and King is going to say what "its a trick I still think your god is silly?"
NO! after all he has just seen that God comes up with the goods and saves these people he put to death, and not only that he notices that a spiritual being has been sent to save them, so of course after seeing that undeniable proof King Nebuchadnezzar is going to say that "ye servants of the most high God"
Another thing, at that time no one knew really Jesus, it could have also just been an angel in with them. The original text clearly states son of the gods, a direct quote from the king.
How is it that you know what Nebuchadnezzar said? All we can say for certainty is that he said:
אֱלָהּʼĕlâhh, el-aw'; (Aramaic) corresponding to H433; God:—God, god
How do you know that God didn't put the words in his mouth like he did when Caiaphas prophesied that Jesus should die for the people. You can't assume you know what Nebuchadnezzar said, at this point only God knows what he said. That's why it's absolutely necessary that God translate the bible and not men.
אֱלָהּʼĕlâhh, el-aw'; (Aramaic) corresponding to H433; God:—God, god
How do you know that God didn't put the words in his mouth like he did when Caiaphas prophesied that Jesus should die for the people. You can't assume you know what Nebuchadnezzar said, at this point only God knows what he said. That's why it's absolutely necessary that God translate the bible and not men.
Seriously? You are certainly having to go around the houses and work hard on this aren't you, just like all the so called things you claim. It is there, its clear, I do not know how more simply I have to put it, but of course you can not accept this, so you now have to start going into all this nonsense, are you seriously asking me "How did I know"? RIDICULOUS!
OF course your reply to you if I ask you the same question will most likely be returned with "because the King James has it right because it is pure word of God", which then brings us back to square one , PROVE IT!
I some how do not think people are going to suffer spiritually if they read Daniel chapter 3 and read son of gods, I can not imagine anyone would think "Yey Jesus was in the furnace" then reads son of gods and go "Ooooo so Jesus really was son of more than one God? " LOL I think not, they will see it is words from Nebuchadnezzar, it is a quote, maybe he was misquoted, maybe not, but so what, its the words from a pagan king, if it had been words quoted from Jesus telling people he was a son of the gods, then Oh boy, that would be a fail, but its not.
Stop making mountains out of Mole Hills and see that King James Onlyism is a flawed cult created by man.
OF course your reply to you if I ask you the same question will most likely be returned with "because the King James has it right because it is pure word of God", which then brings us back to square one , PROVE IT!
I some how do not think people are going to suffer spiritually if they read Daniel chapter 3 and read son of gods, I can not imagine anyone would think "Yey Jesus was in the furnace" then reads son of gods and go "Ooooo so Jesus really was son of more than one God? " LOL I think not, they will see it is words from Nebuchadnezzar, it is a quote, maybe he was misquoted, maybe not, but so what, its the words from a pagan king, if it had been words quoted from Jesus telling people he was a son of the gods, then Oh boy, that would be a fail, but its not.
Stop making mountains out of Mole Hills and see that King James Onlyism is a flawed cult created by man.