The King James Bible

[John146]

Read the footnote. A footnote is far more accessible than the convolutions you offer in support of the KJV's "lies" (again, your word).

You still don't grasp the meaning of "lying".

You still don't see that the KJV "lies" just as blatantly.

You are using a double standard in assessment of the text.

You are using a double standard of reliability.

You are using a double standard of behaviour as you accuse me of not reading what you post, and you patently ignore what I have posted.

You are welcome to continue your bleating about other translations, but be aware that your intellectual dishonesty is plainly evident.

You do not like how Scripture has the answer to your so called contradiction in the KJV. I can't make you see it. You have to seek for yourself.

Are footnotes now part of Scripture? When reading the NASB, do I believe what's written or the words added by man in the footnotes?

As you can see, the NASB cannot be trusted. A true witness will not lie.

 

[John146]

Ti's wordy but worthy. This call for the attention of illumination. This refers to the way in which God enables us to understand the divine revelation or revealed truth. Thus we enjoy studying God's Holy word.

To those who are seeking truth. To the skeptic, God would have them believe a lie.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

In other words, keep updating God's word to fit our ever changing language. If we don't understand certain words or phrases, don't study to shew thyself approved unto God, change it to fit our needs.

What "case" needed to be put to rest?

That is NOT what "study to shew thyself approved" means. To learn an archaic language. If that was the case we should learn ancient Hebrew. Moses, David, Isaiah, Jesus, John and Paul did not speak King James English. It is not necessary.

 

[John146]

That is NOT what "study to shew thyself approved" means. To learn an archaic language. If that was the case we should learn ancient Hebrew. Moses, David, Isaiah, Jesus, John and Paul did not speak King James English. It is not necessary.

Study the word of God with a workman like attitude. Don't look for the easy way out. To the seeker of truth, it may not always come easy or right away. Be patient, keep working and allow the Holy Spirit to lead. In the end, you will not be ashamed.

Rightly dividing the word of truth is a whole other topic.

 

[stand2]

This verse, that verse. This translation, that translation Eventually we must attempt the "peace that passeth all understanding". I will say this much; Learning and understanding other languages strengthens a person's wisdom and insight. As far as the KJV, it was the Bible of my Father and Mother ; the Bible they taught me from ; the Bible that saved me by His grace. For me...it;ll do just fine. Others are free to choose, without any complaint from me. Hey...........it's God's word.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Study the word of God with a workman like attitude. Don't look for the easy way out. To the seeker of truth, it may not always come easy or right away. Be patient, keep working and allow the Holy Spirit to lead. In the end, you will not be ashamed.

Rightly dividing the word of truth is a whole other topic.

An NIV, OJB, Amplified, KJV, Greek & Hebrew interlinear. Plus a set of bible dictionaries, a Strong's Concordance,
Luther Bible in German, Brit Chadashah (Jewish New testament) & a Hebrew and Aramaic lexicon not enough eh?

I've been studying The Word of God for 30 years. (though not continuously) The KJV is a reference text to me. Nothing more.

God is the master of language. He gets his message across.

 

[Dino246]

You do not like how Scripture has the answer to your so called contradiction in the KJV. I can't make you see it. You have to seek for yourself.

You are so far off base that you're playing in the next county. This has absolutely nothing to do with whether I like or don't like the so-called answer to the contradiction. It has everything to do with you having one standard for the KJV and a different standard for other translations.

Are footnotes now part of Scripture? When reading the NASB, do I believe what's written or the words added by man in the footnotes?

Clearly you are unfamiliar with the 1611 KJV; it had footnotes.

As you can see, the NASB cannot be trusted. A true witness will not lie.

"As you can see"... hogwash and codswollop. You think that; I don't. I am very confident that if you found a contradiction in another translation as there is in the KJV, you would use that as evidence that the translation "lies".

You still have not owned up to your double standards. You are willing to dig in the KJV to find an answer to a confusing issue, but with a comparable issue in another translation, you write it off with harsh condemnation and refuse to consider the parallels. That is not integrity. Until you can see your inconsistency, there is no point in continuing to discuss this matter with you.

Sadly, the behaviour you demonstrate here is common among KJV-only proponents... and cultists.

 

[SovereignGrace]

You are so far off base that you're playing in the next county. This has absolutely nothing to do with whether I like or don't like the so-called answer to the contradiction. It has everything to do with you having one standard for the KJV and a different standard for other translations.



Clearly you are unfamiliar with the 1611 KJV; it had footnotes.



"As you can see"... hogwash and codswollop. You think that; I don't. I am very confident that if you found a contradiction in another translation as there is in the KJV, you would use that as evidence that the translation "lies".

You still have not owned up to your double standards. You are willing to dig in the KJV to find an answer to a confusing issue, but with a comparable issue in another translation, you write it off with harsh condemnation and refuse to consider the parallels. That is not integrity. Until you can see your inconsistency, there is no point in continuing to discuss this matter with you.

Sadly, the behaviour you demonstrate here is common among KJV-only proponents... and cultists.

I just heard from Dr. James White that Erasmus had to use the Latin Vulgate to finish the book of Revelation. Then those who used it, revolted against his Greek New Testament, in much the manner the KJVO’s rail against the modern versions.

7 manuscripts versus 5,000+? Oh which to use in translating?

 

[SovereignGrace]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh3k_A9ugOo

 

[John146]

You still have not owned up to your double standards. You are willing to dig in the KJV to find an answer to a confusing issue, but with a comparable issue in another translation, you write it off with harsh condemnation and refuse to consider the parallels. That is not integrity. Until you can see your inconsistency, there is no point in continuing to discuss this matter with you.
Sadly, the behaviour you demonstrate here is common among KJV-only proponents... and cultists.

Can you provide an biblically sound answer for the reason the NASB contradicts itself in 2 Samuel 21:19 and 1 Chronicles 20:5?

NASB 2 Samuel 21:19 There was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.

NASB 1 Chronicles 20:5 And there was war with the Philistines again, and Elhanan the son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.

 

[Dino246]

Can you provide an biblically sound answer for the reason the NASB contradicts itself in 2 Samuel 21:19 and 1 Chronicles 20:5?

NASB 2 Samuel 21:19 There was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.

NASB 1 Chronicles 20:5 And there was war with the Philistines again, and Elhanan the son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.

Own your double standards... then we'll discuss these verses.

 

[MarcR]

There is no similar issue in the NASB with Elhanan killing Goliath. It's a flat out lie. The NASB cannot be trusted.

It is NOT a lie! it is a type setting error. It got past the editors and it was too expensive to cancel a whole press run.

 

[John146]

Own your double standards... then we'll discuss these verses.

In other words, you don't have an answer. I'm ok with that. There is no answer. The NASB cannot be trusted. A faithful witness will not lie.

 

[John146]

It is NOT a lie! it is a type setting error. It got past the editors and it was too expensive to cancel a whole press run.

A type setting error? Really? Too expensive to cancel? Really? We're talking about God's truth.

If what you say is true, then the NASB committee was not interested in truth but $$$$. Oooops!

 

[hornetguy]

"As you can see"... hogwash and codswollop.

Just to clarify..... you left out "claptrap"....

other than that? SPOT ON.

 

[Dino246]

In other words, you don't have an answer. I'm ok with that. There is no answer. The NASB cannot be trusted. A faithful witness will not lie.

The only comments that come to mind aren't worth putting in print. Again, you're way off base.

 

[John146]

NASB Psalm 78:36 But they deceived Him with their mouth And lied to Him with their tongue.

The NASB states God was deceived?

 

[Dino246]

NASB Psalm 78:36 But they deceived Him with their mouth And lied to Him with their tongue.

The NASB states God was deceived?

You have a double standard. That's dishonesty on your part.

 

[John146]

You have a double standard. That's dishonesty on your part.

Please explain it to me then...Was God deceived a the NASB states?

 

[Sagart]

It is NOT a lie! it is a type setting error. It got past the editors and it was too expensive to cancel a whole press run.

No, it is not a type-setting error! It is an accurate translation of the Hebrew text!

ותהי־עוד המלחמה בגוב עם־פלשׁתים ויך אלחנן בן־יערי ארגים בית הלחמי את גלית הגתי ועץ חניתו כמנור ארגים׃​

The King James translation incorrectly in inserts, using italic type, the words, “the brother of”. This is an error because the KJV uses italic type for words that are not in the original text, but are implied. In this verse, the words “the brother of” are NOT implied. We simply have an error in the Hebrew Text, and the NASB correctly translates the Hebrew text as it is. Compare:

1 Chron. 20:5 reads, And there was war with the Philistines again, and Elhanan the son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam. (NASB, 1995)

The Targum reads, “David, the son of Jesse, a pious man, who rose at midnight to sing praises to God, slew Lachmi, the brother of Goliath, the same day on which he slew Goliath the Gittite, whose spear-staff was like a weaver’s beam.”