The King James Bible

  • 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.

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,776
113
Sixth, the sources they translated from were not perfect - medieval masoretic text of Jews for the OT and Erasmus' critical text for the NT
Making Erasmus a whipping boy is a tactic with little or no merit. There were many more printed texts of the New Testament after Erasmus, and in fact those who were experts in this field have told us that it was the 1550 edition of the Greek Text of Stephanus (Robert Estienne or Stephens) which was the primary source for the KJB. This -- in fact -- became the Received Text, and the variations among the various editions and editors are in fact minimal for the Received Text.

We all know how everyone opposed to the King James Bible mocks Erasmus and his first edition. But that is not where the story ends, and it is time for you to get yourself the real story -- "the rest of the story". What people are never told is that Erasmus was one of the leading scholars of his time and well respected among many Protestant scholars. Both Luther and Tyndale used his Greek text in their translational work, as did the translators of the Geneva Bible. And there were actually five editions of this text. He was introduced to Codex Vaticanus by Sepulveda, but was not impressed, and regarded it as inferior to the TR.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
Making Erasmus a whipping boy is a tactic with little or no merit. There were many more printed texts of the New Testament after Erasmus, ... that is not where the story ends, and it is time for you to get yourself the real story -- "the rest of the story".
Great. So you should also know that Stephanus was not the last printer of Greek New Testament and that much more manuscripts were discovered and examined after him.

While Erasmus had a dozen, Stephanus maybe several dozens, we have 6000 today.

Netslé Aland 28 is an example of it. Get the rest of the story.
 
Last edited:

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,487
13,793
113
Making Erasmus a whipping boy is a tactic with little or no merit. ...

We all know how everyone opposed to the King James Bible mocks Erasmus and his first edition. ...
Mischaracterization from a KJV-only proponent; what a surprise.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,776
113
...Netslé Aland 28 is an example of it. Get the rest of the story.
How many times does it have to be said? So here is the real rest of the story.

NESTLE-ALAND = UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES = NESTLE = WESTCOTT & HORT = THE TWO MOST CORRUPT GREEK MANUSCRIPTS IN EXISTENCE.

Those 6,000 manuscripts are still waiting to be collated while Kurt Aland continues to promote the lie that the most corrupt and the most pure, and the most pure are the most corrupt. Erasmus had the wisdom to reject Vaticanus, but Aland and other textual scholars continue to idolize it as "the best"!
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
7,115
1,745
113
I would be interested to see the horror that is certain to be in those "corruptions"

Or, at least a list of the "corruptions" so that I could decide for myself whether they matter, or not.

Do any of these "corruptions" change the message in the word of God? I mean, something substantial, such as "Jesus really wasn't God" or "Jesus really wasn't without sin"... something of that nature.

Spelling/punctuation differences mean nothing to me. And that silly thing about some Persian king saying a "son of the gods" versus a "son of God" is just ludicrous. That changes NOTHING about what God's word is saying.

Or, heaven and earth, versus heavens and earth..... good grief, how silly.

If those types of things are all you have to hang your faith on..... your faith is placed in the wrong place.
 
Last edited:

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
I would be interested to see the horror that is certain to be in those "corruptions"

Or, at least a list of the "corruptions" so that I could decide for myself whether they matter, or not.

Do any of these "corruptions" change the message in the word of God? I mean, something substantial, such as "Jesus really wasn't God" or "Jesus really wasn't without sin"... something of that nature.

Spelling/punctuation differences mean nothing to me. And that silly thing about some Persian king saying a "son of the gods" versus a "son of God" is just ludicrous. That changes NOTHING about what God's word is saying.

Or, heaven and earth, versus heavens and earth..... good grief, how silly.

If those types of things are all you have to hang your faith on..... your faith is placed in the wrong place.
Any untruth, false word or contradiction would corrupt that particular version from being worthy to be called the word of God. It would not be worthy for us to read and study. God's word is truth. All of it.

We are never commanded to doubt or find errors in the word of God, but rather believe every word.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,487
13,793
113
Any untruth, false word or contradiction would corrupt that particular version from being worthy to be called the word of God. It would not be worthy for us to read and study. God's word is truth. All of it.

We are never commanded to doubt or find errors in the word of God, but rather believe every word.
You are becoming quite adept at circular reasoning.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
You are becoming quite adept at circular reasoning.
Well, since God's word says it is perfect, holy and pure without mixture, one could conclude that if the bible you are reading contains errors, contradictions or untruths, then it is not the word of God.
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
7,115
1,745
113
Any untruth, false word or contradiction would corrupt that particular version from being worthy to be called the word of God. It would not be worthy for us to read and study. God's word is truth. All of it.

We are never commanded to doubt or find errors in the word of God, but rather believe every word.
Only if you are blindly anal-retentive, obsessive-compulsive about YOUR preferred translation.
 

Musicus

Senior Member
Oct 26, 2017
314
39
28
Well, since God's word says it is perfect, holy and pure without mixture, one could conclude that if the bible you are reading contains errors, contradictions or untruths, then it is not the word of God.
If that includes grammar and spelling, then I'm reasonably sure the KJV was not grammatically perfect even back in 1611, let alone now.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,786
2,957
113
How many times does it have to be said? So here is the real rest of the story.

NESTLE-ALAND = UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES = NESTLE = WESTCOTT & HORT = THE TWO MOST CORRUPT GREEK MANUSCRIPTS IN EXISTENCE.

Those 6,000 manuscripts are still waiting to be collated while Kurt Aland continues to promote the lie that the most corrupt and the most pure, and the most pure are the most corrupt. Erasmus had the wisdom to reject Vaticanus, but Aland and other textual scholars continue to idolize it as "the best"!

This is utter nonsense! Nestle Aland have a Greek text which differs from Westcott and Hort, because in the last 100 years or so, many, many new and earlier manuscripts have been found.

The Textus Receptus is truly the corrupt version. It uses the Byzantine only, which is rife with scribal errors and additions, with succeeding editions incorporated and passed down to succeeding generations. The only reason there are so many (hence the so-called “Majority Text”) is because the Byzantine Empire kept their Greek, and monasteries kept copying down the GNT. Now, that is not a bad thing, if it means having many copies. But the problem is that the generations of manuscripts became more and more corrupt, until you enter the early 1600’s and Erasumus and hence the KJV are using very corrupted manscripts, as compared to the original autographs, (which yes, we do not have!). But even he protested having to add certain things, because they appeared in NO manuscripts. But, the imprimatur of the RCC said, keep those errors, and he did, or his GNT would not have been published first. Yes, the publishing industry, in its fledgling state was already competitive!

We won’t even get into the fact that Erasmus, who was a good Greek scholar, was forced to kept things like the Johannian Comma in 1 John 5, because the Catholic Church demanded it. And that was found in the Vulgate, a Latin, text, which Jerome, who was NOT a good scholar, translated.

Anyway, I would be more worried about obsolete grammar and arachiac words, instead of wondering whether the lies of Riplinger and Ruckman are truth, and if you are that obsessed with the “pure” text, learn Greek and Hebrew as some of us have, and then you can understand that there are so many options for words, and that differences in the modern text arise simply and often because no language directely translates to another.

Anyone who speaks a foreign language knows that! For me, I far prefer a modern Bible, in a language I understand. Further, it is reprehensible to preach the gospel to someone in 16th century English, who wants to hear the gospel. Because what they will hear is a language that is not their own.

Finally, just for anyone reading this thread, I do NOT read long passages from the KJV, much too hard to plough through. I seriously just skip what those people have written. So, please use any other modern text, as well as your preferred version.

I really cannot believe people are really not just defending, but calling every other translation but the KJV as ”impure” or other nonsense. This doesn’t happen in other languages. I just finally found my German Bible, which is an update of Martin Luther’s translation. It is very readable, and much closer to the Greek than any English translation. That is because German uses noun cases and a complicated adjectival system. So, it can throw the nominative to the end, just like the Greek, which makes no sense in English. In fact, it is a pleasure to read and compare to the Greek. Not perfect, but one of the better translations I have read.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
How many times does it have to be said? So here is the real rest of the story.

NESTLE-ALAND = UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES = NESTLE = WESTCOTT & HORT = THE TWO MOST CORRUPT GREEK MANUSCRIPTS IN EXISTENCE.
STEPHANUS = ERASMUS

The same logic.

Those 6,000 manuscripts are still waiting to be collated while Kurt Aland continues to promote the lie that the most corrupt and the most pure, and the most pure are the most corrupt. Erasmus had the wisdom to reject Vaticanus, but Aland and other textual scholars continue to idolize it as "the best"!
1. Have you ever seen Nestlé Aland manuscript readings?

2. Erasmus did not reject Vaticanus, he wanted to have it, but could not. So he at least wrote letters to his friend in Vatican to tell him what is written there.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
You are becoming quite adept at circular reasoning.
When I watched discusison between James White and Steven Anderson, Steven admitted that he is using circular reasoning but said that there is nothing wrong about such reasoning :)
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,487
13,793
113
When I watched discusison between James White and Steven Anderson, Steven admitted that he is using circular reasoning but said that there is nothing wrong about such reasoning :)
Perhaps the Lord is using Anderson to demonstrate how ridiculous a belief system can get. His KJV worship is bad, but IMHO his denial of the Holocaust is much worse.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,110
960
113
First, please, be consistent and when internal or external evidence is AGAINST KJV, accept it, too.

Second, the Hebrew word does not mean "pillow" in ancient Hebrew, but "band, amulet, fillet". It means "pillow" in later Hebrew, thats why the KJV translators in 17th century were confused. Their knowledge was not as good as is today. They also did not understand that souls do not fly, but that it means "as birds".

Third, there are so many antiquated words in the KJV that it is impossible to deny it.

Fourth, there are also wrong ideas of KJV translators, because of the lack of historical and scientific info, for example using words like "candle", unicorn etc.

Fifth, there are even wrong translations, simply because they were not perfect.

Sixth, the sources they translated from were not perfect - medieval masoretic text of Jews for the OT and Erasmus' critical text for the NT
First, I don’t buy any arrogant claim. It’s all for us to prove.

1 Thes 5:21 Prove all things; all fast that which is good.

Second, you deflect to counterpoint my main point that is antiquity has no bearing against the KJV. The demonstration I made on your default English Bible Version, the NIV is not anything new.

Oftentimes what’s “new” is not true, what is said to be “old” is true.

Third, you entirely reject studying before posting. Your post is a purely of merely a human reasoning and sometimes a gnat straining. The Bible has this to say of the like manner one may have.

Titus 3:10 A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject.

However, this is a forum and this is not church, all has its rights to give his/her own opinion but somehow it needs only to reject such bogus argument. Not YOU of course.
.
2 Thes.3:15 Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,110
960
113
. Their knowledge was not as good as is today. They also did not understand that souls do not fly, but that it means "as birds".
I really don’t know what’s your point in here that souls do not fly? And that this means “as birds”. To assume the proposition “as birds” that can only fly is further from the truth…hoho, a kite can fly, a balloon may fly, a butterfly can fly, emotions fly high and minds can fly, Enoch flied, Elisha flied, Jesus flied so what else do not souls fly? My…somehow when I don’t understand some English word because I am a Filipino then, I have to go some reliable Dictionary.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
Finally, just for anyone reading this thread, I do NOT read long passages from the KJV, much too hard to plough through. I seriously just skip what those people have written. So, please use any other modern text, as well as your preferred version.
Wow! A Greek scholar has trouble reading English? You should master the English language before moving to Greek.

Here's the gospel in the KJV: 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

Real tough to understand...
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,110
960
113
Wow! A Greek scholar has trouble reading English? You should master the English language before moving to Greek.

Here's the gospel in the KJV: 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

Real tough to understand...
Hey John, a native English speaker in troubled with her own language. That may be categorized as "vexation" of the spirit.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,110
960
113
This is utter nonsense! Nestle Aland have a Greek text which differs from Westcott and Hort, because in the last 100 years or so, many, many new and earlier manuscripts have been found.

.
Yet this is another fake news, the 28th USB is nothing new! WH and the "new" discovery are mostly Alexandrian Text type. Same family with corrupt nature.
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
7,115
1,745
113
Wow! A Greek scholar has trouble reading English? You should master the English language before moving to Greek.

Here's the gospel in the KJV: 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

Real tough to understand...
What an absolutely childish reply.... you know exactly what she means.