Does the Bible claim to be inerrant?

[trofimus]

And your point is?

You’re making up a lie and adding it to the word of God?

Only to do what you authorize?

You’re just playing around pretending you can escape the authority of God’s Holy Bible. You can’t.
What’s more obvious though, is that you have nothing backing up any of your unbelief in the Authorized Version.


Jesus Christ is head of the church.

Whereas, King James the first, published the Holy Bible by the authority given him by God.

Why should I pretend something to "escape the authority" of king James?

I am from the central Europe. English monarchs have nothing to do with me. So I do not need to escape anything.

I am just correcting your ideas by what the Bible itself says.

 

[Dino246]

The scripture teaches that God ordained the king.

All other bibles present no evidence of being authorized by God.

A no brainer seems to me.

You apparently don't understand the fallacy of equivocation, in which you are engaging.

The "authorization" that you harp on is valid for the office and person of king. It is not valid for the translation and publication of a version of Scripture.

The only "authorization" to the KJV is that it was "authorized to be read in churches"... the churches of the Anglican communion in England, of which James was the titular head. That's it, that's all. Limited authorization, non-binding on anyone outside the clergy of the Anglican church in 1611.

Using one term (rightly) in one case and trying to apply that sense in the other case is equivocation, and it is not sound reasoning.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

The scripture teaches that God ordained the king.

All other bibles present no evidence of being authorized by God.

A no brainer seems to me.

and the scriptures also tell us that He tears them down too

raises up one nation and another He takes down

if every Bible indicates it is the word of God, and they do (even bad translations) then who are YOU to say otherwise?

the KJ has a good number of errors in it, so either God was not in control there, or human beings are imperfect

 

[Nehemiah6]

How can you be sure that God chose King James to authorize a written copy of his word? For the record, I prefer the KJV and the NKJV. Also, I'm sure that God has indeed authorize the versions of His written word though each generation in a language and format that the average person can relate to and understand. I just don't see how anyone con conclusively say that a person, church, or entity was placed in such a position to make a claim of authority over the translation, revision or compilation of God's written word.

This thread has already gone off the rails. The focus should be on the inerrancy of Scripture, not on King James. However, since the matter has come up, we need to understand a few things as to why the King James Bible was (and is) called "The Authorized Version".

1. King James I was a Protestant, and the Church of England was already under the authority of the King or Queen since the time of Henry VIII. It was the king or queen of England who had the authority to appoint which Bible should be read in the churches of the Church of England. That is what made the KJB "The Authorized Version" (appointed to be read in churches).

2. Before the new translation -- which is called the King James Bible -- the Bishops' Bible was in use in the churches of England since 1568 (revised in 1572).

3. The Calvinistic Geneva Bible (1557-1560) was unacceptable to the bishops of the Church of England, while the Bishops' Bible was not satisfactory to the Calvinistic Puritans within the Church of England.

4. As a result King James was petitioned by the Puritans for a new translation in English (which would be acceptable to both the bishops and the Puritans). This was done at the Hampton Court Conference of 1604.

5. King James authorized the new translation and was personally involved in various details concerning the translation. The Bishops' Bible would be the primary guide for the KJB, but all the previous English translations were consulted. The aim of the translators was to make "out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavour, that our mark."

6. From a Christian perspective, God's hand was in all of these developments, since the Authorized Version became the primary Bible for all English speakers and readers worldwide for over 300 years. God used this translation mightily for the salvation of souls worldwide, and everyone acknowledged the power and the beauty of the KJB. It was fully accepted as the Word of God by those who produced Bible study tools such as Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, as well as all the commentators from the 17th to 20th centuries including Matthew Henry and John Gill. It is still regarded as the most accurate, faithful, and reliable word-for-word translation of the Scriptures by thousands of Christians worldwide.

6. As to the language issue, there may be about a couple of dozen genuine archaisms, but by and large it is perfectly understandable. The King James 2000 Bible has further updated the language, so no one can now complain about how difficult it is to understand. The overriding concern for every Christian is how faithfully does it represent the original Hebrew and Greek, and the answer is that it is extremely faithful and reliable.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Cyrus was ordained beforehand.
So it is a thing that God has done and can do.



King James the first, king of all English speaking people on earth, was ordained of God to publish the Holy Bible.

The modern bibles are unauthorized by God.

you are not well acquainted with history and are making things up

King James was not the king of all English speaking people on earth

many people in France, who were French spoke English...James was not their king

The modern bibles are unauthorized by God

right. just like James was king of the whole world...well only if you spoke English

now you are just being silly

 

[7seasrekeyed]

You present nothing of faith just your rambling philosophy that isn’t grounded in any scripture of God.

oh dear

are you also a king and able to judge people?

God judges the heart...what are you judging?

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Maybe King Jimmy had a royalty arrangement with his publisher.

yes


probably went something like 'if you don't do what I say, then I will send you to the head collector'

he didn't mean the guy who collected taxes by population

 

[7seasrekeyed]

King James threw the king’s printer in jail for making a mistake.

One reason God chose the king was because everyone was afraid of his authority before God.

and yet God says we should fear Him and not what man can do to us

maybe read the KJV a little more then

 

[MarcR]

In the King James Bible and the number 37 threads started by me, I posted numerical patterns of 7, 37, 73 (21st or 3x7 prime) that are found in Matthew 1:1, Mark 1:1; and John 1:1. During my lunch break I plan on posting this same pattern that can be found in Luke 1:1 which would be largely destroyed if the translators had used a word other than "believed" in that verse. I challenge any naysayer to demonstrate 1 pattern in any of these four verses in any other translation.

The KJV largely follows the Textus Receptus which has πεπληροφορημένον NOT πἐρίστευένων in luke 1:1. Regardless what patterns you believe exist or desire to maintain, The role of a translator is to convey the meaning of what is written in the Greek in the English translation. It is not the role of a translator to change words to fit a mumerological pattern. If the translation does not convey the meaning of the original language it is an error. It is not legitimate to use supposed number patterns as an excuse for inaccurate translation. If God wants the number pattern to be there; he will make it happen in an accurate translation.

 

[Dino246]

This thread has already gone off the rails. The focus should be on the inerrancy of Scripture, not on King James. However, since the matter has come up, we need to understand a few things as to why the King James Bible was (and is) called "The Authorized Version".

1. King James I was a Protestant, and the Church of England was already under the authority of the King or Queen since the time of Henry VIII. It was the king or queen of England who had the authority to appoint which Bible should be read in the churches of the Church of England. That is what made the KJB "The Authorized Version" (appointed to be read in churches).

2. Before the new translation -- which is called the King James Bible -- the Bishops' Bible was in use in the churches of England since 1568 (revised in 1572).

3. The Calvinistic Geneva Bible (1557-1560) was unacceptable to the bishops of the Church of England, while the Bishops' Bible was not satisfactory to the Calvinistic Puritans within the Church of England.

4. As a result King James was petitioned by the Puritans for a new translation in English (which would be acceptable to both the bishops and the Puritans). This was done at the Hampton Court Conference of 1604.

5. King James authorized the new translation and was personally involved in various details concerning the translation. The Bishops' Bible would be the primary guide for the KJB, but all the previous English translations were consulted. The aim of the translators was to make "out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavour, that our mark."

I agree with you up to this point; the rest of your post is not addressing the issue of "authorization", but of later developments.

 

[KJV1611]

Events people were waiting for?

No it wasn't events they were waiting for, it was events that they had just witnessed and read about.

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,

Forasmuch as many (many writers - Matthew, Mark, John and others) had set forth to write a detailed chronological order of events declaring THOSE THINGS that they had witnessed Christ do.

Those things were believed among the faithful. This would be miracles, healings, walking on water, casting out demons, being betrayed, crucified and raised from the dead.

These are the things Luke was writing about - eye witness accounts of the life and times of Christ. Luke was writing a detailed account of the life and times of Christ... just like Matthew, Mark and John did.

 

[Bladerunner]

Yeah, you are a special case. You are even more extremistic than other KJVO guys, but your views or reasons are manytimes different.

Gee,,,Thanks

 

[Bladerunner]

After I finish my current reading of the bible from cover to cover I will start another project using the NIV. I like to use a different version for each complete reading to get a more comprehensive perspective on the Word of God and how to apply it to how it shapes my spiritual values and to apply this to how I live my life.

Be sure you add the verses in Mark among other books they (Westcott and Hort) left out? It would be a shame for you to miss them.

 

[Bladerunner]

It's all good brother, nothing to be sorry about. I love the KJV and the NKJV as I find it holds a deeper spiritual truth for me. In the book of Genesis it starts out by saying "In the beginning...". The other versions say the same thing but it doesn't seem as poetic and eloquent as the King James Version.

Its the old English that Brings it out.....

 

[James37]

Why do modern translators prefer "have been" over "which are?"

I am curious how many translations agree with your rendering.

Your 37s patterns may be relevant to something, but it would seem that nobody else sees what that something is, and I for one keep hoping you will one day find and give us a clue, because you never seem to know.

What I do know is that they exist and I believe they demonstrate the authenticity of the King James Bible. They (along with the number 7) form a sort of structure to the Bible that I do not fully comprehend. It is way to early to try and draw to many conclusions as I have only been looking into them (the patterns of entire verses) since October of 2017. How long have you been studying the Bible? I bet there is a whole lot that you do not understand!

 

[Bladerunner]

In the King James Bible and the number 37 threads started by me, I posted numerical patterns of 7, 37, 73 (21st or 3x7 prime) that are found in Matthew 1:1, Mark 1:1; and John 1:1. During my lunch break I plan on posting this same pattern that can be found in Luke 1:1 which would be largely destroyed if the translators had used a word other than "believed" in that verse. I challenge any naysayer to demonstrate 1 pattern in any of these four verses in any other translation.

try those patterns in the Greek language...Keep going, I think you find a jewel.

 

[Bladerunner]

What bible is this and who is the one who authorized it? Everyone can make a claim that the version or translation that they prefer is the only one authorized bible.

Not really? Check your dates?

 

[James37]

try those patterns in the Greek language...Keep going, I think you find a jewel.

True, they can be found in the gematria of both the Hebrew and the Greek.

 

[James37]

The KJV largely follows the Textus Receptus which has πεπληροφορημένον NOT πἐρίστευένων in luke 1:1. Regardless what patterns you believe exist or desire to maintain, The role of a translator is to convey the meaning of what is written in the Greek in the English translation. It is not the role of a translator to change words to fit a mumerological pattern. If the translation does not convey the meaning of the original language it is an error. It is not legitimate to use supposed number patterns as an excuse for inaccurate translation. If God wants the number pattern to be there; he will make it happen in an accurate translation.

“Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,” (Luke 1:1 KJV)

"Forasmuch" Occurs 14 (7 x 2) times in the New Testament
"Forasmuch as" 14th (7 x 2) occurrence in the Bible. (case)
"many" 333rd (37 x 9) verse that contains this word in the Bible.
“many” 74th (37 x 2) verse in the NT that contains this word.
"many" 37th chapter in the Bible that contains this word.
"many" 336th (7 x 48) occurrence in the Bible. (case)
"many" found in 337 chapters of the Bible.
"many" found in 575 verses (7 x 75) of the Bible.
"many" 266 (7 x 38) verses of the New Testament
"many" 296 (37 x 8) verses in the Old Testament
"have" 2336th (73 x 32) verse containing this word in the Bible.
“have” 173rd occurrence in the 144th verse of the NT
"taken" 273rd (7 x 39) occurrence of this word in the Bible.
"in hand" 4th and final occurrence of this phrase in the Bible.
“hand” 49th (7 x 7) verse containing this word in the NT.
"hand to" 37th occurrence of this phrase in Bible.
"hand to" 35th (7 x 5) occurrence of this phrase in the Bible. (case)
"hand to" found 42 (7 x 6) times in the Bible
"hand to" (case) found exactly 7 times in the New Testament
"to set" 28th (7 x 4) occurrence of this phrase in the Bible.
"set" 629th (37 x 17) occurrence of this word in the Bible.
“set” found in 665 (7 x 95) verses of the Bible.
“set forth” found 14 (7 x 2) times in the Bible. 7 OT and 7 NT and Luke 1:1 is 1st occurrence in the NT
“forth” found 888 (37 x 24) times in the Bible and 888 is the Gematria of Jesus in the Greek.
“forth” found in 657 (73 x 9) verses; 374 chapters and 37 books of the OT
“forth” found in 175 (7 x 25) verses of the NT
“order” 42nd (7 x 6) occurrence of this word in Bible. (case)
“order” found in 42 (7 x 6) verses of the OT
“order*” 49th verse (7x7) verse in the Bible containing any form of the word order.
“order*” found in 66 verses of the Bible (number of books in the Bible)
“order*” found 66 times in the Bible (case)
“order*” found 49 (7x7) times in the OT
“declar*” 111th (37 x 3) verse containing any form of the word “declare”
“declar*” found 148 (37 x 4) times in 146 (73 x 2) verses of the Bible
“declar*” found 137 times in the Bible (case)
“declar*” found 37 times in the NT
“of those” 49th (7 X 7) occurrence of this phrase in the Bible
“of those” found 70 times in the Bible.
“those” 222nd (37 x 6) chapter of the Bible containing this word (case)
“those” found in 441 (7 x 7 x 9) verses of the Bible
“those” found in 140 (7 x 20) verses of the NT.
“those” found in 301 (37 x 43) verses of the OT
“those things” found 70 times in 63 (7x9) verses and 56 (7x 8) chapters of the Bible. (case)
“things” 497th (7 x 71) occurrence of this word in the Bible.
“things” 728 (7 x 104) times in the NT
“thing*” found in 1517 (37 x 41) verses of the Bible.
“things which” 49th (7x7) occurrence of this phrase.
“things which” found in 137 verses of the Bible
“things which” 111 (37 x 3) times in the NT.
“things which” 37 verses of the OT.
“which” 3007th occurrence in the 2696th (337 x 8) verse (case)
“which” 1281 (7 x 183) verses of the NT. (case)
“which are” 111th (37 x 3) verse in the Bible containing this phrase (case)
“which are” found in 217 (7 x 31) verses of the Bible
“most” 133 (7 X 19) times in the Bible
“most” 111 (37 x 3) verses of the OT
“most” 77 chapters OT (case)
“most” 21 (3 x 7) times NT
“surely” 280th (7 x 40) occurrence and the 274th (137 x 2) verse
“surely” 196 (7 x 7 x 4; this is the number of times “Jesus Christ” occurs in the KJB) times in Bible (case)
“surely” 7 times in NT
“believed” 28th (7 x 4) verse in the Bible containing this word
“believed” 7th occurrence in the NT
“believ*” 74th (37 x 2) occurrence of any form of the word believe
“believed” 111 (37 x 3) verses in the Bible.
“believ*” 28th (7 x 4) occurrence in the NT (case)
“believ*” 322 (7 x 46) times in 287 (7 x 41) verses
“among” 742nd (7 x 106) occurrence and the 685th (137 x 5) verses (case)
“among” 903 (7 x 29) times in 840 (7 x 120) verses of the Bible. (case)
“among” 703 (37 x 19) times in the OT
"among us" 19th occurrence in the 18th verse (19 + 18 = 37)

* denotes wild card, for example thing* would include thing and things or all forms of the word thing.
Bible = King James Bible

Amazingly you will find that Matthew 1:1; Mark 1:1 and John 1:1 exhibit the same pattern. In fact the entire King James Bible exhibits this sort of structure I just have no personally checked the entire book but I will assert the entire last chapter of the Bible (Rev 22) shows this same pattern.

 

[trofimus]

No it wasn't events they were waiting for, it was events that they had just witnessed and read about.

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,

Forasmuch as many (many writers - Matthew, Mark, John and others) had set forth to write a detailed chronological order of events declaring THOSE THINGS that they had witnessed Christ do.

Those things were believed among the faithful. This would be miracles, healings, walking on water, casting out demons, being betrayed, crucified and raised from the dead.

These are the things Luke was writing about - eye witness accounts of the life and times of Christ. Luke was writing a detailed account of the life and times of Christ... just like Matthew, Mark and John did.

The era when Christ came in was full of apocalyptic expectations. Romans were ruling over all Israel, some Jewish rebellions against the empire were crushed.

People were expecting Christ who will save them. Or Eliah or some prophet.

Thats why I think that the NIV reading that it was about "fulfilment" is OK... It makes sense in the context of that time.