KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES

[John146]

I am not sure whether only one intepretation can be right.

For example "En arché én ho Logos" - In the beginning was the Logos".

Logos can have many interpretations (yes, it means Jesus, but I am talking about why the term Logos is used) and many of them can be right.

One of sign of inspiration is that the text has many layers. That its not only about first plan surface reading.

---

Also, you must realize that we are not talking about God´s intepretation of Bible, but our intepretation of Bible. It will never be perfect and it will always differ.

Even you cannot find a common ground with the KJV1611, even though you two should have the same faith, being both KJV only.

So... what is your complain about?

No complaint here brother, I just believe there is one interpretation of Scripture that can be correct. As believers, we are to seek out the correct interpretation through study and right division.

 

[trofimus]

But the different interpretations you are referring to are not in opposition - they are complementary....
That is NOT the same as two opposing interpretations where both cannot possibly can correct simultaneously!

If one thinks that Jesus´ family is ancient and somebody thinks that Jesus was from ancient days "going forth" to people, it is not in any opposition, IMHO.

Its "only" a different reading. Faith is not in any danger.

 

[trofimus]

No complaint here brother, I just believe there is one interpretation of Scripture that can be correct. As believers, we are to seek out the correct interpretation through study and right division.

J 1:1 - "In the beginning".

Which one interpretation of this beginning is correct?
One can say "in the beginning of creation". And he is correct.
Another one can say "In the beginning of salvation plan" and can be correct.
Another one can say "it means before time" and can be correct.

And we would all need to study in the same way from the same sources for the same amount of time, having the same learning ability and the same formed brains with the same neural connections, having the same experiences and reactions to information so that we all woud have the same interpretation of everything.

 

[preacher4truth]

I just believe there is one interpretation of Scripture that can be correct. As believers, we are to seek out the correct interpretation through study and right division.

You're conflating interpretation with translation.

 

[Joseppi]

Micah 5:2 New International Version (NIV)

2 “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
though you are small among the clans[a] of Judah,
out of you will come for me
one who will be ruler over Israel,
whose origins are from of old,
from ancient times.”

Out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel.

Instead of “he” the niv says “one”.
This allows a woman or angel to fulfill the prophecy.

Instead of “ruler in Israel” the niv says “ruler over Israel”.
Which predicts a ruler over Israel who is not of Israel.

Instead of “whose goings forth” the niv says “whose origins are”.
A person’s origins are defined as the two lineages of the parents.
Jesus origins are his lineage to God, and his lineage from Adam to Mary.
Jesus’ divine right to rule as king in Israel over the whole earth is by his adoptive lineage via Adam to Joseph.

The niv however presents the coming “ruler over Israel” origins as being only of man, or even an angelic man hybrid.
As in “the son of perdition”.

What the niv does is predict the coming of a false christ to rule over Israel, the one whom Jesus noted the Jews would receive that comes in his own name. The antichrist, the beast.

Ruler in Israel is correct for Jesus will rule the whole earth, in Israel. That is, as Israel.
Whereas the niv allows that the coming ruler of the world will rule over Israel.

The niv is a new age spirit of antichrist bible useful for deceiving Christians when the falling away comes and the beast and false prophet stand up.

 

[trofimus]

The niv is a new age spirit of antichrist bible useful for deceiving Christians when the falling away comes and the beast and false prophet stand up.

Elect ones cannot be deceived, regardless of what Bible translation they use.

Other ones will be deceived, regardless of what Bible translation they use.

----

The Holy Spirit in a believer is making the difference, not a Bible in his hand.

 

[dcontroversal]

My pastor, who LOVES the KJV(but he’s not a KJVO) said that Easter was not correct in Acts 12:4.

#FWIW
#FYI

And he is right...the word is Passover........one of many examples....!!

 

[dcontroversal]

You didn't reference or quote a single bible verse to back up your claim, so no I'm not going to take your word for it.

So what....one who will not be honest with the very preface written by 54 Episcopalian priests cannot be expected to be honest with any evidence that contradicts a position of error!

 

[Dino246]

Micah 5:2 New International Version (NIV) ...
Instead of “he” the niv says “one”.
This allows a woman or angel to fulfill the prophecy.

If the Hebrew is not gender-specific, then "one" is the correct translation. If the Hebrew designates a male term, then "he" is the correct translation. Male gender terms were accepted as being non-gender-specific until quite recently, so taking a non-specific term and assuming it is exclusively male is incorrect interpretation. Jesus is the fulfillment of this prophecy; there is no room for inserting a false Christ here.

Instead of “ruler in Israel” the niv says “ruler over Israel”.
Which predicts a ruler over Israel who is not of Israel.

That doesn't follow at all. It's a fantasy of eisegesis; inserting into the text what you want it to say so that you can denigrate it.

Instead of “whose goings forth” the niv says “whose origins are”.
A person’s origins are defined as the two lineages of the parents.
Jesus origins are his lineage to God, and his lineage from Adam to Mary.
Jesus’ divine right to rule as king in Israel over the whole earth is by his adoptive lineage via Adam to Joseph.

The niv however presents the coming “ruler over Israel” origins as being only of man, or even an angelic man hybrid.
As in “the son of perdition”.

Noah Webster is dead, so you aren't him. Therefore, you need to give a source for your definition of "origins" and not simply expect everyone to accept yours as exclusive fact. The English term has a broad range of meaning; not simply ancestral family.

What the niv does is predict the coming of a false christ to rule over Israel, the one whom Jesus noted the Jews would receive that comes in his own name. The antichrist, the beast.

Ruler in Israel is correct for Jesus will rule the whole earth, in Israel. That is, as Israel.
Whereas the niv allows that the coming ruler of the world will rule over Israel.

The coming ruler of the world, Jesus, will rule over Israel as well.

The niv is a new age spirit of antichrist bible useful for deceiving Christians when the falling away comes and the beast and false prophet stand up.

Pure hogwash.

 

[KJV1611]

And he is right...the word is Passover........one of many examples....!!

Almost all Christians in the world call the fulfillment of Passover Easter but the KJV translators call it Easter and you think it’s wrong. Luther and Wycliffe called Passover Easter do you have a problem with them also?

 

[MarcR]

Your justification is based on what a person or group of people thought a 3000 year old word meant and as you've mentioned in the past, word meanings change over time. Besides, I haven't found any pre W and C commentaries that express that very strange view of Micah 5:2 have you?

Job was probably contemporary with Abraham. The Biblical Hebrew has been in continuous use among the Jewish people from the time of Job until the present. There is no need to speculate about what words mean [except for a few personal names or place names]. I can't quite figure out what you mean by W and C.

 

[MarcR]

So your Hebrew skills are better than the KJV and the NASB translators? Please forgive me but I find that quite hard to believe.

I studied Hebrew from the time I was 4 until I was 13 two hours per day 6 days per week. How many of said translators do you suppose had that much training?

 

[dcontroversal]

Almost all Christians in the world call the fulfillment of Passover Easter but the KJV translators call it Easter and you think it’s wrong. Luther and Wycliffe called Passover Easter do you have a problem with them also?

The word is Passover and could care less what "Christians" in the world call it or the other two men you quoted...they were not inspired.....end of story......and to bear that logic out (most in the world doing something) = a compromised stance......

 

[MarcR]

So your Hebrew skills are better than the KJV and the NASB translators? Please forgive me but I find that quite hard to believe.

I'm not trying to meet a publisher's expectations or to sell my work.

 

[preacher4truth]

The Holy Spirit in a believer is making the difference, not a Bible in his hand.

I'd say the two go hand in hand.

 

[preacher4truth]

So your Hebrew skills are better than the KJV and the NASB translators? Please forgive me but I find that quite hard to believe.

So now the KJV has Hebrew skills? Quite the magical book, right?

I find it hard to believe you're genuinely concerned about the original biblical languages and their translation. Unless you want to slam someone over it, then it's important to you.

 

[dcontroversal]

So now the KJV has Hebrew skills? Quite the magical book, right?

I find it hard to believe you're genuinely concerned about the original biblical languages and their translation. Unless you want to slam someone over it, then it's important to you.

It is when one automatically and dogmatically defends a position that is not valid........a position that totally contradicts God inspiring HOLY MEN of GOD.....as opposed to Anglican Priests............who by the way Believed that the KING or Queen of ENGLAND is the head of the LORD'S CHURCH!

 

[Joseppi]

The word is Passover and could care less what "Christians" in the world call it or the other two men you quoted...they were not inspired.....end of story......and to bear that logic out (most in the world doing something) = a compromised stance......

It is Easter not passover.

Acts 12:3 And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)

Note that Passover was already over in Acts 12:3.

Acts 12:4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

And so, Herod waited till after Easter since Passover was over.
The word translated as Passover in modern versions refers to Jesus as the passover lamb.

 

[MarcR]

Your justification is based on what a person or group of people thought a 3000 year old word meant and as you've mentioned in the past, word meanings change over time. Besides, I haven't found any pre W and C commentaries that express that very strange view of Micah 5:2 have you?

I know that WC is water closet. What is w and c?

 

[preacher4truth]

It is when one automatically and dogmatically defends a position that is not valid........a position that totally contradicts God inspiring HOLY MEN of GOD.....as opposed to Anglican Priests............who by the way Believed that the KING or Queen of ENGLAND is the head of the LORD'S CHURCH!

Facts don't matter to KJVO's for the most part. Magic does. For instance, the KJV corrects the Greek and Hebrew. Oxford and Cambridge word differences are still "perfect" bibles, because they say so.