Things to Consider Before Attempting to Correct 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.

YDo

Active member
Dec 9, 2018
151
60
28
What does the Bible say about gossip and lies? "Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. "

" There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers. "

The LGBTQ community many years ago arrived at their own translation of the Bible. They labeled it the Queen James Bible. One of their associates I should say took credit for that monstrosity.
Well before that however King James was slandered by those who wanted to diminish the authorized version of the Bible he arranged to be printed so that later and different translation versions would be accepted. And due to the lie he was gay diminishing his credibility.
There is not one iota of proof behind the accusations. His accusers have never shown one iota of proof to sustain their fabrications.

And if anyone wonders how that could be true it isn't difficult to understand if you encounter someone who devalues the King James Version of the Bible with harsh criticism, pejoratives, or attacks on those for whom it is the preferred tome of study.

James was fluent in three languages, studied two others to become so, and arrived at the conclusion the common people should have access to the Lord's word in their native language rather than have it preached to them in Latin. Until the 1611 version of the KJV being published as a result of his desire only the Church of England possessed the Bible copy.

The lie that King James was gay was born 25 years after James was dead. He had written a pamphlet condemning the use of tobacco and in the hopes its abuses would stop in England. A very wealthy tobacco family known as the Weldon's were not impressed.
Twenty-five years after King James died Anthony Weldon, who was not allowed at court, which was a great dishonor for such well off families at the time in England, got this revenge with is own writings. He claimed James, now dead and unable to retort, was a homosexual.

The false rumor has spread ever since.
King James was not a homosexual, he was not a free mason, he was not any of the things people conceived to use as slander against him and his Christian character after he was unable to defend himself from the standpoint of a Monarch.
Those who propagate those falsehoods all these centuries later are exactly what God calls them.
They should be very worried when it catches up.


Oh, by the way, this should come to mind before thinking to accept the falsehood contrived against King James. How would a man who was a homosexual seek to publish a Bible in full and in the native tongue of those he ruled so that it remained teaching his kind were damned to Hell?
Wouldn't such a man with the power invested in him as monarch and overseer of the English language version of God's word seek to make it what appears today as blasphemy and called the Queen James Bible? Which omits the so called "clobber scriptures" that speak of the fate of unrepentant sexually active sodomites?





 
S

Sherril

Guest
I look in the OT. And I can not find a time when Judah RULED with God.

I do however, see that they also, just like israel and Ephram, were unruly, so much in fact. Babylon conquered them, Medea and persia enslaved them Greece defiled their holy place. And even when christ walked the earh, their unruliness cause rome to totally destroy them and scatter them all over the earth.


Also, the hebrew can help.

The term interpreted “rule” in the KJV or “walk” in the NKJV is this

RWD - to rome about freely, to tear oneself loose (walk with no guide)
To wander restlessly, to roam
here accordeing to the dictionary of biblical languages


8113 רוּד (rûḏ): v.; ≡ Str 7300; TWOT 2129—1. LN 34.40–34.41 (qal) disassociate, formally, roam, be in a state of no longer being in an association, as a figurative extension of roaming or wandering about in linear motion (Jer 2:31; Hos 12:1[EB 11:12]+), see also domain LN 15; (hif) start to roam (Ge 27:40+); 2. LN 25.223–25.250 (hif) be troubled, formally, be caused to roam, i.e., have feelings of anxiety or distress as a figurative extension of being driven or caused to flee in linear motion (Ps 55:3[EB 2]+)

Yep. I think we see who got it wrong.
Thank you brother for responding....i am teachable yet i desire not to be deceived in this matter i desire a pure heart before my God...i desire a pure text and to hear Gods heart through his written word...His instruction book on how to live..God desires us to worship Him in Spirit and in Truth...in these lasts days before the return of our Lord Jesus, there is must deception, so for me i long for (TRUTH) His Truth..thanks again for sharing your heart and understanding...love in Christ Sherril..:)
 
S

Sherril

Guest
It is hard to number the versions of the Bible and all the over 2000 language translations that have been published since 1526 and Tyndale's New Testament.
As far as English translations and paraphrases of scripture published to date there are over 900.
http://news.americanbible.org/article/number-of-english-translations-of-the-bible

Many people think they know God by the book. But God is a spirit and he was The Word before anything that is created was created. His kingdom is within you.
Jesus said seek and ye shall find. "Seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well"
The kingdom is within.
God bless and protect you.
So Ydo what is the pure text, a version that is Gods heart....not changed or diluted...for such a gal as i an older women seeking Gods heart in Spirit and Truth...what is the best English version pl. ? love in Christ Sherril...:)
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
You are the assertion proved true.
Humor isn't bad. Your tactics are not humor save for the satisfaction it brings you.
Mockery, ridicule, laughing at someone while being condescending. The joke is on you thinking you are actually an example of a good person seeking to teach sincere students of the word. And when exposed as just the opposite you try to implicate humor as having your c!! haracteristics. No, that's not how humor works. Humor makes people laugh with the joke. Your condescencion , mockery, ridicule, intends to make people laugh at the person who is made the target of such efforts.

I wonder if people here read your name and realize you're saying, up yours?
Awwww geeeee wizzzz!! What have we here. Someone being morbid about the use of humor. Seems to me I hear it from the pulpit often. You seem to think I am making a comment depreciating someone. Why are you putting words in my mouth I never said?? Your attack is fallacious since you can't read my mind.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,110
960
113
You are putting words in my mouth that I would never say. All translations have flaws. Only the original language is perfect. This is why using my smartphone I can select any translation and switch between translations and see any differences. Committees do the translation not a single person. This minimizes the errors. KJVs major flaw is its age with language changes and environmental science advances. Many words in KJV don't exist today and new words have been added. We now know there are no satyrs for example.
Hi Endoscopy,

God’s words never change. It changes lives! Your archaic con job against KJV is trite and was proven to be false. You have made a major error when age really doesn’t matter.You actually have committed the same mistakes with using only of your post. You are even unaware that what you have posted chosen words are archaic so to speak. You speak of “error” and you are conveying to us a 14th Century word. “Original” is a 14ce. Word, “Switch” is an early 1600’s. So you are as guilty of using words that are old as the kJV. Btw, God can speak English.

God bless
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
So you can not answer the question about why the authors of your perfect bible screwed up and could not translate the word baptiso. But you want to discuss a question not even you can prove yourself.

Thats what I thought..
You have to explain how they "screwed it up." Do you not believe in immersion?
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
Hi Sherril, this is what has happened. The KJV was translated in 1611, more than 400 years ago. Since that time older manuscripts have been discovered. Older ones (obviously) appear closer in time to the originals, so are more reliable, more correct, as there has been less opportunity for copyists to make errors.

This is why there are changes from what we see in the KJV. I love the KJV translation of Luke 2:14, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men." But is it a good translation? Is there good will toward men or good will only toward those who with whom God is pleased, as many (perhaps all) of the modern versions have it?

This is not a matter of the evil one coming in as a Trojan horse at all. It is one of responsibly making available a bible as close as possible to the original text.

Does this help clarify things?
These older manuscripts were found in garbage cans in the vatican. They are older, in better condition, because they were rejected by the early church because they were corrupt. Older never means better, on the contrary.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
If this is the case. Then niether can the KJV be considered Gods word. Because it is different also..thus we have no word we can trust.
How can we know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth if we're all using corrupt bibles and since the "originals" are available?

Btw, what does God think about the "originals"? What value does God place on the "originals"?
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,484
13,786
113
These older manuscripts were found in garbage cans in the vatican. They are older, in better condition, because they were rejected by the early church because they were corrupt. Older never means better, on the contrary.
More ridiculous non-truth. There close to 6000 Greek manuscripts of the NT in a variety of conditions found across the Middle East and Europe. Be specific, or be silent.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,484
13,786
113
How can we know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth if we're all using corrupt bibles...?
By comparing manuscripts... just like the textual scholars have been doing.
 

Sipsey

Well-known member
Sep 27, 2018
1,481
695
113
May I weigh in on one sub-topic within this elongated topic? It pertains to the verse in Hosea (12) in chap. 11. It is interesting that it seemingly is in error. I checked with some rather aged commentary by Mr. Harry Ironside, ( love his name) and he had this take on it. Is his viewpoint valid or is he simply making it fit?

H. Ironside
This verse completes another distinct division of the prophecy, which extends from their first call out of Egypt to their restoration to the land and to God in the days of the millennial kingdom.



The last verse is properly the introduction to chapter 12, and brings in a new subject, which closes with the end of chapter 13. When Hosea prophesied, as frequently noted, the iniquity of Judah was not yet so manifest as that of the ten tribes whom Jeroboam had led astray from the very beginning, turning them away from Jehovah, and setting up the golden calves for their worship. They had been idolatrous from the first, and all their kings had followed in the steps of “Jeroboam the son of Nebat, which made Israel to sin.” Therefore sentence was early pronounced on them because God had to say, “Ephraim compasseth Me about with lies, and the house of Israel with deceit.” There had never been any response to the many warnings and entreaties sent them by the Lord.



But with Judah it was far otherwise. Among them, decline was a matter of slow, and sometimes thwarted, progress. Hence we read, “But Judah yet ruleth with God, and is faithful with the Most Holy” (ver. 12, margin). Up to the time when Hosea prophesied, there was still a measure of devotion to Jehovah in Judah. Moreover, revival after revival followed the fervent calls to repentance uttered by the prophets; but it will be observed that as the years went on, they too became less and less responsive to the voice of God, until they lost all concern for His holiness.12
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
There are thousands of manuscripts that exist and contain inspirations from God. Thousands.
Are they of no avail? Please remember that we do not have the original writings that predate the scriptures in today's Bibles. Those were called, Autographs.
Rather, we have copies across the ages. But not the original texts or inspired words of God.
A fact about those manuscripts is from time to time an insignificant error was introduced when a scribe made a copy. It was a very minor spelling issue that no change to the meaning. Using those insignificant errors the manuscripts heritage can be known. They know when and where the difference was made and allows having all with that error to be known to come from a particular document. Other similar errors are introduced in the same way thus creating a tree of knowing which are the oldest version and the newest ones. Comparing these texts to each other the errors are removed and an error free result is created.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
By comparing manuscripts... just like the textual scholars have been doing.
Does this make man the final authority? Do you know that the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus differ thousands and thousands of times? These are the manuscripts of the new versions use (Rome and Egypt). When they differ, how does one determine which manuscript is correct? Also, when you study a word in Greek and there are 7 English word choices, how do you know which word to go with?
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
What does the Bible say about gossip and lies? "Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. "

" There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked plans, feet that make haste to run to evil, a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers. "

The LGBTQ community many years ago arrived at their own translation of the Bible. They labeled it the Queen James Bible. One of their associates I should say took credit for that monstrosity.
Well before that however King James was slandered by those who wanted to diminish the authorized version of the Bible he arranged to be printed so that later and different translation versions would be accepted. And due to the lie he was gay diminishing his credibility.
There is not one iota of proof behind the accusations. His accusers have never shown one iota of proof to sustain their fabrications.

And if anyone wonders how that could be true it isn't difficult to understand if you encounter someone who devalues the King James Version of the Bible with harsh criticism, pejoratives, or attacks on those for whom it is the preferred tome of study.

James was fluent in three languages, studied two others to become so, and arrived at the conclusion the common people should have access to the Lord's word in their native language rather than have it preached to them in Latin. Until the 1611 version of the KJV being published as a result of his desire only the Church of England possessed the Bible copy.

The lie that King James was gay was born 25 years after James was dead. He had written a pamphlet condemning the use of tobacco and in the hopes its abuses would stop in England. A very wealthy tobacco family known as the Weldon's were not impressed.
Twenty-five years after King James died Anthony Weldon, who was not allowed at court, which was a great dishonor for such well off families at the time in England, got this revenge with is own writings. He claimed James, now dead and unable to retort, was a homosexual.

The false rumor has spread ever since.
King James was not a homosexual, he was not a free mason, he was not any of the things people conceived to use as slander against him and his Christian character after he was unable to defend himself from the standpoint of a Monarch.
Those who propagate those falsehoods all these centuries later are exactly what God calls them.
They should be very worried when it catches up.


Oh, by the way, this should come to mind before thinking to accept the falsehood contrived against King James. How would a man who was a homosexual seek to publish a Bible in full and in the native tongue of those he ruled so that it remained teaching his kind were damned to Hell?
Wouldn't such a man with the power invested in him as monarch and overseer of the English language version of God's word seek to make it what appears today as blasphemy and called the Queen James Bible? Which omits the so called "clobber scriptures" that speak of the fate of unrepentant sexually active sodomites?





This kind of reputation assassination goes on today in the political arena. Politics as usual.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
Does this make man the final authority? Do you know that the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus differ thousands and thousands of times? These are the manuscripts of the new versions use (Rome and Egypt). When they differ, how does one determine which manuscript is correct? Also, when you study a word in Greek and there are 7 English word choices, how do you know which word to go with?
ROFL
You seem to miss the point that man is just removing spelling errors that creapt into the manuscripts. Not changing the meaning at all.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
The word baptize is not an english word, it is a greek tansliterated.

Why was it not interpreted?
The word baptize was around for hundreds of years before 1611. Did you know that?

The Oxford dictionary is an encyclopedia of the English language. It is so thorough and so authoritative that no other language has anything comparable. In this dictionary, there are quotations from English works using the words baptize, baptism, and other forms of the word from the following dates: 1200, 1297, 1300, 1325, 1382. The word is used throughout the English Bible translation of Wycliffe completed in 1382. This means that the word baptize and its forms were English words long before the 1611 translation.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
ROFL
You seem to miss the point that man is just removing spelling errors that creapt into the manuscripts. Not changing the meaning at all.

Not at all, they differ in many ways. There are words, verses and entire chapters missing from one manuscript to another.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
Addendum killed by the 5 minute rule.
ROFL
You seem to miss the point that man is just removing spelling errors that creapt into the manuscripts. Not changing the meaning at all. Scholars of the original language work in committees to insure minimal mistakes are made in translation. This is why I find the AMPC translation helpful. It puts extra alternate meanings of the original language word in parentheses. Many times adding meaning to the word. Here is a classic example of this. Notice the different meanings for "believes in". Clings to puts the concept of a toddler clinging to a fathers leg as he walks. That is how we should cling to Jesus.

John 3 AMPC Amplified Classic
16 For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He [even] gave up His only begotten (unique) Son, so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
The word baptize was around for hundreds of years before 1611. Did you know that?

The Oxford dictionary is an encyclopedia of the English language. It is so thorough and so authoritative that no other language has anything comparable. In this dictionary, there are quotations from English works using the words baptize, baptism, and other forms of the word from the following dates: 1200, 1297, 1300, 1325, 1382. The word is used throughout the English Bible translation of Wycliffe completed in 1382. This means that the word baptize and its forms were English words long before the 1611 translation.
The real issue about the Greek word is what was the root of the word. It was created from another word to define the ceremony of baptism. I researched it years ago. One word was washing the feet for guests and another was immersing cloth in a dye. This has created the controversy about immersion only and pouring and sprinkling being acceptable.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
Hi Endoscopy,

God’s words never change. It changes lives! Your archaic con job against KJV is trite and was proven to be false. You have made a major error when age really doesn’t matter.You actually have committed the same mistakes with using only of your post. You are even unaware that what you have posted chosen words are archaic so to speak. You speak 3 “error” and you are conveying to us a 14th Century word. “Original” is a 14ce. Word, “Switch” is an early 1600’s. So you are as guilty of using words that are old as the kJV. Btw, God can speak English.

God bless
You ignore the simple fact that language changes over years. In the KJV and NIV the translation of a commandment differ because of this.
KJV Thou shalt not kill.
NIV You shall not murder.

In 1611 the word kill meant premeditated murder. Thus today that meaning is lost because the definition of kill has changed. Today when driving a brake failure can cause an accident where a person is killed. This in no way is premeditated murder. Live with the fact that 400 years of language changes and scientific knowledge of nature causes errors in the KJV translation. Today we know there are no satyrs and a few other animals used in the KJV. I keep the following for the KJV only crowd.
__________
Why do you keep using the now flawed KJV translation. The language and understanding of nature has changed over the 400 years since then. There are words that are no longer used. Do you know what a gold ouches is?


KJV Issues
Here is a list of problems with the KJV because of the 400 years of language and science understanding the things of nature.

For example, because of the changes in the English language, a number of words occur in the King James that make zero sense to most people today. These include the following nuggets that you will find scattered here and there:

Almug
Algum
Charashim
Chode
Cracknels
Gat
Habergeon
Hosen
Kab
Ligure
Neesed
Nusings
Ouches
ring-straked
sycamyne
trow
wimples
etc.

The King James translators also translated some animal names into animals that in fact we now have pretty good reason for thinking don’t actually exist:

unicorn (Deut. 33:17)
satyr (Isa 13:21);
dragon (Deut 32:33) (for serpent)
cockatrice (Isa 11:8),
arrowsnake (Gen 49:11, in the margin).

Moreover, there are phrases that simply don’t make sense any more to modern readers:

Phrases that no longer make sense:

ouches of gold (Exod. 28:11);
collops of fat (Job 15:25);
naughty figs (Jer 24:2);
ien with (Jer. 3:2);
the ground is chapt (Jer 14:4);
brazen wall” (Jer 15:20);
rentest thy face (Jer. 4:30);
urrain of the cattle (Exod. 9:2);
(looked up ouches and today we put br in front of it and change the u to o. Brooches.)

And there are whole sentences that are confusing at best, virtually indecipherable (or humorous)

And Jacob sod pottage (Gen 25:29)
And Mt. Sinai was altogether on a smoke (Exoc. 19:18)
Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing (Ps. 5:6)
I trow not (Luke 17:9)
We do you to wit of the grace of God (2 Cor. 8:1)
Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels (2 Cor. 6:12)
He who letteth will let (2 Thes 2:7)
The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies, which are given from one shepherd (Eccles. 12:11)

Other sentences make sense, but would today be considered somewhat problematic – at least for the sacred Scripture. My favorite is the one that refers to a one who: “Pisseth against the wall:…. 1 Sam 25:22, 34, I Kings 14:10!
(looked this up, it means the person is a man, NIV uses the word man)


KJV Issues sites

https://ehrmanblog.org/problems-with-the-language-of-the-king-james-version/

https://newrepublic.com/article/107222/making-it-new

http://www.bibletexts.com/topics/kjv.htm

http://www.equip.org/article/is-your-modern-translation-corrupt/

http://www.hickoryhammockbaptist.org/kjva1.html

https://www.gotquestions.org/different-gospel.html

The Use and Misuse of the King James Bible: An Interview with Mark Ward
Jonathan Petersen
March 13, 2018

https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2...pJobID=1362532267&spReportId=MTM2MjUzMjI2NwS2