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.
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#781
Jun 30, 2015
25,472
13,785
113
#781
KJV1611 said:
I just don't get hoodwinked by double talk. Any witness that does not give the TRUTH is called a FALSE witness.
Click to expand...
So do you call the KJV a false witness in regard to the age of Ahaziah? Or, do you share the double standard that John146 holds?
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#782
#782
John146 said:
If it's in error, why not change it to tell the truth? Seems simply to me.
Click to expand...
You would not like that, Because your so called perfect bible would be changed.

No one would like it. People have tried to some degree by updating them, and look at the flack they get.
 
J

John146

Senior Member
#783
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
#783
eternally-gratefull said:
Truth? Whose truth? Yours? King James? The english church? The roman church? The baptist Church?

Again, Thats why God left us the origional language copies. Which are numerous. So we can find these so called errors. If we take the time, and everything is satisfied.

I do not blindly follow any english text. Because I know the english anguage flaws. If I want a deeper understanding (no matter what bible I use) that is where I go.
Click to expand...
So, the next question would be, which "original language copies?" The Rome and Egyptian manuscripts or the Byzantine manuscripts pointing back to Antioch?
 
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#784
Jun 30, 2015
25,472
13,785
113
#784
John146 said:
If the bible you read has Elhanan killing Goliath in 2 Samuel 21:19, it lies. It cannot be trusted. Facts are facts. David killed Goliath.
Click to expand...
Double standard.

Go and get some integrity. You are lacking in it.

To any reader who things I'm being too harsh: read the whole thread.
 
J

John146

Senior Member
#785
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
#785
Dino246 said:
Double standard.

Go and get some integrity. You are lacking in it.

To any reader who things I'm being too harsh: read the whole thread.
Click to expand...
And I gave a truthful reconciliation of the age of Ahaziah but you fail to believe it.

Can you reconcile the false witness of new versions in 2 Samuel 21:19? Please say scribal error.

A faithful witness will not lie.
 
KJV1611

KJV1611

Banned
#786
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#786
Dino246 said:
So do you call the KJV a false witness in regard to the age of Ahaziah? Or, do you share the double standard that John146 holds?
Click to expand...
I don't know what John believes about it but I am admitting that I don't understand it. I've asked God about it and I'm sure he'll let me know the truth when he's ready. Just because you and I can't figure it out doesn't mean it's an error.
 
J

John146

Senior Member
#787
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
#787
KJV1611 said:
I don't know what John believes about it but I am admitting that I don't understand it. I've asked God about it and I'm sure he'll let me know the truth when he's ready. Just because you and I can't figure it out doesn't mean it's an error.
Click to expand...
I gave the whole explanation in post #726. Most of the time comparing Scripture to Scripture helps solve apparent contradictions. I know a guy who has wrote extensively on these apparent contradictions from bible skeptics. It certainly is not all my work, but my eyes have been opened.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#788
#788
John146 said:
I gave the whole explanation in post #726. Most of the time comparing Scripture to Scripture helps solve apparent contradictions. I know a guy who has wrote extensively on these apparent contradictions from bible skeptics. It certainly is not all my work, but my eyes have been opened.
Click to expand...
Yet you have no yet given an adequate explanation on how words, which are in error can be solved. Apart from going to the origional text.

You are stuck, the same arguments you use to defend your bible can be used against your bible.
 
J

John146

Senior Member
#789
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
#789
eternally-gratefull said:
Yet you have no yet given an adequate explanation on how words, which are in error can be solved. Apart from going to the origional text.

You are stuck, the same arguments you use to defend your bible can be used against your bible.
Click to expand...
I hope God doesn't hold us accountable to His word, since He didn't preserve it for us.;)
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#790
#790
John146 said:
I hope God doesn't hold us accountable to His word, since He didn't preserve it for us.;)
Click to expand...
He did, (Oh wait, you mean his english bible? Well if thats the case, using your own argument, You are in trouble)

Just not the way you think ;)

Like I said, Any so called error you have found does not change the gospel truth. Nothing you found in any text you have debated woudl cause a person to be lost forever because they read the wrong bible. or even to be lacking in the ability to be sanctified.
 
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#791
Jun 30, 2015
25,472
13,785
113
#791
fredoheaven said:
Endoscopy,

No, I didn’t ignore the “fact” that there are Archaic words in the KJV and biblical words such as Thee and Thou etc. but it is you that ignores the FACT to “study” and understand how to treat/deal with ‘Archaic “words. Do we really need to alter the text? God gave us in His words to follow on how to treat them. A case in point where “seer” is said to be “aged-old” word whereas “prophet” is a new word, nevertheless God retain the word “seer” and define it rather than change it. The point is we do not intend to change it, we need to study it! Perhaps, your Bible does not encourage you “study” as does my Bible.
Click to expand...
The word translated "study" in 2 Timothy 2:15 of the KJV is better rendered "be diligent" in today's terms. This is a good reason not to rely blindly on the KJV.

fredoheaven said:
The premonition that the KJV has the only age-old “Archaic” words is FALSE. You seem to be unaware to the FACT that even the NIV uses such! You didn’t even come up a real deal as to what is the language of the 17th Ce. to a language of today. As a proof of the NIV uses such Archaic words for you to consider. The NIV uses porphyry, offal, Nubians, maxiums, goiim, glistcning, aghast, cooing, cors, horde, ibex, pinions, rawboned etc. Oh well, even the word endoscopy seems not in everyday common language and was first used around 1860. That is too old for me.
Click to expand...
"Nubians", "maxiums", "offal", "pinions" and "goiim" are not in the most recent NIV. "Cors" is a transliteration, not an English word. All the rest are in current usage, though perhaps less common. Porphyry, for example, is red marble stone, an ibex is an Arabian antelope, and "cooing" is still used for the sound doves make.

fredoheaven said:
Now to satisfy your thirst on the Archaic con job, I’ll try to dissect the word “satyr’ and tell your common errors in dealing with this subject.
  • Satyr as used in the KJV is not alone of using the word. Singling out the KJV is too unfair. The Geneva Bible 1587, The Bill Bible 1621, Calvin's Latin translation, the English Revised Version 1885...
Click to expand...
This whole paragraph is irrelevant on two counts: one; this is a thread about the KJV, not other translations; and two: it's a fallacy called "tu quoque", which means essentially, "They're doing it too!" It's invalid as a defense.

fredoheaven said:
Now you just gave me some barrage words that need some further study but I do not intend to discuss them here, it’s a schoolboy pedantry and perhaps God want you study them. It will be your assignments not mine.

Study to shew thyself approved unto God…
Click to expand...
Consider yourself barraged. Be diligent to understand these matters.
 
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#792
Jun 30, 2015
25,472
13,785
113
#792
John146 said:
And I gave a truthful reconciliation of the age of Ahaziah but you fail to believe it.

Can you reconcile the false witness of new versions in 2 Samuel 21:19? Please say scribal error.

A faithful witness will not lie.
Click to expand...
Are you still bleating? Go and get some integrity.
 
KJV1611

KJV1611

Banned
#793
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#793
Dino246 said:
The word translated "study" in 2 Timothy 2:15 of the KJV is better rendered "be diligent" in today's terms. This is a good reason not to rely blindly on the KJV.


"Nubians", "maxiums", "offal", "pinions" and "goiim" are not in the most recent NIV. "Cors" is a transliteration, not an English word. All the rest are in current usage, though perhaps less common. Porphyry, for example, is red marble stone, an ibex is an Arabian antelope, and "cooing" is still used for the sound doves make.

This whole paragraph is irrelevant on two counts: one; this is a thread about the KJV, not other translations; and two: it's a fallacy called "tu quoque", which means essentially, "They're doing it too!" It's invalid as a defense.



Consider yourself barraged. Be diligent to understand these matters.
Click to expand...
How does one be diligent with rightly dividing the word of truth? What does that mean, what should we be doing to rightly divide?
 
KJV1611

KJV1611

Banned
#794
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#794
Dino246 said:
Are you still bleating? Go and get some integrity.
Click to expand...
I'm still trying to figure out why Ahaziah's mother was killing the royal seed including Ahaziah's own son, and her grandson, to avenge Ahaziah.... any ideas?
 
Nehemiah6

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
#795
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,776
113
#795
KJV1611 said:
I'm still trying to figure out why Ahaziah's mother was killing the royal seed including Ahaziah's own son, and her grandson, to avenge Ahaziah.... any ideas?
Click to expand...
The answer is right there. Athaliah was the wicked daughter of two very evil and wicked people -- Ahab and Jezebel, and the wife of another wicked man -- Jehoram.

So when someone is steeped in evil and wickedness (possibly even demon possession) what do you expect?
 
KJV1611

KJV1611

Banned
#796
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#796
Nehemiah6 said:
The answer is right there. Athaliah was the wicked daughter of two very evil and wicked people -- Ahab and Jezebel, and the wife of another wicked man -- Jehoram.

So when someone is steeped in evil and wickedness (possibly even demon possession) what do you expect?
Click to expand...
I think that there may be another Ahaziah in this story. There are 3 that I know of but there may be one more. But yeah she was wicked and may have wanted to killed her own grandson. I just know from past KJV "errors" that there is some reason for the two different ages.
 
GraceAndTruth

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
#797
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
#797
Locoponydirtman said:
I studied Bible history and translation.
Folks opinion and feelings and thought and arguments don't matter to me. I just find it entertaining that so many people are willing to go to the mat over such silliness.
Click to expand...
and yet..........here you are..........AND commenting!
 
Endoscopy

Endoscopy

Senior Member
#798
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
#798
KJV1611 said:
The bible does not lie but all bibles have errors. And you expect us to believe that's TRUTH.
Click to expand...
The original texts are infallible. Translations are done by fallible men. To reduce errors committees do the translation so all have a say in the meaning of the original texts. The second issue is which manuscripts are used. Errors of copying creep in but most of those are easily dealt with by comparing original language texts.
 
KJV1611

KJV1611

Banned
#799
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#799
Endoscopy said:
The original texts are infallible. Translations are done by fallible men. To reduce errors committees do the translation so all have a say in the meaning of the original texts. The second issue is which manuscripts are used. Errors of copying creep in but most of those are easily dealt with by comparing original language texts.
Click to expand...
That’s funny I never read that in the Bible. In fact I see places in the Bible where God spoke through a dumb ass, a wicked high priest and not to mention all the people on Pentecost.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.