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.
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
I've already told you the container doesn't matter, there are many ways to say the same thing... You're holding the "originals" up like they're all there ever was and ever can be.... And those original writings were only the container.

The word of God has never been bound by language or words. I don't think there's much more for me to say about this, but I will say that it blows my mind how I get accused of worshiping the bible when it is you guys who worship the container.... which isn't even the word of God.
This is contradictory to your position that the KJV is the only word of God.
 

iamsoandso

Senior Member
Oct 6, 2011
8,048
1,609
113
That is a small fragment. A large fragment might be a manuscript missing a piece like that. One of the problems with the word fragment. There was an instance where they found a pile of fragments like that and were trying to piece them together to recreate the original document. They got to a point where they could not go any farther. They had taken pictures of the fragments and had them loaded into a computer. They had a program that could solve a jigsaw puzzle and turned the fragments over to that. It completed the manuscript and they found that they had placed a piece in the wrong place that caused the blockage.
A methodical way to approach a fragment is to first try to recognize any of "a portion of a word". For instance if I wrote "arithmetic" and it was punched out like the fragment is(haphazard), then it would look like "ote arit". The reason why is in the sentence I wrote the word "wrote" is torn in half and so you see "ote",(last 3 letters of the word "wrote") and the first 4 letters of the next word("arithmetic" in example) and so in the upper part of the fragment(p115) start with Alpha,Rho,ect. https://www.rapidtables.com/math/symbols/greek_alphabet.html and the word is https://biblehub.com/greek/705.htm in the right side of the first sentence in the fragment.

In your post you wrote 6 sentences. In the first you wrote 21 words,in the next 25 words,then 24.24.24 and then two in the last,divided by 6 and you averaged 20 words per sentence. So the width of the page you wrote on will accommodate around 20-25 words per sentence. Now you/we can write about 120 words every 6 sentences on the paper/program you/we use but the writer of p115 may have had a 14 inch wide sheet of paper and we only have 12 inch paper. Lets see who can figure out the words/word in the next sentence in p115.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
A methodical way to approach a fragment is to first try to recognize any of "a portion of a word". For instance if I wrote "arithmetic" and it was punched out like the fragment is(haphazard), then it would look like "ote arit". The reason why is in the sentence I wrote the word "wrote" is torn in half and so you see "ote",(last 3 letters of the word "wrote") and the first 4 letters of the next word("arithmetic" in example) and so in the upper part of the fragment(p115) start with Alpha,Rho,ect. https://www.rapidtables.com/math/symbols/greek_alphabet.html and the word is https://biblehub.com/greek/705.htm in the right side of the first sentence in the fragment.

In your post you wrote 6 sentences. In the first you wrote 21 words,in the next 25 words,then 24.24.24 and then two in the last,divided by 6 and you averaged 20 words per sentence. So the width of the page you wrote on will accommodate around 20-25 words per sentence. Now you/we can write about 120 words every 6 sentences on the paper/program you/we use but the writer of p115 may have had a 14 inch wide sheet of paper and we only have 12 inch paper. Lets see who can figure out the words/word in the next sentence in p115.
What I was referring to was when they found a manuscript in a jar that was in fragments. They were reconstructing it by hand. When they ran into the problem they had already loaded all of the pictures of all of the fragments into the computer. They then ran that jigsaw puzzle program and it worked. They found the last piece they placed was the wrong piece. The program produced the manuscript as a whole manuscript.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
Addendum due to the 5 minute rule. Time for edit was too long.
Analyzing my post with the number of words in a sentence. The number of sentences and other features about the post has nothing to do with the shapes of the fragments. That particular piece they had wrong seemed to fit the text and shape. But it was the wrong piece. The computer found that error. People couldn't figure it out.
 

Endoscopy

Senior Member
Oct 13, 2017
4,028
400
83
Did you think those people were stupid or what? They had reconstructed a lot of the document at that point!!!
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
While that sounds valid, it is an implicit claim in favour of the KJV. The KJV simply isn't perfect, so the claim is not valid.

There are many arguments that can be leveled against the claim... why did God wait 1600 years before producing the Bible; why is there no manuscript evidence for certain passages; why are there clearly contradictory statements; why should we have to learn archaic words in order to understand God's word... etc.

Plus, Scripture doesn't state that it would only have one valid translation into a given language.

It's fine to make the claim that such is not consistent with God's character, but that is ultimately your opinion.
I don't think God waited 1600 years before producing the bible. From the days of the writings of the new testament those writings were passed around to all the churches. I don't know of a time when the word of God wasn't available to his people accept maybe when the Catholics try to keep it from people.

You say scripture doesn't state that there would only be one valid translation per language and it may not directly. But the concept is found everywhere in the bible - one God, many false gods, one Christ many antichrists, children of God children of Belial, one baptism... the bible from cover to cover is one way and many false ways.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
The original language Bible in Hebrew, Aramaic and koine Judeo Greek is inerrant. The problem is getting the correct ones to translate into English. The second problem is language changes over time. Also scientific information about nature has grown rapidly in the last 2 centuries. These 2 issues have caused the KJV to be flawed today. Words no longer in the English language and names of animals that never existed. These issues disappear when using a modern translation. For instance if memory serves me the KJV satyr in the NIV is a bull.
The original word for satyr was a he goat which doesn't tell us anything, maybe it meant something to the original audience but it means nothing to us in English. A satyr isn't even a real animal, it's half goat/half man. The satyr was a god of the woods and that's the context of Isaiah 34:14 and 15.. none of those animals are literal, they are spirits the Lord sent in judgement.

Isa 34:14 The wild beasts of the desert shall also meet with the wild beasts of the island, and the satyr shall cry to his fellow; the screech owl also shall rest there, and find for herself a place of rest.
Isa 34:15 There shall the great owl make her nest, and lay, and hatch, and gather under her shadow: there shall the vultures also be gathered, every one with her mate.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
This is contradictory to your position that the KJV is the only word of God.
Let me clarify. The container has to be right. If the container isn't right then the message of the spirit can't be contained in it. In other words the symbols have to be maintained in the container.

If someone taps out "---...---" as an sos message, it wont be received as a distress message. The symbols have to be maintained in order for the correct message to be conveyed.
 

Embankment

Senior Member
Feb 28, 2017
703
196
43
Let me clarify. The container has to be right. If the container isn't right then the message of the spirit can't be contained in it. In other words the symbols have to be maintained in the container.

If someone taps out "---...---" as an sos message, it wont be received as a distress message. The symbols have to be maintained in order for the correct message to be conveyed.
Rest assured that if you think the message has anything at all to do with what translation of the Bible you are reading then you completely missed the message.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
Rest assured that if you think the message has anything at all to do with what translation of the Bible you are reading then you completely missed the message.
You're entitled to your opinion. Do you believe all bibles say the same thing?
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
Let me clarify. The container has to be right. If the container isn't right then the message of the spirit can't be contained in it. In other words the symbols have to be maintained in the container.

If someone taps out "---...---" as an sos message, it wont be received as a distress message. The symbols have to be maintained in order for the correct message to be conveyed.
But you have admitted that the King James doesn't match the original Hebrew and Greek, and gave some rhetoric as to why that's ok. But the "symbols" don't match.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
Rest assured that if you think the message has anything at all to do with what translation of the Bible you are reading then you completely missed the message.
The message? Isn't the message of God's word is that it can be trusted to tell you the truth? What if parts of it is not true? Wouldn't that give a person the right to question the whole message?

Proverbs 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
But you have admitted that the King James doesn't match the original Hebrew and Greek, and gave some rhetoric as to why that's ok. But the "symbols" don't match.
No the KJV isn't a word for word translation. I don't know Greek nor Hebrew so I have no idea how the symbolism was done.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
I was thinking the exact same thing my friend. He is an anti-King James Bible only King James Bible only. That's circular reasoning at its finest.
If that's what you think about what I said then you completely missed it. There is nothing circular about my reasoning.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,472
13,785
113
The message? Isn't the message of God's word is that it can be trusted to tell you the truth? What if parts of it is not true? Wouldn't that give a person the right to question the whole message?

Proverbs 14:5 A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.
When you reject your double standard then your words will not be hypocritical.
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
If that's what you think about what I said then you completely missed it. There is nothing circular about my reasoning.
It's called cognitive dissonance.