How is the KJV corrupt?

  • 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.

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,347
3,150
113
Times may have changed but the word of God never change. It's power is still the same.
That has nothing to do with the subject. The KJV is a translation of God's word. It is not the actual words of Jesus, the apostles and the prophets. If you are that keen, learn Hebrew and Greek.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
That has nothing to do with the subject. The KJV is a translation of God's word. It is not the actual words of Jesus, the apostles and the prophets. If you are that keen, learn Hebrew and Greek.
And why learn Hebrew and Greek? Do we have the originals? Even if we did, the KJV translators were far superior in their knowledge of the languages than any today.
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,347
3,150
113
And why learn Hebrew and Greek? Do we have the originals? Even if we did, the KJV translators were far superior in their knowledge of the languages than any today.
Utter garbage. Far more is known about Hebrew especially. Somehow the KJV has an utterly undeserved reputation (with some) of being God's word exclusively. It's just not true. Sure, it sounds impressive and deeply religious. It is also baffling to those without an upbringing in Elizabethan English. It baffled me.

I've managed, I suppose by some kind of miracle, to live my Christian life without reference to the KJV. Neither have I learned Hebrew and Greek. I have the indwelling Holy Spirit. It's His job to teach me and to lead me into all truth.
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,347
3,150
113
I'll have to look into that, sounds really useful.
It is the version I normally quote on the forum. I think it is accurate, not falling into the interpretation trap, but readable as well. The NIV is a little too much interpretation. The NASB is accurate but hard to read.

Having said that, the best Bible is the one that you actually read and study.
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,347
3,150
113
Just curious, do you use the KJV exclusively? I'm interested in some of the other historic Bibles that were put together in a more responsible manner than most modern versions are, but which might take a slightly different linguistic approach than the KJV.

Right now I use the KJV and the original languages, trying to find a good interlinear and maybe another historic reliable Bible.
You are obviously a brilliant scholar and you know more than all the linguistic experts put together. Since they are irresponsible and have some kind of hidden agenda to deceive the church and send us all to hell, why don't you produce your own version?
 

Gideon300

Well-known member
Mar 18, 2021
5,347
3,150
113
That's your opinion, "attacking". It is defending the word of God. I constantly get attacked, then I defend my beliefs.
To be precise, the KJV is a translation of God's word. Do you think that Lord Jesus would speak King Jamesese if He came to America today and preached? No. He would speak in words that anyone with a grasp of English would understand. He would speak the native tongue of whatever nation he preached to.

Christians are not necessarily English speaking. There are German and French, Chinese and Italian Bibles. There are Russian Bibles. Are they disqualified because they are not KJV? Of course not. So what is wrong with translations that are written in the English of today? Answer: nothing. There is very little difference between any of the translations where it matters.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
Utter garbage. Far more is known about Hebrew especially. Somehow the KJV has an utterly undeserved reputation (with some) of being God's word exclusively. It's just not true. Sure, it sounds impressive and deeply religious. It is also baffling to those without an upbringing in Elizabethan English. It baffled me.

I've managed, I suppose by some kind of miracle, to live my Christian life without reference to the KJV. Neither have I learned Hebrew and Greek. I have the indwelling Holy Spirit. It's His job to teach me and to lead me into all truth.
Does the Spirit lead you to all truth even when your bible has missing verses and false truth?
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
To be precise, the KJV is a translation of God's word. Do you think that Lord Jesus would speak King Jamesese if He came to America today and preached? No. He would speak in words that anyone with a grasp of English would understand. He would speak the native tongue of whatever nation he preached to.

Christians are not necessarily English speaking. There are German and French, Chinese and Italian Bibles. There are Russian Bibles. Are they disqualified because they are not KJV? Of course not. So what is wrong with translations that are written in the English of today? Answer: nothing. There is very little difference between any of the translations where it matters.
Let’s talk English…the KJV contains the completed, exact English word of God.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,472
13,785
113
And why learn Hebrew and Greek? Do we have the originals? Even if we did, the KJV translators were far superior in their knowledge of the languages than any today.
Really? Then how is it that they were unaware of the Granville Sharp rule? Your assertion is ridiculously devoid of reality.
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
8,312
3,618
113
Absolutely. Galatians 2:20 is the only verse that the KJV gets right and others get wrong.
You did mean Galatians 2:20?:

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."—KJV

"I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me."—NASB

"I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me."—ESV

"I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me."—NIV

"I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me."—English Majority Text Version

"I have been crucified with Christ, and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. And that which I now live in the flesh, I live through faith from the Son of God, the One having loved me and having given up Himself for me."—Berean Literal Bible

Actually, they all say the same thing as the KJV. I don't get what you mean by the "others get wrong."
 

Mem

Senior Member
Sep 23, 2014
7,159
2,174
113
You did mean Galatians 2:20?:

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."—KJV

"I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me."—NASB

"I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me."—ESV

"I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me."—NIV

"I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me."—English Majority Text Version

"I have been crucified with Christ, and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. And that which I now live in the flesh, I live through faith from the Son of God, the One having loved me and having given up Himself for me."—Berean Literal Bible

Actually, they all say the same thing as the KJV. I don't get what you mean by the "others get wrong."
Perhaps Abs is speaking to the the difference in prepositions used, KJV's "of" the Son, Berean's "from" the Son, and the others' "in" the Son?
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,110
960
113
That has nothing to do with the subject. The KJV is a translation of God's word. It is not the actual words of Jesus, the apostles and the prophets. If you are that keen, learn Hebrew and Greek.
Just thought we are talking about the English scripture and not the Hebrew or Greek. Give you just s basic about translation if you may, that when Jesus and the Apostles quoted the Old Testament Hebrew text, the apostles being the writer have written it in Greek would constitute of what we call translation. Hence translation is the word of God.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,472
13,785
113
Just thought we are talking about the English scripture and not the Hebrew or Greek. Give you just s basic about translation if you may, that when Jesus and the Apostles quoted the Old Testament Hebrew text, the apostles being the writer have written it in Greek would constitute of what we call translation. Hence translation is the word of God.
I can agree with you that the translation is still the word of God. However, any translation of the word of God is the word of God. That is not exclusive to the KJV, no matter what the onlyists choose to believe.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,110
960
113
Utter garbage. Far more is known about Hebrew especially. Somehow the KJV has an utterly undeserved reputation (with some) of being God's word exclusively. It's just not true. Sure, it sounds impressive and deeply religious. It is also baffling to those without an upbringing in Elizabethan English. It baffled me.

I've managed, I suppose by some kind of miracle, to live my Christian life without reference to the KJV. Neither have I learned Hebrew and Greek. I have the indwelling Holy Spirit. It's His job to teach me and to lead me into all truth.
Just wondering, why baffled with Kjb English? Is it because of its antiquity? Do you not realize the the Hebrew or Greek is more antiquated and considered to be of the dead language? i believe those language were once chose by God to have its use being the common language of their time. God uses language to proclaim his very purpose to all the world and God is using the English to spread the his word.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,110
960
113
I can agree with you that the translation is still the word of God. However, any translation of the word of God is the word of God. That is not exclusive to the KJV, no matter what the onlyists choose to believe.
Thank you Dino, if it is the word of God therefore it is inerrant, infallible, pure which is truly the claim of every Pro or anti Kjb must be tested. Claims of the kjb proponents have "a more sure word of prophecy". If we are honest to say that all other Modern English Bibles are the same with sureness as the claims of the Kjb, then that would be just fine yet, most them as I observed says something like just an accurate translation. Accuracy has nothing to do with the perfection.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,472
13,785
113
Thank you Dino, if it is the word of God therefore it is inerrant, infallible, pure which is truly the claim of every Pro or anti Kjb must be tested. Claims of the kjb proponents have "a more sure word of prophecy". If we are honest to say that all other Modern English Bibles are the same with sureness as the claims of the Kjb, then that would be just fine yet, most them as I observed says something like just an accurate translation. Accuracy has nothing to do with the perfection.
Since the KJV is demonstrably not perfect, that subject is off the table.