The word of God is not a secret code that needs unlocked.

[Dino246]

So then, there can be no argument for them producing a superior translation by what they chose to work with.

Exactly. In comparison with what is available today, their resources were very limited.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

for example we have in every English version of the Psalm, 'they pierced My hands and My feet'
that's not incorrect, but what it literally says is 'like a lion, My hands and My feet'

In the MT, but the LXX says pierced, so possibly translators used the LXX version instead of the MT one. I know Jewish bibles at one time universally used the MT version of Zechariah 14:5, but several later editions switched over to the LXX version, because it is indisputably the correct version.

 

[posthuman]

So then, there can be no argument for them producing a superior translation by what they chose to work with.

There is at the very leaat no argument that they had superior resources at their disposal, and the whole "anti-textual-criticism" argument is nonsense or at best a diversionary tacric; textual criticism is exactly what every good translator does, kjv governing body included: they critique the texts available at them.

 

[posthuman]

In the MT, but the LXX says pierced, so possibly translators used the LXX version instead of the MT one. I know Jewish bibles at one time universally used the MT version of Zechariah 14:5, but several later editions switched over to the LXX version, because it is indisputably the correct version.

iirc the root of the argument is that the word for "pierced" is the word for lion. so the argument is purely about the true meaning of ancient Hebrew words, not about versions.

i will do some tracing. i am completely untrained in Hebrew and Greek, so i can definitely not comment reliably offhand.

 

[Genez]

Exactly. In comparison with what is available today, their resources were very limited.

Those who believe the KJV Only propaganda, are also very limited.
I wish them well.

 

[Genez]

There is at the very leaat no argument that they had superior resources at their disposal, and the whole "anti-textual-criticism" argument is nonsense or at best a diversionary tacric; textual criticism is exactly what every good translator does, kjv governing body included: they critique the texts available at them.

The whole "anti-textual-criticism" argument came from Satan's atmospheric fake news channel.
Satan fears and hates there being clear thinking Christians walking around and getting about in his domain.
Only knowing TRUTH makes them free. King James fails that test with its archaic language.
I near flunked Shakespeare in school..... and, was far from being alone. It is an insult to me to tell me that the KJV is God's perfect words.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

iirc the root of the argument is that the word for "pierced" is the word for lion. so the argument is purely about the true meaning of ancient Hebrew words, not about versions.

The issue, I think, is does the MT have the original meaning or does the LXX, which predates the MT by almost 1000 years? The LXX is a snapshot frozen in time of the ancient Hebrew text, whereas more than a few revisions were made to the MT that corrupted original meanings. The gospel writers' quoting of OT scripture from the LXX, or possibly from what the Hebrew text was back then, evidences that

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

that's interesting.

it appears that ancient translations and manuscripts don't have "without cause" either.

https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-...ngry-without-a-cause-in-matthew-522-only-kjv/

may i suggest that being liable to judgment does not make a person automatically condemned. and may i remind you that it is also written, do not judge, lest ye also be judged?
not, 'don't judge unless you're pretty sure you have a good reason to judge'


so while it may be more difficult to understand, it is consistent, and does not make Christ a sinner by saying it without a softening clause that textual and external evidence indicates was added after the second century.


Thank you for your examples; i will enjoy looking into these over the next couple of days - tho i will mention right away that things like NLT and GWT etc don't even attempt to be literal and imo don't count as translations at all, they are just rubbish.

i'm interested in accuracy not interpretive paraphrase.

When individuals are prosecuted for a crime, a solid case is often built against them in court with multiple pieces of evidence. This creates a clear theme, leading to a conclusion. The same principle applies to the issue of Bible translations. I haven’t provided just one example but several, each illustrating a recurring theme: how Modern Bibles portray Jesus in ways that imply He could have sinned. It amounts to a denial of truth to dismiss the evident pattern we observe in Modern Bibles on this issue. And this isn't the only concern. I also have a list of nearly 20 points where Modern Bibles portray a distorted version of God, as well.

All Modern Bibles, even those often considered reputable, share a common theme of subtly undermining the Lord and His righteous ways, though it’s often hard to notice without close examination. When it comes to paraphrase Bibles like the NLT and GWT, they are based on the same foundational text as these so-called respected Bibles, the Nestle-Aland text, which draws from Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts. These translations also follow the same philosophy of an ever-shifting text that perpetually leaves room for errors, placing the burden on readers or scholars to determine which words belong or don’t. This approach relies more on guesswork and so-called “Science” than on simply trusting in God’s Word and His goodness as revealed plainly in Scripture.





....

 

[Genez]

KJV = Keep Jesus Veiled!

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Raca means telling someone he is going to Hell.

For, its word's usage, it was seen in the context of...

"The fool" says in his heart there is no God.

Got that from my pastor.
A scholar who taught us from the original languages.
Again, proof, that surface translations into English can make us miss the original point that was being made in a passage.

That is why I recommend my pastor when I can.
He never charges for his Bible lessons.
And, begins almost ever class by citing from the KJV.

You really need to get out from being under the concept of a one man teacher who spoon feeds people whereby his followers just blindly believe him without fact checking him. I have looked into this and there is no proof that the Aramaic word "Raca" is any way associated with hell. It means worthless, or empty, etcetera. There are no roots of the word "Raca" having to do with any form of hell, either.

If you wanted to convey to someone in Aramaic that they are "bound for hell," you would say the following:

"Att khaza l'Gehinnom" (אַתְּ חָזָא לְגֵיהִנּוֹם)

Here are the different Aramaic words that can be used to refer to hell in some way:

Gehinnom (ܓܼܗܲܢܵܐ, Gehinnā) – This is the most direct term used for hell in Aramaic, borrowed from the Hebrew Gehenna (גֵּיהִנּוֹם). Gehinnom originally referred to the Valley of Hinnom, a place outside Jerusalem where refuse and sometimes bodies were burned. Over time, it became a symbol of divine punishment or a place of fiery judgment in both Jewish and early Christian thought.

Sheol (שאול, pronounced She’ol in Hebrew and Shu'la in some Aramaic dialects) – Though not as common in Aramaic, Sheol sometimes appears to describe the abode of the dead. In Jewish and Aramaic contexts, Sheol represents a shadowy underworld or the grave, rather than a place of fiery punishment.

Nura d’Alma (ܢܘܪܐ ܕܥܠܡܐ) – Meaning "fire of the world" or "eternal fire." While not a direct word for hell, this phrase can describe a state or place of eternal punishment associated with hellfire. It is more descriptive and is used to convey the concept of an unquenchable or divine fire rather than hell itself.

Bor Taṭa (ܒܘܪܬܬܐ) – Literally "the pit below" or "the bottomless pit." This term is less commonly used but can refer to a place of spiritual imprisonment or a place of despair. It’s sometimes associated with Sheol or a hellish place.


....

 

[Genez]

You really need to get out from being under the concept of a one man teacher who spoon feeds people whereby his followers just blindly believe him without fact checking him. I have looked into this and there is no proof that the Aramaic word "Raca" is any way associated with hell. It means worthless, or empty, etcetera. There are no roots of the word "Raca" having to do with any form of hell, either.

If you wanted to convey to someone in Aramaic that they are "bound for hell," you would say the following:

"Att khaza l'Gehinnom" (אַתְּ חָזָא לְגֵיהִנּוֹם)

Here are the different Aramaic words that can be used to refer to hell in some way:

Gehinnom (ܓܼܗܲܢܵܐ, Gehinnā) – This is the most direct term used for hell in Aramaic, borrowed from the Hebrew Gehenna (גֵּיהִנּוֹם). Gehinnom originally referred to the Valley of Hinnom, a place outside Jerusalem where refuse and sometimes bodies were burned. Over time, it became a symbol of divine punishment or a place of fiery judgment in both Jewish and early Christian thought.

Sheol (שאול, pronounced She’ol in Hebrew and Shu'la in some Aramaic dialects) – Though not as common in Aramaic, Sheol sometimes appears to describe the abode of the dead. In Jewish and Aramaic contexts, Sheol represents a shadowy underworld or the grave, rather than a place of fiery punishment.

Nura d’Alma (ܢܘܪܐ ܕܥܠܡܐ) – Meaning "fire of the world" or "eternal fire." While not a direct word for hell, this phrase can describe a state or place of eternal punishment associated with hellfire. It is more descriptive and is used to convey the concept of an unquenchable or divine fire rather than hell itself.

Bor Taṭa (ܒܘܪܬܬܐ) – Literally "the pit below" or "the bottomless pit." This term is less commonly used but can refer to a place of spiritual imprisonment or a place of despair. It’s sometimes associated with Sheol or a hellish place.


....

All those words you just said?
To show you could not gasp the few I presented?

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

KJV = Keep Jesus Veiled!

While I'm truly thankful to the Lord that Trump won his second term, your phrase sounds a bit like an empty campaign slogan—something like, “Trump = Justice for Peanut the squirrel.” Such words don’t exactly align with Trump’s official platform. The Trump War Room isn’t primarily focused on “Making America safe for squirrels again.”

Now, if squirrels were safer here in America, that would be a bonus for a squirrel enthusiast like myself. Although I don’t keep squirrels running around my home, I enjoy their lively company on the trails near my house. I’m not looking for revenge for Peanut; I trust he had a full life and is in a better place (or will be in due time).

If I could show you just a glimpse of the amazing discoveries I’ve found about Jesus in my King James Bible, I think you’d be as captivated as a squirrel finding a hidden stash of acorns before winter. The more I uncover, the more it feels like discovering treasures that deepen my awe and gratitude. Each revelation is like finding a new gem, illuminating just how magnificently Jesus shines on every page. It’s enough to make you want to join a frenzy of squirrels gathering blessings as eagerly as peanuts before the chill of winter!


....


....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

All those words you just said?
To show you could not gasp the few I presented?

Defining words should not exist amongst one man but it should be established by either Scripture, or a dictionary, or early church fathers, or the actual original language as the culture would recognize it. I checked on my end, and there is no proof for your definition here. Therefore, the burden of proof is on you to give me goods or sources to back up your Pastor's claim.


....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

in my work i use data to identify cause and find solutions.

i am never opposed to more and better data, and in large part the differences between kjv and later translation work ((where that work had the aim of accurate literal translation)) are the result of having more manuscripts and thereby a better sense of which readings were original and which had been altered over time.

kjv did exactly the same kind of analysis but with poorer resources available to them.

I believe the data shows a clear KJV win for our current lifetime until the End in English-speaking countries.
I have come up with 150 Reasons for the KJV being the Pure Word of God for today.
As a data analyst, I would like your feedback on such data when I finish my sub-articles for this write-up.

…..

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

No. They had previous printed editions in English, Erasmus' five editions, Luther's German edition, a few other languages, the Latin Vulgate, and at most a handful of Greek manuscripts, all of them quite late (9th-11th centuries). Since that time, there have been thousands of manuscripts discovered. The current total is around 5800 NT manuscripts in Greek, along with hundreds of examples in other languages.

Actually, the 5,800 Greek manuscripts are Byzantine text type, and while they are not always an exact match, the Textus Receptus aligns more with these 5,800 manuscripts than the Alexandrian manuscripts such as Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.


....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

I would like to interject that we are subjective rather than objective, so the best we can be is open-minded rather than callous-hearted.

Also, even if we had a perfect/inerrant Bible, we are imperfect or fallible, so we would need to employ a good hermeneutic as we seek an ever better understanding of GW.

Thanks

I believe that a perfect Word needs to exist because man is corrupt and fallen. Man (as a whole) is generally going to go with something that benefits his dark heart rather than let the perfection of God's Word change them.




....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Yes... But it means to be seen as a fool for Christ in the world's eyes.
But, not, to become a fool in the face of what the Scriptures teach.

Never did I suggest otherwise.
Anyway, your reply here does not in any way prove your agenda of the false of Science of Modern Textual Criticism.


...

 

[Genez]

Defining words should not exist amongst one man but it should be established by either Scripture, or a dictionary, or early church fathers, or the actual original language as the culture would recognize it. I checked on my end, and there is no proof for your definition here. Therefore, the burden of proof is on you to give me goods or sources to back up your Pastor's claim.

How many men are you?

My pastor was recommended to me by the professor of ancient languages at a Bible college I attended. This professor was associated with Harvard during WWII. Other pastors who have the integrity and skill to exegete also endorsed him.

What endorsed him the most for me?
He makes sense where others meander around in a maze of footnotes and comments, but can never nail an issue down.

So, you who promote the KJV? Are telling me you know better?


Have a nice Day.

You will like it anyway (eventually).

 

[Genez]

Never did I suggest otherwise.
Anyway, your reply here does not in any way prove your agenda of the false of Science of Modern Textual Criticism.


...

Wow.... what do you live for? Beside to prove yourself right?

 

[Genez]

I believe the data shows a clear KJV win for our current lifetime until the End in English-speaking countries.
I have come up with 150 Reasons for the KJV being the Pure Word of God for today.
As a data analyst, I would like your feedback on such data when I finish my sub-articles for this write-up.

…..

Now if they could only render the King James in clear and lucid English ?

Then you might have at least one foot to stand on.