Is Knowledge of the Original Languages Necessary for KJV Believers?

[Bible_Highlighter]

No, we are staying within the context of the passage.

Who is "we"? I am hoping that is a typo unless you are claiming there is more than one person who is writing this post here.

Gal 6:6 does not say believe in. It says Abraham Believed God. There is a difference in believing in the Lord and believing the Lord. Do you not see there is a difference? Better yet why is there a difference?

Verse 6 starts with the phrase "even as"
This means as you know that what is about to be said is a direct comparison to what was just said.
Verses 2-3 says we received the Spirit and worketh miracles through the hearing, listening to faith. This faith is the faith of Christ that we now live by. As Gal 2:20 says, we are dead but alive. But it is not us that lives but Christ Jesus in us and the life we now live in the flesh we live by the FAITH OF the Son of God that died for us. This is the faith that we are to hear. This is the faith that believes from the heart even as Abraham believed God in all that He said for him to believe and do.


Gal 3:1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
Gal 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Gal 3:3 Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
Gal 3:4 Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain.
Gal 3:5 He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Gal 3:6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.

Did Abraham believe the promise of God in that His descendants would be like the stars?
Does Scripture say that this belief was accounted to him for righteousness?
Does Romans 4 tie in this point?

I would say, "yes."

Your argument appears to side step these basic facts or truths in Scripture and your out there in left field somewhere.

I pray you will see such a basic truth someday.
For now, it just seems like you are desiring to insert something into the text that is not explicitly stated when you examine the whole counsel of God's word.


....

 

[lrs68]

Desiderius Erasmus openly acknowledged that his printed Greek New Testament contained numerous errors, typos, and rushed imperfections due to the intense time constraints under which it was produced.
Context of the Production

• Hasty Publication: Erasmus rushed his 1516 edition (Novum Instrumentum omne) to beat the competing Complutensian Polyglot, resulting in literal thousands of typographical and editorial errors.

• Limited Sources: He relied on a small handful of late medieval manuscripts (mostly from the 12th to 15th centuries) available to him in Basel.

• Back-Translations: Because his final leaf of Revelation (Revelation 22:16–21) was missing entirely from his local Greek source (minuscule 2814), he translated those specific verses straight back from the Latin Vulgate into Greek, introducing readings found in no actual ancient Greek manuscript.

Erasmus's Response and Revisions
• Admitting Fault: Stung by sharp criticism from contemporary scholars and theologians over these flaws and omissions, Erasmus defended his methodology while acknowledging mistakes and actively listing, correcting, or adjusting readings in subsequent editions (1519, 1522, 1527, and 1535).

• The "Textus Receptus" Legacy: Although Erasmus recognized the human fallibility and imperfections of his hastily assembled text, later printers and editors (Robert Stephanus and Theodore Beza) built upon it, leading to the 1633 Elzevir publisher's preface branding it the Textus Receptus ("Received Text") which formed the basis of the King James Version.
Gentle Reformation
Conclusions: The TBS, the Textus Receptus, and Franz Delitzsch
Jun 29, 2026 — Conclusions: The TBS, the Textus Receptus, and Franz Delitzsch * Much of the debate in Reformed circles, when it comes to textual criticism, involves newly disc...
reformation21
Erasmus and the Final Verses of Revelation
The Historical Account 22:16-21) were lacking, and its text in other places was sometimes hard to distinguish from the commentary of Andreas of Caesarea in whic...

 

[Qt]

Who is "we"? I am hoping that is a typo unless you are claiming there is more than one person who is writing this post here.


Did Abraham believe the promise of God in that His descendants would be like the stars?
Does Scripture say that this belief was accounted to him for righteousness?
Does Romans 4 tie in this point?

I would say, "yes."

Your argument appears to side step these basic facts or truths in Scripture and your out there in left field somewhere.

I pray you will see such a basic truth someday.
For now, it just seems like you are desiring to insert something into the text that is not explicitly stated when you examine the whole counsel of God's word.


....

You are ignoring the context. Prove what is being shown to you is wrong within the passage. Even as in verse six brings us back to what was previously said about faith.

And once again. Why the difference between 3:6 and 15:6. For one to believe in the Lord our God is one thing. But it is better to believe the Lord our God as Gal 3:6 states, is it not? For the devils believe and tremble.

 

[Roger316]

Am I understanding your interpretation of Galatians 2:16 correctly? Are you taking the Greek ἐὰν μὴ in its wooden sense of “if not” and understanding the verse along the lines of the following?

“A man cannot be seen as righteous by doing the works of the law, if not through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ working in him.”

Or, to paraphrase what I think you are saying:

“A man is not made righteous by his own works, unless it is through Christ’s faithfulness operating in him; and we enter into this relationship by believing in Christ.”

....

If I might add to your conversation with @Qt I would like to make an exegetical, linguistic point about Galatians 2:6.

In Galatians 2:16, μέν ... δέ (men ... de) is a common Greek construction that signals a contrast or contrastive development. It is often smoother to think of it not as a strict "not this, but this" formula, but as "on the one hand ... on the other hand," or "not by this, but rather by this" when the context is strongly contrastive. The particle μέν prepares the reader for a contrasting statement, while δέ introduces the contrasting element. In Galatians 2:16, Paul uses this construction to set justification by the works of the Law over against justification through faith in Christ. The emphasis is not merely grammatical but theological: righteousness is not obtained by works of the Law, but rather through faith in Jesus Christ. Thus, the men-de construction highlights the sharp contrast between two competing means of justification and directs the reader's attention to the second element as Paul's intended emphasis.