I have an MDiv I got in seminary. We did not ever twist the Bible. In fact we learned how to correctly interpret the Bible, and how to read Hebrew and Greek. I took second year Greek with Bill Mounce, and I read my Bible daily in English (NET right now!) German and Greek. I'm on my second straight read through of the Greek NT, other versions in English I have read the Bible over 50 times!
I have lots of Greek and Hebrew tools like proper tools like lexicons and exegesis books. I've also studied the KJV. I compared the KJV to Hebrew in my Hebrew class. The word order of Hebrew is much closer to English, than Greek, so in grammar, the KJV does much better than its translation from Greek.
I've also studied manuscript evidence. Over 6000 copies of the Greek NT. But KJV is the worst translation from Greek I have ever read. I hate that so many words in the KJV are archaic and/or obsolete. Why on earth would I bother to look up a word in Early Modern English from the KJV, which doesn't exist in contemporary English?? I am much better reading the Greek, looking it up, or read a modern Bible that I can understand, and is close to the Greek, but not in word order, which is so different from English!
As far as the TR or Byzantine manuscripts, they date from the 800-900s AD. No connection back such as the three other families of manuscripts! That in itself makes them the worst manuscripts. Because the Byzantine Empire kept Greek as it language, they wanted to preserve their version of Greek. They had copying schools, where manuscripts were dictated, mistakes in hearing what was said, mistakes in writing it down, and the Byzantine favourite, making notes in the margins of the manuscript, which were read to the next generation of copyists, who incorporated into the text, handing down more and more additions every generation. And because they were Greek, with many monasteries, all these flawed manuscripts were stored carefully and are well preserved, and there are many more of them, than the manuscripts which are very old, not passed down mistakes for centuries. Any student of literature knows the closer you get to the original manuscripts, or autographs, means you get a better version, closer to the original autographs. KJV fails on that account alone.
Have you ever played telephone at a birthday party, or in school or Bible camp? The first person starts with a simple word or phrase. Each time it is transmitted to the next person, mistakes are made. By the last people, the word is not even close to the original word. That is the Byzantine manuscripts, and the KJV. Mistake after mistake. Including Luke 2:17 we talked about earlier, where one letter dropped, a sigma, makes the difference between universalism and saved by faith. The proper Genitive case has the sigma, it was lost by the 15th century AD, and translated as a nominative case, leading to the incorrect theology of universalism.
So it appears you are the one who is totally ignorant of the processes of translation, and why the TR had 1500 years of adding errors and grammatical mistakes. Perhaps you should take a few courses in Greek or Hebrew, and manuscript evidence, and well as Bible interpretation, or hermeneutics!! You certainly have been listening to people with no knowledge of the Greek or Hebrew, who make up nonsense, like the version with the MOST manuscripts wins! No, the manuscripts that are most reliable, win! Those closest to the original autographs. I am much more knowledgeable about languages than you will ever be!
PS I used to teach FSL and French immersion, when I was teaching, and I have a lot of course towards a French degree. I have a few years of German, too, which is why I read Martin Luther's updated translation.
1
1
