No major doctrines changed?

  • 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.

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,325
13,713
113
A sample of the difficult, archaic words...

Matthew 9:17 - NASV / wineskins - KJV / bottles
Interesting choice; one which disproves your point perfectly. There was one KJV-only advocate on this forum who believed that ‘bottles’ in the KJV meant glass containers.

His stubborn insistence on the accuracy of the KJV actually hindered his ability to understand it.

Even where the words seem familiar, they may not be, as meanings have changed in the last 400 years.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,325
13,713
113
A sample of the difficult, archaic words...

Matthew 9:17 - NASV / wineskins - KJV / bottles
Matthew 1:11 - NASV / deportation - KJV / carried away
Luke 6:22 - NASV / ostracize - KJV / separate you from their company
1 Thes. 2:18 - NASV / thwarted - KJV / hindered
1 Tim. 3:3 - NASV / pugnacious - KJV / striker
1 Tim. 3:8 - NASV / sordid - KJV / filthy
1 Tim. 6:16 - NASV / a pang - KJV / sorrows
Hebrews 7:2 - NASV / apportioned - KJV / gave
Hebrews 12:1 - NASV / encumbrance - KJV / weight
Revelation 6:8 - NASV / ashen - KJV / pale
Revelation 18:1 - NASV / illumined - KJV / lightened
Further, I find your attempt to claim that the NASV words are ‘difficult and archaic’ simply ridiculous. Every single one of those words is in my active vocabulary.
 
Dec 21, 2020
1,825
474
83
Further, I find your attempt to claim that the NASV words are ‘difficult and archaic’ simply ridiculous. Every single one of those words is in my active vocabulary.
He's KJVO. They probably aren't in his vocabulary. :)
 

Inquisitor

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2022
2,807
845
113
At the time being written of, no one was using the term easter. The Israeli people were not celebrating, or observing, nor did they even have the thought of Easter, niether did Herod. He was waiting for the passover to be over.
The use of the word Easter by the KJV translators was intentional, not an error or typo or mistake. But Herod was indeed not waiting until after Easter was over. He was waiting for thier passover traditional observances to be over.
So why did The KJV translation make such a simple blunder.

Acts 12:3-4
And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

Herod must have been observing a forty day Easter celebration.

A translator must translate the Koine Greek according to the meaning of the Greek word, in the time frame that the letter was written.
The context of Acts 12 demands the word 'passover' replace 'easter' in the KJV. The days of unleavened bread not the days of Easter. The text tells you that Herod is following Jewish tradition, not Christian tradition.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,085
3,677
113
Interesting choice; one which disproves your point perfectly. There was one KJV-only advocate on this forum who believed that ‘bottles’ in the KJV meant glass containers.

His stubborn insistence on the accuracy of the KJV actually hindered his ability to understand it.

Even where the words seem familiar, they may not be, as meanings have changed in the last 400 years.
One great thing about the KJV is that it defines itself. It’s called the first mention principle. No other version comes close.
 

Inquisitor

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2022
2,807
845
113
There is an ongoing debate over the KJV only issue. One issue that always comes up is, "There are no major doctrinal changes from one version to the next, so what does it matter?" First of all, truth matters no matter how small of a truth you may think. Truth matters to God. He never wants his people to be persuaded out of the whole truth. See Adam and Eve. I'll post some passages found in the KJV and how those same passages differ in the new versions.

1. The doctrine of condemnation to those who walk after the flesh. There is condemnation to those believers who walk after the flesh and not after the Spirit. The bible speaks of temporal condemnation. Romans 8:1 says, "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Modern Translations leave out the part that says, "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." The KJV says, as a part of having no condemnation, two things are required: We have to be in Christ Jesus, and walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. The enemy wants Christians today to justify sin instead of battling against it. So the enemy will do everything he can to give a person a water down version on His holy Word to promote the idea that there is no condemnation for not following the word of God.

Here is an example of temporal condemnation from not walking after the Spirit. The one who is condemned in the following has sinned against God.

Romans 14
15 But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.
16 Let not then your good be evil spoken of:
17 For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.
18 For he that in these things serveth Christ is acceptable to God, and approved of men.
19 Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another.
20 For meat destroy not the work of God. All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence.
21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak.
22 Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.
23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.
The Vulgate. St Jerome translated the Bible into Latin between A.D. 383 and 404. He originally translated it all from Greek, but as he went on he corrected the Old Testament against the Hebrew original. Jerome's Latin version was called the Biblia vulgata, the 'Bible in the common tongue'. By rendering it into Latin he made it accessible to Western Europe. This was the Bible used throughout the Middle Ages. (wikipedia)

Has the Vulgate been altered since it's publication?

Well, we have a copy of the Vulgate New Testament dated to 536-546 AD, roughly 130 years after the publication of the Vulgate.

The Codex Fuldensis, also known as the Victor Codex (Hessian State Library, Codex Bonifatianus I[1]), designated by F, is a New Testament manuscript based on the Latin Vulgate made between 541 and 546.[2] The codex is considered the second most important witness to the Vulgate text; and is also the oldest complete manuscript witness to the order of the Diatessaron. It is an important witness in any discussion about the authenticity of 1 Corinthians 14:34-35[3] and the Comma Johanneum. It is one of the earliest dated manuscripts of the New Testament.

The Vulgate can be tested against the Codex Bonifatianus I.

I do not believe that you would find any alteration to the Vulgate in just one century.

The Vulgate has been available for over 1500 years.
 

Inquisitor

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2022
2,807
845
113
One great thing about the KJV is that it defines itself. It’s called the first mention principle. No other version comes close.
Do you realize how many mistakes the KJV translators made in the book of Acts?
 
L

Locoponydirtman

Guest
So why did The KJV translation make such a simple blunder.

Acts 12:3-4
And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

Herod must have been observing a forty day Easter celebration.

A translator must translate the Koine Greek according to the meaning of the Greek word, in the time frame that the letter was written.
The context of Acts 12 demands the word 'passover' replace 'easter' in the KJV. The days of unleavened bread not the days of Easter. The text tells you that Herod is following Jewish tradition, not Christian tradition.
It wasnt a mistake, or blunder as you said it. It was intentional. And i said why already. To codify Easter into the scriptures, and tradition. I dont think the KJV was the first to do it either. Many translators installed Easter there, in place of passover.
And yes it is true, Herod was not observing any christian holiday. Niether were any of the Israelis there at the time. Easter wasnt even a word in the Hebrew of the time. So they had never even heard of Easter.
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
7,036
1,645
113
One great thing about the KJV is that it defines itself.
You lost me completely there.
So, no matter what, if the KJV says it, it's "gospel".
That's one of the silliest things I've heard in a while.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,325
13,713
113
One great thing about the KJV is that it defines itself. It’s called the first mention principle. No other version comes close.
Gee... that's odd. The "first mention" principle was never "mentioned" in my seminary classes where principles of hermeneutics were taught.

I have since come across texts declaring it utter hogwash, which is where I land on the matter.
 

williamjordan

Senior Member
Feb 18, 2015
516
126
43
One great thing about the KJV is that it defines itself. It’s called the first mention principle. No other version comes close.
So in John 3:16 (KJV), what does the term "whosoever," mean? Think about it long and hard, because you said the KJV defines itself, yet here is an example where you are forced to put your own (modernized) interpretation on the term, when in fact, the KJV used it much differently.
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
9,382
5,721
113
A sample of the difficult, archaic words...

Matthew 9:17 - NASV / wineskins - KJV / bottles
Matthew 1:11 - NASV / deportation - KJV / carried away
Luke 6:22 - NASV / ostracize - KJV / separate you from their company
1 Thes. 2:18 - NASV / thwarted - KJV / hindered
1 Tim. 3:3 - NASV / pugnacious - KJV / striker
1 Tim. 3:8 - NASV / sordid - KJV / filthy
1 Tim. 6:16 - NASV / a pang - KJV / sorrows
Hebrews 7:2 - NASV / apportioned - KJV / gave
Hebrews 12:1 - NASV / encumbrance - KJV / weight
Revelation 6:8 - NASV / ashen - KJV / pale
Revelation 18:1 - NASV / illumined - KJV / lightened

Paps, pisseth, thee, wimples, anon, bakemeats, tabret, thou, bewray, bolled, ye, choler, agon, satyr, emerods, haply, minish, neesing, sottish, wist, wot, assay, shew, astonied, unicorn, bestead, bruit, dure, ensample, implead, knop, collups, lucre, meteyard, sith, ouches, surfeiting, trow, betimes, ague, snuffdishes, mammon, cogitations, bishoprick, durst, felloes, behove, habergeon, quaternions, ravin, surfeiting, wimples, stanched, sackbut, crisping pins.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,769
113
So in John 3:16 (KJV), what does the term "whosoever," mean? Think about it long and hard, because you said the KJV defines itself, yet here is an example where you are forced to put your own (modernized) interpretation on the term, when in fact, the KJV used it much differently.
Why is "whosoever" an issue? The Greek word is pas and here is the meaning:
Strong's Concordance
pas: all, every

Original Word: πᾶς, πᾶσα, πᾶν
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: pas
Phonetic Spelling: (pas)
Definition: all, every

Usage: all, the whole, every kind of.

And Thayer's Greek Lexicon confirms this, and expands on it.

So would you rather have "all", when whosoever means ANYONE AND EVERYONE? Some of the modern translations have "everyone" and some have "whoever". So why are you making an issue out of this? Or would you rather replace "whosoever" with "only the elect"? That God made a mistake with pas?
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,769
113
Paps, pisseth, thee, wimples, anon, bakemeats, tabret, thou, bewray, bolled, ye, choler, agon, satyr, emerods, haply, minish, neesing, sottish, wist, wot, assay, shew, astonied, unicorn, bestead, bruit, dure, ensample, implead, knop, collups, lucre, meteyard, sith, ouches, surfeiting, trow, betimes, ague, snuffdishes, mammon, cogitations, bishoprick, durst, felloes, behove, habergeon, quaternions, ravin, surfeiting, wimples, stanched, sackbut, crisping pins.
At least you will get an education when you look up the meanings.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,095
958
113
So why did The KJV translation make such a simple blunder.

Acts 12:3-4
And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

Herod must have been observing a forty day Easter celebration.

A translator must translate the Koine Greek according to the meaning of the Greek word, in the time frame that the letter was written.
The context of Acts 12 demands the word 'passover' replace 'easter' in the KJV. The days of unleavened bread not the days of Easter. The text tells you that Herod is following Jewish tradition, not Christian tradition.
As far as the context is concerned, the koine Greek should be translated in English as “Easter” in reference to the resurrection of Christ. The “…the days of Unleavened Bread…” was already occurred meaning the Jewish Passover have already been observed when Peter was imprisoned by Herod. Acts 12:4 is a special case to differentiate the use of Passover elsewhere in the New Testament. Christ the Passover lamb has already been slain and the commemoration is the resurrection. It is said that KJB Translator did 28 times and one (1) time use of “Easter” which was carefully analyzed and adopted by the whole body of translators. Such claims of intentional or blatant error are not befitting from far more eligible translators than today’s editors. The one who translated the Book of Acts is none other than the Mathematician Henry Savile to which some claimed that KJB translators are ignoramus about the subject. Savile is also an expert in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and French and such worthy to translate the Gospels, Acts, and Revelation. Well had someone assumed to say they were in a terrible mistake when we need to look for ourselves in a clean glass mirror.

https://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/about-us/history/400-years-savilian-professors
 

Lucy-Pevensie

Senior Member
Dec 20, 2017
9,382
5,721
113
One great thing about the KJV is that it defines itself. It’s called the first mention principle. No other version comes close.

You are wrongly attributing the first mention principle to the KJ alone. The KJV did not mention anything first.
ALL Bibles contain first mention prophecies. The Geneva 1599 Bible contained them before the KJV, as did the Septuagint.


The principle of first mention is that, to understand a particular word or doctrine, we must find the first place in Scripture that word
or doctrine is revealed and study that passage. The reasoning is that the Bible’s first mention of a concept is the simplest and clearest presentation; doctrines are then more fully developed on that foundation. So, to fully understand an important and complex
theological concept, Bible students are advised to start with its “first mention.”
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,325
13,713
113
At least you will get an education when you look up the meanings.
According to John146 you don’t need to ‘look them up’; you just need to keep reading the KJV. She is proving him wrong.
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,085
3,677
113
You lost me completely there.
So, no matter what, if the KJV says it, it's "gospel".
That's one of the silliest things I've heard in a while.
I guess you failed to understand my statement. It defines itself as far as the words or phrases it uses. It's called the first mention principle. One can find the first mention of a word used in the KJV and it's usage will be defined through the passage and that definition will remain on that word throughout scripture.
 

Inquisitor

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2022
2,807
845
113
As far as the context is concerned, the koine Greek should be translated in English as “Easter” in reference to the resurrection of Christ. The “…the days of Unleavened Bread…” was already occurred meaning the Jewish Passover have already been observed when Peter was imprisoned by Herod. Acts 12:4 is a special case to differentiate the use of Passover elsewhere in the New Testament. Christ the Passover lamb has already been slain and the commemoration is the resurrection. It is said that KJB Translator did 28 times and one (1) time use of “Easter” which was carefully analyzed and adopted by the whole body of translators. Such claims of intentional or blatant error are not befitting from far more eligible translators than today’s editors. The one who translated the Book of Acts is none other than the Mathematician Henry Savile to which some claimed that KJB translators are ignoramus about the subject. Savile is also an expert in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and French and such worthy to translate the Gospels, Acts, and Revelation. Well had someone assumed to say they were in a terrible mistake when we need to look for ourselves in a clean glass mirror.

https://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/about-us/history/400-years-savilian-professors
Interesting that only the KJV translates Acts 12:4 'pasch' into 'Easter'. Every other low brow translation uses the word, 'Passover'.

So Savile was correct and every other Biblical scholar and translator was wrong.

You learn something every day.

I checked the Vulgate on Acts 12:4, they used the word 'Pasch'.