Bible Versions

[burien1]

If the problem were really the difficult King James Version, then by now, with all these easy versions around, the quality of Christianity would be much improved! If that has happened, I haven't noticed it yet where I live.

Excellent observation!!!

YSIC

[crmann]

Sparrow wrote:

Well, then how can one trust God to keep His promise to keep His Word if there is not a perfect Word for us today?

Scripture tells us that we are to rely on the Holy Spirit's illumination to gain insights into the meaning and application of Scripture (John 16:12-15; 1 Corinthians 2:9-11).

It is the Holy Spirit's work to throw light upon the Word of God so that the believer can assent to the meaning intended and act on it.

The Holy Spirit, as the "Spirit of truth" (John 16:13), guides us so that "we may understand what God has freely given us" (1 Corinthians 2:12).

Comprehension of the Word of God is impossible without prayerful dependence on the Spirit of God, for He who inspired the Word (2 Peter 1:21) is also its supreme interpreter.

Illumination is necessary because man's mind has been darkened through sin (Romans 1:21), preventing him from properly understanding God's Word.

Mankind cannot understand God's Word apart from God's divine enablement (Ephesians 4:18).

This aspect of the Holy Spirit's ministry operates within the sphere of man's rational capacity, which God Himself gave man (cf. Genesis 2-3).

Illumination comes to the 'minds' of God's people--not to some nonrational faculty like our 'emotions' or our 'feelings'.
To know God's revelation means to use our minds. This makes knowledge something we can share with others, something we can talk about.

God's Word is in words with ordinary rational content.
The ministry of the Holy Spirit in interpretation does not mean interpreters can ignore common sense and logic.

Since the Holy Spirit is "the Spirit of truth" (John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13), He does not teach concepts that fail to meet the tests of truth. In other words, "the Holy Spirit does not guide into interpretations that contradict each other or fail to have logical, internal consistency."

It must also be kept in mind that the function of the Holy Spirit is not to communicate to the minds of people any doctrine or meaning of Scripture that is not contained already in Scripture itself.

The Holy Spirit makes men "wise up to what is written, not beyond it." Indeed, "the function of the Spirit is not to communicate new truth or to instruct in matters unknown, but to illuminate what is revealed in Scripture."

The Word of God is not the words printed on paper. The Word of God is Jesus Christ. The written word communicates the thoughts of God. Not one version of the Bible is prefect. The written word of God is man’s way of expressing the thoughts of God. John 3:16 has been written in how many languages? Each language expresses the same thought of God as written in John 3:16. Are we to be so arrogant as to say our King James’ English version is the only true “scripture?”

Would we do as the Catholic Church has done for centuries and read the Bible only in Latin, which very few understand? The King James Version, likewise, is a foreign language to the majority of people living today.

Could you please explain what these verses mean to you, if it is just the spirit we are to obey?

Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Proverbs 30: 5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

In each of these scriptures, “word” means utterance, or speech. In what language was the Word of God spoken? I have to say, it was not English. In all three scriptures quoted here, the message of the word is important, not the words written.

I have a question for you, Old Timer. Have you ever sat in a public worship service where there were readers for several portions of Scripture?

Yes, many times... As I followed along in my version, I listened for the message, not the words.

In history, the KJV was the ONLY translation available. When one referred to the Bible, it was commonly accepted and known that the KJV was what they were referring to.

How far back in history would you have us go?

In the Middle English Period (ca. 1100-1550), John Wycliffe, John Purvey, and Nicholas of Hereford collaborated to produce the first complete Bible in English. There were two editions of the Wycliffe Bible. They were both translations of the Latin text. The first edition was a literal translation from Latin into English. There was a second edition completed in 1396. It circulated more widely. The focus was on the meaning of sentences, not mere words.

As a result of this work, Wycliffe and his followers, "the Lollards" suffered persecution as heretics. Purvey and Nicholas were forced to recant their work. In 1408, the Constitutions of Oxford included a prohibition against Bible translation without approval of church authorities.

William Tyndale (1484-1536) was a Greek scholar educated at Oxford with a desire to provide a readable Bible to the average person. He based his English New Testament on a Greek text established by Erasmus in 1516. He printed it in Europe in 1526 and revised it in 1534. Myles Coverdale produced the first complete English Bible of the sixteenth century in 1535. Not until 1611, did King James gave his blessing to a new translation, the Authorized Version or King James Bible.

But when one wants to read Scripture/ and interpret it according to the spirit, we can make it say whatever we want.

If we interpret scripture according to the Spirit, the interpretation will be interpreted in truth. If we make it say whatever we want, that is not of the spirit, but of the flesh.

Sparrow, here is a King James scripture:

Mark 13:24-26
24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, 25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken. 26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.

Being that this is from the King James, can you tell me exactly what it is saying??

And, JABova's (Joe's) comments in the above post, supports my statements.

I can only surmise that the King James is your favorite version, and you strongly desire that other versions were never used.

Blessings,

The Old Timer

[crmann]

Sparrow wrote:

Well, then how can one trust God to keep His promise to keep His Word if there is not a perfect Word for us today?

Scripture tells us that we are to rely on the Holy Spirit's illumination to gain insights into the meaning and application of Scripture (John 16:12-15; 1 Corinthians 2:9-11).

It is the Holy Spirit's work to throw light upon the Word of God so that the believer can assent to the meaning intended and act on it.

The Holy Spirit, as the "Spirit of truth" (John 16:13), guides us so that "we may understand what God has freely given us" (1 Corinthians 2:12).

Comprehension of the Word of God is impossible without prayerful dependence on the Spirit of God, for He who inspired the Word (2 Peter 1:21) is also its supreme interpreter.

Illumination is necessary because man's mind has been darkened through sin (Romans 1:21), preventing him from properly understanding God's Word.

Mankind cannot understand God's Word apart from God's divine enablement (Ephesians 4:18).

This aspect of the Holy Spirit's ministry operates within the sphere of man's rational capacity, which God Himself gave man (cf. Genesis 2-3).

Illumination comes to the 'minds' of God's people--not to some nonrational faculty like our 'emotions' or our 'feelings'.
To know God's revelation means to use our minds. This makes knowledge something we can share with others, something we can talk about.

God's Word is in words with ordinary rational content.
The ministry of the Holy Spirit in interpretation does not mean interpreters can ignore common sense and logic.

Since the Holy Spirit is "the Spirit of truth" (John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13), He does not teach concepts that fail to meet the tests of truth. In other words, "the Holy Spirit does not guide into interpretations that contradict each other or fail to have logical, internal consistency."

It must also be kept in mind that the function of the Holy Spirit is not to communicate to the minds of people any doctrine or meaning of Scripture that is not contained already in Scripture itself.

The Holy Spirit makes men "wise up to what is written, not beyond it." Indeed, "the function of the Spirit is not to communicate new truth or to instruct in matters unknown, but to illuminate what is revealed in Scripture."

The Word of God is not the words printed on paper. The Word of God is Jesus Christ. The written word communicates the thoughts of God. Not one version of the Bible is prefect. The written word of God is man’s way of expressing the thoughts of God. John 3:16 has been written in how many languages? Each language expresses the same thought of God as written in John 3:16. Are we to be so arrogant as to say our King James’ English version is the only true “scripture?”

Would we do as the Catholic Church has done for centuries and read the Bible only in Latin, which very few understand? The King James Version, likewise, is a foreign language to the majority of people living today.

Could you please explain what these verses mean to you, if it is just the spirit we are to obey?

Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Proverbs 30: 5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

In each of these scriptures, “word” means utterance, or speech. In what language was the Word of God spoken? I have to say, it was not English. In all three scriptures quoted here, the message of the word is important, not the words written.

I have a question for you, Old Timer. Have you ever sat in a public worship service where there were readers for several portions of Scripture?

Yes, many times... As I followed along in my version, I listened for the message, not the words.

In history, the KJV was the ONLY translation available. When one referred to the Bible, it was commonly accepted and known that the KJV was what they were referring to.

How far back in history would you have us go?

In the Middle English Period (ca. 1100-1550), John Wycliffe, John Purvey, and Nicholas of Hereford collaborated to produce the first complete Bible in English. There were two editions of the Wycliffe Bible. They were both translations of the Latin text. The first edition was a literal translation from Latin into English. There was a second edition completed in 1396. It circulated more widely. The focus was on the meaning of sentences, not mere words.

As a result of this work, Wycliffe and his followers, "the Lollards" suffered persecution as heretics. Purvey and Nicholas were forced to recant their work. In 1408, the Constitutions of Oxford included a prohibition against Bible translation without approval of church authorities.

William Tyndale (1484-1536) was a Greek scholar educated at Oxford with a desire to provide a readable Bible to the average person. He based his English New Testament on a Greek text established by Erasmus in 1516. He printed it in Europe in 1526 and revised it in 1534. Myles Coverdale produced the first complete English Bible of the sixteenth century in 1535. Not until 1611, did King James gave his blessing to a new translation, the Authorized Version or King James Bible.

But when one wants to read Scripture/ and interpret it according to the spirit, we can make it say whatever we want.

If we interpret scripture according to the Spirit, the interpretation will be interpreted in truth. If we make it say whatever we want, that is not of the spirit, but of the flesh.

Sparrow, here is a King James scripture:

Mark 13:24-26
24 But in those days, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, 25 And the stars of heaven shall fall, and the powers that are in heaven shall be shaken. 26 And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory.

Being that this is from the King James, can you tell me exactly what it is saying?? What are these powers that are in heaven?

And, JABova's (Joe's) comments in the above post, supports my statements.

I can only surmise that the King James is your favorite version, and you strongly desire that other versions were never used.

Blessings,

The Old Timer

[crmann]

Quote:
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. Exodus 20:4 (KJV)

Joe wrote:

Now some may call this a stretch, but some may interpret what we are saying is that the printed word itself in the form of the KJV has been in some way elevated to that of equality with the Word. The KJV is only man's interpretation, it is not the original Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic, nor do I see written in the KJV or any translation that the thou shall use the KJV and the KJV only to preach the message to the whole world. This is where I really struggle with the KJV only position. The Lord commanded us to go into all the world, we cannot expect them to learn to read English, let alone King’s English, we need to translate the Word as best we can into their language, even English. And the simple fact that we are even debating this shows division in the Body of Christ. I don’t believe that this is what the Lord intended.

Thank you Joe... You have given me something to share with a friend of mine who is an avowed King James Only person.

[Sparrow]

Hi crmann,

You are correct when you say that Scripture is spiritually discerned. I would not refute any of the Scriptures you quoted. Likewise, it would be a benefit for the Body of Christ to understand the unique insight that former Catholics have to offer when it comes to spiritual enlightenment on this subject.

I am quoting below a partial quote from a post I posted previously on this thread.

The problem with sinful human nature is that we expect that God runs a democracy. He does not. His kingdom is a Theocracy.

I don't need a PhD in apologetics to accurately see this subject and discuss it for what it is. I lived it.

These new English versions were introduced by the Vatican at Vatican II. The RCC hates the KJV. Hmmm.....

The different bible versions were introduced after Vatican II.


From this Catholic site

crossroadsinitiative.com


Quote:
Blocking Access to the Bible

The Holy Bible, Catholic Church, Tradition, Scripture, Word of God, Catholic ChurchSo if this is true, why did the Catholic Church keep people from reading the Bible for all those years?



The answer is, it never did any such thing. The official Church never forbade Bible reading or blocked authentic translations of the Scriptures being given to the People of God. But the important word here is “accurate.” Translation is always, to some degree, an act of interpretation. As such is can be particularly treacherous in leading people into error who think they are simply reading God’s inspired Word. Such was the case with the English translation of John Wyclif, predecessor of the Protestant Reformation, whose anti-clericalism and denial of Christ’s full Eucharistic presence lurked underneath his “simple translation.” So yes, Church authorities objected to certain Bibles being circulated – because they were badly translated Bibles.

Pope Leo XIII, Vatican II, Council of Trent, Holy Bible

So how about when you have good translations? Popes Leo XIII and Pius XII, long before Vatican II, emphasized the importance of everyone being acquainted with the Word of God. And ultimately Dei Verbum 21 proclaims it loud and strong: “Access to sacred Scripture ought to be open wide to the Christian faithful.” In the final chapter of this document, the Second Vatican Council encourages accurate and appropriate translations to be made into all vernacular languages. It even encourages ecumenical teams of translators to come up with versions that can be used by all Christians, assuming such translations are approved by Catholic Church authorities as accurate and containing no doctrinal errors. My favourite translation, by the way, is an ecumenical one – the original Revised Standard Version, done in the 1950's, which was approved for liturgical use in the Catholic Church and is still available as the Ignatius Bible (San Francisco, Ignatius Press).



And from this site:



http://vatican2voice.org/symp/murray.asp


Quote:
However, there is fairly widespread Catholic participation in bible study groups, often fostered by ‘Ecclesial movements’ such as the Neo-catechumenate;[xxvii] the monastic tradition of Lectio divina is developing in lay forms, often ecumenical; and in some places there is joint study with Jews,[xxviii] which Christians almost always find both enlightening and enriching. A radical desideratum in DV 6 (no. 22) was for the Catholic Church to make peace with the Protestant Bible Societies and work with them. Despite longstanding hostility, full collaboration between the Catholic Biblical Federation and the United Bible Societies was soon established, bringing a notable increase in production of vernacular versions all over the world. Similar collaboration has developed with publishers of daily bible reading aids such as the Bible Reading Fellowship, though in this country, at least, nothing seems to check a lamentable decline in general knowledge of the Bible.



These versions are New Age versions.

[crmann]

Sparrow wrote:

Hi crmann,

You are correct when you say that Scripture is spiritually discerned. I would not refute any of the Scriptures you quoted. Likewise, it would be a benefit for the Body of Christ to understand the unique insight that former Catholics have to offer when it comes to spiritual enlightenment on this subject.

I am quoting below a partial quote from a post I posted previously on this thread.

The problem with sinful human nature is that we expect that God runs a democracy. He does not. His kingdom is a Theocracy.

I don't need a PhD in apologetics to accurately see this subject and discuss it for what it is. I lived it.

These new English versions were introduced by the Vatican at Vatican II. The RCC hates the KJV. Hmmm.....

So, what are you saying, Sparrow?

Of all the hundreds of Bible translations around the world today and in different generations past, there are those who select the King James Version as the only one they use or recognize. They claim the King James translation is inspired just as the original writings were. This is certainly a claim the translators never made for themselves! The Bible says inspiration stopped when Revelation chapter 22 was complete. (Rev. 22:18-19)

Some KJV Only people disclaim inspiration for the KJV translators, but they say the KJV is God's perfectly preserved Word. That is the same thing as inspiration. It takes inspiration to have perfection.

I know some will scream at this point and say they believe in perfect preservation, not inspiration for the KJV. That is playing with words. It is not being completely honest. The fact is, if something is perfect, it has to be inspired. Call it what you will. To claim perfection for the KJV is to claim inspiration.

Inspiration in the Bible refers only to the original manuscripts. Each translation has to be judged on its own merits, or lack of them. This includes the KJV which is really only a revised version itself, being based on William Tyndale's translation and the Bishops Bible.

[Sparrow]

crmann,

I think this answers your questions Scripturally.

QUESTION: Is the King James Bible inspired or preserved?

ANSWER: The original autographs were inspired. The King James Bible is those same autographs preserved up to today.

EXPLANATION: The best way to simply describe inspiration and preservation of the Bible is as follows:
Inspiration is when God takes a blank piece of paper (papyrus, vellum, etc.) and uses men to write His words.
Preservation is when God takes those words already written and uses men to preserve them to today.
Both of these actions are DIVINE and are assured by God as recorded in Psalm 12:6, 7.
6 "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, 0 LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."
In Psalm 12:6 God assures us that His originals are perfect. Even though penned by fallible men with the heinous sins of; murder (Moses and David), adultery (David), idolatry (Solomon), and denial of the lord (Peter), God's words are untainted by the sins of the penmen.
That the originals were inspired perfect in their entirety is an undisputed belief among fundamentalists today.
But most fundamentalists argue that only the "originals” were perfect. They say that today we have nothing but copies and translations of those copies. They seem indignant at the thought that any "mere translation" should be considered a perfect copy of the originals. They claim that copies and translations are products of uninspired men and therefore must all contain mistakes.
Fundamentalists clinging to this tenet are mislead. Their folly in accepting this erroneous teaching is fourfold.


More at

http://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_28.asp




http://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_29.asp

[Sparrow]

This is a really good article. It seems that much argument on this thread is made against the KJV. One needs to ask themselves why there is such attack on the KJV, and not the NASB, the NIV, or the RSV, or ESV??

What is it that makes the KJV unique and special in this regard?



Disarming the Saints: The Bible as Defective Weaponry

©2008 Brandon Staggs

In Ephesians 6, the Bible calls itself "the sword of the Spirit." Believers are told to take "the whole armour of God" so that we "may be able to withstand in the evil day." Scripture is hereby likened to a weapon, and we are therefore expected to wield it. 2 Corinthians 10:4 makes it clear that we as followers of Christ are in a state of warfare. As believers, we are furnished by God with a variety of armaments with which to fight our battles. Since God has given us the ultimate offensive weapon, his word, it is to be used, not ignored or shunned.

Further, it is imperative that the believer trust his weaponry. No soldier wishes to go to battle with defective or unreliable armaments, and in the case of we saints, our God has not demanded of us that we fight battles with tools in a state of disrepair.

http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/staggs-disarming-the-saints.html

[mark s]

This is a really good article. It seems that much argument on this thread is made against the KJV. One needs to ask themselves why there is such attack on the KJV, and not the NASB, the NIV, or the RSV, or ESV??

What is it that makes the KJV unique and special in this regard?

Hi Sparrow,

I think you've shown adequately in articles you've posted that its not just the KJV that is subject to criticism!

[crmann]

Well, let's see:


If the 1611 King James was error free, why all these changes?

Since 1611 the KJV has gone through many changes. The followingtable will help illustrate the point. Examples of Changes in the King James Version Since 1611.

Since 1611 the KJV has gone through many changes. The following
table will help illustrate the point.

Examples of Changes in the King James Version Since 1611

1611 KJV to Modern KJV

Gen 39:16
until her lord came home...
until his lord came home

Num 6:14
and one lamb without blemish...
and one ram without blemish

Deut 26:1
which the LORD giveth...
which the LORD thy God giveth...

Josh 3:15
Jordan overfloweth all his banks at the time of the harvest...
Jordan overfloweth all his banks all the time of the harvest

Josh 13:29
half tribe of Manasseh...
half tribe of the children of Manasseh

Judg 11:2
and his wives sons grew up...
and his wife’s sons grew up

1 Sam 18:27
David arose, he and his men...
David arose and went, he and his men

1 Sam 28:7
And his servant said to him...
And his servants said to him


1 Kings 8:61
Let your heart therefore be perfect with the LORD your God...
Let your heart therefore be perfect with the LORD our God

2 Kings 11:10
that were in the Temple...
that were in the temple of the Lord

2 Kings 18:8
from the tower of the watchmen to the fenced cities...
from the tower of the watchmen to the fenced city

1 Chron 7:5
were men of might...
were valiant men of might

2 Chron 28:11
the fierce wrath of God is upon you...
the fierce wrath of the LORD is upon you

Job 39:30
where the slain are, there is he...
where the slain are, there is she

Jer 34:16
whom ye had set at liberty
whom he had set at liberty
___________________

Erroll F. Rhodes and Liana Lupas, eds., The Translators to the Reader: The Original Preface of the King James Version of 1611 Revisited (New York: American Bible Society, 1997), p. 5.

For a much more comprehensive list of changes, see F. H. A. Scrivener, The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611), Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Repre- sentatives (Cambridge: At the University Press, 1884), pp. 148–202.


More errors in the King James Version

Jer 38:16
So the king sware secretly...
So Zedekiah the king sware secretly

Jer 49:1 why then doth their king inherit God...
why then doth their king inherit Gad

Ezek 3:11
unto thy people...
unto the children of thy people

Dan 3:15
into the midst of a fiery furnace...
into the midst of a burning fiery furnace

Dan 6:13
Daniel which is of the captivity of the children of Judah...
Daniel, which is of the children of the captivity of Judah

Joel 1:16
Is not the meat cut off before your eyes...
Is not the meat cut off before our eyes

Mal 4:2
But unto you that fear my name, shall the Sun of righteousness arise with
healing in his wings, and shall go forth and grow up...
But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with
healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up

Matt 12:23
Is this the son of David?
Is not this the son of David?

Luke 1:3
having had perfect understanding of things...
having had perfect understanding of all things



Luke 19:9
This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is the son
of Abraham...
This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham

John 7:16
Jesus answered them, My doctrine is not mine...
Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine

John 15:20
The servant is not greater than the Lord...
The servant is not greater than his lord

Rom 3:24
through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ...
through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus

Rom 12:2
prove what is that good, that acceptable and perfect will of God...
prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God

1 Cor 12:28
helps in governments, diversities of tongues...
helps, governments, diversities of tongues

1 Cor 15:41
another of the moon...
and another glory of the moon

2 Cor 5:2
For in this we groan earnestly, desiring to be clothed...
For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed

2 Cor 11:32
the King, kept the city with a garrison
the king kept the city of the Damascenes with a garrison



1 Tim 1:4
rather than edifying...
rather than godly edifying

2 Tim 4:13
when thou comest, bring with thee, but especially the parchments...
when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments

1 Pet 2:1
and envies, and evil speakings...
and envies, and all evil speakings

1 John 5:12
he that hath not the Son, hath not life...
he that hath not the Son of God hath not life

[crmann]

Translation Errors in the King James version:

Here is a partial listing of King James Version translation errors:

Genesis 1:2 should read "And the earth became without form . . . ." The word translated "was" is hayah, and denotes a condition different than a former condition, as in Genesis 19:26.

Genesis 10:9 should read " . . . Nimrod the mighty hunter in place of [in opposition to] the LORD." The word "before" is incorrect and gives the connotation that Nimrod was a good guy, which is false.

Leviticus 16:8, 10, 26 in the KJV is "scapegoat" which today has the connotation of someone who is unjustly blamed for other�s sins. The Hebrew is Azazel, which means "one removed or separated." The Azazel goal represents Satan, who is no scapegoat. He is guilty of his part in our sins.

Deuteronomy 24:1, "then let him" should be "and he." As the Savior explained in Matthew 19, Moses did not command divorcement. This statute is regulating the permission of divorce because of the hardness of their hearts.

II Kings 2:23, should be "young men," not "little children."

Isaiah 65:17 should be "I am creating [am about to create] new heavens and new earth . . . ."

Ezekiel 20:25 should read "Wherefore I permitted them, or gave them over to, [false] statutes that are not good, and judgments whereby they should not live." God�s laws are good, perfect and right. This verse shows that since Israel rejected God�s laws, He allowed them to hurt themselves by following false man made customs and laws.

Daniel 8:14 is correct in the margin, which substitutes "evening morning" for "days."

Malachi 4:6 should read " . . . lest I come and smite the earth with utter destruction." "Curse" doesn't give the proper sense here. Same word used in Zechariah 14:11.

Matthew 5:48 should be "Become ye therefore perfect" rather than "be ye therefore perfect." "Perfect" here means "spiritually mature." Sanctification is a process of overcoming with the aid of the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 24:22 needs an additional word to clarify the meaning. It should say "there should no flesh be saved alive."

Matthew 27:49 omits text which was in the original. Moffatt correctly adds it, while the RSV puts it in a footnote: "And another took a spear and pierced His side, and out came water and blood." The Savior's death came when a soldier pierced His side, Revelation 1:7.

Matthew 28:1, "In the end of the sabbath as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week . . ." should be translated literally, "Now late on Sabbath, as it was getting dusk toward the first day of the week . . . ." The Sabbath does not end at dawn but at dusk.

Luke 2:14 should say, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men of God�s good pleasure or choosing." That is, there will be peace on earth among men who have God's good will in their hearts.

Luke 14:26 has the unfortunate translation of the Greek word miseo, Strong's #3404, as "hate," when it should be rendered "love less by comparison." We are not to hate our parents and family!

John 1:31, 33 should say "baptize" or "baptizing IN water" not with water. Pouring or sprinkling with water is not the scriptural method of baptism, but only thorough immersion in water.

John 1:17 is another instance of a poor preposition. "By" should be "through": "For the law was given by [through] Moses . . . ." Moses did not proclaim his law, but God's Law.

John 13:2 should be "And during supper" (RSV) rather than "And supper being ended" (KJV).

Acts 12:4 has the inaccurate word "Easter" which should be rendered "Passover." The Greek word is pascha which is translated correctly as Passover in Matthew 26:2, etc.

I Corinthians 1:18 should be: "For the preaching of the cross is to them that are perishing foolishness; but unto us which are being saved it is the power of God," rather than "perish" and "are saved." Likewise, II Thessalonians 2:10 should be "are perishing" rather than "perish."

I Corinthians 15:29 should be: "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the hope of the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the hope of the dead?"

II Corinthians 6:2 should be "a day of salvation," instead of "the day of salvation." This is a quote from Isaiah 49:8, which is correct. The day of salvation is not the same for each individual. The firstfruits have their day of salvation during this life. The rest in the second resurrection.

I Timothy 4:8 should say, "For bodily exercise profiteth for a little time: but godliness in profitable unto all things . . . ."

I Timothy 6:10 should be, "For the love of money is a [not the] root of all evil . . . ."

Hebrews 4:8 should be "Joshua" rather than "Jesus," although these two words are Hebrew and Greek equivalents.

Hebrews 4:9 should read, "There remaineth therefore a keeping of a sabbath to the people of God."

Hebrews 9:28 is out of proper order in the King James. It should be: "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them without sin that look for him shall he appear the second time unto salvation."

I John 5:7-8 contains additional text which was added to the original. "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."

Revelation 14:4 should be "a firstfruits," because the 144,000 are not all the firstfruits.

Revelation 20:4-5 in the KJV is a little confusing until you realize that the sentence "This is the first resurrection." in verse five refers back to "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years" in verse four.

Revelation 20:10, "And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are [correction: should be "were cast" because the beast and false prophet were mortal human beings who were burned up in the lake of fire 1,000 years previous to this time, Revelation 19:20], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever." The point is that Satan will be cast into the same lake of fire into which the beast and false prophet were cast a thousand years previously.

Revelation 22:2 should be "health" rather than "healing."


The King James Bible is far from being error free.

[Sparrow]

Hi crmann,

I have already adressed these changes in a post previously in this thread. I will say this....a change does not constitute "error" from the text.

The printing press was relatively new when the Bible was first printed in English. There were spelling errors etc, due to the fact that God uses FALLIBLE sinful man to accomplish His purpose.

Just as SINFUL fallen men inspired of God wrote the Holy Scriptures to begin with.

[mark s]

Hi Sparrow,

Do you accept or reject the JP Green translation of the Scriptures (designated LITV) to be a faithful and true presentation of God's Word?

[crmann]

Hi Sparrow...

I read the King James frequently. When I realize the KJV is being presented as the only true word of God, however, I cannot allow that presentation to go unchallenged. This is a lie of Satan, and a source of division. Millions of souls have been lead to the Lord through the use of the KJV, however this is because of the work of the Holy Spirit, not the words written in a book.

YBIC,

The Old Timer

[JABova]

This is a really good article. It seems that much argument on this thread is made against the KJV. One needs to ask themselves why there is such attack on the KJV, and not the NASB, the NIV, or the RSV, or ESV??emphasis added - JAB

Sparrow, I don't think anyone is attacking the KJV, we (or at least I) just find that it is not the only legitimate useful translation, and not without error. There are passages in ALL modern version that are far from crystal clear or perfectly rendered. This is why many of us read multiple versions, use Strong's concordance, and for those who can understand even Greek and Hebrew manuscripts (but that would not be me ).

-Joe

[Sparrow]

The gospel is simple.


2 or. 11: 3But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.




The KJV can be understood on a 4th grade level. Our son could read it with no problem in the third grade. If one wants to go deeper, use a Strong's Concordance. I do it all the time.

I don't need multiple versions to see what a passage is saying. God speaks to me through His Word daily. He confirms many things in my life through the KJV, His voice to me, and Spurgeon's Morning and Evening Devotional.

He has been doing this for some time now.

As far as that other version....never heard of it. I would say that it is probably of the same minority manuscript as the others, but I honestly wouldn't know.

All I can do is as the Apostle Paul did. Constantly go back to my conversion and testimony.

I bought a RSV [while unsaved] for my husband for a wedding gift. When God saved me, He used one verse that had been a seed planted in my life sometime throughout my life, to reveal Himself to me.

A Christian man who discipled me in the Lord gave me a Student's NIV bible, and I eventually went to a NKJV.

So I had no "pre-indoctrination". About 14 years ago, a friend loaned me their book by Gail Riplinger, "The New Age Bible Versions". I spent almost 8 hours with all the translations open on my bed and in prayer seeking God for the truth.

Bought my first KJV, and eventually went back to a NKJV. God then took me completely OUT of the organized church where our family homechurched for about 18 months. During this time He led me into a small Christian yahoo group of women [online] who prayed for one another and also posted on another Christian end times website.

God was bring them also to the same conclusion that He brought to me. And that is THIS....IT is time to return to the tried and true KJV, and reject out of hand all other versions which have been introduced in more recent years.

He then led me into much private prayer and study and my position has not changed, nor will it; because it was born of the Holy Spirit into a conviction. A conviction is something that you do not change. It is not like a preference.

Many Christians today treat God's Word like a smorgasboard. They like parts of it; but not the whole.

[mark s]

As far as that other version....never heard of it. I would say that it is probably of the same minority manuscript as the others, but I honestly wouldn't know.

Hi Sparrow,

JP Green translated the LITV from the exact same manuscripts as the King James was translated from.

If you are not familiar with it, then aren't you unqualified to render an opinion of whether its a good translation or not?

Couldn't it be guided by the hand of God the same as the KJV?

[crmann]

This thread has finally fun its course....

Let me thank all those who took their time to be a part of and who were willing to share their thoughts here.

Blessings to all...

The Old Timer