KJV vs other Bibles

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

36 minutes ago, Yowm said:

'No text is 100% free of error' -true.

'No original text is 100% free of error' - false.

We do not have one scrap of original text, the best we have is early copies dating early 2nd century...and at that only fragments of text.

This whole issue revolves around which bodies of early or late manuscript COPIES is one going to go with and there are valid arguments on both sides of the aisle.

Hey look we agree!!

ill let Matrix speak for herself, but when I read her line about "original text" I don't think she meant the autographs. I read it as meaning the original Greek texts. I know she didn't say Greek but given the context of the thread the word "original" has been used in conjunction with "Greek text". 

I agree with you Yowm that the autographs were 100% error free. Like you said we no longer have those  .

Cheers and God Bless

 

Edited March 27, 2017 by Judas Machabeus
Spelt Yowm's name wrong

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

21 minutes ago, Yowm said:

Sorry for the confusion but what would be so 'original' about the Greek texts if they are not the autographs? In other words what is being meant by 'original' if not the autographs?

I'm not sure. But I think the phrases used is "translated from the original Greek"

 

[Revelation Man]

4 hours ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

***The Falling Away means a Departing of the Church, not a Departing of the Faith.***

 

NO the falling away is the Great Apostasy. Something that is happening now, and has been happening for decades or longer, especially in Europe which has in many countries nearly completely abandoned Christianity. That passage in 2 Thess 2:3 uses apostasia which I see you have noted anyway but you wrongly assume that the translators were using Catholic teaching. Completely false for King James did his utmost to leave any and all trace of Catholics teaching out of the bible.

There is no "FALLING AWAY" of the Faith in this passage, its all in you mind, because the word Apostasy has come to be know as this, because of this passage. Words change, in he 1930's anyone hearing gay thought happy/jolly, now sadly most think homosexual lifestyle. It is true that the world will get courser as we go, and even those professing to be Christians will invite evil into the Church. But that doesn't mean that this passage has to mean that which you imply, does it? Lets see what it really means. Is the passage speaking of FAITH ANYWHERE? Go read it and tell me what the Subject is. I think that is obvious, it is speaking about the Thessalonians thinking they had entered int the Day of the Lord(Gods Wrath) and had some how missed the Gathering together unto Christ (Rapture). But Paul says THAT DAY (Day of the Lord or Gods Wrath) shall not come, except there come a DEPARTING (Of the Church) and then the Anti-Christ will be Revealed. 

 

Now what is the subject of this passage? Faith or the Rapture (Gathering together unto the Lord) which takes them out of the World before THAT DAY (Wrath) comes upon them........No where in the passage does it speak about FAITH, yet I am supposed to believe Paul is speaking about FAITH !!! No, we understand exactly what Paul is speaking of here, the Church Departing before the Day of the Lord Arrives. This is not that complex. Only the "traditions of men" keep us in the dark on the point. A proper reading makes it obvious, this is about the Church departing, then the Anti-Christ comes forth. What is blocking the Anti-Christ from coming forth? It is the Holy Spirit working through the Church that is blocking him. When we DEPART, the Holy Spirit will stop blocking his path. 

You missed the point on Catholicism entirely. It was stated that the KJ Translators were trying to say the Catholics teachings were an APOSTASY............They were taking a pot-shot at Catholic teachings. 

 

4 hours ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

Jerome's Vulgate, at least the versions that we have access to today, is heavily corrupted. This Vulgate, unlike the very earliest ones, also says that it is the WOMAN who should bruise the head of the serpent Genesis 3:15

 

One passage doesn't mean something is heavily corrupted. The KJV is corrupted in using the falling away, and in many other places also. Translations of a Hebrew Language that had only 4000 words is a somewhat difficult challenge. With the computer, of course it is now much easier. 

4 hours ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

First of all you are only repeating something that I already said anyway. Secondly as I have already said, the KJV is the only bible that does not WATER DOWN Scripture as all the other English translations do, and especially is the only one that doesn't destroy any evidence of the divinity of Christ in the bible or any references to his first and second comings

 

I think most versions say the same thing. The KJV is just written in Old English, which confuses some people. Even our laws as written in the Constitution are confused by modern Judges, at least they use that as an excuse.

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

6 hours ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

Jerome's Vulgate, at least the versions that we have access to today, is heavily corrupted. This Vulgate, unlike the very earliest ones, also says that it is the WOMAN who should bruise the head of the serpent Genesis 3:15

 

First of all you are only repeating something that I already said anyway. Secondly as I have already said, the KJV is the only bible that does not WATER DOWN Scripture as all the other English translations do, and especially is the only one that doesn't destroy any evidence of the divinity of Christ in the bible or any references to his first and second comings

I am aware of the verse in genesis. I agree with a previous poster that one verse does not make an entire work corrupted. Are other examples that you know of?

 

second point is similar to the first. Not only do you claim other versions are watered down. You put in all caps. Examples would be useful so that we know what verses and the context. 

Cheers and God Bless

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

7 hours ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

NO the falling away is the Great Apostasy

KJV 2 Th 2:3

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 

the Greek work is:

ἀποστασία apŏstasia, ap-os-tas-ee´-ah; fem. ; defection from truth (prop. the state) [“apostasy”]:—falling away, forsake.

other translation I've check (ESV, RSV) use rebellion. I don't know why but looking at the Greek it's pretty clear that Paul is talking about a departure from the faith. 

The passage closes with:

RSV

2 Thessalonians 2:11-12

11 Therefore God sends upon them a strong delusion, to make them believe what is false, 
12 so that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

 

[delade3]

On 3/24/2017 at 4:36 AM, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

KJV vs other bibles.

Everyone knows that the KJV is the best known translation in history. It is also the most hotly disputed between those that accept the KJV only, like myself, and others who prefer modern translations because older translations didn’t have access to the most ancient texts like the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Because of that, there are many who believe that the KJV is riddled with errors, and I would like to prove that is just not so.

One thing I have noticed is that many people who are against the KJV are so because they really don’t understand the nature of the original texts nor the history of the KJV.

Not having a computer, I cant do as thorough a study as I would like here but I will do my best.

One thing that one does have to remember, as anyone knows anyway, is that no one translation is 100% free of error. Likewise no one original text is 100% free of error, not even the tiniest most insignificant ones.

In any text there will always be things like, misspelled words, an unimportant word added or dropped, or the Greek equivalent of not dotting some Is or crossing a few Ts.

God always has a reason for allowing this. To show ONLY GOD IS PERFECT NOT MAN. What matters is that none of these errors do anything to affect OT teaching or the Gospel message in any way.

Ironically enough the so called most ancient texts available today are sometimes the WORST. The Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are two that come ti mind because they drop several passages of Scripture.

http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/CriticalTexts/sinaiticus.htm

http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/q-arent-older-manuscripts-more-reliable

http://www.preservedword.com/content/the-unreliablitity-of-the-alexandrian-manuscripts/

Even Origen, ironically himself a heretic, recognised that texts were already becoming corrupted.

The NIV bible today is well known for using these two Egyptian texts as well as the heavily corrupted Greek translations written by the known occultists Westcott and Hort.

Although amongst modern ENGLISH translations today, some are a fair bit better than others, they all uniformly water down scripture either to a greater or lesser degree, usually by denying the veracity of Scripture regarding the divinity or first and second comings of Christ.

I would also like to forestall another argument that many, especially non Christians, have with the KJV, and that is the numerous revisions it has undergone.

That is easily explained away by the fact that the early revisions were nothing more than the translators putting BACK into the bible words and phrases that got DROPPED, not by THEM but the PRINTERS. This was a notorious problem in the earlier days of printing, and bibles were not spared. There is, for example, an infamous KJV, nicknamed the Wicked Bible, because in it, Thou shalt NOT commit adultery drops the NOT (Some say the printer did that intentionally….hmm I wonder why lol).

Later revisions were really not revisions at all the way we might understand them but just attempts at standardizing spelling and grammar.

Some people who are against the KJV will use some horridly weak arguments like this site…

http://www.bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm

On it they show a page of an original 1611 with its fancy calligraphy and archaic spellings and asks Can anyone read this? Well excuse me but people in the 1600s could read that so there goes that argument….we are simply not used to reading that style of writing so the answer is simple.

DUUUH DON’T READ THE ORIGINAL!!!

They also bring up another example

The first example (Judges 19:2) below shows a place where the meaning of the Hebrew is obscure. Was it "4 months" or "a year and four months"??? Quite a difference! But the structure of the Hebrew makes it difficult to for any translators to know for sure which it is. So they show the alternate reading, NOT KNOWING THEMSELVES FOR SURE WHICH IS CORRECT!

The simple answer to this is entirely due to the differences amongst some manuscripts. They choose according to majority rule. Though as the passage says the structure of the Hebrew can make thing a bit difficult as well.

Also this is completely irrelevant anyway as this is yet another example of one of those unimportant errors that God allows in the bible. Surely these guys can do better than this.

BTW the passage referred to here is this

19:2  And his concubine played the whore against him, and went away from him unto her father's house to Bethlehemjudah *, and was there four whole months

I will just let things go with this as I don’t want this to get too long winded. So I will just leave off with a few other links on the history of the KJV including info on the Tyndale bible that was used in the translation process

http://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1601-1700/story-behind-king-james-bible-11630052.html

http://www.bibleinfo.com/en/questions/history-kjv

http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/william-tyndale.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version#Old_Testament

The first example (Judges 19:2) below shows a place where the meaning of the Hebrew is obscure. Was it "4 months" or "a year and four months"???    In which translation does it say a year and four months?  

 

The word used in the Hebrew for this verse to signify 'four' is : 702. arba  which means "four"   http://biblehub.com/strongs/hebrew/702.htm   and the Hebrew word to denote 'months' is 2320. chodesh  which means  monthly, new moon; which is from From chadash; the new moon; by implication, a month -- month(-ly), new moon.   http://biblehub.com/strongs/hebrew/2320.htm

 

So for four 'new moons'?  And does a new moon occur once a month? Because they did not have the Gregorian nor Julian Calendars back then with the days and weeks and months on paperback format. 

Edited March 27, 2017 by delade3

[TheMatrixHasU71]

15 hours ago, Judas Machabeus said:

KJV 2 Th 2:3

Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 

the Greek work is:

ἀποστασία apŏstasia, ap-os-tas-ee´-ah; fem. ; defection from truth (prop. the state) [“apostasy”]:—falling away, forsake.

other translation I've check (ESV, RSV) use rebellion. I don't know why but looking at the Greek it's pretty clear that Paul is talking about a departure from the faith. 

The passage closes with:

RSV

2 Thessalonians 2:11-12

11 Therefore God sends upon them a strong delusion, to make them believe what is false, 
12 so that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

 

I agree totally. That is what I was saying.

[TheMatrixHasU71]

16 hours ago, Judas Machabeus said:

I am aware of the verse in genesis. I agree with a previous poster that one verse does not make an entire work corrupted. Are other examples that you know of?

 

second point is similar to the first. Not only do you claim other versions are watered down. You put in all caps. Examples would be useful so that we know what verses and the context. 

Cheers and God Bless

I only just noticed you are in Ontario (don't usually pay too much attention to profiles). I am in nova Scotia.

It isn't hard to look up other examples of alterations in more modern versions

http://jesus-is-lord.com/kjvonly.htm

https://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kjvdefns.htm

http://jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/kjb_only.htm

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/NIV/300_changes.htm

Note on that last site, REM= REMOVED. CHG=CHANGED.

 

[TheMatrixHasU71]

19 hours ago, Revelation Man said:

There is no "FALLING AWAY" of the Faith in this passage, its all in you mind, because the word Apostasy has come to be know as this, because of this passage. Words change, in he 1930's anyone hearing gay thought happy/jolly, now sadly most think homosexual lifestyle. It is true that the world will get courser as we go, and even those professing to be Christians will invite evil into the Church. But that doesn't mean that this passage has to mean that which you imply, does it? Lets see what it really means. Is the passage speaking of FAITH ANYWHERE? Go read it and tell me what the Subject is. I think that is obvious, it is speaking about the Thessalonians thinking they had entered int the Day of the Lord(Gods Wrath) and had some how missed the Gathering together unto Christ (Rapture). But Paul says THAT DAY (Day of the Lord or Gods Wrath) shall not come, except there come a DEPARTING (Of the Church) and then the Anti-Christ will be Revealed. 

 

Now what is the subject of this passage? Faith or the Rapture (Gathering together unto the Lord) which takes them out of the World before THAT DAY (Wrath) comes upon them........No where in the passage does it speak about FAITH, yet I am supposed to believe Paul is speaking about FAITH !!! No, we understand exactly what Paul is speaking of here, the Church Departing before the Day of the Lord Arrives. This is not that complex. Only the "traditions of men" keep us in the dark on the point. A proper reading makes it obvious, this is about the Church departing, then the Anti-Christ comes forth. What is blocking the Anti-Christ from coming forth? It is the Holy Spirit working through the Church that is blocking him. When we DEPART, the Holy Spirit will stop blocking his path. 

You missed the point on Catholicism entirely. It was stated that the KJ Translators were trying to say the Catholics teachings were an APOSTASY............They were taking a pot-shot at Catholic teachings. 

Oh ,sorry about that guess I misread that about the Catholic thing.

I still stand by what I said about the great apostasy. All the best commentators say the same thing. And look at what is going on today too. Look all around you. The great apostasy has been happening for decades. This is the environment that the Antichrist will appear in.

 

One passage doesn't mean something is heavily corrupted. The KJV is corrupted in using the falling away, and in many other places also. Translations of a Hebrew Language that had only 4000 words is a somewhat difficult challenge. With the computer, of course it is now much easier. 

About the Vulgate, though the earliest versions were good the versions that exist today are very corrupted. If you paid attention to what I said. I was talking about the whole bible. Not just one passage of the vulgate.

I think most versions say the same thing. The KJV is just written in Old English, which confuses some people. Even our laws as written in the Constitution are confused by modern Judges, at least they use that as an excuse.

 

[TheMatrixHasU71]

21 hours ago, Yowm said:

'No text is 100% free of error' -true.

'No original text is 100% free of error' - false.

We do not have one scrap of original text, the best we have is early copies dating early 2nd century...and at that only fragments of text.

This whole issue revolves around which bodies of early or late manuscript COPIES is one going to go with and there are valid arguments on both sides of the aisle.

Yes I know we don't have anything of the very originals penned by the apostles and prophets but the fact that every single one of them was penned by the hand of fallible men is by itself proof that even if we did have them, because men are not God, these texts by themselves would not be 100% free of even the tiniest most unimportant errors. Even if its just stupid stuff like spelling errors