Choosing a Bible

[Adarian]

KJV is my favorite because of the clarity of the English in it. Because of the consistency of the symbolism in it, and because of the consistency of the metaphor in it, although you need a pretty good command of the English language for it, but a good dictionary helps a lot. If you are interested in having a bible that is truly its own encyclopeadia, this is the one.

I used to be in love with the NIV, but had to do too much research and "other translation" reading to get meaning out of a lot of the text, as it falls into ambiguity in many places. The English is of a poorer quality.

The NIV is partly responsible for some people thinking that the Catholic Church is "Babylon the Great", also known as the mother of harlots spiritually speaking. The idea is utterly false. I have over time come to quite dislike the NIV. It irritates me.

NASB is okay, and the Catholics have a couple of really good bibles. (RSV and Douay-Rheims are popular among the Catholics) Note that the Catholic bibles contain the septuagint, which are seven books that the protestant reformers cut out of the bible during the sixteen hundreds because it was felt that they could not be supported as the Word of God, also called canonical scripture. The first editions of the KJV authorized version contained the septuagint, but these books were removed early on.

One thing that bothers me about study bibles, is that many of the comments are not necessarily what the bible teaches. If you were to become seriously knowledgeable from reading the text of the bible over time instead of study bible comments, and after having gained the proper knowledge in study and prayer, you will read the study comments in the study bibles and wonder what the authors were thinking. Read God's word, and pray for the Holy Spirit to give you understanding. Take the Berean approach in all things purported to be scriptural.

From the book of Acts, chapter 17:

11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

They searched the scriptures, not the comments in the half pages of a study bible.

[Adarian]

If so called errors are to be "exposed" please prove these "errors" from a solid expositionary examination of the Greek and Hebrew, as they correlate to the English language, with clear explanations of why each item is considered an error.

[CSLewis]

KJV is beautiful, rich and poetic however many of the words are no longer in circulation so sometimes at least for me it is hard to find the meaning of some of the words. I especially love the Psalms in KJV

[Floatingaxe]

Choosing a Bible, What's right for you? There are so many Bibles out there today how do you choose a Bible that is right for you? There are study Bibles, Mens Bibles, womens Bibles, students Bibles, Recovery Bibles, Pastoral versions and than come in different versions like the King James, New International Version, The Living, Todays English, and more........ How do I even know where to begin to look?

The question is not "what's right for you?" but what is right.

The KJV and there is no other except the original Hebrew or Greek (and not the updated greek from 1881)

Not NKJV either as there are too many errors.

What are supposed errors in KJV are not true as you can't compare the NIV text with the KJV text as they are not the same. If you don't start with the same Hebrew or Greek text, you're going to get other answers. You're going to get man-made works, not God's word.

In english, the KJV.

German, Martin Luthers.

Actually, if you compare even these two, they are the same. Luther's works in german is = to KJV in english. I know as I can read both as well as Hebrew and Greek.

All these other new bibles are trash... literally. They make a good fire.

Of course, it had to happen, the ugly head of the KJV Only crowd rears it's nasty voice of distortions again. The man is looking for help and insight into a good study Bible, not a trip down KJV Only Alley. Shall I list ALL the errors in the KJV to silence you? Shall I show the places where the King James violates the same rules you people accuse the other translations of? Don't even try to pass it off as an error free or "only true version" as it simply doesn't wash!!! Worthy hasn't the space, nor I the time to list all the errors, but if you people keep insisting I will start a running list.

As to the Original Poster, if you're worried about Translation fidelity and the reasons for the choices over the different Greek Text families, do a little Internet research yourself, WITHOUT all the 'help' from the KJV only crowd and you will discover why they exist. And it isn't something done by Satan either. Or better yet, go to your public Library and get some good books reflecting BOTH sides of the issue. Or better yet, just let it be a dead dog and find a good study Bible that fits your needs and is clear enough for you to understand.

I see lots of good advice on this thread, ignore the KJV Only crowd and you will do well

Amen! Loveya brother!

[Guest Cephas]

Choosing a Bible, What's right for you? There are so many Bibles out there today how do you choose a Bible that is right for you? There are study Bibles, Mens Bibles, womens Bibles, students Bibles, Recovery Bibles, Pastoral versions and than come in different versions like the King James, New International Version, The Living, Todays English, and more........ How do I even know where to begin to look?

The question is not "what's right for you?" but what is right.

The KJV and there is no other except the original Hebrew or Greek (and not the updated greek from 1881)

Not NKJV either as there are too many errors.

What are supposed errors in KJV are not true as you can't compare the NIV text with the KJV text as they are not the same. If you don't start with the same Hebrew or Greek text, you're going to get other answers. You're going to get man-made works, not God's word.

In english, the KJV.

German, Martin Luthers.

Actually, if you compare even these two, they are the same. Luther's works in german is = to KJV in english. I know as I can read both as well as Hebrew and Greek.

All these other new bibles are trash... literally. They make a good fire.

Of course, it had to happen, the ugly head of the KJV Only crowd rears it's nasty voice of distortions again. The man is looking for help and insight into a good study Bible, not a trip down KJV Only Alley. Shall I list ALL the errors in the KJV to silence you? Shall I show the places where the King James violates the same rules you people accuse the other translations of? Don't even try to pass it off as an error free or "only true version" as it simply doesn't wash!!! Worthy hasn't the space, nor I the time to list all the errors, but if you people keep insisting I will start a running list.

As to the Original Poster, if you're worried about Translation fidelity and the reasons for the choices over the different Greek Text families, do a little Internet research yourself, WITHOUT all the 'help' from the KJV only crowd and you will discover why they exist. And it isn't something done by Satan either. Or better yet, go to your public Library and get some good books reflecting BOTH sides of the issue. Or better yet, just let it be a dead dog and find a good study Bible that fits your needs and is clear enough for you to understand.

I see lots of good advice on this thread, ignore the KJV Only crowd and you will do well

Greetings Cephas,

I would like you to list ALL the errors of the KJV and please do so asap. I shall be grateful as I've found a few myself and would just like some confirmation.

Blessings, H.

Sure, I'll try to list some of the errors. Listing them all would be too large a task for now, and for a thread, but I'll also include a couple of links to sites containing more.

One of the new ploys of the KJVo crowd is to condemn those who use scripture against them too, so you should be aware of that. They will use any method to discredit their opponents and bolster their side, even if it involves deception and slight of hand. They will also do anything to diminish the importance of error in their version while magnifying the errors they point out in others. I won't even get into the use of the Erasmus Texts the KJV is based on, and all the errors there, including it's use of the corrupted Latin Vulgate, NOT GREEK.

The main reason they aren't the Geneva Bible ONLY crowd is because King James made it illegal to have any Bible but his version. That speaks loud for it's supposed divine guidance. In fact, the Pilgrims brought the Geneva Bible with them in 1620 - 9 years later, so it was likely the first English Bible OF CHOICE in America, though the Jamestown colony might have had the mandated KJV at that time. At that, as I recall my history, the Geneva Bible was more popular for almost 50 years after the release of the KJV. Anyway, I digress.

For this writing I am lifting quotes from a booklet put out by Plain Truth Ministries, called "The King James Bible Controversy". It is available from them free of charge if you want a copy.

1 john 5:7-8, the KJV adds, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these trhee are one."

The KJV translates the Hebrew re'em as unicorn (Job 39:9-10; Psalms 29:6; 92:10). I believe this may be fixed in modern versions. The word probably refers to an extinct species of ox.

The KJV also uses the artificial name Jehovah, I won't retype all the flawed reasons they did so.

The KJV translators replaces many instances of weights, measures and coinage with English equivalents. Luke 21:2 'lepta' is replaced with 'mite'. Matthew 5:26 'kodrantes' is replaced with farthing.

Matthew 23:6KJV uses "the love the uppermost rooms at feasts" instead of the Greek "they love the first couch at the suppers"

They inserted the euphemism "cut themselves off" in Galatians 5:12 when the Greek really says "emasculate themselves"

Paul's "God forbid" (a phrase common in the KJV-Romans 3:4,6,31; 6:2,15, etc) is the Greek me genoito --> literally, "May it never be." thereby inserting God's name where it doesn't exist in the original text, thereby taking liberties with God's name. Something they scream loudly about for other translations

Here are some errors copied from the site http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/graphic1designer/errors.html

Translation Errors

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." Too bad William Miller didn't realize this.

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." The italicized text was added to the original manuscripts. Most modern translations agree that this was an uninspired addition to the Latin Vulgate to support the unscriptural trinity doctrine.

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."

Italics: Sometimes Helpful, Sometimes Wrong

No language can be translated word for word into another language. Hebrew and Greek idioms often do not come through clearly into literal English. Thus, beginning in 1560 with the Geneva Bible, translators initiated the practice of adding italicized clarifying words to make the original language more plain. The fifty-four King James translators did the same. Often, the added italicized words do help make the meaning clearer. At other times, the translators through their doctrinal misunderstandings added errors instead.

In Psalms 81:4, "was" is totally uncalled for and not in the original Hebrew. New Moons are still a statute of God.

We have shown how in Revelation 20:10 that the italicized "are" is incorrect and that "were cast" in italics would have been more appropriate. Another instance is John 8:28 where Jesus said (KJV), "I am he." The "he" is in italics and was not actually spoken by Jesus, completely obscuring the fact the Jesus was claiming to be the great "I AM" of the Old Testament, John 8:58 and Exodus 3:14.

In Luke 3:23-38, the italicized words "the son" are not in the original Greek. Actually, Luke gives the fleshly descent of the Savior through Mary, while Matthew gives the legal descent through Joseph.

Matthew 24:24 should not have the italicized words "it were". It IS possible for the elect to be deceived. We need to be on guard!

Romans 1:7 incorrectly has the italicized words "to be." The fact is, Christians are now saints.

I Corinthians 7:19 needs some italicized words to make the meaning clear. It should say: "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but [the important thing is] the keeping of the commandments of God."

Colossians 2:16-17 can be properly understood only if the KJV italicized word "is" in verse 17 is left out, as it should be. The message of these verses is: don't let men judge you as doing wrong when you observe the holy days, new moons and sabbaths; let the body of Christ (the Church) do the judging.

I Timothy 3:11 has "their" in italics, which is not implied in the original.

II Peter 2:5 should not have "person, a." Noah was the eighth preacher of righteousness.

I John 2:23 has "[but] he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also" in italics. This is an addition based upon the Latin text and not in the original Greek.

Punctuation Problems

Luke 23:43 has been erroneously used by some to claim that Jesus went straight to heaven at His death. The original Greek did not have punctuation marks as we do today. The KJV states, "And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise." The comma should not be after "thee", but "day." The believing malefactor would be with Christ in the paradise of the redeemed when he was resurrected far into the future.

Mark 16:9 does not say that Jesus was resurrected Sunday morning. There is a missing implied comma between "risen" and "early" and there should be no comma after week as the KJV has it: "Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene . . . ." Thus, it should say, "Now when Jesus was risen, early the first day of the week he appeared first to Mary Magdalene . . . ."

Word Differences

Another thing to keep in mind is the fact that the 1611 A.D. King James English is somewhat different than today's English language. The meaning of certain words has changed, and/or the King James sometimes uses words not familiar to most people today in their common speech. In addition, certain idioms in the original Hebrew and Greek are a little difficult to understand today. The Oxford Wide Margin KJV has excellent marginal references which often explain the correct meanings. Here is a partial listing of changed word meanings:

King James Phrase (on top)

Modern English (on bottom)

Abraham's bosom

"the Kingdom of God" in which the redeemed will have an intimate relationship with father Abraham in sharing the eternal inheritance of the earth.

adoption

"sonship", as in Romans 8:23, 9:4, Ephesians 1:5.

affections

"passions", as in Galatians 5:24, "mind" as in Colossians 3:2.

afflict soul

"fast" as in Leviticus 23:27, 32 (Psalms 35:13).

beguile

"judge against you", as in Colossians 2:18.

betimes

"early", as in Proverbs 13:24.

blains

"blisters", as in Exodus 9:9.

bosom, in his

"have an intimate relationship with", as in II Samuel 12:3, 8, John 1:18.

bruit

"report, rumor", as in Jeremiah 10:22, Nahum 3:19.

charity

"spiritual love", as in I Corinthians 13.

clean heart

"right attitude", as in Psalms 51:10, 73:1.

communicate

"share", as in Hebrews 13:16.

communications

"associations, companionships", as in I Corinthians 15:33.

conversation

"conduct", as in Philippians 2:27, I Peter 3:1, "citizenship" as in Philippians 3:20.

convince

"convict", as in Titus 1:9, James 2:9.

corn

"grain", as in Leviticus 23:14, Deuteronomy 23:25.

cover his feet

"go to the toilet", as in I Samuel 24:3.

creature

"creation", as in Romans 8:20-21, II Corinthians 5:17, Galatians 6:15.

cross

"stake"

damned

"judged", as in Mark 16:16.

devils

"demons", as in I Timothy 4:1.

dissimulation

"hypocrisy", as in Galatians 2:13.

divers

"different" places, persons or things as in Matthew 24:7 and Acts 19:9, Hebrews 1:1, James 1:2.

dividing

"expounding, dissecting", as in II Timothy 2:15.

doting

"sick", as in I Timothy 6:4.

due benevolence

"sexual dues", as in I Corinthians 7:3.

ensamples

"examples, types", as in I Corinthians 10:11.

faint

"give up" as in Luke 18:1, Galatians 6:9.

froward

"evil, wrong", as in Proverbs 2:12.

gay

"expensive, costly", as in James 2:3.

Ghost

"Holy Ghost" should be rendered "Holy Spirit."

glass

"mirror", as in I Corinthians 13:12, James 1:23.

hardness

"blindness" as in Mark 3:5.

he

In reference to the Holy Spirit, the KJV usage of "he" rather than "it" implies the false notion of the trinity. The Holy Spirit is not a separate person, but the mind of God the Father and God the Son. See John 14:16, 17, 26 and 16:7-8, 13-15.

heart

"attitude of mind", as in Jeremiah 17:9.

hell

There are three Greek words rendered "hell" in the New Testament: gehenna, hades (equivalent of Hebrew sheol used in the Old Testament), and tartaroo. Gehenna is the lake of fire, hades is the grave and tartaroo is the abyss, the place of restraint for Satan. For English speaking people during the time of King James, "hell" [hades] was a cellar to store potatoes, not a lake of burning brimstone. In Acts 2:27, "hell" is hades, meaning the grave, while in Matthew 10: 28 and Mark 9:43-48 "hell" means the lake of fire. The only place tartaroo is used is in II Peter 2:4.

husbandman

"farmer, rancher", as in James 5:7.

iniquity

"lawlessness", as in Matthew 24:12.

jealous

"zealous", as in II Corinthians 11:2.

knew

"had sexual relations with", as in Genesis 4:1.

leasing

"lying", as in Psalms 4:2, 5:6.

letteth

"restrains", as in II Thessalonians 2:7.

lusteth after

"earnestly desires" as in Deuteronomy 14:26.

mansions

"offices" as in John 14:2.

meat offering

"meal offering", as in Leviticus 23:13, etc.

meet

"fitting, proper", Matthew 3:8, Genesis 2:18.

mocked

"deceived", as in Galatians 6:7.

morning stars

"angels", as in Job 38:7.

nether

"lower", as in Deuteronomy 24:6.

outlandish

"foreign", as in Nehemiah 13:26.

perfect

"spiritually mature", as in II Timothy 3:17, or "upright or sincere" as in Genesis 17:1.

perform

"finish", as in Philippians 1:6.

him that "pisseth against the wall"

"males", as in II Kings 9:8, etc.

press, the

"the crowd", as in Luke 19:3.

prevent

"precede", Psalms 88:13, I Thessalonians 4:15.

prophesy

"inspired preaching", as in I Corinthians 14.

quicken

"make alive", as in Romans 8:11.

quit

"keep on", as in I Corinthians 16:13.

rain

"teach", as in Hosea 10:12, Isaiah 2:3.

rentest

"distort", as in Jeremiah 4:30.

requite

"offer support for", as in I Timothy 5:4.

rereward

rear guard" as in I Samuel 29:2.

rudiments

"elements", as in Colossians 2:8.

those who "seemed to be somewhat"

"boasters", as in Galatians 2:6.

servant

"slave", as in Philippians 2:7.

simple

"harmless", as in Romans 16:19.

sincerity

"with incorruption", as in Ephesians 6:24.

slept with his fathers

"died", as in II Kings 13:9, II Chronicles 16:12.

sons of God

"angels", as in Job 1:6.

spiritual wickedness

"wicked spirits", as in Ephesians 6:12.

sprinkle

"astonish, startle", as in Isaiah 52:15.

stranger

"newcomer, new convert", as in Deuteronomy 14:29.

suffer

"let, allow, permit" as in Mark 10:14, Revelation 11:9.

tarry

"wait", as in Luke 24:49, I Corinthians 16:8, which is explained in Acts 1:4.

tempted

"tried or tested", as in I Corinthians 10:13, James 1:13.

tenor

"intent or purpose", as in Exodus 34:27.

tongues

"foreign languages", Mark 16:17, I Corinthians 14.

virtue

"power" as in Mark 5:30.

visage

"appearance", as in Isaiah 52:14.

Unjustified Additions to the KJV

Derived From Latin Vulgate, Not in Greek Text

These additions should be omitted from the KJV:

Matthew 27:35

"that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots." This verse appears properly in John 19:24.

John 8:9-10

Delete: "being convicted by their own conscience . . . unto the last . . . alone . . . and saw none but the woman . . . those thine accusers."

The Greek properly reads: "But when they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the eldest, and Jesus was left with the woman being before him. Jesus lifted himself up and said to her, 'Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?'"

Acts 9:5-6

"it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him . . . ."

Acts 10:6

"he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do"

Acts 10:21

"which were sent unto him from Cornelius"

Acts 21:8

"that were of Paul's company"

Romans 13:9

"Thou shalt not bear false witness"

Romans 16:20

"Amen"

Colossians 1:14

"through his blood"

Hebrews 2:7

"and didst set him over the works of thy hands"

Hebrews 11:13

"and were persuaded of them and embraced them"

Hebrews 12:20

"or with a dart shot through"

I John 2:23

"(but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also" is placed in italics in the KJV. The Greek Text omits this portion entirely.

I John 5:7-8

"in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these thee are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth" As previously explained, this is not part of the original Greek text.

Revelation 1:8

"the beginning and the ending"

Revelation 1:11

"I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and . . . which are in Asia"

Revelation 1:20

"which thou sawest"

Revelation 2:17

"to eat of"

Revelation 5:4

"and to read"

Revelation 5:14

"four and twenty . . . him that lives forever and ever"

Revelation 11:1

"and the angel stood"

Revelation 12:12

"the inhabiters of"

Revelation 14:5

"before the throne of God"

Revelation 15:2

"over his mark"

Revelation 16:7

"another out of"

Revelation 16:14

"of the earth and"

Revelation 21:3

"and be their God"

Misplaced Verses in the KJV

In Matthew 23:13-14, the proper order is: "But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in."

Romans 16:25-27 belongs after Romans 14:23, not at the end of the book.

Items Wrongly Substituted or Left Out of the KJV,

Should be Reinstated

Matthew 27:49

"And another took a spear and pierced his side and out came water and blood."

[The Orthodox Church says this was part of the Greek Text until mistakenly deleted in 511 A.D.]

Luke 9:50

". . . for his is not against you."

This verse should read: "And Jesus said to him, Forbid him not, for he is not against you. For whoever is not against you is for you."

Luke 10:22

"And having turned to the disciples, he said:"

John 1:28

"Bethany" instead of "Bethabara", which was a corrupt Egyptian reading.

Acts 9:19

Should read, "Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at the time in Damascus."

Acts 20:28

Should read, " . . . the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to feed the church of the Lord and God, which He purchased with His own blood."

Philippians 3:3

Should be "serve in (the) Spirit of God" rather than "serve God in the spirit."

Colossians 1:6

Should have added "and is growing" after "bringeth forth fruits."

Colossians 2:13

Should read, "And you--being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh--you hath He quickened together with him, having forgiven us all the trespasses . . . "

I Thess. 5:21

Should read, "Despise not prophesyings, but prove all things . . . ."

II Timothy 2:19

"of (the) Lord" rather than "of Christ."

Hebrews 8:8

"To them", not "with them."

Hebrews 13:9

"Carried away", not "carried about."

James 5:12

Should be "into hypocrisy" instead of "under judgment."

I Peter 2:2

End of verse should have added: "unto salvation."

Revelation 2:21

Should be " . . . and she wills not to repent of her fornication."

Revelation 6:12

Should be " . . . and the whole moon became blood . . . ."

Revelation 8:7

Should be " . . . and the third part of the land was burnt up, and the third part of the trees . . . ."

Revelation 8:13

"eagle" rather than "angel."

Revelation 11:18

"nations" instead of "dead."

Revelation 12:6

Should read, "And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has there a place prepared of God . . . ."

Revelation 13:5

Should read, " . . . and power was given it to make war forty-two months . . . ."

Revelation 14:1

Should read, "having His name and the name of His Father written on their foreheads . . . ."

Revelation 15:3

"nations" instead of "saints."

Revelation 17:8

Should read, " . . . when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and shall be present . . . ."

Revelation 18:17

Should read, " . . . everyone who sails to any place . . . " instead of "and all the company in ships."

Revelation 18:20

Should read, " . . . ye holy saints and apostles and prophets."

Revelation 19:12

Should read, " . . . and on his head were many crowns, having names written, and a name written that no man knew . . . ."

Revelation 19:17

Should read, " . . . gather yourselves together unto the great supper of God . . . ", not "supper of the great God."

Revelation 21:24

Should read, "And the nations shall walk by means of its light."

Revelation 22:19

Should read, "tree of life" instead of "book of life."

Revelation 22:21

Should close with "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with all of the saints. Amen."

another site to consider is:

http://www.considerthis.net/Textfile/kjv-errors.htm

There are more, but you can do an internet search yourself to find lots more.

[Guest Cephas]

KJV is my favorite because of the clarity of the English in it. Because of the consistency of the symbolism in it, and because of the consistency of the metaphor in it, although you need a pretty good command of the English language for it, but a good dictionary helps a lot. If you are interested in having a bible that is truly its own encyclopeadia, this is the one.

I used to be in love with the NIV, but had to do too much research and "other translation" reading to get meaning out of a lot of the text, as it falls into ambiguity in many places. The English is of a poorer quality.

The NIV is partly responsible for some people thinking that the Catholic Church is "Babylon the Great", also known as the mother of harlots spiritually speaking. The idea is utterly false. I have over time come to quite dislike the NIV. It irritates me.

NASB is okay, and the Catholics have a couple of really good bibles. (RSV and Douay-Rheims are popular among the Catholics) Note that the Catholic bibles contain the septuagint, which are seven books that the protestant reformers cut out of the bible during the sixteen hundreds because it was felt that they could not be supported as the Word of God, also called canonical scripture. The first editions of the KJV authorized version contained the septuagint, but these books were removed early on.

One thing that bothers me about study bibles, is that many of the comments are not necessarily what the bible teaches. If you were to become seriously knowledgeable from reading the text of the bible over time instead of study bible comments, and after having gained the proper knowledge in study and prayer, you will read the study comments in the study bibles and wonder what the authors were thinking. Read God's word, and pray for the Holy Spirit to give you understanding. Take the Berean approach in all things purported to be scriptural.

From the book of Acts, chapter 17:

11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

They searched the scriptures, not the comments in the half pages of a study bible.

You might wish to use the term Apocrypha instead of Septuagint, since the Septuagint was a Greek translation of the Hebrew old testament done before Jesus was born. The Apocrypha were the unofficial extra books that neither the Hebrews, nor currently the Protestants take as inspired works.

The comparison of Babylon the Great to the Roman Catholic Church predates the NIV by some time and, as I recall is a product of John Darby's Dispensalist interpretations. The church I used to believe in preached it heavily and also preached King James ONLY real heavy. ALL the references I've ever seen equating the two have always been KJV Only churches, or cults using their own translations, like the JW's, so I would beg to differ with you about the NIV being the Bible responsible for that particular belief.

[Guest Cephas]

If so called errors are to be "exposed" please prove these "errors" from a solid expositionary examination of the Greek and Hebrew, as they correlate to the English language, with clear explanations of why each item is considered an error.

Why? You would only deny them or attempt to denounce ANY explanation or proof given anyway. Those already sold on the supposed 'inspiration' and 'superiority' of the KJV have made up their minds and don't wish to be bothered by the facts or truth. As to the rest of us, we don't need to get down to nit picking. The real burden of proof is on the KJV Only crowd anyway, they're the ones making all the stink about the inerrancy of their Leather Bound, paper and ink idol, and putting down all the others for their supposed errors. The King James is error filled too, one doesn't need to chase down every t or i to see if it's crossed or dotted. One only needs to show that there are indeed errors, and that the King James is no more accurate or less error prone than any other version. It was done by humans from the Erasmus texts. Six or seven incomplete and inconsistant Greek manuscripts at best, with the gaps filled in from the corrupt Latin Vulgate of the day. Even Erasmus was pressured into adding passages that he believed didn't belong in his "Received Text" No more really needs be said.

[Guest Biblicist]

I choose to use the New Living Translation for daily reading, I have a friend who reads Greek or Hebrew, or both, who recommended it. I've compared it to other translations and the meaning is always the same, even if the words are not. I do have the KJV, NKJV, my husband uses NIV study Bible. We also have the Womens Devotional Bible and Couples Devotional Bible, both are NIV translations. I tend to use all of them, depending on the need. I still have the Bibles my husband and I each received when we were baptized and my mother reads the Bible my father used when he got saved. He no longer needs the Word, he is with The Word.

Here is a link to the NLT page about the history behind the it.

http://www.newlivingtranslation.com/05disc...s.asp?faq=7#go7

I have come to love the NLT since it has cross reference verses for almost every verse in the margins. I've learned a great deal from my Bible through this.

[Guest shiloh357]

I choose to use the New Living Translation for daily reading, I have a friend who reads Greek or Hebrew, or both, who recommended it. I've compared it to other translations and the meaning is always the same, even if the words are not. I do have the KJV, NKJV, my husband uses NIV study Bible. We also have the Womens Devotional Bible and Couples Devotional Bible, both are NIV translations. I tend to use all of them, depending on the need. I still have the Bibles my husband and I each received when we were baptized and my mother reads the Bible my father used when he got saved. He no longer needs the Word, he is with The Word.

Here is a link to the NLT page about the history behind the it.

http://www.newlivingtranslation.com/05disc...s.asp?faq=7#go7

I have come to love the NLT since it has cross reference verses for almost every verse in the margins. I've learned a great deal from my Bible through this.

I also enjoy the NLT. I have it on my computer. Very good for early morning devotional reading.

[Guest Cephas]

If so called errors are to be "exposed" please prove these "errors" from a solid expositionary examination of the Greek and Hebrew, as they correlate to the English language, with clear explanations of why each item is considered an error.

Why? You would only deny them or attempt to denounce ANY explanation or proof given anyway. Those already sold on the supposed 'inspiration' and 'superiority' of the KJV have made up their minds and don't wish to be bothered by the facts or truth. As to the rest of us, we don't need to get down to nit picking. The real burden of proof is on the KJV Only crowd anyway, they're the ones making all the stink about the inerrancy of their Leather Bound, paper and ink idol, and putting down all the others for their supposed errors. The King James is error filled too, one doesn't need to chase down every t or i to see if it's crossed or dotted. One only needs to show that there are indeed errors, and that the King James is no more accurate or less error prone than any other version. It was done by humans from the Erasmus texts. Six or seven incomplete and inconsistant Greek manuscripts at best, with the gaps filled in from the corrupt Latin Vulgate of the day. Even Erasmus was pressured into adding passages that he believed didn't belong in his "Received Text" No more really needs be said.

Cephas, I read your supposed list of errors, and would simply say that these are not errors at all. Just because you claim these are mistakes doesn't make it so. The King James Version Bible has no errors. It is the only reliable English translation of scripture. Those of you who are sold on the supposed lack of inspiration and superiority of the KJV have made up their minds already, and don't want to be bothered with the fact they are wrong. The real burden of proof is on the group that believes all translations are equal.

And you can deny the reality of errors in the King James til you're blue in the face, it doesn't make it so. However, the real point here is; it would be nice to have ONE discussion about the Bible on this board without some agenda driven KJVo person trying to divert it to a KJVo debate.

The errors do exist, they are well documented and proven, and denying facts doesn't make the facts go away. It just buries your head in the sand. There are even KJVo sites that acknowledge the errors, but then try to minimalize them or make them appear meaningless. So even KJVo people realize there are errors and mistakes.

However, I don't want to turn this into another fruitless KJVo debate. The KJVo people started this, another person asked for answers and I gave him some real answers. Beyond that, it's time to get back to the original purpose of this thread. Answering the man's question. If you have a positive contribution, please make it, but don't rely on worn out, already disproved (thousands of times disproved) 'proofs' of the KJ superiority. Give them your honest reasons for YOUR choice and let the man decide himself. Simple enough.

As to the KJVo debate and crowd: The hate, deception, misrepresentation, blind denial, personal attacks, slander, tantrums and anger I see out of the KJVo crowd is enough for me to know that God isn't behind the movement. God doesn't work that way, but Satan does.

So, if you wish to continue the debate with someone who will debate you, ask the moderator to move these posts to another thread, or start one yourself. Otherwise, let's get back to trying to help the man, IN CHRISTIAN LOVE!