KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES
- Thread starter KingJamesVersionBibleOnly
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A brief history lesson for you:
Alexander conquered Egypt and founded the city of Alexandria. Some private papers of Alexander outlined plans for all races to live in harmony under a Greek empire. The city of Alexandria became well known for its' education, philosophy and religion. The University of Alexandria, a large library, and the famous museum, the Temple of Muses, was sought out by many of the worldly thinkers of that day.
A Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible was supposedly translated in Alexandria in 72 days by 72 Jewish scholars around 250 B.C. This translation was called the LXX or the Septuagint. The entire legend of the LXX was based upon a writing called the Letter of Aristeas. The proposed author of the letter professed to be an high official at the court of Ptolemy Philadelphia(285-247 B.C.).
Ptolemy of this Alexandrian fairy tale supposedly requested Eleazar to authorize six elders of the twelve tribes of Israel to translate the Hebrew Bible into Greek. This masterpiece from Alexandria supposedly became the elite translation that was quoted by the Lord Jesus and His Apostles.
Simpletons believe the fairy tale of Alexandria by faith with no evidence of any B.C. LXX. Prudent students research further. The Lord God did not authorize any inspired writings during the silent years. Common sense and Bible reading aid in understanding the questionable story of the LXX. If six scholars from each of the twelve tribes of Israel were involved, 66 men were apostates because God entrusted the Levites with the preservation of the Scriptures(Duet. 33:8-11, Ezra 7:6-10). It makes no sense that an Orthodox Jew would desire to change His Hebrew Bible into Greek. The Jews adamantly think Gentiles are dogs (Matt. 15:21-28).
The Septuagint most likely stemmed from the first theological school of Christendom that was founded in Alexandria. The first head of this school was Pantaenus in 180 A.D. Clement was the second head in 202, but the school reached its' peak under th tutelage of Origenes Adamantiua in 232. Origen is the hero of Alexandrian scholars. All modern scholars give Origen credit for being the first Bible critic. Origen was obsessed with philosophy and he never believed the Bible literally.
The crowning work of Origen was called the Hexapla. The Hexapla was a book containing six versions of the Old Testament. The fifth column of this work was penned by Origen himself and was most likely the Septuagint. It contained the Apocrypha as part of the OT. The evidence implies that Origen wrote the mysterious Septuagint around 250 A.D. rather than the fairy tale of the Letter of Aristeas.
I won't go into at this time the biblical comparisons between the dangers of Alexandria , Egypt and the blessings of Antioch of Syria. This can be another discussion.
Alexander conquered Egypt and founded the city of Alexandria. Some private papers of Alexander outlined plans for all races to live in harmony under a Greek empire. The city of Alexandria became well known for its' education, philosophy and religion. The University of Alexandria, a large library, and the famous museum, the Temple of Muses, was sought out by many of the worldly thinkers of that day.
A Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible was supposedly translated in Alexandria in 72 days by 72 Jewish scholars around 250 B.C. This translation was called the LXX or the Septuagint. The entire legend of the LXX was based upon a writing called the Letter of Aristeas. The proposed author of the letter professed to be an high official at the court of Ptolemy Philadelphia(285-247 B.C.).
Ptolemy of this Alexandrian fairy tale supposedly requested Eleazar to authorize six elders of the twelve tribes of Israel to translate the Hebrew Bible into Greek. This masterpiece from Alexandria supposedly became the elite translation that was quoted by the Lord Jesus and His Apostles.
Simpletons believe the fairy tale of Alexandria by faith with no evidence of any B.C. LXX. Prudent students research further. The Lord God did not authorize any inspired writings during the silent years. Common sense and Bible reading aid in understanding the questionable story of the LXX. If six scholars from each of the twelve tribes of Israel were involved, 66 men were apostates because God entrusted the Levites with the preservation of the Scriptures(Duet. 33:8-11, Ezra 7:6-10). It makes no sense that an Orthodox Jew would desire to change His Hebrew Bible into Greek. The Jews adamantly think Gentiles are dogs (Matt. 15:21-28).
The Septuagint most likely stemmed from the first theological school of Christendom that was founded in Alexandria. The first head of this school was Pantaenus in 180 A.D. Clement was the second head in 202, but the school reached its' peak under th tutelage of Origenes Adamantiua in 232. Origen is the hero of Alexandrian scholars. All modern scholars give Origen credit for being the first Bible critic. Origen was obsessed with philosophy and he never believed the Bible literally.
The crowning work of Origen was called the Hexapla. The Hexapla was a book containing six versions of the Old Testament. The fifth column of this work was penned by Origen himself and was most likely the Septuagint. It contained the Apocrypha as part of the OT. The evidence implies that Origen wrote the mysterious Septuagint around 250 A.D. rather than the fairy tale of the Letter of Aristeas.
I won't go into at this time the biblical comparisons between the dangers of Alexandria , Egypt and the blessings of Antioch of Syria. This can be another discussion.
I thought about what source I can give you about history/LXX, but then I realized that you prefer certain kinds of materials, the ones without much references or options (even though you call us simpletons).
So, try to read these two:
A New Look at the Origin of the Bible: The SEPTUAGINT -- Is It a Fraud or Forgery?
The School of Alexandria - Origen - Ch 5 - Origen's Theology
I think the first one is written in your style, the second one is about Origen. There are some information you can find interesting (for example manuscripts of Septuagint from before Origen, more sources about the translation than from the letter of Aristeas etc) which will prove your data wrong.
So, try to read these two:
A New Look at the Origin of the Bible: The SEPTUAGINT -- Is It a Fraud or Forgery?
The School of Alexandria - Origen - Ch 5 - Origen's Theology
I think the first one is written in your style, the second one is about Origen. There are some information you can find interesting (for example manuscripts of Septuagint from before Origen, more sources about the translation than from the letter of Aristeas etc) which will prove your data wrong.
Last edited:
Quote from the article as to the trustworthiness of the Septuagint:
The dean of evangelical Biblical scholars, F. F. Bruce, says in his excellent book The Canon of Scripture concerning the Septuagint:
I guess if the Dean Bruce says it's good, then it must be good.
Another quote from the Dean. This one is even more hilarious:
Says F. F. Bruce, Origen was the leading Biblical scholar of the entire Greek early church:
The dean of evangelical Biblical scholars, F. F. Bruce, says in his excellent book The Canon of Scripture concerning the Septuagint:
"The Greek translation of the scriptures was made available from time to time in the third and second centuries B.C. (say during the century 250-150 B.C.). The law, comprising the five books of Moses, was the first part of the scriptures to appear in a Greek version; the reading of the law was essential to synagogue worship, and it was important that what was read should be intelligible to the congregation" (pp. 43-44).
It should be perfectly clear that there is no truth whatsoever in the claim of our critic who attempts to prove that the Septuagint is a "fraud" and a "forgery" and " completely corrupt"!
I guess if the Dean Bruce says it's good, then it must be good.
Another quote from the Dean. This one is even more hilarious:
Says F. F. Bruce, Origen was the leading Biblical scholar of the entire Greek early church:
Quote from the article as to the trustworthiness of the Septuagint:
The dean of evangelical Biblical scholars, F. F. Bruce, says in his excellent book The Canon of Scripture concerning the Septuagint:
I guess if the Dean Bruce says it's good, then it must be good.
Another quote from the Dean. This one is even more hilarious:
Says F. F. Bruce, Origen was the leading Biblical scholar of the entire Greek early church:
The dean of evangelical Biblical scholars, F. F. Bruce, says in his excellent book The Canon of Scripture concerning the Septuagint:
"The Greek translation of the scriptures was made available from time to time in the third and second centuries B.C. (say during the century 250-150 B.C.). The law, comprising the five books of Moses, was the first part of the scriptures to appear in a Greek version; the reading of the law was essential to synagogue worship, and it was important that what was read should be intelligible to the congregation" (pp. 43-44).
It should be perfectly clear that there is no truth whatsoever in the claim of our critic who attempts to prove that the Septuagint is a "fraud" and a "forgery" and " completely corrupt"!
I guess if the Dean Bruce says it's good, then it must be good.
Another quote from the Dean. This one is even more hilarious:
Says F. F. Bruce, Origen was the leading Biblical scholar of the entire Greek early church:
Can you please post names of scholars who gave you information about Septuagint, so that we can compare them and their credibility?
Also, there are many more so historical authorities mentioned - Josephus, Aristobulus the High Priest, Philo of Alexandria and many biblical dictionaries or encyclopedias.
You cannot build the knowlede of truth/facts on just one person or source (yes, Christ is the exception, but thats a different context).
Last edited:
This so called "Letter of Aristeas" is the sole evidence for the existence of this mystical document. There are absolutely NO Greek Old Testament manuscripts existent with a date of 250 BC or anywhere near it. Neither is there any record in Jewish history of such a work being contemplated or performed. So to prove validity based upon opinions from either side does no one any good.
The facts are when pressed to produce hard evidence of the existence of such a document, scholars quickly point to Origen's Hexapla written around 200 AD, or approximately 450 years later than the LXX was supposedly penned, and more than 100 years after the New Testament was completed.
"What then," one might ask, "of the numerous quotes in the New Testament of the Old Testament that are ascribed to the LXX?" The LXX they speak of is nothing more than the second column of Origen's Hexapia. The New Testament quotations are not quotes of any LXX or the Hexapla. They are the author, the Holy Spirit, taking the liberty of quoting His work in the Old Testament in whatever manner He wishes. And we can rest assured that He certainly is not quoting any non-existent Septuagint.
The facts are when pressed to produce hard evidence of the existence of such a document, scholars quickly point to Origen's Hexapla written around 200 AD, or approximately 450 years later than the LXX was supposedly penned, and more than 100 years after the New Testament was completed.
"What then," one might ask, "of the numerous quotes in the New Testament of the Old Testament that are ascribed to the LXX?" The LXX they speak of is nothing more than the second column of Origen's Hexapia. The New Testament quotations are not quotes of any LXX or the Hexapla. They are the author, the Holy Spirit, taking the liberty of quoting His work in the Old Testament in whatever manner He wishes. And we can rest assured that He certainly is not quoting any non-existent Septuagint.
Quote from the article as to the trustworthiness of the Septuagint:
The dean of evangelical Biblical scholars, F. F. Bruce, says in his excellent book The Canon of Scripture concerning the Septuagint:
I guess if the Dean Bruce says it's good, then it must be good.
Another quote from the Dean. This one is even more hilarious:
Says F. F. Bruce, Origen was the leading Biblical scholar of the entire Greek early church:
The dean of evangelical Biblical scholars, F. F. Bruce, says in his excellent book The Canon of Scripture concerning the Septuagint:
"The Greek translation of the scriptures was made available from time to time in the third and second centuries B.C. (say during the century 250-150 B.C.). The law, comprising the five books of Moses, was the first part of the scriptures to appear in a Greek version; the reading of the law was essential to synagogue worship, and it was important that what was read should be intelligible to the congregation" (pp. 43-44).
It should be perfectly clear that there is no truth whatsoever in the claim of our critic who attempts to prove that the Septuagint is a "fraud" and a "forgery" and " completely corrupt"!
I guess if the Dean Bruce says it's good, then it must be good.
Another quote from the Dean. This one is even more hilarious:
Says F. F. Bruce, Origen was the leading Biblical scholar of the entire Greek early church:
Origen was indeed the leading Biblical scholar of the entire non-Jewish early church: F.F. Bruce's statement follows Pauls distinction between Jews and gentiles as between Jews and Greeks. Biblical? Yes. Awkward? somewhat. Hilarious? I don't think so!
Hello MarcR here are the verses that I mentioned discussing yesterday. Take them at your leisure, no hurry.
Luke 1:1-3 King James Version (KJV)
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
The point you were trying to make was that the KJV translators mis-translated "most surely believed" among us and the correct rendering should be "fulfilled" or "accomplished" among us.
The way I see those 3 verses is that Luke is saying that just as others have given their accounts of the things that they had seen Christ do and the things Christ said, Luke is about to do the same... he is going to give his version and view point of what he had seen Christ say and do.
The things that Luke was about to write about were the things that all the bretheren had seen, heard and believed to be true themselves. Is this not correct?
Luke 1:1-3 King James Version (KJV)
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
The point you were trying to make was that the KJV translators mis-translated "most surely believed" among us and the correct rendering should be "fulfilled" or "accomplished" among us.
The way I see those 3 verses is that Luke is saying that just as others have given their accounts of the things that they had seen Christ do and the things Christ said, Luke is about to do the same... he is going to give his version and view point of what he had seen Christ say and do.
The things that Luke was about to write about were the things that all the bretheren had seen, heard and believed to be true themselves. Is this not correct?
Just out of curiosity, what is your highest level of education? The things you write are just beyond bizarre. I am just trying to pin down where all this utter, unsourced, primitive nonsense you post is coming from.
The only thing corrupt was the manuscripts the KJV used. But, even then, they were adequate, for preaching the gospel.
I'm not going to debate soteriology right now. This is about whether the KJV is the ONLY inspired translation, or if other versions are not only valid, but much better, on so many levels.
The only thing corrupt was the manuscripts the KJV used. But, even then, they were adequate, for preaching the gospel.
I'm not going to debate soteriology right now. This is about whether the KJV is the ONLY inspired translation, or if other versions are not only valid, but much better, on so many levels.
Which world?
[h=1]“WORLD" - John's Ten Uses of the Word by Pastor John Samson[/h]The word “world†(Greek: Kosmos) appears 185 times in the New Testament: 78 times in John, 8 in Matthew, 3 in Mark, and 3 also in Luke. The vast majority of its occurrences are therefore in John’s writings, as it is also found 24 times in John’s three epistles, and just three times in Peter.
John uses the word “world†in ten different ways in his Gospel.
1. The Entire Universe - John 1:10; 1:3; 17:5
2. The Physical Earth - John 13:1; 16:33; 21:25
3. The World System - John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11 (see also similar usage in Gal 1:4 – Paul)
4. All humanity minus believers - John 7:7; 15:18
5. A Big Group but less than all people everywhere - John 12:19
6. The Elect Only - John 3:17
7. The Non-Elect Only - John 17:9
8. The Realm of Mankind - John 1:10; (this is very probably the best understanding of the word "world" in John 3:16 also)
9. Jews and Gentiles (not just Israel but many Gentiles too) - John 4:42
10. The General Public (as distinguished from a private group) – not those in small private groups - John 7:4
Seeing this list can be very helpful – especially when traditions reign supreme in some people’s minds that "world" always means all people everywhere. Sometimes it does, but most of the time, it does not. It is a tradition that is very strong but one that cannot survive biblical scrutiny. It is the context that always establishes the meaning of words and their usage.
Reformation Theology: "WORLD" - John's Ten Uses of the Word by Pastor John Samson
[h=1]“WORLD" - John's Ten Uses of the Word by Pastor John Samson[/h]The word “world†(Greek: Kosmos) appears 185 times in the New Testament: 78 times in John, 8 in Matthew, 3 in Mark, and 3 also in Luke. The vast majority of its occurrences are therefore in John’s writings, as it is also found 24 times in John’s three epistles, and just three times in Peter.
John uses the word “world†in ten different ways in his Gospel.
1. The Entire Universe - John 1:10; 1:3; 17:5
2. The Physical Earth - John 13:1; 16:33; 21:25
3. The World System - John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11 (see also similar usage in Gal 1:4 – Paul)
4. All humanity minus believers - John 7:7; 15:18
5. A Big Group but less than all people everywhere - John 12:19
6. The Elect Only - John 3:17
7. The Non-Elect Only - John 17:9
8. The Realm of Mankind - John 1:10; (this is very probably the best understanding of the word "world" in John 3:16 also)
9. Jews and Gentiles (not just Israel but many Gentiles too) - John 4:42
10. The General Public (as distinguished from a private group) – not those in small private groups - John 7:4
Seeing this list can be very helpful – especially when traditions reign supreme in some people’s minds that "world" always means all people everywhere. Sometimes it does, but most of the time, it does not. It is a tradition that is very strong but one that cannot survive biblical scrutiny. It is the context that always establishes the meaning of words and their usage.
Reformation Theology: "WORLD" - John's Ten Uses of the Word by Pastor John Samson
Hello MarcR here are the verses that I mentioned discussing yesterday. Take them at your leisure, no hurry.
Luke 1:1-3 King James Version (KJV)
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
The point you were trying to make was that the KJV translators mis-translated "most surely believed" among us and the correct rendering should be "fulfilled" or "accomplished" among us.
The way I see those 3 verses is that Luke is saying that just as others have given their accounts of the things that they had seen Christ do and the things Christ said, Luke is about to do the same... he is going to give his version and view point of what he had seen Christ say and do.
The things that Luke was about to write about were the things that all the bretheren had seen, heard and believed to be true themselves. Is this not correct?
Luke 1:1-3 King James Version (KJV)
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
The point you were trying to make was that the KJV translators mis-translated "most surely believed" among us and the correct rendering should be "fulfilled" or "accomplished" among us.
The way I see those 3 verses is that Luke is saying that just as others have given their accounts of the things that they had seen Christ do and the things Christ said, Luke is about to do the same... he is going to give his version and view point of what he had seen Christ say and do.
The things that Luke was about to write about were the things that all the bretheren had seen, heard and believed to be true themselves. Is this not correct?
Yes I agree God foreknew and knows everything past present and future. I'm saying that God is speaking of Esau in the same way that he spoke of Agar in Galatians. God is not talking about the literal Agar, he's talking about the figurative Agar.
Galatians 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
Galatians 4:24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.