KJV translators weren't KJV only!

[rayzor]

Here the KJV translators are taking note of the previous Protestant English Versions from Tyndale, Coverdale to Bishops Bible. that's why there was a need for a new translation for the common people and to be appointed to be read in the churches. The KJV translators do not deny they are the words of God but have some imperfections and blemishes that need to purify and KJV as the result of these purifications.

yes and if go back far enough they might find the one that had the bible written in the first place.

 

[ResidentAlien]

Here the KJV translators are taking note of the previous Protestant English Versions from Tyndale, Coverdale to Bishops Bible. that's why there was a need for a new translation for the common people and to be appointed to be read in the churches. The KJV translators do not deny they are the words of God but have some imperfections and blemishes that need to purify and KJV as the result of these purifications.

You forgot to quote the part where they say those previous versions are still God's word, even with blemishes.

The main reason the KJV was made wasn't to eradicate all blemishes, but to make it more readable and understandable.

 

[rayzor]

Not in the context of the chapter. You are sacrificing reading comprehension over worry about some doctrine or other.

Never chapter and vs of itself but truth And spirit.reading comprehension is determined buy Jesus,,,because he said so.

 

[AandW]

What is weird in my Opinion, this is the YEAR 2021, and for the most part, Believers and Followers of God knows the Old Testament in the KJV was originally written in HEBREW and the New Testament is 90% Greek,

So, if we know the O.T. is Hebrew and the N.T. is Greek, why aren't we reading the Hebrew Tanakh for the Old Testament and the Greek Codex Sinaiticus for the New Testament?

After all, the KJV SHOULD BE REPLICATING THE TANAKH FOR THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE CODEX SINAITICUS FOR THE NEW TESTAMENT, since the Hebrew Tanakh and the Greek Codex Sinaiticus [[EXISTED]] BEFORE the KJV by literally THOUSANDS AND HUNDREDS of years!!

 

[rayzor]

You forgot to quote the part where they say those previous versions are still God's word, even with blemishes.

The main reason the KJV was made wasn't to eradicate all blemishes, but to make it more readable and understandable.

some of it is not gods word.but gods word is like pure gold in a sewer.I give a extreme example: The Joseph smith translation.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

All I need is that one verse to know that God's word is truth. Yes, other verses support that doctrine, but only one verse is needed.

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth...that one verse is all I need for the truth that God created the heaven and the earth. Other verses support this truth, but the doctrine is found in one verse.

In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

There are no Bible translations that have altered scripture to deny the believer's eternal security in Jesus.
There are no Bible translations that give belivers a licence to sin either.

 

[AandW]

I love KJV only dummies, because what they quote is literally 50% is FALSE and FAKE because the KJV does not ALIGN with the TRUE more Original and Authentic Hebrew/Greek Versions written before it!

 

[rayzor]

What is weird in my Opinion, this is the YEAR 2021, and for the most part, Believers and Followers of God knows the Old Testament in the KJV was originally written in HEBREW and the New Testament is 90% Greek,

So, if we know the O.T. is Hebrew and the N.T. is Greek, why aren't we reading the Hebrew Tanakh for the Old Testament and the Greek Codex Sinaiticus for the New Testament?

After all, the KJV SHOULD BE REPLICATING THE TANAKH FOR THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE CODEX SINAITICUS FOR THE NEW TESTAMENT, since the Hebrew Tanakh and the Greek Codex Sinaiticus [[EXISTED]] BEFORE the KJV by literally THOUSANDS AND HUNDREDS of years!!

I do and the Ben Asher text does have some issues.And the Greek dos have things that are not translated the same

 

[AandW]

2 examples:

in the Greek Codex Mark ends in Verse 9 of Chapter 16, and the 1 John is not a triune Version like the KJV.

What that means, is the KJV has ADD-ONS!

So, if your Bible is a bunch of ADD-ons to the WORD of God, you ain't got but about 20% TRUTH you're believing!
The Rest is pure BUNK!

Because those ADD-ONS change the entire Verse Meaning so YOU ARE BELIEVING A LIE!

 

[ResidentAlien]

some of it is not gods word.but gods word is like pure gold in a sewer.I give a extreme example: The Joseph smith translation.

This is an exception that proves the rule.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

What is weird in my Opinion, this is the YEAR 2021, and for the most part, Believers and Followers of God knows the Old Testament in the KJV was originally written in HEBREW and the New Testament is 90% Greek,

So, if we know the O.T. is Hebrew and the N.T. is Greek, why aren't we reading the Hebrew Tanakh for the Old Testament and the Greek Codex Sinaiticus for the New Testament?

After all, the KJV SHOULD BE REPLICATING THE TANAKH FOR THE OLD TESTAMENT AND THE CODEX SINAITICUS FOR THE NEW TESTAMENT, since the Hebrew Tanakh and the Greek Codex Sinaiticus [[EXISTED]] BEFORE the KJV by literally THOUSANDS AND HUNDREDS of years!!

I always believed God could communicate all languages. Especially after that little incident at Babel.
And then Pentecost.

But yes, the Hebrew, Greek & Aramaic manuscripts are as close to the original message as one can get.

 

[rayzor]

In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

There are no Bible translations that have altered scripture to deny the believer's eternal security in Jesus.
There are no Bible translations that give belivers a licence to sin either.

yes i know that is true,,But the wicked bible had a misprint in it that said thou shall commit adultery it was a king James version

 

[AandW]

2 examples:

in the Greek Codex Mark ends in Verse 9 of Chapter 16, and the 1 John is not a triune Version like the KJV.

What that means, is the KJV has ADD-ONS!

So, if your Bible is a bunch of ADD-ons to the WORD of God, you ain't got but about 20% TRUTH you're believing!
The Rest is pure BUNK!

Because those ADD-ONS change the entire Verse Meaning so YOU ARE BELIEVING A LIE!

From the TRUE CODEX:

Mark 16:
8 And going out they fled from the sepulcher; for trembling and astonishment had seized them; and they said nothing to any one, for they were afraid.

1:1 Since many have undertaken to draw up a narrative of the matters that have been fully accomplished among us,

You see how it goes to VERSE 8 then to VERSE 1?

Because the TRUE MARK ends at Verse 8 not 16:



The KJV 1 John 5:7:
1 John 5:7. King James Version ... For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

It should read:
6 This is he that came through water and blood, Jesus Christ: not in the water only, but in the water and in the blood; and it is the Spirit that testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.

7 For they that testify are three,

8 the Spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the three are one.


So if you are reading 1 John 5:7. King James Version ... For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one....THIS IS AN ADD ON AND NOT THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD SO YOU ARE BELIEVING A [[LIE]] HERE! (if you think John wrote that from the Inspiration of the Holy Spirit)

 

[AandW]

I always believed God could communicate all languages.

If they are translated to what God actually originally stated, it can!

 

[ResidentAlien]

From the TRUE CODEX:

Mark 16:
8 And going out they fled from the sepulcher; for trembling and astonishment had seized them; and they said nothing to any one, for they were afraid.

1:1 Since many have undertaken to draw up a narrative of the matters that have been fully accomplished among us,

You see how it goes to VERSE 8 then to VERSE 1?

Because the TRUE MARK ends at Verse 8 not 16:

It's not an established fact that Mark ends at v.8. Some manuscripts do in fact have 9-16. It's possible Mark's original manuscript ended at v.8 but in a later version he added 9-16. No one really knows.

 

[Dino246]

This has been explained many times. Did you come up with this or are you repeating what you found on the internet?

Same question to you.

You reject simple, straightforward explanations for "contradictions" in other translations, but present convoluted explanations for contradictions in the KJV as though they should be satisfactory. In doing so, you violate the principle of "one set of measures" that the Bible sets forth. That makes you a hypocrite.

 

[Dino246]

The simple solution to this apparent contradiction is that Ahaziah was physically 22 years old when he began to reign, but since God has appointed Jehu to cut off the house of Ahab, as a son of Ahab through marriage, he was 42 years old. The information is all there in the texts to the student of the word.

Hogwash and codswollop. You're a hypocrite.

 

[Ogom]

If they are translated to what God actually originally stated, it can!

it can''t. God's thoughts, and human's are larger and more complex than single words or even sentences.

 

[Dino246]

It seems to me that if that verse really says that Peter stood condemned, that it settles the issue for me that one can lose his salvation.

But if the kjv is correct in its translation of that verse, and he was merely to be blamed, I find that the matter is still undecided.

Oh no... you might need to study more! What a horror!

 

[AandW]

It's not an established fact that Mark ends at v.8. Some manuscripts do in fact have 9-16. It's possible Mark's original manuscript ended at v.8 but in a later version he added 9-16. No one really knows.

We do know around 200 A.D. the Greek Bible only had 8 Verses to Mark 16.

I doubt since there are now 8 MORE VERSES come time around 345 A.D., [[it's clear]] Mark [did not] ADD this but a NOBODY did!