How is the KJV corrupt?

  • 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.

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
Christians are not necessarily English speaking. There are German and French, Chinese and Italian Bibles. There are Russian Bibles. Are they disqualified because they are not KJV?
Equivalent translations of the Bible in these languages have also been produced by the Trinitarian Bible Society. https://www.tbsbibles.org/page/language

The key element is the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts. Therefore we need nor bring up this straw man argument.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
I thought the Septuagint was all Greek?
Yes it is a corrupted Greek translation of the Hebrew Tanakh (and includes all the apocryphal books which belong to the OT period). The claim that all the NT quotes from the OT match the LXX is only partially true. And I have personally researched this.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,602
13,861
113
Granville Sharp rule

What in the world is that???
never heard of it
"Basically, Granville Sharp's rule states that when you have two nouns, which are not proper names (such as Cephas, or Paul, or Timothy), which are describing a person, and the two nouns are connected by the word 'and,' and the first noun has the article ('the') while the second does not, both nouns are referring to the same person." - www.theopedia.com/granville-sharps-rule
 
Jan 5, 2022
1,224
620
113
37
"A higher plane," hehe
www.youtube.com
Equivalent translations of the Bible in these languages have also been produced by the Trinitarian Bible Society. https://www.tbsbibles.org/page/language

The key element is the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts. Therefore we need nor bring up this straw man argument.
Yes, there were good reasons why the Minority Texts were rejected by the church, less propagated, and not relied upon for historical Bibles.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,602
13,861
113
How is that demostrated? Brother, friend
2 Kings 8:26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.

2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.

That is a clear, unambiguous, irreconcilable contradiction. The KJV is not perfect, for a perfect translation would not have such a blatant problem.

John146 claims some convoluted wresting of the context renders it reconciled... which is hogwash.
 

TheLearner

Well-known member
Jan 14, 2019
8,221
1,584
113
68
Brighton, MI
Granville Sharp rule

What in the world is that???
never heard of it
http://www.equip.org/PDF/JAJ505.pdf
"
Bowman/Sharp’s Rule – page 5 A. Defining Sharp’s Rule It should be noted that Sharp set forth not merely one rule but six governing the use of the definite article. Almost all of these rules have been accepted as valid except the first, which is the one that applies to Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. In this study, therefore, we shall be concerned only with the first rule, which shall be called simply “Sharp’s rule.” Sharp’s rule has been variously stated by different grammarians and theologians, and this may help to explain the confusion which has surrounded this issue. The definition of Sharp’s rule that shall be defended here is as follows: In Greek, when two nouns of the same case are connected by kai (“and”), and the definite article appears before the first noun but not before the second, both nouns refer to the same person if the nouns are (1) personal, (2) singular, and (3) non-proper nouns, and if the nouns are (d) not normally paired semantically as denoting two persons. This definition is in most respects similar to the one given by Sharp himself, and even closer in wording to the definition offered recently the Lutheran scholar C. Kuehne.3 Neither Sharp nor Kuehne, however, included the final qualification (d) regarding semantically “paired” nouns. More recently still, the Greek grammarian Daniel B. Wallace, whose doctoral dissertation was devoted to Sharp’s rule, has defended a definition of the rule essentially identical to that of Kuehne.4 In his recent textbook Wallace argues that the rule covers all article-noun-kai-noun (TSKS) expressions with three qualifications: “(1) neither is impersonal; (2) neither is plural; (3) neither is a proper name.” In other words, “according to Sharp, the rule applied absolutely only with personal, singular, and non-proper nouns.”5 The definition I defend here includes these three qualifications and adds a fourth: if the nouns are normally semantically paired as denoting two persons, Sharp’s rule normally does not apply. One other possible qualification I would add – though it does not materially affect the argument of this paper – is that it is possible that Sharp’s rule might not always apply to a series of three or more nouns in this construction. At least one textbook does state that “the rule could also be applied to a series of three or more,”6 but even the way this statement is worded suggests that it would not necessarily apply to all such series. Still, with the other qualifications observed, there are no exceptions in the New Testament to the rule involving series of three or more nouns, 3C. Kuehne, “The Greek Article and the Doctrine of Christ's Deity,” Journal of Theology, Church of the Lutheran Confession, 13, 3 (Sept. 1973) 19-20, 26. Kuehne discussed the application of Sharp’s rule to the deity of Christ in six issues of this journal, in Vol. 13, Nos. 3 and 4, and Vol. 14, Nos. 1-4 (Sept. 1973 - Dec. 1974). 4Daniel B. Wallace, “The Article with Multiple Substantives Connected by Kai in the New Testament: Semantics and Significance,” Ph.D. diss. (Dallas Theological Seminary, 1995). 5Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 272. 6James A. Brooks and Carlton L. Winberg, Syntax of New Testament Greek (Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1978), 70. " https://cupdf.com/document/bowman-sharps-rule.html

https://www.aomin.org/aoblog/general-apologetics/granville-sharps-rule/
https://www.academia.edu/48841201/G...he_Deity_of_Jesus_Christ_in_the_New_Testament
https://www.theopedia.com/granville-sharps-rule
https://www.researchgate.net/public...HE_DEITY_OF_JESUS_CHRIST_IN_THE_NEW_TESTAMENT

https://digilander.libero.it/domingo7/SharpsRule.pdf
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,167
3,699
113
2 Kings 8:26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.

2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.

That is a clear, unambiguous, irreconcilable contradiction. The KJV is not perfect, for a perfect translation would not have such a blatant problem.

John146 claims some convoluted wresting of the context renders it reconciled... which is hogwash.
For the sincere student of the word, it’s not hogwash. For the Bible skeptic, God would have him to be deceived.

So, according to you, the KJV is corrupt and should not be used as the word of God.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.
As John Gill says in his commentary "it seems best to acknowledge a mistake of the copier, which might easily be made through a similarity of the numeral letters, forty two, for twenty two".
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,167
3,699
113
As John Gill says in his commentary "it seems best to acknowledge a mistake of the copier, which might easily be made through a similarity of the numeral letters, forty two, for twenty two".
But that’s not what we have. There is truth there for the seeker of truth.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,602
13,861
113
For the sincere student of the word, it’s not hogwash. For the Bible skeptic, God would have him to be deceived.

So, according to you, the KJV is corrupt and should not be used as the word of God.
No, according to YOU...

Things that are different are not the same. Two separate versions cannot be both the word of God when they contain different words and different truths. “Thy word is truth.“ Words matter to God. Truth matters to God.
By your own words, the KJV cannot be the word of God, because it contains two versions of the same story with clearly contradictory words and "truths".

You dug your own hole. It's time to get some integrity and own it.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,602
13,861
113
As John Gill says in his commentary "it seems best to acknowledge a mistake of the copier, which might easily be made through a similarity of the numeral letters, forty two, for twenty two".
I have no problem at all with the text, because I understand how such differences come to be. I simply use it as proof that the KJV is not perfect.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
But that’s not what we have. There is truth there for the seeker of truth.
Well there is only a partial similarity. So there must be some other reason.
עֶשְׂרִ֨ים = twenty (esrim)
אַרְבָּעִ֨ים = forty (abarim)
 

John146

Senior Member
Jan 13, 2016
17,167
3,699
113
No, according to YOU...



By your own words, the KJV cannot be the word of God, because it contains two versions of the same story with clearly contradictory words and "truths".

You dug your own hole. It's time to get some integrity and own it.
I‘ve provided the reconciliation for the so called contradiction many times. You don’t like the explanation, so it must be a contradiction.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,954
13,615
113
kjv no es español, entonces, ¿qué hago?
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,602
13,861
113
I‘ve provided the reconciliation for the so called contradiction many times. You don’t like the explanation, so it must be a contradiction.
My like or dislike of the reconciliation is irrelevant. You have provided an explanation in which the numbers make sense but the text doesn’t. For that reason, it doesn’t hold water.
 

fredoheaven

Senior Member
Nov 17, 2015
4,112
963
113
Since the KJV is demonstrably not perfect, that subject is off the table.
Umm, you said earlier, Kjb is the word of God therefore, inerrant, meaning perfect and now you are changing. Anyway, we have gone through these on many many threads. You just don't have one but I have one that is inerrant. God bless