The Error of KJV-Onlyism

[Nehemiah6]

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (2 Timothy 3:16).

Paul was referring to the original Scriptures. When he was writing, the Hebrew Tanakh had been faithfully copied by Hebrew scribes since Moses. So in fact there was no difference between the originals and copies of copies.

At the same time Peter called his own epistles "prophecy" and equated all Paul's epistles with the Hebrew Scriptures. Now when we come to bible translations, a FAITHFUL translation (the KJB) can indeed be called "Scripture" and also "the Word of God". But it is still a translation.

 

[HealthAndHappiness]

All these places involve “hell” in some way.
Just like in the English language, the Bible has homonyms in it.
Meaning, if you look up a word in the English language, there are sometimes multiple meanings for that one word.
Homonyms are words that look and sound the same but they have different meanings.
Again, we also have to understand that the KJB translators were the best scholars on the planet.
Their credentials are far unmatched by any other group of scholars that came before them or after.
I wish the words “for ever” and ever were translated as ”ages to ages” but God has a reason for everything that He does that we do not understand. It is still accurate, but it is more of a metaphorical way of expressing that idea.

16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have life for ages to ages?

I'm convinced that they were better at translating than wishing it said what James Strong or any other theologian wishes it said.

 

[Magenta]

Paul was referring to the original Scriptures. When he was writing, the Hebrew Tanakh had been faithfully copied by Hebrew scribes since Moses. So in fact there was no difference between the originals and copies of copies.

At the same time Peter called his own epistles "prophecy" and equated all Paul's epistles with the Hebrew Scriptures. Now when we come to bible translations, a FAITHFUL translation (the KJB) can indeed be called "Scripture" and also "the Word of God". But it is still a translation.

Why change it if it was correct the first time? Eh. You and your dishonesty know no bounds.

 

[fredoheaven]

KJV - Errors

Deuteronomy 8:9 –

A land wherein thou shalt eat bread without scarceness, thou shalt not lack any thing in it; a land whose stones are iron, and out of whose hills thou mayest dig brass.

One cannot “dig brass” out of hills where it doesn’t exist. Other than an infinitesimal amount of mineral brass found in Siberia, brass is an alloy produced by man. One digs copper out of hills. 1 demerit.

The key to understanding this is the word “dig” which means “to obtain or extract”. This is to excavate the elements and from them or out of them we eventually make brass, or as you say “copper”. None of these elements are found actually in their pure form just by "mining" the earth. So this is not a matter of translational error, it is just a misunderstood English word.

 

[HealthAndHappiness]

Also, I forgot I saved the full version of Theo Hikmat’s video on YouTube involving the NKJV. Download it and save it and give it to others.

That was a good way to bring in the new year.

I don't often find my time productive in the Bible forum, but this was well thought out.

For you and anyone who wonders what my stance is on the KJV issue, this man covers it pretty well.

Why I Only Find the KJV Worth Using

 

[7thMoon]

I think this video is very informative.

 

[7thMoon]

That was a good way to bring in the new year.

I don't often find my time productive in the Bible forum, but this was well thought out.

For you and anyone who wonders what my stance is on the KJV issue, this man covers it pretty well.

Why I Only Find the KJV Worth Using

I find it useful because it is the reverse interlinear behind the Blue Letter Bible.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have life for ages to ages?

I'm convinced that they were better at translating than wishing it said what James Strong or any other theologian wishes it said.

I agree. James Strong was on the ASV committee. I don’t trust all of his definitions. A few them line up with the Modern Bibles.

The list of the words on the study on ”hell” I defined is from my own personal study on how those words were used in context to their respective chapters and giving honor to the English word “hell.” I am also not claiming my definitions are 100% authoritative, either. They just fit the context the best in my humble opinion.

John 3:16 does not have the Greek word ”aiōn” (αἰών) in it. I was referring to English word “ever” in Revelation 20:10, which is the Greek word, “aiōn" (αἰών).

1. Go to BlueLetterBible and type in the English word “ever” or “Revelation 20:10.”
2. Once you are at the Revelation 20:10, entry, click the Strong’s button at the top
(Note: This is only visible in desktop mode (Which must selected at the bottom of the page if it is not selected).
3. Click on the Strong’s Number next to the English word ”ever” in Revelation 20:10.
4. Once you click on the Strong’s Number entry, you will see some definitions.
5. But if you scroll down on entry page for that Greek word, you will see how that word is used elsewhere in the KJV in English.

Ephesians 2:7 has the Greek word “aiōn” for the English words “the ages.” Yet, this same Greek word is used for the English words “world,“ and ”ages” elsewhere in the KJV. BlueLetterBible is currently default to searching in the KJV.

 

[Gideon300]

It sounds like you are looking for a lame excuse.

Read from Romans 1,
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Men without the Bible translated in their language didn't have an excuse because of what is seen in creation, so why would you have an excuse if there are some mistakes in your Bible translation.

You are equating God preserving His word with the idea of there having to be one infallible translation in English. What about other languages? What about the original languages the Bible was actually written in? Why would you think the translation has to be perfect rather than the interpretations.

Are you going to prophesy 'Thus saith the Lord' that God says that the KJV is infallible? If you do, I would question the legitimacy of your prophecy. If no one claims to be a prophet and no one claims to prophesy this idea, then what rational support could you have for such a notion?

It seems that many KJV only people do not realise that not all Christians speak English. When I was first saved, I was bailed up after church by a KJ wielding nut job telling me how the KJV was the only true version. I thought to myself, if reading the KJV does that to you, leave it alone. And every preacher would read from the KJV and say it said "this" but really meant "that". I skipped the learn Elizabethan English and how to deal with bowels and went for alternative versions. Now I read the Berean mostly. I also check out literal translations. I've somehow survived 50 years in the Lord without the KJV.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Paul was referring to the original Scriptures. When he was writing, the Hebrew Tanakh had been faithfully copied by Hebrew scribes since Moses. So in fact there was no difference between the originals and copies of copies.

At the same time Peter called his own epistles "prophecy" and equated all Paul's epistles with the Hebrew Scriptures. Now when we come to bible translations, a FAITHFUL translation (the KJB) can indeed be called "Scripture" and also "the Word of God". But it is still a translation.

No, my friend. Paul was not exclusively referring to only the original Scriptures. How do I know? Because of the verse right before it.
Paul tells Timothy that he has known the Holy Scriptures since he was a child (See: 2 Timothy 3:15). Timothy did not have the originals when he was a child. But he would have had a copy. So his copy that he had which was called Scripture, and the very next verse says… ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God (Meaning even the Scriptures Timothy had as a child were given by inspiration of God). It does not say, “the copies of Scripture are not given by inspiration of God.” It does not say that.

 

[Magenta]

I've somehow survived 50 years in the Lord without the KJV.

How dare you .

 

[fredoheaven]

KJV - Errors

The next is from Deuteronomy 33:17 –

The word “unicorns” is decidedly incorrect. First, there are no such things. But even if the old English word speaks of a rhino or something else with one horn, the Hebrew word is singular – “unicorn.” And so, no matter what, the translation is wrong because a unicorn has only one horn. Therefore, this is another of the innumerable errors found in the translation. It is just a ridiculously funny one.

Your concern is about the masculine singular Hebrew “reem”. This is simply indicated by the fact that the Hebrew reem in the KJB is plural, simply because it causes absurdity in the English translation where we have the “horns” speaking of plural. The question is does a Hebrew word with masculine singular form cannot be translated in English as plural? Yes, it can be translated which is dependent on the context according to the Hebrew grammar.

https://uhg.readthedocs.io/en/latest/number_plural.html

 

[Magenta]

No, my friend. Paul was not referring to the original Scriptures.

N6 was referring to what Timothy had known since a child...

He even specified: the Hebrew Tanakh.

 

[7thMoon]

Yes, and it's not "over men" either, as Stan_the_man claims.

It clear in the Hebrew is that she will long for her husband, and he may even abuse her. I don't know the Hebrew means abuse, but rule implies enough. Eve was a helpmatch, not a helper. Man is the one who is supposed to labor.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

"Water-downed"? I guess reading the KJV has taught you nothing about proper English grammar.

The problem is that "fornication", being a transliteration, has no cognates in English. Unless you happen to have learned what the word is intended to mean, you would be guessing. Calling it "sexual immorality" makes it much more clear.


I have never attended a church where I was regularly using the same translation as the pastor. I don't hold that one should, necessarily, and I don't hold that one should stick to a single translation. So I don't share your concern.


Quotations without citations are not evidence, but rather hearsay. Don't bother using them again.

This is totally backwards. Sexual Immorality is an obscurity of fornication, which means sex outside of marriage.
Look at old dictionaries. That is what fornication means. Also, if you lived during the 1700s here in America, the Bible was the King James Bible and there would not have been any Modern Bibles from Westcott and Hort that you are tripping over to defend. This discussion would not even exist if you lived back then.

 

[Mem]

Nice job. It actually means her desire is to have authority over her husband. It is the source of much marital dissension.

and I'm not sure his 'ruling over you' isn't as pleasant as xome may think it should be either, actually it is an apple juxtaposed against an orange of submissions, to one another that is.

 

[7thMoon]

There is an etymological relating of porne into fornication. But it isn't a typical transliteration.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

N6 was referring to what Timothy had known since a child...

He even specified: the Hebrew Tanakh.

I highly doubt the Jews gave Timothy the originals. There were multiple synagogues. Do you think they all had the originals when they did their readings of Scripture? No, of course not. They had copies of Scripture. Paul says ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God. One either believes what Paul says on 2 Timothy 3:16 when he says, "ALL Scripture is given by inspiration of God” or they don’t believe those words. I believe those words by Paul. When he says ALL Scripture that would extend to the copies of Scripture of which Timothy had, and which the Ethiopian eunuch had. They did not have the originals. Jesus also had the same scroll of Isaiah that the Ethiopian eunuch had? Surely not.

 

[HealthAndHappiness]

I agree. James Strong was on the ASV committee. I don’t trust all of his definitions. A few them line up with the Modern Bibles.

The list of the words on the study on ”hell” I defined is from my own personal study on how those words were used in context to their respective chapters and giving honor to the English word “hell.” I am also not claiming my definitions are 100% authoritative, either. They just fit the context the best in my humble opinion.

John 3:16 does not have the Greek word ”aiōn” (αἰών) in it. I was referring to English word “ever” in Revelation 20:10, which is the Greek word, “aiōn" (αἰών).

1. Go to BlueLetterBible and type in the English word “ever” or “Revelation 20:10.”
2. Once you are at the Revelation 20:10, entry, click the Strong’s button at the top
(Note: This is only visible in desktop mode (Which must selected at the bottom of the page if it is not selected).
3. Click on the Strong’s Number next to the English word ”ever” in Revelation 20:10.
4. Once you click on the Strong’s Number entry, you will see some definitions.
5. But if you scroll down on entry page for that Greek word, you will see how that word is used elsewhere in the KJV in English.

Ephesians 2:7 has the Greek word “aiōn” for the English words “the ages.” Yet, this same Greek word is used for the English words “world,“ and ”ages” elsewhere in the KJV. BlueLetterBible is currently default to searching in the English KJV.

Thank you for your explanation. I'm glad you found errors in one of the common "go tos" for KJV users. Exhaustive word studies are very revealing.

A friend once started a Bible Greek class with me and part way through he got mad at me while I was reading the KJV out loud. He jumped on me and shouted the short verse was WRONG! IT DOESN'T SAY SUCH AND SUCH! IT REALLY SAYS.....____________________________......(on and on for a long paragraph.)
The friend was part way through the first year introductory Greek. He already (thought he) knew more than the 54 scholars on the KJV translation committee who spoke fluent Greek, Latin and many other languages. Lol. 😄

 

[HealthAndHappiness]

Did you take an entire year of Greek too Moon?