Things to Consider Before Attempting to Correct the King James Bible

I'd think you would have to prove your claim about the Anglican thing.

And the king Jimmy nonsense makes those who use it look like the same bunch of fools as followers of Borg dog boy. Can you address the King James Bible topic like adults? Or aren't you all old enough to meet that criteria yet?

I put my trust in God's promise to preserve His words, not the men He used to accomplish this task.

Did you answer the question? Who killed Goliath? My bible says David. What does yours say?

Bingo! It will define itself. No need for a fancy education. Words are all you need.

I haven't used the term Jimmy. Or aren't you grown up enough to apply response to the correct person.

King James, was Anglican. Look it up yourself. im not your daddy or the substitute teacher

Exactly why they transliterated words, compared to previous "learned and able men" and copied much of the OT verbatim from a previous English version.....just what we need....another "let's worship the version" instead of the God of the version......

Like a deacon and preacher I knew.....JESUS AND Paul preached out of the King Jimmy.....and if it is good enough for them it is good enough for me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Most of the KJV onlies need to read the translators preface/introduction to their translation - they be rolling in their graves to see what these "persons" are trying to do with their translation.

But they will retort the preface wasn't inspired

Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Perhaps if you understood the context of this assertion, you would stop using it, for you would see that it doesn't support your cause in the least.

First, it isn't God's promise; it is the psalmist's attribution. Second, if it is the words that are to be preserved (debatable), the words are preserved FROM a wicked generation, not simply "for ever".

They already did. In this thread. With great irrelevance.

Ameneth...the King Jameseth iseth the besteth versioneth thateth maneth haseth to studietheth.....

All haileth JIMMY!!

King James Version
Original Preface [1611]

Now to the later we answere; that wee doe not deny, nay wee affirme and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set foorth by men of our profession (for wee have seene none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the Kings Speech which hee uttered in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian and Latine, is still the Kings Speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expresly for sence, every where.

For it is confessed, that things are to take their denomination of the greater part; and a naturall man could say, Verùm ubi multa nitent in carmine, non ego paucis offendor maculis, &c. A man may be counted a vertuous man, though hee have made many slips in his life, (els, there were none vertuous, for in many things we offend all) also a comely man and lovely, though hee have some warts upon his hand, yea, not onely freakles upon his face, but all skarres.

No cause therefore why the word translated should bee denied to be the word, or forbidden to be currant, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting foorth of it. For what ever was perfect under the Sunne, where Apostles or Apostolike men, that is, men indued with an extraordinary measure of Gods spirit, and priviledged with the priviledge of infallibilitie, had not their hand? The Romanistes therefore in refusing to heare, and daring to burne the Word translated, did no lesse then despite the spirit of grace, from whom originally it proceeded, and whose sense and meaning, as well as mans weaknesse would enable, it did expresse.

http://www.togetherweteach.com/TCB/kjvpreface.htm

*Checks hands for warts*

Phew - just freakles.

Sorry for my blond gone white responses

Here is one translation

There was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.
2 Samuel 21:19 NASB
https://bible.com/bible/100/2sa.21.19.NASB

And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaare–oregim, a Beth–lehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.
2 Samuel 21:19 KJV
https://bible.com/bible/1/2sa.21.19.KJV

Right. So did Elhanan kill Goliath as stated in the NASB or did Elhanan kill the brother of Goliath as stated in the KJV? Remember, David killed Goliath.

I think that Jesus read OT scrolls only.

Hmmmm, u had me so i had to do some research.
And there was war again with the Philistines; and Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, whose spear staff was like a weaver's beam.
1 Chronicles 20:5 KJV
https://bible.com/bible/1/1ch.20.5.KJV..

So the operative word in both KJV and NASB is "again"

So yes David killed Galliath

The latter..........

The perfect KJV can be translated from English into Chinese -- naturally without using even any recent dictionaries or lexicons that would corrupt the translation.

Hahahahahah the perfect King Jimmy.......we have a winner..............!!!!!!!!!!