What translation has the exact words of God preserved for English speakers?

The "KJV only" teaching adds words to God's finished revelation by saying that the English words of prophecy in the KJV book of Revelation are equal to or supercede the words of Revelation that God inspired in koine Greek. If you add words to the book of Revelation that God did not inspire (which I think KJV only does) and say they are inspired, then I say you violate Revelation 22:18,19.

John wrote the book of Revelation in koine Greek and I think we both agree that it was by the inspiration of God. And he said at the end of the book that we should not add to the prophecies. Translating into another language is not adding to the prophecies because it is simply putting the original revelation in a form accessible for all peoples to be able to understand. In my understanding, the original words in koine Greek are the beginning and focal point of all translations in any language.

But if you make the English translation of the KJV "inspired", then the focal point becomes the English words and not the Greek words. You have added "words" to inspiration that were not given to John. He said do not add to the revelation!

Our difference is clearly shown in the discussion of "glosse" in I Cor. 14:2 - the KJV translates it as "unknown tongue". You begin with the English words of the KJV. I begin with the Greek word "glosse" to determine the meaning.

Which words are inspired? I say the original Greek words given to the author.

It is IMPOSSIBLE to translate a bible without first interpreting what a passage means because words have multiple meanings in all languages. That means that you either study Gods word that God interpreted through a human being that God inspired to write exactly what God intended to be written or you study a bible that some man interpreted on his own and has his beliefs and biases all over. That’s just common sense Chester.

As far as which words are inspired, both the originals, ORIGINALS that don’t exist any more, and the KJV are both inspired.

Actually, it's a fallacy called a false dichotomy. You think these are the only two options, but that is not the case.


Sorry, that's just your belief, and so far you have provided nothing in the way of evidence that it is any more than your belief. Further, as my previous response to Fredo shows, there are significant logical problems with your position. On top of all that, others have demonstrated that there are certain words in the KJV that are simply wrong; wrong in 1611 and still wrong in 2020.

I’m tied up right now but I’ll be back later.

You're focusing on "moved by the Holy Spirit" ("Ghost" in the KJV). Look closer at "spoke".

The combination of the two terms is what makes that verse supportive of the doctrine of inspiration. The prophets spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. They did not speak of their own accord. Whether that means that the men were inspired or not is actually secondary; the words they spoke were inspired. The Holy Spirit gave them the message and they penned the words.

Umm, this could be another mistaken identity of giving me my authority to rest on the KJ team (qualified as ad hominem attack) but anyway you would not answer the two that by your opinion were not qualified. I only asked for clarification in response to your post, to rehash, “is there any backing from the scriptures that authors (writers) were inspired?” And you have given the two to start with as you have other verses to prove that authors were inspired. So let’s stick to the scriptures you brought in and by the way if honesty is concerned, it seems your scriptural quotes on II Peter 1:21 is not the exact wording of the KJV (qualified as I don’t know) but rather you have quoted the ESV, hence, I assumed that your Bible preference is ESV. Yet, we will discuss them comparing scripture with scripture.

Let’s discuss if your statement that writers were given by inspiration/ were inspired.

1. In the KJV had translated 2 Timothy 3:16 the “pasa graphe” says All scripture is given by the inspiration of God…and as far as the scripture is concerned, the All scripture and not the writers gets inspiration.

2. 2 Peter 1;21 could be sticky. In the KJV, says:

2 Peter 1:21, KJV: "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

Your suppose reference here that ‘authors/writers’ were inspired is the phrase ‘ moved by the Holy Ghost’ which is given a meaning by the ESV as ‘carried along by the Holy Spirit’ which is quite correct. But moving or being carried along is equivalent to inspiration? The Greek used here is pherō is never translated as inspiration even in the modern English bibles are saying. You are again caught of not doing well in a given assignment (no offence made). That means tons of scholars says the same thing as KJV is saying, they only defined “moved” but in anyway refers to the authors or writer as inspired rather they were moved by the Spirit of God to penned the scripture given by inspiration. Here is the list so that I will not be again accused of circular reasoning:

New International Version
For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

New Living Translation
or from human initiative. No, those prophets were moved by the Holy Spirit, and they spoke from God.

English Standard Version
For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Berean Study Bible
For no prophecy was ever brought forth by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Berean Literal Bible
For no prophecy at any time was brought by the will of man, but men spoke from God, being carried by the Holy Spirit.

New American Standard Bible
for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

New King James Version
for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

King James Bible
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Christian Standard Bible
because no prophecy ever came by the will of man; instead, men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Contemporary English Version
The prophets did not think these things up on their own, but they were guided by the Spirit of God.

Good News Translation
For no prophetic message ever came just from the human will, but people were under the control of the Holy Spirit as they spoke the message that came from God.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
because no prophecy ever came by the will of man; instead, men spoke from God as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

International Standard Version
because no prophecy ever originated through a human decision. Instead, men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

NET Bible
for no prophecy was ever borne of human impulse; rather, men carried along by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

New Heart English Bible
For no prophecy ever came by human will, but people spoke from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
The prophecy came not by the will of man in the ancient times, but when holy men of God spoke, being compelled by the Holy Spirit.

GOD'S WORD® Translation
No prophecy ever originated from humans. Instead, it was given by the Holy Spirit as humans spoke under God's direction.

New American Standard 1977
for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

King James 2000 Bible
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

American King James Version
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Alright, but that doesn’t answer my clarification if authors were inspired or given by inspiration.

Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Judges 13:25 And the Spirit of the LORD began to move him at times in the camp of Dan between Zorah and Eshtaol.

2 Sam 24:1 And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

Heb 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house . . .

The demand that only the writers of the Original Autographs were MOVED (inspired) by the Holy Ghost because the prophecy of old time came by God. Yet only the scriptures are said to be inspired and never the authors. Nevertheless, it says that the men, who were so MOVED by God (not inspired) in this prophecy of Scripture, and they “SPAKE” the prophecy of scripture; so, this is about speaking and not writing in 2 Peter 1:21. Was either of the Authors, the Writers, the donkey, and the false prophet Balaam MOVED by the Holy Ghost? Was Tertius moved by the Holy Ghost? I say yes but they were not inspired.

Frankly it amazes me that you and others even argue the point.

We should not limit ourself to an interpretation of the Bible. We should study the Bible in the Original language.

I think you have a personal issue (vendetta?) with KJO people. At least it comes off that way (in the last couple posts).

I am not a KJVO.

I prefer it and I don't mind telling others of its qualities.

At the same time there really isn't a modern equivalent to the KJV. Even the modern Received Text based translations turn to a rendering in line with modern translations in many places (these are not language updates either). I do not believe the narrative that the KJV is filled with errors and based on late manuscripts with additions. I do believe the critical text is missing vital scripture passages.

Again, peace be to you in Jesus name.

I think you have a personal issue (vendetta?) with KJO people. At least it comes off that way (in the last couple posts).

I dont speak greek or hebrew. Odds are neither do you. I would be surprised if I ran across a person here who can go and conversate with people in the streets of Jerusalem in hebrew, or with greeks in Athens.

I realize koine greek is different than modern greek, but in my opinion using a lexicon and looking up words isnt knowing the language, knowing the language is being able to hold a conversation in that language

Frankly, since you hold no English translation as the word of God then,

NO translation is inspired (which is the position I hold). The word of God is, but the wording of the translation isn't.

Im not a KJVOnlyist because im not from an english speaking country, but I do find this philosophy to be confusing.

1. No translation is inspired.
2. Only the original autographs are inspired
3. We dont have the original autographs.

The reply is we dont have originals but we got copies, in the original languages.
But even that isnt really authoritative, since ive seen people talk about "copyist errors"

So what can we trust?

Im not a KJVOnlyist because im not from an english speaking country, but I do find this philosophy to be confusing.

1. No translation is inspired.
2. Only the original autographs are inspired
3. We dont have the original autographs.

The reply is we dont have originals but we got copies, in the original languages.
But even that isnt really authoritative, since ive seen people talk about "copyist errors"

So what can we trust?

Frankly, since you hold no English translation as the word of God then, it will be useless for me to discuss to you in this matter.

To demonstrate that translation makes inspiration then we go to the Bible as the Final written authority. When Paul quoted partially the Book of Psalms 2:7 as recorded in Acts 13:33 which was written originally written in Hebrew and possibly spoke that in Koine Greek when Paul went to Antioch of Pisidia before the Jews. While I may have assumed he quoted those Hebrew text and spoken into a Greek (translation) but the undeniable thing is that St. Luke wrote the original Hebrew into a Koine Greek is really a translation and the Heb translated in the Gk gets its inspiration. So that was a very basic example why translation preserves the inspiration.

Another, is the copies of the scriptures constitute inspiration. Paul to Timothy is explaining that the copy of scriptures (not the original one) held by Timothy “is given by inspiration” so copies preserves the inspiration.

Translators are not inspired; the scripture is. The so called “originals” either written in parchment (vellum) or in papyrus (scroll) where Paul, Tertius, and other Apostles originally wrote them were no longer with us. This without a doubt were inspired scriptures. Soon these autographs were copied and copied and faithful copies does preserves the inspiration while there are other forces that are work behind the scriptures and wanted to mutilate, change or corrupt the word of God as Paul and other Apostles had warned of these things does not preserves the inspiration. Now, we have to take note that these copies either faithfully done or not were both came from the same origin and these were translated we called Versions.

No it was not in anyone’s decision that translations preserve inspiration but that is what the Bible says. God demonstrated preservation either by copies or by translation. The Holy Spirit the author of the scripture confuses no one. I think it is proper to say that it’s about accurate translation without losing the purity, hence, it is not mixed or corrupted. Once the translation lacks accuracy, then loses it purity.

The paraphrase or free translation, the dynamic equivalency/ impact translation, the literal does not carry the words, the sense, the style and the emphasis of the Heb-Ara-Gk and may not set in a proper of the English language. The need of Formal Translation is the best way of translation as in the KJV text. What about the other Modern English translation? Since inspiration refers to the whole not in parts then it is not considered ‘given by inspiration’ though we have some theories of inspirations, either partial, thought or dynamic. What I believe is what the scripture teaches “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” and I take the KJV English text as scripture. If other translations say they are the same as the KJV, then it must be proven “Prove all things, hold fast to that which is good”.

Of course my belief about the KJV is to be accepted or not but I wouldn't enforce it to anyone in here, rather let God speaks.

Bingo! I wish people would just be truthful and admit they do not have access to the word of God. I wish preachers would be honest to their congregation.