How is the KJV corrupt?

It would be best if you can give the passage or the verse, don't just simply pick a word and have left its context. But this is only a suggestion. Thanks

If you cannot understand plain English, then I can't help you.

You know nothing about me. I looked up all the references to "bowels" and picked one as an example. Life is way too short to analyse every last translation verse by verse to see if it is translated correctly. I leave the nitpicking to KJV fanboys.

Likely because of your misunderstanding of "the faith of Christ", you have completely misunderstood the entire chapter. You have ignored the clear, plain, direct statement of verse 1. It's clearly stated again in verse 39: "And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise." Those verses frame all the stories, and all the stories are of people who acted on their belief that God is true to His word. By doing so, they demonstrated faith, which is certainty in things not seen.

Those people did not receive a good report because of their testimony, but because of their faith. Faith is not testimony! Testimony is only one's declaration of personal experience, which may not have anything to do with faith.

Once again you put disrespectful digs in your post. Why? Have you so little of the love of Christ in you?

but faith is definitely not equal to works:

faith has an object, yes?
if God the Son has faith, who does God the Son put His faith in?

so far i think you have been describing His faithfulness - i.e. His trustworthiness in doing what He came to do.
His character, such that He can be depended on; he will keep His word, and He will not fail to do what is right.
it's for these reasons that we are sure when we put our faith in Him.

but 'being faithful' is not the same thing as 'having faith'
-- i am faithful to show up at work every morning and perform my duties with excellence.
that does not mean 'i have faith in my job'

it makes perfect sense that God is faithful.
but does it makes sense to say God has faith?
doesn't that mean God is putting His trust in someone else to save God? because that makes no sense

Faith includes works. They obtained a good REPORT! Pretty simple.

Noah had faith. Where’s the evidence? He prepared an ark as God directed. Faith requires evidence. Faith requires substance. If Noah received Go’s direction and did not obey, then he would not have demonstrated faith.

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; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.

Yes! The believer is justified by faith….Christ’s faith! Christ did all the work. My faith is weak. My faith waivers. Christ’s faith never wavered! Amen!

Revelation 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

Exactly. This makes no sense but it seems to me you cannot discussed translation. Anyway, thanks for interacting. God bless

They keep the faith of Jesus. How does a person "keep" the faith that another person exercises? They don't! They maintain their faith in Jesus!

Yes, they have the testimony of Christ's work in their hearts.

I see no contradiction with my view, but only inconsistency and convolution with yours.

Keeping the commandments is a must during this dispensation. If you don't, you lose the faith of Christ. The tribulation saint is not secure in Christ. One must endure to the end.

Testimony is equated with faith.

No, it is not; read the texts more carefully.

i don't understand what that means -- if i fail, Christ stops believing in me? He no longer trusts me?
why would He ever trust me, a mortal man?

there's something here i am just not getting

The faith of Christ is God’s righteousness. It’s upon those that believe. One doesn’t want to lose God’s righteousness.

Romans 3
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

The law should teach man it is impossible to be righteous according to God. But Christ was completely obedient under the law. That’s the faith of Jesus Christ, aka God’s righteousness. It is imputed to the believer.

Galatians 3
22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Faith without work is dead!

in Matthew 17:27, Christ tells Peter to go and catch a fish, in whose mouth will be the satisfaction of the temple tax both for Jesus and for Simon.

in the Greek it is a stater, which is a four-drachma coin, a Greek currency.
why is the temple tax being paid for with Greek currency instead of the temple shekel?
((ESV crazily translates it as shekel... no idea how they justify that. i guess they figure hmm it ought to be a shekel so the texts must be wrong?? wow))

in KJV that nuance is altogether absent; they translate it simply, "a piece of money" -- weirdly not a piece of 17th century British coin?

clearly this is not a salvation-dependent piece of knowledge. but does it not matter at all?
i never even knew to ask the question, why it isn't a shekel, until 1987, when my church started using the 1984 NIV for youth classes.

no one has ever answered that question for me. ((i'm looking at you, ESV - not satisfied with what ya did there. hmm.))
does that mean it doesn't matter?
if that is the case, why did God specify 'drachma' in His book, when it was first written, instead of generically 'a piece of money' ?


at any rate i still see value in gaining some amount of understanding of the original languages. i thank God that so much knowledge is so easily available to us these days

Something that is something else cannot be by something else, so the faith of Christ is not the righteousness of God. They are distinct.

The righteousness of God is the gift imparted.

The "faith of Christ" is the avenue by which the gift comes.

The recipients are "all them that believe".

What do they believe? That what they have been told about Jesus's atoning death and resurrection is the truth, that their sins are covered by His blood shed on the cross, and that they have a glorious eternal future with God. They take it as truth, and that "taking" is exercising faith. While that faith is indeed the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8), that faith is not merely in any random thing, but is specifically placed in the Person and finished work of Christ.

The correct understanding of "the faith of Christ" is faith in Christ.

Yes, and? How does that add to the discussion at this point? How does it bring clarity to the question of the nature of "the faith of Christ"?