Omitted verses.

The "original" ten commandments were destroyed by Moses. What followed was a copy of the original. Only the eyes of Moses actually saw the original, and yet, the copy is just as good.

Yes I knew that even from the beginning. Then I came up with a supposed new verse(es) and uncovered a whole lot of scrutiny which is actually educational. I know that saving Grace was found by people who had to read single torn out pages of Bibles that were passed along by underground railroads into places where the Bible was prohibited. Our lord saves.

I'm going to keep an eye on you, from today for ever. aka, from now on....

There's a lot there. What exactly do you see as the problem? Do you believe the word "The" should be added?

There were about 40 or so more years of scribe work left to do after that bro......

Deu 31:23
And he gave Joshua the son of Nun a charge, and said, Be strong and of a good courage: for thou shalt bring the children of Israel into the land which I sware unto them: and I will be with thee.

Deu 31:24
And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a book, until they were finished,

Deu 31:25
That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying,

Deu 31:26
Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.

Of course not, but I believe his promise was always fulfilled and it came about to completeness in the KJV. Did God know of that English was going to explode? Did God know of the great men that would come and need a perfect English bible? Did God know how the English speaking world would be desiring to know God?

Or how humbling it is to understand that God has preserved his pure words for us in English and I have the privilege to read and study his words without question. Wow, blows me away.

Take an hour to review that post. And then decide for yourself.......

And we can kindly thank our CC scholar @TheDivineWatermark for his earnest efforts.

Just compare different versions. The differences seem minor when you consider that main concepts are reiterated many times in many places throughout the New Testament in most all popular modern versions. I am particularly comfortable with the KJV (which I personally consider a modern English version.)

Don't knock it if you haven't tried it. Oooooohhhhhmmming is one of the few simple pleasures available to oysters.

Oooopps......another "problem". Well known of course. Were you aware of this?

https://www.barrysetterfield.org/Genesis_1-11/part_14_genealogies.html

Total years from Creation to Abraham

Alexandrian: 3463
Masoretic: 2107
Difference: 1356 years


Abraham was born in 2322 B.C. Adding this to the Alexandrian age gives 5785 years from Creation to Christ. Adding to the Masoretic, however, only gives 4429 years from Creation to Christ. One of the reasons for the discrepancies between the Alexandrian as we have given it and the age as figured by most of the above listed church fathers is that Terah is listed as 70 when his first son was born, but that was evidently not Abraham, for Abraham was about 75 when his father died at 205 years old (Genesis 11:32, Genesis 12:4), and that would make Terah, as we show above, about 130 when Abraham was born. This does not answer for the full discrepancy, but it does narrow the gap a bit.



"Why, then, are our modern Bibles today giving us an age of about 6000 years since Creation for our time? The answer lies in the Masoretic text, from which all our modern Bibles, including the modern Hebrew, have arisen. The Masoretic is a product of the Council of Jamnia, a series of 'discussion groups' which met about 100 A.D. The Romans has destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D., and thus also destroyed the original manuscripts of the Scriptures. Copies, of course, remained, primarily known today as the Alexandrian Septuagint (LXX) and the Samaritan Pentateuch. The rabbis, gathered under Rabbi Akiba, wanted to formulate a new 'official' copy of the Hebrew Scriptures. In doing so, they switched from the more ancient paleo Hebrew (sort of like our cursive) to the modern block Hebrew characters. (They also left out the vowel points, which were not restored until 900 A.D., and then on the basis of oral tradition.) Because they wanted to eliminate the ability of the new Christian sect to use the Hebrew scriptures as evidence that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah, they altered some of the quotes used by the Christians which came from the Old Testament. This is why many of the quotes used in today's Bibles do not match the referents in the Old Testament. In at least one case (Hebrews 1:6), the referent, Deuteronomy 32:43, is so changed as to be unrecognizable. It is there, however, in the Alexandrian. In addition, the rabbis in the Council felt that the genealogies in Genesis must be wrong. It would be dishonoring to God for a man to wait until after he was a hundred or a hundred and fifty to have a son. So, in many cases, they simply dropped the cipher for "100" from the ages of many of the men at the time their mentioned son was born. This effectively chops over 1300 years off the age of the earth in terms of the Masoretic texts."

Here you go buddy. You are aware of the issue with 1Kings 6:1 right?

Luke Implies 573 (593 years - Barry has since updated this figure!) Years - Solomon Says 480!

In 1 Kings 6:1 there is a key comment that is the basis for many chronologies. The record there states that 480 years elapsed from the Exodus to 4th year of the reign of Solomon when work began on the Temple. This needs to be examined closely as other Biblical passages imply that the total length of this period amounted to 573 years. This Scriptural conundrum is solved when all the relevant statements are examined. The book of Acts provides us with the first of these clues. There we find that the 573 years is made up of 40 wilderness years (Acts 13:18); 450 years under the Judges (Acts 13:20); 40 years under Saul (Acts 13:21); 40 years under David (l Kings 2:11); and 3 years under Solomon before the Temple construction commenced (1 Kings 6:1). This totals 573 years, or 93 years longer then stated in l Kings 6:1.

Judges Lists The 93 (113 - corrected by Barry!) Missing Years!

To find the answer, one only has to turn to the book of Judges! In there, the nation of Israel was punished 5 times for sin between the Exodus and Solomon's reign: 8 years under the King of Mesopotamia (Judges 3:8); 18 years under the king of Moab (Judges 3:14); 20 years under the King of Canaan (Judges 4:2-3); 7 years under the Midianites (Judges 6:1); and 40 years under the Philistines (Judges 13:1). Fascinatingly enough, this totals just 93 years - the exact period omitted from 1 Kings 6:1 ! The Omission Principle is thereby exactly illustrated by this example. Furthermore it amplifies the necessity of taking all Biblical statements into account before arriving at a final conclusion.

https://barrysetterfield.org/scriptchron.htm#destruction

NO translation is the Word of God, including the KJV. Surely you can understand this, yes?

..well, maybe not.

When our English teacher told us that in literature class, they were shocked. They must've heard from their pastors and priests that it was Old English.
Lol.
They aught to read Beowulf......
......IF they can.

The KJV is a literary work of art in this modern era as it is a masterpiece of translation.

KJV compared with a couple of the other most popular Bibles

And, If it cannot be trusted ( And we don't even "read It All the way
through at least once ), how then do we Obey God:

"But He Answered and said, It Is Written, Man shall not live by bread
alone, but By Every Word That Proceedeth Out Of The Mouth Of God."
(Matthew 4:4; Luke 4:4; Deuteronomy 8:3 KJB) Amen.

Little wonder then, so Many are so confused...

But the question is: Can a ploughboy read and comprehend it? If it doesn't serve its purpose it doesn't matter how masterful a piece of literary art and translation it is.

Ploughboys have been reading it since it was translated. It was written for the common folks in the pews. That was the intent by King James.

Ploughboys in the pews at the Baptist church