King James Errors

(Wayne Murray;38790)
You were doing so well till this.Any accomplished student of God's Word (The Authorized Version of the 1611 King James Bible 1886) knows there are errors in translation. Not to mention the revisers of the Authorized Version did not have the wealth of facts and information in the Massorah, which now has been compiled by a Biblical scholar.Enough said.
Call me old fashioned, but I place no faith on our accomplished students of God's Word today. I also place no faith in Hebrew or Greek. Correct me if I am wrong, but the Massorah is a writing that details how a scribe of the Bible is supposed to copy the Bible. It details how that every marking must be in its place. You say that the Massorah was not known then. However, the monks (the scribes that copied the Bible up until the KJV) had similar practices. They had to know exactly how many times a letter or word occurred in a book of the Bible and, if i am correct, if there were more than 3 errors in an individual copy, it had to be thrown out and started over. That sounds oddly like the Massorah to me. What I am proposing is that perhaps the translators of the KJV did know the Massorah. Forgive me if I am wrong.

(Two;38792)
Wayne I had read that was wondering if anyone else had? Cannot recall where I saw it though?????Hmmmmmm
I think it was Bullinger who compiled the Massorah, but do not quote me.Another point is the transliteration of names rather than translation. Let me give an basic example. The name Moses is a transliteration from Hebrew letter to our equivilant letter. But God's Word sometimes uses a name to mean something like "drawn from the water", which is what Moses' name means. So in many cases the names should have been translated rather than transliterated. I hope that makes sense.Moving on, one translation error is right in the beginning, Genesis, and the correct translation sheds so much light.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. And the earth "was" without form, is incorrect.And the earth "became" without form, is correct.Then there is the word translated "man" in Gen.1:26 and Gen.2:7 for example. This error has caused much darkness. Gen.1:28 should be "mankind". Gen.2:7 should be "the same man Adham" (eth Ha-adham).Enough said.

(warr7020;38794)
Call me old fashioned, but I place no faith on our accomplished students of God's Word today. I also place no faith in Hebrew or Greek. Correct me if I am wrong, but the Massorah is a writing that details how a scribe of the Bible is supposed to copy the Bible. It details how that every marking must be in its place. You say that the Massorah was not known then. However, the monks (the scribes that copied the Bible up until the KJV) had similar practices. They had to know exactly how many times a letter or word occurred in a book of the Bible and, if i am correct, if there were more than 3 errors in an individual copy, it had to be thrown out and started over. That sounds oddly like the Massorah to me. What I am proposing is that perhaps the translators of the KJV did know the Massorah. Forgive me if I am wrong.
See Appendix 30 in the Companion Bible.Enough said.

You say that Genesis 1:2 is mistranslated, but all you have given is what you say is a correction. You've given no proof that it is wrong, nor proof that you are correct. Please, however, do not site a "Biblical scholar's" book as to proof that that correction is correct. I have no reason to trust them more than I trust you. I would ask them for proof that they are correct. You sound like an educated man, Wayne Murray, I'll not argue that. I would argue that all education is not however all that it is cracked up to be. I don't hate education, but truly we all know that there are those out there teaching false things. Look at evolution in public schools in America. We also know that there are false teachers within the Church (II Peter 2:1). We must be careful of what Isaiah 47:10 speaks of. Trust God, not education. I'm assuming that you have read these things from books from other scholars. The only reason I say this is because that is exactly a trap that I fell into not so long ago. Whether or not you are is between you and God.

As to Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:7 (I assume you meant Genesis 1:27 because Genesis 1:28 doesn't have the word "man" in it). In Genesis 1:27, the word man means mankind. The Bible often uses this word to refer to all of mankind (male and female). In Genesis 2:7, the Bible isn't saying that God created man right then. It is describing how God created him. Obviously this is the same man from before, seeing as there were no others mentioned.

(warr7020;38801)
You say that Genesis 1:2 is mistranslated, but all you have given is what you say is a correction. You've given no proof that it is wrong, nor proof that you are correct. Please, however, do not site a "Biblical scholar's" book as to proof that that correction is correct. I have no reason to trust them more than I trust you. I would ask them for proof that they are correct. You sound like an educated man, Wayne Murray, I'll not argue that. I would argue that all education is not however all that it is cracked up to be. I don't hate education, but truly we all know that there are those out there teaching false things. Look at evolution in public schools in America. We also know that there are false teachers within the Church (II Peter 2:1). We must be careful of what Isaiah 47:10 speaks of. Trust God, not education. I'm assuming that you have read these things from books from other scholars. The only reason I say this is because that is exactly a trap that I fell into not so long ago. Whether or not you are is between you and God.
For proof, you will have to study.The word "was" is (hayah) in the Hebrew, the same Hebrew word (hayah) used in Gen.2:7 "became", Gen.4:3 "it came to past", Gen.9:15 "become", Gen.19:26 "became".The Revisers did not distinguish the verb "to be" from 'to become".Truth is not a trap, but rings like a bell for those who have ears to hear.

(warr7020;38804)
As to Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:7 (I assume you meant Genesis 1:27 because Genesis 1:28 doesn't have the word "man" in it). In Genesis 1:27, the word man means mankind. The Bible often uses this word to refer to all of mankind (male and female). In Genesis 2:7, the Bible isn't saying that God created man right then. It is describing how God created him. Obviously this is the same man from before, seeing as there were no others mentioned.
You are correct Gen.1:26.The word “man” (Gen.1:26) in the Hebrew text looks like this ( אדם ).With no article means “Mankind”, transliterated is (adam).The word “man” (Gen.2:7) in the Hebrew text looks like this ( את־האדם ).With the article and particle means “The man Adham”, transliterated is (eth-Ha adham).

Once again, we come to education. You've argued from a book (or your education, which came from books and teachers, who are the writers of books). The books you have studied were written by men, as you will argue the Bible was. Thus your books become as fallible as you claim the Bible is. They are just as open to error as you are saying the Bible is. Now which are we to trust? If you would trust a book telling you that the Bible is wrong, then your authority isnt coming from the Bible. It's coming from your educatioin. Did God write the book that suggested that the Bible is mistranslated? If you claim God wrote the Bible, then which should be trusted? If you trust that book over the Book then you should follow it for guidance, not the Bible. If the Bible can be changed because a human suggests that perhaps it's wrong, then it is no longer our Holy Book. What I'm saying in short is that I would trust my Bible over books and teachers. It has never led me wrong, and I trust It not to anytime soon. Truth may not be a trap, but lies can look very much like the truth.

(warr7020;38818)
Once again, we come to education. You've argued from a book (or your education, which came from books and teachers, who are the writers of books). The books you have studied were written by men, as you will argue the Bible was. Thus your books become as fallible as you claim the Bible is. They are just as open to error as you are saying the Bible is. Now which are we to trust? If you would trust a book telling you that the Bible is wrong, then your authority isnt coming from the Bible. It's coming from your educatioin. Did God write the book that suggested that the Bible is mistranslated? If you claim God wrote the Bible, then which should be trusted? If you trust that book over the Book then you should follow it for guidance, not the Bible. If the Bible can be changed because a human suggests that perhaps it's wrong, then it is no longer our Holy Book. What I'm saying in short is that I would trust my Bible over books and teachers. It has never led me wrong, and I trust It not to anytime soon. Truth may not be a trap, but lies can look very much like the truth.
Nope, you are all wrong.But, you have the right to remain ignorant of truth.I will respond no more to deaf ears.

this is all very interesting and such..and im sure there were many other posts about this topic, and excuse me if im being blunt here, but i believe some of you are simply taking this matter too seriously. I mean i know it's the word of God, or to say, the word inspired by God, since it was written by man from God. But my point exactly, that the 99.5% as some of you claim to be correct, with the minor errors such as "became" as oppose to "was", isn't something that you should be so fierce about. But, i know this is important for those of you who are distinct in getting to the root of the word and meaning. But I believe this doesn't and shouldn't play any partial impediment on us as christians finding a revelation from God's word. Sure there are going to be errors, we are not perfect. And for me, 99.5% is good enough. frankly, if (and i believe it to be so) the only "errors" in the bible (KJV to be exact, since i also prefer that) are simple mispellings, then i dont believe this is a reason for us to be frustrated. But i could be speaking for myself, so excuse me if im being blunt.

(poetboy;38838)
this is all very interesting and such..and im sure there were many other posts about this topic, and excuse me if im being blunt here, but i believe some of you are simply taking this matter too seriously. I mean i know it's the word of God, or to say, the word inspired by God, since it was written by man from God. But my point exactly, that the 99.5% as some of you claim to be correct, with the minor errors such as "became" as oppose to "was", isn't something that you should be so fierce about. But, i know this is important for those of you who are distinct in getting to the root of the word and meaning. But I believe this doesn't and shouldn't play any partial impediment on us as christians finding a revelation from God's word. Sure there are going to be errors, we are not perfect. And for me, 99.5% is good enough. frankly, if (and i believe it to be so) the only "errors" in the bible (KJV to be exact, since i also prefer that) are simple mispellings, then i dont believe this is a reason for us to be frustrated. But i could be speaking for myself, so excuse me if im being blunt.
But hey, God's children that study the Bible needs to get serious. If we take it lightly, might as well be deceived then? To tell you the truth, I hate Satan with a passion. As for the minor mispelling,it's no big deal. And the KJV is no way a perfect bible, but hey it's the best we can get in English Bible.JagLovest thou in Christ Yahshua, Lord and Saviour of the world.

(poetboy;38838)
with the minor errors such as "became" as oppose to "was", isn't something that you should be so fierce about.
Minor error ?????The example I gave (was and became) is beyond a MAJOR error. Genesis chapter one is a polysyndenton with many "ands".Gen.1:1, the heavens and earth are created.Gen.1:2, that earth age is destroyed because of Satan's rebellion.Gen.1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the earth BECAME without form (a desolation) and void (empty).Jer 4:23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light. Jer 4:24 I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly. Jer 4:25 I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled. Jer 4:26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger. Jer 4:27 For thus hath the LORD said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.

Minor error ?????The example I gave (was and became) is beyond a MAJOR error.
I view it as a very minor error. When something becomes something it is. After it became what is it? It was. I'm obviously not a language scholar and I know very little about Hebrew except I think it is read right to left, other than that it might as well be gibberish to me.Now if you found the Earth was translated wrong and actually was Mars or another planet, then I would say that is a major error. For the ignorant masses I'm sure was and became will not make much of a difference in the big picture.

(For Life;38878)
I view it as a very minor error. When something becomes something it is. After it became what is it? It was. I'm obviously not a language scholar and I know very little about Hebrew except I think it is read right to left, other than that it might as well be gibberish to me.Now if you found the Earth was translated wrong and actually was Mars or another planet, then I would say that is a major error. For the ignorant masses I'm sure was and became will not make much of a difference in the big picture.
I think you are missing the point.Read these verses.Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 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. Now read this.Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Gen 1:2 And the earth became 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. The first example makes it sound like the earth was still in the process of being created.The second example the completed earth became desolate and empty.If you do not see, so be it.

I try to use multiple translation where I can because they can differ greatly. My favorite Bible has four translations on each page (NIV, NASB, Amplifies, KJV).I know people who swear by the KJV and people who don't want anything to do with it. I have heard people denounce the NIV saying that homosexuals worked on it and extol the virtues of the KJV forgetting that King James himself was a Mason and openly homosexual. Talk about hypocrisy. I am not dissing King James or the KJV merely discussing how people can take up ridiculous positions when it comes to the Bible and then attempt to defend then in silly ways.As a former educator, I know the value of language and appreciate that language is living. It takes on new words and old words take on new meanings constantly. The language that we call English was not the same language that it was in 17th century. America was not even a country then.This to me is more important than whether a translator or the person who commissioned the translation was homosexual or not. Sometimes we allow ourselves to be distracted by trivialities.I like to use a current translation. I have not warmed up the the Message, but only because of its style which does not lend itself to study. I like the NLT and NIV. But would not use either exclusively.

All versions have discrepancies. Most are unintentional, some unavoidable because converting the words and sentences from another language doesn't always translate well (hardly ever). MANY modern versions are wrecklessly bordering on satanic, especially the NKJV (approx. 100,000 discrepancies). The front cover of the NKJV has a logo with 3 points and 6 lines (666),...need I say more? It's been around since 1980 and no discerning Christians have caught on. Read on and you'll see that the "strong delusion" has always existed in the hearts of many.-------------------------What Jesus did on the cross was completely sufficient that every person on earth have salvation available to them (Luke 3:6), but not all flesh is alike (1 Corinthians 15:39). Some people will simply come to The Lord out of hunger, but not drink of His spirit (Revelation 7:16). There are better things that belong to salvation (Hebrews 6:9) such as a purified conscience when learning from God's eternal spirit (Hebrews 9:14) and being able to hear His voice (John 10:27) so that you can "live by" His true word (Ephesians 6:17) and He can be everything to you (1 Corinthians 15:28) so that you have a truly personal relationship with Him (1 Corinthians 15:28, with all of your idiosyncracies, habits, etc.) so that your love is made perfect (1 John 4:18). The fear of God is only the beginning of wisdom (unbelievers should fear not having God in their life) and is a teaching of MAN (Isaiah 29:13). Scripture is the introductory doctrine of Jesus (Hebrews 6:1) and the "word of truth" (Ephesians 1:13, 2 Timothy 2:15, John 14:6) that all "babes in Christ" must learn for self discipline, etc. because they still think in fleshly ways, but we must mature in Christ to learn the "depths of God (1 Corinthians 2:10).Many people will say "I don't know if I would have the faith to do what Job did", but true Godly Christianity is not about faith, the book of Job is a LOVE story, that's how he stayed true to God after all he endured. Faith can falter, but love never fails. I have faith in the laws of physics also, but I don't love them. TRUE Christianity is a LOVE ("the GREATEST OF THESE", 1 Corinthians 13:13), God is LOVE. We should not walk by faith, we should "walk by the spirit" (Galatians 5:16 and 25) and live under the law of liberty (James 1:25 and 2:12) because the law of Ten Commandments and the law of ordinances ('commands' in the N.T.) were abolished on the cross (and without those 'laws of sin', sin lies dead (Romans 7:8).There should be NO self abasement (Colossians 2:18 and 23) so that you can have a PERSONal relationship and SELF discipline to establish a CONSCIENCE "in my inmost SELF" (Romans 7:22). Self abasement is a very bad teaching that the god of confusion has inflicted on humanity and it causes 'The identity crisis of Christianity and a strong delusion (2 Thessalonians chap. 2 and Ezekiel 14:4-8). Being saddened (low of spirit) by all of the corruption, hatred/resentment, cheating, suffering of this world, the PRESENT heaven should be in a Christian's heart (Matthew 5:3) along with the "rivers of living water" (John 7:38) that were mixed with Christ's blood at the cross (drink of them). The strong delusion has always existed along with the stumbling block of one's own heart. Keep your humility genuine, it is the requirement and maintenance of wisdom.All verses are from the RSV.

(Wakka;38783)
The KJV Bible is 99.5% correct. The remaining half percent is just spelling error, and whatnot.Read this. It's talking about the KJV, not NIV or whatever.http://www.carm.org/evidence/rewritten.htm
The .5% or so of spelling and minor errors have already been put to good use. They are there for a purpose.In the 1800's when Joseph Smith was working on his book of fiction ,also known as the Book of Mormon, he claimed to go out in the desert , put on a huge pair of gold rim special seer glasses , and read a special hyroglyphics on solid gold plates. This exercise gave him the infallible revealed word of God he claimed was the Mormon religion.Things went along pretty good for a while until some Christians challenged him with the fact that many passages were copied from the King James Bible. Well Joseph Smith got out of that one pretty easy. "Would God not speak to me in the same fashion and use some of the same words as he did in the KJV" he asked. Who could argue that.Things went along quite well after that. That was until modern day when a really sharp scholar noticed that not only had Smith plagerized parts of the KJV he also copied the minor spelling and other mistakes as well. Word for word he copied them.God works in all things for the glory of his purpose. Spelling mistakes included.Arnie M.

I have 14 Bibles and 8 translations and by and large they all say the same thing the majority of the time.The Jehovah's Witness production has the most serious errors deviations and additions. To their credit they at least show brackets around the added words. This version I only use when I study their teachings. It is unreliable for any other use. Christ is denied. That is its purpose.1611 Old English Language version compiled at the request of King James has been an accurate version for 400 years and is still widely used today.I often use the NIV Study Bible for ease of reading and because it clearly includes all other versions of debatable passages.What I would prefer is the Original Greek and Hebrew Manuscripts as penned by the original authors of the scriptures. This would be the absolute accurate word of God. A copy of this I do not have.Arnie M..

Arnie do you have a strongs concordance? You can take each word of KJB back to Hebrew and Greek

Arnie sense it seems we have much in common as far as the what we read and study I have a couple site you might find interesting to check out if you havent seen themhttp://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/http://www.sacred-texts.com/index.htm