I don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but just a hint that will make responses easier...please quote who it is that you are responding to, since there are many readers and responders, it helps to know who you are addressing....
The whole purpose of translation is to interpret what one language says in another. So it isn't just the words but the meanings they convey, that is important. The KJV is a poor translation compared with those that use more modern English, since language usage has changed a lot since then and language studies are more up to date. Old English just is not understood these days, except by those who tend to treat it as though it was from God's own hand...it wasn't. The KJV has undergone revisions but it's still a hard read for those who can't comprehend archaic English. It also contains clear trinitarian bias which means it adds words to imply things that are not in the original texts.
I use the (NKJV) to help study Thomas Nelson
Hebrews 5:10-12 (NKJV) called by God as High Priest
"according to the order of Melchizedek,"
of whom we have much to say, and hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing.
For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need
someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food.
This is easier than the old KJV to understand though isn't it? A slight improvement.
Do you know how Jesus is a "High Priest according to the manner of Melchizedek"?
But when those who use the KJV as the base for their own translations, carry over the same errors, it becomes obvious.
John 1:18 is a classic example of trinitarian bias where added words convey something different to what the original Greek says......
"No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (KJV)
"
No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him." (NKJV)
Now read this verse in the link below (out of 63 different translations) and observe how it is translated in numerous Bibles and you will see same glaring error in all of them.
https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/John 1:18
This is how it reads in Greek but even the Mounce Interlinear follows the error.....
"No one oudeis has horaō ever pōpote seen horaō God theos. The only monogenēs Son , himself God theos, the ho one who is eimi in eis the ho bosom kolpos of the ho Father patēr, he ekeinos has made him known exēgeomai."
To be translated correctly, "monogenes theos" literally means "only begotten god". The word "son" is not in the Greek text at all. If it was, it would read "only monogenēs Son hyios" the same as it is written in John 3:16. "The only Son himself God" is added to that verse to imply a trinity.
But it also says that "no one has ever seen God"...how many saw Jesus?
The 1995 edition of the NASB had it right, but changed it in the next revision.
"No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him."
"Monogenes" means an only child of any gender. "Theos" is "god" and means any god or goddess or divine mighty one. "Theos" is not just used for the one God of Israel.....even satan is called "theos" in Greek. (2 Cor. 4:3-4)
Jesus is also called "theos" but it doesn't mean that he is God (ho theos)....it simply indicates his divinity...that he is 'from' God because as John 1:1 says he was "with" his God "in the beginning". He is God's "firstborn". (Colossians 1:15)
On his return to heaven, Jesus still refers to his Father as "my God".....(Revelation 3:12)
So when it says "monogenes theos" it literally means "only begotten god"....but no translation got it right except the 1995 edition of the NASB because of how inconvenient it was to explain an "only begotten god".
If in John 1:18 "theos" can be translated "Son" then verse 1 should also be translated the same way...
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was the Son".
