Fables or Fiction concerning editions of the KJV

[Logos1560]

And you are a Charter Member Ruckmanite.

I wouldn't be surprised if I found out you'd married into his family.

For real.

How can you seriously post such an obvious false accusation that bears false witness?

I am not a Ruckmanite, and I do not follow or agree with his erroneous KJV-only teachings.

The fact that I stated the truth that three of your points concerning his teachings conflict with what Peter Ruckman himself wrote and taught does not at all suggest that I supposedly agree with him. Pointing out the truth that you misrepresented his KJV-only teaching does not suggest that I agree with Peter Ruckman.

 

[Logos1560]

The final revision of the KJV was done between 1762 and 1769. The 1762 revision had to do with spelling. For example, old forms that had an "e" after verbs, and "u" instead of "v," and "f" for "s" were all standardised to conform to modern spelling.

Your claim that the final revision of the KJV was done between 1762 and 1769 is simply not true.

KJV editions printed in the 1700’s including the 1769 Oxford still have a character shaped like “f” for long “s” in many words. A few examples of this use of this character for the long "s" in only a dozen chapters of the 1769 Oxford edition are the following: "fin" (Ps. 32:5), “fought” (Ps. 34:4), "fee" (Ps. 34:12), "chafe" (Ps. 35:5), "wife" (Ps. 36:3), “forfake” (Ps. 37:8), "flay" (Ps. 37:14), "feed" (Ps. 37:26), "fore" (Ps. 38:2), “foundness” (Ps. 38:3), “flippeth” (Ps. 38:16), “confume” (Ps. 39:11), “fo” (Ps. 40:12), “defire” (Ps. 41:6), “favourest” (Ps. 41:11), "foul" (Ps. 42:1), “fay” (Ps. 42:3), “fong” (Ps. 42:8), “caft” (Ps. 43:2), “felleft” (Ps. 44:12), and "fake" (Ps. 44:26). This evidence along with additional verifiable information will demonstrate that all updating and all standardization of the KJV's text were not finished by 1769. KJV editors/printers in or after 1810 had to determine and decide whether this character was used as a “f” or for a long “s” in hundreds or thousands of words.

The revisions and changes in the 1762 involved more than just spelling. Many of the changes and revisions often credited to the 1762 Cambridge were made earlier in the 1743 Cambridge. The 1743 Cambridge edition already has a majority of the renderings and spellings that could be or are considered to be characteristic of the later 1762 edition [“men” (Gen. 47:6), “consecration” (Exod. 29:16), “hath sinned” (Lev. 5:10), “shall they be” (Num. 3:13), “one silver bowl” (Num. 7:61), “and ye shall have” (Deut. 4:25), “all lost things“ (Deut. 22:3), “and the Gadites” (Josh. 12:6), “nor of Halbah” (Jud. 1:31), “that” before “after the year” omitted (2 Sam. 11:1), “eightieth” (1 Kings 6:1), “Asa‘s heart” (1 Kings 15:14), “thou thyself hast” (1 Kings 20:40), “until now” (2 Kings 8:6), “all the business” (1 Chron. 26:30), “whom God alone” (1 Chron. 29:1), “rulers of“ (1 Chron. 29:6), “Charchemish“ (2 Chron. 35:20), “and the gold” (Ezra 7:18), “Mordecai‘s matters” (Esther 3:4), “and he seeth“ (Job 8:17), “and he saveth” (Ps. 107:19), “these things” (Ps. 107:43) “children shall also sit” (Ps. 132:12), “merchant ships” (Prov. 30:31), “farther” (Eccl. 8:17), “gone to” (Isa. 15:2), “feedeth on ashes” (Isa. 44:20), “is” (Jer. 1:13), “The word that” (Jer. 40:1), “the whirlwind” (Hos. 13:3), “and he kept” (Amos 1:11), “Hamath“ (Amos 6:14), “hidden things“ (Obadiah 1:6), “fleeth away“ (Nahum 3:16), “casteth out devils” (Matt. 9:34), “in the judgement” (Matt. 12:41), “had no root“ (Matt. 13:6), “the Christ” (Matt. 16:16), “eternal life“ (Matt. 19:29), “farther“ (Matt. 26:39), “word” (Matt. 26:75), “bodies of the saints“ (Matt. 27:52), “farther“ (Mark 1:19), “afterwards“ (Luke 4:2), “and he cried out” (Luke 4:33), “lifted” (Luke 16:23), “a third” (Luke 20:12), “his lord” (John 15:20), “but the time” (John 16:25), “doctor of the law” (Acts 5:34), “killedst” (Acts 7:28), “And they wrote” (Acts 15:23), “from things strangled” (Acts 21:25), “and in the prophets” (Acts 24:14), “sitting on” (Acts 25:6), “and have gained” (Acts 27:21), “have not charity” (1 Cor. 13:2), “in utterance” (2 Cor. 8:7), “in knowledge” (2 Cor. 8:7), “those who” (Gal. 2:6), “access“ (Eph. 2:18), “and I beseech” (Phil. 4:2), “our‘s“ (Titus 3:14), “be ye warmed and be ye filled” (James 2:16), “labourers who“ (James 5:4), “inhabitants“ (Rev. 17:2), “on either side” (Rev. 22:2)]. There are some variations or changes found in the 1743 Cambridge edition that are not in the 1762 Cambridge [“unleavened bread” (Lev. 7:13), “among the people” (Num. 5:21), “their tents” (Num. 9:18), “or of vines” (Num. 20:5), “did sacrifice and burn” (2 Kings 14:4), “mercy’s sake” (Ps. 6:4), “Canaan” (Acts 13:19)].

The 1762 Cambridge edition does have a small number of differences, changes, or revisions in its text that were not found in the 1743 Cambridge edition [“brakedst” (Deut. 10:2), “the widow‘s” (Deut. 24:17), “hath borne“ (1 Sam. 2:5), “priest‘s custom“ (1 Sam. 2:13), “priest‘s offices“ (1 Sam. 2:36), “in a straight” (1 Sam. 13:6), “at Michmash” (1 Sam. 13:11), “road” (1 Sam. 27:10), “And made” (2 Sam. 2:9), “sins“ (2 Chron. 33:19), “sneezing” (Job 41:18), “thine handmaid“ (Ps. 116:16), ”grey” (Prov. 20:29), “counsellor“ (Isa. 3:3), “make ye“ (Isa. 32:11), “lain“ (Jer. 3:2), “Rachel” (Jer. 31:15), “beast“ (Ezek. 34:28), “marshes“ (Ezek. 47:11), “LORD God“ (Hab. 3:19), “Berechiah“ (Zech. 1:1)]. On the other hand, the 1762 Cambridge does not have a good number of the changes that had already been introduced in the 1743 edition or in other pre-1762 Cambridge editions such as ones in 1747, 1756, or 1760. For one example, the 1762 edition does not have the apostrophes at a number of verses where they had already been introduced in the 1743 to 1760 Cambridge editions.

It may be possible that there was some hurry in getting this 1762 Cambridge folio edition printed before the folio being prepared by rival Cambridge printer John Baskerville.

 

[Logos1560]

The final revision of the KJV was done between 1762 and 1769. The 1762 revision had to do with spelling.

There are around 100 changes or revisions involving LORD/Lord and GOD/God that were not made by 1769. These changes were introduced and followed beginning with the 1835 Oxford edition of the KJV. One Oxford edition in 1829 had the changes earlier.

Around 100 differences involving LORD/Lord and GOD/God can be found between the 1769 Oxford and most post-1900 KJV editions. One possible explanation for them could be variation in the different printed editions of the Hebrew Masoretic Text in some of the places with the KJV translators and later editors possibly following different editions. The KJV translators consulted multiple varying sources, including the Spanish Bible. Thus, the 1569 Spanish Bible or the 1602 Spanish Valera and its underlying Hebrew text for its Old Testament could be one possible source that resulted in the use of “LORD” in a few cases. For example, the 1569 Spanish Bible has “Jehova” where the 1611 edition has “LORD” at 1 Kings 3:10, 2 Kings 19:23, and Nehemiah 1:11. Another possible explanation for these variations may be suggested in Appendix 32 in The Companion Bible. This appendix claimed: “Out of extreme (but mistaken) reverence for the ineffable Name ‘Jehovah,’ the ancient custodians of the Sacred Text substituted in many places ‘Adonai’” (p. 31). This appendix in The Companion Bible listed “The 134 passages where the Sopherim altered ‘Jehovah’ to ‘Adonai’” and asserted that these 134 passages were preserved and given in the Massorah. Elias Levita (1468-1549) as translated by Christian D. Ginsburg referred to “the sacred name of the Lord, which is written [Adonai], and on which they [the Massorites] remark ’one hundred and thirty-four times’ (Massoreth Ha-Massoreth of Elias Levita, p. 233). Elias Levita asserted that the reason for this is that “the tetragammaton must not be read as it is written, for it must not be pronounced with the lips, but is to be read under the appellation [Adonai]” (p. 233).

A later KJV editor or printer may have removed some uses of “LORD” without knowing the actual reasons or possible textual sources for why they were found in the 1611 edition or for why they may have been found in later editions.

Concerning these LORD/Lord variations, Sir Robert H. Inglis, member of Parliament for Oxford University, stated the following in 1837: “In the year 1832, a gentleman of the University, of competent knowledge in the Hebrew language, was engaged to examine all passages in the Hebrew Bible (I believe by Vander Hooght) in which the word ’Lord’ occurs, and to mark those which in the original signified ’Jehovah,’ and the University standard has been corrected by this marked edition” (Reports from Committees, Vol. XIII, p. 48).

Did this unidentified person know exactly which edition of the Hebrew Bible that the KJV translators followed so that the same exact edition was used? The statement by Inglis indicated that an edition of the Hebrew text printed by Vander Hooght at Amsterdam (likely the 1705 one) was used instead of any actual edition used by the KJV translators. Was this person aware of other evidence or reasons as to why the 1611, the 1769, or other KJV editions may have had “LORD” in some cases?

Is the Hebrew word that would underlie “LORD” in the 1769 Oxford KJV the exact, same Hebrew word as that would underlie “Lord” in many present KJV editions?

The correction in KJV editions, changing "God" to "GOD", at 2 Samuel 12:22 to show that the Hebrew name for Jehovah is found in this verse was not made until the 1829 Oxford edition of the KJV.

2 Samuel 12:22 [see also Gen. 6:5, 2 Chron. 28:11, Isaiah 49:13] [God--1602 Bishops]

God (1675, 1679, 1681, 1709, 1713, 1715, 1720, 1722, 1728, 1737, 1747, 1753, 1754, 1758, 1760, 1762, 1765, 1768, 1769, 1770, 1771, 1772, 1773, 1774, 1776, 1777, 1778, 1782, 1783, 1784, 1787, 1788, 1791, 1792, 1795, 1795e, 1798, 1799, 1800, 1803, 1804, 1808, 1810, 1812, 1813, 1819, 1821, 1823, 1828, 1830, 1831 Oxford) [1629, 1635, 1637, 1638, 1648, 1683, 1743, 1747, 1756, 1760, 1761, 1762, 1763B, 1765, 1767, 1768, 1769, 1773, 1775, 1778, 1783, 1790, 1792, 1794, 1795, 1800, 1812, 1816, 1817, 1822, 1823, 1824, 1833 Cambridge] {1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1626, 1630, 1631, 1633, 1634, 1640, 1644, 1648, 1650, 1652, 1655, 1657, 1660, 1672, 1674, 1684, 1698, 1703, 1705, 1706, 1711, 1712, 1730, 1735, 1741, 1743, 1747, 1750, 1759, 1760, 1761, 1763, 1764, 1767, 1768, 1772, 1795, 1811, 1813, 1816, 1817, 1820, 1824, 1825, 1827, 1828, 1831 London} (1755 Oxon) (1637, 1638, 1715, 1716, 1722, 1751, 1756, 1760, 1764, 1766, 1787, 1789, 1791, 1793, 1802, 1810, 1820, 1827, 1842, 1843, 1851, 1858 Edinburgh) (1722, 1743, 1762, 1782, 1801, 1809 Dublin) (1645 Dutch) (1696, 1700 MP) (1746 Leipzig) (1774 Bristol) (1774, 1777 Fortescu) (1776 Birmingham) (1776 Pasham) (1777 Wood) (1780 Gill) (1782 Aitken) (1785 Wilson) (1790 Bolton) (1791, 1816 Collins) (1791, 1841 Thomas) (1799 Helston) (1801 Hopkins) (1802, 1813, 1815 Carey) (1803 Etheridge) (1804 Gower) (1804, 1807, 1813 Johnson) (1790, 1804, 1808, 1828 MH) (1809, 1810, 1813, 1818, 1826, 1828 Boston) (1810 Woodward) (1811 Hewlett) (1815 Walpole) (1816 Albany) (1816, 1836, 1848 Hartford) (1816 Mercein) (1818 Holbrook) (1818, 1819, 1827, 1829, 1831, 1843, 1845, 1850, 1851, 1954, 1956, 1984 ABS) (1821, 1831 Brown) (1822, 1831, 1832, 1835 Scott) (1823, 1827 Smith) (1824, 1826 Bagster) (1832 PSE) (1832 Wilbur) (1834 Coit) (1835 Towar) (1836 Stebbing) (1837 Knight) (1840 Roby) (1842 Girdlestone) (1843, 1856 AFBS) (1843 Robinson) (1845, 1854, 1857, 1876 Harding) (1846 Coldstream) (1846 Portland) (1848 IFB) (1853 Butler) (1855 Perry) (1859, 1868 RTS) (1897 Mackail) (1924, 1958 Hertel) (1975 CBP) (1976 Holman) (CSB) (WMCRB) (1985 VB) (1987 Dugan) (1987 PSI) (1987, 1989, 2001, 2002, 2003 TN) (1991, 2008 AMG) (2004 World) (2005 ICC) (2006 PP) (KJVCB) (CNB) (Life) (2008 GID) (2008 Pilot) (2010 BRO) (APB) (HMSB) (2012 WSB) (2013 Holman) (2015 KJVFSB) (2017 KWSB) (2019 Open) (1833 WEB) (1842 Bernard) (1853 Boothroyd)

GOD (1829, 1835 Oxford, SRB, 1996 SSB, Oxford Classic, NPB) [CCR, CSTE, DKJB]

 

[Alan Gross]

1679, 1681, 1709, 1713, 1715, 1720, 1722, 1728, 1729, 1737, 1743, 1746, 1747, 1749, 1753, 1754, 1755, 1758, 1760, 1762, 1765, 1768, 1771, 1772, 1773, 1774, 1776, 1777, 1778, 1782, 1783, 1788, 1804 Oxford) [1629, 1635, 1637, 1638, 1648, 1683, 1743, 1747, 1756, 1760, 1761, 1762, 1763B, 1765, 1767, 1768, 1769, 1812, 1816, 1817, 1873, 2005, 2011 Cambridge] {1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1626, 1630, 1631, 1633, 1634, 1640, 1644, 1652, 1655, 1657, 1660, 1672, 1674, 1684, 1689, 1693, 1703, 1705, 1706, 1711, 1712, 1723, 1728, 1730, 1735, 1741, 1743, 1747, 1750, 1759, 1761, 1763, 1764, 1767, 1768, 1772, 1795, 1853, 1879 London} (1755 Oxon) (1637, 1638, 1712, 1714, 1715, 1722, 1726, 1729, 1735, 1751, 1756, 1760, 1764, 1766, 1769, 1787, 1789, 1791, 1793, 1796, 1802, 1806, 1810, 1820, 1827, 1834, 1858 Edinburgh) (1860, 1866 Glasgow) (1722, 1741, 1743, 1762, 1801, 1809 Dublin) (1645 Dutch) (1696, 1700 MP) (1746 Leipzig) (1774 Bristol) (1774, 1777 Fortescu) (1776 Birmingham) (1776 Pasham) (1777 Wood) (1782 Aitken) (1784 Piguenit) (1785 Wilson) (1790 Bolton) (1790, 1804 MH) (1791, 1816 Collins) (1791, 1841 Thomas) (1799 Helston) (1802, 1813, 1815 Carey) (1803 Etheridge) (1807 Johnson) (1809, 1810, 1813, 1818, 1826, 1836 Boston) (1810, 1823, 1832, 1835, 1839 Scott) (1811 Hewlett) (1814 Woodward) (1815 Walpole) (1816 Albany) (1816 Mercein) (1818 Holbrook) (Clarke) (1818, 1819, 1827, 1829, 1831, 1838, 1840, 1843, 1850, 1851, 1868, 1881, 1888, 1894, 1902, 1954, 1956, 1957, 1963, 1968, 1970, 1971, 1984, 1988, 2004, 2008 ABS) (1821, 1831 Brown) (1823, 1827 Smith) (1824, 1826 Bagster) (1832 PSE) (1832 Wilbur) (1835 Jenks) (1835 Towar) (1836 Stebbing) (1839, 1845, 1854, 1857 Harding) (1840 Roby) (1843, 1850 AFBS) (1844, 1848 Hartford) (1846 Portland) (1848 IFB) (1855 Perry) (1857 More) (1873 Cooke) (1876 Porter) (1910 Collins) (1924 Hertel) (1945 World) (1948 WSE) (WMCRB) (1984 AMG) (2000, 2002 ZOND) (TPB) (HPB) (2006 PENG) (2007, 2008, 2010, 2011 HEND) (NHPB) (1833 WEB) (1842 Bernard) (1853 Boothroyd)

beside (1769 Oxford, SRB) [DKJB]

Leviticus 18:18
besides (1675, 1679, 1681, 1709, 1715, 1720, 1722, 1728, 1747, 1749, 1753, 1754, 1758, 1762, 1765, 1768, 1770, 1771, 1773, 1774, 1776, 1778, 1782, 1783, 1784, 1795, 1804 Oxford) [1629, 1635, 1637, 1638, 1648, 1683, 1743, 1747, 1756, 1760, 1761, 1762, 1763B, 1765, 1767, 1768, 1769, 1812, 1816, 1817, 1873, 2005, 2011 Cambridge] {1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1626, 1630, 1631, 1633, 1634, 1640, 1644, 1648, 1650, 1652, 1655, 1657, 1660, 1672, 1684, 1705, 1706, 1711, 1712, 1723, 1728, 1730, 1735, 1741, 1743, 1747, 1750, 1759, 1760, 1763, 1764, 1767, 1768, 1772, 1853, 1879 London} (1755 Oxon) (1637, 1638, 1714, 1715, 1716, 1722, 1729, 1751, 1756, 1760, 1764, 1766, 1769, 1787, 1791, 1793, 1802, 1806, 1810, 1820, 1827, 1834, 1858 Edinburgh) (1860, 1866 Glasgow) (1743, 1762, 1809 Dublin) (1645 Dutch) (1696, 1700 MP) (1746 Leipzig) (1774, 1777 Fortescu) (1776 Birmingham) (1782 Aitken) (1790, 1804, 1828 MH) (1791, 1816 Collins) (1799 Helston) (1801 Hopkins) (1802, 1813, 1815 Carey) (1807 Johnson) (1810, 1818, 1826 Boston) (1810, 1832, 1835 Scott) (1816 Albany) (1816 Mercein) (1818 Holbrook) (1818, 1819, 1827, 1829, 1843, 1851, 1853, 1854, 1855, 1858, 1868, 1888, 1894, 1902, 1954, 1956, 1957, 1963, 1968, 1970, 1971, 1984, 1988, 2004, 2008 ABS) (1821, 1831, 1859 Brown) (1823, 1827 Smith) (1826 Bagster) (1832 PSE) (1832 Wilbur) (1835 Towar) (1836, 1848 Hartford) (1836 Stebbing) (1840 Roby) (1841 Thomas) (1843 Robinson) (1845, 1854, 1876 Harding) (1846 Portland) (1848 IFB) (1850, 1856 AFBS) (1857 More) (1873 Cooke) (1876 Porter) (1910 Collins) (1924, 1958 Hertel) (1948 WSE) (WMCRB) (1984 AMG) (1989, 1991 World) (2000, 2002 ZOND) (TPB) (HPB) (2006 PENG) (2007, 2008, 2010, 2011 HEND) (NHPB) (1833 WEB) (1842 Bernard)

beside (1769 Oxford, SRB) [DKJB]


Numbers 6:21 [besides--1560 Geneva, 1568 & 1602 Bishops]

besides (1675, 1679, 1681, 1709, 1715, 1720, 1722, 1728, 1746, 1747, 1749, 1753, 1754, 1758, 1760, 1762, 1765, 1768, 1770, 1771, 1772, 1774, 1776, 1778, 1783, 1804 Oxford) [1629, 1635, 1637, 1638, 1648, 1683, 1743, 1760, 1761, 1762, 1763B, 1765, 1767, 1768, 1769, 1812, 1816, 1817, 1873, 2005, 2011 Cambridge] {1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1626, 1630, 1631, 1633, 1634, 1640, 1644, 1648, 1650, 1652, 1655, 1657, 1660, 1672, 1684, 1698, 1703, 1705, 1706, 1711, 1712, 1723, 1728, 1730, 1735, 1741, 1743, 1747, 1750, 1759, 1760, 1763, 1764, 1767, 1768, 1772, 1853 London} (1755 Oxon) (1637, 1638, 1715, 1716, 1722, 1729, 1751, 1756, 1760, 1764, 1769, 1787, 1789, 1791, 1793, 1802, 1806, 1810, 1820, 1827, 1834, 1858 Edinburgh) (1866 Glasgow) (1762, 1809 Dublin) (1645 Dutch) (1696, 1700 MP) (1746 Leipzig) (1774, 1777 Fortescu) (1776 Birmingham) (1777 Wood) (1782 Aitken) (1790 Bolton) (1790, 1804, 1828 MH) (1791, 1816 Collins) (1801 Hopkins) (1802, 1813, 1815 Carey) (1803 Etheridge) (1807 Johnson) (1810, 1818, 1826 Boston) (1810, 1832, 1835 Scott) (1816 Albany) (1818 Holbrook) (1818, 1819, 1827, 1829, 1843, 1851, 1853, 1854, 1855, 1858, 1868, 1888, 1894, 1902, 1954, 1956, 1957, 1963, 1968, 1970, 1971, 1988, 2004, 2008 ABS) (1821, 1831, 1859 Brown) (1823, 1827 Smith) (1832 PSE) (1832 Wilbur) (1836, 1848 Hartford) (1841 Thomas) (1843, 1850 AFBS) (1843 Robinson) (1845, 1854, 1876 Harding) (1846 Portland) (1848 IFB) (1873 Cooke) (1876 Porter) (1910 Collins) (1924, 1958 Hertel) (1948 WSE) (WMCRB) (1984 AMG) (1989 World) (2000, 2002 ZOND) (TPB) (HPB) (2006 PENG) (2007, 2008, 2010, 2011 HEND) (NHPB) (1828 Alexander) (1833 WEB) (1842 Bernard)

beside (1769 Oxford, SRB) [DKJB]


Numbers 28:15 [besides--1560 Geneva, 1602 Bishops, NKJV]

besides (1675, 1679, 1681, 1709, 1715, 1720, 1722, 1728, 1729, 1746, 1747, 1754, 1760, 1762, 1765, 1768, 1770, 1771, 1772, 1774, 1776, 1778, 1783, 1804 Oxford) [1629, 1635, 1637, 1638, 1648, 1743, 1747, 1756, 1760, 1761, 1762, 1763B, 1765, 1767, 1768, 1769, 1812, 1816, 1817, 1873, 2005, 2011 Cambridge] {1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1630, 1631, 1633, 1634, 1640, 1644, 1648, 1650, 1652, 1655, 1657, 1660, 1672, 1684, 1693, 1698, 1703, 1706, 1711, 1712, 1723, 1728, 1730, 1735, 1741, 1743, 1747, 1759, 1760, 1763, 1764, 1767, 1768, 1772 London} (1755 Oxon) (1637, 1638, 1715, 1716, 1729, 1751, 1756, 1760, 1764, 1766, 1787, 1789, 1791, 1793, 1802, 1806, 1810, 1827 Edinburgh) (1743, 1762, 1809 Dublin) (1645 Dutch) (1696, 1700 MP) (1746 Leipzig) (1776 Birmingham) (1776 Pasham) (1777 Fortescu) (1782 Aitken) (1790 Bolton) (1790, 1804, 1828 MH) (1791, 1816 Collins) (1801 Hopkins) (1802, 1813, 1815 Carey) (1803 Etheridge) (1807 Johnson) (1810, 1832, 1835 Scott) (1816 Albany) (1816, 1848 Hartford) (1818 Holbrook) (1818, 1819, 1827, 1829, 1843 ABS) (1826 Boston) (1823, 1827 Smith) (1831, 1859 Brown) (1832 Wilbur) (1840 Roby) (1841 Thomas) (1843, 1850 AFBS) (1845, 1854 Harding) (1846 Portland) (1848 IFB) (1873 Cooke) (2000, 2002 ZOND) (TPB) (HPB) (2006 PENG) (2008, 2010 HEND) (NHPB) (1833 WEB) (1853 Boothroyd)

beside (1769 Oxford, SRB) [1683 Cambridge, DKJB] {1626 London}


Numbers 28:31 [besides--1560 Geneva, NKJV]

besides (1681, 1722, 1729, 1746, 1747, 1749, 1760, 1762, 1770 Oxford) [1629, 1635, 1637, 1638, 1648, 1743, 1760, 1761, 1762, 1763B, 1768, 1769, 1812, 1816, 1817, 1873, 2005, 2011 Cambridge] {1611, 1626, 1630, 1631, 1633, 1640, 1644, 1648, 1650, 1652, 1655, 1672, 1693, 1698, 1703, 1706, 1712, 1723, 1728, 1730, 1743, 1760, 1768, 1772 London} (1755 Oxon) (1715, 1716, 1729, 1751, 1756, 1769, 1787, 1791, 1793, 1806, 1827 Edinburgh) (1743, 1809 Dublin) (1645 Dutch) (1696 MP) (1746 Leipzig) (1774 Fortescu) (1776 Pasham) (1782 Aitken) (1791, 1816 Collins) (1790, 1804 MH) (1816, 1848 Hartford) (1818 Boston) (1821, 1859 Brown) (1823 Smith) (1826 Bagster) (1827, 1843 ABS) (1832 Wilbur) (1840 Roby) (1841 Thomas) (1846 Portland) (1848 IFB) (1850 AFBS) (1873 Cooke) (2000, 2002 ZOND) (TPB) (HPB) (2006 PENG) (2008, 2010 HEND) (NHPB) (1833 WEB) (1853 Boothroyd)

Oh yeah, in light of all that, I thought this might be a real regular blessing to you,
along some of those same lines....

Isaiah 55
55:1
你们一切干渴的都当就近水来；没有银钱的也可以来。你们都来，买了吃；不用银钱，不用价值，也来买酒和奶。
55:2
你们为何花钱（原文是平银）买那不足为食物的？用劳碌得来的买那不使人饱足的呢？你们要留意听我的话就能吃那美物，得享肥甘，心中喜乐。
55:3
你们当就近我来；侧耳而听，就必得活。我必与你们立永约，就是应许大卫那可靠的恩典。
55:4
我已立他作万民的见证，为万民的君王和司令。
55:5
你素不认识的国民，你也必召来；素不认识你的国民也必向你奔跑，都因耶和华─你的　神以色列的圣者，因为他已经荣耀你。
55:6
当趁耶和华可寻找的时候寻找他，相近的时候求告他。
55:7
恶人当离弃自己的道路；不义的人当除掉自己的意念。归向耶和华，耶和华就必怜恤他；当归向我们的　神，因为　神必广行赦免。
55:8
耶和华说：我的意念非同你们的意念；我的道路非同你们的道路。
55:9
天怎样高过地，照样，我的道路高过你们的道路；我的意念高过你们的意念。
55:10
雨雪从天而降，并不返回，却滋润地土，使地上发芽结实，使撒种的有种，使要吃的有粮。
55:11
我口所出的话也必如此，决不徒然返回，却要成就我所喜悦的，在我发他去成就（发他去成就：或译所命定）的事上必然亨通。
55:12
你们必欢欢喜喜而出来，平平安安蒙引导。大山小山必在你们面前发声歌唱；田野的树木也都拍掌。
55:13
松树长出，代替荆棘；番石榴长出，代替蒺藜。这要为耶和华留名，作为永远的证据，不能剪.

I hope I didn't forget anything! Is it too long?

 

[Logos1560]

The American Bible Society has published and distributed thousands and thousands of copies of the KJV. Gutjahr pointed out that by 1830 the American Bible Society “was producing 300,000 copies of Scripture a year” (American Bible, p. 30). He noted that by the 1860’s, “the Society was regularly printing over a million volumes a year” (p. 35). De Hamel pointed out that by 1880 the American Bible Society had “printed more than 32,000,000 copies” (The Book, p. 261). Thus, the ABS editions of the KJV would have likely been the most common and widely available edition in the 1800’s in America.

Why is the most common KJV edition of the 1800’s not considered the standard American edition? Gutjahr indicated that by the late 1820’s the ABS’s edition of the KJV was recognized as “the unofficial standard biblical text” (American Bible, p. 90). David Norton wrote: “By the 1830’s the American Bible Society’s texts were serving as the model for other American publishers” (Textual History, p. 119). About ABS’s editions, Daniell confirmed: “Its text established itself as a sort of standard” (Bible in English, p. 637). Some American publishers in the 1800’s indicated on their title page that their edition’s text was conformed to the American Bible Society’s standard edition. The publisher of Hitchcock’s Complete Analysis of the Holy Bible noted that it used “the authentic and singularly accurate text of the American Bible Society” (p. viii).

The ABS editions of the KJV have a number of differences when compared to the present-day Oxford edition in the Scofield Reference Bible.

An American Bible Society edition of the KJV printed in 1846 has "subtile" for "subtil" (Gen. 3:1), "Spirit" for "spirit" (Gen. 6:3), "assuaged" for "asswaged" (Gen. 8:1), "a husbandman" for "an husbandman" (Gen. 9:20), "mortar" for "morter" (Gen. 11:3), “lifted“ for “lift“ (Gen. 14:22), “a horror“ for “an horror“ (Gen. 15:12), “In that“ for “In the“ (Gen. 15:18), “fetched“ for “fetcht“ (Gen. 18:7), “have borne“ for “have born“ (Gen. 30:20), "grizzled" for "grisled" (Gen. 31:10), "aught" for "ought" (Gen. 39:6), "raven" for "ravin" (Gen. 49:27), "loathe" for "lothe" (Exod. 7:18), "rye" for "rie" (Exod. 9:32), “sanctuary, O LORD“ for “Sanctuary, O Lord“ (Exod. 15:17), "clothes" for "cloths" (Exod. 31:10, 35:19, 39:1, 39:41), "strewed" for "strawed" (Exod. 32:20), "cleft" for "clift" (Exod. 33:22), “a hole“ for “an hole“ (Exod. 39:23), "cuckoo" for "cuckow" (Lev. 11:16), "plaster" for "plaister" (Lev. 14:42), "plastered" for "plaistered" (Lev. 14:43), "brazen" for "brasen" (Num. 16:39), “awl“ for “aul“ (Deut. 15:17), "or Sheba" for "and Sheba" (Jos. 19:2), "prancings" for "pransings" (Jud. 5:22), “mother-in-law“ for “mother in law“ (Ruth 1:14), "steadfastly" for "stedfastly" (Ruth 1:18), “priest‘s custom“ for “priests‘ custom“ (1 Sam. 2:13), “hasted“ for “hastened“ (1 Sam. 17:48), “And he made“ for “And made“ (2 Sam. 2:9), "word" for "words" (1 Kings 3:12), “basins“ for “basons“ (1 Kings 7:50), “the LORD“ for “the Lord“ (1 Kings 8:56), "three pounds" for "three pound" (1 Kings 10:17), “the LORD“ for “the Lord“ (2 Kings 7:6), “all the tribes“ for “all tribes“ (2 Kings 21:7), "five thousand pounds" for "five thousand pound" (Ezra 2:69), “in the dust“ for “in dust“ (Job 39:14), "Most High" for "most High" (Ps. 21:7), "Holy Spirit" for "holy spirit" (Ps. 51:11), "steadfast" for "stedfast" (Ps. 78:8), "paid" for "payed" (Prov. 7:14), "inquiry" for "enquiry" (Prov. 20:25), “yea further“ for “yea farther“ (Eccl. 8:17), "wash ye" for "wash you" (Isa. 1:16), "Spirit of the LORD" for "spirit of the LORD" (Isa. 11:2), “a hungry“ for “an hungry“ (Isa. 29:8), “a hill“ for “an hill“ (Isa. 30:17), "Mighty One" for "mighty One" (Isa. 49:26), "inflaming" for "Enflaming" (Isa. 57:5), "Holy Spirit" for "holy Spirit" (Isa. 63:10), "astonished" for "astonied" (Jer. 14:9), "neither … nor daughters" for "neither … or daughters" (Jer. 16:2), "afterwards" for "afterward" (Jer. 34:11), “The word which“ for “The word that“ (Jer. 40:1), "portray" for "pourtray" (Ezek. 4:1), "loathed" for "lothed" (Ezek. 16:45), "since" for "sith" (Ezek. 35:6), "outer" for "utter" (Ezek. 40:31, 37), "music" for "musick" (Dan. 6:18), “a harlot“ for “an harlot“ (Joel 3:3), "prized" for "prised" (Zech. 11:13), "public" for "publick" (Matt. 1:19), "Spirit" for "spirit" (Matt. 4:1), "cloak" for "cloke" (Matt. 5:40), "lunatic" for "lunatick" (Matt. 17:15), "sponge" for "spunge" (Matt. 27:48), “further“ for “farther“ (Mark 1:19), "lifted" for "lift" (Luke 16:23), "sycamore" for "sycomore" (Luke 19:4), "others" for "other" (Luke 23:32), "sergeants" for "serjeants" (Acts 16:35), "publicly" for "publickly" (Acts 18:28), "fleshly" for "fleshy" (2 Cor. 3:3), "those who" for "these who" (Gal. 2:6), "sometime" for "sometimes" (Eph. 5:8), "always" for "alway" (Phil. 4:4), "steadfastness" for "stedfastness" (Col. 2:5), "Holy Spirit" for "holy Spirit" (1 Thess. 4:8), "broidered" for "broided" (1 Timothy 2:9), "thoroughly" for "throughly" (2 Tim. 3:16), "heretic" for "heretick" (Tit. 3:10), and "chrysolite" for "chrysolyte" (Rev. 21:20).

This 1846 ABS edition also has some renderings not in present ABS editions such as “Heman“ instead of “Hemam“ (Gen. 36:22), “LORD God“ instead of “Lord GOD“ (Exod. 23:17), "nor scales" instead of "and scales" (Lev. 11:10), “an house“ for “a house“ (Lev. 14:55), "walls" instead of "wall" (Lev. 25:31), "an whole" instead of "a whole" (Num. 10:2), "thy hand" instead of "thine hand" (Deut. 2:24), "thy heart" instead of "thine heart" (Deut. 15:7), “coasts“ instead of “coast“ (Deut. 16:4), “thy handmaidens“ instead of “thine handmaidens“ (Ruth 2:13), “thine house“ instead of “thy house“ (Ruth 4:12), “God“ instead of “GOD“ (2 Sam. 12:22), "the LORD" instead of "the Lord" (1 Kings 3:10), “the LORD“ instead of “the Lord“ (1 Kings 22:6), “rulers over“ instead of “rulers of“ (1 Chron. 29:6), “sin“ instead of “sins“ (2 Chron. 33:19), "mend" instead of "amend" (2 Chron. 34:10), “O LORD“ instead of “O Lord“ (Neh. 1:11), "thine eyes" instead of "thy eyes" (Job 15:12), “my hands“ instead of “mine hands“ (Job 31:7), "thy companions" instead of "the companions" (Job 41:6), "the LORD" instead of "the Lord" (Ps. 2:4), “and who“ instead of “or who“ (Ps. 24:3), "thy handmaid" instead of "thine handmaid" (Ps. 116:16), "snare" instead of "snares" (Ps. 141:9), "him that soweth" instead of "he that soweth" (Prov. 6:19), "the LORD" instead of "the Lord" (Isa. 7:14), “Get ye“ instead of “Get you“ (Isa. 30:11), “strip ye“ instead of “strip you“ (Isa. 32:11), "mine uncle's" instead of "my uncle's" (Jer. 32:9), "the LORD" instead of "the Lord" (Ezek. 18:25), "Lord GOD" instead of "Lord God" (Dan. 9:3), “flieth“ instead of “fleeth“ (Nah. 3:16), "Get ye" instead of "Get you" (Zech. 6:7), “Cesar‘s“ instead of “Caesar‘s“ (Mark 12:17), “and he cried out“ instead of “and cried out“ (Luke 4:33), "Mine head" instead of "My head" (Luke 7:46), "any" instead of "any man" (John 10:28), "none" instead of "no man" (John 10:29), "and the truth" instead of "the truth (John 14:6), and "an one" for "a one" (2 Cor. 2:7). Like the 1804 Oxford, this 1846 ABS edition makes more use of hyphens than does the present Oxford edition. For example, the 1846 edition has “son-in-law“ (Gen. 19:12), “to-day“ (Gen. 21:26), “back-side” (Exod. 26:12), “stiff-necked” (Exod. 33:5), “four-square” (Exod. 38:1), and “to-night“ (Josh. 2:2).

 

[Logos1560]

There are not two or more KJVs but only one, and the one that is used today is basically the 1769 edition.

Beyond that, I... don't...care...

Are you suggesting that you do not care about the actual verifiable facts concerning the many varying editions of the KJV?

It was soundly demonstrated that you made some statements concerning KJV editions that are not factually true.

 

[Conan]

Neither do I as I have stated to you a dozen or more times, you jackass.

You are a kjvonlyist. You are fooling no one.

 

[Logos1560]

Neither do I as I have stated to you a dozen or more times,

I have not claimed that you are a Ruckmanite.

The accurate term KJV-only does not mean Ruckmanite as you incorrectly seem to assume. That fact has already been pointed out to you.

 

[Logos1560]

When you see a KJV omitting and altering dozens and dozens of verses,
to intentionally edit out The Lordship and Deity of Jesus Christ,
to match and compare with The Jehovah's Witnesses New World Translation,
essentially word for word, .

I have clearly noted that I have not recommended nor advocated the Critical Text as you incorrectly try to suggest. You try to create a bogus strawman distortion or misrepresentation that is not at all what I have stated.

You have not proven that present English Bibles from the same Hebrew Masoretic texts and Textus Receptus texts as the pre-1611 English Bibles and the 1611 KJV, which includes the NKJV, the Modern KJV, the KJ2000, etc., edit out the Lordship and deity of Jesus Christ.

Even though I have not recommended them, you do not even prove your accusation to be true of English Bible translations made from the Critical Text. You do not demonstrate that the translators intentionally seek to match the Jehovah's Witnesses New World Translation. You allege but do not prove. You seem to use the guilty-by-association fallacy. Perhaps you have been misinformed by KJV-only sources.

Several pre-1611 English Bibles and many post-1611 English Bibles clearly, precisely, and accurately identify Jesus Christ as "our God and Saviour" at 2 Peter 1:1 so that it is clear that they are not denying the Lordship and Deity of Jesus Christ.

 

[JesusFan]

Many people, especially KJV-only advocates, seem to be uninformed or misinformed concerning editions of the KJV.

The claim of there being only 3 editions of the KJV and the claim of there being only seven editions of the KJV are not true.

The claim that all the revisions in editions of the KJV have been "only spelling, punctuation and numbers" is not true.

A claim that the English text in KJV editions has been unchanging [excluding spelling and punctuation] from 1611 until today would not be true.

It has not been soundly demonstrated that the KJV is "the most literal English translation we possess."

The 1862 Young's Literal Translation could be asserted to be more literal than the KJV.

The KJV is not actually a literal, every word, word-for-word English Bible translation of the preserved Scriptures in the original languages.

There were literally hundreds, if not thousands of differences between the 1611 and the 1769 and other revisions over the years.

And to those advocating KJVO, which of the many TR texts are the perfect and infallible one, and where did God promise to inspire any translation as he did the Originals?

And why did NONE of the reformers nor any Baptists accept KJVO until time when the sda writer made a big deal about this?

 

[JesusFan]

I have clearly noted that I have not recommended nor advocated the Critical Text as you incorrectly try to suggest. You try to create a bogus strawman distortion or misrepresentation that is not at all what I have stated.

You have not proven that present English Bibles from the same Hebrew Masoretic texts and Textus Receptus texts as the pre-1611 English Bibles and the 1611 KJV, which includes the NKJV, the Modern KJV, the KJ2000, etc., edit out the Lordship and deity of Jesus Christ.

Even though I have not recommended them, you do not even prove your accusation to be true of English Bible translations made from the Critical Text. You do not demonstrate that the translators intentionally seek to match the Jehovah's Witnesses New World Translation. You allege but do not prove. You seem to use the guilty-by-association fallacy. Perhaps you have been misinformed by KJV-only sources.

Several pre-1611 English Bibles and many post-1611 English Bibles clearly, precisely, and accurately identify Jesus Christ as "our God and Saviour" at 2 Peter 1:1 so that it is clear that they are not denying the Lordship and Deity of Jesus Christ.

The Nas and the Esv proclaim the deity of the Lord Jesus just as much as the Kjv, and perhaps at times even more so!

 

[37818]

The Nas and the Esv proclaim the deity of the Lord Jesus just as much as the Kjv, and perhaps at times even more so!

A said variant reading is either the reading handed down from the original readind or it is not.

 

[Alan Gross]

t
the Esv proclaim the deity of the Lord Jesus just as much as the Kjv,
and perhaps at times even more so!

(2) Virgin Birth of Christ – Matthew 1:25; Luke 2:33

(KJB) And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son:
and he called his name JESUS. (Matthew 1:25)

(KJB) And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things
which were spoken of him. (Luke 2:33)

(ESV) but knew her not until she had given birth to a son.
And he called his name Jesus. (Matthew 1:25

(ESV) And his father and his mother marveled at what was said about him.
(Luke 2:33)

In Matthew 1:25 we find a very important word missing in the ESV and that is “firstborn.” Jesus was the firstborn son of Mary which means that he was born of the virgin. Mary had other sons and daughters who were of Joseph.

Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him. (Mark 6:3)

The ESV omits firstborn and replaces it with “a” which means it could have been any of the other sons. The word “firstborn” is a specific word pointing to the fact that Jesus was the only one who was born of Mary while she was a virgin. The others were born the natural way.

In Luke 2:33 we see an appalling replacement. In the KJB we read the name “Joseph” as he was associated with Mary but in the ESV it is replaced with “father” making Joseph the biological father of Jesus which means that Jesus had the sin nature passed down to him through Joseph.

If Jesus had the sin nature then he was disqualified for being the Saviour because he was as sinful as the rest of us.

(3) The Purity and Sinless nature of Jesus – Luke 2:22

(KJB) Jesus had to be purified because he had sin And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord

(ESV) And when the time came for their purification according to the Law of Moses, they brought him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord

Here is another attack on the purity of Jesus Christ.

In Leviticus 12 we read the ceremony behind this. When a woman gave birth to a male, she was to be unclean for 8 days and then an additional 33 days and after that she was to bring a sin offering to the temple which could have been a lamb or even a pigeon. Then the priest would offer it before the LORD and she would then be purified.

This is exactly how it is written in the KJB but when we look at the ESV, we see that the sin offering was for both of them implying that Jesus had sin and had to have a sin offering on his behalf also.

This is a serious indictment against the purity and sinless nature of Christ.

For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
(Hebrews 4:15)

(4) Jesus made out to be a Liar – John 7:8

(KJB) Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast;
for my time is not yet full come.

(ESV) You go up to the feast. I am not going up to this feast,
for my time has not yet fully come.”

The Feast of Tabernacles was taking place and it lasted 7 days.

Jesus’ brethren were going up to the feast but he did not go at that time but attended a little later. Many were awaiting the arrival of Jesus and were looking for him at the feast.

In the KJB Jesus states that he was not going up yet to the feast so his brethren went on ahead of him and we read in John 7:10 we read the Jesus did go the feast later. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret. (John 7:10)

If you look at the ESV you will see that it states plainly that Jesus said “he was not going up to the feast” which means that Jesus had lied to his brethren.

This is another indictment against the pure nature of the Lord Jesus Christ making him a sinner in the ESV.

(5) Bodily Resurrection of Christ – Acts 2:30

(KJB) Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

(ESV) Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne,

(KJB) And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. {13} He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. (2 Samuel 7:12-13)

The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it;
Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne. (Psalm 132:11)

By removing “according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ” the translators violate the Scriptures in three ways.

First, they once again remove the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by doing that they remove the specific name of the one that was to fulfill the prophecy found in the above two verses.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the one who fulfilled the prophecy and promise that God made to David.

Secondly, they have removed another reference to the bodily resurrection, “…he would raise up Christ” indicates a reference to the resurrection when the Lord Jesus Christ would rise from the dead, ascend into Heaven and then take His rightful place as the eternal king of the body of Christ, of which David was a member.

Thirdly, they remove a reference to the incarnation of Christ, “…according to the flesh.” This verse teaches that Christ did not appear as some type of Spirit but came in the flesh according to the prophecy of many Scriptures. By removing these nine words, the modern versions have attacked and removed three cardinal doctrines of the Christian Faith and they attacked, once again, the person of the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the head of the church.

Of course, the second century Gnostics did not believe that Christ was God come in the flesh so they removed this reference to him and the modern translators have followed the same line of thinking because if they disagree with the Gnostics, then they would have left the verse intact, but they didn’t.

con't to #6.

 

[Alan Gross]

(6) Deity of Christ – John 3:13; 8:59; 9:35

(KJB) And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. (John 3:13)

(KJB) Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by. (John 8:59)

(KJB) Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him,

he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? (John 9:35)

(ESV) No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. (John 3:13)

(ESV) So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple. (John 8:59)

(ESV) Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and having found him he said,

“Do you believe in the Son of Man?” (John 9:35)

In John 3:13 we read about the omnipresence of the Lord Jesus Christ which is an attribute of God alone for no mere human can be in two places at once, yet here we have a straight teaching that Jesus was both on earth and in Heaven at the same time.



When we come to the ESV we see that the phrase “which is in heaven” has been omitted which omits one of the greatest allusions to the deity of Christ showing that he is indeed God on earth.

In John 8:59 Jesus ended his declaration that he was God. Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. (John 8:58)

Jesus was the “Great I Am” of Sinai and the Jews wanted to stone him for claiming the tile of “I Am” which the Jews would have been very familiar with.

Since they believed that Jesus was committing blasphemy by equating himself with God, they picked up stones and were ready to stone him.

Then in verse 59 we read a miracle had occurred and that was Jesus went through the midst of the crowd and then passed by them and went on his way.

There was no way that Jesus could have walked through a crowd which was ready to stone him and they not see him unless the people had been intentionally blinded to him.

This was a miracle by Jesus that no one noticed him especially when they had all picked up stones to stone him.

When we come to the ESV, that miracle has been omitted and just shows Jesus hiding himself and then somehow sneaking out of the temple.

Without a miracle, there would have been no way Jesus
could have escaped the murderous crowd.

In John 9:35 we read Jesus meeting up with the man whom Jesus gave back his sight and found out that he was ejected from the Temple.

Jesus comes to him and asks if he believes in the Son of God?

For only God could restore someone’s sight and not a mere man.

In the ESV we read that “God” has been changed to “Man” which means he asked the man if he believed in the Son of Man.

It was God who made the blind man see but the Gnostics did not believe that Christ was God so they removed his name and replaced it with Man.

Then in John 9:38, the man worshipped Jesus but as a man and not God. And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him. (John 9:38)

The worship of man is forbidden by the scriptures.

Here is a good example of Jesus rejecting the title of Good Master.

{17} And when he was gone forth into the way, there came one running, and kneeled to him, and asked him, Good Master, what shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?

{18} And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. (Mark 10:17-18)

So why would Jesus reject that title?

The reason is that this man was looking at Jesus as a man and not God.

Jesus is a Good Master but if you only see him as a human teacher, then you are glorifying man. If you see him as a divine teacher, God incarnate, then you are worshipping correctly.

con't to #7 & #8.

 

[Logos1560]

This thread is not concerning the ESV or other English Bible translations from the Critical Text. Rather than deal with the truth that exposed incorrect KJV-only fiction concerning editions of the KJV, perhaps KJV-only advocates try to divert attention away from the truth.

The subject of this thread concerns inaccurate information verses accurate information concerning editions of the KJV.

Whose work are KJV-only advocates doing when they post fiction or incorrect claims concerning editions of the KJV?

 

[Logos1560]

The worship of man is forbidden by the scriptures.

Does the KJV agree with your claim?

Luke 14:10 in the KJV
But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room, that when he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, go up higher: then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee.

Daniel 2:46 in the KJV
Then the king Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face, and worshipped Daniel, and commanded that they should offer an oblation and sweet odours unto him.

Coverdale's use of the verb "worship" with the meaning of "honor, respect, or reverence" was revised in the KJV to "did reverence" (2 Sam. 9:6), "did obeisance" (2 Sam. 14:4), "bowed himself" (2 Sam. 14:22), "made obeisance" (2 Chron. 24:17), and "honour" (2 Chron. 32:33, Esther 6:3, 6). “Worship” at Isaiah 43:20 in the Bishops’ Bible was updated to “honour” in the KJV. Wycliffe’s has “not worshipped his father or his mother” at Matthew 15:6 where the KJV has “honour not his father or his mother.“ Wycliffe’s also had “worship” at several other verses (Matt. 19:19, Mark 7:10, 10:19, Luke 18:20) where the KJV has “honour.“ After having revised or updated several such uses, the KJV kept a similar use of "worship" at Luke 14:10. At this verse, Waite's Defined KJB indicated that this use of "worship" was archaic and gave this definition for it: "honor, dignity, worthiness" (p. 1371). At Daniel 2:46, Coverdale's, Matthew’s, Great, Geneva, and Bishops’ Bibles have "bowed himself unto Daniel" while the KJV has "worshipped Daniel."

 

[Logos1560]

A present-day edition is entitled The King James Red Letter Bible (Special Study Edition) and was published in Palm Beach, Florida. Its publisher or editor is a KJV defender, perhaps even a KJV-only advocate.

This KJV edition has a page of "changes in spelling and word usage" (p. xxii). This KJV edition capitalized some pronouns when used for God [see examples in Psalms 19-21]. Some example differences in this KJV include the following: "between" for "betwixt" (Gen. 17:11), “brought“ for “fetcht“ (Gen. 18:7), "got" for "gat" (Gen. 19:27), “know“ for “wot“ (Gen. 21:26), "that is" for "to wit" (Gen. 24:21), "lain" for "lien" (Gen. 26:10), "knew" for "wotteth" (Gen. 39:8), "grizzled" for "grisled" (Gen. 31:10), "honorable" for "honourable" (Gen. 34:19), “stripped“ for “stript“ (Gen. 37:23), “knew“ for “wotteth“ (Gen. 39:8), “to see“ for “to wit“ (Exod. 2:4), "loathe" for "lothe" (Exod. 7:18), “knew“ for “wist“ (Exod. 16:15), “basins“ for “basons“ (Exod. 24:6), "knob" for "knop" (Exod. 25:33), "spew" for "spue" (Lev. 18:28), "crookback" for "crookbackt" (Lev. 21:20), “jubilee“ for “jubile“ (Lev. 25:9), “mixed“ for “mixt“ (Num. 11:4), "my LORD" for "my Lord" (Num. 14:17), "ribbon" for "ribband" (Num. 15:38), "evil-favoredness" for "evilfavouredness" (Deut. 17:1), "rearward" for "rereward" (Josh. 6:9), "that is" for "to wit" (Josh. 17:1), "withes" for "withs" (Jud. 16:7), "unsavory" for "unsavoury" (2 Sam. 22:27), "the LORD" for "the Lord" (1 Kings 3:10), "ceiling" for "cieling" (1 Kings 6:15), "to that is" instead of "to wit" (1 Chron. 7:2), "sneezings" for "neesings" (Job 41:18), "the LORD" for "the Lord" (Ps. 2:4), “His“ for “his“ (Ps. 19:1), “He“ for “he“ (Ps. 19:4), “Thou“ for “thou“ (Ps. 19:12), “His, He, His, His“ for “his, he, his, his“ (Ps. 20:6), “Thy“ for “thy“ (Ps. 21:1), "endeavors" for "endeavours" (Ps. 28:4), “helped“ for “holpen“ (Ps. 83:8, 86:17), "paid" for "payed" (Prov. 7:14), “repaid“ for “repayed“ (Prov. 13:21), "soldering" for "sodering" (Isa. 41:7), "Holy Spirit" for "holy Spirit" (Isa. 63:10), "since" for "sith" (Ezek. 35:6), "marshes" for "marishes" (Ezek. 47:11), "public" for "publick" (Matt. 1:19), "Immanuel" for "Emmanuel" (Matt. 1:23), "cloak" for "cloke" (Matt. 5:40), "show" for "shew" (Matt. 8:4), “Jonah“ for “Jonas“ (Matt. 12:39), "dare" for "durst" (Matt. 22:46), “Noah“ for “Noe“ (Matt. 24:37), "sponge" for "spunge" (Matt. 27:40), "helped" for "holpen" (Luke 1:54), “John the Baptist“ for “John Baptist“ (Luke 7:20), "before" for "ere" (John 4:49), “havoc“ for “havock“ (Acts 8:3), "near" for "nigh" (Acts 9:38), “Timothy“ for “Timotheus“ (Acts 16:1), "sergeants" for "serjeants" (Acts 16:35), "bring" for "fetch" (Acts 16:37), "know" for "wist" (Acts 23:5), “struck“ for “strake“ (Acts 27:17), "hoisted" for "hoised" (Acts 27:40), "honors" for "honours" (Acts 28:10), "brought" for "fetched" (Acts 28:13), “Hosea“ for “Osee“ (Rom. 9:25), “Isaiah“ for “Esaias“ (Rom. 9:27), "know" for "wot" (Rom. 11:2), “grafted“ for “graffed“ (Rom. 11:23), “to that is“ for “to wit“ (2 Cor. 8:1), "clamor" for "clamour" (Eph. 4:31), "example" for ensample" (Phil. 3:17), "always" for "alway" (Phil. 4:4), "behavior" for "behaviour" (Tit. 2:3), “scepter” for “sceptre” (Heb. 1:8), and "Savior" for "Saviour" (2 Pet. 1:1).

 

[Alan Gross]

It was soundly demonstrated that you made some statements concerning KJV editions that are not factually true.

God's standard for a "revision", "edition", "correction", "version", "change", etc , is that which falls outside of the boundaries and parameters of The Old Testament quotations recorded in The New Testament.

Old Testament quotations in the New Testament :
Archer, Gleason L., Jr., 1916-2004

There is your criteria for evaluating
whether a substantial difference in meaning has occured.

Where a substantial difference in meaning has occured,
would be the topic of discussion regarding a "revision", "edition", "correction", "version", "change", which bring an alteration to its stance of authenticity, actuality, materiality, factuality, verity, and genuineness, etc.

Your suggestions of any "revision", "edition", "correction", "version", "change", etc , that do not fall outside of the boundaries and parameters of The Old Testament quotations recorded in The New Testament, as being pertinent to a discussion of:
Fables or Fiction concerning editions of the KJV,
are as absolutely meaningless as what you are having a whole herd of cows about, such as the innumerable copies of such Bible gems, like:

“His“ for “his“ (Ps. 19:1),
“He“ for “he“ (Ps. 19:4),
“Thou“ for “thou“ (Ps. 19:12),
“His, He, His, His“ for “his, he, his, his“ (Ps. 20:6),
“Thy“ for “thy“ (Ps. 21:1),
"endeavors" for "endeavours" (Ps. 28:4),
"helped“ for “holpen“ (Ps. 83:8, 86:17),
"paid" for "payed" (Prov. 7:14),
“repaid“ for “repayed“ (Prov. 13:21),
"soldering" for "sodering" (Isa. 41:7),
"Holy Spirit" for "holy Spirit" (Isa. 63:10),
"since" for "sith" (Ezek. 35:6),
"marshes" for "marishes" (Ezek. 47:11),
"public" for "publick" (Matt. 1:19),
"Immanuel" for "Emmanuel" (Matt. 1:23),
"cloak" for "cloke" (Matt. 5:40),
"show" for "shew" (Matt. 8:4),
“Jonah“ for “Jonas“ (Matt. 12:39),

Alas, "ad nauseam" has been done in these tiresome posts
of repeated minutiae so often that they have become "annoying ad nauseam".

See the big difference?

But, the biggest problem for you and your fellow-conspirators
vehement and relentless in opposition to the infallible Word of God
Preserved for Mankind, as exemplified in the King James Bible publications, is your genuinely inexcusable oversight displayed

in your not having built you case against, what for 400 years
God's people have referred to as, "The Holy Bible",
by failing to ferret out what YOU call, a "revision", "edition", "correction", "version", "change", etc , when they are printed right on the same pages, within the same copy of the KJB.

I listed one of the undeniable total flubs and obvious lies in mistranslating the KJB, above.

“Jonah“ for “Jonas“ (Matt. 12:39).

Can you believe that?

You're sighting that as being an instance of a new "revision", "edition", "correction", "version", "change", etc , and yet those unintelligent and uneducated translators of the KJB, placed his name as being. "Jonas", in The New Testament, when everybody knows that his name in The Old Testament was "Jonah".

Ever hear of "Jonah"?

Then, how and why and when and where could you possibly not detected this blatant fallacy and falsity recorded in just one KJB?

Are the whole lot of you just floundering rank amateurs?

Dah.

You might want to look some of them up.

But, just to help you out a little bit, be sure to always refer to it
as The King James Bible (KJB).

For you, in your line of work, calling it The King James Version (KJV) would most certainly have to be the source of inconsolable embarrassment to you.

FYI.

 

[Logos1560]

“His“ for “his“ (Ps. 19:1),
“He“ for “he“ (Ps. 19:4),
“Thou“ for “thou“ (Ps. 19:12),
“His, He, His, His“ for “his, he, his, his“ (Ps. 20:6),
“Thy“ for “thy“ (Ps. 21:1),

If you had read what I posted, it was clear why those examples are given.

Some KJV-only advocates have criticized other English Bibles for capitalizing pronouns used for God, but in this case a KJV edition made by KJV defender or KJV-only advocate does the same thing.

This KJV edition capitalized some pronouns when used for God [see examples in Psalms 19-21].

Some example differences in this KJV include the following: “His“ for “his“ (Ps. 19:1), “He“ for “he“ (Ps. 19:4), “Thou“ for “thou“ (Ps. 19:12), “His, He, His, His“ for “his, he, his, his“ (Ps. 20:6), “Thy“ for “thy“ (Ps. 21:1),

 

[Alan Gross]

The subject of this thread concerns inaccurate information
verses accurate information concerning editions of the KJV.

Haven't there been several revisions of the King James Bible since 1611?

"ANSWER: No. There have been several editions but no revisions.

"EXPLANATION: One of the last ditch defenses of a badly shaken critic of the Authorized version 1611 is the "revision hoax." They run to this seeming fortress in an attempt to stave off ultimate defeat by their opponents who overwhelm their feeble arguments with historic facts, manuscript evidence and to obvious workings of the Holy Spirit..."

THE KING JAMES VERSION OF 1611.
THE MYTH OF EARLY REVISIONS.

"Men have been "handling the word of God deceitfully" (II Cor. 4:2) ever since the devil first taught Eve how. From Cain to Balaam, from Jehudi to the scribes and Pharisees, from the Dark Age theologians to present-day scholars, the living words of the Almighty God have been prime targets for man's corrupting hand. The attacks on the Word of God are threefold: addition, subtraction, and substitution. From Adam's day to the computer age, the strategies have remained the same. There is nothing new under the sun..."

"One attack which is receiving quite a bit of attention these days is a direct attack on the Word of God as preserved in the English language: the King James Version of 1611. The attack referred to is the myth which claims that since the King James Version has already been revised four times, there should be and can be no valid objection to other revisions...."

"Obviously, there are times when a foolish query should be ignored and times when it should be met with an answer. If to answer the attack will make you look as foolish as the attacker, then the best answer is to ignore the question..."

"On the other hand, there are often questions and problems that, if true, would be serious. To ignore these issues would be to leave the Bible attacker wise in his own conceit. I believe that the question of revisions to the King James Version of 1611 is a question of the second class..."

"Can the argument be answered? Certainly!..."

"The authority for our preserved English text is not found in any human work. The authority for our preserved and infallible English text is in God! Printers may foul up at times and humans will still make plenty of errors, but God in His power and mercy will preserve His text despite the weaknesses of fallible man..."

"Yet, in a strict comparison of the two editions, approximately 100 textual differences can be found. In the same vein the King James critics can find only about 400 alleged textual alterations in the King James Version after 375 years of printing and four so-called revisions! Something is rotten in Scholarsville!

"The time has come to examine these "revisions."

"Much of the information in this section is taken from a book by F.H.A. Scrivener called The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611), Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representatives. The book is as pedantic as its title indicates. The interesting point is that Scrivener, who published this book in 1884, was a member of the Revision Committee of 1881.

"He was not a King James Bible believer, and therefore his material is not biased toward the Authorized Version. In the section of Scrivener's book dealing with the KJV "revisions," one initial detail is striking. The first two so-called major revisions of the King James Bible occurred within 27 years of the original printing.

"The 1629 edition of the Bible printed in Cambridge is said to have been the first revision. A revision it was not, but simply a careful correction of earlier printing errors. Not only was this edition completed just eighteen years after the translation, but two of the men who participated in this printing, Dr. Samuel Ward and John Bois, had worked on the original translation of the King James Version. Who better to correct early errors than two who had worked on the original translation!..."

"According to a study which will be detailed later, 72% of the approximately 400 textual corrections in the KJV were completed by the time of the 1638 Cambridge edition, only 27 years after the original printing!..."

"The thousands of alleged changes are spelling changes made to match the established correct forms..."

"What would ranne, euill, and ftarres be according to present- day spelling? See if you can figure them out. The present-day spellings would be ran, evil, and stars. These typographical and spelling changes account for almost all of the so-called thousands of changes in the King James Bible.

"None of them alter the text in any way.

"Therefore they cannot be honestly compared
with thousands of true textual change
which are blatantly made in the modern versions."

"Textual Changes"

"Almost all of the alleged changes have been accounted for. We now come to the question of actual textual differences between our present editions and that of 1611. There are some differences between the two, but they are not the changes of a revision. They are instead the correction of early printing errors.

"That this is a fact may be seen in three things:

"(1) the character of the changes,
"(2) the frequency of the changes throughout the Bible,
"and (3) the time the changes were made.

"First, let us look at the character of the changes made from the time of the first printing of the Authorized English Bible. The changes from the 1611 edition that are admittedly textual are obviously printing errors because of the nature of these changes. They are not textual changes made to alter the reading..."

"F.H.A. Scrivener, in the appendix of his book, lists the variations between the 1611 edition of the KJV and later printings..." By looking at "....5% of the textual changes made in the King James Version in 375 years. Even if they were not corrections of previous errors, they would be of no comparison to modern alterations. But they are corrections of printing errors, and therefore no comparison is at all possible. Look at a list for yourself and you will find only one that has serious doctrinal implications.

"In fact, in an examination of Scrivener's entire appendix, it is the only variation found by this author that could be accused of being doctrinal. I am referring to Psalm 69:32 where the 1611 edition has "seek good" when the Bible should have read "seek God."

"Yet, even with this error, two points demonstrate that this was indeed a printing error. First, the similarity of the words "good" and "God" in spelling shows how easily a weary typesetter could misread the proof and put the wrong word in the text. Second, this error was so obvious that it was caught and corrected in the year 1617, only six years after the original printing and well before the first so-called revision.

"The myth that there are several major revisions to the 1611 KJV should be getting clearer. But there is more.

"Not only does the character of the changes show them to be printing errors,
so does their frequency.

"Fundamentalist scholars refer to the thousands of revisions
made to the 1611 as if they were on a par with the recent bible versions.

"They are not.

"The overwhelming majority of them are either type style or spelling changes. The few which do remain are clearly corrections of printing errors made because of the tediousness involved in the early printing process. The sample list given above will demonstrate just how careful Scrivener was in listing all the variations. Yet, even with this great care, only approximately 400 variations are named between the 1611 edition and modern copies...

"The character and frequency of the textual changes clearly separate them from modern alterations. But the time the changes were made settles the issue absolutely. The great majority of the 400 corrections were made within a few years of the original printing...

"The character of the textual changes is that of obvious errors. The frequency of the textual changes is sparse, occurring only once per three chapters. The chronology of the textual changes is early with about three fourths of them occurring within twenty-seven years of the first printing.

"All of these details establish the fact that there were no true revisions in the sense of updating the language or correcting translation errors.

"There were only editions which corrected early typographical errors."

"Our source of authority for the exact wording of the 1611 Authorized Version is not in the existing copies of the first printing. Our source of authority for the exact wording of our English Bible is in the preserving power of Almighty God.''"