"There is safety in believing the words of the KJV Bible." A powerful quote by our Board member, JD731.

[John of Japan]

Well I guess it doesn't answer your question directly.

I said it in the tense of who knows how many are printing the KJV in other languages and shipping them over the world?

It is impossible to print the Bible in other languages. The KJV is an English Bible. You cannot have an English Bible in another language. It is impossible. Do you mean a translation of the KJV into other languages? If so, it ceases to be the KJV at that point, and becomes a translation of the KJV.

There's no official record of it being done.

I know that JSM (Jimmy Swaggart) has translated 8 languages in the KJV and ships them overseas to those countries.

I doubt if Jimmy has done that himself, since he is not a linguist. Do you mean he has sponsored such translations? Do you have a link where I could read more about this?

How many similar JSM are there in this world doing this without official record of it?

As far as I know, I am aware of all the ministries in the US and Great Britain active in this area. There are not that many.

I am a translator and a linguist, and I teach translation in our seminary. I believe I would know. Though I must say I recently heard of a lone wolf translation working in the language of Iceland.

Here's the deal, though. Bible translation is very difficult and takes a very long time. Very few missionaries are cut out for it.

 

[Charlie24]

It is impossible to print the Bible in other languages. The KJV is an English Bible. You cannot have an English Bible in another language. It is impossible. Do you mean a translation of the KJV into other languages? If so, it ceases to be the KJV at that point, and becomes a translation of the KJV.

I doubt if Jimmy has done that himself, since he is not a linguist. Do you mean he has sponsored such translations? Do you have a link where I could read more about this?

As far as I know, I am aware of all the ministries in the US and Great Britain active in this area. There are not that many.

I am a translator and a linguist, and I teach translation in our seminary. I believe I would know. Though I must say I recently heard of a lone wolf translation working in the language of Iceland.

Here's the deal, though. Bible translation is very difficult and takes a very long time. Very few missionaries are cut out for it.

I didn't intend for this to become an argument, John.

I have watched JS for years but I'm not a Pentecostal, and have my differences with him. But I do agree with his theology.

I have no links to this as I watched his program and seen him explain how they translate the KJV into other languages.

Of course he doesn't do it himself, and has hired translators for the job. who are fluent in those languages.

There is a barrier with translating an English version into other languages, the way he does it is by sticking to the KJV as close as possible with side notes for each verse or as needed in that language explaining the content as clear as possible.

It's similar to his Expositors Bible that has an explanation for almost every verse, and I've found it to very accurate to my understanding of Doctrine taught from Scripture.

 

[John of Japan]

I didn't intend for this to become an argument, John.

I don't feel like it is an argument, but just a good discussion. Bible translation is my area of academic expertise, so I hope to be a blessing and a help in this area.

I have watched JS for years but I'm not a Pentecostal, and have my differences with him. But I do agree with his theology.

I have no links to this as I watched his program and seen him explain how they translate the KJV into other languages.

Shucks. I'd love to know more about his team's efforts.

Of course he doesn't do it himself, and has hired translators for the job. who are fluent in those languages.

I figured he did.

There is a barrier with translating an English version into other languages, the way he does it is by sticking to the KJV as close as possible with side notes for each verse or as needed in that language explaining the content as clear as possible.

So his team uses a literal method (sometimes called optimal equivalence or essentially literal) rather than dynamic/functional equivalance.

It's similar to his Expositors Bible that has an explanation for almost every verse, and I've found it to very accurate to my understanding of Doctrine taught from Scripture.

Very interesting. I did find some references on the Internet to Swaggart's efforts, and it appears to me that what is actually being translated is the notes to his study Bible rather than the Bible itself. Correct me if I'm wrong. The reason I say this is that French and Vietnamese are mentioned, but they have had their own Bibles for many years, so there is no need for new translations.

 

[Charlie24]

I don't feel like it is an argument, but just a good discussion. Bible translation is my area of academic expertise, so I hope to be a blessing and a help in this area.

Shucks. I'd love to know more about his team's efforts.

I figured he did.

So his team uses a literal method (sometimes called optimal equivalence or essentially literal) rather than dynamic/functional equivalance.

Very interesting.

My knowledge of this is a drop in the bucket compared to yours.

All I know is what I've seen and heard from the JSM and from the missionaries and pastors in those countries.

Swaggart wrote all of the comments in English from various theologians and scholars and the translators follow word for as word close as possible to communicate what he has said in that language.

That's all I know and it seems possible for that communication to take place, but I'm not experienced in this type thing.

 

[Salty]

If you could crawl in your lifetime to find the King James Bible, could you get saved as a sinner, learn exactly how God saves people, understand what a church is, and be Led to be Scripturally baptized, because they have had their soul Placed under the Eternal Word of God?

Would these statements be just as true as yours above:
1) If you could crawl in your lifetime to find the NASB, could you get saved as a sinner, learn exactly how God saves people, understand what a church is, and be Led to be Scripturally baptized, because they have had their soul Placed under the Eternal Word of God?

2) If you could crawl in your lifetime to find the HSCB, could you get saved as a sinner, learn exactly how God saves people, understand what a church is, and be Led to be Scripturally baptized, because they have had their soul Placed under the Eternal Word of God?

3) If you could crawl in your lifetime to find the NKJV, could you get saved as a sinner, learn exactly how God saves people, understand what a church is, and be Led to be Scripturally baptized, because they have had their soul Placed under the Eternal Word of God?

4) 1) If you could crawl in your lifetime to find the (fill in the blank) , could you get saved as a sinner, learn exactly how God saves people, understand what a church is, and be Led to be Scripturally baptized, because they have had their soul Placed under the Eternal Word of God?

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

This, beyond anything else said by you, or anyone else on the Board, or BY ANYONE anywhere in the whole World, is an extremely POWERFUL statement.

Is there safety in believing the words of any and every edition of the KJV?

Is there actual safety in believing any errors in KJV editions to be true and not errors?

A clerical error of one word in one Edition, for which the Publishers were heavily censored and all but 12 or 15 copies burned. is incredibly specific, when the act of comparison is practiced by them in the first place found their own error?

For that blatant a presumed 'clerical error' in the typesetting to make it all the way to being published, makes that specific error in that specific place, where it has the Bible encourage adulteries, an 'error' very suspicious of sabotage.

Isn't that something? Of all the places in any other verse in the Bible to have that specific one entire word left, to give an emotionally charged sexual activity the opposite of what God says in this Bible and every other; "thou shalt not commit adultery", to make it read "thou shalt commit adultery", just by chance(?), is utterly incredulous. Possible, but by what odds? Highly, highly improbable.

Your General vs Specific Argument accomplishes nothing, other than bolstering the position of anyone with a fondness for the King James Version, who see how rare a thing it is to find an unintentional (or maybe intentional) error, which proves that the faith they have placed in the King James English Bible is a position of safety for them.

THE EXCEPTION PROVES THE RULE.

Thou shalt commit adultery {1631 London KJV edition}

• THE EXCEPTION PROVES THE RULE.
• From Google AI Overall;
  
  • The Commandment: Exodus 20:14 reads:
  • "Thou shalt not commit adultery".
  • The Mistake: The 1631 print read: "Thou shalt commit adultery," a complete reversal of the moral law.
  • The Cause: Likely a compositor's error during hasty typesetting, though some believe it was intentional sabotage by competitors.
• Context: Understand it's a famous printing mistake, not a doctrinal change.
• Correct Text: Refer to standard KJV editions or online sources (like Bible.com) for the accurate commandment.
• • Suppression: King Charles I ordered the Bibles recalled and burned.
  • Punishment: Printers Barker & Lucas were heavily fined, lost their license, and Barker died in debtor's prison.
  • Rarity: Only a handful of these "Wicked Bibles" remain, making them collector's items and museum pieces.

 

[Logos1560]

The KJV translators may have left uncorrected the error of the name of the wrong group of people “Amorites” (1 Kings 11:5) that is in the 1602 edition of the Bishops’ Bible, which could make them responsible for this error of fact being found in the 1611.

At 2 Kings 24:19, the 1611 edition has the name of the wrong king “Jehoiachin,” introduced from the 1602 edition’s “Joachin.” If the KJV translators had noticed this error of fact at 2 King 24:19 in the 1602 edition of the Bishops’ Bible, they failed to make sure that the printers at London corrected it since it remained in editions of the KJV printed at London in 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1626, 1630, 1631, 1633, 1634, 1640, 1644, 1650, 1652, 1655, 1657, and 1698.

At Exodus 6:21, the standard revised 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV introduced a new error of fact, the name of the wrong person Zithri. A typesetter probably looked at the end of Exodus 6:22 for this name Zithri instead of at the end of Exodus 6:21 for the correct name Zichri. This error remained uncorrected in most KJV editions printed by Oxford and by Cambridge for over 100 years until corrected in the 1873 Cambridge edition.

David Norton asserted: “It should never be forgotten that there were genuine problems in the first edition text that the Cambridge editors contributed greatly to remedying” (Textual History of the KJB p. 92). Nevertheless, the 1638 standard Cambridge KJV edition and the 1629 edition did not fix all the errors, imperfections, or inconsistencies in the 1611 edition of the KJV. Concerning “man of activity” at Genesis 47:6, David Norton noted: “1611’s error comes from Bod [1602 Bishops’ with annotations]. Elsewhere the phrase is plural” (Textual History, p. 207). David Norton observed: “There are four good reasons for thinking this an error: the singular is inconsistent with ‘make them rulers,’ the Hebrew is plural, the same Hebrew is translated as plural in the other places where it occurs, and all the previous translations recognized that it was plural” (p. 36). The 1560 Geneva Bible translated it accurately and faithfully to the Hebrew as “men of activity.” Gordon Campbell wrote: “In Genesis 47:6, for example, he [F. S. Parris] observed that the singular form ‘man’ made little sense in the phrase ‘if thou knowest any man of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle’, and so changed ‘man’ to ‘men,’ which is what the Hebrew says” (Bible, p. 131).

 

[JD731]

The KJV translators may have left uncorrected the error of the name of the wrong group of people “Amorites” (1 Kings 11:5) that is in the 1602 edition of the Bishops’ Bible, which could make them responsible for this error of fact being found in the 1611.

At 2 Kings 24:19, the 1611 edition has the name of the wrong king “Jehoiachin,” introduced from the 1602 edition’s “Joachin.” If the KJV translators had noticed this error of fact at 2 King 24:19 in the 1602 edition of the Bishops’ Bible, they failed to make sure that the printers at London corrected it since it remained in editions of the KJV printed at London in 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1626, 1630, 1631, 1633, 1634, 1640, 1644, 1650, 1652, 1655, 1657, and 1698.

At Exodus 6:21, the standard revised 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV introduced a new error of fact, the name of the wrong person Zithri. A typesetter probably looked at the end of Exodus 6:22 for this name Zithri instead of at the end of Exodus 6:21 for the correct name Zichri. This error remained uncorrected in most KJV editions printed by Oxford and by Cambridge for over 100 years until corrected in the 1873 Cambridge edition.

David Norton asserted: “It should never be forgotten that there were genuine problems in the first edition text that the Cambridge editors contributed greatly to remedying” (Textual History of the KJB p. 92). Nevertheless, the 1638 standard Cambridge KJV edition and the 1629 edition did not fix all the errors, imperfections, or inconsistencies in the 1611 edition of the KJV. Concerning “man of activity” at Genesis 47:6, David Norton noted: “1611’s error comes from Bod [1602 Bishops’ with annotations]. Elsewhere the phrase is plural” (Textual History, p. 207). David Norton observed: “There are four good reasons for thinking this an error: the singular is inconsistent with ‘make them rulers,’ the Hebrew is plural, the same Hebrew is translated as plural in the other places where it occurs, and all the previous translations recognized that it was plural” (p. 36). The 1560 Geneva Bible translated it accurately and faithfully to the Hebrew as “men of activity.” Gordon Campbell wrote: “In Genesis 47:6, for example, he [F. S. Parris] observed that the singular form ‘man’ made little sense in the phrase ‘if thou knowest any man of activity among them, then make them rulers over my cattle’, and so changed ‘man’ to ‘men,’ which is what the Hebrew says” (Bible, p. 131).

If I understand my Bible correctly, Jesus Christ, the son of God, is the word of God personified., Do you agree?

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

have had their soul Placed under the Eternal Word of God?

I wasn't talking about their having their soul under part of the Eternal Word of God.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

You missed the point, which is that there are billions of people in the world

My point was that anyone around the World can say what they want about anything they can come up with to say on any subject.

Not germane.

I was saying that there are those who don't know a Bible when they see it.

You missed the point, which is that there are billions of people in the world with no KJV or equivalent thereof.

I think you missed the point that no matter what anyone says on any subject + O.P.

But the whole point is that they have no Bible!!

No one was talking about whether they had Bibles or not.

Again, most of the world, billions of people, have no Bible at all, much less a KJV equivalent (which actually does not exist, since the KJV is English).

We appreciate you sharing that with us.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

The KJV translators may have

Have you got the stats on the number of years it's been, since these great issues of your concern, have been resolved?

 

[Logos1560]

Have you got the stats on the number of years it's been, since these great issues of your concern, have been resolved?

The fact of actual errors in editions of the KJV has not yet been resolved since a few errors can sometimes still be found in post-1980 editions of the KJV.

At Exodus 6:21, the standard revised 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV introduced a new error of fact, the name of the wrong person Zithri. A typesetter probably looked at the end of Exodus 6:22 for this name Zithri instead of at the end of Exodus 6:21 for the correct name Zichri. This error remained uncorrected in most KJV editions printed by Oxford and by Cambridge for over 100 years until corrected in the 1873 Cambridge edition. This 1769 Oxford edition error Zithri at Exodus 6:21, corrected after 100 years, was reintroduced into the KJV in at least one Thompson Chain Reference Bible KJV edition [Fifth Improved Edition] with a 2007 copyright date.

Some post-1980 editions of the KJV whose text was typed up on computers for the printers introduced some new errors into some present KJV editions. There are at least two different computer-based KJV texts that are printed in over 30 post-1980 editions of the KJV, and each of them has a different set of variations and errors.

 

[John of Japan]

My point was that anyone around the World can say what they want about anything they can come up with to say on any subject.

I was saying that there are those who don't know a Bible when they see it.

I was a missionary to Japan for 33 years. Every furlough I found that the English translation issue had heated up more and more. Meanwhile, billions of people in the world had not a single phrase of any translation of the Bible, much less a KJV equivalent Bible of some kind. Japan had no NT in modern Japanese from the TR, which is why we launched the Lifeline Japanese Bible effort.

It bothers me greatly when KJVO people concentrate on English and forget the Great Commission. We need to get the Bible into every language in the world to fulfill the Great Commission. This situation ought to bother all KJVO advocates, who often read the Great Commission in the KJV but then don't obey it.

I think you missed the point that no matter what anyone says on any subject + O.P.

I don't understand what you mean by this.

No one was talking about whether they had Bibles or not.

Of course they were. That was me.

We appreciate you sharing that with us.

We simply must obey the Great Commission and get the Word of God into all languages.

 

[Salty]

Should Mark 16:18 actually part of the Bible?
Do we accept that verse as Gospel truth

 

[Ben1445]

Should Mark 16:18 actually part of the Bible?
Do we accept that verse as Gospel truth

If you don’t believe Mark 16:18, then you should also take out
Isaiah 43:2
When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee;
and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee:
when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned;
neither shall the flame kindle upon thee.

Acts 28:1-6
And when they were escaped, then they knew that the island was called Melita. And the barbarous people shewed us no little kindness: for they kindled a fire, and received us every one, because of the present rain, and because of the cold. And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand. And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live. And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm. Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god.

Also Isaiah 11:6-9
The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb,
and the leopard shall lie down with the kid;
and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together;
and a little child shall lead them.
And the cow and the bear shall feed;
their young ones shall lie down together:
and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp,
and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.
They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain:
for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD,

to answer the question fully, Mark 16:18 is not a verse about instruction in the order of service in churches. It is a testimony of the faithfulness of God to His servants.

 

[Salty]

If you don’t believe Mark 16:18, then you should also take out
Isaiah 43:2

So are you saying we should handle snakes and/or tolerate the practice?

 

[Ben1445]

So are you saying we should handle snakes and/or tolerate the practice?

Like I said, it’s not given to us to be an ordinance. (We don’t even wash feet. We are a long way away from adding snakes as an ordinance. Maybe snakes would be safer than feet. )

Matthew 4:6-7
And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

But to say Mark 16:18 doesn’t belong in Scripture because some people misuse it… then you must also remove what the devil misused in tempting Christ.
For the same reason I don’t take out references to tongues when they are mentioned, even if they are also misused.

 

[Ben1445]

So are you saying we should handle snakes and/or tolerate the practice?

To be 100% clear. I don’t tolerate it. It is a misuse of Scripture.

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

The fact of actual errors in editions of the KJV has not yet been resolved since a few errors can sometimes still be found in post-1980 editions of the KJV.

each of them has a different set of variations and errors.

And what is God's Standard Criteria for evaluating what "the fact of actual errors" is and His Perspective on "variations and errors", for which we have Scripture Warrant, from God Himself?

Do you know?

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

And what is God's Standard Criteria for evaluating what "the fact of actual errors" is and His Perspective on "variations and errors", for which we have Scripture Warrant, from God Himself?

There are at least two different computer-based KJV texts that are printed in over 30 post-1980 editions of the KJV, and each of them has a different set of variations and errors.

Notice the various books in the New Testament 'quote' these two verses in Jeremiah, from Jeremiah 31:33 and Jeremiah 31:34;

this gives us a beginning view on God's Standard Criteria for evaluating what "the fact of actual errors" is and His Perspective on "variations and errors", for which we have Scripture Warrant, from God Himself;

(and we're not even considering the different spellings of names, from the Old Testament to the New Testament, etc., which we take for granted, even though they can be quite different looking.)

Jer 31:33; "For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people."

John 6:45; "It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me— "

Rom 11:27; “and this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.”

Heb 8:10; "For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people."

Heb 10:16; “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, write them on their minds,”
...

And as we see Jeremiah 31:34 quoted in the New Testament;

Jeremiah 31:34; "And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”

John 6:45; "It is written in the Prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me—

Rom 11:27; “and this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.”

Heb 8:11; "And they shall not teach, each one his neighbor and each one his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest.

Heb 8:12; "For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more.”

Heb 10:17; "then he adds, “I will remember their sins and their lawless deeds no more.”

They are all valid and accepted in their own state, without much question, in the final results. They show God's expectable criteria, for judging 'errors' and variants.