64 errors in the Cambridge edition of the King James translation of the Bible

[Salamander]

Originally posted by Theodore Beza:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Our Baptist forefathers would have rejected KJVO'ism, as would our fundamentalist forefathers.

At the time of the Westminster Confession, the Church of England, the Baptists, and the Congregationalists all had ample opportunity to subscribe to KJVO doctrine and DID NOT do so. </font>[/QUOTE]Not exactly, friend. They did have ample opportunity, but their bias to the Geneva Bible prevented them from so doing. Also, their political bias against the Monarchy had that same effect upon their "preference".

Isn't it funny, how the Geneva Bible passed from the scene and the King james took precedence as The Word of God? But then.......

 

[Salamander]

Originally posted by TCassidy:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Salamander:
Without going into a volume of facts to discuss, by your estimation, you leave the door open for satan to slander any version of the Bible by introduction of false doctrine as a premise to try and make any point in that regard.

I didn't open that door. Satan did that all by himself. What bothers me more is that he finds so many willing helpers in slandering the bible. The KJVOs slander every bible in English except the KJV. And that is a shame. You expect the ungodly to attack God's word, but when Christians help Satan in his work you have to wonder about their motives. By the way, that is just as true about the "other side." </font>[/QUOTE]Pointing out errors is not slander, it is mere criticism, though some do have a regard to act, shall we say, VEHEMENTLY?

Now, if we take the works of "s"atan into account, as applicable to Bible versions, we than MUST consider that attribute commanded to all Christians, to be holy, as "I am holy".

In consideration of all moral aspects, the more churches lean to a modern version, the less "holy" they are become: standards drop, attendence soars, and the more likened to a social club that church becomes, having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.

I have found that the churches that incorporate a KJO stance, even though some are not as separated as others, tend to maintain godly standards. I actually haven't ever experienced the power of God in any modern version church. I have attended churches where the KJB is "preferred", but to my utter amazement, they too seem to posess that same social spirit, rather than true worship, sad to say, because some of these churches have men of God I highly respect.

 

[rsr]

Originally posted by Salamander:
In consideration of all moral aspects, the more churches lean to a modern version, the less "holy" they are become: standards drop, attendence soars, and the more likened to a social club that church becomes, having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.

Wow. There's a blanket statement just dying for some kind of proof — other than your anecdotes.

 

[HankD]

the more churches lean to a modern version, the less "holy" they are become:

We have heard this before, please present the evidence.

BTW, the KJV is and was the Bible of many cults.
So can we then say that the more churches lean to the KJV the more cultish they become?

HankD

 

[kubel]

RSR: I would have to agree with salamander. That's not to say that your church becomes a social club because it reads from a modern version, but I often do see less truely concervative, high standard churches reading from modern versions than I do the KJV. At least that's how it is around here, and in my own personal experience. I'm not sure what it's like in your area.

 

[HanSola2000]

The proof IS posted. That is the EXPERIENCE AND OBSERVATION that they have given. I have seen the same. That doesn't mean its like that everywhere, becasue our experiences are limited, but I suspect its like no matter where you go, with exceptions, thank God!

 

[HanSola2000]

But I have seen, IN MY OBERVATION AND EXPERIENCE, that anywhere OSAS is harped on constantly, you will find sin, compromise and justification for carnality no matter whcih bible is trumpeted. That false doctrine is anti-holiness, and a minister of sin. I have seen it so many times I cannot count. It is grieveous.

 

[TCassidy]

Originally posted by HanSola2000:
But I have seen, IN MY OBERVATION AND EXPERIENCE, that anywhere OSAS is harped on constantly, you will find sin, compromise and justification for carnality no matter whcih bible is trumpeted. That false doctrine is anti-holiness, and a minister of sin. I have seen it so many times I cannot count. It is grieveous.

So you are saying that the Gospel produces sin? Don't you know that it is the Gospel that removes sin, not causes it?

 

[HanSola2000]

OSAS is not the gospel. It is a teaching that undermines the gospel, which is salvation FROM sin, not in sin. Now the gnostics taught it didn't matter how you lived, as long as you had a cetain knowledge and experience, and John went out of his way to teach us such ideas were false, and that Christianity IS obedience to God. Paul and all the NT teaches this. OSAS teaches Christians can live in disobedience and still be saved. That is a lie. Without holiness no man will see the Lord. That was written to Christians. If the writer believed in OSAS, he never would have said that, nor would he have posited that condition to believers. Anyway, we are off topic, but that is my belief.

 

[TCassidy]

I see. So, you say that Jesus is a liar when He says, "I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish." And you say that the Bible lies when it says, "whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life."

You say, "I give unto them temporary life; and they might perish." You say "whosoever believeth in him might perish, and might only have temporary life."

Sorry, I will take God's word for it. (And I am beginning to understand why you don't have any grasp of the spiritual things being discussed in this forum. 1 Cor. 2:14. Trusting in your own good works will tend to do that to you.)

 

[HanSola2000]

Well Cass, you kinda took those verses outta context. Our Lord ALSO said "My sheep HEAR MY VOICE AND THEY FOLLOW ME, and I give THEM eternal life, etc.

You know "hear" means "listen to", and they FOLLOW Him--they deny themsleves, take up their cross and follow Him. Sounds like they are meeting the conditions, and to THEM He gives eternal life, and to those who follow Him as explained by Him, they absolutley cannot perish.

But there are at least upwards of 84 verses in the NT that teach salvation is conditional. Paul said continue in the grace of God. John said to abide in Him. Jesus said that if we don't abide, we will be cut of and burned. You don't believe that do you?

 

[HankD]

Well Cass, you kinda took those verses outta context. Our Lord ALSO said "My sheep HEAR MY VOICE AND THEY FOLLOW ME, and I give THEM eternal life, etc.

Hearing the voice and following the Shephard is not a condition for becoming a sheep but a characteristic of being a sheep.

Jesus said that if we don't abide, we will be cut of and burned.

This is a characteristic of the "tares" who at the end of the day will indeed be burned, they claimed Him as their own but like those to whom Jesus said (though they called Him Lord, Lord) "I never knew you", they will ultimately perish because they sinned from the beginning like their father the devil.

They were religious (like Judas) and they fooled everyone but God (like Judas).

HankD

 

[HanSola2000]

No, Our Lord said that if any of the branches--which are saved people as defined by our Lord right in John 15--if they don't abide in the vine, they will be cut off and burned. The passage is plain, as is Matt 24:13.

 

[gb93433]

Originally posted by HanSola2000:
OSAS is not the gospel. It is a teaching that undermines the gospel, which is salvation FROM sin, not in sin. Now the gnostics taught it didn't matter how you lived, as long as you had a cetain knowledge and experience, and John went out of his way to teach us such ideas were false, and that Christianity IS obedience to God. Paul and all the NT teaches this. OSAS teaches Christians can live in disobedience and still be saved.

Which one do you not understand?

1 John 5:11-13, "And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life." (NAS)

1 John 5:11-13, "And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; [and] he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God." (KJV)

 

[HankD]

No, Our Lord said that if any of the branches--which are saved people as defined by our Lord right in John 15--if they don't abide in the vine, they will be cut off and burned. The passage is plain, as is Matt 24:13.

Believe what you will, abiding in Christ is a characteristic of the true believer, although it doesn't make him a true believer, it is way to see who is who, "by their fruits you shall know them".

Galatians 5:19-23 shows us the difference between the works of the flesh and the fruit of the Spirit.

Anyone not abiding is Christ is not part of the true vine and indeed never has been and they cannot produce the fruit of the Spirit of Christ because they have not His root.

A phoney may give the impression of "abiding" and even be a proponent of "Lordship salvation (saying Lord, Lord!)" with works to prove it ("and in thy name done many wonderful works?)" but the disconnect is proven by Jesus statement "I never knew you", in other words they were never His to fellowship with in the first place.

But in one thing you are correct "they will be cut off and burned."

Matthew 13
40 As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.
41 The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;
42 And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

The wheat didn't turn into the tares. The tares were/are the children of the devil from the beginning. Jesus planted wheat, they remained wheat, grew up and produced fruit.

The evil one planted the weeds and they shall be burned.

HankD

 

[PeterAV]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
64 errors in the Cambridge edition of the King James translation of the Bible

The real and only genuine King James translation of the Bible published in 1611 correctly capitalizes the incorrect plural form “Cherubims” in the 65 occurrences of it in the Bible. The 1769 Cambridge edition of the King James translation of the Bible capitalizes it in its first occurrence, but fails to capitalize it in any of the following 64 occurrences.

And by the way, since “Cherubims” is an incorrect plural form and it is found 65 times in both the King James translation of the Bible published in 1611 and the imperfect Cambridge edition of 1769, that means beginning with this one word, we find 129 errors in the Cambridge edition of 1769, the very edition that most KJO Independent Fundamentalist “Baptist” churches use. And considering that there are 129 errors in the Cambridge edition of 1769 in just the word “Cherubims,” just think how many errors we would find if we checked out all of the other thousands of words in the Cambridge edition of 1769!

I hereby challenge the KJOist to find in any single “modern version” even 1% of the number of errors that we can find in the Cambridge edition of 1769.

*******
Actually it is not a mistake at all.
Plus there are several times that the AV will capitalize the first occurance of a certain word and then revert back to the accepted reading and spelling.Good effort though.

 

[kubel]

PeterAV,

Saying “cherubims” is like saying “mices”. I don't understand how that isn't a mistake.

 

[TCassidy]

"Cherubim" may be the plural of "cherub" in Hebrew, but if you would check a good dictionary you would see that the English words "Cherubim" (singular) and "cherubims" (plural) did not come into English from Hebrew, but came from the French "cherubin" (singular) and "cherubins" (plural). Such use was gradually replaced by "cherub" and "cherubs" from the 17th century and by the 19th century had become standard. In fact, in English "cherubim" is a verb meaning "to sing like a cherub."

 

[PASTOR MHG]

Originally posted by HanSola2000:
OSAS is not the gospel. It is a teaching that undermines the gospel, which is salvation FROM sin, not in sin. Now the gnostics taught it didn't matter how you lived, as long as you had a cetain knowledge and experience, and John went out of his way to teach us such ideas were false, and that Christianity IS obedience to God. Paul and all the NT teaches this. OSAS teaches Christians can live in disobedience and still be saved. That is a lie. Without holiness no man will see the Lord. That was written to Christians. If the writer believed in OSAS, he never would have said that, nor would he have posited that condition to believers. Anyway, we are off topic, but that is my belief.

Friend, this is a clear misunderstanding of the Scriptures on your part. Take a little time and study the differences between BODY, SOUL, and SPIRIT as they relate to the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit.

You also may want to get a little better grasp on the Distinct differences between JUSTIFICATION and SANCTIFICATION. A blurring of the two doctrines is usually where the confusion comes from.

Max

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by HanSola2000:

You know "hear" means "listen to", and they FOLLOW Him--they deny themsleves, take up their cross and follow Him. Sounds like they are meeting the conditions, and to THEM He gives eternal life, and to those who follow Him as explained by Him, they absolutley cannot perish.

You are twisting this verse badly.

What does it say? Does it say that sheep listen to His voice and decide to become His sheep? No. It says His sheep hear His voice and follow. Anyone who considers the nature of sheep and the illustration being used would never attempt to use this as a demonstration of free will.