a good study bible

[Jordan Kurecki]

"but it is also in some Old Latin manuscripts, and the Old Latin translation dates from around 200 A.D"

 

[McCree79]

"

"Majority text" or "minority readings"


It is also fallacious and hypocritical to suggest that just because the reading found in 1 John 5:7

Then the same shall be said about every KJVO argument.

Its not that 1 John 5:7 is in a minority Greek manuscripts, its in zero that I know of before a Greek manuscript was wrote after Eramus wrote the first to editions of his Greek text. Eramus plus the next to men who worked on the Greek foundation of the TR acknowledged that the version of 1 John 5:7 was not original and include such in the margins. It was included to make the Catholic Vulgate fans happy. Every argument the KJVO supports use today, is the same ones that the Vulgate supporters used to attack Eramus Greek and the KJV.

In Exodus, the KJV teaches their are multiple gods..

ESV|“You shall not revile God, nor curse a ruler of your people.

NLT|“You*°must*not*°dishonor*God*°or*curse°any*of your*°rulers*.*42.9%*difference

NKJV|“You shall not revile God, nor curse a ruler of your people.*0%*difference

HCSB|“You*°must*not*°blaspheme*God*°orcurse a*°leader among*your people.37.9%*difference

KJV |°Thou shalt*not revile*°the gods*, nor curse*°the*ruler of*°thy*people.40%*difference

In numbers the KJV teaches God breaks his promises .......

ESV|According to the number of the days in which you spied out the land, forty days, a year for each day, you shall bear your iniquity forty years, and you shall know my displeasure.’

NLT|°“ ‘Because your men explored*the°land for forty*days*, you must wander*in*°the°wilderness for*forty*°years—*a year for each day,*°suffering the consequences of*your°sins. Then*you*°will discover what it is like to have me for an enemy*.’*68.2%*difference

NKJV|According to the number of the days in which you spied out the land, forty days,°for each day*°you shall bear your*°guilt one year, namely*forty years, and you shall know°My rejection.*19%*difference

HCSB|°You will bear the consequences of your sins 40 years based on*the number of the*40*days*°that*you*°scouted*the land,*°a year for each day*°. You will*know*°Mydispleasure*°.*57.3%*difference

KJV |°After*the number of the days in which*°ye searched*the land,*even*forty days,each day for*a year*°,*°shall*ye*bear your°iniquities, even*forty years, and*°ye*shall know my*°breach of promise.35.8%*difference

Modern translations are just as good, if not better than the KJV.

*I don't have the NIV or NASB on my phone or I would have used those renderings for comparison instead.....I used what I had handy.

 

[McCree79]

"but it is also in some Old Latin manuscripts, and the Old Latin translation dates from around 200 A.D"

Jerome's does I know. That was late 4th century. Not saying your wrong. I'm just unfamiliar with said Latin manuscripts. My on Latin manuscript knowledge period, is of Jerome's work. Jerome based his off mid 2nd century Latin, but those were destroyed by Muslims. However, we do know that Jerome was fully OK with changing the Latin to add eloquence(especially to the words of Paul) and to support Catholic doctrines, such as primacy of Peter and Mary worship.

 

[Baptist Believer]

...we believe that God perfectly preserved his word through the translation of the KJV. we believe the KJV as we use today, to be perfect and without error.

2 Samuel 6:23 (KJV)
"Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death."

2 Samuel 21:8 (KJV)
"But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite:"

This contradiction can be easily reconciled, but one cannot make the claim that "the KJV as we use today, to be perfect and without error."

The KJV was an outstanding translation in its day and it still holds up very well. However, ascribing perfection to it is unwarranted. While I believe that God preserves His word, I think we need to acknowledge that the meaning of the scripture is preserved even though the actual words vary from language to language and even copy to copy.

 

[wpe3bql]

my go to person would probably be David Cloud.

I've found Brother David Cloud to be a rather interesting individual. His 1996-97 work, Things Hard to Be Understood, a 220+ page work that was published in Canada is a rather exhaustive tome defending almost every relevant passage from Genesis 1:1 through to Revelation 22:19.

I found his defense of the Acts 12:4 term "Easter" to be one of especial interest. His defense of "Easter" vs. "Passover" is primarily that of indicating that "Easter" is a specific day on our contemporary calendars (although it's never the exact same day from year to year); OTOH, he states that "Passover" is more of a "season."

Bro. Cloud takes up about half a page (p. 142) to expound this thesis.

Now, wouldn't this controversy be put to an end if the KJV translators would have merely re-phrased that part of Acts 12:4 to read, "Easter season"?

------------------------------------------------------

Also, Bro. Cloud once put out a several page article listing several popular musical entertainers who died of "other than natural causes."

I can merely infer that his reason(s) for such a list was to somehow indicate that the primary (only?) these individuals met their respective deaths was either the culture and/or their performance repertoire was not 110%+ of the "great hymns of the faith."

Maybe such might have been the case.

OTOH, Bro. Cloud never included such folks as the blind Fanny J. Crosby or William J. Kirkpatrick (just to name two) whose works fill a good part of our hymnals.


H'mmmm.



Please understand that I am not a "1611 KJV hater." I keep one of my many copies of the KJV close by my computer for reference purposes. My signature below is from the KJV. I've even written a work defending the KJV's use of "baptism" in this translation. [PM me if you want a link to this work.] The KJV is probably the most widely used and highly-cherished English translation we have available today.

 

[Logos1560]

"

"Majority text" or "minority readings"



Sure, there are a few minority readings in the King James Bible, but for every one in the KJB there are at least 20 minority readings found in the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV and that is no exaggeration"

http://www.brandplucked.webs.com/1john57.htm

Since you are arguing that having a few minority readings has to be good, does a consistent application of that same reasoning suggest or imply that having more minority readings could be better?

Are you in effect admitting that KJV-only reasoning rests on inconsistent, unjust divers textual measures and demonstrating that it does not rest on any consistent, sound, just textual measures?

 

[kyredneck]

You recommend it for who.....?!? ha ha ha ha

...Independent, Fundamental, Separatist, Dispensational, Non-Cal, King James Only.

For the time will come when they will not endure the sound doctrine; but, having itching ears, will heap to themselves teachers after their own lusts; 2 Tim 4:3

 

[tyndale1946]

...Independent, Fundamental, Separatist, Dispensational, Non-Cal, King James Only.

For the time will come when they will not endure the sound doctrine; but, having itching ears, will heap to themselves teachers after their own lusts; 2 Tim 4:3

You took the words right out of my mouth!... Brother Glen:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[kyredneck]

Well, it probably came off as a little harsh, I doubt the passage was called for, but I do believe it's a big mistake to confine one's study with so many restrictions.