an actual 1769 Oxford error

[Ed Edwards]

Act 4:10-12 (KJV1611 Edition):
Be it knowen vnto you all, and to all the people of Israel,
that by the Name of Iesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified,
whome God raised from the dead, euen by him, doeth this
man stand here before you, whole.
Act 4:11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders,
which is become the head of the corner.
Act 4:12 Neither is there saluation in any other:
for there is none other name vnder heauen giuen
among men whereby we must be saued.

Consider 'Iesus Christ of Nazareth':

'Iesus' is the name
'Christ' is a title meaning 'chosen one of God'
'of Nazareth' is a title showing where Iesus lived.

we are NOT saved by calling on the title(s) but by calling on the name.

 

[Diggin in da Word]

Acts 4:10-12 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

I called on Jesus Christ, and guess what?? He heard me and He saved me!

Praise His Holy Name!

 

[Linda64]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
William S. Correa: //Who is Iesus ?//

I know 100 professional running backs who would love
to have one of the holes in your knowledge about the KJB
in their opponents line

'Iesus' is the name whereby we must all be saved,
according to the REAL KJB, the KJV1611 Edition
(not the upgraded Modern Version, the KJV1769 "JESUS" is NOT "IESUS" it is "IESVS" . Looks like you have changed the "VEdtion
used by most KJVOs).

Iesus appears in the KJV1611 Edition New Testament 981
times in 940 verses.
Jesus does not appear in the KJV1611 Edition New Testament.

Mark 1:1 (KJV1611 Edition):
The beginning of the Gospel of Iesus Christ, the Sonne of God,

BTW, 'Iesus' 'sonne' and 'God' appear in 23 verses of the
Real KJB, the KJV1611 Edition.

Ed--

You sound like the Sacred Name "Cult"--the opposite side of the very same coin as those who say you MUST call on the name "YAH" or "YESHUA" in order to be saved. Anything else to these people is PAGAN--even the GREEK Name:

2424. Iesous
Search for G2424 in KJVSL
IhsouV Iesous ee-ay-sooce'

of Hebrew origin (3091); Jesus (i.e. Jehoshua), the name of our Lord and two (three) other Israelites:--Jesus.

See Hebrew 3091

I have a copy of "The Holy Bible, 1611 Edition, King James Version" ALL the words that have the letter "J" in them, are signified by an "I" instead. That being said, you cannot say that IESUS cannot be properly translated as JESUS. By doing so, you put a stumbling block on others, telling that they are not calling on the right name--which is EXACTLY what the Sacred Name "Cult" people do.

Also, alot of the U's are changed to V's, etc. The 1769 edition is simply a correction of grammar and spelling of the original 1611 edition--NOTHING MORE. It is NOT a MODERN translation. The MODERN translation (RSV, being the first) didn't come out until 1881.

 

[william s. correa]

Originally posted by Deacon:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by william s. correa:
I'll pray about it!
...Well I prayed About it And I plead the Blood Of Jesus and will not Apologize for my comment.

Does anyone wonder why some churches are taking the title "Baptist" out of their name?

Rob </font>[/QUOTE]Because the One World Religion is falling into place!

 

[Ed Edwards]

Ed is a many tongues name of Iesus believer

Linda64: //Ed--
You sound like the Sacred Name "Cult"--the opposite side
of the very same coin as those who say you MUST call on
the name "YAH" or "YESHUA" in order to be saved.//

Linda64 //I have a copy of "The Holy Bible, 1611 Edition,
King James Version" ALL the words that have the letter
"J" in them, are signified by an "I" instead.
...
The 1769 edition is simply a correction of grammar
and spelling of the original 1611 edition--NOTHING MORE.//


Sister Linda64: you contradict yourself.
You say the only difference between the KJV1611 Edition
and the KJV1769 Edition is SPELLING.

Contradictory, you call me 'like' a Sacred Name Cult member.
All I did was use an alternate spelling; but you accuse me
of being a cult member? YOu contradict yourself.

I quoted this scripture:
//Act 4:10a, 12B (KJV1611 Edition):
Be it knowen vnto you all, and to all the people of Israel,
that by the Name of Iesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified,
whome God raised from the dead,...
12B for there is none other name vnder heauen giuen
among men whereby we must be saued.//

I made this statement:
//'Iesus' is the name whereby we must all be saved,//

Tell me, which part of my statement is NOT supported by that
scripture? The answer, of course, is my statement is
supported by my scripture.
It has nothing whatsever to do with picking the RIGHT NAME
to get God to do something for your (this is called 'magic').

I have friends who have called upon the following names
and gotten saved:

Jesus (late modern English),
Iesus (early modern English - pronounced as we pronounce 'Jesus'),
Yeshua (Hebrew)


Speaking of the KJV1769 Edition Linda64 says:
//It is NOT a MODERN translation. The MODERN translation
(RSV, being the first) didn't come out until 1881.//

Fine, you are at liberty to define MODERN VERSION as you wish.
HOwever, I also have the liberty in Christ to define
MODERN VERSION as "published after 1701". Either definition
is logical and neither definition is superior in any manner
(i.e. neither of us gets any bragging rights) over the other.

Linda64: //The 1769 edition is simply a correction of grammar
and spelling of the original 1611 edition--NOTHING MORE.//

Sister Linda64 - this statement has been disproved countless
times on various threads of this Version/Translation board.
Following is a list of other types of changes made.
But first I mention: Not all KJV1769 Editions agree;
not all on-line KJV1769 Editions agree in these matters:

1. Spelling (already mentioned)
2. punctuation
3. word changes
4. Many KJV1769s do NOT have the Translator Margin Notes
(some do have footnotes instead of the original KJV1611 Edition
notes in the right and left margins.

Doctrine based on a word misunderstanding #47

BTW, I'm the guy who is writing the book about:
Drastic doctrincal changes hinging on the understanding/misunderstanding
ov KJV1679 Version words.

Here is one:
I Corinthians 14:33 (KJV1769 Edition):
For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace,
as in all churches of the saints.

IN 1611 'confusion' could only mean 'not peaceful'.
But since about 1880 'confusion' has also meant
'disorderly'.

The whole Pentacostal movement among the Methodist/Wesylian
tradition starting in 1906 in Southern California and rural
Kansas was reacted to by people who thought 'confusion'
meant 'disorderly'.
BUt even the very verse shows that the 'confusion'
being spoken of is the opposite of 'peace'.

Whole denominations reacting negatively to the
Pentacostal movment have the WRONG MEANING of the
word 'confusion' and the wrong doctrine as a result.

Caveat for those whose only form of exercise appears
to be 'jumpting to conclusion'. I am not pentacostal
nor carismatic, I just have proper interpertation of the
Bible reasons not to be pentacostal, not wrong interpertation
reasons. The big reason for me is that one does not
have to speak in tongues to prove the Holy Spirit dwells
within them. The Holy Spirit gives gifts of the Spirit
as He wills, not always 'speaking in unknown tongues'.

Acts 4:12B quoted, source unknown:
... for there is none other name under heaven given among men,
whereby we must be saved.

Diggin in da Word: //I called on Jesus Christ, and guess what??
He heard me and He saved me!//

//Praise His Holy Name!//


Amen, Brother Diggin in da Word!

And it was His Holy Name 'Jesus'
not his Holy Title 'Christ' that was the name 'under
heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.'

StandingfirminChrist: //Let's look at John 5:4...

John 5:4 For the aungel `of the Lord cam doun certeyne tymes
in to the watir, and the watir was moued;
and he that first cam doun in to the sisterne
{Note: that is, a watir gederid togidere, hauinge no fiyss.}
aftir the mouynge of the watir, was maad hool of what euer
sijknesse he was holdun.

//Many versions, such as the Complete Jewish Bible
and the Holman Christian Study Bible omit this verse.

//When read with the story, the verse sheds light on what
the man was there for and what happened at a certain season.//

YEs, that does shed light, indicating that the sources used
by that unknown translation had been added to by
uninspired scribes.

BTW "Holman Christian Study Bible' is NOT
a term used to denote a 'version'.
If one has a Holman Christian Study Bible, then
there should be a version listed within (or on the outside)
the Bible itself.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

And now, Ed, you are contradicting yourself. In your earlier post, you said that the only name that a person could call on and get saved is the name Iesus (not the KJV1769) wait, let me quote it...

originally quoted by EdEdwards:
'Iesus' is the name whereby we must all be saved, according to the REAL KJB, the KJV1611 Edition (not the upgraded Modern Version, the KJV1769 Edtion used by most KJVOs).

yet, now you say you have friends who called on the name Jesus and got saved. Either they are saved under only the one (not the 1769) or not. Which is it?

 

[Ed Edwards]

No contradiction.
What does "according" mean?

 

[Linda64]

according

ACCORD'ING, ppr.

1. Agreeing; harmonizing.

Th' according music of a well mixt state.

2. Suitable; agreeable; in accordance with.

In these senses, the word agrees with or refers to a sentence.

Our zeal should be according to knowledge.

Noble is the fame that is built on candor and ingenuity, according to those beautiful lines of Sir John Denham.

Here the whole preceding parts of the sentence are to accord, i.e. agree with, correspond with, or be suitable to, what follows. According, here, has its true participial sense, agreeing, and is always followed by to. It is never a preposition.

 

[Ed Edwards]

StandingfirminChrist: //you said that the only name that
a person could call on and get saved is the name Iesus//

I did not say it, the Bible said it;
the King James Version (KJV) Bible says it:

Act 4:10-12 (KJV1611 Edition):
Be it knowen vnto you all, and to all the people of Israel,
that by the Name of Iesus Christ of Nazareth,
whom ye crucified, whome God raised from the dead,
euen by him, doeth this man stand here before you, whole.
11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders,
which is become the head of the corner.
12 Neither is there saluation in any other:
for there is none other name vnder heauen
giuen among men whereby we must be saued.

By contrast, the KJV also says:

Acts 4:10 (KJV1769):
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel,
that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth,
whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead,
even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
4:11This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders,
which is become the head of the corner.
4:12Neither is there salvation in any other:
for there is none other name under heaven
given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Is the name 'Iesus' or 'Jesus'?
'Christ' is a title, not a name.
'of Nazareth' is a title, not a name.
Which different KJV is a KJB?

 

[Linda64]

JESUS CHRIST

"Jesus" is Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word meaning Savior (Mt 1:21). "Christ" is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word Messiah, meaning anointed, and refers to Jesus as the Messiah promised in O.T. Scripture (Da 9:25-26; Joh 1:41; 4:25; Ac 2:36). While Jesus refers particularly to the Lord's humanity and incarnation by which He became a man to die for our sins, Christ refers particularly to the Lord's eternal deity as the Son of God.

Way of Life Encyclopedia

And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS &lt;Iesous&gt;: for he shall save his people from their sins. (Matthew 1:21)

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:

Which different KJV is a KJB?

KJV and KJB--&gt;same thing

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Linda64:

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Which different KJV is a KJB?

KJV and KJB--&gt;same thing </font>[/QUOTE]Let me ask again.

I have three KJVs that are different from
each other.
Which one is the KJB?

1. KJV 1611 Edition
2. KJV 1769 Edition
3. KJV 1873 Edition (may be same as
the 1850 Edition)

I have three books in my hand, which is
the one and only KJB = King James Bible?
They each say KJV = King James Version
on them. The KJV1611 says it is
the KJV1611 Edition.
The KJV1873 edition says it is the KJV1873
Edition.
The KJV1769 does NOT say what it is, but
i've studied the matter and it is
a KJV1769 Edition.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Linda64:
[QB] JESUS CHRIST

"Jesus" is Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word meaning Savior (Mt 1:21). "Christ" is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word Messiah, meaning anointed, and refers to Jesus as the Messiah promised in O.T. Scripture (Da 9:25-26; Joh 1:41; 4:25; Ac 2:36). While Jesus refers particularly to the Lord's humanity and incarnation by which He became a man to die for our sins, Christ refers particularly to the Lord's eternal deity as the Son of God.

Way of Life Encyclopedia

And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS &lt;Iesous&gt;: for he shall save his people from their sins. (Matthew 1:21)

Nevertheless, 'Jesus' (AKA: Iesus, Yeshua)
is a NAME; 'Christ' or 'Messiah' is
a TITLE. One is saved by the NAME of Jesus;
nowhere in the Bible does it say one is
saved by the TITLE of Jesus.

 

[Ed Edwards]

1. My KJV1611 Edition Bible is in this book:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0840700415/102-6523238-4896113?v=glance&n=283155

2. My KJV1769 is the KJV in this Bible:
http://www.bestwebbuys.com/Prophecy_Study_Bible-ISBN_0899579248.html?isrc=b-search

3. My KJV1873 is the KJV in this Bible:
http://www.familychristian.com/shop/product_image.asp?ProdID=8136

Which of these is the KJB = King James Bible?

To keep on topic i note:
Only #2 above is like an actual KJV1769 Oxford Bible.

 

[Ed Edwards]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
1. My KJV1611 Edition Bible is in this book:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0840700415/102-6523238-4896113?v=glance&n=283155

2. My KJV1769 is the KJV in this Bible:
http://www.bestwebbuys.com/Prophecy_Study_Bible-ISBN_0899579248.html?isrc=b-search

3. My KJV1873 is the KJV in this Bible:
http://www.familychristian.com/shop/product_image.asp?ProdID=8136

Which of these is the KJB = King James Bible?

To keep on topic i note:
Only #2 above is like an actual KJV1769 Oxford Bible.

Good question, Brother Ed.
Who will dare take a stand?
Which of these are the elusive KJB?

 

[AntennaFarmer]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:

Is the name 'Iesus' or 'Jesus'?

You actually know the answer don't you Ed?

A.F.

 

[TCassidy]

Originally posted by Ed Edwards:
Is the name 'Iesus' or 'Jesus'?

Please, Ed, stop embarrassing yourself. You are starting to give the impression that you are more than slightly senile. We all know that Pierre de la Ramée was the first to use the letter "J" in place of the initial "I" and that he did so in the 1570s. And that it took over 100 years for that convention to become universally accepted.

 

[Dr. Bob]

I think Ed was just driving home an obvious point. Some of our friends claim the 1611 as their version, while changing the spellings to more modern form. Just pointing out the obvious.

We all know the thousands of spelling changes that were occuring in the 1600-1750 era. And that these have no bearing on the revisions in subsequent editions. Languages change.

(BTW, as far as the name, we all know it was Yeshua!)

 

[AntennaFarmer]

Originally posted by Dr. Bob:
I think Ed was just driving home an obvious point. Some of our friends claim the 1611 as their version, while changing the spellings to more modern form. .......

So it appears to me also. However, it is not a logical conclusion of the doctrine that fonts and spelling of english words are inspired. I think that Ed knows this. I think that we all know this.

Why the straw man? We wish to arrive at the truth rather than score debating points.

A.F.

 

[Ed Edwards]

AntennaFarmer: //Why the straw man? //

Tis you, Bro. AntennaFarmer
has picked the straw man to argue about
when there were real issues here. The issue is
this: which of the KJVs is the KJB? Is the 1769
Oxford KJV the KJB?

Some say all three (and more) of the above KJVs
are the KJB. You are welcome to say the same.

 

[TCassidy]

I think Ed was just driving home an obvious point. Some of our friends claim the 1611 as their version, while changing the spellings to more modern form. Just pointing out the obvious.

We all know the thousands of spelling changes that were occuring in the 1600-1750 era. And that these have no bearing on the revisions in subsequent editions. Languages change.

Yes, I know, but the objection, nevertheless, represents a straw man argument that is entirely outside the scope of the discussion. It is similar to the "well what about all those whosoevers" arguments against particular redemption constantly being offered by Arminians. A nonsensical argument is nonsense regardless of who presents it or why.

(By the way, speaking of spelling changes did I miss where “occurring” changed to “occuring?” )