Contradictions within the KJV

Abraham was TESTED.If people would quit trying to grasp for straws and READ,they would see that Abraham's "tempting" was a testing.

Nary a one.The only "contradictions" are in the minds(their final authority)of those who cook up this baloney..

 

Here you need to know the Greek terms translated "tempted", "tested", etc.
Here you need to know the English terms: "tempt",
"test", "prove".

One person wanted it like this:
"tempt" is when the Devil trys to show you are a failure,
"test" is when God trys to show you a success.

But in the Greek they are both the same term, so the
Greek doesn't support this viewpoint.
However, the statement is true:
The Devil trys to show you are a failure;
God trys to show you a success.

So James 1:13 can be understood in light of that statement:
GOd cannot be shown a failure, God never trys to show persons failures.
In Gen 22:1 God trys to show Abraham a success.

There is no contradiction here in the KJV.

 

That was Great! Ed! I'll "keep" that one, you explained it perfectly for those who can't read context and arrive at the truth.

 

I believe the seeming contradiction comes from the definition of the word 'tempt', as you noted in your original post. When WE hear 'tempt', we think of trying to entice or lure someone into doing wrong, by promises of pleasure or gain. When the AV was written, 'tempt' as a verb primarily meant, "test, or to dare". The word 'temptation', however, meant much the same as it does today.

The AV translators were merely using 'tempt' according to the definitions of their day. To them, there was no contradiction. However, this furthers the case against exclusive use of the KJV, as many English readers do not know the old definitions of common words as used in 1611. (For example, 'let' has done a 360, from "hinder" to "allow".)

 

What about the easiest KJV contradiction?

Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."

with

Exodus 32:27 "Thus sayeth the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side...and slay every man his brother...companion...neighbor."

I Samuel 15:2,3,7,8 "Thus saith the Lord . . . Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling...And Saul smote the Amalekites...and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword."


Now, it is obvious to me what the 'kill' is referring to in Exodus 20, since I can read or look up "ratsach" in the original text or look it up in Strong's. However, one who reads the KJV alone has no ability to see what God is talking about. This is a clear contradiction, and one that has no explaining away using only the KJV. God said, "Don't do it," then he says, "do it."

 

A contradiction is NOT present here. Context, context, context!

 

NIV, NASB, Message, Amplified, NLT, ESV, CEV, NKJV, and YLT all have "murder" and present no contradiction. The King James Bible presents a serious contradiction that cannot be explained away using just the text. It is therefore fallible and fails the test of most KJVO's.

 

I agree. The AV translators knew the differences between kill, slay, and murder as they used all 3 words in various places. They were a little careless w/Ex.20:13.

 

In James 1:2 and 1:13 they use two different words. In James 1:2and 1:12 the word for trails is very different than in James 1:13 where another word is used for temptation.

 

So, are you saying that Saul violated the Commandment?
(An honest question, by the way.)

 

Check this one out:

http://islamway.com/english/images/library/contradictions.htm

 

The most recent I've come across is in I Cor 11:24- And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said,"Take, eat,this is my body, which is broken for you: do this in memory of me."

Cross ref to Luke 22:19- Jesus says..."This is my body which is given for you..."

What I see is similar in quote, but I Cor is in direct contradiction entirely, for Jesus bones were never broken.

Some may say that it is in reference to the breaking of the bread, but that is stretching text to fit KJV support. That quote is in reference to what Jesus had said as He was breaking bread, and correctly stated in Luke.

 

Do you not consider Jesus' body to have been "broken" by the Crucifixion???????

Think again what that entailed!

Besides, Paul does not say bones were broken - just the body.

Again, no contradiction here!

 

Where is the reference to His body being "broken" in crucifiction, besides in I Cor?

I don't believe Paul ever said his body was broken, and it is a contradiction in the KJV.

I believe the word being used is what refers to a piece of broken bread. Seems the Catholics have it right, according to the KJV, because they have the actual body they break when they break bread. If Jesus had said, in Greek, that his body is "broken", it was in direct reference to his bread.

 

The Greek reads "klwmenon" which is the present, passive, participle of "klao" meaning "to break." If you have a problem with that, you have to take it up with God, not with the KJV.