Is “God Forbid” a Mistranslation in the KJV?

[Alan Gross]

“God forbid”
"is the negative interjection within a particular syntactical construction."


Is “God Forbid” A Mistranslation in the KJV?

from: Syllabus for Bible Texts and Versions,
Manuscript Evidence, and God’s Promises of Preservation, #18.)

"The Old Testament Hebrew translated as “God forbid”
is the negative interjection lyIlDj 514
within a particular syntactical construction, 515
found in phrases such as …w…n%R;mIm …wn°D;l ·hDlyIlDj (Joshua 22:29).

"Commenting on this verse, Keil and Delitzsch note, “…w…nR;mIm …wnD;l hDlyIlDj,
far be it from us away from Him (…w…nR;mIm=hÎOwhy`Em, 1 Samuel 24:7; 26:11; 1 Kings 21:3), to rebel against Jehovah, etc.”516

"That is, the word is properly considered in texts such as Joshua 22:29 as a part of a syntactical construction that expresses the idea of “God/Jehovah forbid.”

"God forbid that we should rebel against the LORD, and turn this day from following the LORD, to build an altar for burnt offerings, for meat offerings, or for sacrifices, beside the altar of the LORD our God that is before his tabernacle."

"This view is supported by texts such as hGÎwøhy`Em y∞I;l hDlyªIlDj (1 Samuel 24:6),
hYÎwøhy`Em ‹yI;l hDly§IlDj (1 Samuel 26:11),
h˝Îwøh◊y y°I;l ·hDlyIlDj; (2 Samuel 23:17),
hYÎwøhy`Em ‹yI;l hDly§IlDj (1 Kings 21:3),
l¶EaDl hDl™IlDj Job 34:10 (Job 34:10, KJV, “be it far from God”),
and y%AhølTaEm y°I;l ·hDlyIlDj (1 Chronicles 11:19, KJV “my God forbid it me”).

"One notes that the LXX at times translates lyIlDj phrases with mh\ ge÷noito.517

"The Greek phrase mh\ ge÷noito
is consistently rendered in the New Testament of the KJV as “God forbid.”518

"Concerning this, A. T. Robertson’s
massive Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research notes:

“In modern Greek Dr. Rouse finds people saying not mh\ ge÷noito, but oJ qeo\ß na» fula¿xhØ (Moulton, Prol., p. 249), though na¿is not here necessary (Thumb, Handb., p. 127).” 519

"That is, the modern Greek version of the New Testament’s mh\ ge÷noito is “God forbid.”

"Thus, there are good reasons in both the Hebrew of the Old Testament and the Greek of the New Testament for the translation “God forbid” as found in the King James Version of the Bible. 520


514 The word appears a total of 21 times in the Old Testament, in Genesis 18:25; 44:7, 17; Joshua 22:29; 24:16; 1 Samuel 2:30; 12:23; 14:45; 20:2, 9; 22:15; 24:7 (Eng. v. 6); 26:11; 2 Samuel 20:20; 23:17; 1Kings 21:3; 1Chronicles 11:19; Job 27:5; 34:10.

515 Note in the Hebrew text the l that consistently follows, the NIm often present, etc.

516 Commentary on the Old Testament, C. F. Keil & F. Delitzsch, orig. pub. T & T Clark, Edinburgh, elec. acc. in the Christian Library Series, vol. 15: Classic Commentary Collection, AGES Library, Rio, WI: 2006. Note on Joshua 22:29.

517 Genesis 44:7, 17; Joshua 22:29; 24:16; 1 Kings 20:3517
—in each case the KJV reads “God forbid.”

518 Note Luke 20:16; Romans 3:4, 6, 31; 6:2, 15; 7:7, 13; 9:14; 11:1, 11; 1 Corinthians 6:15; Galatians 2:17; 3:21; 6:14.

519 A Grammar of the Greek New Testament
in the Light of Historical Research, A. T. Robertson.
4th ed. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1934, pg. 940.

520 Note that various commentators have asserted the same thing.

For example: “There is OT warrant for the rendering ‘God forbid.’

Mh genoito corresponds to the Hebrew hlylx
and occurs as the rendering of the same in the LXX
(cf. Gen. 44:7,17; Josh. 22:29; 24:16; I Kings 20:3).

And hlylx is sometimes used with the names for God hohy and myhla
and la (I Sam. 24:6; 26:11; I Kings 21:3; I Chron. 11:19; Job 34:10; cf. I Sam. 2:30)
and with the pronoun when the same refers to God (Gen 18:25).

Hence our English expression ‘God forbid’ has Biblical precedent.

The Greek mh genoito, indicating the recoil of abhorrence,
needs the strength of this English rendering derived from the Hebrew Cf.
J. B. Lightfoot: Comm., ad Gal. 2:17.” (The Epistle to the Romans, John Murray, pg. 94).

See previous comments regarding, "God Forbid", in the KJV:

The KJV has been Preserved more Perfectly than Human Possibility.
"God Forbid" #1, Objection to "God Forbid".

The KJV has been Preserved more Perfectly than Human Possibility.
"God Forbid" #2, Rebuttal to Objection to "God Forbid".

"All previous English versions use this same expression, "God forbid",
including:

Wycliffe 1380, 1395;
Tyndale 1525, 1534;
Coverdale 1535;
The Great Bible (Cranmer) 1539,
Matthew's Bible (John Rogers) 1549, the Bishop's Bible 1568,
the Geneva Bible 1557, 1587, 1599, 1602,
the Beza New Testament 1599 and the Douay-Rheims version of 1582.

"God forbid" is also the reading found in John Wesley's N.T. translation of 1755,
the Mace N.T. 1729, Whiston's Primitive New Testament of 1745,
the Worsley Version of 1770,
Thomas Haweis N.T. 1795,
the Book of the New Covenant 1836 (Granville Penn),
the English Revised Version (of Westcott-Hort fame) of 1885,
and the American Standard Version of 1901.

The Douay version of 1950 has "God forbid"
in Luke 20:16; Romans, I Corinthians and Galatians,
The World English Bible 2000 in Luke 20:16 and Gal. 2:17,
Weymouth Version 1912 in Mat. 16:22, Luke 20:16 and Gal. 6:14,
the Revised Standard Version of 1952 in Mt. 16:22 and Luke 20:16,
J. B. Phillips N.T. 1962 has "God forbid" in Luke 20:16,
the New Jerusalem bible 1985 has "God forbid" in Luke 20:16,
the New Living Translation 1996 in Luke 20:16, and Galatians 6:14,
and the 1998 Third Millennium Bible, and The Update Bible of 2003
have "God forbid" in all the same passages as does the King James Bible.

"Other English Bibles that use the phrase "GOD FORBID" in places like Romans 3:4 are
The Bill Bible 1671,
the Clarke N.T. 1795,
The Revised Translation 1815,
The Hussey N.T. 1845,
The Hewett N.T. 1850,
The Revised N.T. 1862,
The Alford N.T. 1870,
The Revised English Bible 1877,
The Clarke N.T. 1913,
The Amplified Bible 1987,
The Word of Yah 1993,
God's First Truth 1999,
The Sacred Family of Yah 2001 "Elohim forbid",
The Tomson New Testament 2002 - "God forbid",
the Evidence Bible 2003,
The Resurrection Life New Testament 2005 (Vince Garcia),
the Bond Slave Version 2009,
The New European Version 2010,
Conservative Bible 2011,
the Aramaic Bible in Plain English 2013,
The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011,
The BRG Bible 2012
and The Modern English Version 2014.

"The Common English Bible 2011 - “GOD FORBID
that we should rebel against the Lord” (Joshua 22:29),

“Then the people answered, “GOD FORBID
that we ever leave the Lord to serve other gods!” (Joshua 24:16),

“GOD FORBID that I should do that,” he said.
“Isn’t this the blood of men who risked their lives?” (1 Chronicles 11:19),

“Then Peter took hold of Jesus and, scolding him,
began to correct him: “GOD FORBID, Lord!
This won’t happen to you.” (Matthew 16:22),

“But as for me, GOD FORBID that I should boast about anything
except for the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Galatians 6:14)

"Maybe these Common English Bible translators
should have consulted with Mr. Kutilek
before they made all these "blunders", ya think?

Much, much, much more at: Another King James Bible Believer.

con't

 

[Alan Gross]

The Holy Bible, Modern English Version 2014
not only has “GOD FORBID” in Romans 3:4 - GOD FORBID!
Let God be true, and every man a liar.
As it is written: “That You may be justified in Your words,
and may prevail in Your judging.”,

but also in Romans 3:6, 31; 6:2, 15; 7:7, 13; 9:14; 11:1;
1 Cor. 6:15, Galatians 2:17, 3:21 and 6:14 -
"GOD FORBID that I should boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ"

"The New RSV has "heaven forbid" in Luke 20:16 (likewise no heaven nor forbid-according to Kutilek). By the way the NRSV also has "God forbid" in Mat. 16:22, as well as the RSV and the NASB where likewise it is not "in the Greek" as the scholars like to say.

"The 1998 Complete Jewish Bible has "Heaven forbid" in passages like Luke 20:16 and Romans 3:4 etc.

The modern Hebrew Names Version 2014 contains "God forbid" in Gal. 2:17,

The New Century Version 2005 has "heaven forbid"
in all the same verses where the KJB has "God forbid"

The Living Bible 1971 has "God forbid"
in Romans 3:6, Gal 2:17, and 6:14, 1 Samuel 26:11
"But GOD FORBID that I should kill the man he has chosen to be king!",
1 Chronicles 11:19 and in Job 22:18 "GOD FORBID that I should say a thing like that."

The Expanded Bible 2011 has "GOD FORBID"
in 1 Chronicles 11:19, Matthew 16:22, and Luke 20:16.

The Complete Jewish Bible 1998 - “My GOD FORBID that I should do such a thing!
Am I to drink the blood of these men who went and put their lives in jeopardy?”
(1 Chronicles 11:19), “Heaven forbid!” (Romans 3:4, 6)

The Lexham English Bible 2012 has ''God forbid" in Matthew 16:22 - "And Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying, GOD FORBID, Lord! This will never happen to you!”

The International Standard Version 2014 has "GOD FORBID" in 1 Samuel 24:6 - "He told his men, “GOD FORBID that I should do this thing to your majesty, the Lord’s anointed, by stretching out my hand against him, since he’s the Lord’s anointed.”, and in 1 Chronicles 11:19.

The Greek Lexicons - μη γενοιτο

A Greek-English Lexicon, Liddell & Scott, 1968 Oxford Press page 349
gives one definition of the Greek μη γενοιτο and that is "GOD FORBID."

Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament 1882 page 115 defines μη γενοιτο as "a formula especially frequent in Paul (and in Epictetus) "far be it! GOD FORBID!"

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament
and Other Early Christian Literature, by William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich,
University of Chicago Press 1957 page 157
defines μη γενοιτο as "far from it, GOD FORBID."

God Forbid - This from KJV Today -

“God forbid” or “May it not be” in Romans 3:4, et al.? - KJV Today

Μη γενοιτο is a prayer

Contrary to what many critics believe, the idiom, “God forbid” did not originate in English.
It is an idiom of biblical Hebrew origin, first introduced in 1 Samuel 24:6: “The LORD forbid that I should do this thing….” (ESV, NIV). Thus the idiom has biblical precedent and is legitimate. The charge, however, is that the word “God (θεός)” is not in the Greek "μη γενοιτο" in Romans 3:4 and elsewhere. The Greek literally says “become (optative) not.” However, the verb in the optative mood expresses a strong negative wish in the strongest of terms, even invoking a "prayer":


"The voluntative optative seems to be used this way in the language of prayer. Again, as with μη γενοιτο, it is largely a carry-over from Attic even though its meaning has changed. This is not due to any substantive change in syntax, but is rather due to a change in theological perspective. Prayers offered to the semi-gods of ancient Athens could expect to be haggled over, rebuffed, and left unanswered.

"But the God of the NT was bigger than that. The prayers offered to him depend on his sovereignty and goodness. Thus, although the form of much prayer language in the NT has the tinge of remote possibility when it is offered to the God who raised Jesus Christ from the dead, its meaning often moves into the realm of expectation.

"If uncertainty is part of the package, it is not due to questions of God's ability, but simply to the petitioner's humility before the transcendent one." (Daniel Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics at 481).


Daniel Wallace in no uncertain terms acknowledges that μη γενοιτο is a language of prayer carried over from Attic Greek. Whereas the Athenians directed the plea "μη γενοιτο" to their pagan gods, the writers of the New Testament direct this same prayer phrase to God. Thus when a New Testament writer says "μη γενοιτο," the implied subject is God.

"God" is made explicit, but not added

The KJV translators did not add "God" in translating μη γενοιτο, but merely made explicit the subject that was implicit in Greek. Such a practice is so common in translation that it is never an issue. [End of comments from KJV Today article]

The proper force of this Greek phrase 'me genoito' is to express a negative in the strongest of possible terms. The English expression "God forbid" perfectly and accurately conveys the force of this thought, whereas such phases as "may it not be" come across as prissy and effeminate.

Mr. Kutilek chides our AV because "God" is not literally found in the text.

In spite of all his learning, he has little understanding of how languages work and exalts his opinion above any bible version out there today.

Another example of "God not being in the original" is seen in the use of the verb kreematizo and the noun kreematismos as found in Romans 11:4 and other passages.

In Romans 11:4 we read: “But what saith the answer of God unto him?”.

The NIV reads, “And what was God's answer to him?”

It is interesting to note that there is no word in ANY Greek text for the word “God”.

Despite this fact the NIV reads "God's answer".

Not only do the NASB and NIV say "the answer of GOD" here in Romans 11:4
but so also do Wycliffe 1395,
Tyndale 1525,
Coverdale 1535,
Bishops' Bible 1568,
the Geneva Bible 1587,
Wesley's translation 1755,
the Revised Version 1881,
ASV of 1901,
the RSV 1973,
ESV 2001-2011,
the Amplified 1987
and the Holman Standard of 2009.

Now I wonder what Mr. Kutilek would say to that?

Literally, the Greek of Rom. 11:4 reads, “alla ti legei autoo ho kreematismos”.

The last word in the previous phrase is ‘kreematismos’ and it carries the idea of 1) an answer from God or 2) a divine response or revelation.

So, in order to accurately preserve the Greek in this sentence the word “God” or “Divine” must be "added" (even though NOTHING has been added) to the English text.

In fact if "God" were not 'added' then the sense of the verse would be lost.

The verb form is found in Matthew 2:12, 22: Acts 10:22; and Hebrews 8:5 and 11:7.

In Matthew 2:12 and 22 the KJB reads, “And being warned of God”.

The NASB likewise reads in both, “And having been warned by God”, and so does the NKJV in 2:22.

The NASB also renders this verb as "warned by God" twice in Hebrews 8:5 and 11:7. The NKJV reads "divinely instructed", though strictly speaking the words 'God' or 'Divinely' are not "literally" there.

Once again we see that
the NASB,
NKJV,
ESV 2011
and NIV have committed the unpardonable sin, according to Mr. Kutilek, of saying "by God" when God is not in the Greek text.

So too have Tyndale,
Coverdale,
Bishops' Bible,
the Geneva Bible,
the Revised Version,
the ASV,
RSV
and the Amplified Bibe 1987 to name just a few.

con't

 

[Alan Gross]

The 2001-2011 English Standard Version editions also "add" the word God in the expressions "warned of God", "God's reply", and "instructed by God" in Romans 11:4; Hebrews 8:5 and Hebrews 11:7.

It also adds the word God to other passages
when not literally found in the Greek.

The ESV as well as the RSV and NIV adds the word "God" to Hebrews 4:8 when it is not in any Greek text at all. "...then would HE (God - ESV) not have spoken of another day."

They also add the word GOD when not found in any text in Acts 7:4 "he (GOD in ESV, NASB, RSV, NIV) removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell."

Likewise, the New Jerusalem Bible of 1985 has "me genoito" as "God forbid" in Luke 20:16 and has the expression "warned of God" in Acts 10:22, Hebrews 8:5 and 11:7 as well.

Another example of “God not being in the text” is found in the NASB FOUR times in Acts 7:4, Acts 13:43; and Acts 17:4 and 17.

In Acts 7:4 we read in all texts "he removed him into this land wherein ye now dwell."

But the NASB as well as the ESV, NIV, RSV add the word GOD to the text, saying "GOD removed him from this land..."

In Acts 13:43 the KJB, as well as the NKJV, RV, ASV, and even the NIV read: “many of the Jews and RELIGIOUS (or devout) proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas”.

The word is sebomai and there is nothing literally found about God in the word at all.

Even the NASB in this same chapter verse 50 the word is simply translated as “devout”

However, in Acts 13:43, 17:4 and 17 the NASB reads “GOD-fearing”, with no literal “God” in any Greek text.

The NIV too switches gears and in both Acts 17:4 and 17 likewise “adds” the word God just like the NASB, but not so the KJB, NKJV, RV or ASV.

The Voice 2012 has GOD FORBID in the following verses -

1 Samuel 24:6 - “GOD FORBID that I do any harm to my lord, the one chosen by the Eternal to rule. How could I even pretend to assault him, knowing he is the Eternal’s anointed king?”

1 Samuel 26:11 - “GOD FORBID that I would be the one to harm the Eternal’s anointed king. But please, take his spear next to his head and that water jug, and let’s go.”

Luke 20:16 - “I’ll tell you what he’ll do; he’ll come and wipe those tenants out, and he’ll give the vineyard to others. Crowd: No! GOD FORBID that this should happen!” (μη γενοιτο)

1 Corinthians 8:13 - “So if any type of food is an issue that causes my brothers and sisters to fall away from God, then GOD FORBID I should ever eat it again so that I would never be the crack, the rise, or the rock on the road that causes them to stumble.”

Dan Wallace’s NET version 2006 has GOD FORBID in 1 Chronicles 11:19 - “GOD FORBID that I should do this!”, and in Matthew 16:22 - “So Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him: “GOD FORBID, Lord! This must not happen to you!”

Mr Kutilek apparently is totally unaware that the NASB has 'God forbid" in Matthew 16:22 (as well as Dan Wallace's NET version) where his own scholarly standards would condemn this version he recommends. It is a different Greek construction, but again neither the words “God” nor “forbid” are found there.

The NASB, ESV and the NIV all frequently add the words God or Lord when they are not “in the original text”.

Surprise! Even the New KJV, which he told us to consult, has translated the exact same “me genoito” as GOD FORBID in Galatians 6:14 !

Oh, wait! There's even more. The "old" NIV of 1984 had completely omitted all references to "God forbid" when translating the words me genoito and translated it as "May this never be!" in Luke 20:16.

But now in 2005 in the TNIV and again in 2011 the "new" New International Version have come out, and guess what they did. They have now translated this same phrase as "When the people heard this, they said, "GOD FORBID!" (μη γενοιτο)

And the 2012 Knox Bible has "God forbid" in Genesis 44:17; 1 Kings 20:9; 22:15; Luke 20:16; Romans 6:2,15; Romans 7:7, 13; Romans 11:11 "Tell me, then, have they stumbled so as to fall altogether? GOD FORBID" = (μη γενοιτο) ; 1 Corinthians 6:15 and Galatians 6:14 (μη γενοιτο)

In fact, this is the definition that the Oxford Greek Dictionary gives.

Also Constantine Tsirpanlis, former Instructor in Modern Greek Language and Literature at New York University, Former Consultant for the Program in Modern Greek Studies at Hunter College, Professor of Church History and Greek Studies at Unification Theological Seminary, gives the definition of "me genoito" on page 72 of his book, "Modern Greek Idiom And Phrase Book," Barron's Educational Services, Inc., 1978, ISBN 0-8120-0476-0.

The ONLY definition Tsirpanlis (a native Greek) gives for "me genoito" is "God forbid!"

There is NO reference to "may it never be", "by no means" or "certainly not"!

 

[Deacon]

Wow, I…

…can’t….

….read…

….all…

…that….

….!…..

So what you are saying simply is the KJV, while generally a quite literal translation, departs from that tradition here and provides a functional equivalent.

…Concise and to the point…

…Easier to understand….

Rob

 

[rsr]

It is not necessary to quote entire articles by Will Kinney. A couple of paragraphs and the link is sufficient. This is true everywhere on the Baptist Board. Posts that quote substantially all of an article will be edited.

 

[Alan Gross]

I won that one, didn't I?

 

[Piper]

Oh, man, and it translates JACOB as James all through the New Testament.

 

[Logos1560]

At Acts 10:14, Tyndale's and Matthew's Bibles have "God forbid" while the KJV has "Not so." At Acts 11:8, Tyndale's, Matthew's, Whittingham's, and Geneva Bibles have "God forbid" while the KJV again has "Not so." At 2 Samuel 20:20, the Geneva and Bishops’ Bibles have “God forbid” twice while the KJV has “Far be it” twice. This verse has the same Hebrew word twice that the KJV rendered “God forbid” several other times. If "God forbid" is an accurate translation, why did the KJV change that rendering to "far be it" at 2 Samuel 20:20?

Alan, are you in effect suggesting that the KJV was wrong to change the dynamic equivalent rendering "God forbid" in the pre-1611 English Bibles at 2 Samuel 20:20, Acts 10:14, and Acts 11:8 to more literal renderings?
Did you really win when in effect you condemned the KJV in these three cases and when you are advocating inconsistency?
The truth is consistent so the KJV should have kept these uses of "God forbid" if it was the best rendering of the original-language words.

How do you win by praising and commending non-literal, non-word-for-word, dynamic equivalent renderings?

 

[Alan Gross]

Thank you, Rob, I guess I should have said, that "God forbid", which is indicating the recoil of abhorrence, is simply a voluntative optative mood verb used as a negative interjection and INVOCATION idiom, within the particular theological perspective syntactical construction, carried-over from Attic Greek,
that has biblical integrity and precedent, Greek-English Lexicon authority and is linguistically legitimate, so "The KJV translators did not add "God" in translating μη γενοιτο, but merely made explicit the subject that was implicit in Greek perfectly and accurately conveying the force of this thought, whereas such phases as "may it not be" come across as prissy and effeminate.

"Such a practice is so common in translation that it is never an issue."

“God forbid”
"is the negative interjection within a particular syntactical construction."

“God forbid”
is the negative interjection lyIlDj 514
within a particular syntactical construction,

part of a syntactical construction that expresses the idea of “God/Jehovah forbid.”

indicating the recoil of abhorrence,
needs the strength of this English rendering derived from the Hebrew

Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament
and Other Early Christian Literature, by William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich,
University of Chicago Press 1957 page 157
defines μη γενοιτο as "far from it, GOD FORBID."

idiom of biblical Hebrew origin,

he idiom has biblical precedent and is legitimate.

The Greek literally says “become (optative) not.” However, the verb in the optative mood expresses a strong negative wish in the strongest of terms, even invoking a "prayer":

However, the verb in the optative mood expresses a strong negative wish in the strongest of terms, even invoking a "prayer":

voluntative optative seems to be used this way in the language of prayer.

. This is not due to any substantive change in syntax, but is rather due to a change in theological perspective.

And it's supposed to be God's Book.

carry-over from Attic

μη γενοιτο is a language of prayer carried over from Attic Greek.

Thus when a New Testament writer says "μη γενοιτο," the implied subject is God.

"God" is made explicit, but not added.

The KJV translators did not add "God" in translating μη γενοιτο, but merely made explicit the subject that was implicit in Greek. Such a practice is so common in translation that it is never an issue.

The proper force of this Greek phrase 'me genoito' is to express a negative in the strongest of possible terms. The English expression "God forbid" perfectly and accurately conveys the force of this thought, whereas such phases as "may it not be" come across as prissy and effeminate.

...

So what you are saying simply is the KJV, while generally a quite literal translation, departs from that tradition here and provides a functional equivalent.

I have no ax to grid with the KJV, as
Doug Kutilek and others, who appear to be attempting any possible denigration of what used to be called, "The Bible", at every available opportunity.

That is just not my religion and how I 'profess' to be 'worshipping God'.

His currently fashionable and typically eccentric and IMHO cynical, sarcastic, sneering, etc., remark was:

"It is obvious, of course, that here at least, the KJV is not a literal translation of the original, but is at best a paraphrase, a “dynamic equivalent.”

But I know what you are saying.

 

[Alan Gross]

Oh, man, and it translates JACOB as James all through the New Testament.

Perfectly natural. Perfectly normal.

 

[Mikoo]

At Acts 10:14, Tyndale's and Matthew's Bibles have "God forbid" while the KJV has "Not so." At Acts 11:8, Tyndale's, Matthew's, Whittingham's, and Geneva Bibles have "God forbid" while the KJV again has "Not so." At 2 Samuel 20:20, the Geneva and Bishops’ Bibles have “God forbid” twice while the KJV has “Far be it” twice. This verse has the same Hebrew word twice that the KJV rendered “God forbid” several other times. If "God forbid" is an accurate translation, why did the KJV change that rendering to "far be it" at 2 Samuel 20:20?

Alan, are you in effect suggesting that the KJV was wrong to change the dynamic equivalent rendering "God forbid" in the pre-1611 English Bibles at 2 Samuel 20:20, Acts 10:14, and Acts 11:8 to more literal renderings?
Did you really win when in effect you condemned the KJV in these three cases and when you are advocating inconsistency?
The truth is consistent so the KJV should have kept these uses of "God forbid" if it was the best rendering of the original-language words.

How do you win by praising and commending non-literal, non-word-for-word, dynamic equivalent renderings?

Just another area where the KJV translators got it wrong. I can't even take this guy serious anymore.

 

[Conan]

I have no ax to grid with the KJV, as
Doug Kutilek and others, who appear to be attempting any possible denigration of what used to be called, "The Bible", at every available opportunity.

This is false witness to the max. Doug Kutilek and anyone else do not have a gripe against the KJV at all. It is with the KJVOnlyism and lies associated with it is what they oppose.

 

[Alan Gross]

This is false witness to the max. Doug Kutilek and anyone else do not have a gripe against the KJV at all. It is with the KJVOnlyism and lies associated with it is what they oppose.

Perfectly natural. Perfectly normal.

 

[Alan Gross]

Just another area where the KJV translators got it wrong. I can't even take this guy serious anymore.

“God forbid”

 

[Alan Gross]

At Acts 10:14, Tyndale's and Matthew's Bibles have "God forbid" while the KJV has "Not so." At Acts 11:8, Tyndale's, Matthew's, Whittingham's, and Geneva Bibles have "God forbid" while the KJV again has "Not so." At 2 Samuel 20:20, the Geneva and Bishops’ Bibles have “God forbid” twice while the KJV has “Far be it” twice. This verse has the same Hebrew word twice that the KJV rendered “God forbid” several other times. If "God forbid" is an accurate translation, why did the KJV change that rendering to "far be it" at 2 Samuel 20:20?

Alan, are you in effect suggesting that the KJV was wrong to change the dynamic equivalent rendering "God forbid" in the pre-1611 English Bibles at 2 Samuel 20:20, Acts 10:14, and Acts 11:8 to more literal renderings?
Did you really win when in effect you condemned the KJV in these three cases and when you are advocating inconsistency?
The truth is consistent so the KJV should have kept these uses of "God forbid" if it was the best rendering of the original-language words.

How do you win by praising and commending non-literal, non-word-for-word, dynamic equivalent renderings?

Br. Thomas Ross wrote the O.P. and although

Will Kinney

has dozens and dozens and dozens and dozens of Bible versions listed that each had translators you are in direct opposition to, (despite the fact that they all actually know what qualifications are required to be a translator), and yet, we are still allowed to post links to secondary sources, which means specific authors haven't been entirely censored, like a cult.

We're winnin'.

 

[Conan]

We're winnin'.

Your ridiculous is what you are. KJVOnlyism is a false teaching. One totally devoid of reason. The KJV on the other hand is still an excellent Version, unlike Onlyism.

 

[Alan Gross]

We're winnin'.

I don't know what problem you have with winning.

Your ridiculous is what you are.

KJVOnlyism is a false teaching. One totally devoid of reason. The KJV on the other hand is still an excellent Version, unlike Onlyism.

I don't know what problem you have with me not being KJVO.

Seems like you are against them, though.

Your ridiculous is what you are.

Translators translated "God forbid", as a fine translation.

I'm not going to look at Jesus and tell Him it is wrong, a deviation or departing from their established course or accepted standard of translating or least of all, a 'mistranslation'.

 

[Conan]

I don't know what problem you have with winning.

You have not won. And as long as you do not use truth but falsehoods you never will.

I don't know what problem you have with me not being KJVO.

Seems like you are against them, though.

You are KJVOnly and you use their false sources.

Translators translated "God forbid", as a fine translation.

I'm not going to look at Jesus and tell Him it is wrong, a deviation or departing from their established course or accepted standard of translating or least of all, a 'mistranslation'.

Ok.

 

[Alan Gross]

as long as you do not use truth but falsehoods you never will.

You define (truth) and redefine things (falsehoods) all the way around the barn to fit your simple accusations and some of the strangest equations for leveling irrelevant condemnation I have ever seen.

You are KJVOnly

I don't know by what definition.

and you use their false sources.

If the one fellow that found concordances for 78 Bible versions is one, I could care less.

Quality research.

I will say that any number of other religious beliefs get away with mass-produced irregularities, including safeguarding those apparently lost as a goose flying upsidedown in a 60 mile an hour wind, to a fault, and yet there seems to be a very mad cow hatred toward the actual KJVO proponents.

They're real wrong, of course, on many points, but some of their research suits me, while maybe you assume it all has to be condemned.

I'll condemn spurious efforts as not being what they purport to be; as false and fake, in the production of Occult materials, if that is what you want.

It's the Judgment of God on Apostate Christianity, in my mind.

Call them the NICSOV, for example, or the KJCV, with the 'C' in that case meaning 'Christian'.

I'll go with all that.

 

[Logos1560]

I don't know by what definition.

Your own claims and assertions for the KJV show that you are KJV-only. You may have closed your eyes to seeing that your posts display KJV-only reasoning.

You can be soundly identified as KJV-only because your own stated claims in your posts measure up to what constitutes being KJV-only. Some of your own statements in your posts clearly display KJV-only reasoning/teaching.

I may have read more KJV-only books and writings than any KJV-only advocate has read and than you have read so perhaps I understand better what constitutes KJV-only than you do.

It is clear that you consider the KJV to be the word of God translated into English in a different sense (equivocally) than you consider the NKJV to be the word of God translated into English. You have not proven from Scripture that God was any more involved in the making of the KJV than God was also involved in the making of the NKJV. The same Holy Spirit guided the NKJV translators as guided the KJV translators. In at least some places when compared to the same original-language texts from which the KJV is translated, the NKJV is better and more accurate than the KJV.

The truth is that the NKJV is the word of God translated into English in the same sense (univocally) as the KJV is the word of God translated into English.