-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Is the KJV's rendering the most accurate in these ten passages?
- Thread starter Logos1560
- Start date
Is the KJV's rendering the most accurate in these ten passages?
Compared to what?
Ascetic X
Well-Known Member
Good article.
From “?fbclid=“ to the end of the tracking code can be deleted to display a shorter link.
Here is all you need for the link:
The author claims a PhD from "International Seminary." It's website looks very much like a degree mill to me: some "adjunct professors" without even a BA (for example, "Pastor Mae Chester"), others with only a bachelor's (a seminary prof should have at least a master's). Again, it looks like a Charismatic institution, which means IMO inferior Bible knowledge and a low academic level.
I'll stop there before I get myself into trouble.
I'll stop there before I get myself into trouble.
Anyway, let's take a look at his first passage, Mark 6:20, " For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just man and an holy, and observed him; and when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly." He objects "a just man and an holy." This is perfectly proper English grammar, even in 2026. "An holy" clear has an antecedent in "man." Also, in proper English we put "an" before a word starting with a consonant. At any rate, the KJV simply stuck to the word order of the KJV. I have no problem with that.
His other objection to the KJV puts "protected" instead of "observed." The Friberg lexicon (Tim and Barbara Friberg, and Neva Miller) has "1) (carefully) keep in mind, preserve in memory (LU 2.19); (2) guard, protect, keep safe and sound (MK 6.20); passive be preserved (MT 9.17)." It seems to me that "keep in mind" is close to "observe," so I can't say the KJV is wrong here.
When Lantz says, "The Greek term simply means 'to protect,'" he is incorrect, as can be seen by the Friberg lexicon entry. Lantz seems to have the typical non-translator view that translation is simply finding a one-for-one correspondence between the languages. Though he has a PhD, he shows little understanding of Greek in this article, though he refers to the Greek in the article.
His other objection to the KJV puts "protected" instead of "observed." The Friberg lexicon (Tim and Barbara Friberg, and Neva Miller) has "1) (carefully) keep in mind, preserve in memory (LU 2.19); (2) guard, protect, keep safe and sound (MK 6.20); passive be preserved (MT 9.17)." It seems to me that "keep in mind" is close to "observe," so I can't say the KJV is wrong here.
When Lantz says, "The Greek term simply means 'to protect,'" he is incorrect, as can be seen by the Friberg lexicon entry. Lantz seems to have the typical non-translator view that translation is simply finding a one-for-one correspondence between the languages. Though he has a PhD, he shows little understanding of Greek in this article, though he refers to the Greek in the article.
Armchair Apologist
Active Member
There is usually nothing wrong with the way the King James Bible is translated.
The problems arise (and they have brought it up here) when one tries to adapt a "2026 understanding" to English that was in use back in 1611.
KJVO types get really wacky-do over their reading and understanding of the "King's English" written way back then!
The problems arise (and they have brought it up here) when one tries to adapt a "2026 understanding" to English that was in use back in 1611.
KJVO types get really wacky-do over their reading and understanding of the "King's English" written way back then!
Our understanding of Biblical Hebrew has advanced since the KJV was introduced.
The author of the article called these verses "Problem Passages"
They're not necessarily mistranslations, (I have my own list of those), but mis-communication - not entirely conveying the meaning to today's readers. Mark Ward would call some of these passages, "false friends."
Passages that use words that no longer mean what they did when they were originally used.
Other passages are translational choices of the translators.
For example...
The author mentions a passage of the KJV translated in Isaiah:
Isaiah 65:11–12 (AV 1873)
11 But ye are they that forsake the Lord,
That forget my holy mountain,
That prepare a table for that troop*,
And that furnish the drink offering unto that number**.
12 Therefore will I number you to the sword,
And ye shall all bow down to the slaughter:
Because when I called, ye did not answer;
When I spake, ye did not hear;
But did evil before mine eyes,
And did choose that wherein I delighted not.
The words are actually proper names of Phoenician gods, (Gad [mentioned along with Baal as a location in Joshua 11:17; 12:7; 13:5] and Meni [a god of fate or destiny] in the Hebrew tongue). The CEB (Common English Bible) mentions this in their translation but misses the connection in the following verse.
Isaiah 65:11–12 (CEB - Common English Bible)
11 But you who abandon the Lord,
who forget my holy mountain,
who set a table
for a god of good fortune,
and fill cups of mixed wine
for a god of fate:
12 I will offer you to the sword.
You will all bow down for slaughter,
because I called
and you didn’t answer;
I spoke and you wouldn’t hear.
You did what I considered evil,
and chose what I didn’t want.
But most modern translations as early as the Douay-Rheims Bible have been using "fortune" as the pagan god's name.
Isaiah 65:11–12 (ESV 2025)
11 But you who forsake the Lord,
who forget my holy mountain,
who set a table for Fortune
and fill cups of mixed wine for Destiny,
12 I will destine you to the sword,
and all of you shall bow down to the slaughter,
because, when I called, you did not answer;
when I spoke, you did not listen,
but you did what was evil in my eyes
and chose what I did not delight in.”
The KJV was translated well but has aged poorly when it comes to a modern reader's understanding.
And when it comes down to it, if the translation cannot communicate the originally intended message to the audience, it is a fatal flaw.
Or... if there's a better way to translate a passage, it's time for another version.
Rob
The author of the article called these verses "Problem Passages"
They're not necessarily mistranslations, (I have my own list of those), but mis-communication - not entirely conveying the meaning to today's readers. Mark Ward would call some of these passages, "false friends."
Passages that use words that no longer mean what they did when they were originally used.
Other passages are translational choices of the translators.
For example...
The author mentions a passage of the KJV translated in Isaiah:
Isaiah 65:11–12 (AV 1873)
11 But ye are they that forsake the Lord,
That forget my holy mountain,
That prepare a table for that troop*,
And that furnish the drink offering unto that number**.
12 Therefore will I number you to the sword,
And ye shall all bow down to the slaughter:
Because when I called, ye did not answer;
When I spake, ye did not hear;
But did evil before mine eyes,
And did choose that wherein I delighted not.
- or, Gad.
- ** or, Meni.
The words are actually proper names of Phoenician gods, (Gad [mentioned along with Baal as a location in Joshua 11:17; 12:7; 13:5] and Meni [a god of fate or destiny] in the Hebrew tongue). The CEB (Common English Bible) mentions this in their translation but misses the connection in the following verse.
Isaiah 65:11–12 (CEB - Common English Bible)
11 But you who abandon the Lord,
who forget my holy mountain,
who set a table
for a god of good fortune,
and fill cups of mixed wine
for a god of fate:
12 I will offer you to the sword.
You will all bow down for slaughter,
because I called
and you didn’t answer;
I spoke and you wouldn’t hear.
You did what I considered evil,
and chose what I didn’t want.
But most modern translations as early as the Douay-Rheims Bible have been using "fortune" as the pagan god's name.
Isaiah 65:11–12 (ESV 2025)
11 But you who forsake the Lord,
who forget my holy mountain,
who set a table for Fortune
and fill cups of mixed wine for Destiny,
12 I will destine you to the sword,
and all of you shall bow down to the slaughter,
because, when I called, you did not answer;
when I spoke, you did not listen,
but you did what was evil in my eyes
and chose what I did not delight in.”
The KJV was translated well but has aged poorly when it comes to a modern reader's understanding.
And when it comes down to it, if the translation cannot communicate the originally intended message to the audience, it is a fatal flaw.
Or... if there's a better way to translate a passage, it's time for another version.
Rob
Last edited:
Lantz's 2nd example is "pineth away" in Mark 9:18. He appears to have never heard "pine away" in modern English, but it is definitely still in use, and anyone who knows English well will recognize it. There is even a webpage: Understanding “Pine Away” — Meaning, Usage, and Practical Tips - English Words Champs.
Here is the Friberg lexicon entry for the Greek word: "ξήρανιω 1aor. ἐξήρανα ; pf. pass. ἐξήραμμαι; 1aor. pass. ἐξήρανθην; (1) literally dry out, parch, cause to wither (JA 1.11); passive become dry, dry up ( RV 16.12); of the flow of blood stop (MK 5.29); of plants wither, dry up (MT 13.6 ); of grain that has finished growing ripe; metaphorically, of conditions for judgment ready (RV 14.15); (2) figuratively and passive, of a damaged human body; of the whole body stiffen (up), become rigid (MK 9.18); of a limb shrivel, wither, become useless (MK 3.1)."
According to BAGD, there is evidence from secular mss for the modern version rendering "become stiff." However, it is certainly possible to understand the KJV, "pineth away" as being correct. A disease can certainly make one pine away. Note the meaning "to suffer" given in the webpage I linked to.
Here is the Friberg lexicon entry for the Greek word: "ξήρανιω 1aor. ἐξήρανα ; pf. pass. ἐξήραμμαι; 1aor. pass. ἐξήρανθην; (1) literally dry out, parch, cause to wither (JA 1.11); passive become dry, dry up ( RV 16.12); of the flow of blood stop (MK 5.29); of plants wither, dry up (MT 13.6 ); of grain that has finished growing ripe; metaphorically, of conditions for judgment ready (RV 14.15); (2) figuratively and passive, of a damaged human body; of the whole body stiffen (up), become rigid (MK 9.18); of a limb shrivel, wither, become useless (MK 3.1)."
According to BAGD, there is evidence from secular mss for the modern version rendering "become stiff." However, it is certainly possible to understand the KJV, "pineth away" as being correct. A disease can certainly make one pine away. Note the meaning "to suffer" given in the webpage I linked to.
Thankfully, our salvation is not hampered by a mistranslation/misunderstanding of Hebrew.
Praise God!!
Praise God!!
Lantz's third objection to the KJV is Acts 5:30. He gives the following quotes:
Acts 5:30 (KJV) says, “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.”
Acts 5:30 (NASB) says, "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross.”
Acts 5:30 (NKJV) says, “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you murdered by hanging on a tree.”
Here is his objection: "The main problem I have with the way the KJV worded this verse is that it makes Peter say that the Jews first killed Jesus, or slew him, and then hung him on a tree. We know from all the Synoptic Gospel accounts that Jesus was nailed to the cross first, and then he died on the cross." The problem here is that he does not know the Greek. The verb for "slew/put to death" is διαχειρίζω, and there is no problem with translating it "murder." However, the second verb is κρεμάσαντες, an aorist participle. So the most literal translation would be: "whom you murdered (as he was) hanging on a tree." Or, as Young's Literal Translation has it, "whom ye slew, having hanged upon a tree."
The upshot is that there is interpretation going on in all three of the versions Lantz mentioned.
Acts 5:30 (KJV) says, “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.”
Acts 5:30 (NASB) says, "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross.”
Acts 5:30 (NKJV) says, “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you murdered by hanging on a tree.”
Here is his objection: "The main problem I have with the way the KJV worded this verse is that it makes Peter say that the Jews first killed Jesus, or slew him, and then hung him on a tree. We know from all the Synoptic Gospel accounts that Jesus was nailed to the cross first, and then he died on the cross." The problem here is that he does not know the Greek. The verb for "slew/put to death" is διαχειρίζω, and there is no problem with translating it "murder." However, the second verb is κρεμάσαντες, an aorist participle. So the most literal translation would be: "whom you murdered (as he was) hanging on a tree." Or, as Young's Literal Translation has it, "whom ye slew, having hanged upon a tree."
The upshot is that there is interpretation going on in all three of the versions Lantz mentioned.
atpollard
Well-Known Member
Koine Greek. (God reinspired people to get it right.)