Regarding 'Archaic' English

[Saved421]

Dear community,

I think its important to note that The KJB's English is British English not American English.

Second, I have seen/heard these archaic words being used in real life, mostly in documentaries and videos.

Its interestingly to note that many of these old terms are still used in the naval/mitary and other industries.

The Reformation translators sought for an time when English will have words that would be pure, different than common words used.

There are also quotes about how that the phrasing of the Bible should be not the same as common phrasing.

The Bible is not any book, it should use Biblical Language.

Thanks for reading,

Shawn

 

[Saved421]

Note: Reformation translators were against going to the original languages but instead reading the English.

Comparing within the Bible to define words.

 

[Saved421]

Its also important to note the KJB translators were very knowledgable about Greek/Hebrew/Latin and many other languages.

They also had resources that are no more avail, as well being able to read the manuscripts without needing a Lexicon to explain it in English.

They knew these languages from an early age, fluent in them.

They as the title pg, they diligently compared the original languages, and many diverse versions.

Including many foreign language versions.

Anyhow, what's really needed is Bible translation into other languages and the blood stained gospel spread.

The Gospel:

All have sinned, Jesus (God manifested in the flesh) shed his blood on Mnt Calvary, buried, died, rose again on the 3rd day.

We have salvation in this dispensation by faith in that precious blood he purged our sins by himself and is in the mercy seat in heaven.

Thanks for reading, be ye born again.

Shawn

P/S - Repent mean change of mind (in salv case, unbelief to belief.)

 

[Logos1560]

Note: Reformation translators were against going to the original languages but instead reading the English.

Comparing within the Bible to define words.

You may have been misinformed by Gail Riplinger's unproven claim that the KJV defines all its words or by the claim of someone who repeats Riplinger's human opinion.

Perhaps Gail Riplinger herself may have later realized that she had claimed and suggested too much in asserting that the KJV has a perfect, built-in definition for all its words. Does Gail Riplinger perhaps try to tone down or walk back some of her own earlier claims that suggested a built-in, “perfect” definition and “razor-sharp distinctions” for all the words in the KJV? Gail Riplinger referred to “the sense that readers were looking for one quick and authoritative ‘definition’ and the Bible does not always lend itself to that” (Dictionary Inside the King James Bible, p. 241).


Gail Riplinger wrote: “No human is capable of saying, with the certainty readers might project on to the work that their selections of ‘definitions’ were absolutely correct” (Dictionary Inside the King James Bible, p. 241). Gail Riplinger wrote: “It [this book] is not always an exhaustive examination of any word, nor are the definitions always whole representative, but are sometimes quite random” (p. 18). Gail Riplinger wrote: “This book is by no means exhaustive in its listing of words, or in the definitions, descriptions, associations, and qualifiers which the Bible gives” (p. 241). Gail Riplinger admitted: “The ‘definition’ cited may not be the only one, or may not even be the best one overall” (p. 16).

Seeming to contradict her own claim that the KJV has a built-in definition for all its words, Gail Riplinger also acknowledged: “Units of measure are often not defined since they are exclusive to one era, language, or region” (p. 18). Do Riplinger’s own words in effect provide clear evidence that her claim that the KJV has a built-in definition for all its words is not true so that it could be called a myth?

 

[Logos1560]

Comparing within the Bible to define words.

Do you practice what you preach and accept the possible built-in definition for the KJV’s rendering “mansions” at John 14:2?

Gail Riplinger asserted: “The definition may be somewhere in the chapter” (In Awe, p. 49). Referring to use of Strong’s Concordance, Gail Riplinger wrote: “Within the context of one of the verses listed by Strong, God will define the word” (Which Bible, p. 30). The KJV translators themselves rendered a form of this same Greek word at John 14:2 as "abode" at John 14:23. Would you accept that “abode” would be the KJV’s perfect built-in definition for mansion? Gail Riplinger asserted: “Synonyms can be substituted; these provide the Bible’s built-in dictionary” (In Awe, p. 168).

Gail Riplinger claimed: “The words that differ in the early English Bibles are pure synonyms” (In Awe, p. 859). Three early pre-1611 English Bibles from the Greek Received Text have the rendering "dwelling places" at John 14:2 while the 1535 Coverdale's Bible and the 1538 Coverdale's Duoglott have "dwellings." The old Wycliffe’s Bible has “dwellings” at John 14:2. The 1543 Spanish Enzinas also has "moradas" [dwelling] at John 14:2. Luther's German Bible has "Wonungn" [dwellings] at John 14:2. Will you accept pure synonyms from the pre-1611 English Bibles as a good definition for the KJV’s rendering “mansions”?

Instead of practicing what they preach and accepting synonyms, at least some KJV-only advocates reject and condemn synonyms when found in post-1611 English Bibles. Pastor Raymond Blanton protested that "mansions" at John 14:2 was replaced with "dwelling places" in the NKJV (Perilous Times, October, 1994, p. 5). James Son wrote: "For the most part, the modern translations substitute the word 'rooms' and the words 'dwelling places' for the word 'mansions'" (New Athenians, p. 215). Kent Rabe claimed that the Spanish Reina-Valera differs from the Greek Received Text at John 14:2 by changing "mansions" to "dwelling places" (Double Exposure, p. 35). Do these KJV-only authors dismiss or reject the KJV’s “perfect” built-in definition for mansions?

In 1604, Robert Cawdrey defined mansion as “an abiding place”(Table Alphabetical). Ken Barker noted: "The word 'mansions' in King James's day had the idea of 'manse,' which was a dwelling" (Accuracy Defined & Illustrated, p. 91). KJV translator Lancelot Andrewes used this word with this meaning as seen in his reference to “the mansion house of your parson” (Two Answers, pp. 113, 128). "Mansion" at 2 Corinthians 5:1, 2 in Tyndale's, Matthew's, and Great Bibles was changed to "house" in the KJV. At 2 Kings 23:7, the 1535 Coverdale‘s Bible has “mansions“ where the KJV has “hangings.” At Numbers 10:31, the Bishops‘ Bible has “mansions“ while the KJV has “how we are to encamp.” In his 1828 Dictionary, Noah Webster gave the first definition of mansion as "any place of residence; a house; a habitation." Noah Webster then listed the usage of "mansion" at John 14:2 as an example of this definition. At its entry for mansion, the 1967 Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary noted as its first definition: “1 a. obs[olette]: the act of remaining or dwelling” and “b. archaic: abode” (p. 515).


D. A. Waite's Defined KJB gave the following definition for mansion: "resting, abiding, or dwelling places" (p. 1418). David Cloud’s Concise KJB Dictionary has this meaning: “an abode (John 14:2)” (p. 58). The Liberty Annotated Study Bible gave the following note for mansions: "Lit. dwellings" (p. 1639). Green's Concise Lexicon defined the Greek word used at John 14:2 and 23 as "an abode, dwelling" (p. 85). A Bible Word List in the back of the Cambridge Standard Text Edition of the KJV defined mansions as “resting places, abiding places.“

Concerning John 14:2, Martin Luther wrote: “First of all, they should know of the many abodes for them with the Father” (Luther’s Works, Vol. 24, p. 26). At this verse, the 1657 English edition of The Dutch Annotations has "In my Father's house [That is, in heaven] are many dwellings [or abidings, or abiding places]." The rendering "mansions" in Tyndale’s New Testament most likely came from Jerome’s Latin Vulgate rendering in this verse: mansiones. Perhaps unaware of the source of this word and its meaning in the 1600's, James Son claimed that "Mansions is the exact word that the Lord wants us to have" (New Athenians, p. 216).

Do most present-day readers of the KJV understand the word "mansions" at John 14:2 according to its meaning in the 1500’s and 1600’s or do they likely read a very different meaning into this word? Are many present-day KJV readers unable to see and find the KJV’s built-in definition for mansions? Did their minds not create a perfect ‘dictionary’ definition for this word?

 

[Logos1560]

Comparing within the Bible to define words.

Will you practice what you preach in this example?

Another way that Gail Riplinger asserted that the built-in definition can be found will be considered. Gail Riplinger maintained that one of the ways to find the built-in definition was to “look for parallellism” (Language of the KJB, p. 25). Gail Riplinger wrote: “Locate the parallelism. Find the word or words which sit in a parallel position to the word in question” (In Awe, p. 62). Gail Riplinger asserted: “The parallel definition is perfectly suited to the context” (p. 65). Is there a parallel built-in definition in Psalm 22 for unicorns? Does this parallelism use the Hebrew word for the tame or domesticated animal in one place (Ps. 22:12) and the Hebrew word for the wild animal in the other (Ps. 22:21)?

At Deuteronomy 33:17, a London edition of the KJV printed by Henry Hills in 1660 and the KJV in the 1696 edition of Matthew Poole’s Annotations have this marginal note for unicorns: “Or of a wild bull.” Did the person responsible for the additional marginal notes in the 1660 edition of the KJV find and give the KJV’s own perfect, built-in definition from Psalm 22 for the unicorn?


In his commentary, John Hewlett wrote: “The reems are in effect called ‘wild bulls’ by the Psalmist, Psalm 22. For those he styles ‘bulls of Bashan;‘ i.e. of the mountains of Bashan, verse 12, he calls ‘reems;‘ verse 21, as though they were synonymous terms” (Vol. 2, p. 397). Charles Taylor also quoted or noted that the “reems are in effect called wild bulls” . . . “as though they were synonymous terms” (Scripture Illustrated, p. 192). In the Companion Bible, E. W. Bullinger has this note: “unicorns=the bulls of v. 12” (p. 740). In his 1839 book edited from the writings of others, George Bush indicated that the three animals in verses 20 and 21 correspond “to the three before mentioned as besetting him, but ranged in an inverted order, viz. the dog, the lion, and the reem, in place of the bulls of Basham (Illustrations of the Holy Scriptures, p. 403). George Bush added that “the interference is almost irresistible, that the reemim of verse 21 are the parim of verse 12, the bulls of Bashan (Ibid.). He continued: “At least we may infer that the reem was an animal not so unlike those bulls that it might with propriety be interchanged with them in poetic parallelism” (Ibid.). In his Commentary on the Bible, J. R. Dummelow asserted: “In this [Ps. 22:21] and the preceding verse the figures of verses 12, 13, 16 (bulls, lions, dogs) are repeated” (p. 338). Does Psalm 22:12 provide the scriptural built-in definition for unicorns?


It has also been maintained that Psalm 22:21 indicates that the reem [translated unicorn in the KJV] had two horns. Friedrich Delitzsch asserted: “Who does not see the obvious contradiction involved in the translation of Psalm 22:21, ‘For thou hast heard me from the horns [dual in Hebrew] of the unicorns,’ where more than one horn is ascribed to the unicorn?” (Hebrew Language, p. 6). Moses Stuart noted: “The dual in Hebrew is used principally to designate such objects as are double either by nature or by custom” (Hebrew Grammar, p. 271). Gary Long observed: “The dual, though, is restricted to nouns that occur in natural pairs (like hands),” “convey certain expressions of time,” and “measure two” (Grammatical Concepts, p. 32). Ken Schenck affirmed that Hebrew “had a ‘dual’ number to indicate two things” (Biblical Hebrew, p. 97). Scrivener indicated that where KJV editions have “two horns” or “two horns” at Daniel 8:3, 6, 20 “the noun is dual” (Authorized Edition, p. 34). Just as this dual form for the Hebrew word for horns was translated “two horns” in Daniel, it could have just as accurately been translated “two horns” in reference to the reem or unicorn. Robert Brown cited Deuteronomy 33:17 as follows: “his horns (i.e. two horns) are like the horns of a wild bull” (Unicorn, p. 9).

Do you and Gail Riplinger avoid the KJV’s own possible built-in definition for unicorn in Psalm 22 instead of accepting it? Is Gail Riplinger inconsistent in applying her own instructions concerning how to find built-in definitions? Did Gail Riplinger fail to consider and follow her own declaration to “look for parallellism”?

Concerning Deuteronomy 33:17 in his 1848 Bible (KJV) and Commentary, Adam Clarke wrote: "Reem is in the singular number, and because the horns of a unicorn, a one-horned animal, would have appeared absurd, our [KJV] translators, with an unfaithfulness not common to them, put the word in the plural number" (I, p. 834). The earlier pre-1611 English Bibles (Wycliffe's, Tyndale's, Coverdale's, Matthew's, Great, Taverner's, Geneva, and Bishops') all had unicorn [singular] at Deuteronomy 33:17. The 1611 KJV changed this noun that was singular in number in the Hebrew Masoretic text and in all the earlier English Bibles to a plural. The 1762 Cambridge standard KJV edition and the 1769 Oxford standard KJV edition have the following marginal note for the word unicorns: “Hebrew an unicorn.” The marginal note can be seen in an edition of the KJV printed in London in 1711 so it was added before 1762. This marginal note in standard editions of the KJV affirms with the earlier pre-1611 English Bibles and the 1657 English translation of the Dutch that the Hebrew word was singular in number. There is a plural form for this Hebrew word, which was not used at this verse (Deut. 33:17). The Bible in the original language referred to the strength of one reem (Num. 23:22) and to the horns of one reem (Deut. 33:17).

In formal equivalence, Gail Riplinger maintained that “a singular is carried over as a singular” (In Awe, p. 270). According to a consistent application of the KJV-only view's own stated reasoning, was the KJV wrong to change a singular to a plural at this verse? Would Jack McElroy ask about this change of a Hebrew noun singular in number to a plural that if the KJV is “so wrong and confused about singular and plural, what else is it confused about?” (Bible Version Secrets, p. 218). Has any consistent, sound evidence been presented that proves that this Hebrew word that is singular in number must be precisely translated as plural at this verse? The context of the verse in Deuteronomy also clearly supports the view that this animal had more than one horn. In the context, the “them” of this verse refers back to “horns.“ With them (the two horns of a reem [singular]), he [singular] shall push. Joseph is pictured as having two horns on his one head [singular] just as the one head of one reem has two horns. Over and over the evidence shows that the claims or assertions made by KJV-only advocates themselves are not applied consistently and justly.

 

[Saved421]

Its very hard for to find dictionaries online here. I would like to note Gail isn't infaillable.

Regarding Unicorns and mansions, they are still used with the same meaning in parts of the world.

There is no issue with the English.

The Lord Jesus Christ went to prepare a very nice place for his children to live for ever and ever.

 

[Saved421]

 

[JonC]

One problem is that the KJV was written to provide a pro-Church of England translation in the vernacular (in the contemporary language of that time period). It was not designed to be a standard never to be reviewed for acciracy or updated to remain in the vernacular.

Lest we forget, the reason we have the KJV is the English government mandate that made this initially unpopular translation the only available translation. Why were Christians initually so resistant to the KJV? Tradition. Now we see this with KJVO Christians.

I have listened to several KJO preachers who made errors in their sermons because they misunderstood the archaic language.


But like you, I tend to reject the updates to archaic language in hymns. It's a good thing, but tradition makes me resist updating those words.

 

[JesusFan]

One problem is that the KJV was written to provide a pro-Church of England translation in the vernacular (in the contemporary language of that time period). It was not designed to be a standard never to be reviewed for acciracy or updated to remain in the vernacular.

Lest we forget, the reason we have the KJV is the English government mandate that made this initially unpopular translation the only available translation. Why were Christians initually so resistant to the KJV? Tradition. Now we see this with KJVO Christians.

I have listened to several KJO preachers who made errors in their sermons because they misunderstood the archaic language.


But like you, I tend to reject the updates to archaic language in hymns. It's a good thing, but tradition makes me resist updating those words.

I prefer to read and study say creeds and confessions though in modern day vocabulary myself

 

[JesusFan]

Dear community,

I think its important to note that The KJB's English is British English not American English.

Second, I have seen/heard these archaic words being used in real life, mostly in documentaries and videos.

Its interestingly to note that many of these old terms are still used in the naval/mitary and other industries.

The Reformation translators sought for an time when English will have words that would be pure, different than common words used.

There are also quotes about how that the phrasing of the Bible should be not the same as common phrasing.

The Bible is not any book, it should use Biblical Language.

Thanks for reading,

Shawn

The Reformers wanted to havbe the Hebrew and Greek texts translated in "plough boy" English, as they did not see bible as requiring "holy English", same way many assumed original books written in some type of Holy Ghost Greek, and not common Koine Greek

 

[JesusFan]

Note: Reformation translators were against going to the original languages but instead reading the English.

Comparing within the Bible to define words.

The reformers ALL saw the original Hebrew and Greek text as final and supreme authority, the main go to for the translators

 

[JesusFan]

Its also important to note the KJB translators were very knowledgable about Greek/Hebrew/Latin and many other languages.

They also had resources that are no more avail, as well being able to read the manuscripts without needing a Lexicon to explain it in English.

They knew these languages from an early age, fluent in them.

They as the title pg, they diligently compared the original languages, and many diverse versions.

Including many foreign language versions.

Anyhow, what's really needed is Bible translation into other languages and the blood stained gospel spread.

The Gospel:

All have sinned, Jesus (God manifested in the flesh) shed his blood on Mnt Calvary, buried, died, rose again on the 3rd day.

We have salvation in this dispensation by faith in that precious blood he purged our sins by himself and is in the mercy seat in heaven.

Thanks for reading, be ye born again.

Shawn

P/S - Repent mean change of mind (in salv case, unbelief to belief.)

They used lexicons and other Hebrew and Greek stdy works, and our modern translators know even more about the Greek and Hebrew than they did, and far superior research tools to be able to use now also

 

[JonC]

I prefer to read and study say creeds and confessions though in modern day vocabulary myself

I'm with ya. We can always study the words and go back to original languages. But there is no need to go back to antiquated words when they are translated as well. It just opens the door to error.



I don't care if people use the KJV (it is a beautiful translation). But I don't want people to suffer under a translation they struggle with because they are mislead into believing it is somehow more than a bible translation or their only opinion when it comes to studying God's Word.

I love reading ancient Greek works, and part of this is the ideas come through better because the translations are mostly in contemporary language.


I have even heard preachers pray in antiquated language ("Lord, I beseech Thee....", etc.).


The gospel needs to be accessible. We may not have problems with antiquated English, but to others this can be a stumbling block.

We owe it to younger generations of Christians to give them God's Word in their language.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Dear community,

I think its important to note that The KJB's English is British English not American English.

Second, I have seen/heard these archaic words being used in real life, mostly in documentaries and videos.

Its interestingly to note that many of these old terms are still used in the naval/mitary and other industries.

The Reformation translators sought for an time when English will have words that would be pure, different than common words used.

There are also quotes about how that the phrasing of the Bible should be not the same as common phrasing.

The Bible is not any book, it should use Biblical Language.

Thanks for reading,

Shawn

When translations of the Bible are not frequently revised, we find people trying to make sense of English like this:

Exodus 19:18 And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. KJV, 1611

Instead of English like this:

Exodus 19: 18. Now Mount Sinai was completely in smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire. Its smoke ascended like the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mountain quaked greatly. (NRSV)

And we find archaisms like these in the KJV:

"abased" (Matt. 23:12; Luke 14:11; 18:14) then meant "humbled"
"abide" (Acts 20:23) then meant "await"
"acquaintance" (Luke 2:44; 23:49; Acts 24:23) then meant "acquaintances"
"admiration" (Rev. 17:6) then meant "wonder"
"affections" (Gal. 5:24) then meant "passions"
"again" (Matt. 27:3; Luke 14:6) then meant "back"
"allege" (Acts 17:3) then meant present "evidence"
"allow" (Luke 11:48; Rom. 14:22; 1 Thes. 2:4) then meant "approve"
"amazement" (1 Pet. 3:6) then meant "terror"
"amend" (John 4:52) then meant "mend"
"answer" (2 Tim. 4:16) then meant "defense"
"approve" (2 Cor. 6:4; 7:11) then meant "commend" or "prove"
"assay" (Acts 9:26; 16:7; Heb. 11:29) then meant "essay" or "attempt"
"attendance" (1 Tim. 4:13) then meant "attention"
"base" (1 Cor. 1:28; 2 Cor. 10:1) then meant "lowly"
"behind" (Col. 1:24) then meant "lacking"
"bewitched" (Acts 8:9, 11) then meant "astonished"
"by and by" (Matt. 13:21; Mark 6:25; Luke 17:7; 21:9) then meant "immediately"
"careful" (Luke 10:41; Phil. 4:6) then meant "anxious"
"charged" (1 Tim. 5:16) then meant "burdened"
"charger" (Matt. 14:8, 11; Mark 6:25, 28) then meant "platter"
"charity" (1 Cor. 8:1; 13:1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 13; etc.) then meant "love"
"charitably" (Rom. 14:15) then meant "in love"
"communicate" (Gal. 6:6; Phil. 4:14, 15; 1 Tim. 6:18; Heb. 13:16) then meant "share"
"communications" (Cor. 15:33) then meant "companionship"
"concluded" (Rom. 11:32; Gal. 3:22) then meant "shut up"
"conscience" (1 Cor. 8:7; Heb. 10:2) then meant "consciousness"
"convenient" (Rom. 1:28; Eph. 5:4; Phlm. 8) then meant "fitting" or "proper"
"conversation" (2 Cor. 1:12; Gal. 1:13; Eph. 2:3; etc.) then meant "manner of life" or "conduct"
"corn" (Matt. 12:1; Mark 2:23; 4:28; etc.) then meant "grain"
"countries" (Luke 21:21) then meant "country"
"country, a" (John 11:54) then meant "the country"
"damnation" (Matt. 23:14; Mark 12:40; Luke 20:47; etc.) then meant "condemnation" or "judgment" (1 Cor. 11:29)
"damned" (Mark 16:16; Rom. 14:23; 2 Thes. 2:12) then meant "condemned" or "judged"
"delicately" (Luke 7:25) then meant "luxuriously"
"deliciously" (Rev. 18:7, 9) then meant "wantonly"
"doubtful" (Luke 12:29) then meant "anxious"
"draught" (Matt. 15:17; Mark 7:19) then meant "drain"
"earnestly" (Luke 22:56; Acts 23:1) then meant "carefully" or "steadfastly" or "intently"
"ensue" (1 Pet. 3:11) then meant "pursue"
"entreat(ed)" (Matt. 22:6; Luke 18:32; 20:11; etc.) then meant "treat(ed)"
"estate" (Acts 22:5) then meant "council"
"estates" (Mark 6:21) then meant "men of nobility or rank"
"ever, or" (Acts 23:15) then meant "before"
"evidently" (Acts 10:3) then meant "clearly" or "openly" (Gal. 3:1)
"fame" (Matt. 4:24; 9:26, 31; 14:1; Mark 1:28; etc.) then meant "report" or
"feeble-minded" (1 Thes. 5:14) then meant "fainthearted"
"forward" (2 Cor. 8:10, 17; Gal. 2:10) then meant "ready" or "eager"
"frankly" (Luke 7:42) then meant "freely"
"furnished" (Matt. 22:10) then meant "filled"
"go beyond" (1 Thes. 4:6) then meant "transgress"
"good" (1 Jn. 3:17) then meant "goods"
"goodman" (Matt. 20:11; 24:43; Mark 14:14; etc.) then meant "master"
"governor" (James 3:4) then meant "pilot"
"grudge" (James 5:9; 1 Pet. 4:9) then meant "grumble"
"guilty" (Matt. 23:18) then meant "bound"
"hardly" (Matt. 19:23) then meant "with difficulty"
"instant" (Luke 23:23) then meant "insistent," or "constant" (Rom. 12:12), or "urgent" (2 Tim. 4:2)
"keep under" (1 Cor. 9:27) then meant "buffet"
"lade" (Luke 11:46) then meant "load"
"large" (Matt. 28:12) then meant "much"
"lewd" (Acts 17:5) then meant "wicked"
"lewdness" (Acts 18:14) then meant "villainy"
"listed" (Matt. 17:12; Mark 9:13) then meant "wished"
"listeth" (John 3:8; James 3:4) then meant "wishes"
"lively" (Acts 7:38; 1 Pet. 1:3; 2:5) then meant "living"
"loft" (Acts 20:9) then meant "story"
"marred" (Mark 2:22) then meant "destroyed"
"meat" (Matt. 3:4; 6:25; 10:10; 15:37; 24:45; etc.) then meant "food"
"minister" (Luke 4:20) then meant "attendant"
"minstrels" (Matt. 9:23) then meant "flute players"
"motions" (Rom. 7:5) then meant "passions"
"observed him" (Mark 6:20) then meant "kept him safe"
"occupy" (Luke 19:13) then meant "trade"
"other" (John 21:2; Acts 15:2; 2 Cor. 13:2; Phil. 2:3) then meant "others"
"other some" (Acts 17:18) then meant "some others"
"overcharge(d)" (Luke 21:34; 2 Cor. 2:5) then meant "over burden(ed)"
"particularly" (Acts 21:19; Heb. 9:5) then meant "in detail"
"pitiful" (1 Pet. 3:8) then meant "merciful"
"presently" (Matt. 21:19; 26:53; Phil. 2:23) then meant "immediately"
"pressed out of" (2 Cor. 1:8) then meant "oppressed beyond"
"prevent" (1 Thes. 4:15) then meant "precede"
"prevented" (Matt. 17:25) then meant "spoke first to"
"profited" (Gal. 1:14) then meant "advanced"
"profiting" (1 Tim. 4:15) then meant "progress"
"proper" (Acts 1:19; 1 Cor. 7:7) then meant "own" or "beautiful" (Heb. 11:23)
"quick" (Heb. 4:12) then meant "living"
"quit you" (1 Cor. 16:13) then meant "conduct yourselves"
"reason" (Acts 6:2) then meant "reasonable"
"record" (John 1:19; Acts 20:26; 2 Cor. 1:23; Phil. 1:8) then meant "witness"
"respect, had" (Heb. 11:26) then meant "looked"
"room" (Matt. 2:22; Luke 14:7, 8, 9, 10; Acts 24:27; 1 Cor. 14:16) then meant "place"
"sardine" (Rev. 4:3) then meant "sardius"
"scrip" (Matt. 10:10; Mark 6:8; Luke 9:3; 10:4; etc.) then meant "bag"
"secondarily" (1 Cor. 12:28) then meant "secondly"
"sentence" (Acts 15:19) then meant "judgment"
"several" (Matt. 25:15) then meant "particular"
"shamefacedness" (1 Tim. 2:9) then meant "modesty" or "propriety"
"shape" (John 5:37) then meant "form"
"should" (Acts 23:27) then meant "would"
"sincere" (1 Pet. 2:2) then meant "pure"
"strange" (Acts 26:11) then meant "foreign"
"strangers of" (Acts 2:10) then meant "visitors from"
"string" (Mark 7:35) then meant "band"
"study" (1 Thes. 4:11; 2 Tim. 2:15) then meant "strive"
"tables" (Luke 1:63; 2 Cor. 3:3) then meant "tablets"
"take no thought" (Matt. 6:25, 28, 31, 34; 10:19; Luke 12:11, 22, 26) then meant "be not anxious"
"taking thought" (Matt. 6:27; Luke 12:25) then meant "being anxious"
"temperance" (Acts 24:25; Gal. 5:23; 2 Pet. 1:6) then meant "self-control"
"temperate" (1 Cor. 9:25; Tit. 1:8) then meant "self- controlled"
"translated" (Col. 1:13; Heb. 11:5) then meant "transferred"

 

[JesusFan]

When translations of the Bible are not frequently revised, we find people trying to make sense of English like this:

Exodus 19:18 And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. KJV, 1611

Instead of English like this:

Exodus 19: 18. Now Mount Sinai was completely in smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire. Its smoke ascended like the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mountain quaked greatly. (NRSV)

And we find archaisms like these in the KJV:

"abased" (Matt. 23:12; Luke 14:11; 18:14) then meant "humbled"
"abide" (Acts 20:23) then meant "await"
"acquaintance" (Luke 2:44; 23:49; Acts 24:23) then meant "acquaintances"
"admiration" (Rev. 17:6) then meant "wonder"
"affections" (Gal. 5:24) then meant "passions"
"again" (Matt. 27:3; Luke 14:6) then meant "back"
"allege" (Acts 17:3) then meant present "evidence"
"allow" (Luke 11:48; Rom. 14:22; 1 Thes. 2:4) then meant "approve"
"amazement" (1 Pet. 3:6) then meant "terror"
"amend" (John 4:52) then meant "mend"
"answer" (2 Tim. 4:16) then meant "defense"
"approve" (2 Cor. 6:4; 7:11) then meant "commend" or "prove"
"assay" (Acts 9:26; 16:7; Heb. 11:29) then meant "essay" or "attempt"
"attendance" (1 Tim. 4:13) then meant "attention"
"base" (1 Cor. 1:28; 2 Cor. 10:1) then meant "lowly"
"behind" (Col. 1:24) then meant "lacking"
"bewitched" (Acts 8:9, 11) then meant "astonished"
"by and by" (Matt. 13:21; Mark 6:25; Luke 17:7; 21:9) then meant "immediately"
"careful" (Luke 10:41; Phil. 4:6) then meant "anxious"
"charged" (1 Tim. 5:16) then meant "burdened"
"charger" (Matt. 14:8, 11; Mark 6:25, 28) then meant "platter"
"charity" (1 Cor. 8:1; 13:1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 13; etc.) then meant "love"
"charitably" (Rom. 14:15) then meant "in love"
"communicate" (Gal. 6:6; Phil. 4:14, 15; 1 Tim. 6:18; Heb. 13:16) then meant "share"
"communications" (Cor. 15:33) then meant "companionship"
"concluded" (Rom. 11:32; Gal. 3:22) then meant "shut up"
"conscience" (1 Cor. 8:7; Heb. 10:2) then meant "consciousness"
"convenient" (Rom. 1:28; Eph. 5:4; Phlm. 8) then meant "fitting" or "proper"
"conversation" (2 Cor. 1:12; Gal. 1:13; Eph. 2:3; etc.) then meant "manner of life" or "conduct"
"corn" (Matt. 12:1; Mark 2:23; 4:28; etc.) then meant "grain"
"countries" (Luke 21:21) then meant "country"
"country, a" (John 11:54) then meant "the country"
"damnation" (Matt. 23:14; Mark 12:40; Luke 20:47; etc.) then meant "condemnation" or "judgment" (1 Cor. 11:29)
"damned" (Mark 16:16; Rom. 14:23; 2 Thes. 2:12) then meant "condemned" or "judged"
"delicately" (Luke 7:25) then meant "luxuriously"
"deliciously" (Rev. 18:7, 9) then meant "wantonly"
"doubtful" (Luke 12:29) then meant "anxious"
"draught" (Matt. 15:17; Mark 7:19) then meant "drain"
"earnestly" (Luke 22:56; Acts 23:1) then meant "carefully" or "steadfastly" or "intently"
"ensue" (1 Pet. 3:11) then meant "pursue"
"entreat(ed)" (Matt. 22:6; Luke 18:32; 20:11; etc.) then meant "treat(ed)"
"estate" (Acts 22:5) then meant "council"
"estates" (Mark 6:21) then meant "men of nobility or rank"
"ever, or" (Acts 23:15) then meant "before"
"evidently" (Acts 10:3) then meant "clearly" or "openly" (Gal. 3:1)
"fame" (Matt. 4:24; 9:26, 31; 14:1; Mark 1:28; etc.) then meant "report" or
"feeble-minded" (1 Thes. 5:14) then meant "fainthearted"
"forward" (2 Cor. 8:10, 17; Gal. 2:10) then meant "ready" or "eager"
"frankly" (Luke 7:42) then meant "freely"
"furnished" (Matt. 22:10) then meant "filled"
"go beyond" (1 Thes. 4:6) then meant "transgress"
"good" (1 Jn. 3:17) then meant "goods"
"goodman" (Matt. 20:11; 24:43; Mark 14:14; etc.) then meant "master"
"governor" (James 3:4) then meant "pilot"
"grudge" (James 5:9; 1 Pet. 4:9) then meant "grumble"
"guilty" (Matt. 23:18) then meant "bound"
"hardly" (Matt. 19:23) then meant "with difficulty"
"instant" (Luke 23:23) then meant "insistent," or "constant" (Rom. 12:12), or "urgent" (2 Tim. 4:2)
"keep under" (1 Cor. 9:27) then meant "buffet"
"lade" (Luke 11:46) then meant "load"
"large" (Matt. 28:12) then meant "much"
"lewd" (Acts 17:5) then meant "wicked"
"lewdness" (Acts 18:14) then meant "villainy"
"listed" (Matt. 17:12; Mark 9:13) then meant "wished"
"listeth" (John 3:8; James 3:4) then meant "wishes"
"lively" (Acts 7:38; 1 Pet. 1:3; 2:5) then meant "living"
"loft" (Acts 20:9) then meant "story"
"marred" (Mark 2:22) then meant "destroyed"
"meat" (Matt. 3:4; 6:25; 10:10; 15:37; 24:45; etc.) then meant "food"
"minister" (Luke 4:20) then meant "attendant"
"minstrels" (Matt. 9:23) then meant "flute players"
"motions" (Rom. 7:5) then meant "passions"
"observed him" (Mark 6:20) then meant "kept him safe"
"occupy" (Luke 19:13) then meant "trade"
"other" (John 21:2; Acts 15:2; 2 Cor. 13:2; Phil. 2:3) then meant "others"
"other some" (Acts 17:18) then meant "some others"
"overcharge(d)" (Luke 21:34; 2 Cor. 2:5) then meant "over burden(ed)"
"particularly" (Acts 21:19; Heb. 9:5) then meant "in detail"
"pitiful" (1 Pet. 3:8) then meant "merciful"
"presently" (Matt. 21:19; 26:53; Phil. 2:23) then meant "immediately"
"pressed out of" (2 Cor. 1:8) then meant "oppressed beyond"
"prevent" (1 Thes. 4:15) then meant "precede"
"prevented" (Matt. 17:25) then meant "spoke first to"
"profited" (Gal. 1:14) then meant "advanced"
"profiting" (1 Tim. 4:15) then meant "progress"
"proper" (Acts 1:19; 1 Cor. 7:7) then meant "own" or "beautiful" (Heb. 11:23)
"quick" (Heb. 4:12) then meant "living"
"quit you" (1 Cor. 16:13) then meant "conduct yourselves"
"reason" (Acts 6:2) then meant "reasonable"
"record" (John 1:19; Acts 20:26; 2 Cor. 1:23; Phil. 1:8) then meant "witness"
"respect, had" (Heb. 11:26) then meant "looked"
"room" (Matt. 2:22; Luke 14:7, 8, 9, 10; Acts 24:27; 1 Cor. 14:16) then meant "place"
"sardine" (Rev. 4:3) then meant "sardius"
"scrip" (Matt. 10:10; Mark 6:8; Luke 9:3; 10:4; etc.) then meant "bag"
"secondarily" (1 Cor. 12:28) then meant "secondly"
"sentence" (Acts 15:19) then meant "judgment"
"several" (Matt. 25:15) then meant "particular"
"shamefacedness" (1 Tim. 2:9) then meant "modesty" or "propriety"
"shape" (John 5:37) then meant "form"
"should" (Acts 23:27) then meant "would"
"sincere" (1 Pet. 2:2) then meant "pure"
"strange" (Acts 26:11) then meant "foreign"
"strangers of" (Acts 2:10) then meant "visitors from"
"string" (Mark 7:35) then meant "band"
"study" (1 Thes. 4:11; 2 Tim. 2:15) then meant "strive"
"tables" (Luke 1:63; 2 Cor. 3:3) then meant "tablets"
"take no thought" (Matt. 6:25, 28, 31, 34; 10:19; Luke 12:11, 22, 26) then meant "be not anxious"
"taking thought" (Matt. 6:27; Luke 12:25) then meant "being anxious"
"temperance" (Acts 24:25; Gal. 5:23; 2 Pet. 1:6) then meant "self-control"
"temperate" (1 Cor. 9:25; Tit. 1:8) then meant "self- controlled"
"translated" (Col. 1:13; Heb. 11:5) then meant "transferred"

The English language has had so much changes to it since the time of the 1611 Kjv being produced, that one is literally reading a foreign language, nearly like reading Koine greek

 

[JesusFan]

When translations of the Bible are not frequently revised, we find people trying to make sense of English like this:

Exodus 19:18 And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. KJV, 1611

Instead of English like this:

Exodus 19: 18. Now Mount Sinai was completely in smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire. Its smoke ascended like the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mountain quaked greatly. (NRSV)

And we find archaisms like these in the KJV:

"abased" (Matt. 23:12; Luke 14:11; 18:14) then meant "humbled"
"abide" (Acts 20:23) then meant "await"
"acquaintance" (Luke 2:44; 23:49; Acts 24:23) then meant "acquaintances"
"admiration" (Rev. 17:6) then meant "wonder"
"affections" (Gal. 5:24) then meant "passions"
"again" (Matt. 27:3; Luke 14:6) then meant "back"
"allege" (Acts 17:3) then meant present "evidence"
"allow" (Luke 11:48; Rom. 14:22; 1 Thes. 2:4) then meant "approve"
"amazement" (1 Pet. 3:6) then meant "terror"
"amend" (John 4:52) then meant "mend"
"answer" (2 Tim. 4:16) then meant "defense"
"approve" (2 Cor. 6:4; 7:11) then meant "commend" or "prove"
"assay" (Acts 9:26; 16:7; Heb. 11:29) then meant "essay" or "attempt"
"attendance" (1 Tim. 4:13) then meant "attention"
"base" (1 Cor. 1:28; 2 Cor. 10:1) then meant "lowly"
"behind" (Col. 1:24) then meant "lacking"
"bewitched" (Acts 8:9, 11) then meant "astonished"
"by and by" (Matt. 13:21; Mark 6:25; Luke 17:7; 21:9) then meant "immediately"
"careful" (Luke 10:41; Phil. 4:6) then meant "anxious"
"charged" (1 Tim. 5:16) then meant "burdened"
"charger" (Matt. 14:8, 11; Mark 6:25, 28) then meant "platter"
"charity" (1 Cor. 8:1; 13:1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 13; etc.) then meant "love"
"charitably" (Rom. 14:15) then meant "in love"
"communicate" (Gal. 6:6; Phil. 4:14, 15; 1 Tim. 6:18; Heb. 13:16) then meant "share"
"communications" (Cor. 15:33) then meant "companionship"
"concluded" (Rom. 11:32; Gal. 3:22) then meant "shut up"
"conscience" (1 Cor. 8:7; Heb. 10:2) then meant "consciousness"
"convenient" (Rom. 1:28; Eph. 5:4; Phlm. 8) then meant "fitting" or "proper"
"conversation" (2 Cor. 1:12; Gal. 1:13; Eph. 2:3; etc.) then meant "manner of life" or "conduct"
"corn" (Matt. 12:1; Mark 2:23; 4:28; etc.) then meant "grain"
"countries" (Luke 21:21) then meant "country"
"country, a" (John 11:54) then meant "the country"
"damnation" (Matt. 23:14; Mark 12:40; Luke 20:47; etc.) then meant "condemnation" or "judgment" (1 Cor. 11:29)
"damned" (Mark 16:16; Rom. 14:23; 2 Thes. 2:12) then meant "condemned" or "judged"
"delicately" (Luke 7:25) then meant "luxuriously"
"deliciously" (Rev. 18:7, 9) then meant "wantonly"
"doubtful" (Luke 12:29) then meant "anxious"
"draught" (Matt. 15:17; Mark 7:19) then meant "drain"
"earnestly" (Luke 22:56; Acts 23:1) then meant "carefully" or "steadfastly" or "intently"
"ensue" (1 Pet. 3:11) then meant "pursue"
"entreat(ed)" (Matt. 22:6; Luke 18:32; 20:11; etc.) then meant "treat(ed)"
"estate" (Acts 22:5) then meant "council"
"estates" (Mark 6:21) then meant "men of nobility or rank"
"ever, or" (Acts 23:15) then meant "before"
"evidently" (Acts 10:3) then meant "clearly" or "openly" (Gal. 3:1)
"fame" (Matt. 4:24; 9:26, 31; 14:1; Mark 1:28; etc.) then meant "report" or
"feeble-minded" (1 Thes. 5:14) then meant "fainthearted"
"forward" (2 Cor. 8:10, 17; Gal. 2:10) then meant "ready" or "eager"
"frankly" (Luke 7:42) then meant "freely"
"furnished" (Matt. 22:10) then meant "filled"
"go beyond" (1 Thes. 4:6) then meant "transgress"
"good" (1 Jn. 3:17) then meant "goods"
"goodman" (Matt. 20:11; 24:43; Mark 14:14; etc.) then meant "master"
"governor" (James 3:4) then meant "pilot"
"grudge" (James 5:9; 1 Pet. 4:9) then meant "grumble"
"guilty" (Matt. 23:18) then meant "bound"
"hardly" (Matt. 19:23) then meant "with difficulty"
"instant" (Luke 23:23) then meant "insistent," or "constant" (Rom. 12:12), or "urgent" (2 Tim. 4:2)
"keep under" (1 Cor. 9:27) then meant "buffet"
"lade" (Luke 11:46) then meant "load"
"large" (Matt. 28:12) then meant "much"
"lewd" (Acts 17:5) then meant "wicked"
"lewdness" (Acts 18:14) then meant "villainy"
"listed" (Matt. 17:12; Mark 9:13) then meant "wished"
"listeth" (John 3:8; James 3:4) then meant "wishes"
"lively" (Acts 7:38; 1 Pet. 1:3; 2:5) then meant "living"
"loft" (Acts 20:9) then meant "story"
"marred" (Mark 2:22) then meant "destroyed"
"meat" (Matt. 3:4; 6:25; 10:10; 15:37; 24:45; etc.) then meant "food"
"minister" (Luke 4:20) then meant "attendant"
"minstrels" (Matt. 9:23) then meant "flute players"
"motions" (Rom. 7:5) then meant "passions"
"observed him" (Mark 6:20) then meant "kept him safe"
"occupy" (Luke 19:13) then meant "trade"
"other" (John 21:2; Acts 15:2; 2 Cor. 13:2; Phil. 2:3) then meant "others"
"other some" (Acts 17:18) then meant "some others"
"overcharge(d)" (Luke 21:34; 2 Cor. 2:5) then meant "over burden(ed)"
"particularly" (Acts 21:19; Heb. 9:5) then meant "in detail"
"pitiful" (1 Pet. 3:8) then meant "merciful"
"presently" (Matt. 21:19; 26:53; Phil. 2:23) then meant "immediately"
"pressed out of" (2 Cor. 1:8) then meant "oppressed beyond"
"prevent" (1 Thes. 4:15) then meant "precede"
"prevented" (Matt. 17:25) then meant "spoke first to"
"profited" (Gal. 1:14) then meant "advanced"
"profiting" (1 Tim. 4:15) then meant "progress"
"proper" (Acts 1:19; 1 Cor. 7:7) then meant "own" or "beautiful" (Heb. 11:23)
"quick" (Heb. 4:12) then meant "living"
"quit you" (1 Cor. 16:13) then meant "conduct yourselves"
"reason" (Acts 6:2) then meant "reasonable"
"record" (John 1:19; Acts 20:26; 2 Cor. 1:23; Phil. 1:8) then meant "witness"
"respect, had" (Heb. 11:26) then meant "looked"
"room" (Matt. 2:22; Luke 14:7, 8, 9, 10; Acts 24:27; 1 Cor. 14:16) then meant "place"
"sardine" (Rev. 4:3) then meant "sardius"
"scrip" (Matt. 10:10; Mark 6:8; Luke 9:3; 10:4; etc.) then meant "bag"
"secondarily" (1 Cor. 12:28) then meant "secondly"
"sentence" (Acts 15:19) then meant "judgment"
"several" (Matt. 25:15) then meant "particular"
"shamefacedness" (1 Tim. 2:9) then meant "modesty" or "propriety"
"shape" (John 5:37) then meant "form"
"should" (Acts 23:27) then meant "would"
"sincere" (1 Pet. 2:2) then meant "pure"
"strange" (Acts 26:11) then meant "foreign"
"strangers of" (Acts 2:10) then meant "visitors from"
"string" (Mark 7:35) then meant "band"
"study" (1 Thes. 4:11; 2 Tim. 2:15) then meant "strive"
"tables" (Luke 1:63; 2 Cor. 3:3) then meant "tablets"
"take no thought" (Matt. 6:25, 28, 31, 34; 10:19; Luke 12:11, 22, 26) then meant "be not anxious"
"taking thought" (Matt. 6:27; Luke 12:25) then meant "being anxious"
"temperance" (Acts 24:25; Gal. 5:23; 2 Pet. 1:6) then meant "self-control"
"temperate" (1 Cor. 9:25; Tit. 1:8) then meant "self- controlled"
"translated" (Col. 1:13; Heb. 11:5) then meant "transferred"

many of those into KJVO seem to view the English of the 1611 Kjv as being some type of "holy language", almost as if God gave them angelic words from heaven itself in the translation.

by their logic should have stayed Vulgate only, as Latin reads and sounds more "holy" than English

 

[JonC]

When translations of the Bible are not frequently revised, we find people trying to make sense of English like this:

Exodus 19:18 And mount Sinai was altogether on a smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire: and the smoke thereof ascended as the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mount quaked greatly. KJV, 1611

Instead of English like this:

Exodus 19: 18. Now Mount Sinai was completely in smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire. Its smoke ascended like the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mountain quaked greatly. (NRSV)

And we find archaisms like these in the KJV:

"abased" (Matt. 23:12; Luke 14:11; 18:14) then meant "humbled"
"abide" (Acts 20:23) then meant "await"
"acquaintance" (Luke 2:44; 23:49; Acts 24:23) then meant "acquaintances"
"admiration" (Rev. 17:6) then meant "wonder"
"affections" (Gal. 5:24) then meant "passions"
"again" (Matt. 27:3; Luke 14:6) then meant "back"
"allege" (Acts 17:3) then meant present "evidence"
"allow" (Luke 11:48; Rom. 14:22; 1 Thes. 2:4) then meant "approve"
"amazement" (1 Pet. 3:6) then meant "terror"
"amend" (John 4:52) then meant "mend"
"answer" (2 Tim. 4:16) then meant "defense"
"approve" (2 Cor. 6:4; 7:11) then meant "commend" or "prove"
"assay" (Acts 9:26; 16:7; Heb. 11:29) then meant "essay" or "attempt"
"attendance" (1 Tim. 4:13) then meant "attention"
"base" (1 Cor. 1:28; 2 Cor. 10:1) then meant "lowly"
"behind" (Col. 1:24) then meant "lacking"
"bewitched" (Acts 8:9, 11) then meant "astonished"
"by and by" (Matt. 13:21; Mark 6:25; Luke 17:7; 21:9) then meant "immediately"
"careful" (Luke 10:41; Phil. 4:6) then meant "anxious"
"charged" (1 Tim. 5:16) then meant "burdened"
"charger" (Matt. 14:8, 11; Mark 6:25, 28) then meant "platter"
"charity" (1 Cor. 8:1; 13:1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 13; etc.) then meant "love"
"charitably" (Rom. 14:15) then meant "in love"
"communicate" (Gal. 6:6; Phil. 4:14, 15; 1 Tim. 6:18; Heb. 13:16) then meant "share"
"communications" (Cor. 15:33) then meant "companionship"
"concluded" (Rom. 11:32; Gal. 3:22) then meant "shut up"
"conscience" (1 Cor. 8:7; Heb. 10:2) then meant "consciousness"
"convenient" (Rom. 1:28; Eph. 5:4; Phlm. 8) then meant "fitting" or "proper"
"conversation" (2 Cor. 1:12; Gal. 1:13; Eph. 2:3; etc.) then meant "manner of life" or "conduct"
"corn" (Matt. 12:1; Mark 2:23; 4:28; etc.) then meant "grain"
"countries" (Luke 21:21) then meant "country"
"country, a" (John 11:54) then meant "the country"
"damnation" (Matt. 23:14; Mark 12:40; Luke 20:47; etc.) then meant "condemnation" or "judgment" (1 Cor. 11:29)
"damned" (Mark 16:16; Rom. 14:23; 2 Thes. 2:12) then meant "condemned" or "judged"
"delicately" (Luke 7:25) then meant "luxuriously"
"deliciously" (Rev. 18:7, 9) then meant "wantonly"
"doubtful" (Luke 12:29) then meant "anxious"
"draught" (Matt. 15:17; Mark 7:19) then meant "drain"
"earnestly" (Luke 22:56; Acts 23:1) then meant "carefully" or "steadfastly" or "intently"
"ensue" (1 Pet. 3:11) then meant "pursue"
"entreat(ed)" (Matt. 22:6; Luke 18:32; 20:11; etc.) then meant "treat(ed)"
"estate" (Acts 22:5) then meant "council"
"estates" (Mark 6:21) then meant "men of nobility or rank"
"ever, or" (Acts 23:15) then meant "before"
"evidently" (Acts 10:3) then meant "clearly" or "openly" (Gal. 3:1)
"fame" (Matt. 4:24; 9:26, 31; 14:1; Mark 1:28; etc.) then meant "report" or
"feeble-minded" (1 Thes. 5:14) then meant "fainthearted"
"forward" (2 Cor. 8:10, 17; Gal. 2:10) then meant "ready" or "eager"
"frankly" (Luke 7:42) then meant "freely"
"furnished" (Matt. 22:10) then meant "filled"
"go beyond" (1 Thes. 4:6) then meant "transgress"
"good" (1 Jn. 3:17) then meant "goods"
"goodman" (Matt. 20:11; 24:43; Mark 14:14; etc.) then meant "master"
"governor" (James 3:4) then meant "pilot"
"grudge" (James 5:9; 1 Pet. 4:9) then meant "grumble"
"guilty" (Matt. 23:18) then meant "bound"
"hardly" (Matt. 19:23) then meant "with difficulty"
"instant" (Luke 23:23) then meant "insistent," or "constant" (Rom. 12:12), or "urgent" (2 Tim. 4:2)
"keep under" (1 Cor. 9:27) then meant "buffet"
"lade" (Luke 11:46) then meant "load"
"large" (Matt. 28:12) then meant "much"
"lewd" (Acts 17:5) then meant "wicked"
"lewdness" (Acts 18:14) then meant "villainy"
"listed" (Matt. 17:12; Mark 9:13) then meant "wished"
"listeth" (John 3:8; James 3:4) then meant "wishes"
"lively" (Acts 7:38; 1 Pet. 1:3; 2:5) then meant "living"
"loft" (Acts 20:9) then meant "story"
"marred" (Mark 2:22) then meant "destroyed"
"meat" (Matt. 3:4; 6:25; 10:10; 15:37; 24:45; etc.) then meant "food"
"minister" (Luke 4:20) then meant "attendant"
"minstrels" (Matt. 9:23) then meant "flute players"
"motions" (Rom. 7:5) then meant "passions"
"observed him" (Mark 6:20) then meant "kept him safe"
"occupy" (Luke 19:13) then meant "trade"
"other" (John 21:2; Acts 15:2; 2 Cor. 13:2; Phil. 2:3) then meant "others"
"other some" (Acts 17:18) then meant "some others"
"overcharge(d)" (Luke 21:34; 2 Cor. 2:5) then meant "over burden(ed)"
"particularly" (Acts 21:19; Heb. 9:5) then meant "in detail"
"pitiful" (1 Pet. 3:8) then meant "merciful"
"presently" (Matt. 21:19; 26:53; Phil. 2:23) then meant "immediately"
"pressed out of" (2 Cor. 1:8) then meant "oppressed beyond"
"prevent" (1 Thes. 4:15) then meant "precede"
"prevented" (Matt. 17:25) then meant "spoke first to"
"profited" (Gal. 1:14) then meant "advanced"
"profiting" (1 Tim. 4:15) then meant "progress"
"proper" (Acts 1:19; 1 Cor. 7:7) then meant "own" or "beautiful" (Heb. 11:23)
"quick" (Heb. 4:12) then meant "living"
"quit you" (1 Cor. 16:13) then meant "conduct yourselves"
"reason" (Acts 6:2) then meant "reasonable"
"record" (John 1:19; Acts 20:26; 2 Cor. 1:23; Phil. 1:8) then meant "witness"
"respect, had" (Heb. 11:26) then meant "looked"
"room" (Matt. 2:22; Luke 14:7, 8, 9, 10; Acts 24:27; 1 Cor. 14:16) then meant "place"
"sardine" (Rev. 4:3) then meant "sardius"
"scrip" (Matt. 10:10; Mark 6:8; Luke 9:3; 10:4; etc.) then meant "bag"
"secondarily" (1 Cor. 12:28) then meant "secondly"
"sentence" (Acts 15:19) then meant "judgment"
"several" (Matt. 25:15) then meant "particular"
"shamefacedness" (1 Tim. 2:9) then meant "modesty" or "propriety"
"shape" (John 5:37) then meant "form"
"should" (Acts 23:27) then meant "would"
"sincere" (1 Pet. 2:2) then meant "pure"
"strange" (Acts 26:11) then meant "foreign"
"strangers of" (Acts 2:10) then meant "visitors from"
"string" (Mark 7:35) then meant "band"
"study" (1 Thes. 4:11; 2 Tim. 2:15) then meant "strive"
"tables" (Luke 1:63; 2 Cor. 3:3) then meant "tablets"
"take no thought" (Matt. 6:25, 28, 31, 34; 10:19; Luke 12:11, 22, 26) then meant "be not anxious"
"taking thought" (Matt. 6:27; Luke 12:25) then meant "being anxious"
"temperance" (Acts 24:25; Gal. 5:23; 2 Pet. 1:6) then meant "self-control"
"temperate" (1 Cor. 9:25; Tit. 1:8) then meant "self- controlled"
"translated" (Col. 1:13; Heb. 11:5) then meant "transferred"

I was thinking specifically of John 3:16 (one I've heard KJO preachers misrepresent in error) and perhaps "Lucifer" as a proper name (an error KJVO Christians often make in fighting against other Believer's use of God's Word).

For the most part, the KJV andcother translations line yo very well to me. But I grew up having to read antiquated English in school (and I liked reading that literature). I also grew up hearing and using the KJV.

So to me I don't always appreciate the barrier the language of the KJV poses to others. I know it dies because I've worked with people who struggled, not with Scripture but with the language (they were expected to overcome a language barrier before they would be able to struggle with God's Word).

 

[Saved421]

I am not going to argue with you all, agree to disagree.

I have no issue with the KJB English, even if I did, I will study it using English. I do not speak Greek or Hebrew.

Have a good day.

 

[Saved421]

many of those into KJVO seem to view the English of the 1611 Kjv as being some type of "holy language", almost as if God gave them angelic words from heaven itself in the translation.

by their logic should have stayed Vulgate only, as Latin reads and sounds more "holy" than English

Yes, and so did many people back when the 1700s and back then, most of it was already archaic.