The flaws of the KVJ

[RipponRedeaux]

Mr Agedman continues to deny the obvious. The NKJV demonstrates the KJV is deeply flawed.
The use of mythical animals in the KJV demonstrates it is deeply flawed.
Translating different places as the same place demonstrates the KJV is deeply flawed.
I could list dozens of flaws and each and every one would be said to be a non-flaw.

Van, you need to own your own words. You said that the KJV is "deeply flawed." You need to substantiate that remark with proof or leave the room with your head bowed in contrition.
The words "deeply flawed" (which you have accused many Bible translations of being) would apply to doctrines of the Bible. Which doctrines of the KJV are deeply flawed?

 

[37818]

I assume you are saying "through faith" is correct rather than "through Him." If so, both you and the KJV are wrong.

Note the miracles of Jesus were performed by the power of the Holy Spirit. Thus the power healing the man came "through Him." Full Stop

. . . And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know: yea, the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all. . . .

 

[37818]

There are two ways to look at the words of God, 1) literally, and 2) spiritually, because the words of the bible are intended to be both.

Spiritual meanings come from the literal reading of the text. Else is an excuse to twist the word of God.

Jn 6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

Nobody quotes this verse as proof they are elect because we all know that no one who is alive today has seen the Son. But these guys he was speaking to has seen him.

. . . which seeth the Son, . . . Is understood [spititually] to mean "who understand the Son. Jesus argued ". . . Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; . . ." Matthew 13:13.

For instance, Jesus Christ was crucified in 30 AD but for 3.5 years . . . .

3.5 years is an interpertation. Personally I only get about 2 years. John's account only explicitly mentions 3 Passovers. Matthew and Mark the one. Luke twice, Jesus parents taking Him to it every year and the one in Matthew and Mark, being the last of the three in John.

 

[Dave G]

All the treanslations of Deuteronomy 33:17 which before the KJV treanslated רְאֵם֙ as unicorn translated it as uncorn in the singular.

I agree.
Here's the Hebrew:
https://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/deu33.pdf

Here is the translation of it in the 1599 Geneva:

" His beauty shall be like his firstborn bullock, and his horns as the horns of an unicorn: with them he shall smite the people together, even the ends of the world: these are also the ten thousands of Ephraim, and these are the thousands of Manasseh."

and here it is in the AV:

" His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth:
and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh."

One says, "the horns of an unicorn" in a slightly more specific way, and one says "the horns of unicorns" in a slightly more general way.
That there is a difference between how the two translations represent that verse, I freely admit.

On a side note, the Geneva also translates "beauty" in the first part of the passage, while the AV translates the same word as "glory" for the Hebrew word for "honor"...."he shall smite" in the Geneva, and "he shall push" in the AV for the Hebrew word for "he-shall-gore"

But again, I see no problem with the AV and the way that it translated this passage...
in other words, I don't take exception to it, and I don't see how it's a problem or a flaw;

In fact, I think that they did a better job in their work than the ones that came before it.

 

[Dave G]

@37818 :
In the end, we'll have to agree to disagree.

When it comes down to it, I still see the AV as being a translation of the correct Greek and Hebrew texts, and having what could be construed as poorer translation choices when examined in the light of more modern Englishchoices;
But the reality of it is, is that I believe that it is far superior to what came before it, and it is definitely far superior, using the English of its day, than anything that has so far come after it.

In addition, to me it is the word of God,
and the best representation of it in my own native language that I've seen so far in my 43+ years as a believer.
To others it is an old horse that needs to be put out to pasture, which I will respectfully disagree with probably until the day that I go to be with the Lord.


I'll make this my last reply in this thread.
May God bless you and all who read this.

 

[JD731]

Something to think about, if you find this of any value:

Did it occur to you that the word "seen" in John 6:36 and John 6:40 could be taken in the spiritual sense ( and not the literal ), as in "seeing the truth of", or " having the truth of who He is revealed to them by God",
similar to what the Lord told Peter in Matthew 11:27?:

I might could do that if the context were not referring to a visual that proved he is the "bread of life" that was sent down from heaven to give life to the world and had the same character as the manna in the wilderness which was the type referenced. These guys had just seen that the day before. Read the whole chapter. The manna must be ingested for physical life to be maintained and likewise, he told them, they must eat his flesh and they would have life.Everything physical in this narrative pointed to the spiritual. The point is they must have his presence in their physical bodies in order to have everlasting life. This would be possible when he came back after the resurrection from the dead in the person of the Holy Ghost. Not one in that congregation that day, including his very own disciples, could receive that teaching at that time because their minds were not fitted for that teaching yet. Nevertheless, the Father would receive them if they just believed Jesus words whether they understood them at that time. The first thing that all of them were required to believe is that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God and that the Father had sent him.

This whole chapter of Jn 6 depends on the understanding of the foundational teaching of the manna in the OT. The physical represents the spiritual in all of God's doctrines. It is the way of God.

Jh 17:20 20 Neither pray I for these (apostles) alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

Col 1:26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:
27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:

1 John 5:12. He that hath the son (in them) hath life.

It is so exciting to ponder this glorious truth about our savior, it is hard to type.

" All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him

."

or that what is stated here:

" When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. " ( Matthew 16:13-17 ).?

I only ask because that is how it strikes me when I read it for myself.

The revelation of the Father and what he is like was a ministry of the Son. It was not a subject of the OT scriptures. This understanding of the Christ as the Son of the living God had certainly registered on Peter and the apostles. What Peter stated that he believed was all that required of any of those Jews for justification during the earthly ministry of Jesus Christ. This can be easily proven by the fact that not a single person, apostle or otherwise, believed when he had risen from the dead and they did not even understand it.

Jn 20:24 But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came.
25 The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.

29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:

31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

Mark 16:9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.

11 And they (The apostles and prophets), when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.
12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.
13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.

May the Lord Jesus Christ receive the glory he deserves. What a savior!

 

[JD731]

Spiritual meanings come from the literal reading of the text. Else is an excuse to twist the word of God.


. . . which seeth the Son, . . . Is understood [spititually] to mean "who understand the Son. Jesus argued ". . . Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; . . ." Matthew 13:13.

3.5 years is an interpertation. Personally I only get about 2 years. John's account only explicitly mentions 3 Passovers. Matthew and Mark the one. Luke twice, Jesus parents taking Him to it every year and the one in Matthew and Mark, being the last of the three in John.

This is not possible because all things were in place for the ministry of Jesus Christ on earth to be the first half of the seventy weeks of Daniel had the Jewish nation received him as their Messiah and King. He came to fulfill all things, he said. The reason for this age with the mystery form of the kingdom when the King is away and his subjects are under the laws of the governments of this world is because the generation of Jews who were charged to receive him failed to do so. By doing so, that generation (which was his own generation) committed a sin that he would not pardon in that world (age) or that one to come (which is this one we are in) and nationally, they were judicially blinded and the gentiles chosen to accomplish his purpose. After this age and all the rebels of that nation are destroyed through the fires of tribulation then God will keep all the covenant promises he has made to them as his people, including dwelling in their own land safely.

Because he has not taken his kingdom yet we call him Lord and not King Jesus. All the subjects of his kingdom will have called him Lord before they can call him King.

One must be born again to enter into his kingdom. Romans 10 says the following.

8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Think about it.

 

[37818]

This is not possible because all things were in place for the ministry of Jesus Christ on earth to be the first half of the seventy weeks of Daniel had the Jewish nation received him as their Messiah and King.

Well then, that interpertation of 70th week of Daniel is false. Not the Biblical interpertation. The Biblical 70th week of Danel is in Revelation 11:3 and Revelation 12:6 and so yet future.

 

[JD731]

Well then, that interpertation of 70th week of Daniel is false. Not the Biblical interpertation. The Biblical 70th week of Danel is in Revelation 11:3 and Revelation 12:6 and so yet future.

Indeed it is but history has unfolded this way because of the unbelief of Israel. If they would have received him history would have unfolded differently.

Notice where the responsibility lies here and what our Lord did in response to his rejection by his people.

Luke 14:15-24
15 And when one of them that sat at meat with him heard these things, he said unto him, Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God.
16 Then said he unto him, A certain man made a great supper, ( supper time is at the end of the day when the work is done) and bade many:
17 And sent his servant at supper time to say to them that were bidden, Come; for all things are now ready.
18 And they all with one consent began to make excuse. The first said unto him, I have bought a piece of ground, and I must needs go and see it: I pray thee have me excused.
19 And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to prove them: I pray thee have me excused.
20 And another said, I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.
21 So that servant came, and shewed his lord these things. Then the master of the house being angry said to his servant, Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind.
22 And the servant said, Lord, it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room.
23 And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled.
24 For I say unto you, That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.

Whose fault was it that the Bidden ones missed the supper and fell into great disfavor with the certain man? Do you think the invitation to come to the supper was legitimate?

 

[37818]

Indeed it is but history has unfolded this way because of the unbelief of Israel. If they would have received him history would have unfolded differently.

Well, how you interpert it.

 

[JD731]

Well, how you interpert it.

There is only one way to interpret it and that is by believing what you read. Look at this explanation by John. Keep in mind that when he writes his gospel in 90 AD, it is in retrospect and his understanding of the ministry of Jesus Christ is far greater than when he lived out these details he put in his gospel. He writes in the past tense, looking back. Note;

John 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

He wrote John 6 and was in the band of the 12 who did not know what it meant at the time to eat the flesh of the son of man in order to have everlasting life. He surely did know when he wrote his gospel and he knew how sinners became sons of God, which requires a birth into God's family through his son.

1 John 3:Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.
2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

Now, for a definition or an equivalence of supper time that we found in Lk 14.

Gal 4:4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

5 To redeem them that were under the law, (that would be the circumcision) that we might receive the adoption of sons.
6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

The fullness of time (singular) was the end of a time and the beginning of another. Under the former time that had come to it's fullness, sinners could be a servant of God by keeping his law as a lifestyle but they could not be a son. Under the law of liberty, which Jesus Christ our Lord ushered in at his resurrection, men could be a son of God when they received the Spirit of Christ into their bodies by faith in his death, burial, and resurrection.

Rom 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Ga 3:23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus

This is written to gentiles because Israel would not come. Who failed here? God? No, Israel failed and God wrote his history a different way than he would have.

Rom 10:1 Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.
2 For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge.
3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.

The righteousness of God would be Christ. What glorious and wonderful truths God has given us. What a privilege for us gentiles to be accepted in the beloved. A saved man ought to shout right here.

 

[Van]

SNIP

On and on, disinformation piled on disinformation, off topic piled on off topic. This level of harassment should not be allowed.

 

[Van]

Van, SNIP

On and on, off topic disparagement piled on off topic disparagement.

The NKJV demonstrates the KJV is deeply flawed.
The use of mythical animals in the KJV demonstrates it is deeply flawed.
Translating different places as the same place demonstrates the KJV is deeply flawed.
I could list dozens of flaws and each and every one would be said to be a non-flaw.

 

[Van]

So you actually think. SNIP

Please stop posting off topic personal insults.

 

[robycop3]

Some "ACTUAL goofs & booboos in the KJV are:

* "Easter" in Acts 12:4. This has been discussed & proven in other threads on this site.
* "the love of money is THE root of ALL evil" in 1 Tim. 6:10.
* Thou shalt not KILL" in Ex. 20:13
* The words "and shalt be" in Rev. 16:5. Those words are NOT found in that verse in any known ancient manuscripts, nor in any revision of the Textus Receptus until Beza's revision, used by the AV makers. Right now, it's reckoned that those words were a "conjectural emendation" by Beza tho must've thought they "looked good" there. While those words ARE correct, they have NOT been proven to actually belong in that verse.

 

[Van]

Are you as closed minded as @Van. SNIP

Please stop posting off topic personal insults.

 

[Van]

. . . And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know: yea, the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all. . . .

I asked if "through faith" or "through Him" was the right translation, and he quotes the KJV but does not say this is correct. Why? Because it is not.

 

[Van]

Van, you need SNIP

Yet another harassment post, off topic personal insult. Why all these disinformation posts? To hide the truth the KJV is deeply flawed as demonstrated by the NKJV. Unicorns anyone?

 

[37818]

Please stop posting off topic personal insults.

Done.

 

[agedman]

8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. 9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. 10And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: 11In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. 13And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; 15And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.