THIS is an Essentisl Tool for all KJVO to have and use now

[robycop3]

The aim of the study is to rightly divide the word of truth. If there is a right division there must be a wrong division, no?

Right, and the non-Scriptural KJVO myth is an example of it.

 

[JD731]

Right, and the non-Scriptural KJVO myth is an example of it.

I sympathize with your sentiment but the alternative to a perfect word, which seems to be no restraints and anything goes, has not been proven.

 

[JesusFan]

I sympathize with your sentiment but the alternative to a perfect word, which seems to be no restraints and anything goes, has not been proven.

There is no perfect translation

 

[robycop3]

I sympathize with your sentiment but the alternative to a perfect word, which seems to be no restraints and anything goes, has not been proven.

The KJV is far-from-perfect, as has been shown numerous times on this site.

 

[Ben1445]

The KJV is far-from-perfect, as has been shown numerous times on this site.

Were it actually “far from” I would suggest that we not use it.
As several on the BB (who appear to be most against it) have said, it is a good translation. I would suggest that it is not “far from.”

 

[robycop3]

Were it actually “far from” I would suggest that we not use it.
As several on the BB (who appear to be most against it) have said, it is a good translation. I would suggest that it is not “far from.”

Just sit down with an expert on Koine Greek, and an Old Hebrew expert and analyze the KJV's goofs & booboos. You'll be amazed !

 

[Ben1445]

Just sit down with an expert on Koine Greek, and an Old Hebrew expert and analyze the KJV's goofs & booboos. You'll be amazed !

So your contention is that the KJV is so far from God’s Word that it shouldn’t be called that. You think that people who read and follow what a KJV says are going to Hell?

Not what you meant?
Then it really is not that far from perfect. If people spent as much time building themselves up in the version that they preferred, instead of tearing down other versions, they would be much better off.

I’m not saying that the Book of Mormon is acceptable if you just apply it. There are some versions that are not worth spending time in. But generally speaking, probably what you are using and what I am using are just fine.
The only thing worse than KJVO-ism is “anything other than KJV”-ism.

 

[robycop3]

No, I meant what I said. There are many translation errors in the KJV than what most people know about. I've discussed several of the more-glaring ones here, such as "Easter" in Acts 12:4, but there are many more less-obvious goofs as well.

 

[Ben1445]

No, I meant what I said. There are many translation errors in the KJV than what most people know about. I've discussed several of the more-glaring ones here, such as "Easter" in Acts 12:4, but there are many more less-obvious goofs as well.

So when you hear Easter, you think automatically that the translators meant Ishtar? Or is the use of the word Easter well recognized in English as referring to the resurrection of Christ?
You seem to hold both sides to me. That we need translation into the common English, but also that we shouldn’t use the common English.

 

[David Lamb]

So when you hear Easter, you think automatically that the translators meant Ishtar? Or is the use of the word Easter well recognized in English as referring to the resurrection of Christ?
You seem to hold both sides to me. That we need translation into the common English, but also that we shouldn’t use the common English.

But the original Greek word is translated "Passover" in 26 of the 27 times it occurs in the KJV New Testament. Why should it be translated as "Easter" here:

Ac 12:4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered [him] to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter <3957> to bring him forth to the people.

Whey ever would Herod's intention be based on a word referring to a festival based around the resurrection of Jesus Christ? He was an enemy of the gospel of Christ.

 

[Ben1445]

But the original Greek word is translated "Passover" in 26 of the 27 times it occurs in the KJV New Testament. Why should it be translated as "Easter" here:

Ac 12:4 And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered [him] to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter <3957> to bring him forth to the people.

Whey ever would Herod's intention be based on a word referring to a festival based around the resurrection of Jesus Christ? He was an enemy of the gospel of Christ.

Because the translators were using their modern English.
I know it’s Passover.

My point is that when translators used their modern English for the KJV it wasn’t okay but the KJV doesn’t use today’s modern English so it is still not okay.
It just smacks of a double standard.

 

[David Lamb]

Because the translators were using their modern English.
I know it’s Passover.

My point is that when translators used their modern English for the KJV it wasn’t okay but the KJV doesn’t use today’s modern English so it is still not okay.
It just smacks of a double standard.

Sorry, I seem to have been guilty of misunderstanding your earlier post. I thought you meant that the KJV was right in having "Easter". My mistake!