PDA

View Full Version : Differences between the KJV and NIV



StackerKen
11th September 2010, 12:41 PM
Some here think there are Major differences between the two.

other than some missing verses...(left out because the were not in earlier manuscripts, found more recently)

I don't see any major differences....Care to show me some?

Jazkal
11th September 2010, 03:38 PM
I would suggest you get and read this book:

New Age Bible Versions
http://www.amazon.com/New-Age-Bible-Versions-Documentation/dp/0963584502

Best documentation on the subject that you can find.

If nothing else, the background on Westcott and Hort is worth the cost of the book by itself.

StackerKen
11th September 2010, 03:50 PM
Thanks Jazkal

I read the two side by side often. and like I said I don't see the difference in the message.

I already have Trusted Wise Counsel.

How do I know I can trust the authors of that book that you recommend? (to be wise and truthful)

eta; Here is what my trusted wise counsel says about that book you recomended.

http://www.equip.org/articles/new-age-bible-versions

last paragraph

A volume the size of NABV would be required to point out Riplinger’s misunderstanding of theology, translation technique, and her fascination with New Age conspiracy and its association with modern versions. This book will cause a temporary stir. Hopefully, however, most Christians will recognize NABV as an ill-begotten book and will turn back to a study of the Word of God in the language of the people today. In so doing they will fulfill the prayers of godly translators of centuries past, including the very ones who translated the King James Version of the Bible.

Jazkal
11th September 2010, 06:52 PM
If you want to ignore one of the two sides of the argument, then you are free to do so. It is not my place to tell you how to find the truth of a matter.

However, the background info on the root documents that the NIV is based on; is FACT, that isn't under dispute. (Westcott and Hort's documents - Fact)

And the background and beliefs of those two men is also not in dispute (their auto-biographies - Fact).

The info is available from multiple sources.

Here is one that google popped up:
http://www.chick.com/reading/books/157/157_08a.asp

Direct quotes from them:
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/wh-heretics.htm


"I reject the word infallibility of Holy Scriptures overwhelmingly." (Westcott, The Life and Letters of Brook Foss Westcott, Vol. I, p.207)

That is why they have no problems with modifying the scripture, it wasn't God inspired to begin with.

So taking them at their own word, not reading anything into what they HAVE said, I wouldn't have anything to do with anything these men have had to do with, including bible versions that are based on their works.

But hey, that is just me.

Jazkal
11th September 2010, 07:12 PM
I just found this "NIV Quiz", thought it was funny.

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/nivquiz.htm


NIV BIBLE QUIZ

INTRUCTIONS: Using the New International Version� Bible (NIV), answer the following questions. Do not rely on your memory. As the Bible is the final authority, you must take the answer from the NIV Bible verse (Not from footnotes but from the text. Footnotes are not the Bible.).

1. Fill in the missing words in Matthew 5:44. "Love your enemies, ________ them that curse you, _____________ to them that hate you, and pray for them that __________ and persecute you."

2. According to Matthew 17:21, what two things are required to cast out this type of devil?

3. According to Matthew 18:11, why did Jesus come to earth?

4. According to Matthew 27:2, what was Pilate's first name?

5. In Matthew 27:35, when the wicked soldiers parted His garments, they were fulfilling the words of the prophet. Copy what the prophet said in Matthew 27:35 from the NIV.

6. In Mark 3:15, Jesus gave the apostles power to cast out devils and to:

7. According to Mark 7:16, what does a man need to be able to hear?

8. According to Luke 7:28, what was John? (teacher, prophet, carpenter, etc.). What is his title or last name?

9. In Luke 9:55, what did the disciples not know?

10. In Luke 9:56, what did the Son of man not come to do? According to this verse, what did He come to do?

11. In Luke 22:14, how many apostles were with Jesus?

12. According to Luke 23:38, in what three languages was the superscription written?

13. In Luke 24:42, what did they give Jesus to eat with His fish?

14. John 3:13 is a very important verse, proving the deity of Christ. According to this verse (as Jesus spoke), where is the Son of man?

15. What happened each year as told in John 5:4?

16. In John 7:50, what time of day did Nicodemus come to Jesus?

17. In Acts 8:37, what is the one requirement for baptism?

18. What did Saul ask Jesus in Acts 9:6?

19. Write the name of the man mentioned in Acts 15:34.

20. Study Acts 24:6-8. What would the Jew have done with Paul? What was the chief captain's name? What did the chief captain command?

21. Copy Romans 16:24 word for word from the NIV.

22. First Timothy 3:16 is perhaps the greatest verse in the New Testament concerning the deity of Christ. In this verse, who was manifested in the flesh?

23. In the second part of First Peter 4:14, how do [they] speak of Christ? And, what do we Christians do?

24. Who are the three Persons of the Trinity in First John 5:7?

25. Revelation 1:11 is another very important verse that proves the deity of Christ. In the first part of this verse Jesus said, "I am the A__________ and O___________ , the _________ and the _______:"

Conclusion: Little space is provided for your answers, but it's much more than needed. If you followed the instructions above, you not only failed the test, you receive a big goose egg. So now what do you think of your "accurate, easy-to-understand, up-to-date Bible"? If these 25 questions haven't served to show you that the NIV is a very inferior Bible, based on a very inferior Greek text, write me and I'll make up another quiz with 25 more questions, or 250, if you wish; but you will still flunk the text. If you would like to improve your score, and in fact score 100%, you can take this test using the Authorized (King James) Bible .

StackerKen
11th September 2010, 10:07 PM
oh yeah...funny...ha ha ^-^ I know the NIV is missing some stuff That is why I read both. Many times side by side...

I tell you the Message is the same message.

Can you show me where it is not the same message?

Now I don't wanna spend a lot of time on your quiz right now...but lets take a quick look...

question #1 New International Version
But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,

King James Bible
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Pretty much the same thing...just shorter in the NIV

question#2
the answer can be found in the New International Version
Mark 9:29 He replied, "This kind can come out only by prayer."

question #3

the answer can be found in the New International Version
Luke 19:10 "For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost."


question #4 who cares?

I will continue this later

Jazkal
12th September 2010, 07:06 AM
The NIV is missing almost 10% of the Words of God. If you find that acceptable, then you sir have something wrong with you, and it is no small thing.

Since you seem to be short on time, and don't seem to want to actually research the issues. I would suggest you at least look into who Westcott and Hort are and how/what that have to do with your bible. Without doing that you will continue in your ignorance, at your own peril.

StackerKen
12th September 2010, 07:38 AM
The NIV is missing almost 10% of the Words of God. If you find that acceptable, then you sir have something wrong with you, and it is no small thing.

Since you seem to be short on time, and don't seem to want to actually research the issues. I would suggest you at least look into who Westcott and Hort are and how/what that have to do with your bible. Without doing that you will continue in your ignorance, at your own peril.


Are you implying that if I don't read only the KJV that I am in peril?

I will continue you "quiz" and continue showing how wrong that assumption is.

You still have not shown where the message differs.....

Do you just want to spread rumors about the Translators?

StackerKen
12th September 2010, 08:51 AM
Question #5 on this "quiz"
The answer is in the NIV John 19:24

#6
I don't know why the translator left that out...Probably because it wasn't in the transcripts they used.
(does it really change the message?)

#7
everyone knows a man need ears to hear. (same answer as #6)

#8
same as before the answer is in the NIV Matthew 3:1


I am seeing that the NIV is missing more than I realized...But the message is still the same.

And I certainly don't think that a person has to read the KJV to be saved....

Many were saved before it was printed :)

Jazkal
12th September 2010, 09:44 AM
Do you just want to spread rumors about the Translators?


I am not spreading rumors. I am repeating the words of the translators, in context. They wrote many things on different topics. I'm trying not to ruin the surprise.

Did you actually read the one quote I posted from Westcott himself?

"I reject the word infallibility of Holy Scriptures overwhelmingly." (Westcott, The Life and Letters of Brook Foss Westcott, Vol. I, p.207)

Do you believe that the scriptures are inspired by God or just some historical documents written by Hebrews and Jews?

Really, you need to answer that question for yourself. Because based on what your answer is, will totally change your worldview.

So which is it?

StackerKen
12th September 2010, 10:04 AM
Do you just want to spread rumors about the Translators?


I am not spreading rumors. I am repeating the words of the translators, in context. They wrote many things on different topics. I'm trying not to ruin the surprise.

Did you actually read the one quote I posted from Westcott himself?

"I reject the word infallibility of Holy Scriptures overwhelmingly." (Westcott, The Life and Letters of Brook Foss Westcott, Vol. I, p.207)

Do you believe that the scriptures are inspired by God or just some historical documents written by Hebrews and Jews?

Really, you need to answer that question for yourself. Because based on what your answer is, will totally change your worldview.

So which is it?


I believe the Bible is the "infallible repository for redemptive revelation."
But the Translations may not be perfect and the same with the translators themselves

I think even the translators of the KJV said that.

StackerKen
12th September 2010, 10:10 AM
Jazkal; I appreciate your concern on this matter. I really do.

You keep asking me questions and I do my best to answer

yet you will not answer me.

Is the the core and most essential Message the same in both translations?

if not

Can you show me where they differ?

StackerKen
12th September 2010, 10:33 AM
Jazkal; I now plan to get a American King James Version :)

Thanks again for your concern.

Jazkal
12th September 2010, 11:20 AM
You keep asking me questions and I do my best to answer
yet you will not answer me.
Can you show me where they differ?

There are so many changes, you need to really study this in detail yourself. It isn't my place to do it for you. I can point you towards research material, such as Ripplinger's book, and another good book is:

"Which Bible Can We Trust?" by Les Garrett
http://www.amazon.com/Which-Bible-Can-We-Trust/dp/1585380067




Jazkal; I now plan to get a American King James Version :)
Thanks again for your concern.

What finally brought you to this decision? I thought you already had a KJV and were reading them side by side? Maybe I'm reading too much into your statement, but does this mean you are going to get rid of the NIV?

StackerKen
12th September 2010, 11:32 AM
Jazkal; I now plan to get a American King James Version :)
Thanks again for your concern.


What finally brought you to this decision? I thought you already had a KJV and were reading them side by side? Maybe I'm reading too much into your statement, but does this mean you are going to get rid of the NIV?


I have the "Old English" version of the KJV and I do read them side by side often.

I figure if I get an American King James Version I can just read it alone...and it will be easier for me.

No. Im not getting rid of My NIV. :)


eta; I guess maybe it's called "the New King James version"

ya think that one is ok?

Jazkal
17th September 2010, 06:13 PM
This site has some good examples you could review:

http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/bacon-niv1.html

Kali
17th September 2010, 06:35 PM
Some say the KJV is perfect...they're wrong.

No translation of another language is perfect.

The KJV is the most doctrinally sound for sure.

NKJV is second, but with a few serious errors.

All the rest are garbage. The NIV is as corrupt as they come.

All the trinity proof scriptures have been removed or changed.

Try proving the trinity with a NIV.

Fortyone
17th September 2010, 06:41 PM
I use neither, my Orthodox bible hasnt been translated quite as much as yours ;)

Kali
17th September 2010, 06:46 PM
Also, the scriptures that happen to be missing from the NIV are almost always the important ones.

Kali
17th September 2010, 06:57 PM
Check out these foundational trinity scriptures that existed in English for 360 years until the newer translations starting coming out around 1970's. (There's more but this is what I had saved)

1 John 5:7

KJV: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

NIV: For there are three that testify: (Rest is Missing)

The NIV takes out the very scripture that tells us that all three are one, what we call the trinity!


1 Timothy 3:16

KJV: "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh..."

NIV: "Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body"

NIV changes "manifested in the flesh" to "appeared in a body".



1 John 4:2-3

KJV: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

NIV: but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

NIV leaves out Jesus Christ coming in the flesh (again).


Acts 17:29

KJV: Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.

NIV: Therefore since we are God's offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by man's design and skill.

NIV changes "the godhead" to "the divine being"


Philippians 2:6

KJV: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God

NIV: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped

NIV changes the deity of Christ here.

Jazkal
17th September 2010, 08:26 PM
The Jehovah's Witnesses have a translation based on the same root manuscripts of Westcott and Hort (same ones that the NIV uses), which made it easy for them to do away with the Deity of Jesus.


EDIT:
Just for the record, I am not a KJV-Only adherent.

Saul Mine
18th September 2010, 07:24 AM
Interlinear
10 kleptes ouk . erchetai ei me .ina . klepse
...thief . only .comes .. if not that .he might steal

kai thuse .... kai apolese ..... ego elthon
and might kill and might destroy I . comes

ina ... zoen echosin ....... kai perrison ...... echosin
so that life they might have and more abundantly might have

KJV
John 10:10 - The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.

RSV
John 10:10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly.

NIV
John 10:10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.

As you can see, only the KJV preserves the intensifier more abundantly. The other versions tone it down, and one version renders it "eternal life", which Jesus definitely did not say.

The interlinear also illustrates why we have to have versions and not translations.

StackerKen
19th December 2010, 03:13 PM
First, I want to affirm with all evangelical Christians that the Bible is the Word of God, inerrant, inspired, and our final authority for faith and life. However, nowhere in the Bible am I told that only one translation of it is the correct one. Nowhere am I told that the King James Bible is the best or only holy Bible. There is no verse that tells me how God will preserve his word, so I can have no scriptural warrant for arguing that the King James has exclusive rights to the throne. The arguments must proceed on other bases.

Second, the Greek text which stands behind the King James Bible is demonstrably inferior in certain places. The man who edited the text was a Roman Catholic priest and humanist named Erasmus.1 He was under pressure to get it to the press as soon as possible since (a) no edition of the Greek New Testament had yet been published, and (b) he had heard that Cardinal Ximenes and his associates were just about to publish an edition of the Greek New Testament and he was in a race to beat them. Consequently, his edition has been called the most poorly edited volume in all of literature! It is filled with hundreds of typographical errors which even Erasmus would acknowledge. Two places deserve special mention. In the last six verses of Revelation, Erasmus had no Greek manuscript (=MS) (he only used half a dozen, very late MSS for the whole New Testament any way). He was therefore forced to back-translate the Latin into Greek and by so doing he created seventeen variants which have never been found in any other Greek MS of Revelation! He merely guessed at what the Greek might have been. Secondly, for 1 John 5:7-8, Erasmus followed the majority of MSS in reading there are three witnesses in heaven, the Spirit and the water and the blood. However, there was an uproar in some Roman Catholic circles because his text did not read there are three witnesses in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit. Erasmus said that he did not put that in the text because he found no Greek MSS which had that reading. This implicit challengeviz., that if he found such a reading in any Greek MS, he would put it in his textdid not go unnoticed. In 1520, a scribe at Oxford named Roy made such a Greek MS (codex 61, now in Dublin). Erasmus third edition had the second reading because such a Greek MS was made to order to fill the challenge! To date, only a handful of Greek MSS have been discovered which have the Trinitarian formula in 1 John 5:7-8, though none of them is demonstrably earlier than the sixteenth century.


http://bible.org/article/why-i-do-not-think-king-james-bible-best-translation-available-today

StackerKen
19th December 2010, 03:35 PM
The King James Version is a word-for-word translation. Other translations, such as the New International Version (NIV), are meaning-for-meaning translations.

... In spite of its imperfections, the King James Version remains a masterpiece. . .

http://www.angelfire.com/hi2/graphic1designer/errors.html

Here is a partial listing of King James Version translation errors:

Genesis 1:2 should read "And the earth became without form . . . ." The word translated "was" is hayah, and denotes a condition different than a former condition, as in Genesis 19:26.

Genesis 10:9 should read " . . . Nimrod the mighty hunter in place of [in opposition to] the LORD." The word "before" is incorrect and gives the connotation that Nimrod was a good guy, which is false.

Leviticus 16:8, 10, 26 in the KJV is "scapegoat" which today has the connotation of someone who is unjustly blamed for other's sins. The Hebrew is Azazel, which means "one removed or separated." The Azazel goal represents Satan, who is no scapegoat. He is guilty of his part in our sins.

Deuteronomy 24:1, "then let him" should be "and he." As the Savior explained in Matthew 19, Moses did not command divorcement. This statute is regulating the permission of divorce because of the hardness of their hearts.

II Kings 2:23, should be "young men", not "little children."

Isaiah 65:17 should be "I am creating [am about to create] new heavens and new earth . . . ."

Ezekiel 20:25 should read "Wherefore I permitted them, or gave them over to, [false] statutes that are not good, and judgments whereby they should not live." God's laws are good, perfect and right. This verse shows that since Israel rejected God's laws, He allowed them to hurt themselves by following false man made customs and laws.

Daniel 8:14 is correct in the margin, which substitutes "evening morning" for "days." Too bad William Miller didn't realize this.

Malachi 4:6 should read " . . . lest I come and smite the earth with utter destruction." "Curse" doesn't give the proper sense here. Same word used in Zechariah 14:11.

Matthew 5:48 should be "Become ye therefore perfect" rather than "be ye therefore perfect." "Perfect" here means "spiritually mature." Sanctification is a process of overcoming with the aid of the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 24:22 needs an additional word to clarify the meaning. It should say "there should no flesh be saved alive."

Matthew 27:49 omits text which was in the original. Moffatt correctly adds it, while the RSV puts it in a footnote: "And another took a spear and pierced His side, and out came water and blood." The Savior's death came when a soldier pierced His side, Revelation 1:7.

Matthew 28:1, "In the end of the sabbath as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week . . ." should be translated literally, "Now late on Sabbath, as it was getting dusk toward the first day of the week . . . ." The Sabbath does not end at dawn but at dusk.

Luke 2:14 should say, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men of God's good pleasure or choosing." That is, there will be peace on earth among men who have God's good will in their hearts.

Luke 14:26 has the unfortunate translation of the Greek word miseo, Strong's #3404, as "hate", when it should be rendered "love less by comparison." We are not to hate our parents and family!

John 1:31, 33 should say "baptize" or "baptizing IN water" not with water. Pouring or sprinkling with water is not the scriptural method of baptism, but only thorough immersion in water.

John 1:17 is another instance of a poor preposition. "By" should be "through": "For the law was given by [through] Moses . . . ." Moses did not proclaim his law, but God's Law.

John 13:2 should be "And during supper" (RSV) rather than "And supper being ended" (KJV).

Acts 12:4 has the inaccurate word "Easter" which should be rendered "Passover." The Greek word is pascha which is translated correctly as Passover in Matthew 26:2, etc.

I Corinthians 1:18 should be: "For the preaching of the cross is to them that are perishing foolishness; but unto us which are being saved it is the power of God", rather than "perish" and "are saved." Likewise, II Thessalonians 2:10 should be "are perishing" rather than "perish."

I Corinthians 15:29 should be: "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the hope of the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the hope of the dead?"

II Corinthians 6:2 should be "a day of salvation", instead of "the day of salvation." This is a quote from Isaiah 49:8, which is correct. The day of salvation is not the same for each individual. The firstfruits have their day of salvation during this life. The rest in the second resurrection.

I Timothy 4:8 should say, "For bodily exercise profiteth for a little time: but godliness in profitable unto all things . . . ."

I Timothy 6:10 should be, "For the love of money is a [not the] root of all evil . . . ."

Hebrews 4:8 should be "Joshua" rather than "Jesus", although these two words are Hebrew and Greek equivalents.

Hebrews 4:9 should read, "There remaineth therefore a keeping of a sabbath to the people of God."

Hebrews 9:28 is out of proper order in the King James. It should be: "So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them without sin that look for him shall he appear the second time unto salvation."

I John 5:7-8 contains additional text which was added to the original. "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one." The italicized text was added to the original manuscripts. Most modern translations agree that this was an uninspired addition to the Latin Vulgate to support the unscriptural trinity doctrine.

Revelation 14:4 should be "a firstfruits", because the 144,000 are not all the firstfruits.

Revelation 20:4-5 in the KJV is a little confusing until you realize that the sentence "This is the first resurrection." in verse five refers back to "they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years" in verse four.

Revelation 20:10, "And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are [correction: should be 'were cast' because the beast and false prophet were mortal human beings who were burned up in the lake of fire 1,000 years previous to this time, Revelation 19:20], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever." The point is that Satan will be cast into the same lake of fire into which the beast and false prophet were cast a thousand years previously.

Revelation 22:2 should be "health" rather than "healing."

Italics: Sometimes Helpful, Sometimes Wrong

No language can be translated word for word into another language. Hebrew and Greek idioms often do not come through clearly into literal English. Thus, beginning in 1560 with the Geneva Bible, translators initiated the practice of adding italicized clarifying words to make the original language more plain. The fifty-four King James translators did the same. Often, the added italicized words do help make the meaning clearer. At other times, the translators through their doctrinal misunderstandings added errors instead.

In Psalms 81:4, "was" is totally uncalled for and not in the original Hebrew. New Moons are still a statute of God.

We have shown how in Revelation 20:10 that the italicized "are" is incorrect and that "were cast" in italics would have been more appropriate. Another instance is John 8:28 where Jesus said (KJV), "I am he." The "he" is in italics and was not actually spoken by Jesus, completely obscuring the fact the Jesus was claiming to be the great "I AM" of the Old Testament, John 8:58 and Exodus 3:14.

In Luke 3:23-38, the italicized words "the son" are not in the original Greek. Actually, Luke gives the fleshly descent of the Savior through Mary, while Matthew gives the legal descent through Joseph.

Matthew 24:24 should not have the italicized words "it were". It IS possible for the elect to be deceived. We need to be on guard!

Romans 1:7 incorrectly has the italicized words "to be." The fact is, Christians are now saints.

I Corinthians 7:19 needs some italicized words to make the meaning clear. It should say: "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but [the important thing is] the keeping of the commandments of God."

Colossians 2:16-17 can be properly understood only if the KJV italicized word "is" in verse 17 is left out, as it should be. The message of these verses is: don't let men judge you as doing wrong when you observe the holy days, new moons and sabbaths; let the body of Christ (the Church) do the judging.

I Timothy 3:11 has "their" in italics, which is not implied in the original.

II Peter 2:5 should not have "person, a." Noah was the eighth preacher of righteousness.

I John 2:23 has "[but] he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also" in italics. This is an addition based upon the Latin text and not in the original Greek.

Punctuation Problems

Luke 23:43 has been erroneously used by some to claim that Jesus went straight to heaven at His death. The original Greek did not have punctuation marks as we do today. The KJV states, "And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise." The comma should not be after "thee", but "day." The believing malefactor would be with Christ in the paradise of the redeemed when he was resurrected far into the future.

Mark 16:9 does not say that Jesus was resurrected Sunday morning. There is a missing implied comma between "risen" and "early" and there should be no comma after week as the KJV has it: "Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene . . . ." Thus, it should say, "Now when Jesus was risen, early the first day of the week he appeared first to Mary Magdalene . . . ."

Word Differences

Another thing to keep in mind is the fact that the 1611 A.D. King James English is somewhat different than today's English language. The meaning of certain words has changed, and/or the King James sometimes uses words not familiar to most people today in their common speech. In addition, certain idioms in the original Hebrew and Greek are a little difficult to understand today. The Oxford Wide Margin KJV has excellent marginal references which often explain the correct meanings. Here is a partial listing of changed word meanings:

King James Phrase (on top)
Modern English (on bottom)
Abraham's bosom
"the Kingdom of God" in which the redeemed will have an intimate relationship with father Abraham in sharing the eternal inheritance of the earth.
adoption
"sonship", as in Romans 8:23, 9:4, Ephesians 1:5.
affections
"passions", as in Galatians 5:24, "mind" as in Colossians 3:2.
afflict soul
"fast" as in Leviticus 23:27, 32 (Psalms 35:13).
beguile
"judge against you", as in Colossians 2:18.
betimes
"early", as in Proverbs 13:24.
blains
"blisters", as in Exodus 9:9.
bosom, in his
"have an intimate relationship with", as in II Samuel 12:3, 8, John 1:18.
bruit
"report, rumor", as in Jeremiah 10:22, Nahum 3:19.
charity
"spiritual love", as in I Corinthians 13.
clean heart
"right attitude", as in Psalms 51:10, 73:1.
communicate
"share", as in Hebrews 13:16.
communications
"associations, companionships", as in I Corinthians 15:33.
conversation
"conduct", as in Philippians 2:27, I Peter 3:1, "citizenship" as in Philippians 3:20.
convince
"convict", as in Titus 1:9, James 2:9.
corn
"grain", as in Leviticus 23:14, Deuteronomy 23:25.
cover his feet
"go to the toilet", as in I Samuel 24:3.
creature
"creation", as in Romans 8:20-21, II Corinthians 5:17, Galatians 6:15.
cross
"stake"
damned
"judged", as in Mark 16:16.
devils
"demons", as in I Timothy 4:1.
dissimulation
"hypocrisy", as in Galatians 2:13.
divers
"different" places, persons or things as in Matthew 24:7 and Acts 19:9, Hebrews 1:1, James 1:2.
dividing
"expounding, dissecting", as in II Timothy 2:15.
doting
"sick", as in I Timothy 6:4.
due benevolence
"sexual dues", as in I Corinthians 7:3.
ensamples
"examples, types", as in I Corinthians 10:11.
faint
"give up" as in Luke 18:1, Galatians 6:9.
froward
"evil, wrong", as in Proverbs 2:12.
gay
"expensive, costly", as in James 2:3.
Ghost
"Holy Ghost" should be rendered "Holy Spirit."
glass
"mirror", as in I Corinthians 13:12, James 1:23.
hardness
"blindness" as in Mark 3:5.
he
In reference to the Holy Spirit, the KJV usage of "he" rather than "it" implies the false notion of the trinity. The Holy Spirit is not a separate person, but the mind of God the Father and God the Son. See John 14:16, 17, 26 and 16:7-8, 13-15.
heart
"attitude of mind", as in Jeremiah 17:9.
hell
There are three Greek words rendered "hell" in the New Testament: gehenna, hades (equivalent of Hebrew sheol used in the Old Testament), and tartaroo. Gehenna is the lake of fire, hades is the grave and tartaroo is the abyss, the place of restraint for Satan. For English speaking people during the time of King James, "hell" [hades] was a cellar to store potatoes, not a lake of burning brimstone. In Acts 2:27, "hell" is hades, meaning the grave, while in Matthew 10: 28 and Mark 9:43-48 "hell" means the lake of fire. The only place tartaroo is used is in II Peter 2:4.
husbandman
"farmer, rancher", as in James 5:7.
iniquity
"lawlessness", as in Matthew 24:12.
jealous
"zealous", as in II Corinthians 11:2.
knew
"had sexual relations with", as in Genesis 4:1.
leasing
"lying", as in Psalms 4:2, 5:6.
letteth
"restrains", as in II Thessalonians 2:7.
lusteth after
"earnestly desires" as in Deuteronomy 14:26.
mansions
"offices" as in John 14:2.
meat offering
"meal offering", as in Leviticus 23:13, etc.
meet
"fitting, proper", Matthew 3:8, Genesis 2:18.
mocked
"deceived", as in Galatians 6:7.
morning stars
"angels", as in Job 38:7.
nether
"lower", as in Deuteronomy 24:6.
outlandish
"foreign", as in Nehemiah 13:26.
perfect
"spiritually mature", as in II Timothy 3:17, or "upright or sincere" as in Genesis 17:1.
perform
"finish", as in Philippians 1:6.
him that "pisseth against the wall"
"males", as in II Kings 9:8, etc.
press, the
"the crowd", as in Luke 19:3.
prevent
"precede", Psalms 88:13, I Thessalonians 4:15.
prophesy
"inspired preaching", as in I Corinthians 14.
quicken
"make alive", as in Romans 8:11.
quit
"keep on", as in I Corinthians 16:13.
rain
"teach", as in Hosea 10:12, Isaiah 2:3.
rentest
"distort", as in Jeremiah 4:30.
requite
"offer support for", as in I Timothy 5:4.
rereward
rear guard" as in I Samuel 29:2.
rudiments
"elements", as in Colossians 2:8.
those who "seemed to be somewhat"
"boasters", as in Galatians 2:6.
servant
"slave", as in Philippians 2:7.
simple
"harmless", as in Romans 16:19.
sincerity
"with incorruption", as in Ephesians 6:24.
slept with his fathers
"died", as in II Kings 13:9, II Chronicles 16:12.
sons of God
"angels", as in Job 1:6.
spiritual wickedness
"wicked spirits", as in Ephesians 6:12.
sprinkle
"astonish, startle", as in Isaiah 52:15.
stranger
"newcomer, new convert", as in Deuteronomy 14:29.
suffer
"let, allow, permit" as in Mark 10:14, Revelation 11:9.
tarry
"wait", as in Luke 24:49, I Corinthians 16:8, which is explained in Acts 1:4.
tempted
"tried or tested", as in I Corinthians 10:13, James 1:13.
tenor
"intent or purpose", as in Exodus 34:27.
tongues
"foreign languages", Mark 16:17, I Corinthians 14.
virtue
"power" as in Mark 5:30.
visage
"appearance", as in Isaiah 52:14.
Unjustified Additions to the KJV
Derived From Latin Vulgate, Not in Greek Text

These additions should be omitted from the KJV:

Matthew 27:35
"that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots." This verse appears properly in John 19:24.
John 8:9-10
Delete: "being convicted by their own conscience . . . unto the last . . . alone . . . and saw none but the woman . . . those thine accusers."

The Greek properly reads: "But when they heard it, they went away, one by one, beginning with the eldest, and Jesus was left with the woman being before him. Jesus lifted himself up and said to her, 'Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?'"

Acts 9:5-6
"it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him . . . ."
Acts 10:6
"he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do"
Acts 10:21
"which were sent unto him from Cornelius"
Acts 21:8
"that were of Paul's company"
Romans 13:9
"Thou shalt not bear false witness"
Romans 16:20
"Amen"
Colossians 1:14
"through his blood"
Hebrews 2:7
"and didst set him over the works of thy hands"
Hebrews 11:13
"and were persuaded of them and embraced them"
Hebrews 12:20
"or with a dart shot through"
I John 2:23
"(but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also" is placed in italics in the KJV. The Greek Text omits this portion entirely.
I John 5:7-8
"in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these thee are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth" As previously explained, this is not part of the original Greek text.
Revelation 1:8
"the beginning and the ending"
Revelation 1:11
"I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and . . . which are in Asia"
Revelation 1:20
"which thou sawest"
Revelation 2:17
"to eat of"
Revelation 5:4
"and to read"
Revelation 5:14
"four and twenty . . . him that lives forever and ever"
Revelation 11:1
"and the angel stood"
Revelation 12:12
"the inhabiters of"
Revelation 14:5
"before the throne of God"
Revelation 15:2
"over his mark"
Revelation 16:7
"another out of"
Revelation 16:14
"of the earth and"
Revelation 21:3
"and be their God"
Misplaced Verses in the KJV

In Matthew 23:13-14, the proper order is: "But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in."

Romans 16:25-27 belongs after Romans 14:23, not at the end of the book.

StackerKen
19th December 2010, 03:35 PM
Items Wrongly Substituted or Left Out of the KJV,
Should be Reinstated

Matthew 27:49
"And another took a spear and pierced his side and out came water and blood."
[The Orthodox Church says this was part of the Greek Text until mistakenly deleted in 511 A.D.]

Luke 9:50
". . . for his is not against you."
This verse should read: "And Jesus said to him, Forbid him not, for he is not against you. For whoever is not against you is for you."

Luke 10:22
"And having turned to the disciples, he said:"
John 1:28
"Bethany" instead of "Bethabara", which was a corrupt Egyptian reading.
Acts 9:19
Should read, "Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at the time in Damascus."
Acts 20:28
Should read, " . . . the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to feed the church of the Lord and God, which He purchased with His own blood."
Philippians 3:3
Should be "serve in (the) Spirit of God" rather than "serve God in the spirit."
Colossians 1:6
Should have added "and is growing" after "bringeth forth fruits."
Colossians 2:13
Should read, "And you--being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh--you hath He quickened together with him, having forgiven us all the trespasses . . . "
I Thess. 5:21
Should read, "Despise not prophesyings, but prove all things . . . ."
II Timothy 2:19
"of (the) Lord" rather than "of Christ."
Hebrews 8:8
"To them", not "with them."
Hebrews 13:9
"Carried away", not "carried about."
James 5:12
Should be "into hypocrisy" instead of "under judgment."
I Peter 2:2
End of verse should have added: "unto salvation."
Revelation 2:21
Should be " . . . and she wills not to repent of her fornication."
Revelation 6:12
Should be " . . . and the whole moon became blood . . . ."
Revelation 8:7
Should be " . . . and the third part of the land was burnt up, and the third part of the trees . . . ."
Revelation 8:13
"eagle" rather than "angel."
Revelation 11:18
"nations" instead of "dead."
Revelation 12:6
Should read, "And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she has there a place prepared of God . . . ."
Revelation 13:5
Should read, " . . . and power was given it to make war forty-two months . . . ."
Revelation 14:1
Should read, "having His name and the name of His Father written on their foreheads . . . ."
Revelation 15:3
"nations" instead of "saints."
Revelation 17:8
Should read, " . . . when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and shall be present . . . ."
Revelation 18:17
Should read, " . . . everyone who sails to any place . . . " instead of "and all the company in ships."
Revelation 18:20
Should read, " . . . ye holy saints and apostles and prophets."
Revelation 19:12
Should read, " . . . and on his head were many crowns, having names written, and a name written that no man knew . . . ."
Revelation 19:17
Should read, " . . . gather yourselves together unto the great supper of God . . . ", not "supper of the great God."
Revelation 21:24
Should read, "And the nations shall walk by means of its light."
Revelation 22:19
Should read, "tree of life" instead of "book of life."
Revelation 22:21
Should close with "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ be with all of the saints. Amen."
Conclusion

The King James Version is a word-for-word translation. Other translations, such as the New International Version (NIV), are meaning-for-meaning translations.

... In spite of its imperfections, the King James Version remains a masterpiece. . .

G2Rad
19th December 2010, 05:37 PM
The King James Version is a word-for-word translation. Other translations, such as the New International Version (NIV), are meaning-for-meaning translations.

... In spite of its imperfections, the King James Version remains a masterpiece. . .


StackerKen,

man will never comprehend meaning exhaustively

... my ways are not your ways ....

Mere attempt is blasphemy IMHO,


But, you know my views

I trust KJV is better than original greek and Hebrew because it is living word God

God bless you

Kali
19th December 2010, 08:25 PM
I studied this topic of bible translations for a long time and I can say with 100% certainty that no English Bible is perfect.

I can also say that the KJV is perfect in key doctrine though (salvation, trinity, etc).

It has no doctrinal errors although there are some other errors which many KJV Only groups would argue against...but they are hard heads even when shown proof. Ask any KJVO where the perfect Spanish Bible is...they wont have an answer, if they do I can prove it follows Alexandrian texts in some places...so they MUST believe that God only gave his perfect word in English...which of course would be false.

So for doctinal purposes the KJV is the best. ALL new versions are corrupt.

There is not one verse in the KJV in regards to salvation that changes salvation, there is in every other Bible. This is why I say they are corrupt.

If you change salvation you switch to another Jesus.

The original texts are perfect in all ways...and even with that said one can ask "which texts".

G2Rad
20th December 2010, 08:28 AM
The original texts are perfect in all ways...and even with that said one can ask "which texts".

where are those "perfect" original texts :) ? there are no originals. is God too feeble to provide us with His word ::)?

God is not the author of confusion. Authors do write books. God's book is not confusion.

you say - we don't have the perfect word of God, only jews have it
but it written for the jews, For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. (Isaiah 28:11)

jews are blinded in part. you wanna let them lead?

I found that KJVO people preach a lot of sence.

Mathew, Mark, Luke and John have differences. Mathew spoken to jews, Mark to Romans, Luke to mankind, John to the Church, KJV to English people. why not? :)

These are times of our visitations. Lord visited Jews in their time. Now He is visiting us.

:)

StreetsOfGold
20th December 2010, 11:20 AM
Some here think there are Major differences between the two.

other than some missing verses...(left out because the were not in earlier manuscripts, found more recently)

I don't see any major differences....Care to show me some?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVS7XF1oV0Q

bellevuebully
20th December 2010, 07:07 PM
Ken, here is my practical view on the matter....

None of us laymen are in a position to know if this translation is better than that one. As you said...the core message is the same. All of the pieces need to fit together. Denying Christ's deity, as is found in the JW translation ignores the scores of contradictory indications elsewhere in the bible that Jesus was God incarnate...therefore to the dump with it. It proves it's own invalidity.

Really, here is the bottom line that really should settle this matter for anyone. This is practical, not academic. If God told us to go forth and preach the word to all of the world, and the KJV is the only reliable text, does that mean we need to teach all of the people in African villages or in the south pacific the english language so that they can share in the word of God? Are the translaters that are currently working in Papua New Guinea and other isolated pockets of the world not going to translate in the most effective way in order to transfer meaning where possibly no word exists to do so? The final product will speak for itself....it will either contain the core message or contradict it. I have trouble believing old english can be directly translated into many or any of these native tongues.

God is much bigger than that. He is looking for the poor in spirit to come to him with the trust of a little child seeking salvation. The poor in spirit accept the gospel willingly and joyfully, seeing the message for what it is, not needing academic perfection. Otherwise, the poor, the uneducated, the illiterate, and the geographically isolated would be left out in the cold......I don't believe for a nano-second that God is limited by these conditions.

God bless.