QUESTION#58

The Answer Book ^ | 1989 | Dr Samuel C Gipp Th.D

[Commander8]

QUESTION: How many mistakes are there in the King James Bible?

ANSWER: None

[Commander8]

That's right, no mistakes in the perfect Bible.
All other versions are dirt and rags compared to God's infallible Word.

http://www.christianpatriot.com/compare.htm

[Lloyd Grey]

Since when is King James, God?

[LiteKeeper]

In the KJV, 1 Timothy 6:20 talks about "science". The word in Greek is gnwsewn - the common word for "knowledge." Can you explain why the word "science" is used, and not "knowledge" which is how it is translated in every other occurence of that word in the KJV? [It is translated "knowledge" in the NASB.]

[LiteKeeper]

QUESTION: How many mistakes are there in the King James Bible?

ANSWER: None.

EXPLANATION: None.

Rather presumptious, wouldn't you say?

[Between the Lines]

"All other versions are dirt and rags compared to God's infallible Word."

What arrogance.... "KJV is the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through the KJV bible.

There are over 200 revisions to the KJV bible and there are some big differances. Tell me please, which one is God's infallible Word and which ones are dirt and rags.

For more see: The King James Version Revisions

We all worship the same God we all praise the same Jesus and you don't have to know how to read Old English to read and understand God's infallible Word.

[Commander8]

Read this
http://www.chick.com/reading/books/158/158_05.asp

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

Bring the whole gang, Looks like the Jehovah's Witnesses have come out to play!

[Jean Chauvin]

Oooooohhhh Noooooooo!

The "let's change the Bible so it agrees with our bonkers belief system" crowd! Sheeesh!

Jean

[LiteKeeper]

Please read this much more balanced approach to the issue by a KJV user. A Biblical Position on the KJV Controversy

I believe you will find this helpful.

[Between the Lines]

Thanks for the link. It is a little long but a great read.

[fortheDeclaration]

Those 'revisions' were due to either printing errors, spelling changes etc. The Greek and Hebrew texts themselves were never altered, unlike all the modern versions which are making constant changes due changes in their texts.

The last revision (really an edition) of the KJB was in the 18th century.

Any edition of the KJ at any time is better then any new version since it comes from the correct Greek and Hebrew texts and was translated by men who actually believed they were translating the word of God and not 'reconstructing' a missing text.

[fortheDeclaration]

In the KJV, 1 Timothy 6:20 talks about "science". The word in Greek is gnwsewn - the common word for "knowledge." Can you explain why the word "science" is used, and not "knowledge" which is how it is translated in every other occurence of that word in the KJV? [It is translated "knowledge" in the NASB.]

The word 'science' is used all the major English Reformation translations before 1611 (Tyndale, Great, Geneva).

All the modern translations follow the Roman Catholic Douey Rheims (including the NKJ) and translate it as 'knowledge'.

Science is one of the 'gods' of this age, thus God had that word put in to expose them.

Science: In a general sense knowledge or certain knowledge, the comprehension or understanding of truth or facts by the mind. (Websters, American Dictionary of the English Language)

Hence, 'science' for the greek word gnosis is totally valid and strikes at the hubris of those who (scientists) who think they can play God.

[fortheDeclaration]

QUESTION: How many mistakes are there in the King James Bible? ANSWER: None. EXPLANATION: None. Rather presumptious, wouldn't you say?

Well, where are the errors?

I can give you an 'error' in a new version, compare 2Sam.21:19 with 1Chro.20:5.

So who killed Goliath?

Did David or Elhanan?

New Versions are never concerned with errors since they do not believe they can have a perfect Bible anyway.

It is a 'process' that after 100 years (200 versions) of 'updating' and 'improving' the King James, they still haven't gotten right.

Now, why is that?

After 100 years, why haven't they finally given us a perfect Bible, correcting all those nasty KJ 'errors'.

Why is that they continue to publish more updated modern English language versions that never seem to really get it right?

Could it be the same reason they have copyright laws on every new version?

The Love of money is the root of all evil (1Tim.6:10) (another verse that every new version changes)

[fortheDeclaration]

Since when is King James, God?

He is not, the Book that bears his name, however,is the Book that God places above His own name(Psa.138:2)

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

ftD, ya missed the whole point of the ping. Check out the guy's post #6, it's a site from the Jehovah's Witnesses...it doesn't even get the dates of the revisions of the KJV right.

Usually JW's aren't political at all, wonder what's up with this?

[fortheDeclaration]

Thank you for the 'ping'. Yes, you are correct, it is a JW site.

Interesting that they are attacking the King James, but understandable, since their own bible is from the corrupt Westcott/Hort Critical text (the same text that all the new versions use).

I guess the reason they are on the FR site is that they found out we have a religious section!

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

Hey, no problem, i thought you might find this one amusing!

Usually they don't even debate religion in a public forum...they have gotten embarrased too many times. i don't follow them as closely as i once did, since they are going on to the "ash heap" of irrelevancy these days.

i wonder if they have changed their traditional methods since their last convention...hmm, maybe we will all have to start paying closer attention, ya think?

BTW, Fredric Franz's "translation" of the W/H/T text.would make Wescott and Hort spin in their graves. In the 1960 edition of the New World Translation they commented that the ejgw; eijmiv in John 8:58 (which they render as "I have been") was translated in the "perfect indefinite tense"...no such tense exists in Greek, LOL

i notice that they changed that statement in the new editions, but the argument is still garbage that is easily disproven.

[fortheDeclaration]

perfect indefinite tense"...no such tense exists in Greek, LOL i notice that they changed that statement in the new editions, but the argument is still garbage that is easily disproven.

Amen! LOL!