New International PerVersion

Mocking You

New member
A bible that's missing verses is more of a stumbling block. You can get a KJV that has aittle dictionary. The NIV just leaves out verses and changes others.

Surely you're not that stupid. The NIV does not contain some verses that are in the KJV because the translations use two different manuscripts. They are not "missing" because the TR is not the end-all, be-all manuscript that all others are judged against.

There are phrases and words in the NIV that are "missing" from the KJV.

Furthermore, there are verses that were added to the KJV by copyists.

And, no, I shouldn't need to carry around a dictionary to read the Bible.
 

Mocking You

New member
Errors where the KJV translation disagrees with the Textus Receptus:

Snip list.

Stan, we could list verses that are mistranslated in the KJV for hours. Won't matter to Daniel1611. He just ignores them and makes personal attacks.

One of my go-to verses to illustrate this is Daniel 7:9. Even the Geneva Bible, which predates the KJV got it right, whereas the KJV has it wrong.

Daniel 7:9 Thrones “cast down” or thrones “set up”?

I beheld until the thrones were cast down.. [KJV]
As I looked, thrones were set in place… [NIV]
I beheld until the thrones were set up.. [Geneva]
 

StanJ

New member
Snip list.

Stan, we could list verses that are mistranslated in the KJV for hours. Won't matter to Daniel1611. He just ignores them and makes personal attacks.
One of my go-to verses to illustrate this is Daniel 7:9. Even the Geneva Bible, which predates the KJV got it right, whereas the KJV has it wrong.
Daniel 7:9 Thrones “cast down” or thrones “set up”?
I beheld until the thrones were cast down.. [KJV]
As I looked, thrones were set in place… [NIV]
I beheld until the thrones were set up.. [Geneva]

Yeh, I get that, and don't really post FOR him, but FOR others who may not know or may be seduced by his rhetoric.
 

Psalmist

Blessed is the man that......
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
The KJV hasn't been revised several times since 1611, I have heard it said that the KJV that is being read today is not completely in text of the original KJV.
 

CabinetMaker

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!
Hall of Fame
The KJV hasn't been revised several times since 1611, I have heard it said that the KJV that is being read today is not completely in text of the original KJV.
The version that is used today is the 1796 edition.
 

StanJ

New member
The KJV hasn't been revised several times since 1611, I have heard it said that the KJV that is being read today is not completely in text of the original KJV.

Yes, but KJVOers will say that they were inconsequential, regardless of the fact that the original translators (5o CoE scholars) even stated on the opening page that it was "TRANSLATED OUT OF THE ORIGINAL TONGUES, DILIGENTLY COMPARED AND REVISED."
They never claimed inspiration or infallibility in their work. They also stated that they hoped the CoE would reap good fruit and that King James was the principle Mover and Author of the work.
One can then ask themselves if they really believe King James was inspired by God to render a perfect English version through 50 biased and totally intimidated CoE clergy?
 

Mocking You

New member
Yes, but KJVOers will say that they were inconsequential, regardless of the fact that the original translators (5o CoE scholars) even stated on the opening page that it was "TRANSLATED OUT OF THE ORIGINAL TONGUES, DILIGENTLY COMPARED AND REVISED."

Depending on who you listen to there are either "over 500" or "over 1,000" or "over 2,000" changes to the 1611 text. Most of these are trivial, like:

you changed to ye
fro changed to from
amongst changed to among

etc.

BUT, there is one significant change made to a later edition that does radically change the meaning of the text:

Compare Gen. 2:21 in pre-1769 KJV and post 1769 KJV:

Pre: And the LORD God caused a deepe sleepe to fall vpon Adam, and hee slept; and he tooke one of his ribs, and closed vp the flesh in stead thereof.

Post: And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof

Here is a partial list of some changes:
http://www.bible-researcher.com/canon10.html
 

everready

New member
Snip list.

Stan, we could list verses that are mistranslated in the KJV for hours. Won't matter to Daniel1611. He just ignores them and makes personal attacks.

One of my go-to verses to illustrate this is Daniel 7:9. Even the Geneva Bible, which predates the KJV got it right, whereas the KJV has it wrong.

Daniel 7:9 Thrones “cast down” or thrones “set up”?

I beheld until the thrones were cast down.. [KJV]
As I looked, thrones were set in place… [NIV]
I beheld until the thrones were set up.. [Geneva]

If i may ask what's your bottom line here, what do you think the verse means, my first impression is that it means the same thing just said differently?

everready
 

Psalmist

Blessed is the man that......
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
This is side note.

I have a Cambridge Revised Standard Version 1881-1885. Hard Bound.

and a Star American Standard Version 1901. Bonded Leather.
 

Psalmist

Blessed is the man that......
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
It was revised in 1769 to update spelling. No changes to actual words were made. E.g. "iudgment" was changed to "judgment". Same word, updated spelling. No actual words were changed.
That was one of my points was the spelling.
 

Mocking You

New member
A 1716 edition has Jesus say in John 5.14 “sin on more” instead of “sin no more”!

The next year, the famous ‘Vinegar Bible’ appeared; this name was attached to this printing because the chapter title to Luke 20 was “The Parable of the Vinegar” instead of the “Parable of the Vineyard.”

In 1792, Philip, rather than Peter, denied his Lord three times in Luke 22.34.

Three years later the ‘Murderer’s Bible’ was printed: It was called this because in Mark 7.27 Jesus reportedly told the Syro-Phoenician woman, “Let the children first be killed” instead of “Let the children first be filled”!

In 1807 an Oxford edition has Heb 9.14 say, “Purge your conscience from good works” instead of “Purge your conscience from dead works.”

A printing of the KJV in 1964 said that women were to “adorn themselves in modern apparel” instead of “modest apparel” in 1 Tim 2.9.

But none of these printing mistakes can equal the Bibles of 1653 or 1631. These are the two ‘Evil Bibles’ of the King James history, for they both left out the word ‘not’ at key junctures. The 1653 edition—known as the ‘Unrighteous Bible’—said “the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God” in 1 Cor 6.9. And the 1631 edition, the infamous ‘Wicked Bible,’ wrote the seventh of the ten commandments as “Thou shalt commit adultery”!

The Wicked Bible was such an embarrassment to the Anglican Church that the archbishop ordered the Bibles to be burned, and he fined the printer, Robert Barker, 300 pounds—no small sum in those days. Barker, who had been the king’s printer since the Authorized Version came out, died fourteen years later in debtor’s prison.

Not only have there been these occasional but bizarre printing mistakes, but several errors in the 1611 edition have never been changed. For example, in both Acts 7.45 and Heb 4.8 the name “Jesus” appears when Joshua is actually meant!

https://betterbibles.wordpress.com/2005/08/24/kjv-editions-and-some-humorous-errors/
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
I used to volunteer at the Evangelical Movement of Wales bookshop in Town, but I removed my support because of the rubbish they sold. The greatest of which was the NIV. Once we know something is wrong we have a duty to act upon that knowledge. I lost a lot of friends in that action.

According to the KJV the Feast of Unleavened Bread happens PRIOR to the Passover:

"Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare for thee to eat the passover?" (Mt.26:17; KJV).​

However, the Passover always PRECEDED the first day of the feast of unleavened bread:

"In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the Lord's passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the Lord: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread" (Lev.23:5-6).​

This is the correct translation:

"Now on the first day of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus and asked, “Where do You want us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?” (Mt.26:17; NASB).​

The first day of unleavened bread was on the 14th (Ex.12:14) and it was on that day when unleavened bread was eaten with the Passover meal (Ex.12:8).

So the translators of the KJV made an error when they added words at Matthew 26:17 which are not found in the Greek manuscripts. When they mis-translated the verse they have the "first day of the feast of unleavened bread" (of the 15th) preceding the "Passover" (of the 14th).
 

StanJ

New member
Depending on who you listen to there are either "over 500" or "over 1,000" or "over 2,000" changes to the 1611 text. Most of these are trivial, like:
you changed to ye
fro changed to from
amongst changed to among

I also find it amusing, but not in a funny way, that they accuse versions like the NIV to have omitted over 65,000 words when in fact the KJV added those words. :dizzy:

The following is a good site for more info on this issue.

http://www.bible.ca/b-kjv-only.htm
 

This Charming Manc

Well-known member
I'm happy with any translation, so many believers both now and through history don't have any copy of scripture, so how dare we attack and insult good translations of his word?

I grew up on the NIV, if find the KJV hard, i'm personally not keen on certain versions , but they are all Gods word which contains his power of salvation and the Good news of Jesus Christ.

Lets not 'do down' any of them.

I use Biblegateway.com 2015 edition. LCD bound.
 

StanJ

New member
I'm happy with any translation, so many believers both now and through history don't have any copy of scripture, so how dare we attack and insult good translations of his word?

I grew up on the NIV, if find the KJV hard, i'm personally not keen on certain versions , but they are all Gods word which contains his power of salvation and the Good news of Jesus Christ.

Lets not 'do down' any of them.

I agree, as most here would, but the issue is those that denigrate the NIV in favour of the KJV as the ONLY English Bible to actually be inspired.
 
Top