What errors do you think exist within the KJV?

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[Bible Highlighter]

The proper way for this verse is not that he burned them, but more like his men paraded them around as in they gained the victory- and later they were burned.
Some versions have it right as to how they were carried -lifted up.
Another verse tells that they were burned.

But how do you know it is wrong for it to say that? Time lapses are not unknown to the Bible; Also, there is no conflict with the rest of the text in them burning them or anything. Personal opinion is not an excuse as to why it is an error.

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[Neal of Zebulun]

How so? Explain it to me.

I'll let the Holy Spirit do that if it's in His will. You're welcome to read the post again.

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[Bible Highlighter]

It was a word added to the verse by the translators. There was certainly a better way than to say - two men in one bed.

Maybe the future forces people to live in cramped spaces. Maybe they are bunk beds. You don’t know. You are speculating that this is an error when it could not be.

Just like the verses that have people being worshipped instead of honoured.

The word “gay” could be used in public without anyone looking weird at you because it meant something different in the past when used in passing conversation. In other words, certain words change with the passage of time. For we cannot enforce our modern way of speaking and writing English upon 1600’s English.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I am little surprised the KJV Only crowd hasn't descended on this post. While I am no textual expert, a goodly amount of the so called errors are reflecting the differences between the Septuagint (LXX) and the Masoretic text of the Old Testament. Another thing to keep in mind, there are differences between versions of the LXX also. If there was a disputed text the KJV translators generally went with the traditional rendering since the KJV is actually a revision of the Bishops Bible, which was a revision of the Great Bible, which includes much of Tyndale's translation.

The KJV is a fine translation although the language is a bit dated. For example:

2Co 6:12 Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels. (KJV)

2Co 6:12 You are not restrained by us, but you are restrained in your own affections. (NASB)

There are many areas like this where the obsolete usage of a words gets in the meaning of the text. If you want a good edition of the KJV, Trinitarian Bible Society publishes a reference bible with helps in the margins if a word has changed meaning. I would also say if one wants to tackle reading the KJV, try reading it aloud. That's where I believe the translation really shines. However, let me be clear, while I personally read the KJV, and it is the translation my church uses liturgically, I do not believe that it is an inspired translation as the KJV only crowd asserts. Only the autographs are inspired. If one struggles with the English of the KJV, then obtain a bible you can understand. It makes no sense to read a translation where the reader has to translate themselves in order to understand.

While I believe the KJV is inspired because English is the world language and the KJV has proven itself to be divine Biblically in various ways, I do think it is very important that new readers compare it with Modern Translations because the KJV speaks in a very archaic way sometimes; Especially in the OT.

 

[1stcenturylady]

If you click on the link within my OP (Original Post), you will see the issue involving the number of David’s horsemen resolved in Supposed Contradiction #1.

As for your other reference:

I do not see that as a contradiction. The Old and New Testament talk of how men of God in the OT were indwelled by the Spirit. I will give you verses later.

I did read your other post and saw the 2 Samuel post, but it was comparing it to a verse in Chronicles, two different verses. What I wrote about is the same verse in other translations.

The Holy Spirit was inside some in the Old Testament: kings, and prophets, but not just a Jew. In the NT every Christian will have the Holy Spirit inside them, or they are not a Christian, not just a pastor or apostle.

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[Golfing Gator]

Act 12:4 has always bugged me in the KJV.

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 to bring him forth to the people.

Clearly they were not yet celebrating Easter in the first Century and even if they were (which they were not) neither Herod nor the Jewish people would have cared enough to wait for it to be over.

 

[Halbhh]

What errors do you think exist within the KJV?

Please see my other CF thread here on answers to various supposed contradictions in the KJV.
I have a few more answers to supposed contradictions for the KJV I would like to add later.


Anyways, may God bless you;
And may you please be well.

No doubt some things that aren't crucial, but....consider -- most of us are hearing mistakes that are serious every day that come from isolating verses away from context.

So, the error we should really be concerned about are those errors like that which rely on ignoring the full book from which a verse is taken from, and reach conclusions that actually harm people.

Compared to that, some problems in KJ translations that context usually will help, just isn't greatly important in my view.

I also enjoy a lot of KJ wording. Here's an old favorite, from Matthew chapter 6, verses 25-34, where Christ is telling us not to worry about mere physical provision (an important message to us all), and also not even to worry about tomorrow (!). First a modern translation, then the KJ --

"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." -- NIV

"Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." -- KJV

Don't you enjoy that wording? I love it.

 

[vinsight4u]

/nvm

 

[1stcenturylady]

No doubt some things that aren't crucial, but....consider -- most of us are hearing mistakes that are serious every day that come from isolating verses away from context.

So, the error we should really be concerned about are those errors like that which rely on ignoring the full book from which a verse is taken from, and reach conclusions that actually harm people.

Compared to that, some problems in KJ translations that context usually will help, just isn't greatly important in my view.

I also enjoy a lot of KJ wording. Here's an old favorite, from Matthew chapter 6, verses 25-34, where Christ is telling us not to worry about mere physical provision (an important message to us all), and also not even to worry about tomorrow (!). First a modern translation, then the KJ --

"Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." -- NIV

"Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof." -- KJV

Don't you enjoy that wording? I love it.

Yes, many of my memory verses as a child I learned from the KJV.

 

[Blade]

Hmm .. don't see read any errors. Read different translations. Some wrote something.. I myself might disagree with but.. Yeshua/Jesus is real. And since I have have the sweet sweet Holy Spirit.. He is the one that leads guides me into all truth not man. I trust Him.. I have faith in Him. Never once has He said.. "that is not what I said.. that is not what I meant". Now MAN does.

I learned was taught I pray like all of us.. you always go the ORG Hebrew and Greek. There are hmm names? Being talked about. We really need to search. Some of them are no where in the ORG Torah alone. I call my son bob.. or bahbah (how he 1st said Brandon lol). Yet.. he never once wondered asked who I was talking to. As for the REAL name of God... go for it.. run with that.. I ME find it best to say NOTHING lol.. but to fall on my face.. even knowing I have EVERY right to stand. Just me...same with Jesus..at His feet forever.. happy

 

[jalvarez4Jesus]

Outside the number of horsemen David acquired (either 700 KJV, 1700 Tanakh/Septuigent/NASB, or 7000 NIV) when comparing the same verse in 2 Samuel 8:4, the most disturbing one I found was Isaiah 63:11

NKJV
Then he remembered the days of old,
Moses and his people, saying:
“Where is He who brought them up out of the sea
With the shepherd of His flock?
Where is He who put His Holy Spirit within them,

KJV has the same misleading wording.

NASB
Then His people remembered the days of old, of Moses.
Where is He who brought them up out of the sea with the shepherds of His flock? Where is He who put His Holy Spirit in the midst of them,

The cloud of smoke and the pillar of fire were not inside them, but in the midst of them.

This isn't a reference to the cloud of smoke and pillar of fire. It's a reference to the Holy Spirit indwelling Moses, "Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? where is he that put his holy Spirit within him?" (Isaiah 63:11 KJV). Saints in the Old Tetstament had the holy spirit within them, "Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me." (Psalm 51:11).

There is no real reason to call "within him" (as found in the KJV) an error other than to say it's doctrinally wrong (when it isn't).

 

[jalvarez4Jesus]

Outside the number of horsemen David acquired (either 700 KJV, 1700 Tanakh/Septuigent/NASB, or 7000 NIV) when comparing the same verse in 2 Samuel 8:4,

"And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: and David houghed all the chariot horses, but reserved of them for an hundred chariots." (2 Samuel 8:4).
"And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: David also houghed all the chariot horses, but reserved of them an hundred chariots." (1 Chronicles 18:4).

Now, let’s look at this alleged contradiction in the King James Bible. 2 Samuel 8:4 tells us there were 700 horsemen whereas 1 Chronicles 18:4 tells us there were 7,000. Which one is correct? Both of them.

To see why, let’s look at the definition of “horseman” in an old dictionary.

The 1828 Noah-Webster Dictionary
HORSEMAN, noun A rider on horseback.
1. A man skilled in riding.
2. A soldier who serves on horseback.

A horseman is simply someone who rides on a horse for leisure or in times of war. In a battle of war two categories of “horsemen” exist. There were the horsemen who started as horsemen in the battle, and there are horsemen who remained horsemen in the battle. The horsemen who started as horsemen in the battle are the total amount of men who rode on horses in the beginning of the battle. The horsemen who remained horsemen in the battle are the total amount of men who were captured while still on their horses at the end of the battle. That means that the battle started out with 7,000 horsemen, but ended with only 700 men who rode on horses. What happened to the other 6,300 horsemen? They weren’t killed in battle, because 1 Chronicles 18:4 indicates that they were alive when David captured them. Where were the other 6,300 horsemen? They had fled off their horses, and were captured on foot at the end of the battle.

Why would the 6,300 horsemen jump off their horses? Because these 6,300 horsemen had a dual role in the battle. In ancient battle, there were some horsemen who also worked as footmen (or those who battled on foot). This can be seen most clearly in 2 Samuel 10:18, where in another battle, David is reported to kill 40,000 horsemen; and in 1 Chronicles 19:18, David is said to have killed 40,000 footmen. Thus, in this other battle, horsemen were also footmen.

In the original case with 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4, the other 6,300 were horsemen who later got off their horses and battled on foot. Only one of the two accounts decides to continue calling them horsemen even though they were in the end captured on foot. Thus, there is no contradiction in the King James Bible once other scriptures about biblical warfare are known. There were at the start of the battle 7,000 men who rode on horses (1 Chronicles 18:4), and at the end of the battle there were only 700 men who rode on horses (2 Samuel 8:4). The other 6,300 that were captured were caught battling on foot, not on horse.

 

[1stcenturylady]

This isn't a reference to the cloud of smoke and pillar of fire. It's a reference to the Holy Spirit indwelling Moses, "Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? where is he that put his holy Spirit within him?" (Isaiah 63:11 KJV). Saints in the Old Tetstament had the holy spirit within them, "Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me." (Psalm 51:11).

There is no real reason to call "within him" (as found in the KJV) an error other than to say it's doctrinally wrong (when it isn't).

Interesting. Thank you. I was looking at the NKJV which says "within them," but as you say the KJV says "within him." So let's see what the literal version says, "11 And He remembereth the days of old, Moses -- his people. Where [is] He who is bringing them up from the sea, The shepherd of his flock? Where [is] He who is putting in its midst His Holy Spirit?

NKJV:
11 Then he remembered the days of old,
Moses and his people, saying:
“Where is He who brought them up out of the sea
With the shepherd of His flock?
Where is He who put His Holy Spirit within them,

KJV:
"Then he remembered the days of old, Moses, and his people, saying, Where is he that brought them up out of the sea with the shepherd of his flock? where is he that put his holy Spirit within him?


And now the NASB and NIV.

NASB: "Then His people remembered the days of old, of Moses.
Where is He who brought them up out of the sea with the shepherds of His flock?
Where is He who put His Holy Spirit in the midst of them,

NIV: Then his people recalled the days of old,
the days of Moses and his people—
where is he who brought them through the sea,
with the shepherd of his flock?
Where is he who set
his Holy Spirit among them,


So, it seems they all say it a little bit differently. It seems it is the NKJV that is the most misleading, and the original KJV is correct.

 

[jalvarez4Jesus]

KJV mixes up hell and hades.

KJV has "sons of Israel" in Deuteronomy 32:8 while it should be "sons of God".

Actually, it doesn't mix up hell and hades. What is hell? A place of burning torment. What is hades? A place of burning torment (Luke 16:23). Hades is just one of Greek word to describe the same hell. And why exactly should Deuteronomy 32:8 read "sons of God"? "the children of Israel" (KJV) is the reading of the Masoretic text and makes the most sense of scripture. The verse says that God divided the nations (read Genesis 10) according to the number of the children of Israel (or "sons of God" as you want to change it to). There are a TON of "sons of God" (Job 38:7, Matthew 26:53), WAY MORE than can be found in Genesis 10. "children of Israel" (i.e. TWELVE) makes a lot more sense.

 

[1stcenturylady]

"And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: and David houghed all the chariot horses, but reserved of them for an hundred chariots." (2 Samuel 8:4).
"And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: David also houghed all the chariot horses, but reserved of them an hundred chariots." (1 Chronicles 18:4).

Now, let’s look at this alleged contradiction in the King James Bible. 2 Samuel 8:4 tells us there were 700 horsemen whereas 1 Chronicles 18:4 tells us there were 7,000. Which one is correct? Both of them.

To see why, let’s look at the definition of “horseman” in an old dictionary.

The 1828 Noah-Webster Dictionary
HORSEMAN, noun A rider on horseback.
1. A man skilled in riding.
2. A soldier who serves on horseback.

A horseman is simply someone who rides on a horse for leisure or in times of war. In a battle of war two categories of “horsemen” exist. There were the horsemen who started as horsemen in the battle, and there are horsemen who remained horsemen in the battle. The horsemen who started as horsemen in the battle are the total amount of men who rode on horses in the beginning of the battle. The horsemen who remained horsemen in the battle are the total amount of men who were captured while still on their horses at the end of the battle. That means that the battle started out with 7,000 horsemen, but ended with only 700 men who rode on horses. What happened to the other 6,300 horsemen? They weren’t killed in battle, because 1 Chronicles 18:4 indicates that they were alive when David captured them. Where were the other 6,300 horsemen? They had fled off their horses, and were captured on foot at the end of the battle.

Why would the 6,300 horsemen jump off their horses? Because these 6,300 horsemen had a dual role in the battle. In ancient battle, there were some horsemen who also worked as footmen (or those who battled on foot). This can be seen most clearly in 2 Samuel 10:18, where in another battle, David is reported to kill 40,000 horsemen; and in 1 Chronicles 19:18, David is said to have killed 40,000 footmen. Thus, in this other battle, horsemen were also footmen.

In the original case with 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4, the other 6,300 were horsemen who later got off their horses and battled on foot. Only one of the two accounts decides to continue calling them horsemen even though they were in the end captured on foot. Thus, there is no contradiction in the King James Bible once other scriptures about biblical warfare are known. There were at the start of the battle 7,000 men who rode on horses (1 Chronicles 18:4), and at the end of the battle there were only 700 men who rode on horses (2 Samuel 8:4). The other 6,300 that were captured were caught battling on foot, not on horse.

I wasn't comparing two accounts in different books, but the translation of ONE VERSE, 2 Samuel 8:4.

KJV: "4 And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen: and David houghed all the chariot horses, but reserved of them for an hundred chariots.

NKJV: 4 David took from him one thousand chariots, seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand foot soldiers. Also David hamstrung all the chariot horses, except that he spared enough of them for one hundred chariots.

NASB: 4 David captured from him 1,700 horsemen and 20,000 foot soldiers; and David hamstrung the chariot horses, but reserved enough of them for 100 chariots.

NIV: 4 David captured a thousand of his chariots, seven thousand charioteers and twenty thousand foot soldiers. He hamstrung all but a hundred of the chariot horses.

YLT: 4 and David captureth from him a thousand and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen, and David destroyeth utterly the whole of the charioteers, only he leaveth of them a hundred charioteers.

Tanakh: 1,700 horsemen

Wow, look at Young's Literal Translation. It is a completely different meaning than all the rest.