[Will Kinney]

Originally Posted by George

It's real heartening to know that throughout the world, God has people who, by faith, have believed His promises concerning His words, and are willing to defend them and contend with the "naysayers" that abound throughout "Christendumb" today.

Amen! Thanks be to our God and Saviour for His Book and the faith to believe what it says. Aside from this single Book we have no other revelation of truth, what the lost state of man is, Who our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is, and what He has done for His people. He redeemed us from our sins by His precious blood, raised us up together with Him, and seated us together with Him in the heavenlies. What a wonderful Saviour we have!

All of grace,
Will K

[Debau]

Originally Posted by George

Aloha all,

I'm baaaack!

I want to commend Will, Stephanos, MC1171611, PB1789, Vendetta Ride, Bibleprotector, Gord, KJB Princess, Brother Tim, Here Am I, avbunyan, Steven Avery, pbiwolski, Forrest, Debau, Diligent, and Bro. Parrish (I hope I haven't missed anyone) for a masterful job of defending the Holy words of God {found in the King James Bible}.

Has there ever been such a motley crew (eclectic?) that can differ with each other on specific doctrines (as we sometimes do) - and yet come together in complete unity when it comes to the AUTHORITY of a Book we all can hold in our hands? And I don't mean the latest flavor of the day!

The foregoing "debate" was good for at least 2 reasons (there are more):

#1. It sharpens our minds and helps to solidify our belief in the King James Bible and,
#2. It is instructive as to how the mind of a SOPHIST works!

It's good to see that while I was gone that the brethren can do quite well without me (I'm not "indispensable" after all )! It's real heartening to know that throughout the world, God has people who, by faith, have believed His promises concerning His words, and are willing to defend them and contend with the "naysayers" that abound throughout "Christendumb" today.

Great job brethren - it's good to be back!

Amen here too!

Philippians 1:17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.

Seems the Sophists cut tail and run when the "curmudgeon" returneth! (He's baaack!)

Welcome back!

[pbiwolski]

Originally Posted by George

I want to commend Will, Stephanos, MC1171611, PB1789, Vendetta Ride, Bibleprotector, Gord, KJB Princess, Brother Tim, Here Am I, avbunyan, Steven Avery, pbiwolski, Forrest, Debau, Diligent, and Bro. Parrish (I hope I haven't missed anyone) for a masterful job of defending the Holy words of God {found in the King James Bible}.

In the words of an "old preacher" you know...

"It's the Book, man, it's the Book. I'm tellin' you, it's the Book, man..."

[Will Kinney]

Hi saints. Here are some more false allegations that I recently ran into over at FFF. A Bible Agnostic with seminary training posted these examples by James Price (the guy who helped put together the NKJV). He knows the bogus bible versions like the NASB, NIV, ESV, NKJV, Holman etc. all depart from the Hebrew readings, so he won't defend them. His only recourse is to try to prove that the KJB also rejects the Hebrew texts, and then he can rest satisfied knowing that there does not exist anywhere on this earth a complete, inspired and inerrant Bible.

May these examples be of help to other Bible believers.

James Price, who helped put together the NKJV, is another Bible critic who has long lists of what he considers to be errors in our beloved King James Bible. Here are a few of them that were posted recently at a Bible club I belong to where the vast majority of professing Christians do not believe there exists such a thing as a complete and inerrant Bible in any language.

2 Chron 33:19--Hebrew Hozai LXX the seers

This is another absurd attempt to “prove” the KJB allegedly rejects the Hebrew text. Not only does the King James Bible translate this word as “seers” here but so do the Jewish translations of JPS 1917, the 1936 Jewish Publication Society version, the Complete Jewish Bible, Coverdale, the Bishops’ bible, the Geneva Bible, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, the NIV, Green’s literal, the Amplified bible, Luther’s 1545 German bible “der Seher”, the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995 “están escritos en las palabras de los videntes”, the French Martin 1744 and Ostervald 1996 -”der Voyants”, the Modern Greek “logois twn blepontwn”, the RSV, NRSV, ESV and Bible in Basic English. Even Wallace and company’s NET versions says “the annals of the prophets.”

It is versions like the NKJV and NASB that transliterate the word as ”the sayings of HOZAI.” The Hebrew word is # 2374 chozeh. In fact, even the NKJV and the NASB have both translated this same word as “seers” in several other passages!

Job 1:19--Hebrew from across LXX, KJV from [omits across]

This Bible critic is really hard up to try to find some kind of an error here. The phrase is “There came a great wind FROM the wilderness”. Not only does the King James Bible read this way but so too do the Revised Version, the American Standard Version, Green’s literal, the Jewish Publication Society 1936 translation, Hebrew Names Bible, the Amplified, Holman Standard and the NIV.

Song 4:1; 6:5--Hebrew going down LXX, KJV appear

Again, this is a simple difference of translation of the Hebrew word, not a difference between the Hebrew text and the so called LXX. The Hebrew word occurs only twice and it is found only in the Song of Solomon. All one has to do is to compare a multitude of translations out there to see that there is a huge variety of different ways this word has been translated.

Douay-Rheims as well as Lamsa’s have the goats “come UP from the mount”, Bishops has “be shorn upon the mount”, Geneva has “look down from”, Young has “shown from mount Gilead” (which would agree more with the KJB reading), the RV and ASV have the goats “live along the mount”, Darby has them merely “on the mount”, while the NASB has them “descending”, the NKJV “going down from the mount”, the Easy to Read version has them “dancing down the mount”, the NIV Spanish edition (Nueva Versión Internacional) has the goats “frolicking” on the mount - “cabras que retozan en los montes”, the Italian Diodat has them “grazing” on the mount, while the Bible in Basic English has the goats “take their rest on the mount”.

Not only has the King James Bible translated this word as “appear” as in “thy hair is like a flock of goats, that APPEAR from mount Gilead” but so too do Websters 1833, the 1994 KJV 21st Century Version, Third Millenium Bible. The Spanish versions keep on changing from one year to the next, but the Reina Valera 1909 agrees with the KJB saying the goats “se muestran” or “appear” on the mount Gilead.

Isa 57:8--lit. hand (figure of nudity) LXX, KJV [omits the word]

A multitude of Bible translations agree with the King James Bible and not even the NASB, NIV, NKJV, Youngs, Darby, Holman, RSV, NRSV, nor ESV say anything about a “hand” here. The word ‘hand’ is often used in a figurative sense. This Bible Critic has no complete, inspired and inerrant Bible in any language - just bits and pieces that he selects according to his own understanding, and his understanding is in disagreement with EVERYBODY else. He has become his own little god and his own authority.

Hos 13:16--Hebrew is held guilty LXX, KJV become desolate

This is again another ridiculous and false charge. Not only does the KJB say “Samaria shall become DESOLATE” but so also do Wycliffe, Bishops, Coverdale, Geneva Bible, the 1936 Jewish translation, Youngs, Green’s ‘literal’, the Bible in Basic English, Luther’s 1545 German bible, the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras, the Reina Valera 1909, the French Martin, and the Italian Diodati - “Samaria sarà desolata” Even the NKJV, which translates it as “is held guilty” here, has translated the same Hebrew word as “desolate” in places like Isaiah 24:6 and Ezekiel 6:6. People like James Price who make up these goofy laundry lists of alleged departures from the Hebrew texts are blind hypocrites. Remember, Mr. Price is one of the main guys behind the NKJV, and yet his version has translated this same word the same way as found in the King James Bible.

Gen 7:22--Hebrew Spirit LXX, Vg, KJV (omits the word)

Another silly charge. The KJB reads: “All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.” The KJB translators were well aware of the fact that the more literal Hebrew reads “the breath of the spirit of life” because they mention it in their marginal notes. However it is not always necessary to the sense to include the word ‘spirit’ and all the modern versions do this very same thing in other places.

Not only does the KJB say “the breath of life” but so do Wycliffe, Coverdale, Bishops’ bible, the NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Darby, Douay, the 1936 Jewish translation, NET version, TNIV, Green’s 2000 ‘literal’, the Italian Diodati and Riveduta, French Martin and Ostervald, Spanish Sagradas Escrituras and the KJV 21st Century version.

Versions like the NASB, NIV also frequently omit the word “spirit” when they feel it is not necessary to the sense of the passage. For example, in Exodus 6:9 it says: “but they hearkened not unto Moses for anguish of SPIRIT”, but the NASB, NIV omit the word here. Also in Proverbs 14:29 we read of “he that is hasty OF SPIRIT”, yet versions like the NKJV, NASB, NIV omit the word, and in Proverbs 16:2 “the LORD weigheth the SPIRITS” has been changed to “motives” in the NIV, NASB and Holman.

Num 10:29--Hebrew Reuel LXX, Vg, KJV Raguel

This is a simple case of a variation in spelling. Also reading RAGUEL are Wycliffe, Bishops’s bible, Coverdale, Webster’s 1833, Young’s, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, Luther’s 1545 German bible, the Modern Greek version, and the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960 and 1995.

Num 13:8, 16--Hebrew Hoshea LXX, Vg, KJV Oshea

Another spelling variation, not a departure from the Hebrew texts. Also reading OSHEA are the Geneva Bible, Bishops’s bible, Young’s ‘literal’, Websters, the French Martin, the Portuguese Ferreira, and the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960 and 1995.

Num 13:24--Hebrew cluster LXX, Vg, KJV cluster of grapes (adds words)

Well, Duh. It’s obvious that the cluster they gathered was a cluster of grapes and so too read the Geneva Bible, Coverdale, Bishops’ bible, the NIV, TNIV, Darby, the Message, New English Bible 1970, and the 1989 Revised English Bible to name a few.

Deut 2:27--Hebrew in the road LXX, Vg, KJV (omits the word)

This is getting really silly. These guys are really desperate to find anything they think will stick. The KJB did not omit anything. It says “I will go along by THE HIGH WAY...” The highway was the road! So too read the Jewish translations of 1917, 1936, the RV, ASV, Geneva bible, Bishops’, Coverdale, Hebrew Names Bible, the 1917 and 1936 Jewish translations, the Bible in Basic English, Darby, Green’s 2000 ‘literal’, and even the NASB and Holman Standard read “highway”.

1 Sam 5:9, 12: 6:4, 5--Hebrew tumors broke out LXX, Vg, KJV they had emerods in their secret parts

Does James Price really want to go here? All he shows by this example is his own ignorance and blind bias against The Book.

I have addressed this example in a separate article. You can see it here. The King James Bible is right, as always.

http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/Amos4-4.html

Psa 39:13--Hebrew remove your [gaze] LXX, Vg, KJV O spare me.

This is another case of difference of translation of the Hebrew texts, not a LXX issue. “O SPARE ME, that I may recover strength, before I go hence and be no more.” is also the reading found in Bishops’ bible, Coverdale, the Revised Version, the American Standard Version, Hebrew Names Bible, World English Bible, New Living Translation, KJV 21st Century, 1969 Berkeley version, and Third Millenium Bible.

Many others are similar in meaning. The Geneva bible has “Stay thine anger from me”, while the New Century Version and Easy to Read versions read: “Leave me alone”, and the Bible in Basic English has: “Let your wrath be turned away from me.”

Jer 52:12--Hebrew King Nebuchadnezzar LXX, Vg, KJV Nebuchadnezzar (omits the word King)

This example is getting pretty picky. Literally speaking, the word for “king” does occur three times in this single verse, but there are times when the word is not needed to give the strict sense of the passage.

Here we read: “...which was the nineteenth year of *(king) Nebuchadressar KING of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, which served the KING of Babylon, into Jerusalem.”

Other Bible translations that have omitted translating one of the three times the word “king” occurs in this verse are Coverdale, Bishops bible, Wallace’s NET version, the New English Bible 1970, the 1989 Revised English Version, Amplified bible, the NIV, TNIV, New Life Bible, Darby, the Hebrew Publication Society’s 1936 translation, God’s Word translation, Webster’s 1833 and the 1994 KJV21st Century.

In fact, a simple look at the complete NIV concordance shows that there are 55 times that they have not translated this word at all. In this example of Jeremiah 52:12 it is quite clear that Nebuchadnezzar was the KING of Babylon.

The allegations of error in the King James Bible are endless. If you knock one down, the critics will rarely if ever admit they were wrong but instead will just bring up another one. Yet not one of their allegations of error has ever been proved. These Bible Critics are in fact Bible Agnostics. Today's Christian scholars do not believe that any Bible in any language (including the Hebrew or "the" Greek) is the inspired, complete and inerrant words of God. Each one considers himself to be an expert, and they ALL disagree with each other hundreds of times as to what the correct texts are and how they should be translated. Each one has become his own final authority, and (in their view) apparently God has failed to keep His promises to preserve His words in "the book of the LORD".

"Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail..." Isaiah 34:16.

Will Kinney