Supposed Translating Errors In The King James Bible

Details

Category: Bible Translations

Published on Monday, 30 March 2009 02:19

Written by Ryan Hicks

SUPPOSED TRANSLATING ERRORS IN THE KING JAMES BIBLE

By Ryan Hicks

This page will host a collection of actual quotes from Bible-doubters accusing God's word of containing errors. I will not give the authors of the accusations web site's addresses, because no one should have to view such wickedness. All you Bible-believers please send me more quotes of claimed errors in the King James Bible from the Bible-doubters.

One common trait that these people have with the other Bible doubters who do not believe the Bible is their horrible illogic and total lack of fairness and reason. These people seem to go all out to dream up errors and contradictions where none exist. It is clear that the only errors and contradictions are those in their minds and in their man inspired "bibles."

SUPPOSED ERROR #1

The KJV mistranslates the Greek hierosulous as "robbers of churches" in Acts 19:37 when it should read "robbers of temples."

This is an extremely desperate attempt at finding an error. If anyone wants to be honest they will realize that hierosulous could be translated many ways and give the correct idea. It could read "robbers of temples," "robbers of churches", and "robbers of assemblies." With all these possibilities the KJB stands alone as the most accurate without error.

SUPPOSED ERROR #2

The KJV confuses the pagan origin Roman Catholic Easter holy day with what the TR [Textus Receptus] clearly says is the Jewish Passover in Acts 12:4.

Quite the contrary. One of Easter's older meanings is Passover, but the King James translators were not simply using another word for Passover here. The truth is that it would be erroneous and unbiblical to translate the Greek word pascha as "Passover" here. Let us look at Acts 12:1-4 to get an idea of the context of this verse.

Acts 12:1-4
1   Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church.
2   And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.
3   And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread.)
4   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.

The problem is that all of the modern "bibles" are perversions and fall for a lie of the devil here. The truth is that there is no way that the Passover could have been in mind here. In verse 3 we see that Peter was taken during the days of unleavened bread. According to Exodus 12:1-19; 13:7; and Deuteronomy 16:1-4 it is clear that the feast of unleavened bread began after or very close to the time of the finishing of the Passover. Thus, Herod could not have been "intending after Passover to bring him forth to the people," because the Passover was already past seeing it was already the days of unleavened bread. The logical conclusion is that the pagan King Herod was celebrating the pagan holiday of Easter and wanted to wait until after it was over before bringing Peter forth to the people. Thus the King James translators did a magnificent job of accurately translating the word pascha here as "Easter."

SUPPOSED ERROR #3

The KJV inaccurately transliterates the Greek word baptizo as "baptism" when it should have just translated it "immersion."

There is nothing inaccurate about it. Just because many refuse to learn that baptism means immersion does not reflect upon the accuracy of the KJB translating and transliterating. Many of the modern man inspired "bibles," even, do not see a problem with transliterating this word instead of translating it "immersion."

SUPPOSED ERROR #4

The King James incorrectly reads "schoolmaster" in Galatians 3:24 when it should read "attendant" or something similar because the law brought us to Christ, not taught us about Christ.

This is foolish. In this case the Greek word paidagogos which means guide or guardian is accurately translated "schoolmaster." The word "schoolmaster" does not mean a teacher necessarily. A Schoolmaster can be someone that teaches but it also means someone that directs or disciplines. The word schoolmaster is the accurate translation here, and "attendant" would be erroneous. All an attendant does is attend to someone or something, the law did not attend to but directed and disciplined. It directed us to Christ, which is exactly the point of this verse.

SUPPOSED ERROR #5

The King James reads, "God forbid" in Romans 3:4, 6, 31; 6:2, 15; 7:7, 13; 9:14; 11:1, 11; 1 Corinthians 6:15; Galatians 2:17; 3:21; 6:14 where it should read "may it not be" or "let it not be." The KJV adds the word "God" where it is absent in the TR because it was a common expression in 1600's. Proof that the translators used dynamic equivalents.

This is no error. The phrase "may it not be" or "let it not be" are weak expressions compared to "God forbid." This argument about the God forbid is not usually made because of its foolishness. God forbid was a common expression for extreme disapproval in the 1600's. Were they supposed to translate it weakly when it needed to be extreme? How else would they communicate an extreme disapproval, but by using the common expression for extreme disapproval, "God Forbid?" This does not prove that they used dynamic equivalents, rather that they used common sense and Godly wisdom in their translating. The phrase "God forbid" continues to express an extreme disapproval of something, and no English reader assumes that you are merely saying that God is forbidding something. This is a simple phrase used in common language and understood by all.

SUPPOSED ERROR #6

The King James reads, "ashes upon his face" in 1 Kings 20:38 when it should read "bandage over his eyes" (KJV varies from TR by using ashes).

Apparently they do not know the Hebrew very well. The Hebrew word 'apher gives the idea of a covering of ashes. It comes from the same root word as does the Hebrew 'epher which means ashes. This truth is why the KJB correctly translates 'apher ashes both times it occurs. The real error comes when you do not translate it accurately like the KJB did and translate it "bandage."

SUPPOSED ERROR #7

The Hebrew texts do not contain things that the King James Bible adds. For example, 2 Samuel 21:19 reads in the King James Bible, "And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam." In the accepted Hebrew text the phrase "the brother of" is not found. Thus, the King James Bible added to the word of God.

The Hebrew text simply contradicts itself because we know from 1 Samuel 17 that David killed Goliath and from 1 Chronicles 20:5 that Elhannan the son of Jaareoregim (also called Jair) slew Lahmi THE BROTHER OF GOLIATH THE GITTITE! Many modern Bible perversions successfully make these verses contradict one another by following the manuscripts which all contain errors. This, the King James Bible more accurately reflects the word of God than some error prone manuscripts.

SUPPOSED ERROR #8

The KJV interpretively translates the Hebrew of Amos 4:4 by ending with "three years" instead of "three days."

Not only is the King James Bible correct in translating the Hebrew "three years," but to translate it "three days" is unscriptural. The third year after the Sabbatical year (seventh year) was the year of tithing. The King James Bible translators even make a note helping the reader to grasp the Hebrew rendering which explains their accurate translation by saying, "three years of days." This is another case where the King James Bible is more accurate than the Hebrew manuscripts.

SUPPOSED ERROR #9

The King James reads "Jesus" in Hebrews 4 when it should read "Joshua."

This is not the case. It should not read Joshua! The Greek word is Iesous and should always be translated "Jesus." The Scripture in question is Hebrews 4:8 which reads, "For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day." This is talking about Joshua and not Jesus Christ. It should read "Joshua" if the New Testament was originally in Hebrew, but the name retained for Joshua by the Holy Spirit was the Greek for the Hebrew Joshua (i.e. Jesus). You could paraphrase it as "Joshua" if you do not care about having the word of God or the word that God authored!

SUPPOSED ERROR #10

The King James incorrectly translates the Hebrew word for eunuch as "officer."

In the ten times that the King James translators translated the Hebrew cariyc as "officer" (Genesis 37:36; 39:1; Judges 9:28; 1 Kings 4:5, 19; 22:9; 2 Kings 8:6; 25:19; 2 Chronicles 24:11) it should not be "eunuch." The two times that it is translated "officers" (Genesis 40:2, 7) it should not read "eunuchs." The KJB translators had the sense enough to translate it "eunuch" 17 times (2 Kings 9:32; 20:18; Isaiah 39:7; 56:3-4; Jeremiah 29:2; 34:19; 38:7; 41:16; 52:25; Daniel 1:3-18) and "chamberlain" 13 times (2 Kings 23:11; 1:10-15; 2:3, 14, 15, 21; 4:4-5; 6:2, 14; 7:9). The new translations are doing no good by translating the Hebrew cariyc as "eunuch" every time it occurs. That is why the KJB has it translated accurately in three different ways in different contexts. These modern translators are notorious for forgetting that many of the Hebrew and Greek words they are trying to translate have different meanings that must be accurately determined by the context and setting of the passage in question. A simple broad brushing of the word cariyc as eunuch each time it occurs does not take into account the time period of its use, the obvious intent of the writer, and the common usage of that word and its meaning in that setting. This is the failed logic of the modern scholars who criticize the Bible through their textual criticism and then do not actually put any of the principles of textual criticism to practice in their translations.

SUPPOSED ERROR #11

John 1:3 and other places should read "came into being" instead of "made."

This is simple error. The Lord Jesus Christ, the word, made all things. There is a difference between making something and creating something. To make is to form something from already existing materials. To create is to bring into being from nothing. God created all things and made them. In the passage in John 1:3 the idea is that of Jesus making or forming things out of the materials He created by speaking them into existence. While all thing did come into being through the Lord Jesus Christ, this verse is talking about His direct role in the formation of the creation.

SUPPOSED ERROR #12

The Hebrew word "raqiya'" should be translated "expanse" and not "firmament" as it is in the King James Bible.

• < Prev