{"id":1232,"date":"2012-08-24T20:55:36","date_gmt":"2012-08-25T00:55:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.dustoffthebible.com\/?p=1232"},"modified":"2019-01-04T16:24:01","modified_gmt":"2019-01-04T21:24:01","slug":"5-mistakes-the-prove-the-king-james-version-only-people-are-completely-nuts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dustoffthebible.com\/Blog-archive\/2012\/08\/24\/5-mistakes-the-prove-the-king-james-version-only-people-are-completely-nuts\/","title":{"rendered":"5 Reasons The King James Version Only Movement Is Completely Nuts"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Let me get one thing straight before I even start this list. There is nothing wrong with wanting to read the KJV. The problem is when fanatics try to force other people to read it because they have been convinced that the new translations are evil because the translators are “changing” the Bible. However, the King Jame Bible on your shelf right now is not the same as the original 1611 KJV. In fact, the 1611 KJV Bible that you can buy on amazon or any other Bible store is still not the same as the real 1611 King James.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/center>\u00a0 The Bible you see above…..is “like” the 1611 version. Except it’s missing all the\u00a0Apocryphal\u00a0books. Which, contrary to popular belief, were included in all the original KJV Bibles. After the 1611 Bible was created it went through numerous updates. It was revised in 1629, 1638, 1760, 1762, 1769, and a few minor revisions in\u00a0 between those dates. The current standard text is from 1769 and has thousands of changes between it and the 1611. Most of those changes were due to the changes in the English language. They updated as needed to keep up with how English was used….a novel concept.<\/p>\n

To stay as “pure” as possible in this blog post, I will only quote from my store bought\u00a01611 KJV Bible.<\/p>\n

\n

5. The\u00a0Passover\u00a0is now Easter (Acts 12:4)<\/a><\/h2>\n

\u00a0And when hee had apprehended him, hee put him in prison, and deliuered him to foure quaternions of souldiers to keepe him, intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This is one of the funnest things to point out to people who refuse to read those\u00a0wretched, evil, new-age translations, and swear by only the good old King Jimmy. Why is it so fun? Because most of them are willing to bet an arm and a leg that the translators of the KJV would NEVER make a mistake like that! This is much to big of a mistake to overlook. And after all, the King James is the perfect word of God in English. At least that is what they were taught to believe. (http:\/\/av1611.com\/kjbp\/faq\/errors.html<\/a>)<\/p>\n

\"Jesus<\/a>
Yea, that’s how I remember it. Jesus was all about Easter!<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

But KJV advocate are SOOO intent on proving that that KJV is the only Word of God that they will go out of their way to justify even the smallest mistakes. Here is one guy’s web page<\/a> trying to explain why Easter was actually the correct translation. You can see right from the start this its going to be special ….<\/p>\n

“I will prove to you from the King James Bible that “Easter” is in fact, the proper word to use.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

He’s going to use the KJV to prove that the KJV is correct? That’s called circular reasoning and it’s usually a laughable attempt at but. But that is exactly what he tries to do. He attempts to discuss how a word should be translated…..but never actually looks up what the stinking word was in Greek (the original language). This is like trying to fly to the moon without a rocket ship. How can you prove that something was translated into English correctly if the only thing you look at is the English translation? It’s so completely\u00a0ludicrous\u00a0it makes my head hurt.<\/p>\n

The Greek word being used is “pascha (\u03c0\u03ac\u03c3\u03c7\u03b1).” This is the same word used for Passover, in the Greek version of the Old Testament (LXX) that Jesus and the disciples used. Every time they spoke the word Passover in Greek, it was pascha. Therefore, every Greek lexicon ever has had the definition of pascha as Passover. Their is no known recorded use of the word pascha being translated into Easter, outside of the KJV.<\/p>\n

Still not convinced? Here is the same word being translated in Matthew 26:2.<\/p>\n

Ye know that after two dayes is the feast of the Passeouer, and the Sonne of man is betrayed to be crucified.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Easter as we know it did not exist until the Holy Roman empire started expanding. It’s name is derived from the Germanic Pagan goddess Oestre. The definition that the author looked up in the Webster New World Dictionary was for a Germanic goddess, as it’s listed in the article, “Eastre, dawn goddess, Austro”. This was not a 1st century Roman or Greek figure.<\/p>\n

Additionally, the first Christians were Jewish and most still celebrated passover. Even though many Christians did not celebrate the passover, because they were gentiles, there was no Easter celebration developed yet at the time that Peter was imprisoned to be murdered. The Roman empire was many decades away from having any contact with Germanic culture.<\/p>\n

Moreover, the context of the passage does not make any sense if we assume Easter was the holiday.<\/p>\n

\n

When he saw that this met with approval among the Jews,\u00a0he proceeded to seize Peter also. This happened during the Festival of Unleavened Bread.<\/span>\u00a04\u00a0<\/sup>After arresting him, he put him in prison, handing him over to be guarded by four squads of four soldiers each. Herod intended to bring him out for public trial after the Passover.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Why would Herod wait until after the gentile Christians celebrated a holiday? That doesn’t make any sense. He was killing Christians, not Jews. He was out to please the Jews, not the gentiles. That is why he waited until he had their full attention, after the passover. Why would a guy killing Christians wait until after they celebrated Easter to kill them in front of the Jews who did not celebrate Easter? The logic is not there.<\/p>\n

\n

4. Don’t pay attention to one who is wearing gay clothes (James 2:3)<\/h2>\n

Even more special than 400 year old translation mistakes<\/a> is when the actual\u00a0translation\u00a0sound like a 5th grader’s joke. That is exactly what happened in James 2:3 when James is giving instructions for people not to give special treatment to those who are dressed in fine clothes. Unless you’re reading the KJV; than it’s gay clothes.<\/p>\n

\"richard<\/a>
Ok now that you mention it, I think the KJV might be onto something……..<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Lets be realistic here. In 1611 gay meant something different. It meant happy, bright, or radiant. Therefore, the translation was not actually that far off. It was a fairly good translation for it’s day. The real issue that the KJV has kept the gay clothes\u00a0rendering for over 400 years. Why would any Bible translation do this? Why the heck not?!\u00a0Contextualization\u00a0means nothing when you have\u00a0the only God- ordained translation in English, right?<\/p>\n

All I’m saying here is that keeping language translation up to date with current trends is necessary is something is going to be\u00a0relevant. In fact, it’s the whole reason why the KJV was created in the first place.<\/p>\n

\n

3. The KJV is rated at a 5th grade reading level<\/a> and is statistically easier to read than the newer translations?<\/h2>\n

The first time I heard this idea I thought to myself…..”how exactly was this test performed? Because if this is true than somewhere there are a bunch of 5th graders that have a higher reading level than I do!!”<\/p>\n

The facts of the matter are that this is information that has been forwarded over and over again in people’s email. It has NO factual basis. It came originally from charts like the one below.<\/p>\n

\"Flesch-Kincaid<\/a>
Flesch-Kincaid KJV Chart (http:\/\/www.av1611.org\/kjv\/kjv_easy.html)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Like all of the KJVO arguments, this one seems like it could almost have some\u00a0legitimacy\u00a0about it. But just a quick look under the hood tells a different story.<\/p>\n

The Flesch-Kinkaid reading scale basically\u00a0calculates scores based on how many words are in a sentence and how many\u00a0syllables\u00a0are in a word.\u00a0The more syllables in a word and the more words in a sentence then the higher it ranks on the “hard to read” scale. Anyone who thinks this test proves that the KJV (against all normal\u00a0sensibilities) is easier to read than the NIV obviously doesn’t understand what the chart actually represents.<\/p>\n

This\u00a0is why this system has absolutely nothing to do with the readability of the KJV; no one cares how many syllables are in a word or how many words are in a sentence. We want the Bible to use the correct lingo. That is all. Nothing less and nothing more. In fact, most people would love to read a King James Bible…..but they can’t. Because the words are no longer understandable by modern English readers. Many modern readers do not know how to interpret 400 year old English. This is why our English translations must be kept up-to-date.<\/p>\n

The preface to the 1611 KJV even states…<\/p>\n

But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknown tongue?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

2. Modern Bible translations remove the name of Jesus<\/a>, among other evils<\/h2>\n

The first time I read about this issue I was legitimately concerned. I thought to myself that if this\u00a0information\u00a0is true then the modern translators have some real explaining to do . I did some research and found a table outlining the issue…<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Scripture Reference<\/em><\/td>\nKJV<\/em><\/td>\nNIV<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Matt 9:28, Matt 13:36, Matt 17:20,
\nMatt 17:22, Matt 18:2, Matt 24:2,
\nMark 5:13, Mark 7:27, Mark 11:14,
\nMark 14:18, Luke 7:22, John 4:16,
\nJohn 4:46, John 8:20, John 9:1,
\nJohn 11:14, John 11:39, John 20:15,
\nJohn 21:5<\/td>\n		Jesus<\/strong><\/td>\nhe<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2 Cor 4:11<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong><\/td>\nhis<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Matt 8:29<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong>, thou Son of God<\/td>\nSon of God<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Matt 16:20<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong>\u00a0the Christ<\/td>\nthe Christ<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Romans 15:8, 2 Cor 4:6, 2 Cor 5:18<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong>\u00a0Christ<\/td>\nChrist<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Col 1:28, Phile 1:6, 1 Pet 5:10,
\n1 Pet 5:14<\/td>\n		Christ\u00a0Jesus<\/strong><\/td>\nChrist<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Luke 7:19, Luke 10:39, Luke 10:41<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong><\/td>\nthe Lord<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Acts 19:10, 1 Cor 5:5<\/td>\nLord\u00a0Jesus<\/strong><\/td>\nLord<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Rom 16:18<\/td>\nLord\u00a0Jesus<\/strong>\u00a0Christ<\/td>\nLord Christ<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
1 Cor 16:22, 2 Tim 4:22<\/td>\nLord\u00a0Jesus<\/strong>\u00a0Christ<\/td>\nLord<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
John 19:38<\/td>\nthe body of\u00a0Jesus<\/strong><\/td>\nthe body<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Acts 3:26<\/td>\nSon\u00a0Jesus<\/strong><\/td>\nservant<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Rom 1:3<\/td>\nSon\u00a0Jesus<\/strong>\u00a0Christ our Lord<\/td>\nSon<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Acts 7:45, Heb 4:8
\n(Jesus,Joshua: What’s the difference?<\/a>)<\/td>\n		Jesus<\/strong><\/td>\nJoshua<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Acts 8:37, Romans 16:24, Col 1:2<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong><\/td>\n[not present, but it is in the footnote]<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
John 21:21, Acts 9:29, Gal 6:15,
\nEph 3:9, Eph 3:14<\/td>\n		Jesus<\/strong><\/td>\n[not present]<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

And then I did what every responsible should do; I did a reverse look up in my NIV Bible for the name of Jesus and found that quite often the KJV removed the name of Jesus where the NIV kept it. Hrrrmm that’s\u00a0interesting! As it turns out this is one of those arguments that can be turned right back around to\u00a0defeat\u00a0the claim it initially made. Never mind the fact that the claim was\u00a0erroneous\u00a0to begin with, since the word “he” in the context of the passage is the same as using the name of who ever the subject is……Jesus. Here is the list of the times the NIV uses the name of Jesus and the KJV does not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Scripture Reference(s)<\/em><\/td>\nKJV<\/em><\/td>\nNIV<\/em><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Matt 4:4, Matt 4:19, Matt 4:21,
\nMatt 8:24, Matt 9:1, Matt 11:20,
\nMatt 12:22, Matt 12:46, Matt 13:24,
\nMatt 15:3, Matt 15:10, Matt 15:23,
\nMatt 15:39, Matt 16:4, Matt 16:23,
\nMatt 19:8, Matt 19:11, Matt 19:17,
\nMatt 20:23, Matt 21:10, Matt 21:23,
\nMatt 22:34, Matt 24:3, Matt 26:20,
\nMatt 26:23, Matt 26:25, Matt 27:3,
\nMatt 27:14, Mark 1:10, Mark 1:16,
\nMark 1:21, Mark 1:35, Mark 1:38,
\nMark 1:43, Mark 2:4, Mark 2:13,
\nMark 2:14, Mark 2:23, Mark 3:3,
\nMark 3:4, Mark 3:13, Mark 3:23,
\nMark 4:1, Mark 4:9, Mark 4:13,
\nMark 4:33, Mark 4:28, Mark 5:2,
\nMark 5:8, Mark 5:9, Mark 5:18,
\nMark 5:32, Mark 5:35, Mark 5:38,
\nMark 6:1, Mark 6:6, Mark 6:39,
\nMark 6:45, Mark 7:14, Mark 7:24,
\nMark 7:31, Mark 7:33, Mark 7:36,
\nMark 8:5, Mark 8:15, Mark 8:23,
\nMark 8:25, Mark 8:26, Mark 8:30,
\nMark 8:33, Mark 9:9, Mark 9:12,
\nMark 9:19, Mark 9:21, Mark 9:28,
\nMark 9:30, Mark 9:35, Mark 10:1,
\nMark 10:17, Mark 10:46, Mark 11:1,
\nMark 11:12, Mark 11:27, Mark 12:15,
\nMark 12:28, Mark 12:38, Mark 12:43,
\nMark 13:3, Mark 14:16, Mark 14:17,
\nMark 14:32, Mark 14:61, Mark 15:2,
\nMark 15:44, Mark 16:11, Mark 16:12,
\nMark 16:14, Luke 4:23, Luke 4:38,
\nLuke 4:42, Luke 5:12, Luke 5:13,
\nLuke 5:14, Luke 5:16, Luke 5:20,
\nLuke 5:27 (twice), Luke 5:34, Luke 6:1,
\nLuke 6:5, Luke 6:8, Luke 6:12,
\nLuke 7:1, Luke 7:11, Luke 7:15,
\nLuke 7:21, Luke 7:24, Luke 7:43,
\nLuke 7:48, Luke 7:50, Luke 8:1,
\nLuke 8:22, Luke 8:27, Luke 8:29,
\nLuke 8:42, Luke 8:49, Luke 8:52,
\nLuke 8:55, Luke 9:1, Luke 9:18,
\nLuke 9:21, Luke 9:28, Luke 9:51,
\nLuke 9:55, Luke 10:28, Luke 11:1,
\nLuke 11:14, Luke 11:17, Luke 11:27,
\nLuke 11:29, Luke 11:37, Luke 11:38,
\nLuke 11:46, Luke 11:53, Luke 12:1,
\nLuke 12:14, Luke 12:22, Luke 13:10,
\nLuke 13:18, Luke 13:22, Luke 14:1,
\nLuke 14:12, Luke 14:16, Luke 15:3,
\nLuke 15:11, Luke 16:1, Luke 17:1,
\nLuke 17:11, Luke 17:20, Luke 18:1,
\nLuke 18:9, Luke 18:27, Luke 18:29,
\nLuke 18:31, Luke 18:35, Luke 19:4,
\nLuke 19:28, Luke 20:17, Luke 20:41,
\nLuke 20:45, Luke 21:1, Luke 21:5,
\nLuke 21:37, Luke 22:8, Luke 22:13,
\nLuke 22:14, Luke 22:25, Luke 22:34,
\nLuke 22:35, Luke 22:39, Luke 22:67,
\nLuke 23:3, Luke 23:7, Luke 23:9,
\nLuke 24:28, Luke 24:35, John 9:22,
\nJohn 11:43, John 11:57, John 12:9,
\nJohn 12:37, John 13:28, John 18:6,
\nJohn 19:41, John 20:9, John 21:15,
\nJohn 21:16 (twice), John 21:17, John 21:19,
\nActs 1:22, Acts 9:20, Hebrews 2:11,
\nHebrews 7:24, Hebrews 8:6, 1 John 2:6,
\n1 John 3:16<\/td>\n		he<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Matt 8:31, Matt 9:32, Matt 12:10,
\nMatt 12:14, Matt 14:35, Matt 16:1,
\nMatt 17:3, Matt 17:14, Matt 18:21,
\nMatt 19:13, Matt 19:16, Matt 20:20,
\nMatt 21:7, Matt 26:62, Matt 27:18,
\nMatt 27:34, Matt 27:48, Mark 1:30,
\nMark 1:32, Mark 1:34, Mark 2:4,
\nMark 2:18, Mark 3:2, Mark 3:6,
\nMark 5:10, Mark 5:12, Mark 5:17,
\nMark 5:22, Mark 6:54, Mark 7:1,
\nMark 7:5, Mark 7:26, Mark 8:11,
\nMark 8:22, Mark 9:15, Mark 9:20,
\nMark 10:10, Mark 10:13, Mark 11:21,
\nMark 12:13, Mark 14:1, Mark 14:10,
\nMark 14:45, Mark 14:46, Mark 14:51,
\nMark 15:10, Mark 15:16, Mark 15:22,
\nMark 15:36, Mark 15:39, Luke 4:38,
\nLuke 4:40, Luke 5:1, Luke 5:18,
\nLuke 5:29, Luke 6:7, Luke 7:17,
\nLuke 7:20, Luke 7:36, Luke 8:4,
\nLuke 8:32, Luke 8:37, Luke 9:10,
\nLuke 10:25, Luke 13:1, Luke 13:31,
\nLuke 14:15, Luke 14:25, Luke 16:14,
\nLuke 18:15, Luke 18:43, Luke 19:39,
\nLuke 20:27, Luke 22:2, Luke 22:4,
\nLuke 22:6, Luke 22:66, Luke 23:3,
\nLuke 23:55, John 1:40, John 7:43,
\nJohn 8:4, John 10:42, John 11:3,
\nJohn 13:2, John 19:12, John 19:32,
\nActs 3:16, Acts 13:27, Hebrews 13:15<\/td>\n		him<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Luke 20:20, Acts 3:16, Acts 13:24<\/td>\nhis<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Matt 17:24, Matt 20:29, Luke 10:38<\/td>\nthey<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong>\u00a0and his disciples<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
2 Cor 11:4<\/td>\nwhom<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Acts 10:48<\/td>\nthe Lord<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong>\u00a0Christ<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Acts 18:25<\/td>\nthe Lord<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Mark 16:19, 2 Thess 2:8<\/td>\nLord<\/td>\nLord\u00a0Jesus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Acts 16:7<\/td>\nSpirit<\/td>\nSpirit of\u00a0Jesus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Acts 24:24, Romans 8:34, 1 Cor 4:17,
\nGal 5:24, Eph 3:6, Col 4:12<\/td>\n		Christ<\/td>\nChrist\u00a0Jesus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Acts 9:22<\/td>\nthis<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Acts 13:38, Heb 3:3<\/td>\nthis man<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Mark 3:20, Mark 7:19,
\nLuke 9:31, John 10:40<\/td>\n		[not present]<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Romans 1:4<\/td>\n[not present]<\/td>\nJesus<\/strong>\u00a0Christ our Lord<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Jude 1:25<\/td>\n[not present]<\/td>\nthrough\u00a0Jesus<\/strong>\u00a0Christ our Lord, before all ages<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

As you can see, this argument doesn’t bode well for those who claim that modern translations are trying to remove the name of Jesus. But\u00a0thanks to Gail Riplinger’s famous book, “New Age Versions<\/a>“, I do not believe this argument is going away. It seems a staple in most argument over the NIV.<\/p>\n