For KJV folks, a heads up

[KUWN]

Here is the translation of 2 Sam 21.19 in your KJV:

"{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."

Notice the words "the brother of" are in italics. That means that do not appear in the manuscripts. This verse is actually a "contradiction" because, if you were translating this verse without adding information in italics, it would read that "Elhanan....slew Goliath.." We know David slew Goliath. So, KJV, be prepared if a skeptic tries to say the KJV has a contradiction in it.

 

[IndianaRob]

Here is the translation of 2 Sam 21.19 in your KJV:

"{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."

Notice the words "the brother of" are in italics. That means that do not appear in the manuscripts. This verse is actually a "contradiction" because, if you were translating this verse without adding information in italics, it would read that "Elhanan....slew Goliath.." We know David slew Goliath. So, KJV, be prepared if a skeptic tries to say the KJV has a contradiction in it.

Have you ever considered the copies of the copies of the copies of the originals introduced the error and the KJV translators caught the error and fixed it?

 

[KUWN]

Have you ever considered the copies of the copies of the copies of the originals introduced the error and the KJV translators caught the error and fixed it?

That's exactly what happen, but the skeptic will argue that the KJV translators "added to the Word" without a single manuscript agreeing with that addition. They have by-passed the evidence in the manuscripts and added words that do not appear in any manuscript. Can they do that with other verses?

 

[IndianaRob]

That's exactly what happen, but the skeptic will argue that the KJV translators "added to the Word" without a single manuscript agreeing with that addition. They have by-passed the evidence in the manuscripts and added words that do not appear in any manuscript. Can they do that with other verses?

They added it because it’s given in 1 Chronicles and yes they can and did do it in other verses.

 

[ChristinaL]

They added it because it’s given in 1 Chronicles and yes they can and did do it in other verses.

What people like KUWN dont seem to understand as the the words in italics were added to make better sense of the passages.

 

[KUWN]

What people like KUWN dont seem to understand as the the words in italics were added to make better sense of the passages.

The Hebrew scribes who copied the manuscripts did not remove the error. They kept it in the manuscripts. To them, man has no right to veto the Sacred Text. The KJV translators didn't think twice to correct God's word to their liking. There is no Hebrew manuscript that corrects the contradiction. The manuscript evidence should take precedence over a translator's adding to the Word. Why are people so intimidated over errors in our Translations. Translations are man-made writings.

 

[Behold]

Here is the translation of 2 Sam 21.19 in your KJV:

"{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."

Notice the words "the brother of" are in italics. That means that do not appear in the manuscripts. This verse is actually a "contradiction" because, if you were translating this verse without adding information in italics, it would read that "Elhanan....slew Goliath.." We know David slew Goliath. So, KJV, be prepared if a skeptic tries to say the KJV has a contradiction in it.

A little history on the KJV Translators.

When you see a word that is "italicized" in a KJV.... then that is the KJV Translators, showing you that they put it there.
They did this for the sake of HONESTY, and Integrity, so that they could remain faithful to the "texts" they were Translating, as much as possible.


God honors this type of behavior with His Grace and His Anointing.

Reader, sometimes you find yourself in a situation......that is confused...
So, when that happens, and you need to resolve it, and are not certain, then just do the right thing.
See, there is always a "right thing" and that is the way to pursue........always... even if it hurts, even if it offends.... even if it stops something that you didnt want to lose., but were trying to keep it, because of whatever personal reason you have... and this THING, is not what you should be a part of..........and that is why you feel confused, upset, not at REST in your Spirit.

 

[ChristinaL]

The Hebrew scribes who copied the manuscripts did not remove the error. They kept it in the manuscripts. To them, man has no right to veto the Sacred Text. The KJV translators didn't think twice to correct God's word to their liking. There is no Hebrew manuscript that corrects the contradiction. The manuscript evidence should take precedence over a translator's adding to the Word. Why are people so intimidated over errors in our Translations. Translations are man-made writings.

There are no supposed errors that dont have reasonable explanations. What appear to be errors are either not errors at all, or genuine ones but God allows unimportant errors to remain to show God alone is perfect not us. The idea too that the KJV translators made corrections to their liking however is foolishness
A fairly extensive commentary on this can be found here

2 Samuel 21:19 Commentaries: There was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.

 

[KUWN]

Let's introduce a little humor into this discussion to lighten things up a bit. These mistakes were all part of the 1611 version:


In the KJV, the seventh commandment was slightly altered. The word “not” was
accidentally omitted. With this oversight, the KJV read, “You shall commit
adultery.” Not sure how many copies were circulated before this omission was
noticed. I do know this, after this error was duly noted, and corrected I
might add, scoffers labeled this edition the “Wicked Bible.”

In the garden of Gethsemane, the first KJV had “Judas” going there to pray,
not Jesus.

When John in Revelation 21:1 saw the new heaven and earth, he described it
as having “no more sea.” The KJV, in an early edition, once again omitted a
word (no). Hence, in this version’s rendition of the new heaven and earth,
there was actually ‘more sea.’

Here’s a good one. In 1 Corinthians 6:9, it’s not the ‘righteous’ who
inherit the kingdom, it’s the “unrighteous.” Not so sure I don’t like that
better!

John 5:14 is a close second for the funniest. After Jesus heals the
paralytic man, he admonishes him to “sin no more.” However, two letters
where reversed in this KJV. Can you guess which two? Yup! If the printer was
right, that man was asked to sin ‘on’ more! Must have been the same person
who worked on the Commandments.

Psalm 119:161 was goofed. But in this case, we can see why. Here is that
verse as it should have appeared:

Princes persecute me without a cause,
But my heart stands in awe of Your word.

Notice how the printers subliminally personalize it, albeit by mistake. Here
is how it appeared in that KJV:
Printers persecute me without a cause,
But my heart stands in awe of Your word.

In Luke, you recall when Jesus told Peter that he would deny Him three
times. Nope, It was Philip, as far as the KJV printers could tell. At least
both names start with a P.

Although a rather obscure passage, the mistake in Ezekiel 47:10 should have
been caught (get it?). In this verse, the fisherman stand (that’s the
correct wording), but according to the KJV, the fish stand. That would be
quite a feat.

This last one I mention is found in the section of Scripture from which I
chose the name for my daughter. The KJV got all the words right, they just
put two in the wrong order. As we can see they switched them. Here is how it
should have appeared:

“Then Rebekah and her damsels arose, and they rode on the camels and
followed the man.”

Now, I close with this final error. This is how it actually appeared in the
KJV. Talk about a damsel in distress!

“Then Rebekah and her camels arose, and they rode on the damsels and
followed the man.”

How in the world can anyone make a misteak like that?

 

[ChristinaL]

Let's introduce a little humor into this discussion to lighten things up a bit. These mistakes were all part of the 1611 version:


In the KJV, the seventh commandment was slightly altered. The word “not” was
accidentally omitted. With this oversight, the KJV read, “You shall commit
adultery.” Not sure how many copies were circulated before this omission was
noticed. I do know this, after this error was duly noted, and corrected I
might add, scoffers labeled this edition the “Wicked Bible.”

In the garden of Gethsemane, the first KJV had “Judas” going there to pray,
not Jesus.

When John in Revelation 21:1 saw the new heaven and earth, he described it
as having “no more sea.” The KJV, in an early edition, once again omitted a
word (no). Hence, in this version’s rendition of the new heaven and earth,
there was actually ‘more sea.’

Here’s a good one. In 1 Corinthians 6:9, it’s not the ‘righteous’ who
inherit the kingdom, it’s the “unrighteous.” Not so sure I don’t like that
better!

John 5:14 is a close second for the funniest. After Jesus heals the
paralytic man, he admonishes him to “sin no more.” However, two letters
where reversed in this KJV. Can you guess which two? Yup! If the printer was
right, that man was asked to sin ‘on’ more! Must have been the same person
who worked on the Commandments.

Psalm 119:161 was goofed. But in this case, we can see why. Here is that
verse as it should have appeared:

Princes persecute me without a cause,
But my heart stands in awe of Your word.

Notice how the printers subliminally personalize it, albeit by mistake. Here
is how it appeared in that KJV:
Printers persecute me without a cause,
But my heart stands in awe of Your word.

In Luke, you recall when Jesus told Peter that he would deny Him three
times. Nope, It was Philip, as far as the KJV printers could tell. At least
both names start with a P.

Although a rather obscure passage, the mistake in Ezekiel 47:10 should have
been caught (get it?). In this verse, the fisherman stand (that’s the
correct wording), but according to the KJV, the fish stand. That would be
quite a feat.

This last one I mention is found in the section of Scripture from which I
chose the name for my daughter. The KJV got all the words right, they just
put two in the wrong order. As we can see they switched them. Here is how it
should have appeared:

“Then Rebekah and her damsels arose, and they rode on the camels and
followed the man.”

Now, I close with this final error. This is how it actually appeared in the
KJV. Talk about a damsel in distress!

“Then Rebekah and her camels arose, and they rode on the damsels and
followed the man.”

How in the world can anyone make a misteak like that?

Ok here is an explanation even a complete simpleton can understand. In those days errors BY THE PRINTERS not the authors, wrer a massive problem with any sort of book

 

[amigo de christo]

Here is the translation of 2 Sam 21.19 in your KJV:

"{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."

Notice the words "the brother of" are in italics. That means that do not appear in the manuscripts. This verse is actually a "contradiction" because, if you were translating this verse without adding information in italics, it would read that "Elhanan....slew Goliath.." We know David slew Goliath. So, KJV, be prepared if a skeptic tries to say the KJV has a contradiction in it.

hey , relax , its the way earlier english was spoken .
Try learning early , middle , early modern and modern english .
The KJV is accurate . Try learning how english changed .
Some of us did this for ourselves .

 

[amigo de christo]

Ok here is an explanation even a complete simpleton can understand. In those days errors BY THE PRINTERS not the authors, wrer a massive problem with any sort of book

Sister this person just wants to try and say anything to make the KJV seem inaccurate .
I actually went and learned how english even came about and the changes .
THE KJV is accurate . Some of us , like me , actaully went to the library and learned it for ourselves .
I seen early english , which did you know english stems from german .
IT does . that is why you see MILCH KINE and other words still in it . MILCH KINE means MILK COW
IN GERMAN .
i actually did this to also prove that the KJV was accurate . YOu can go back
and even read Ruinc . which was our written langauge . NOW
monks and etc , USED the latin alaphabet to give us our own written langauge too .
YES our alaphabet comes from latin . DIDNT always sister .
But this too is why in early english you see that funny looking P which is actually
THORN in ruinc. IT makes the TH sound that latin did not have a letter for at that time .
Pat , would have sounded like not pat but THAT .
this gringo learned much and what i learned for myself , PROVED teh KJV was accurate all along .
YOU should see the earliest writings in english of even the LORDS prayer .
during middle english we had a lot of french influence too
you begin to see cwen , which was queen , replaced with Q . and many other things too . THERE was even
a great vowel change . I read much sister DONT let this guy lie to you . THE KJV is an accurate bible .

 

[KUWN]

hey , relax , its the way earlier english was spoken .
Try learning early , middle , early modern and modern english .
The KJV is accurate . Try learning how english changed .
Some of us did this for ourselves .

You have no idea what I posted. It has nothing to do with English, only Hebrew. Reread it and then respond.

 

[ChristinaL]

You have no idea what I posted. It has nothing to do with English, only Hebrew. Reread it and then respond.

Actually post something intelligent and worth responding to first

 

[ChristinaL]

Sister this person just wants to try and say anything to make the KJV seem inaccurate .
I actually went and learned how english even came about and the changes .
THE KJV is accurate . Some of us , like me , actaully went to the library and learned it for ourselves .
I seen early english , which did you know english stems from german .
IT does . that is why you see MILCH KINE and other words still in it . MILCH KINE means MILK COW
IN GERMAN .
i actually did this to also prove that the KJV was accurate . YOu can go back
and even read Ruinc . which was our written langauge . NOW
monks and etc , USED the latin alaphabet to give us our own written langauge too .
YES our alaphabet comes from latin . DIDNT always sister .
But this too is why in early english you see that funny looking P which is actually
THORN in ruinc. IT makes the TH sound that latin did not have a letter for at that time .
Pat , would have sounded like not pat but THAT .
this gringo learned much and what i learned for myself , PROVED teh KJV was accurate all along .
YOU should see the earliest writings in english of even the LORDS prayer .
during middle english we had a lot of french influence too
you begin to see cwen , which was queen , replaced with Q . and many other things too . THERE was even
a great vowel change . I read much sister DONT let this guy lie to you . THE KJV is an accurate bible .

Its only weak lazy minds that just wont put a little extra effort into reading and understanding the kjv

 

[KUWN]

Actually post something intelligent and worth responding to first

I can now see why that simple post was over your head. Please do not reply to any of my posts from now on. Please.

 

[amigo de christo]

The Hebrew scribes who copied the manuscripts did not remove the error. They kept it in the manuscripts. To them, man has no right to veto the Sacred Text. The KJV translators didn't think twice to correct God's word to their liking. There is no Hebrew manuscript that corrects the contradiction. The manuscript evidence should take precedence over a translator's adding to the Word. Why are people so intimidated over errors in our Translations. Translations are man-made writings.

The hebrew scribes who copied the manuscripts did not remove , WHAT ERROR .
what man often sees as error was his own misunderstanding . What error .

 

[KUWN]

The hebrew scribes who copied the manuscripts did not remove , WHAT ERROR .
what man often sees as error was his own misunderstanding . What error .

"{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."

Notice the words "the brother of" are in italics. That means that do not appear in the manuscripts. This verse is actually a "contradiction" because, if you were translating this verse without adding information in italics, it would read that "Elhanan....slew Goliath.." We know David slew Goliath. So, KJV, be prepared if a skeptic tries to say the KJV has a contradiction in it.

In the first paragraph, notice this: the brother of, the italics tells you that it is not in the manuscripts. So, the KJV simply added to the Bible the words "the brother of" to cover up the mistake. So, what it is saying is the "Elhanan... slew Goliath."
You should have seen that stick out like a sore thumb.
I see you are not familiar with the characteristics of manuscripts.
Do you see the mistake now?
It is an easy fix, but to do that you have to add words to the Bible (in italics).

 

[Bladerunner]

Here is the translation of 2 Sam 21.19 in your KJV:

"{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."

Notice the words "the brother of" are in italics. That means that do not appear in the manuscripts. This verse is actually a "contradiction" because, if you were translating this verse without adding information in italics, it would read that "Elhanan....slew Goliath.." We know David slew Goliath. So, KJV, be prepared if a skeptic tries to say the KJV has a contradiction in it.

first of all ,, do you know how many brothers Golith had? See you are trying to change God's WORD to suit yourself...believe the words as they are written and simply find out what they mean...Not if they are true for the Lord does not LIE as you suggest.

 

[amigo de christo]

"{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."

Notice the words "the brother of" are in italics. That means that do not appear in the manuscripts. This verse is actually a "contradiction" because, if you were translating this verse without adding information in italics, it would read that "Elhanan....slew Goliath.." We know David slew Goliath. So, KJV, be prepared if a skeptic tries to say the KJV has a contradiction in it.

In the first paragraph, notice this: the brother of, the italics tells you that it is not in the manuscripts. So, the KJV simply added to the Bible the words "the brother of" to cover up the mistake. So, what it is saying is the "Elhanan... slew Goliath."
You should have seen that stick out like a sore thumb.
I see you are not familiar with the characteristics of manuscripts.
Do you see the mistake now?
It is an easy fix, but to do that you have to add words to the Bible (in italics).

have you not read the entire thing . Its obvious its not goliath . because years earlier DAVID had slew goliath .
Not to mention TRY reading the verses before this . IT talks about the sons of THE giant .
it was not an error to put that in . These were siblings , sons of the Giant .
I tried to tell you this is how people wrote . Even earlier in langauges . Saying Goliath , would have been implying
this giant was of HIS LINE . the kjv translaters just made it clear . Read the verses above it .
Plus any hebrew who read this would have well known it was NOT GOLIATH HIMSELF , but was of GOLIATHS LINE .
come now , try again .