Error in KJV and NKJV

[Ronald Nolette]

Calvinism is a "doctrine of Devils".

You can't change it .

Let me show you what the Devil did...

He watched Martin Luther and a few like Him revolt against the "Dark Ages" Church.. the "cult of the virgin".
This revolt, was God breathed Truth coming out of Cult of Mary, theological darkness.

So what did the Devil do?
He raised up John Calvin, at the same time, to POISON, the Protestant Church, with Calvinism.

That is what the devil does.
He bring the LIES to try to hinder the truth., always.

BLAH BLAH BLAH! All opinion and no bible- you are a fraud.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

What i said to you, was not about your verses.

I simply told you that when you are on a Christian forum, and your Thread is attempting to cast doubt on the word of God, then the reality is, the Holy Spirit would not lead anyone to do that to the word of God..
And because you told us you are a self proclaimed "seer" and you can't SEE OR understand the real issue with your Thread, then... as i said... .this is a "situation" that you are proving yourself to own.

Many westerners like all Gentile nations, will hang on for dear life their false doctrines based on translations like the one I pointed out. For those who love God, I want to know what is the truth and not the flawed western interpretation. Again, I must warn you about your last sentence. It is reviling. "11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner—not even to eat with such a person.

 

[Wrangler]

I use the NKJV and even though this error is in it, it is the only one I've found

There are websites dedicated to this topic. The most famous error is 1 John 5:6-8.

Any translation with James in the title is the worst translations available in English. Not only is the FROM deficient, the TO part of the translation is archaic. We simply don't speak that way anymore.

The KJV is the most important book ever written in the English language. After 4 centuries, it's had its day in the sun.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

There are websites dedicated to this topic. The most famous error is 1 John 5:6-8.

Any translation with James in the title is the worst translations available in English. Not only is the FROM deficient, the TO part of the translation is archaic. We simply don't speak that way anymore.

The KJV is the most important book ever written in the English language. After 4 centuries, it's had its day in the sun.

Yes, I agree about 1 John 5:6-8. The second one is Romans 8:1.

 

[Episkopos]

I use the NKJV and even though this error is in it, it is the only one I've found, and I've written in it the correction.

Isa. 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 [c]shepherd of His flock?
Where is He who put His Holy Spirit within them,

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,

If you know of any other errors let me know.

LOL. Any translation is rife with errors. ALL translators have an agenda. It's best to consult more than one source. It's best to know the original language, of course.

As to your example above...the Hebrew "bekirbechem" is usually translated as "in the midst of them".

However, in my bible... MSS ... it says "bekirbo"...which means "In his midst"....masculine singular....not plural as in the translations you listed.

So then since "in his midst" does not say well..."in the midst of him" is better. And this means that it is "within him"....not within them.

So then neither translation is accurate. Typical...

Whenever something is stated that goes outside conventional thinking, the idea is transmogrified into something more understandable to the carnal mind.

An example of this is from Ps. 131:2...

Surely I have behaved and quieted myself, as a child that is weaned of his mother: my soul is even as a weaned child.

This translation (KJV) is out to lunch and doesn't convey the spiritual ramifications of losing one's life for Christ. So the translators, nonspiritual as they were, were unable to show forth the gospel from the OT.

The Hebrew reads (transliterated of course)

Kegamoul aley imo, kagamoul alay naphshi.

Notice the rhythm in the text. A direct comparison with (a child) being weaned of his mother with a man being weaned of his soul (life).

So then a MUCH better rendering of Ps. 131:2 is "as (a child) is weaned of his mother, so I am weaned of my life".

 

[Rockerduck]

There are websites dedicated to this topic. The most famous error is 1 John 5:6-8.

Any translation with James in the title is the worst translations available in English. Not only is the FROM deficient, the TO part of the translation is archaic. We simply don't speak that way anymore.

The KJV is the most important book ever written in the English language. After 4 centuries, it's had its day in the sun.

1 John 5:6-8. This is not an error. You must understand that the purpose of 1 John was to combat the rise of Gnosticism within the growing church. What is that? They say Christ came into Jesus at His baptism (water) and Christ left the man Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane and left the man Jesus to die(blood) on the Cross.

This is He who came by water(baptism) and blood (atoning death)—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood.

The apostle John is saying Jesus was just as much Christ at His Baptism as He was in death.

 

[Johann]

Kegamoul aley imo, kagamoul alay naphshi.

נַ֫פְשִׁ֥י naf·Shi כְּ֭גָמֻל Ke·ga·mul עֲלֵ֣י 'a·Lei אִמּ֑וֹ im·Mo; כַּגָּמֻ֖ל kag·ga·Mul עָלַ֣י 'a·Lai נַפְשִֽׁי׃ naf·Shi.

 

[Rockerduck]

LOL. Any translation is rife with errors. ALL translators have an agenda. It's best to consult more than one source. It's best to know the original language, of course.

As to your example above...the Hebrew "bekirbechem" is usually translated as "in the midst of them".

However, in my bible... MSS ... it says "bekirbo"...which means "In his midst"....masculine singular....not plural as in the translations you listed.

So then since "in his midst" does not say well..."in the midst of him" is better. And this means that it is "within him"....not within them.

So then neither translation is accurate. Typical...

Whenever something is stated that goes outside conventional thinking, the idea is transmogrified into something more understandable to the carnal mind.

An example of this is from Ps. 131:2...

Surely I have behaved and quieted myself, as a child that is weaned of his mother: my soul is even as a weaned child.

This translation (KJV) is out to lunch and doesn't convey the spiritual ramifications of losing one's life for Christ. So the translators, nonspiritual as they were, were unable to show forth the gospel from the OT.

The Hebrew reads (transliterated of course)

Kegamoul aley imo, kagamoul alay naphshi.

Notice the rhythm in the text. A direct comparison with (a child) being weaned of his mother with a man being weaned of his soul (life).

So then a MUCH better rendering of Ps. 131:2 is "as (a child) is weaned of his mother, so I am weaned of my life".

You are wrong. Psalm 131:2 means what says. King David is admitting he is not a know it all and is content not knowing the mysteries of God and relies on the loving care of God.

Psalms 131:2 -
Instead, I have calmed and quieted myself,
like a weaned child who no longer cries for its mother’s milk.
Yes, like a weaned child is my soul within me.

 

[Episkopos]

You are wrong. Psalm 131:2 means what says. King David is admitting he is not a know it all and is content not knowing the mysteries of God and relies on the loving care of God.

Psalms 131:2 -
Instead, I have calmed and quieted myself,
like a weaned child who no longer cries for its mother’s milk.
Yes, like a weaned child is my soul within me.

Did you read the Hebrew? can you read the Hebrew? Or is this a theory that you are speaking by opinion?

Whatever you do don't look any deeper into this.... or other such blatant mis-translations.

 

[Episkopos]

נַ֫פְשִׁ֥י naf·Shi כְּ֭גָמֻל Ke·ga·mul עֲלֵ֣י 'a·Lei אִמּ֑וֹ im·Mo; כַּגָּמֻ֖ל kag·ga·Mul עָלַ֣י 'a·Lai נַפְשִֽׁי׃ naf·Shi.

But do you understand it?

Gamoul alay....as a phrase is used here twice to mean "weaned upon" ...or just"weaned". Gamal (same letters) can also mean camel. (I think this is due to the fact that a camel can go so long without water)

Elsewhere in the bible that very same phrase (gamoul alay) is translated poorly to say "deal bountifully." A total obfuscation of the text to make something sound nice. In truth many translators have no idea of what is being conveyed.

Being weaned of (upon) something and being dealt bountifully, in my books, are not the same at all. But that's just me, it seems.

 

[Rockerduck]

Did you read the Hebrew? can you read the Hebrew? Or is this a theory that you are speaking by opinion?

Whatever you do don't look any deeper into this.... or other such blatant mis-translations.

I don't need Hebrew or Greek. I was given the gift of Knowledge by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Episkopos]

I don't need Hebrew or Greek. I was given the gift of Knowledge by the Holy Spirit.

LOL Is ignorance a gift of the Spirit now? I get the humour.

 

[Rockerduck]

LOL Is ignorance a gift of the Spirit now? I get the humour.

I read the bible, not books about the bible.

 

[Episkopos]

I read the bible, not books about the bible.

Like the translation of the KJV into Hebrew...or the New testament from the KJV into Greek? If the KJV was good enough for Paul, right?

 

[Wrangler]

1 John 5:6-8. This is not an error.

Yes. 1 John 5:6-8 is an error and one of the most egregious errors of the KJV.

This is why no modern translation renders the verses in the same way.

Only a KJVO would claim it is not an error.

 

[Johann]

But do you understand it?

Do you read scholarly work?

 

[Episkopos]

But do you understand it?

Gamoul alay....as a phrase is used here twice to mean "weaned upon" ...or just"weaned". Gamal (same letters) can also mean camel. (I think this is due to the fact that a camel can go so long without water)

Elsewhere in the bible that very same phrase (gamoul alay) is translated poorly to say "deal bountifully." A total obfuscation of the text to make something sound nice. In truth many translators have no idea of what is being conveyed.

Being weaned of (upon) something and being dealt bountifully, in my books, are not the same at all. But that's just me, it seems.

An example of this error in translation from Ps. 119:17

Deal bountifully with thy servant, that I may live, and keep thy word.

IOW...if you scratch my back I will scratch yours? I don't think so.

Now here is the verse rendered the better way...

"Wean Your servant, that I may live, and keep Your word" Ps. 119:17

If we are searching for biblical instruction...which rendering is more helpful...and accurate?

As we are weaned of our own life, God gives us His life so that we can fulfill His word.

 

[Episkopos]

Do you read scholarly work?

LOL You mean PHD's like Jesus, Peter, and John and Paul?? (People who Have Discerment)

 

[Johann]

Deal bountifully with thy servant, that I may live, and keep thy word.

(gâmal｜gaw-mal'｜verb｜deal fully)

[Heb] גָּמַל‎ ETCBC: גמל [R940]‎ (verb｜deal fully) OSHL: c.cj.aa TWOT: 360 GK: H1694 Greek: ἀνταποδίδωμι [G467], βλαστάνω [G985], βουλεύω [G1011], ἐκτρέφω [G1625], ἐνδείκνυμι [G1731], ἐνεργέω [G1754], ἐπάγω [G1863], ἐπιχειρέω [G2021], ἐργάζομαι [G2038], εὐεργετέω [G2109], κάμηλος [G2574]

Derivation: a primitive root;
Strong's: to treat a person (well or ill), i.e. benefit or requite; by implication (of toil), to ripen, i.e. (specifically) to wean
KJV: bestow on, deal bountifully, do (good), recompense, requite, reward, ripen, [phrase] serve, mean, yield.

Hebrew Word: gamal
Strong's Reference: H1580
Definition: to deal, to recompense, to ripen (ASV: do, deal, requite, reward; RSV: deal, requite, deal bountifully.)

OTW Number: 360 a
Transliteration: gemul
Strong's Reference: H1576
Definition: recompense.

OTW Number: 360b
Transliteration: gemula
Strong's Reference: H1578
Definition: recompense.

OTW Number: 360c
Transliteration: tagmul
Strong's Reference: H8408
Definition: benefit.

OTW Number: 360d
Transliteration: gamal
Strong's Reference: H1581
Definition: camel.

This verb occurs in the Qal and Niphal stems. In the Qal it signifies to render either good or evil to someone. In some passages the two are contrasted (Pro_31:12; 1Sa_24:17 [H18]); in others evil is done (Gen_50:15, Gen_50:17; Pro_3:30); in still others good is done (Isa_63:7). At times the idea is to deal bountifully with (Psa_13:6; Psa_116:7; etc.), or to deal out reward (2Sa_19:36 [H37]). At times there is a recompense or a requital in a bad sense (Psa_7:4 [H5]); Deu_32:6; Psa_137:8).

The Qal form may mean to wean a child (1Sa_1:23-24; 1Ki_11:20; Hos_1:8) so that one reads of the weaned child (gamul; Psa_131:2) or the child weaned from milk (gemule mehalab).

gamal in the Qal may also mean to bear ripe almonds (Num_17:8 [H23]) or to ripen, of grapes (Isa_18:5).

gamal occurs in the Niphal three times, twice of the weaning of Isaac (Gen_21:8) and once of Samuel (1Sa_1:22 ) .

.gemul. Recompense, reward, benefit, dealing. This noun occurs eighteen times. It is the recompense given by God (Isa_3:11; Isa_35:4; Isa_59:18; Isa_66:6; Jer_51:6; Lam_3:64; Oba_1:15; Joe_3:7 (H 4.7]) and by man (Joe_3:4 [H4.4]; Psa_137:8); the benefits God has given (Psa_103:2; 2Ch_32:25), and the deeds one does (Jdg_9:16; Pro_12:14; Isa_3:11). The Psalmist invokes God, the God of recompense (Jer_51:56; cf Deu_28:1-68), to give the wicked his due (Psa_28:4; Psa_94:2).

gemula. Dealing, recompense. This feminine noun is used of the reward which David offered to Barzillai in return for a favor which he showed to David when he was fleeing from Absalom (2Sa_19:37). A plural form in the prophets describes God's retribution to his adversaries (Isa_59:18), in particular to Babylon, for the Lord is a God of recompense (Jer_51:56).

tagmul. Benefit. This is an abstract masculine noun (GKC 85r) from the root gamal. It occurs in the plural with an Aramaic suffix, tagmulohi (GKC 911; Psa_116:12). The ASV renders "benefits", and the RSV, "bounty." Having recovered from an illness, overwhelmed with God's goodness toward him, the Psalmist asks what he should return for such benefits. He answered with self-dedication, sacrifice, and payment of vows.

gamal. Camel. LXX, kamelos. A beast of burden mentioned throughout the OT, from the patriarchal accounts to the postexilic age. Used primarily for riding (Gen_24:61, Gen_24:63; Gen_31:17; 1Sa_30:17; Isa_21:7) and carrying loads, camels were also milked (Gen_32:15-16). Camel flesh is considered edible by Arabs. But Israel's dietary laws prohibited it, since the camel chews the cud, but has no parted hoof (Lev_11:4; Deu_14:7).

The camel's ability to go long periods without water suited him for the spice trade (2Ch_9:1), carrying food some distances, transporting products of Gilead to Egypt (Gen_37:25), transporting tribute (2Ki_8:9 ff, and transporting gifts to the Lord (Isa_60:6). Caravans were of various sizes (Gen_24:10). Making the camels kneel (Gen_24:11), unloading them, and providing food for them (Gen_24:32) was a regular part of the trip. Drawing water for camels at a well at a stopping place was a big task; Rachel's willingness to do it showed her character and answered Eliezer's prayer (Gen_24:10, Gen_24:19, Gen_24:20, Gen_24:44, Gen_24:46).

Raiders rode camels (Jdg_6:5; Jdg_7:12; Jdg_8:21, Jdg_8:26) and often seized the camels of their enemies (Job_1:17; Jer_49:29, Jer_49:32; 1Sa_15:3; 1Sa_27:9; 2Ch_14:15 [H14]); Isa_30:6). One episode lists a booty of fifty thousand camels (1Ch_5:21). Sennacherib lists camels among the booty he took from Judah. Camels were a means of rapid escape (1Sa_30:17). Rabbah of Ammon is threatened with becoming a pasture of camels (Eze_25:5).

The wealth of men like Abraham (Gen_12:16; Gen_24:35), Jacob (Gen_30:43), and Job was counted (along with other livestock) in the number of their camels. Job had three thousand before his affliction, but six thousand afterward (Job_1:3; Job_42:12). David had a special overseer of camels (1Ch_27:30). Like other livestock, camels were victims of the plague in Egypt (Exo_9:3; cf. Zec_14:15). Those who returned from exile are said to have had 435 camels (Ezr_2:67; cf. Neh_7:68).

Albright has argued that the camel was not extensively domesticated until the Iron Age (about 1200). He holds that the patriarchal references are somewhat anachronistic and that the common nomad of that day depended on the ass (SAC, p. 164-65). He does, however, allow that "partial and sporadic domestication may go back several centuries earlier." J. P. Free gathered evidence of earlier use of domesticated camels, though his proof need not be pressed to say that ass nomadism was not the more common (J. P. Free, JNES 3: 187-93.) K. Kitchen since then has brought out additional evidence to demonstrate that the camel was domesticated already in the Early Bronze Age (see Andre Parrot, Syria 32: 323).

Bibliography: Free, Joseph P., "Abraham's Camels," JNES 3: 187-93. Isserlin, B. S., "On Some Possible Occurrences of the Camel in Palestine," PEQ:50-53. Lambert, W. G., "The Domesticated Camel in the Second Millennium: Evidence from Alalakh and Ugarit," BASOR 160: 42-43. THAT, I, pp. 426-28. J.P.L.

 

[Johann]

LOL You mean PHD's like Jesus, Peter, and John and Paul?? (People who Have Discerment)

Non compos mentis--

You're a waste of my time and I think you should consider another vocation.