are you aware that the King James version of the bible contains over 5,900 errors in translation?

Question

apparently his scribes weren't too good with hebrew...

Answer 1

Hmmm.Better than I expected.

Answer 2

Yep. That's why I opt for the NLT. But I would rather read the Bible in Greek or Hebrew. Maybe someday I will.

The reason the KJV has so many errors is because it is from a Latin translation of the Greek and Hebrew, and then the Latin was translated into English. The increased translation messed up several words.

The NIV however, is a direct translation from the Greek and Hebrew - so there are less chances of mess ups.

Answer 3

I've never heard this before. Where's your source? The Bible was has over 60 books and 40 authors written over a period of hundreds of years. And the amazing fact is that it never contradicts itself. Of course meaning will be different when you translate from different languages, especially a language as old as Hebrew and Greek into English. However, the overall meaning of the Bible and the big picture story it tells can't be undisputed.

Answer 4

Hebrew is a very challenging language to translate into English; regardless if it's the Bible or recipe. A lot of the meanings are lost in translation.

Answer 5

I think 1 reason that translation had some errors was because there were a lot less original transcripts and scrolls available. Weren't the Dead Sea Scrolls & other documents found years after the KJ?

Answer 6

Isn't it amazing how vulnerable people are to believe whatever they are told...rather than do the research. I was raised Christian and converted to Judiasm ...the errors in the Bible were part of the reason.Seems like Christians would want to learn Hebrew so they could study from the older scriptures. Go figure.

Answer 7

I am quite aware, but didn't know it was to that extreme.

The Darby, the English Standard Version, The American Standard Version, the Youngs Literal, and a few more that was compiled in the 1800's after older scrolls and manuscripts were found, are much more accurate.

Answer 8

Yes, and there is more to it than that:

It has hundreds of errors, and it was not the first Bible printed in English, it just happen to have King James backing.

People in the English-speaking world use and accept the King James or Authorized Version more than any other single Bible translation. In fact, so highly esteemed is this translation that many persons venerate it as the only true Bible. This raises some questions.

Do these countless persons who use the King James Version know why, despite objections from churchmen, modern translations keep rolling off the presses? Do they know why the King James Version itself was once opposed by the people? Do they know why, despite vigorous protest and opposition, the King James Version entered into the very blood and marrow of English thought and speech? Do they know what illuminating document is probably missing from their own copies? In short, do they really know the King James Version?

The purpose of Bible translation, then, is to take these thoughts of God, originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, and put them into the common languages of today. Bible translation makes God’s Book a living Book. So true Christians read the Bible, not to be entertained by clever turns of expression, unusual words, excellency of style, striking rhetorical devices or felicities of rhythm, but to learn the will of God. It was for this reason that the King James Version came into existence. That was in 1611.
From almost every quarter the King James Bible met opposition. Criticism was often severe. Broughton, a Hebrew scholar of the day, wrote to King James that he “should rather be torn asunder by wild horses than allow such a version to be imposed on the church.”

The translators, not unaware that people preferred to keep what had grown familiar, knew that their work had unleashed a storm. They tried to calm the people down. They wrote a “Preface of the Translators” to explain why the King James Version was made. This preface is called by the Encyclopedia Americana “a most illuminating preface describing the aims of the translators which unhappily is omitted from the usual printings of the Bible.” Thus most Authorized Versions today, though they contain a lengthy dedication to King James, omit the preface. Its presence would clear up many misunderstandings about the purpose of the revision. The reader would learn that strong opposition was expected.

The reader would learn that the King James Version was a revision of earlier works made with a modest hope of improvement and no thought of finality, In time the clamor died down, and the King James Version prevailed over the Geneva Bible. For more than two and a half centuries no other so-called authorized translation of the Bible into English was made. Little wonder that many people began to feel that the King James Bible was the only true Bible. Like many people who once objected to any change in the Geneva Bible, many persons today object to any change in the King James Bible. They oppose modern translations perhaps as vigorously as the King James Version itself was once opposed.

King James Bible has been changed; today no one reads the King James Version in its original form. Explaining why this is so the book The Bible in Its Ancient and English Versions says: “Almost every edition, from the very beginning, introduced corrections and unauthorized changes and additions, often adding new errors in the process. The edition of 1613 shows over three hundred differences from 1611. . . . It was in the eighteenth century, however, that the main changes were made. . . . The marginal references were checked and verified, over 30,000 new marginal references were added, the chapter summaries and running headnotes were thoroughly revised, the punctuation was altered and made uniform in accordance with modern practice, textual errors were removed, the use of capitals was considerably modified and reduced, and a thorough revision made in the form of certain kinds of words.”

So many changes have been made, many of them in the readings of passages, that the Committee on Versions (1851-56) of the American Bible Society found 24,000 variations in six different editions of the King James Version!

What, then, of the objections raised by persons who say they do not want the King James Bible changed? Since the King James Version has already been changed, they lie on a crumbled foundation. If these persons do not want it changed, then why do they use, instead of a copy of an edition of 1611, an edition that has been changed?

They appreciate, perhaps unknowingly, the improvements the later editions have made. They do not like the odd spelling and punctuation of the 1611 edition; they do not want to read “fet” for “fetched,” “sith” for “since” or “moe” for “more,” as the edition of 1611 had it. Thus improvement, when needed, is appreciated, even by those who say they object to any changing of the King James translation.

One of the major reasons the Authorized Version is so widely accepted is its kingly authority. There seems little doubt that, had not a king authorized this version, it would not today be venerated as though it had come direct from God

Answer 9

Probably an exaggeration... It DOES CONTAIN NUMEROUS DELIBERATE mistranslations and many places where the translators included passages which seem not to have been original. The supporters will tell you lots of lies which they claim support the "accuracy" of the version, but, as a translator myself, I will assure you that there are many points where the readings of the kjv are in error.

The fact that many of these were DELIBERATE leads me to try and explain the truth to those who have been DECEIVED into believing it.

Answer 10

The King James Version is God's perfect word.It has no errors(2 Tim 3:16).God bless.

Answer 11

well that's because they did not use Hebrew. Most of the KJV was translated from the Greek Septuagint.

a translation of a translation will almost always be off