Mistranslations in the King James?

Question

Yes. For example, Easter, which is a pagan holiday / festival of fertility, appears one time in the KJV:

Acts 12:4 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 manuscript say “Passover”, not “Easter”. Does this matter? Yes, because God hates man messing with His Word:

What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it. Deuteronomy 12:32

Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Deuteronomy 4:2

Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Any other mistranslations in the King James?

Answer 1

Other than the one about the word for "poisoner" being translated as "witch", I also like to remind people about the mistranslation found in the New Testament at the end of the Lord's Prayer. It is translated in the KJV as "Deliver us from Evil" instead of "Deliver us from the Evil One" (the Evil One could also be the "Tempter" or the "Pain-giver", as a rough translation from the Koine Greek text still used in the Greek Orthodox Christian liturgical services)

Answer 2

Yes, there are translation errors. But a God who could inspire the Bible initially, certainly can preserve it sufficiently so that it still contains all basic truths. As Bible translation progresses, it becomes more accurate, and corrections are made. I have made a search for the most accurate translation in English, which is still readable, and have learned that it is The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, published by the Watchtower Society. This was even a question on a TV game show, and the above translation was the correct answer. If one checks out 1 John 5:7, it reads on way in the KJV and different in most other Bibles. Many Catholic Bibles have an asterisk at this scripture, and admit (at the botom of the page) they passed judgement, and added it to the scriptures. The KJV continued this error

Answer 3

We do not have to worry about Easter, Christmas, or any other pagan holidays unless we are worshiping the idols of the pagan holiday. We have, always worshiped God, whether it was a pagan holiday in the past or not, it does not matter. What matters is what we do now, do we worship God in Spirit and in truth ? If this is the case, then it makes no difference what day it is done on.

When we start to slip away from the truth, by trusting in dates, places and times. Then we have something to worry about. We need to stay focused on the Kingdom of Heaven, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

God be with you,
Evangelist, William M. Butler
Grace Evangelistic Ministry

Answer 4

Many. In constructing and editing the text, Erasmus had the feeblest of manuscript resources. He chiefly used one manuscript of the Gospels, dating from the twelfth century, and one manuscript of Acts and the Epistles, also from the twelfth century. These he edited and corrected, using one or two additional manuscripts of each section, along with his Latin Vulgate. For Revelation, Erasmus had but one Greek manuscript which, though of better than average quality (so says Hort), yet lacked the last six verses of the book.
http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/kutilek_erasmus.htm

There are now over 6000 and they are older and more reliable.
I was a KJV only guy until I lifted my head out of the sand and began studying for myself. I was amazed at how God blesses those who do this. Not only do I have better understanding of the scriptures, but can communicate it better.

Answer 5

Wrong.Easter and passover are used correctly my deluded inquisitor and accuser.There are no errors in the 1611AV.It is not the Bible that uses Easter incorrectly,it is Catholics.Christians know better.That passage is referring to the pagan holiday.There are no "holidays" for a Christian.Not one!Thousands of other so-called errors could be cited by you,and thousands of corrections could be given by me.

Answer 6

I prefer the King James Bible overall over other versions. I simply correct where correction is warranted. I do not feel it is a thing to be argued over. If one likes the NIV and another likes the Good News Bible and another likes the New American Standard Bible and another likes the New Living Bible and another likes the Amplified or Youngs, or Darby's, or whatever, that is fine with me. I prefer the KJV, and I have a reason for that, but my feeling is whatever Bible a person uses, the Holy Spirit can grab them good.

Answer 7

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

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 opspeaking 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.

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 8

I myself like the King James Version & New King James Version. The NKJV says passover.

Answer 9

King James was a complete nutcase and he changed plenty in the Bible, he also deleted bits, added bits, it's a total fabrication....
Here's one~~ Thou shalt not suffer a Witch to live~~
It was originally Poisoner, and by changing just that one word, 9,000,000 people lost their lives, not to mention the Christians today who continue to persecute Witches because of this...
I think they should do some research on the book they hold so precious, then they would not be so arrogant and self righteous...
Blessed Be... )O(

Answer 10

KJV Romans 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

MKJV Romans 8:26 Likewise the Spirit also helps our infirmities. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.