Does the KJV translate things according to theology?

Question

I say it does. For example:

Revelations 19:8
And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.

This verse talks about the righteousness of saints which in most christian doctrines state it is not due to acts. Well...

Hebrews 9:10
Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

The key word in both passages is this:

Dikaioma

It is the same word in both passages for righteousness and ordinances. What determines how it is translated? In this case, theology.

In modern translations they translate it properly and the same in both cases. That is, righteous acts.

Rev. 19:8
It was given to her to clothe herself in fine linen, bright and clean; for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints.

See how a slight change in the translation can change the meaning of a thing?

that which has been deemed right so as to have force of law
what has been established, and ordained by law, an ordinance
a judicial decision, sentence
of God
either the favourable judgment by which he acquits man and declares them acceptable to Him
unfavourable: sentence of condemnation
a righteous act or deed

The KJV translators totally left out the 'act.'

Why do think that is?

If they did this here how many more times have they done this. I can think of more concerning a king, morning star, and lucifer (Isaiah and Revelations.)

Again I ask, why do some of my fellow believers hold on the KJV as THE one and only translation to use?

Oh the translitered passage from the KJV:

Rev. 19:8
kai edoqh auth ina peribalhtai bussinon lampron kaqaron, to gar bussinon ta dikaiwmata twn agiwn estin.

look how dikaiwmata is there but not in the translation to english.

Jolly Roger - the interesting thing is that the word is there for acts, they simply did not add it in:

righteousness as opposed to righteous acts...

AtC - There you are! ;-)

I DO have a KJV, NIV, NLT, NASB, NKJV, and a bunch online.

When it comes to the NIV, I agree, NIV is actually worse.

When comparing NASB to KJV though I have found NASB to be pretty accurate in most cases where KJV is either unclear or doesn't fit with the context.

Ultimately though, I bypass both sometimes and go right for the source, the old greek and hebrew, well, whatever is still available.

In most cases it doesn't make too much of a difference but in some cases it makes me stop and wonder...

Answer 1

As I understand the history of the KJV of the bible, it was translated to fit in with the religious and political agenda of the person that ordered the translations done in the first place. Hence the mistranslation of the word Murder into Kill in the 10 commandments and the supstitution of the word witch for poisoner later on in the passage "Suffer not a witch to live." as well as several other glaring purposeful changes.

Answer 2

It was translated into the common language of the 1600's from perhaps not the best source and probably used no literary criticism.

This makes it suspect as a reliable translation.

Edit:
I'm not up on specifics anymore, but there appear to several spots where words were added and removed in the KJV. Years ago, someone pointed to a verse in Hebrews in the KJV and "The Good News" version and exclaimed "They removed "Blood" from the TGN! I later checked the greek, and blood was not in the originals, so in reality the KJV had added it.

Answer 3

No, it doesn't. They took the Majority Text and translated it as accurately as possible into English. New versions have taken the Minority Text and translated it into English. Hence the differences.

The men who translated the KJV were scholars who were fluent in Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and Aramaic as it was found in the Majority Text. They were experts, and they did a darn good job. They weren't setting out to make a politically correct Bible, or one that had all the "popular" doctrines and theology. It was simply a word-for-word translation from those other languages into English. The thing that determined how those same words in different passages were translated was CONTEXT. They looked at the context of the passage to determine the proper meaning.

Answer 4

I see you've been studying Hebrew theology... you know that this can effectively end your belief in Jesus, right? You are already aware of how "the fallen angel" story is a fabrication, looking too closely at this doctrine reveals things people don't want you to know, and many people just won't believe. Good luck on your journey to enlightenment.

Answer 5

KJV and NKJV are good English translations.

Good = imperfect but many consider them to be among the better translations over the years.

Answer 6

The KJV has a great many errors in it.