King James scholars

[placebofactor]

After reading many of the posts, I am sure there are many well-educated people on this forum, some schooled in the languages of Greek and Hebrew. But being a student compared to being the teacher or those who write the books on languages is vastly different. There are those on this forum who have criticized the K.J.B. and dare to compare it with the Bible their organization has published, or what Westcott and Hort have produced. To me, it’s about credentials.

Of the fifty-four translators who began the work, four were college presidents, six were bishops, five were deans, thirty held PhDs, thirty-nine held master's degrees, there were forty-one university professors, thirteen were masters of the Hebrew language, and ten had mastered Greek. Because of sickness and death, seven men dropped out.

Every man involved in the King James Bible translation believed in the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, all believed in the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and all were men of prayer. The translators of the King James Bible believed that what they had spent nearly seven years of their lives producing was an “exact translation of the holy Scriptures into the English tongue.”

Each man used the resources of Cambridge, Oxford, and Westminster Universities. Historians concur that during this era, the English language had “ripened to its full perfection.” It was also said, the study of Greek, and the oriental languages, and of rabbinical lore, had been carried to a greater extent in England than ever before or since. The character and credentials of the translators were impeccable.
I have listed only five of the 47 men who worked on the King James Bible.

Lancelot Andrewes, while a young student at Cambridge, learned a new language each year during Easter break. After several years, he had mastered most of the languages of Europe. He spoke Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic and at least fifteen other languages. It was said of him that he could have been “interpreter general” at the Tower of Babel! He was also reputed to have spent an average of five hours each day in prayer. He was known as “the star of preachers.”

William Bedwell produced translations of the Scriptures into Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee and Arabic. He produced a Persian dictionary and a three-volume Arabic lexicon. He was a master of the Semitic languages, which shed much light on Hebrew words and phrases, most importantly those Hebrew words and phrases that found their way into the Greek language of the New Testament.

John Bois read through the Hebrew Bible by age five, and by age six was writing Hebrew legibly. He was often found studying Greek at the Cambridge library from four a.m. until 8 p.m. (sixteen hours a day!). Bois tutored many of his fellow students at the University in Greek, and his class was also attended by many of his Greek professors! He had the entire Greek New Testament committed to memory. He practiced fasting twice a week and often gave to help the poor until he had no more to give himself.

Dr. Miles Smith was known as “a walking library.” He was called by his contemporaries “an incomparable theologist.” He had studied all of the writings of the Latin and Greek church fathers, and was as well versed in Arabic, Chaldee and Syriac as he was in English. It was said of Smith that he “had Hebrew at his fingers’ ends.” He was chosen by the other translators to write the Preface to the King James Bible, Miles Smith served as the final editor on the King James translation, perusing the entire text of the Bible before it went to press in 1611.

John Reynolds at the age of 23 was made a Greek lecturer at Corpus Christi College. He gave himself to the study of the Scriptures in the original languages and was an “able and successful preacher.” He had read all the Greek and Latin fathers, and all the records of the ancient church. He was known as “a living library” and “a third university” (Oxford, Cambridge, and John Reynolds!). It is said of him, “The memory and reading of that man were near to a miracle. He was so well skilled in all arts and sciences, as if he had spent his whole life in each of them.”

Of the fifty-four translators, four were college presidents, six were bishops, five were deans, thirty held PhDs, thirty-nine held master's degrees, there were forty-one university professors, thirteen were masters of the Hebrew language, and ten had mastered Greek. Every man involved in the King James Bible translation believed in the verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, all believed in the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ, and all were men of prayer. Yet they were all humble men.

A look at some of the statements of the translators themselves reveals the depth of their convictions concerning the eternal Word of God. They spoke of the Scriptures as “that inestimable treasure which excelleth all the riches of the earth.” They acknowledged the Bible as being “so full and so perfect,” “a fountain of most pure water, springing up into everlasting life.” They believed “the original (Scriptures were) from heaven, not earth; the author being God, not men; the penmen, such as were sanctified from the womb and endued with a principal portion of God’s Spirit.” They referred to the Bible as “God’s Word,” “God's Truth,” “God’s testimony,” “the Word of salvation.

A few closing comments from The Translators to the Reader: Gentle Reader, we commend thee to God, and the Spirit of His grace. He removed the scales from our eyes, the veil from our hearts, opening our wits that we may understand His Word, enlarging our hearts, yea correcting our affections, that we may love it above gold and silver, yea that we may love it to the end.

Ye are brought unto fountains of living water which ye dig not. Others have labored, and you may enter into their labors; O receive not so great things in vain, O despise not so great salvation! It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God; but a blessed thing it is, and will bring us to everlasting blsessedness in the end, when God speaks unto us, to hearken; when He sets His Word before us, to read it; when He stretches out His hand and calleth, to answer, Here am I, here we are to do thy will O God.”

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Capbook in post #15]

New testament an improved version-1808
literal translation of NT-1863
Concise commentary-1885 by R.Young
i understand at least 20 translations has a god.

When one looks at the Greek-The Word is given the same word that satan is given at 2 Cor 4:4, while the true God mentioned at both spots gets a totally different word. One cannot translate that word different at both spots as trinity bibles has done in error-a god is correct.
The whole reason behind the difference is that God gets-God and the other 2 gets god. It was the only way to show the difference.
god= has godlike qualities.

I was referring to Abner Kneeland's NT, if you have a link that we could compare his works to others.
Anyway, there are many translations that aims to maintain the highest accuracy to the original languages that rendered John 1:1 "and the word was God" and in Greek it says, "and God was the word." See below;

No it doesn't. In the Greek it actually shows that the Word was "a god." I have looked at the difference between THE God and god without the article, and I can see the difference in my Interlinear Bible. The word "god" simply means an esteemed, powerful individual, and that is what John was trying to say. He differentiated between THE God and the Word which was not THE God.

See the thread "John 1:1, the Word was a god" for further insight.

[Capbook]

[Replying to Capbook in post #15]

New testament an improved version-1808
literal translation of NT-1863
Concise commentary-1885 by R.Young
i understand at least 20 translations has a god.

When one looks at the Greek-The Word is given the same word that satan is given at 2 Cor 4:4, while the true God mentioned at both spots gets a totally different word. One cannot translate that word different at both spots as trinity bibles has done in error-a god is correct.
The whole reason behind the difference is that God gets-God and the other 2 gets god. It was the only way to show the difference.
god= has godlike qualities.

I was referring to Abner Kneeland's NT, if you have a link that we could compare his works to others.
Anyway, there are many translations that aims to maintain the highest accuracy to the original languages that rendered John 1:1 "and the word was God" and in Greek it says, "and God was the word." See below;

No it doesn't. In the Greek it actually shows that the Word was "a god." I have looked at the difference between THE God and god without the article, and I can see the difference in my Interlinear Bible. The word "god" simply means an esteemed, powerful individual, and that is what John was trying to say. He differentiated between THE God and the Word which was not THE God.

See the thread "John 1:1, the Word was a god" for further insight.

Yes, apostle John, as you say, "trying to say" but he really did not say it. The same author of the same chapter show beyond doubt that Jesus is God. (John 1:18) where it is a clear text from literal word for word Bible translations that aims to maintain the highest degree of accuracy to original words (Hebrew and Greek) that says it. Where the "N7" prove that the original Greek words of the text is "only-begotten God or the only-begotten God. Only various readings says, "Son." Both translations are correct, we'll just acknowledged that Jesus has the nature of God. This may clear our mind, that for Christians to experience eternal life must know who really Jesus is.(John 17:3)

(Updated ASV+) Jhn 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God N7  who is in the bosom of the Father, N8  that one has made him fully known.

N7 John 1:1 (UASV+)
The original words were μονογενὴς θεός or ο μονογενης θεος “only-begotten God” or “the only-begotten God” (P66 P75 א B C* L 33 syrhmp 33 copbo) A variant reading is ο μονογενης υιος “the only begotten Son” A C3 (Ws) Θ Ψ f1, Maj syrc).

[onewithhim]

[Replying to Capbook in post #15]

New testament an improved version-1808
literal translation of NT-1863
Concise commentary-1885 by R.Young
i understand at least 20 translations has a god.

When one looks at the Greek-The Word is given the same word that satan is given at 2 Cor 4:4, while the true God mentioned at both spots gets a totally different word. One cannot translate that word different at both spots as trinity bibles has done in error-a god is correct.
The whole reason behind the difference is that God gets-God and the other 2 gets god. It was the only way to show the difference.
god= has godlike qualities.

I was referring to Abner Kneeland's NT, if you have a link that we could compare his works to others.
Anyway, there are many translations that aims to maintain the highest accuracy to the original languages that rendered John 1:1 "and the word was God" and in Greek it says, "and God was the word." See below;

No it doesn't. In the Greek it actually shows that the Word was "a god." I have looked at the difference between THE God and god without the article, and I can see the difference in my Interlinear Bible. The word "god" simply means an esteemed, powerful individual, and that is what John was trying to say. He differentiated between THE God and the Word which was not THE God.

See the thread "John 1:1, the Word was a god" for further insight.

Yes, apostle John, as you say, "trying to say" but he really did not say it. The same author of the same chapter show beyond doubt that Jesus is God. (John 1:18)

Yes John said exactly that. Apparently, you don't have an understanding of Greek. "A god" means a god other than THE God. The Greeks of that day would have understood that. Also, John 1:18 does not prove that Jesus is God. You yourself have said that their are variations of the phrase "only begotten Son" according to which manuscript you are considering. So "the only begotten God" is not a stable "proof" that Jesus is God. Other manuscripts say differently.

[Capbook]

[Replying to Capbook in post #15]

New testament an improved version-1808
literal translation of NT-1863
Concise commentary-1885 by R.Young
i understand at least 20 translations has a god.

When one looks at the Greek-The Word is given the same word that satan is given at 2 Cor 4:4, while the true God mentioned at both spots gets a totally different word. One cannot translate that word different at both spots as trinity bibles has done in error-a god is correct.
The whole reason behind the difference is that God gets-God and the other 2 gets god. It was the only way to show the difference.
god= has godlike qualities.

I was referring to Abner Kneeland's NT, if you have a link that we could compare his works to others.
Anyway, there are many translations that aims to maintain the highest accuracy to the original languages that rendered John 1:1 "and the word was God" and in Greek it says, "and God was the word." See below;

No it doesn't. In the Greek it actually shows that the Word was "a god." I have looked at the difference between THE God and god without the article, and I can see the difference in my Interlinear Bible. The word "god" simply means an esteemed, powerful individual, and that is what John was trying to say. He differentiated between THE God and the Word which was not THE God.

See the thread "John 1:1, the Word was a god" for further insight.

Yes, apostle John, as you say, "trying to say" but he really did not say it. The same author of the same chapter show beyond doubt that Jesus is God. (John 1:18)

Yes John said exactly that. Apparently, you don't have an understanding of Greek. "A god" means a god other than THE God. The Greeks of that day would have understood that. Also, John 1:18 does not prove that Jesus is God. You yourself have said that their are variations of the phrase "only begotten Son" according to which manuscript you are considering. So "the only begotten God" is not a stable "proof" that Jesus is God. Other manuscripts say differently.

I think you missed something in my response, I will color blue for easy reference, and were supported by papyri P66, P75 and etc; (John 1:18) where it is a clear text from literal word for word Bible translations that aims to maintain the highest degree of accuracy to original words (Hebrew and Greek) that says it. Where the "N7" prove that the original Greek words of the text is "only-begotten God or the only-begotten God. Only various readings says, "Son." Both translations are correct, we'll just acknowledged that Jesus has the nature of God.

(Updated ASV+) Jhn 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God N7  who is in the bosom of the Father, N8  that one has made him fully known.

N7 John 1:1 (UASV+)
The original words were μονογενὴς θεός or ο μονογενης θεος “only-begotten God” or “the only-begotten God” (P66 P75 א B C* L 33 syrhmp 33 copbo) A variant reading is ο μονογενης υιος “the only begotten Son” A C3 (Ws) Θ Ψ f1, Maj syrc).

[onewithhim]

I was referring to Abner Kneeland's NT, if you have a link that we could compare his works to others.
Anyway, there are many translations that aims to maintain the highest accuracy to the original languages that rendered John 1:1 "and the word was God" and in Greek it says, "and God was the word." See below;

No it doesn't. In the Greek it actually shows that the Word was "a god." I have looked at the difference between THE God and god without the article, and I can see the difference in my Interlinear Bible. The word "god" simply means an esteemed, powerful individual, and that is what John was trying to say. He differentiated between THE God and the Word which was not THE God.

See the thread "John 1:1, the Word was a god" for further insight.

Yes, apostle John, as you say, "trying to say" but he really did not say it. The same author of the same chapter show beyond doubt that Jesus is God. (John 1:18)

Yes John said exactly that. Apparently, you don't have an understanding of Greek. "A god" means a god other than THE God. The Greeks of that day would have understood that. Also, John 1:18 does not prove that Jesus is God. You yourself have said that their are variations of the phrase "only begotten Son" according to which manuscript you are considering. So "the only begotten God" is not a stable "proof" that Jesus is God. Other manuscripts say differently.

I think you missed something in my response, I will color blue for easy reference, and were supported by papyri P66, P75 and etc; (John 1:18) where it is a clear text from literal word for word Bible translations that aims to maintain the highest degree of accuracy to original words (Hebrew and Greek) that says it. Where the "N7" prove that the original Greek words of the text is "only-begotten God or the only-begotten God. Only various readings says, "Son." Both translations are correct, we'll just acknowledged that Jesus has the nature of God.

(Updated ASV+) Jhn 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God N7  who is in the bosom of the Father, N8  that one has made him fully known.

N7 John 1:1 (UASV+)
The original words were μονογενὴς θεός or ο μονογενης θεος “only-begotten God” or “the only-begotten God” (P66 P75 א B C* L 33 syrhmp 33 copbo) A variant reading is ο μονογενης υιος “the only begotten Son” A C3 (Ws) Θ Ψ f1, Maj syrc).

You wrote: "Both translations are correct!" Why do you insist that "God" has to be in the verse? You said yourself that the translation saying "Son" is also correct.

[Capbook]

No it doesn't. In the Greek it actually shows that the Word was "a god." I have looked at the difference between THE God and god without the article, and I can see the difference in my Interlinear Bible. The word "god" simply means an esteemed, powerful individual, and that is what John was trying to say. He differentiated between THE God and the Word which was not THE God.

See the thread "John 1:1, the Word was a god" for further insight.

Yes, apostle John, as you say, "trying to say" but he really did not say it. The same author of the same chapter show beyond doubt that Jesus is God. (John 1:18)

Yes John said exactly that. Apparently, you don't have an understanding of Greek. "A god" means a god other than THE God. The Greeks of that day would have understood that. Also, John 1:18 does not prove that Jesus is God. You yourself have said that their are variations of the phrase "only begotten Son" according to which manuscript you are considering. So "the only begotten God" is not a stable "proof" that Jesus is God. Other manuscripts say differently.

I think you missed something in my response, I will color blue for easy reference, and were supported by papyri P66, P75 and etc; (John 1:18) where it is a clear text from literal word for word Bible translations that aims to maintain the highest degree of accuracy to original words (Hebrew and Greek) that says it. Where the "N7" prove that the original Greek words of the text is "only-begotten God or the only-begotten God. Only various readings says, "Son." Both translations are correct, we'll just acknowledged that Jesus has the nature of God.

(Updated ASV+) Jhn 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God N7  who is in the bosom of the Father, N8  that one has made him fully known.

N7 John 1:1 (UASV+)
The original words were μονογενὴς θεός or ο μονογενης θεος “only-begotten God” or “the only-begotten God” (P66 P75 א B C* L 33 syrhmp 33 copbo) A variant reading is ο μονογενης υιος “the only begotten Son” A C3 (Ws) Θ Ψ f1, Maj syrc).

You wrote: "Both translations are correct!" Why do you insist that "God" has to be in the verse? You said yourself that the translation saying "Son" is also correct.

Yes, both translations are correct, original Greek word as "God," and various readings as "Son," as long as we acknowledged that He has the nature of God.(John 1:18, John 3:16)

[onewithhim]

Yes, apostle John, as you say, "trying to say" but he really did not say it. The same author of the same chapter show beyond doubt that Jesus is God. (John 1:18)

Yes John said exactly that. Apparently, you don't have an understanding of Greek. "A god" means a god other than THE God. The Greeks of that day would have understood that. Also, John 1:18 does not prove that Jesus is God. You yourself have said that their are variations of the phrase "only begotten Son" according to which manuscript you are considering. So "the only begotten God" is not a stable "proof" that Jesus is God. Other manuscripts say differently.

I think you missed something in my response, I will color blue for easy reference, and were supported by papyri P66, P75 and etc; (John 1:18) where it is a clear text from literal word for word Bible translations that aims to maintain the highest degree of accuracy to original words (Hebrew and Greek) that says it. Where the "N7" prove that the original Greek words of the text is "only-begotten God or the only-begotten God. Only various readings says, "Son." Both translations are correct, we'll just acknowledged that Jesus has the nature of God.

(Updated ASV+) Jhn 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God N7  who is in the bosom of the Father, N8  that one has made him fully known.

N7 John 1:1 (UASV+)
The original words were μονογενὴς θεός or ο μονογενης θεος “only-begotten God” or “the only-begotten God” (P66 P75 א B C* L 33 syrhmp 33 copbo) A variant reading is ο μονογενης υιος “the only begotten Son” A C3 (Ws) Θ Ψ f1, Maj syrc).

You wrote: "Both translations are correct!" Why do you insist that "God" has to be in the verse? You said yourself that the translation saying "Son" is also correct.

Yes, both translations are correct, original Greek word as "God," and various readings as "Son," as long as we acknowledged that He has the nature of God.(John 1:18, John 3:16)

Yes he does. He is spirit just as the Father is Spirit. (John 4:24) And he is like the Father in that he obeys the Father and does as He wishes.

[Capbook]

Yes John said exactly that. Apparently, you don't have an understanding of Greek. "A god" means a god other than THE God. The Greeks of that day would have understood that. Also, John 1:18 does not prove that Jesus is God. You yourself have said that their are variations of the phrase "only begotten Son" according to which manuscript you are considering. So "the only begotten God" is not a stable "proof" that Jesus is God. Other manuscripts say differently.

I think you missed something in my response, I will color blue for easy reference, and were supported by papyri P66, P75 and etc; (John 1:18) where it is a clear text from literal word for word Bible translations that aims to maintain the highest degree of accuracy to original words (Hebrew and Greek) that says it. Where the "N7" prove that the original Greek words of the text is "only-begotten God or the only-begotten God. Only various readings says, "Son." Both translations are correct, we'll just acknowledged that Jesus has the nature of God.

(Updated ASV+) Jhn 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God N7  who is in the bosom of the Father, N8  that one has made him fully known.

N7 John 1:1 (UASV+)
The original words were μονογενὴς θεός or ο μονογενης θεος “only-begotten God” or “the only-begotten God” (P66 P75 א B C* L 33 syrhmp 33 copbo) A variant reading is ο μονογενης υιος “the only begotten Son” A C3 (Ws) Θ Ψ f1, Maj syrc).

You wrote: "Both translations are correct!" Why do you insist that "God" has to be in the verse? You said yourself that the translation saying "Son" is also correct.

Yes, both translations are correct, original Greek word as "God," and various readings as "Son," as long as we acknowledged that He has the nature of God.(John 1:18, John 3:16)

Yes he does. He is spirit just as the Father is Spirit. (John 4:24) And he is like the Father in that he obeys the Father and does as He wishes.

Yes, though Jesus is God, still obeys the Father, referred as relational subordination where the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are co-equal, co-eternal in essence, they have distinct roles and relationships, with the Son and Spirit being subordinate to the Father in terms of their actions and activities, not in their nature or being.

[onewithhim]

I think you missed something in my response, I will color blue for easy reference, and were supported by papyri P66, P75 and etc; (John 1:18) where it is a clear text from literal word for word Bible translations that aims to maintain the highest degree of accuracy to original words (Hebrew and Greek) that says it. Where the "N7" prove that the original Greek words of the text is "only-begotten God or the only-begotten God. Only various readings says, "Son." Both translations are correct, we'll just acknowledged that Jesus has the nature of God.

(Updated ASV+) Jhn 1:18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God N7  who is in the bosom of the Father, N8  that one has made him fully known.

N7 John 1:1 (UASV+)
The original words were μονογενὴς θεός or ο μονογενης θεος “only-begotten God” or “the only-begotten God” (P66 P75 א B C* L 33 syrhmp 33 copbo) A variant reading is ο μονογενης υιος “the only begotten Son” A C3 (Ws) Θ Ψ f1, Maj syrc).

You wrote: "Both translations are correct!" Why do you insist that "God" has to be in the verse? You said yourself that the translation saying "Son" is also correct.

Yes, both translations are correct, original Greek word as "God," and various readings as "Son," as long as we acknowledged that He has the nature of God.(John 1:18, John 3:16)

Yes he does. He is spirit just as the Father is Spirit. (John 4:24) And he is like the Father in that he obeys the Father and does as He wishes.

Yes, though Jesus is God, still obeys the Father, referred as relational subordination where the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are co-equal, co-eternal in essence, they have distinct roles and relationships, with the Son and Spirit being subordinate to the Father in terms of their actions and activities, not in their nature or being.

If the Son is subordinate to the Father, then they are not equal. "Relational subordination" is a fancy way of twisting the Scriptures and adding to the text.

[Capbook]

You wrote: "Both translations are correct!" Why do you insist that "God" has to be in the verse? You said yourself that the translation saying "Son" is also correct.

Yes, both translations are correct, original Greek word as "God," and various readings as "Son," as long as we acknowledged that He has the nature of God.(John 1:18, John 3:16)

Yes he does. He is spirit just as the Father is Spirit. (John 4:24) And he is like the Father in that he obeys the Father and does as He wishes.

Yes, though Jesus is God, still obeys the Father, referred as relational subordination where the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are co-equal, co-eternal in essence, they have distinct roles and relationships, with the Son and Spirit being subordinate to the Father in terms of their actions and activities, not in their nature or being.

If the Son is subordinate to the Father, then they are not equal. "Relational subordination" is a fancy way of twisting the Scriptures and adding to the text.

Relational subordination between you and your son does that mean that you both aren't equal in rights and dignity? Though you differ in roles and activities.