Contradictions within the KJV

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Walls, Jan 10, 2004.

  1. Walls

    Walls
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    802
    Likes Received:
    0
    James 1:13 says, Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: (KJV)

    While Gen 22:1 says, And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. (KJV)

    Even though tempt may mean several things without study, this appears to be a conflict of scripture.

    However other versions say tried or tested. The ASV and Geneva says prove.

    Gen 22:1 And it came to pass after these things, that God did prove Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham. And he said, Here am I. (ASV)

    Are there any other contradictions in the KJV?
     
  2. Anti-Alexandrian

    Anti-Alexandrian
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2002
    Messages:
    764
    Likes Received:
    0
    Abraham was TESTED.If people would quit trying to grasp for straws and READ,they would see that Abraham's "tempting" was a testing.


    Nary a one.The only "contradictions" are in the minds(their final authority)of those who cook up this baloney..
     
  3. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here you need to know the Greek terms translated "tempted", "tested", etc.
    Here you need to know the English terms: "tempt",
    "test", "prove".

    One person wanted it like this:
    "tempt" is when the Devil trys to show you are a failure,
    "test" is when God trys to show you a success.

    But in the Greek they are both the same term, so the
    Greek doesn't support this viewpoint.
    However, the statement is true:
    The Devil trys to show you are a failure;
    God trys to show you a success.

    So James 1:13 can be understood in light of that statement:
    GOd cannot be shown a failure, God never trys to show persons failures.
    In Gen 22:1 God trys to show Abraham a success.

    There is no contradiction here in the KJV.

    [​IMG]
     
  4. Precepts

    Precepts
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    1,890
    Likes Received:
    0
    That was Great! Ed! I'll "keep" that one, you explained it perfectly for those who can't read context and arrive at the truth.
     
  5. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    I believe the seeming contradiction comes from the definition of the word 'tempt', as you noted in your original post. When WE hear 'tempt', we think of trying to entice or lure someone into doing wrong, by promises of pleasure or gain. When the AV was written, 'tempt' as a verb primarily meant, "test, or to dare". The word 'temptation', however, meant much the same as it does today.

    The AV translators were merely using 'tempt' according to the definitions of their day. To them, there was no contradiction. However, this furthers the case against exclusive use of the KJV, as many English readers do not know the old definitions of common words as used in 1611. (For example, 'let' has done a 360, from "hinder" to "allow".)
     
  6. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    What about the easiest KJV contradiction?

    Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."

    with

    Exodus 32:27 "Thus sayeth the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side...and slay every man his brother...companion...neighbor."

    I Samuel 15:2,3,7,8 "Thus saith the Lord . . . Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling...And Saul smote the Amalekites...and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword."


    Now, it is obvious to me what the 'kill' is referring to in Exodus 20, since I can read or look up "ratsach" in the original text or look it up in Strong's. However, one who reads the KJV alone has no ability to see what God is talking about. This is a clear contradiction, and one that has no explaining away using only the KJV. God said, "Don't do it," then he says, "do it."
     
  7. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    A contradiction is NOT present here. Context, context, context! [​IMG]
     
  8. Walls

    Walls
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    802
    Likes Received:
    0
    Scott, that seems to be in every version not just the KJV.

    I believe that the commandment not to kill is meaning to do malice to someone. Waging war because of injustice or evil doings is another thing.
     
  9. Walls

    Walls
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    802
    Likes Received:
    0
    But why didn't the KJV translaters say prove? It is used 25 times.

    Why didn't they use try? It is used 17 times.

    The word tempt is used 14 times. One time only meaning prove or try, if I follow along the guidelines laid out in this thread. One time referring to Satan doing the tempting. The rest of the verses is when God is being tempted.

    Once again, if the word tempted is being used; it is either Satan that has tempted or someone tempting God.

    Then if we take a peek at who the tempter is:

    Mt 4:3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.


    But look at this, here faith is being checked as was Abraham's. 1Th 3:5 For this cause, when I could no longer forbear, I sent to know your faith, lest by some means the tempter have tempted you, and our labour be in vain.

    If the King James is inerrant, wouldn't they have used a different word in Gen 22:1?
     
  10. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    NIV, NASB, Message, Amplified, NLT, ESV, CEV, NKJV, and YLT all have "murder" and present no contradiction. The King James Bible presents a serious contradiction that cannot be explained away using just the text. It is therefore fallible and fails the test of most KJVO's.
     
  11. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    I agree. The AV translators knew the differences between kill, slay, and murder as they used all 3 words in various places. They were a little careless w/Ex.20:13.
     
  12. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    In James 1:2 and 1:13 they use two different words. In James 1:2and 1:12 the word for trails is very different than in James 1:13 where another word is used for temptation.
     
  13. Walls

    Walls
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    802
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is very interesting. All of TR based translations say kill, except NKJV. The others say murder. Very interesting! :eek:
     
  14. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    So, are you saying that Saul violated the Commandment?
    (An honest question, by the way.)
     
  15. Walls

    Walls
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2002
    Messages:
    802
    Likes Received:
    0
    I cannot answer that question. It has been about six months since I was in Sameul and would have to read up on it again before I could make a comment.

    But based on Saul's behaviour towards David, I would definetly say he violated the New Testament Command to love your enemy, wherein all laws are stemmed from.
     
  16. Keith M

    Keith M
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
  17. TheOliveBranch

    TheOliveBranch
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,597
    Likes Received:
    0
    The most recent I've come across is in I Cor 11:24- And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said,"Take, eat,this is my body, which is broken for you: do this in memory of me."

    Cross ref to Luke 22:19- Jesus says..."This is my body which is given for you..."

    What I see is similar in quote, but I Cor is in direct contradiction entirely, for Jesus bones were never broken.

    Some may say that it is in reference to the breaking of the bread, but that is stretching text to fit KJV support. That quote is in reference to what Jesus had said as He was breaking bread, and correctly stated in Luke.
     
  18. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you not consider Jesus' body to have been "broken" by the Crucifixion???????

    Think again what that entailed!

    Besides, Paul does not say bones were broken - just the body.

    Again, no contradiction here!
     
  19. TheOliveBranch

    TheOliveBranch
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,597
    Likes Received:
    0
    Where is the reference to His body being "broken" in crucifiction, besides in I Cor?

    I don't believe Paul ever said his body was broken, and it is a contradiction in the KJV.

    I believe the word being used is what refers to a piece of broken bread. Seems the Catholics have it right, according to the KJV, because they have the actual body they break when they break bread. If Jesus had said, in Greek, that his body is "broken", it was in direct reference to his bread.
     
  20. skanwmatos

    skanwmatos
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Greek reads "klwmenon" which is the present, passive, participle of "klao" meaning "to break." If you have a problem with that, you have to take it up with God, not with the KJV. [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Loading...