Missing Verses in the KJV

It is most likely the words missing in the KJV are original with David. It is possible the words were intentionally left out of a canonical edition, which earlier records may have retained and some later translations may have reinserted.

The question for inerrantists is what exactly is inspired? The sources the chronicler used to compose 1 & 2 Chronicles, or the final product of 1 & 2 Chronicles once it was arranged into a compositional, or canonical, whole?

The same goes for the Psalms, which were composed over hundreds of years but eventually were arranged and numbered into 150 Pslams, presumably before New Testament times (cf. Ac 13:33). How much did David compose and write that are not included in the 150 Psalms. If we were to find and authenticate some of these Psalms, should we add them, since they must have been inspired? Should we add the thousands of missing proverbs of Solomon (cf. 1Ki 4:32) were they to be found and verified?

Our job is to go after the canon, not the sources. Perhaps the case of Ps 145:13 is not a good example, because in my mind it could go either way, though I currently favor the view that the words in question were intended to be left out by the inspired composer of the canon. But the larger issue at hand, i.e., what is the inspired, canonical text, should deserve our attention.

The New Testament may mirror some of the problems we see here, especially as it regards certain canonical features that made it into most MSS but not into others. These canonical features would be consistent with someone like John, the last living apostle, gathering together and compiling and perfecting a work that was to be transmitted as the canonical text. If John were to make some editorial decisions some 30-50 years after some of the other apostolic works had entered transmission, there would be competing texts until the more canonical and accepted readings eventually overtook all the rest. Just some critical thoughts.

 

I believe many of the problems above have come from the KJV's using one set of mss while later versions used other mss. An overview of Scripture shows us the answers to these probs.

A while back, I mentioned that the four Gospels each had a different reading of the sign that was fastened above Jesus' head on the cross, & Dr. Cassidy pointed out that one read everything that was on that sign by putting all the various readings together. Same with the differing editions of the "Lord's Prayer" between Matthew & Luke.

Newer versions are made from an eclectic mix of the available mss & thus the translators have many more of the various readings before them. But they don't always use all of them. Thus, I believe if we follow the suggestion of the AV men..."variety of translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense ofthe Scriptures"...we shall have a better knowledge of what the Scriptures actually say. Thus, the Holy Spirit sill better increase our understanding of them because we have more for Him to work with. For Him to do HIS part, WE must do OURS.

 

Amen, Brother Robycop3 -- Preach it! :thumbs: