Presenting the Word of God to the People of God

Presenting the Word of God to the People of God

A close friend of mine asked me to have breakfast with him recently so that we could discuss something pressing upon him. Not sure of what was up, I – of course – agreed.

In our conversation, he said he had come to the conclusion, from a purely secular perspective, that the only thing that could save our nation from inevitable collapse was for the people to be turned back to a right relationship with God. There is nothing in the political arena that is capable of doing that at this point.

I think his thoughts are based on the fact that there is really no other avenue that will stop the fast-paced moral slide into the abyss that is occurring in the nation, and indeed in the entire world. There is no doubt that unless this unholy tide is stemmed, it will be too late in a very short time. Indeed, it may be too late even now.

In fact, just a week ago, I reported that “More than 120 retired American military officials have signed an open letter warning that America has veered left under Democratic control and that the nation’s survival is on the line.” They said –

“Under a Democrat Congress and the Current Administration, our Country has taken a hard left turn toward Socialism and a Marxist form of tyrannical government which must be countered now by electing congressional and presidential candidates who will always act to defend our Constitutional Republic.”

The main problem in America comes from the fact that the same people who have crept into the government, meaning the communists, have also secured themselves into almost every seminary in the nation. This may sound conspiratorial, but it is not. The leftist agenda in this nation is a communist agenda. The two, at this point, are inseparable.

If all you watch is the mainstream media, this may seem surprising to you, but they have been, for many years now, at the forefront of this by reporting a false narrative while these communists have slowly worked their way through both the government and our churches.

Text Verse: “I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. But you be watchful in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.” 2 Timothy 4:1-5

To understand this problem, and to look back at how long this has been planned, we will go to a report submitted to the US Congress in 1963.

On Thursday, January 10, 1963, the Honorable A.S. Herlong, Jr. of Florida submitted, in an extension of remarks to the US House of Representatives, what he entitled “Current Communist Goals.” In his submission, he specifically named forty-five goals of the communists in order to gain control of this nation.

What I am presenting to you now is a sermon on how I prepare my sermons. It seems like this would otherwise be a waste of time. There are churches everywhere. Seminaries have courses on homiletics. And so on. Isn’t that enough to get the word of God out in a proper manner to the church? No, I do not believe it is.

Many seminaries teach a great deal, but little of it is based solely on the word of God. Some of them teach nothing of the word of God at all. And it is perfectly evident from what issues from innumerable churches across our land, from week to week, that the word of God is not the main concern of what they are presenting to the attendees.

But that is exactly what the structure of the church is established for. It is not there to push agendas, it is not there to make people feel good, and it is not there to be a self-perpetuating money maker. It is an institution that is to be designed around one main thing – the word of God. And that word of God is given to tell us, above all else, about His dealings with humanity through the Person of Jesus Christ.

Further, I’m not saying that the way I prepare sermons is the best way to do so. However, there are countless sermons spoken forth on any given Sunday that have – literally – nothing to do with the word of God. And those that do may only touch on the word. The rest of the time, people are simply given an easy message that is intended to encourage them in some manner.

This is not a proper way of informing people about the contents of the word of God. Whatever these people are being taught in seminary, it is not enough. That is perfectly evident. And so, I will convey to you my own method of sermon preparation so that any who truly cares about the word will be able to follow this path without all of the learning curve that I had to go through in order to come to where I am now.

The truth is, though, that this would be unnecessary if pastors were properly trained in the biblical text and proper theology, and also if they were willing to spend the necessary time it takes to prepare and present the type of sermons to their congregations that would protect their flocks from the damage inflicted by such ungodly people within the society.

This is not a sermon on either politics or communism, but these points must be understood as – at least in part – a basis for understanding why such a sermon is deemed by my friend to be necessary at all. Our churches have been led down a sad path of theological apostasy, and the only way to rectify that is to turn ourselves to what is sound and reasonable. And this is to be issued forth from any pastor who truly feels the weight of his responsibility to the flock he presents himself to each week.

Immensely important things like exalting the word of God that tells us about Jesus Christ in our church gatherings are to be found in His superior word. And so, let us consider that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. An Unholy Agenda

With the thought in mind that I said earlier about the leftist agenda in the United States actually being a communist agenda, and that it is being championed by the democrat party, I need to substantiate that before we go on. And so, of the forty-five points submitted by Representative Herlong to the United States House of Representatives in 1963 that I mentioned a moment ago, please consider the following twenty-eight –

  1. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
  2. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
  3. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
  4. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
  5. Gain control of all student newspapers.
  6. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
  7. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, and policymaking positions.
  8. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
  9. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
  10. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
  11. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
  12. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
  13. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, and healthy.”
  14. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
  15. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.” (Remember these goals were published to expose them in 1958) Coincidence?
  16. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
  17. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
  18. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
  19. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
  20. Eliminate all laws or procedures, which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
  21. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
  22. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
  23. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
  24. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
  25. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
  26. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
  27. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
  28. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“] united force [“] to solve economic, political or social problems.

This was 1963, almost sixty years ago. Were we to go over each of these points, even with only with a broad brushstroke of printed articles from the past year, we would be able to identify that almost each and every one of them has been carefully and meticulously introduced, pursued, and fully completed within one party of the United States of America – the democrat party. This is unquestionable, it is without controversy, and it is beyond contestation.

Our government has been fully taken over by the communists and we have let it happen, above all, because we have replaced our faith in God with false idols of prosperity, wealth, consumption, moral turpitude, and even downright depravity. And, sadly, it is the church that has often been at the forefront of this amazingly precipitous decline.

Of all these forty-five points, the most important one, though only listed in position 27, says, “Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with ‘social’ religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a ‘religious crutch.’”

The reason this is the most important one is that if proper religion were maintained within the churches of our nation, none of these other points would have occurred. We would have remained on guard, we would not have allowed sexually, politically, and morally deviant people to overtake our society. And we surely would not have allowed the democrat party of these United States to succeed in destroying the foundational Christian underpinnings of this nation.

The man in the White House, his vice president, and indeed all of his associates – along with the democrats in the House and the Senate – are opposed to the right, perfect, and moral doctrines found in Scripture – wholly and entirely. Any person who has read through the Bible even once, and even if he does not accept the Bible as God’s word, could come to no other conclusion.

Everything stems back to, as Jude says, the “faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” In our somnambulance, it is a faith that we have let go of, and we are now paying the price for our slumbering.

Almost every mainstream denomination has been completely sold out to this leftist agenda. Methodist, Episcopal, Presbyterian, and so on. They have, for all intents and purposes, become bastions of communist ideology. Even the once sound Southern Baptist Convention has been infiltrated by this ideology, and it is quickly turning aside from the sacred and precious faith.

And because people within the congregations were unwilling to step away from what was occurring before their eyes, the power of these miscreants increased within the government because the people who run these churches are in the same bed as those who run this government.

It no longer matters to those in the democrat party if they commit the most horrendous of perversions because those in the churches are not there to condemn them. Think of Barney Frank – and how many years ago was that! Indeed, these churches are there to support them.

These words are not intended to condemn immorality within society. I am not the judge of those things. I can only highlight them as examples that are contrary to what the Bible expects for the society, and especially for the people of God. God will judge. Our accusations will convert no one. Only a proper explanation of what God expects in order to come to a precious saving faith in His provision will convert anyone.

Those churches that have held to the morality of Scripture as sacrosanct are belittled by members of their own denominations, by a complicit media, and now by a complicit group within Big Tech.

The voices of moral reason and godliness have been silenced both actively and passively. Actively by the tech companies, by government itself, and even by those within the hierarchies of these denominations who hold power over those in lower positions. And passively this has come about by those pastors who are too afraid to speak out at what is going on.

I do not need to dwell on this point any further, and I shall not. The damage is done, the infection has set in, and unless pastors are willing to exalt the morality found in Scripture to its rightful place within this society once again, even those pastors who ride a borderline approach are soon to be rounded up… and executed. Mock that if you will, but the hour is not long in coming. History is not without precedent in this regard. Rather, it is filled with it.

When faced with their own demise, most pastors will, sadly, simply step off the borderline and set their feet ontto the left of it, aligning themselves with the forces of iniquity that they are too terrified of to speak out against any longer. Yes, I suppose most will choose this path when the time comes.

Tragedy in the Garden

The woman was enticed, and she ate of the fruit
She passed it on to Adam and he ate as well
He became the second willing recruit
And together they left a sad story to tell

Their eyes were opened to their exposed state
They realized that life in sin just ain’t so great

They sewed together figs to hide their shame
And made coverings that just wouldn’t suffice
The Lord questioned them about their hiding game
And they realized that sin just ain’t so nice

“Where are you?” called the LORD. (Though he already knew)
“I was hiding because I realized something wasn’t right
I was afraid to answer, I’m naked … yes, it’s true
And so, I hid myself, like a shadow in the night”

“Who told you that you were naked? What is this you did do?
Have you taken of the fruit which I told you not to eat?”
“It was the women who did it… the one made by You
She told me of its yumminess… and how it was so sweet”

I thought it would be so good, but I guess I paid the price
I’m beginning to see that sin really ain’t so nice

“Woman, what is this thing that you have done?
Traded life under the heavens for life under the sun.”
Oh my Lord it was the serpent. He deceived me and I ate
And now I’m seeing that sin just ain’t so great”

Oh God that we could take it back and undo what we have done
Life was wonderful under the heavens
But it’s terrible under the sun

What can we do make things right?
Where can we turn to be healed?
How long will we be cast from Your sight?
How long until the grave is unsealed?

I have a plan, children, but you’ll have to wait
Many years under the sun toiling in the heat
But I will someday open wide heaven’s gate
When My own Son, the devil will defeat

I will send My own Son, the devil to defeat

II. How My Sermons are Prepared

For those preachers who are set and ready to put as first position the lives they have been called to, it means hard work is ahead. It is undoubtedly true that most pastors do not write their own sermons. Some have their staff write them so that they can deliver them with panache on Sunday morning.

There are books with formatted sermons already available. Sermons can be downloaded from the internet, and they can be purchased from innumerable people who will do the work for them so that they can get back to the more important issues of the ministry – be it a day of golfing each week, or some other time of leisure that would be otherwise unheard of if they truly devoted themselves to the calling set before them.

This should not be. Though you will not find this in Scripture, I am of the belief that no sermon should ever be preached by a pastor that he has not personally put together after struggling in the battle of preparing it. If he cannot do this one thing – this most important and intimate thing – for those he is shepherding, he should not be their shepherd.

Congregants should find out where their pastor’s sermons come from. If they are not from him and his personal studies, then what he is preaching is the work of another, and the doctrine may or may not even be what he believes. But it is the doctrine presented by the pastor that guides the church. And it is the church alone, that can stand against the unholy tide flooding the nations of this world.

And, before going on, a note of correction for those pastors who are willing to speak out – from the word – concerning the moral issues of the society: The term “Judeo-Christian values” is not a sound or appropriate way to refer to the values of the nation they are trying to return morality to.

Pastors may put forth terms such as “biblical values,” or they may be more specific and say, “Christ-centered biblical values.” But the term “Judeo Christian values” exalts the faith, whatever that may be, of Jews who do not believe in Christ… to the same level as those people – Jew or Gentile – who do. It is a perverse term that should never have become a part of the standard lexicon of faithful preachers of the word of God.

The entire body of Scripture, Old Testament and New, cannot be properly understood or explained without Jesus Christ being the central focus of what is being presented from Scripture. Jesus made that explicit in John 5 –

“You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. 40 But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.” John 5:39, 40

&

“Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; there is one who accuses you—Moses, in whom you trust. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. 47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?” John 5:45-47

It is unconscionable for the preacher to preach in the church of the saints of Jesus Christ without clearly demonstrating, each and every week, that this precious word of God – conveyed to us by God through men of God – points to His workings in redemptive history completely and entirely, with Jesus Christ as the focus of what God is doing.

And finally, before I explain the mechanical “how” of preparing a sermon as I do, I will say this – clearly and without ambiguity. No person should be allowed into the pulpit to preach on the word of God unless he is fully versed in the word of God.

If he has not read the Bible through, innumerable times, and if he does not commit to reading this word every single day of his life – first thing in the morning and last thing at night – he should not be your preacher.

Any person can go to the streets and share the gospel, even preach the gospel. But for a complete and well-prepared analysis of God’s word from the pulpit, that person must be fully aware of the contents of the entire body of Scripture.

This does not mean various theologies of Scripture that anyone can learn in a seminary without knowing the word of God. This means knowing the word of God so that they can tell when the theologies of Scripture are being improperly taught to them when they attend seminary.

We have put the cart before the horse by sending people unaware of Scripture off to seminary to learn doctrine. Proper doctrine is to be derived from an analysis of Scripture. Scripture is not to be interpreted from man-derived doctrines.

No wonder we are in the pickle we are in! When a person enters a theological seminary and he is not yet well-versed in Scripture, he is subject to be taught anything – no matter how perverse – and he will accept it from that point on.

This is the same model that has been introduced into our secular schools all over this nation. We are training young minds to believe in a communist model of life, and this is what they will cling to – believing that what they are trained is correct – for all their days. And this all started because these communists first infected the churches of those who are now the teachers in our schools.

When Alexis de Tocqueville wrote about the young democracy planted in this nation, he highlighted the religious nature of the people of this land. He was adamant that the traditional religion of America is certainly of the highest importance in the nation’s statesmanship.

So much was this the case that he said that our religion – our Christian faith – “should be considered the first” of the nation’s “political institutions.” He concluded that America must at all costs “maintain Christianity.” This cannot occur unless pastors first properly explain this precious message to those who will enter into the political arena.

And that cannot occur when we ordain pastors who are unaware of the contents of the precious treasure we call “The Word of God.” If a person is well-versed in Scripture, there are many ways to present it to a congregation. Today, most sermons are presented as “life application” sermons, instructing the congregation on how to live one’s life in regard to whatever issue is being presented in the subject material.

Although there is nothing wrong with this approach, teaching the contents of the word of God, line by line, will mold congregants into people who are aware of the nuances of Scripture. With such a presentation, from week to week, they will not need to be told how to live their lives in a biblical manner. They will know how to do so because they will be aware of what the Bible expects of them.

This is the approach that some denominations take, and it is the approach that I myself follow. And so, as tedious as it may appear, I want to give a brief overview of how these sermons are put together. I honestly believe it is the most effective way of conveying the word of God to the people of God, and if enough voices rise from the pulpit with this approach, those who hear will understand the truth, reliability, and power of this word.

Each week, I follow on from whatever passage ended the previous week. We started our biblical adventure on October 23th, 2011, with Genesis 1:1. Since then, we have slowly and methodically progressed through the five books of Moses, so that today, a bit less than ten years later, we are going through the fifth book of Moses, Deuteronomy.

Following this approach has been both spiritually rewarding, and I am sure it has been edifying to all who have continued through these books, myself included. In the early chapters of Genesis, even until about Genesis 35, I feel I went far too fast through the verses. I wasn’t attentive to the detail as I should have been, and I was unlearned in any meaningful sense in the Hebrew.

Therefore, this has been as much of a learning experience for me as it has been for those who have participated in these sermons. The process has remained basically the same, but it has been slowly modified here and there to where we are now. It is my hope that in explaining how I write these sermons, it will help others in progressing more quickly past those points of learning that I had to struggle through.

I had no model to go by, no pattern laid out, and I had to discover what did work and what did not work. Even today, I will slightly amend my approach as needed.

When I started typing the sermons, I chose a passage by the size or content of the passage and determined to write a sermon based on that. At times, this is still necessary, but it is now the exception rather than the rule.

Instead, I will have the framework of the sermon laid out each week – a template that I use for each sermon. This has a title (which includes the book, chapter, and verses of the sermon and the subject of it); a text passage (whatever the subject verses are referred to during the sermon); a text verse (a verse that will anchor the entire text passage to the mind of the listener); and the standard closing of the opening section which is substantially repeated each and every week.

After this, will be a place for the main points of the sermon – be it two, three, or even four sections. Then comes a closing verse (a verse that will sum up the thought of what has been presented). After that will be a note of what the contents of the next sermon will be. And then a place is left for a poem based on all of the text passage for that sermon.

There is a reason for each of these. Maybe surprisingly, the poem for the sermon, or sermons, for the entire coming chapter is the first thing I type. Supposing I have completed the verses for Deuteronomy 17, then before I actually start the Chapter 18 sermons – meaning the week before I start – I compose a poem based on all verses of Chapter 18. This poem is as close to the original text as I can possibly make it.

That is now complete, and I don’t have to worry about it interfering with the typing of whatever sermons come out of Chapter 18, be it one sermon or five. As the contents of each sermon are completed, I simply take the poem and divide it according to the verses that were included in it. For example, Deuteronomy 18 turned out to be three sermons – 1-8; 9-14; and 15-22.

The question may be, “Why do you do a poem based on the verses of each chapter?” Being glad you asked, I will explain. The reason is that before giving the sermon, the sermon text is read – Deuteronomy 18:15-22, for example. After that, the sermon is given based on those eight verses. After the sermon has been given, a poem, based directly on those eight verses and matching them as closely as possible, is then read.

In all, the sermon passage is therefore heard in three different ways. It is, thus, a memory tool for the congregation. As poetry is different in tone and make-up, even if it is almost a mirror of the text itself, it is a completely unique memory tool.

Out of sheer laziness, because of the amount of time it takes, several times, I have thought to drop this part of the sermon. And each time I thought to do so, someone has walked up out of the blue and said how much the poem helps them to process what they have just heard.

With the format laid out and the poem done for the entire chapter, on the next Monday, I start into the sermon itself. I have the format all ready, and so I start by reviewing the verses that I will be going over and immediately get into analyzing the first verse. We’ll say it is Deuteronomy 18:15.

What I do is to open (at least) 8 tabs on the computer. The first six are from BibleHub.com and are set to the following:

1) Bible Hub – a parallel of the verse being evaluated with approximately 25 different translations of that verse. Sometimes, looking at them isn’t necessary. Sometimes reading all 25 translations is needed. It is an invaluable tool.

2) Bible Hub – the entire verse in the Hebrew with a link to Strong’s concordance for each word; each word in Hebrew; a literal English translation for each word; and the morphology of each word. Each word is linked to those various tools, and each is meticulously reviewed by me in all four of these aspects, as needed.

If the word being looked at is a new word in Scripture, that is noted, and its meaning and etymology are explained during the sermon. The introduction of new words, the number of times the words are used in Scripture, and other such information can be an integral part of understanding the passage.

This may be the most important tab open and spending an hour or more on a single verse is not uncommon.

3) Bible Hub – commentaries from (for the Old Testament) Charles Ellicott, Joseph Benson, Matthew Henry, Albert Barnes, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, John Gill, the Geneva Bible, Cambridge, and the Pulpit Commentary.

4) Bible Hub – the commentary of Adam Clarke.

5) Bible Hub – the commentary of John Lange.

6) Bible Hub – the commentary of Keil and Delitzsch.

To get a fuller idea of what the verse being looked at is saying, I read almost every word of every commentary just named. This is an important step. These men have been trained in the biblical languages, and they have built their commentaries on some of the finest Bible scholars in all of church history who preceded them.

With the exception of Cambridge, for an evaluation of the Bible as an inspired text, these are some of the finest commentaries available. Cambridge is terrible in this regard, and their commentaries are often worse than useless – they being a bunch of liberal scholars.

And yet, their insights into the structure of the passage, and their analyses of the mechanical aspects of the Hebrew are invaluable. This past Monday, they pointed out a gender error in Deuteronomy 21:10 that not one of the 28 translations of the Bible that I read for the sermon caught, and not one of the scholars named above caught. And yet, without that, the typology of Jesus Christ in that passage would have been overlooked or flawed.

Even when their conclusion concerning the meaning of the text is completely wrong, as it most often is, what they submit can often alert the reader to something nobody else ever even hints at.

In other words, in their attempt to call the contents of the Bible into question, they will often bring out marvelous insights that – when thought through – do exactly the opposite.

As a side note concerning Bible Hub. It is one of the best sites I know of for the type of work I do. It is an invaluable resource and without it, the labor involved in what I do would go from 6-10 hours to 15 or even 20 hours, or more. There is no site that I appreciate more.

However, as this was put together by man, there will be errors at times. When I find an error in any part of the pages I am evaluating, I do not ignore it. I immediately stop my sermon typing and email John at Biblehub.com with the corrections. I sent one to him this Monday from that same verse. His site is a masterpiece of biblical information, and we want a perfect site for the users.

7) Bible Gateway – the chapter that is being evaluated (in this case Deuteronomy 18) is opened. This is kept open all day and often needs to be referred to innumerable times. I always use the same version for sermon typing (NKJV). Any variations in version are always cited.

8) Bible Gateway – an extra bible search engine is opened in order to search out passages from elsewhere in the Bible that will be cited. At times, I may open two or three extras if there is a lot going on.

9) In addition to the above, if there are any names of places or people included in the passage, a tab is opened for Abarim Publications. They have the finest and most accurate analyses of the meaning of biblical names to be found. Many “Bible Name” sites are so far off of an actual meaning of the names that they are useless. Caution and care must be taken when considering biblical names.

With all of these tabs open, and with reading everything involved with each of them for analyzing each verse, and then putting it together into a cohesive and understandable (well, hopefully) analysis for the congregation, I still take time to do one more thing with the verse that seemingly has nothing to do with the sermon. And yet, it often helps me to put together thoughts that are actually invaluable for the sermon.

It is something I recommend to anyone who wants to progress in their understanding of the Hebrew, the structure of the verse, and of how that verse can be misunderstood. I have taken one version of the Bible and I compare it directly with the Hebrew, word for word, and then check that translation for error – for every verse I look at.

In my case, and for personal reasons, I chose the King James Version. The reason this is productive is because it leads to other really valuable insights that you might not even have imagined. If you are going to analyze the Bible for your sermons as I do, I wholly recommend you pick a version of the Bible and do exactly this with each verse.

As a side note, I also type a commentary on a single verse of the New Testament seven days a week. Other than the Gospels, Acts (which is next), and Revelation (which is now three quarter complete), I have a full commentary on the entire New Testament. The reason I bring this up is that I do the same evaluation of the Greek against the KJV as I do for the sermon from the Old Testament Hebrew. If you would like my Hebrew/Greek comparison of the KJV, it is on our website.

At the end of the text study and sermon typing, we will say for Deuteronomy 18:15-22, I immediately finish the body of the sermon by typing closing comments. They are usually something that is more of a life application concerning what has been looked at.

However, there are times I will completely skip a life application, and simply go on to convey the glory of what Christ has done in relation to the subject matter at hand. In the end, the summary to the sermon is what will settle the minds of those listening and help them to redirect to what is most important.

That is either their life responsibility in relation to God, or simply contemplating the glory of God. Either way, this is an invaluable part of a sermon, and it must be carefully presented to leave the listener with the thought that they are accountable to this great, gracious, and yet holy God.

When that is spoken out to them, they should be moved into their soul over His goodness as is relayed to us in the redemptive narrative that is presented in the pages of Scripture.

Once this is completed, I will usually only then figure out what I want to be my text verse for the sermon. As I explained earlier, it is a verse that will anchor the entire text passage to the mind of the listener. In the case of Deuteronomy 18:15-22 the text verse is of Isaiah 8:19, 20.

Normally a text verse will be one verse, or a few at best. However, at times, it may be a whole passage if needed to convey the thought properly.

Next, I will figure out a closing verse. That is a verse that will, hopefully, sum up the content of the passage for the reader to say, “Yeah, I get that!” For that particular Deuteronomy sermon, I chose Hebrews 12:18-24.

Next, unless I have already divided the sermon up into individual sections, I will do that at this time. This is important because there are almost always changes of thought within the sermon that should be separated in order to help the reader transition.

In the case of Deuteronomy 18:15-22, it was divided up into three sections –

  1. Him You Shall Hear (verses 15 & 16)
  2. I Will Require It of Him (verses 17-19)
  3. III. You Shall Not Be Afraid of Him (verses 20-22)

Each of these main points are based on words that are conveyed directly within those verses. It is, thus, a word for word memory tool for the listener of the sermon, whether he or she realizes it or not.

After dividing the sermon up in this way, I then take the time to type a poem that reflects the sentiment of what was and what will be conveyed between the sections. I do one poem prior to the beginning of any second, third, or fourth section.

Hence, because there are three sections in the sermon from Deuteronomy 18:15-22, there will be two intervening poems. The reason for this is that it allows listeners or readers to mentally stop and clear their minds of the overload of information that they have just been presented… because there is an overload of information that has just been presented.

I learned to do this while reading a sermon by Charles Spurgeon, and it has been something I have done almost since the very beginning of my time as a preacher. I cannot imagine giving a sermon without this.

So, what is left at this point? Only two things are left for the sermon to be completed. The next thing I do is to now type the introduction to the sermon. Yes, that is almost the last – not the first – thing that I do. It is very rare for me to do it at any other time, but it does happen occasionally.

This comes at the end of the sermon typing because until I have done the conclusion of the sermon, I don’t know what that conclusion will be. But the conclusion is based on the contents of the sermon, and I don’t know what the contents of the sermon will be until the sermon is complete.

Once the conclusion is done, then the opening is typed to closely match what is said at the conclusion, and I can’t match that opening with the conclusion until I know what the conclusion says. This is the standard way of presenting such information – give a thought, explain that thought, and then sum up that thought.

In the case of the sermon, because the summing up is done first, then the opening must come afterward in order to match the summary, which is based on the contents of the sermon. Everything finds its place when it is done this way. Listeners are reminded of what they were told at the beginning of the sermon, and it will thus much better instill in their minds the contents of the entire sermon.

After the opening comments are completed, there is one more thing that needs to be done – the main title to the sermon. The sermon verses need to be put into the title. These weren’t known until the sermon was complete. In this case, Deuteronomy 18:15-22. After that, and last of all, the sermon is given a name.

Obviously, a title is a normal part of a sermon, but that is only chosen based on the contents of the sermon. Therefore, the contents of the title are usually the first and the last parts of the sermon to be completed. For example:

Deuteronomy 18:15-XX is the first thing I know about the sermon. When the sermon is complete and I know which verse has ended the passage, I then complete that part: Deuteronomy 18:15-22. This is actually necessary because there are times where I will start a sermon and will end up only evaluating one verse for the entire sermon. So, this part of the title must be completed after I know the sermon’s contents.

From there, and only then, is a title chosen. I used to choose titles for viewer appeal – “This sounds good and will catch people’s attention.” I no longer do this. I don’t care about catching people’s attention. I care about a proper presentation of the word of God. Therefore, the title is now, almost always, chosen directly and word-for-word from the sermon text. Thus, the sermon title is now complete –

Deuteronomy 18:15-22
A Prophet Like Moses

This is how sermons are prepared at the Superior Word.

To worship and to serve the Lord our God
Eternal fellowship in a land of Delight
On hallowed soil our feet will trod
And the Lord shall always be in our sight

In His light, to walk and also to praise
The Lamb of God who was slain
Illuminated by His ever-glowing rays
No tears, no fear, no sorrow, no pain

Come to the waters and be restored
Drink and receive Grace from the Lord

Heaven’s door is open for all to go through
But you see it’s guarded with cherub and sword
So, to pass through the gate, this you must do
It is the gospel, “Call on the Lord”

By faith in His work and by faith alone
Access is granted past heaven’s sword
His blood was shed for your sins to atone
Again, I beg you, call on the Lord

Again, I implore you, call on the Lord

III. Other Technical Aspects

Preparing a sermon as I do does not mean that when I am done on Monday, that the sermon work is done. Not by a longshot. Unlike a life application sermon that you can type up and have ready in an hour or so and then set it aside for Sunday morning, my 7-10 (or more) hour Monday sermon typing is only a beginning step.

First, a sermon that has been done in the way I do it cannot be conveyed to the congregation with minimal notes. It cannot be looked at once and then spoken forth either. Rather, what is typed is usually so intricate and complicated that it must be read, just as it is typed, to the church.

The first thing I do is to set the sermon aside for an entire week or more so that I mentally let go of everything that has been put together. After this, I read it out loud, check for errors, move things so that they fit better within the sermon, add in or amend things, and so on.

At the same time, I do the graphics work for the sermon. Everything that will be inserted into the video copy of the sermon that the congregation doesn’t get to see (but they get to see me live, so it’s a happy trade off), is prepared for when the video work is done.

After that, the sermon is set off to the side for the next nine or so weeks. That is because I type the sermons ten weeks in advance. This is an invaluable tool for several reasons. First, if I get sick or am otherwise unable to be at the church, I am unlikely to get behind.

Secondly, in doing another nine sermons in the order of Scripture, I am able to learn much more about what is coming, and often new points that I had not even thought of for those nine as-yet unread sermons will come out. If I could do sermons one hundred weeks in advance, how much more would this be the case. But one can only do so much.

And third, special sermons – such as at Christmas or Resurrection Day – will not interfere with the flow of the sermons out of the book we are engaged in at that time.

One week before giving the sermon, usually on Friday, I practice it out loud. This actually has the benefit of me getting my mind off the sermon I will be giving on Sunday, and it will have me ready for the next week because I now have all of the information from two sermons in my head to some extent.

On the week that I give the sermon, I will then practice it out loud each day, checking for things to correct or amend, and getting myself familiar enough with it so that it, hopefully, is passable to the church when it is given. They are far too gracious as they ignore my less than satisfactory oratory skills. For this, I am blessed.

Finally, on Thursday, I print off a copy for everyone that attends, I put it on the church website, scheduling it to appear on Sunday morning, and on Friday morning I send a copy of it out to those who attend online. And, on Friday as with each week, I then practice the next week’s sermon again, and the cycle continues on.

After giving the sermon on Sunday, I must then go home and edit and render the video, and then upload it to various sites on the internet. Once that is done, everything for the next ten weeks of sermons is moved forward one week in my sermon files, and the day is done.

Monday morning, a new battle is engaged as I face the daunting challenge of typing a new sermon – “Oh Lord, prepare my fingers for the battle that lies ahead.” It is my weekly petition to be given the grace of facing His word and not being left entirely defeated in the process.

To conclude: The point of this sermon is to help those who cherish this word, but who have not yet formed a sound approach to presenting this precious gift to the people they minister to.

Please note: it will make no difference that I have done this sermon unless it gets out to others, so I hope you will be willing to share it if it has been a blessing to you.

Closing Verse: “It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.’” Luke 4:4

The Word of God – holy, pure, and perfect too
It is given to satisfy man’s weary soul
In this life we trod, let us take an eternal view
And allow the word to convert us to God’s heavenly roll

There, in the Book of Life our names will be
Because we pursued His word and found Jesus
Innumerable redeemed, there by the glassy sea
Such a marvelous thing God has done for us

If we will just open the Bible, our own Book of Life
And accept what it says as holy and true
Then between us and God will end the strife
The word is given; to us life begins anew

Thank You, O God, for this marvelous word
In accepting its truths our place in heaven is forever assured

 Hallelujah and Amen…

Isaiah 26:19 (Your Dead Shall Live)

Isaiah 26:19
Your Dead Shall Live

“Your dead shall live;
Together with my dead body they shall arise.
Awake and sing, you who dwell in dust;
For your dew is like the dew of herbs,
And the earth shall cast out the dead.” Isaiah 26:19

Isaiah 24-27 is referred to as “Isaiah’s Apocalypse.” There is judgment, woe, and death recorded there, but there is also restoration and life. Scholars argue over the context and whether the words are referring to an actual resurrection, or whether they are being used figuratively when speaking of enemies in a conflict.

For example, the words, “Your dead shall live,” could be speaking of actual dead, or it could be speaking of the state of Israel – in a dead condition and sorely needing revival.

The next words, “Together with my dead body they shall arise,” are more complicated. The words “Together with” are inserted and immediately give an impression not necessarily intended. The Hebrew reads “my dead body they shall arise.” Thus, it may be two separate clauses – “My dead body” and “they shall arise.”

In other words, “My dead body” is a singular construct and thus it would refer collectively to the dead of the Lord. Then as individuals “they shall arise,” being third person plural, would refer to each individual of that body arising. But what does it mean?

Again, this could be figurative language speaking of Israel in a hopeless condition but being spiritually revived – as in the valley of dry bones in Ezekiel 37. Or it could be referring to the actual dead of the Lord being brought back to life.

At the end of Isaiah’s apocalypse, in Isaiah 27, it refers to the great trumpet being blown that will bring Israel’s outcasts back to the land. That is echoed by Jesus in Matthew 24:31. Both speak of a time of great trouble for Israel, a time of hiding for the Lord’s people, and then a time of regathering of the people.

Having said that, there is no reason to not take this in both a literal and a figurative sense. Israel, as a nation, is seen as a template of what God does in Christ for the individual believer. As elsewhere, the words then could have a twofold significance.

The point and purpose of the coming of the Messiah is that of restoration and life. There is a problem that needs fixing, we cannot fix it, and the Lord sent Christ Jesus to do for us what we cannot do for ourselves.

Text Verse: “For all the promises of God in Him are Yes, and in Him Amen, to the glory of God through us.” 2 Corinthians 1:20

The day before typing this Resurrection Day sermon, after a long day of church, video editing, and so on, I was sitting at the table having dinner when Sergio emailed me and asked about this particular verse from 2 Corinthians. He said, “I’m not sure what it means in context. I’ve heard pastors take it out of context.” At first, that seems contradictory.

But he knew what they were saying was out of context, even if he couldn’t put his finger on what the correct context was. As I had lamb chop all over my fingers, and as I was wiped out from the day’s work, I simply punted and sent him the link to my 2 Corinthians commentary.

Five minutes later, he excitedly emailed back citing my commentary, “Christ is the incarnate answer to the promises of God.” He then said, “Woooooooooowwewww. It makes ALL the sense in the world now!!!! I have tears understanding this verse now!!!” His use of accompanying emoticons was quite impressive.

He then said, “All the pastors (and recent famous worship songs) I’ve heard made this verse about ‘me’ and ‘us.’ But it’s all about Christ! Fulfilled in Him!!!!”

With that, I really wanted to know what someone else had said about the verse to get him so inquisitive at 1am Israel time. His answer was –

“He said (paraphrase): ‘what’s your purpose in life? What’s your motive? It’s important to establish one! Paul’s purpose was to share the gospel amongst the nations while being imprisoned… but we are free. So, our purpose is to have eternal life, get better life, and get God’s promises for us. The promises of Yes, and Amen, and the spirit.”

With that, I called the analysis “minty bubbles.” They taste good, but they have no substance. The sad part was that he said it was a discipleship video for young believers.

The next morning, Sergio said he was still thinking about the verse from the night before. My response was, “Me too. The minty bubbles are not completely wrong, but they have come at the idea in the wrong way. If they are treating the reception of the promises as being first directed to us, it is a self-centered doctrine. If we acknowledge that all promises of God are fulfilled in Christ, then it is Christ-centered. The secondary reception is us. Obviously, there would be no need to send Jesus if we didn’t exist. But the purpose is not for us to be exalted or blessed apart from Christ. Rather, it is for us to exalt God because He did this for us through Jesus. We are the recipients, but the purpose is the glory of God.”

Whether Isaiah’s words immediately speak of a spiritually dead condition of Israel or not, they convey a literal truth that God has done something in the world of which we are the recipients of that effort.

It is true that there would have been no need for it to have been done if we didn’t exist. But the purpose of the doing wasn’t so that we would have abundance and prosperity. Rather, the purpose of what He has done is first and foremost to bring glory to Himself. The good that we receive is not the purpose, it is the result.

Today is Resurrection Day 2021. But Resurrection Day is a day that comes after Good Friday. There would have been no resurrection without Christ’s death first. And there would have been no need for Christ’s death if we weren’t already separated from God.

Let us remember this. What God has done is because we are in a pit, God promised to get us out of that pit, and God sent Jesus to make that possible. To God be the glory. This is a truth that is to be found in His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again and… May God speak to us through His word today and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. Sadness at the Graveside

Regardless as to whether Isaiah’s words are to be taken figuratively, literally, or both, the fact that we could even debate them tells us that we have an understanding of what it means to die. And of that which results from death.

Taking the words and analyzing them from a negative perspective shows us this. In saying “Your dead shall live.” It means that something is dead. If we are talking about something that is dead, we are – by default – referring to something that was alive.

We don’t talk about rocks being dead. They were never alive, and so we don’t speak of them in that way. When someone says, “My car died,” it means that it has stopped running. It is not in the state it was intended to be. Such is the case with people. We are alive, and then we die.

To say “your dead” signifies a close and personal connection to the dead. If someone in Bolivia dies, there is nothing close and personal to us, unless we are from Bolivia. We wouldn’t say to a person from Czechoslovakia “your dead” when referring to the dead guy from Bolivia.

When the Lord, through Isaiah, says, “Your dead shall live,” it is confirming that there was a personal connection to the dead. If you take the Bible as the truth of man’s history on the earth, then you know that death was never the intent for people.

God created man for a particular purpose. In the Genesis narrative, when did He create the man? Was it on the first day? The second? The third? No. When God created man, it was on the sixth and final day of His creative effort. And not only did He do it on the sixth day, He did it at the end of the sixth day – after creating the land animals.

Man was the crowning aspect of the creation, the finishing touch. Everything was prepared for him first, and then the Lord God worked the dust, formed the man, and called him to life.

Chapter 2 of Genesis immediately began with –

“Thus the heavens and the earth, and all the host of them, were finished. And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.” Genesis 2:1, 2

Only after stating that does it go back and fill in the information left out of Chapter 1. God created man on the sixth day, and then it says that He, the Lord, planted a garden in Eden and placed the man there.

The word used in Genesis 2:15 is yanakh. It means to lay down, set, and so on. It is from the same root as nuakh, or to rest. The verb, being causative, signifies that the Lord “rested” the man in the garden.

It then says that he was rested there for a purpose. Most translations say that the action was so that man could “tend and keep” the garden, but that is not the intent at all. Such a translation causes a gender discord between the verbs and the object of those verbs.

Also, if the man was rested in the garden, it would make no sense to have him tend the garden. This is especially so for two reasons.

The first is that man was created on the sixth day. The seventh day is a day of rest and that day, according to Hebrews 4:3, continues on forever. God worked and then rested. The second reason is that the man’s responsibility was not to the garden, but to God.

The man was not rested there to tend and keep the garden, but to worship and serve the Lord. This is the purpose of the Sabbath. The seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord. In Exodus, the Lord provided the manna for the people, and they were to rest, not work.

This was to recall to their minds the rest that man had lost. God created man at the end of His week of work. He rested the man in the garden after the work was complete. The relationship was to be one of worshiping and serving the Lord in intimate fellowship.

My friend Kyle picked up on this while watching the Genesis sermon and helped me to expand on it for this sermon. It is in this state of rest that man was to live. As it was in fellowship with God, the intent was that it was to be forever. But intent and result are not always the same. The Lord gave the man a choice, a garden of delight and life, or the knowledge of good and evil, and death.

The very fact that death was an option means that the other option was not just life, but life without death. One tree was law – “You shall not eat of its fruit,” while the other tree was grace. It was simply there in the garden with no prohibition attached to it.

Man chose life under the law by choosing the fruit forbidden by the law. But as Paul tells us, “The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law” (1 Corinthians 15:56). And the word confirms that. The Lord said to the man –

“In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
Till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.” Genesis 3:19

So, there is what Isaiah is referring to. The man was taken from the dust and he became a living being. The man would return to the dust, because he was no longer alive. In saying, “your dead,” he was noting that they were once alive. In saying they “shall live,” he is indicating that this state of death would end.

The Lord then says through Isaiah: nebelati yequmum – “my dead body; they shall arise.” The people of the Lord are “His dead body,” meaning His body of people who have died.

That is a stated fact, but it doesn’t explain how they became His dead body. That is a completely separate part of the matter, and it also goes back to the Genesis narrative. The man failed to accept the grace, and instead he opted for the law, meaning disobeying it.

The serpent deceived the woman, calling into question the truth of the Lord’s word. But it was in the act of eating the fruit of the tree, the fruit forbidden by the Lord – meaning in violating the law – that death resulted. The law was given, violating the law was sin, and death was the inevitable consequence. As Paul says in Romans 3:20, “by the law is the knowledge of sin.”

If the Lord had put the tree in the garden and said nothing about eating its fruit, then they could have eaten it and not died. It isn’t the fruit, but the violation of the law, that brought the death. As this is so, then it cannot be by the law that life can come.

When Isaiah says “my dead body” while referring to the people of the Lord, it cannot be by the law that they became His dead body, only that they became dead by the law. So how did they become His, if not by law? The answer is introduced in the curse upon the serpent –

“And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head,
And you shall bruise His heel.” Genesis 3:15

The Lord promised that the Seed of the woman would come to correct the matter. Shortly after that was stated, and after the Lord told the man that he would toil the ground until he returned to the dust, the account says –

“And Adam called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.” Genesis 3:20

The man was told that he would die on the day he ate the forbidden fruit. He then was told that he would toil all the days of his life until he returned to the dust. Obviously, and putting two and two together, he was able to grasp that he was already dead in one sense, and then he would also die in another sense because he was alive still.

Thus, “death” has more than one meaning. As this is so, then “life” has more than one meaning as well. In calling His wife Eve, he was acknowledging this.

Her name is Khavah, “Life.” Abraim, in analyzing the name, says, “The name Eve denotes the collectivity that is common to the behavior of living things.” In this, they translate her name Symbiosis. There is a commonality to the life that would come through her.

In other words, Adam had come to understand that the life that he had lost would be restored. He did this while standing there as a living, breathing man. And therefore, he could not have been thinking of physical life at all, but of the spiritual life that he had lost. This was his “death” that occurred on the day he ate of the fruit.

But he had believed what the Lord said concerning One who would crush the serpent. In his belief, it then says –

“Also for Adam and his wife the Lord God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.” Genesis 3:21

The clear implication is that this action by the Lord was in response to the man’s naming of His wife. There they were, dead. And yet, he called her “Life.” Not because of the life they possessed, but because of the life that they would possess.

Adam believed, and the Lord covered the man’s nakedness. As these were garments of skin, it means the Lord took an animal and slayed it in order to cover him. A transfer was made. An innocent died, a guilty one was covered – all because of a simple act of faith.

The Lord was, at that time, showing what pleased Him. He was also showing in typology how He would come to cover all who pleased Him, meaning by their faith. However, there are consequences for our actions, even if our sins are covered. In His sentence upon the man, the Lord had said that he would toil for his food until he returned to the dust.

But the garden is a place of rest, not toil. And in the garden is the tree of life by which man can eat and live forever. Because of these things, the man was driven out from the garden to abad, or work, the ground. It is the same word that was used of his purpose in the garden, but with an entirely different context. He was to worship and serve the Lord, now he would serve the ground.

The rest, in the place of rest, was removed from him because he was removed from it. From this point on, everything in Scripture is, in one way or another, given to reveal how man would be returned to that lost rest in the place of rest.

Adam, though destined to die, had found the way to life. The narrative then immediately went from the account in the garden to the two sons of Adam and Eve. With very little in the narrative to explain why things turned out as they did, a contrast is set between the offerings the two made to the Lord.

The Lord accepted the offering of Abel, and he rejected the offering of Cain. However, there is enough said that the author of Hebrews explains what the difference between the two was. It wasn’t the type of offering, but the attitude behind the offering. Of this, he says –

“By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts; and through it he being dead still speaks.” Hebrews 11:4

The offering of Abel was one of faith. This is what made the offering more excellent. It was a hope-filled offering anticipating the life that was promised to his parents. Cain’s offering lacked this, and it was rejected.

From there, Hebrews 11 lists one person after another from one biblical account after another. And each time he does, he introduces him or her with the words, “By faith.” The deed or act they did is placed secondary to the idea of it being a deed or act of faith.

It is this, then, that distinguishes the people of God from all others. And it is those who died in faith that are collectively called “my dead body” in Isaiah 26. It is of this group of whom it then says, “they shall arise.” They are alive because of faith, even if they are dead in the body.

Someday, their bodies will arise because the Life is in them, and that is because they have believed the word of the Lord, meaning the Seed of the woman will come to accomplish His work. It is this simple hope that gives life, even in a body of death.

We know this is the case, and that it is not by a particular genealogy, that the life is granted. It is true that a particular genealogy was selected in order to bring in the Messiah. But being a part of that genealogy or not has no bearing on whether one is truly of the Messiah.

We know this because the line through which the Messiah comes is through Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But from Jacob, it is only through Judah that He would come. And yet, all twelve sons of Israel possessed the same hope, even though they were not all in His direct genealogy.

And we also know it is so because at times in the narrative, people are brought in from outside of the twelve sons of Israel, and they also possessed that same hope. Some of them were even brought directly into the line of the Messiah through marriage.

And we also know it so because Job was not of this genealogy at all, and yet, his record of interaction with the Lord, and the faith he possessed, assures us that he too possessed the same life as those of faith in Israel. As he himself said –

“And after my skin is destroyed, this I know,
That in my flesh I shall see God,
27 Whom I shall see for myself,
And my eyes shall behold, and not another.
How my heart yearns within me!” Job 19:26, 27

Only a person with a complete lack of understanding, or a personal bias against such a notion, would argue that Job is not included in the collective described as “my dead body.” Indeed, when they arise, Job will be among them. It is the hope in Messiah that makes it so. Job’s faith made him a son of God.

It is the amount of available revelation that sets the boundaries of this saving faith. One cannot have faith in a false Messiah. As the revelation of God concerning Him is increased, it is the responsibility of the individual to accept what has been presented and believe it.

This is why the Jew who has rejected Jesus will not be saved. God has provided the increased revelation, this has been rejected, and his trust is in something other than the Lord’s provision. On the other hand, Job’s understanding of the promise was far more limited. He had the word passed down from Adam until Noah, and then from Noah down to him.

As limited as his understanding was, it was enough. He sought after God, knowing that God had a plan and a purpose for him because of the promise. He had faith in that promise, and by faith the Bible calls him a son of the God, meaning the true God.

This is the pattern set forth for man to be saved, and faith in the promise is the expectation. There may be sadness at the graveside for those who mourn their dead, but for those who have lived in faith, they shall rise. For those who mourn and yet know this, it is a mourning of temporary loss, but also of hope-filled anticipation. Because of Messiah, there is a day coming when there will be a blessed reunion.

Your dead shall live; they shall rise to life again
My dead body will not be lost; they shall arise
To them, life I give, the faithful sons of men
The gift without money and without cost, even a glorious prize

Awake and sing, you who dwell in dust
You shall rise again when I make the call
Because in My Son, you placed your trust
No more shall you be covered by death’s terrible pall

For your dew is like the dew of lights, reinvigorating the soul
And the earth shall cast out the dead
You shall receive heavenly rights; you are entered on the scroll
The days of dust are gone, replaced with beauty instead

II. To the Glory of God

As we opened, I told you about Sergio’s inquiry concerning 2 Corinthians 1:20. He seemed almost dejected about what he had heard from others. The reason this was so is that they had made the plan of God me-centered.

That is fine if you want the Bible, and indeed your life, to be all about you. But if it is all about you, it is actually a sincerely vapid existence, and a truly miserable hope you have. Sergio caught onto this, and so it caused an internal conflict.

The promises of God are to us, but they are realized in Christ. He is the incarnate answer to the promises of God. When Sergio saw the clarity of what Paul is conveying, he was moved to tears.

One can see the contrast between Cain and Abel. Cain, like that pastor Sergio cited, would have been elated at the news that God’s promises are realized in him. Abel, on the other hand, like Sergio, would have been appalled. “Me? That’s why I’m bringing this offering to You! It’s not about me, but about my hope in what You have promised.”

Abel had a hope beyond his earthly life. It was a hope of rest in the place of rest that his parents had once known. Someday, his hope will be realized. As Isaiah says: haqitsu v’ranenu shokene aphar – “Awake and shout for joy, dwellers of dust.”

It takes the reader right back to Genesis 3 once again –

“In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
Till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.” Genesis 3:19

The man from the dust would return to the dust. Likewise, so would all who follow him. But for those who lived in faith, that state would not be final. In the curse upon the serpent, he was told that he would eat the dust. But despite this, he would not prevail over the faithful who had returned to the dust.

The hope of Messiah is that the bonds of death would be broken. Those the earth had reclaimed would be brought forth once again to shout aloud in joy. If you think about it, it is right that man is born, lives, and dies in this hope. Generation after generation it is so, telling us that when our renewal comes, it is because of what He has done, not what we have done.

If it were because of our deeds, the ground could not hold us. But it does. Even for two thousand years it has. Death has continued to reign, and the dust continues to receive more. And yet, those who hope continue to hope.

If it were merely God’s promises fulfilled in us, they surely would have been fulfilled by now. But being God’s promises fulfilled in Christ, every soul that is added to those who will rise only increases the glory. Someday the call will be made, and those in the dust shall awaken.

Isaiah describes how this will happen, saying, ki tal oroth talekha – “for dew lights your dew.” It is a poetic way of saying that the dew that settles upon those dead is like the dew that comes in the morning. When the completeness of the light shines forth, everything is nourished by this morning dew, and it is brought to vigor.

In the same manner, a time is coming when life will be suddenly and completely reinvigorated into those who dwell in the dust. They will reanimate in a new form and come forth. Paul describes the two states as they were and as they will be –

“The first man was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord from heaven. 48 As was the man of dust, so also are those who are made of dust; and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who are heavenly. 49 And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man.” 1 Corinthians 15:47-49

This change will be so sudden and so abrupt because of the reinvigorating power of Christ that Isaiah continues with the words, va’arets rephaim tapil – “and land ghosts will overthrow.” It is a poetic way of saying that the place where the dead are will be cast down and defeated. That is again reflective of Paul’s words –

“For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 So, when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: ‘Death is swallowed up in victory.’
55 ‘O Death, where is your sting?
O Hades, where is your victory?’” 1 Corinthians 15:54

This is the promise, and this is the wonder that we anticipate each year as we celebrate Resurrection Day. But before we finish, we need to remember that in order for Christ to come forth from the grave, He first had to go to the grave.

Adam disobeyed God. Through this, sin entered the world. And death came through that sin. From there, the Bible reveals that death spread to all men, because – as Paul says – all sinned. In other words, because we were in Adam when he sinned, we bear the guilt of Adam.

This is true in several ways. It is true legally because Adam is our federal head. He is the first man from whom all other men come. Just as the leader of a nation represents his citizens, so Adam represents all who come from Adam.

It is true potentially. It says in Genesis 5 –

“And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters. So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.” Genesis 5:3-5

We have no idea how many children Adam had. It could have been 10 or it could have been 150. All were potentially in him and all that were born actually came from him. In the same way, any normally functioning person could have any number of children, or they could have no children. Every person who comes after someone is potentially in that person, and any number of possible people could come from that same stream.

And it is true seminally. Acts 17:26 says, “…and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth.”

Again, in Hebrews 7, Levi is said to be in the loins of Abraham, and that because he was, he paid tithes to Melchizedek through Abraham even though he wasn’t yet born, and even though he wouldn’t come for three more generations. He was seminally in his father before he ever existed.

Because of these things, all of us are in Adam in these three ways and thus we all bear his sin in these ways. We are born spiritually dead – as we saw from the account of Cain and Abel.

There is a disconnect between us and God, and there is a sentence of condemnation hanging over our heads from the moment of our conception. It is a sentence that is merely waiting to be executed. (John 3:18)

As this is so, something external needs to be introduced in order for the sentence to be changed from condemnation to restoration. The way that external correction came about was for God Himself to unite with human flesh in the Person of Jesus. He did this in the womb of Mary.

As His father is God, He did not receive Adam’s sin. He was born qualified to cover our sins, just as the innocent animal’s skin covered Adam and Eve of their nakedness.

Further, Christ Jesus was born under the Law of Moses – the covenant God made between Himself and the people of Israel. In that covenant, He stipulated that the man who did the things of the law would live by them. Christ already had life in Him, but being born under the law, He had to fulfill that law.

This is what the gospels then record. The Son of Man was born without sin, and He lived out the law without ever sinning, proving Himself not only qualified, but capable. He did what we could not do because the sin already existed in us.

And then, in fulfillment of the law, He died. In other words, as He had no sin, and as He committed no sin, the law found its completion in Him. In its completion, it ended, and a New Covenant replaced it. It is the Christ covenant.

It is the fulfillment of what was promised. It is what Adam anticipated when he named his wife “Life.” It is what Abel anticipated when he made his offering. It is what Job hoped for when he sat and spoke with those with him.

Christ Jesus gave up His life so that we could be granted what we could not otherwise possess. In His death, God provided an atonement – a covering – for sin. And that covering is offered in the exact same manner for us as it was for those in the past, meaning by faith. Adam had faith and was covered. That was only a type of what God would do in Christ.

Now, in Christ the final, full, and forever covering of sin is granted for those who simply believe. Though it has been two thousand years, God is still imputing to His people the same righteousness in the exact same way. And with each person who accepts the premise and is saved, the glory to God increases.

Sergio asked about Paul’s words concerning Christ, “For all the promises of God in Him are Yes, and in Him Amen, to the glory of God through us.” The answer is that God’s promises are fulfilled in Christ. From there, and only from there, do those promises then belong to us.

Jesus Christ is the answer to the problem that plagues us. His death is the remedy for our condition. In His burial, He bore our sin into the grave. And His resurrection is the proof that it is so. The atonement is made, the sin is expiated, the life is granted, and eternity lies just ahead for those who will – by faith – accept the premise and receive what God has done through Him.

This is the love of God that is found in Christ Jesus, and this is the grace of God that says, “I have done the work so that you may enter My rest.” Please be wise and receive this wonderful gift of life and restoration. May it be so, and may it be today.

Closing Verse: “But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.” 1 Corinthians 15:20-23

Next Week: Deuteronomy 15:12-23 So hard to imagine, and yet it is true… (The Lord Your God Redeemed You) (48th Deuteronomy Sermon)

A Celebration of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ

This is the gospel which was preached to you
It is also the one you received and on which you stand
It is the gospel of salvation, providing life that’s new
And which will carry you to the promised Holy Land

What is delivered to you is what was before received
That Christ died for our sins according to God’s word
He was buried and He rose, and so we have believed
And many witnesses testify to this message you have heard

Now, if Christ is preached that He is risen from the dead
How can some among you say the resurrection isn’t true?
If there is no resurrection after Christ was crucified and bled
Then our faith as well as yours is certainly askew

And if so, we are found false witnesses of God
Because we have wrongly testified of this mighty deed
And our faith is futile, no heavenly streets we’ll trod
And we are still dead in our sins; fallen Adam’s seed

Even more, those who have fallen asleep in the Lord are gone
And we are the most pitiable creatures
———-the world could ever look upon

But indeed, Christ is risen from the dead
He is the Firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep
And as death came through one man, Adam, our federal head
So, Christ will make all alive; our souls He will keep

But there is an order to the Resurrection call
Christ was first, the pattern for the rest when He comes
When He does, He will make a shout out to us all
And we will rise as if to the sound of heavenly battle drums

Then comes the time, when He delivers the kingdom to the Father
When all rule, authority, and power have come to an end
The last enemy to be destroyed is death, never more to bother
Then the Son will to the Father eternal rule extend

But you ask, what will we be like after our time of sleep?
After we have been buried in corruption’s pit so deep?

Our body is sown in dishonor, but it will be raised in glory
It is sown in weakness, but raised in power – the resurrection story

The first man Adam became a living being, it is true
The last Adam became a life-giving Spirit, life to me and you

And as was the man of dust, created so long ago
So are those likened unto him, also made of dust
And as is the Man, the Lord from heaven, you know
That we shall bear His image for eternity just as we’ve discussed

Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God
Nor can corruption inherit that which is incorrupt
Be we shall all be changed, and so, heavenly streets we’ll trod
In the twinkling of an eye, the change will be abrupt

When the last trumpet sounds, we will be taken to glory
We shall all be changed, completion of the gospel story

Where O Death, O where is your sting?
When Christ our Savior, us to Himself does He bring

Where O Hades, O where is your victory?
When Christ translates His children to eternal glory

The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin the law
But thanks be to God who gives us victory through our Lord
My beloved brethren be steadfast in all you’ve heard and saw
And cling confidently to God’s eternal word

Know for certain that your labor is not in vain
Be of good cheer, Christ is coming again

Hallelujah and Amen…

Errors in the King James Version

This is a list of translation errors which are found in the King James Version (KJV), a mediocre translation of Scripture. I started compiling them after having completed several of my book studies, and so the many errors in their translation of those books are not included for the most part. As for this list, these errors are based on the same source texts used by the KJV translators, so we are dealing apples with apples in this list.

 

Note: I am sure I have errors in my comments on this page – spelling, punctuation, numerical, and etc. One might point out the irony of me highlighting errors in the KJV while having my own errors, but I am not interested in dotting every t or crossing every i (wait, reverse that). Rather, I am giving information to be considered for those who honestly want to know if this version is what the cult of “King James Onlyism” claims. Even a short study will show it is not.

 

I said a moment ago that the KJV is a marginal translation. I was being gracious.

 

———————————————————

 

Note: The KJV fails to use quotation marks, making the text obscure and even difficult at times. It is good that modern translations have corrected this translational problem.

 

The errors below are based on a reading of the original Hebrew and Greek in comparison to the KJV.

 

Note: The KJV fails to note the article in front of “God” – ha’elohim, or “the God” hundreds of times, beginning with Genesis 5:22. Each time the article is placed there in the Hebrew, it is done so for a theological purpose. Not placing it there leaves a void in our understanding of what THE GOD is telling us. I won’t include every instance of this, but it should be made known. Each time it is lacking is 1 demerit in their translation.

 

Genesis 1:1 –

The KJV translates ha’shemayim (literally, the heavens) in the singular (the heaven). They then translate the exact same phrase in the plural in Genesis 2:1, 2:4, etc. There is an annoying lack of consistency in this. 1 demerit for each inconsistency in the rest of the Bible. It is not a great way to start a Bible translation, with such an obvious error, and it does not bode well for the reader to stick with this version any longer, but if you do, we’ll keep highlighting its seemingly countless errors.

 

Genesis 43:14 –

The word “mercy” is plural – “mercies,” as in Jeremiah 42:12. 1 demerit.

 

Genesis 14:5

Rephaims is incorrect. The “im” is a plural marker. The same is true with “Zuzims” and “Emims.” 3 demerits.

 

Genesis 15:20

Rephaims is incorrect. The “im” is a plural marker. 1 demerit.

 

Genesis 20:13 –

The word translated as “God” is incorrect. The verb is plural and the verse should thus say “gods.” There is a reason for this which is missed by the translators. 1 demerit.

 

Genesis 29:17 –

The expression yephat toar, means “beautiful in form.” The KJV ignores the second word, thus receiving 1 demerit.

 

Genesis 39:6 –

The expression yepheh toar, means “beautiful in form.” The KJV ignores the second word, thus receiving 1 demerit.

 

Genesis 31:21 –

It says, “the Gilead,” not “Gilead.” 1 demerit.

 

Genesis 31:23 –

It says, “the Gilead,” not “Gilead.” 1 demerit.

 

Genesis 35:7 –

The word translated as “God” is incorrect. The verb is plural and the verse should thus say “gods.” There is a reason for this which is missed by the translators. 1 demerit.

 

Genesis 38:18 –

It is not a bracelet, it is a cord. The two are completely different words, both found in Numbers 19:15. 1 demerit.

 

Genesis 46:34 –

The words “an abomination unto the Egyptians” are incorrect. The exact same Hebrew words are used in Exodus 8:26 (twice) and are correct there – “abomination of the Egyptians.” 1 demerit.

 

Genesis 49:6 –

The word “wall” is incorrect. It is an ox. The translators mistakenly used the root shor, “wall” instead of shur, “carrier” to explain what is being said. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 10:5 –

The Hebrew reads, “the eye of the earth.” 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 13:4 –

It says, “the Abib,” with the article. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 15:14

The KJV uses the term “Palestina.” This is utterly ridiculous. The word signifies “Philistine,” coming from the Hebrew pelesheth. There was no such thing as “Palestine,” until so named by the Romans  in the second century AD. Out of 8 occurrences of the word, the KJV botched four of them. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 15:27 –

Here the KJV translates the word enot as “wells.” However, in Numbers 33:9, the same word speaking of the same place with the same springs, says “fountains.” 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Ex 16:16 –

Tent is singular, not plural. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 16:23 –

Unfortunately, the KJV completely mistranslated this verse and added in two definite articles which don’t exist in the Hebrew. They say, “To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD.” By adding these in, they have inserted inappropriate theology to the text which has actually been harmful to the church. 2 demerits.

 

Exodus 17:14 –

It is “the book” not “a book.” There is a definite article which is omitted translated in the KJV. Also, it is not “from under heaven,” but “from under the heavens.” 2 demerits.

 

Exodus 18:10

Moses says “who has delivered you out of the hand of the Egyptians. The word “you” is plural, so he is either speaking to several people who aren’t yet mentioned, or he is speaking of the collective group of Israel. The KJV incorrectly translates this as singular (you) instead of plural (ye). 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 18:10

It is not “to their place,” but “to his place.” It is masculine singular. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 19:13

The KJV completely botched this verse by saying, “There shall not a hand touch it.” This is speaking not of the mountain, but of the person who has touched the mountain.

Exodus 19:13. The repetition of the word “touch” (נָגַע) naturally suggests the thought that the object is the same as in the preceding verse, viz., “mount.” But this cannot be the case. For (1) if this were so, it is not probable that the word “hand” would be used, especially after the more general prohibition. The second prohibition would be weaker than the first, for one would most naturally touch the mountain with the foot, not the hand. But (2) more decisive still is the consideration that the conjunction כִּי does not admit of this construction. It can here only have the meaning “but” in the sense of the German “sondern,” i.e, “but on the contrary.” As the verse stands in A. V., a reader would most naturally understand “but” to be equivalent to “but that,” and the meaning to be, “No hand shall touch it without his being stoned,” etc., which, however, cannot have been the meaning of the translators, and certainly not of the Hebrew author. On the other hand, it makes no sense to say, “No hand shall touch the mountain, but on the contrary he shell be stoned.” The meaning must be: “No hand shall touch him,” i.e., the offender; “but he shall be killed without such contact by being stoned or shot.”—TR.] KD, 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 20:4 –

It says, “in the heavens,” not “in heaven.” Also, in Deuteronomy 5, the same word translated as “under” here is “beneath there. As it is the same word as “beneath” just used in this verse, “under” in incorrect. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 20:5 –

Three definite articles inserted by the KJV are not in the original and should be italicized. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 20:6 –

The Hebrew reads, “to those who love Me and to those keeping my commandments.” It is two different thoughts, carefully worded as such. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 20:7 –

It does not say “in vain.” It says, “to vanity.” 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 20:7 –

7 (con’t) And they said, “All that the Lord has said we will do, and be obedient.”

 

These words qol asher dibber Yehovah na’aseh v’nishma, are almost exclusively translated in this way. “We will do and be obedient.” However, only one of the twenty Bibles I read, the Jubilee Bible, says, “All that the LORD has said we will do, and we will hear.” This is correct. The word shema means to hear, but hearing is often associated with obedience, such as “I want you to hear me,” which means “I want you do as I say.” However, one cannot be obedient unless they first hear. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 20:10 –

It is A Sabbath TO the Lord, not THE Sabbath OF the Lord. 2 demerits.

 

Exodus 20:13 –

The word for “murder” here is correctly translated as such. It is ratsakh and this is its first use in the Bible. Barnes notes that “This properly denotes taking the life of another with malice, or with an intention to murder him. The Jews understood it as meaning no more.”

Thus translating this as “kill” as the KJV does, can only confuse the meaning. For example, the Bible mandates that capital offenders such as murderers are to be executed. However, the use of the word “kill” instead of “murder” in this verse has led to both a misunderstanding of the intent of the commandment and a misuse of it against what the law actually prescribes in the execution of offenders.

Because of the faulty translation, it has even been used by some in the nonsensical manner of claiming that the killing of animals is wrong. However, this is a complete misuse of the command. In Exodus 12:21, the people were told to “kill the Passover.” But that verse uses an entirely different word than the one used here.

Using the word “kill” in this commandment also sets up other contradictions in the Bible as well because Israel is often instructed to destroy certain people groups in battle. These instances are not to be considered as “murder.” The Pulpit Commentary, among others, adds in this note concerning this precept –

“The Israelites are told that to take life is a crime. God forbids it. As usual, no exceptions are made. Exceptions appear later on; but the first thing is to establish the principle.” Pulpit

This is incorrect. Exceptions, which precede the giving of the law, already exist. In chapter 17, the Lord told Moses, “Choose us some men and go out, fight with Amalek.” At the end of that account, it said, “So Joshua defeated Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword.”

As the incident predates the law, then a distinction is being made between “killing” and “murder.” The word “kill” is too broadly rendered and thus it is a most unfortunate translation. It ignores both previous precedent and later instruction and refinement. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 22:1 –

Two different Hebrew words are translated as “ox” and two different words are translated as “sheep.” The verse says, “If a man steals an ox (shor) or a sheep (seh), and slaughters it or sells it, he shall restore five oxen (bakar) for an ox (shor) and four sheep (tson) for a sheep (seh). It’s obvious that a distinction is being made between what is stolen and what is to be returned. Otherwise, it would have just used the same words. 2 demerits.

 

Exodus 22:16 –

The word aras is consistently translated as “virgin.” This is how it should be here as well. For example, see Genesis 24:16. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 22:28 –

elohim lo t’qallel – These words are translated in several ways. “You shall not revile God.” “You shall not revile the gods.” Or, “You shall not revile the judges.” The word elohim can mean any, but “the gods” makes no sense. There is one God and all other gods are false and are to be reviled.

If it is “judges” then there should be an article before elohim. There isn’t and so that is incorrect. Rather, this is speaking of God, “the fountain of justice and power” (Clarke). This then leads naturally to the second half of the verse…

28 (con’t) nor curse a ruler of your people.

The ruler of the people of Israel derived his authority from God and therefore to curse him was to lay a curse upon the Lord who established the ruler of the people. This part of verse 28 is actually cited by Paul in Acts 23:5 during a trial with the ruling council where he notes the high priest as a ruler of the people.

The entire verse in substance is repeated several times in Scripture and in both testaments where honoring the Lord and honoring a ruler of the people are tied hand in hand. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 22:30 –

The term “oxen” is incorrect. It should be “cattle.” All oxen and cows fall under the term “cattle,” but not all cattle are oxen and cows.

Oxen are working animals, whereas cows are females kept for milk, meat, or breeding. Both however are being referred to here. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 13:4 –

It says, “the Abib,” with the article. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 23:18 –

The second half of this verse is incorrectly translated. The word for “sacrifice” is khag. It is a completely different word than the word in the first half, which is zebakh. The word means “feast,” not “sacrifice.” It is referring to the “feast” of Passover which is explained in Exodus 12:10. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 23:28 –

This verse introduces the tsirah, or hornet, into the Bible. It is the first of just three times that they are mentioned. The word comes from tsara which means to be leprous. There is an article in front of “hornet.” It is “the hornet.” 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 24:15 –

It says “the cloud” covered it. Thus, it is the same cloud which guided the people through their wanderings, through the Red Sea, and which has brought them to where they are. It is the cloud which both conceals the glory of the Lord and in which the glory is revealed. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 25:13 –

The translation is lacking. It says, “And the cubit.” This is specifically speaking of the cubit of the goat’s hair covering, which was thirty cubits across. It was to exceed the linen covering of verse 2, which was twenty-eight cubits. This extra cubit was to be on either side of the tabernacle, and it was to be allowed to hang down, like a valance, in order to completely hide the golden boards of the tabernacle. Thus, only a picture of awareness of sin and judgment was to be seen in this. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 25:18 –

“cherubims” is incorrect. Either two cherubs, or two cherubim. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 25:29 –

These are not covers, but jars. It should read “jars which to pour.” 2 demerits.

 

Exodus 26:5 –

The KJV gives a very poor rendering of this by saying, “that the loops may take hold one of another.” It is not the loops which will take hold of one another. It is that the loops will allow one another to be united by the clasping of golden clasps. Specificity is important here and their translation is lacking in this case. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 26:9 –

Again as is often the case, the KJV unfortunately translates the last word as “tabernacle” and not “tent.” The word is ohel and it is completely different than the mishkan, or tabernacle, which it covers. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 26:11 –

The KJV is incorrect in this verse. It says “brass” instead of “bronze.” It was either copper or bronze at this point in history. Brass was not yet used. 1 demerit for every time that “brass” is used in the OT. Approximately 75 demerits.

 

Exodus 26:32 –

There is no article in front of “four sockets.” The word “the” is not correct. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 27:1 –

This is a specific altar which is a specific piece of furniture for the tabernacle. Thus, there is an article in front of the “altar.” It is ha’mizbeakh – “the altar.” Unfortunately, the KJV doesn’t accurately highlight this. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 27:16 –

The KJV confuses the wording here and for the screen in Exodus 26 for entry into the holy place by calling them the same term as the rest of the tabernacle, “hangings.” However, it then calls this a “curtain” in numbers 3:26. It is not precise or consistent in the translation, thus making it difficult to know what is what. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 27:21 –

The term ohel moed, or “tent of meeting” is used for the first time in Scripture. After this, it will become a common term. The KJV gets a demerit in the translation for saying “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word ohel means “tent.” the word moed means “meeting.” There is also no “the” in the Hebrew. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 28:7 –

Two errors! There is no possessive pronoun and no “the” in the original. “Two shoulder pieces.” 2 demerits.

 

Exodus 28:12 –

The KJV says “of memorial unto the children of Israel.” This is not correct. The stones were considered a reminder to God, not a reminder to the children of Israel. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 28:17 –

The identity of almost all of the twelve stones named here cannot be precisely determined. There are stones which can be eliminated based on their hardness. In other words, it was not possible at this time in history to engrave on a topaz. Therefore, the KJV which says “topaz” gets a demerit for their translation. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 28:18 –

It is recognized that none of these stones, the emerald, sapphire, and diamond, could be engraved at this time in history. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 28:43 –

It is not the “tabernacle of the congregation” but the “tent of meeting.” The word is ohel and it means “tent.” This is why it first says, “the tent of meeting” and then “near the altar.” Further, it is not “congregation,” but “meeting.” Although not yet described, this is speaking of the altar of incense which will stand in the Holy Place. Fail. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 29:4 –

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 29:9 –

Incorrect. There is no article in front of “bonnets.” It is not “the bonnets,” but “bonnets.” 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 29:10 –

Incorrect. It is not “a bullock” but “the bullock.” The term ha’par specifies that it is the same one chosen in verse 1 which was “without blemish.” The KJV confuses this, and thus it could be any bullock. Further, it is “the tent,” not “the tabernacle.” 2 demerits.

 

Exodus 29:16 –

The KJV says to “sprinkle” its blood all around the altar, this is not what is happening. It should say something like “scatter” or “splash.” It is a completely different word, zaraq, than that which will be used in verse 21. The NIV gives a far better rendering with, “Slaughter it and take the blood and splash it against the sides of the altar.” The KJV completely confuses the action here with that of verse 21. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 29:30 –

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 29:42 –

The KJV completely botched this by calling it the tabernacle of the congregation. This is entirely incorrect. It is ohel moed – the tent of meeting.  They have made the assumption that this is speaking of the door of the courtyard where the altar is placed, but this is not correct. The sacrifices are said to be “at the door of the tent of meeting before the Lord.” This is speaking of the door to the tent of meeting, even though the altar isn’t placed in that exact spot.  The door for the tent is the word pethakh. The gate of the courtyard is the word shaar. They are two entirely different words describing two different things. Thus they receive 5 demerits for their translation, and another demerit (making 6) for simply copying the Geneva Bible without correcting it.

 

Exodus 31:14 –

The verse begins with “And.” “And you shall…” 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 30:16 –

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 31:18 –

KJV reads “two tables of testimony.” The Hebrew reads “two tables of THE testimony.” 1 demerit for not being specific.

 

Exodus 32:13 –

It says, “to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.” 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 32:16 –

The money is to be used not for its service, but for its construction. This silver is for the sockets and other items detailed in Exodus 38:25-28. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 32:19 –

Two errors. First, “the dancing” is incorrect. There is no article, and the word is a plural noun – “dances.” “…and saw the calf and dances.” 2 demerits.

 

Exodus 33:7 –

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 33:8 –

Again, the word is ohel, tent. Two more demerits for twice translating this as “tabernacle.”

 

Exodus 33:9 –

Again, the word is ohel, tent. Two more demerits for twice translating this as “tabernacle.”

 

Exodus 33:10 –

Again, the word is ohel, tent. One more demerit for translating this as “tabernacle.”

 

Exodus 33:11 –

Again, the word is ohel, tent. One more demerit for translating this as “tabernacle.”

 

Exodus 33:21 –

There is a definite article in front of “rock.” It is “the” rock. Pretty much everyone but the KJV gets this right. The symbolism of Christ is completely missed in this translation. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 34:1 –

The word rendered twice as “stone” in Hebrew is “stones.” It is plural and is intended to make a picture of Christ, in contrast to Adam. The specificity, and thus the intended picture, is lost in the KJV. 2 demerits.

 

Exodus 34:18 –

Twice, it says, “the Abib,” with the article. 2 demerits.

 

Exodus 34:29 –

The translation here says, “that Moses wist not that the skin of his face shone while he talked with him.” This is not the sense of what is written. Rather, it says, “the skin of his face shone through his talking with Him.” It was in the conversation with the Lord that his face was made to shine, and it continued to shine even afterwards. 1 dermerit.

 

Exodus 34:33 –

The KJV incorrectly inserts the word “till.” It is “after.” Moses, authenticating the word of the Lord, spoke with his face unveiled. After speaking with them, he placed the veil over his face. This veiling of the face is explained in 2 Corinthians 3. The Lord gave the law, but after it was given, that which the law revealed was veiled. What was revealed is that the law had an end. It was passing away. This is what was veiled from the people according to Paul. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 38:24 –

The gold mentioned here was not for the “holy place” but for the sanctuary. The gold was used in the holy place, the most holy, place, and on the pillars which supported screen entrance into the tabernacle. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 39:41 –

There is no “and” before “the holy garments for Aaron the priest” in the Hebrew. 1 demerit.

 

Exodus 40:2 –

It is the “tent of meeting,” (ohel moed), not the “tent of the congregation” (the word would be edah) which is used by the KJV. The tent of meeting is where the Lord would meet with His designated representative, not the congregation. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 40:7 –

The KJV correctly (finally!) sticks with “tent” but says “of the congregation.” It is incorrect. It is the ohel moed, or “tent of meeting.” 2 demerits.

 

Exodus 40:12 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 40:22 –

The KJV again says “tent of the congregation.” This is incorrect. It is ohel moed – “the tent of meeting.” What is astonishing, is that they had just called this the “tabernacle of the congregation” just a few verses earlier even though the same words were used in the Hebrew. The lack of clarity in the KJV is truly remarkable. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 40:24 –

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 40:26 –

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 40:29 –

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 40:30 –

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 40:32 –

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 40:34 –

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Exodus 40:35 –

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 1:1 –

The Hebrew literally reads. Rather, it says, va’yiqra el moshe vaydaber Yehovah elav – “And called unto Moses and spoke Yehovah unto him.” To understand why this change is so important, we have to go back to the end of Exodus. In the last paragraph, it said –

 

“Then the cloud covered the tabernacle of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. 35 And Moses was not able to enter the tabernacle of meeting, because the cloud rested above it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle.” Exodus 40:34, 35

 

The beginning of Leviticus is being tied directly to this thought. Understanding that, there is a time when the glory of the Lord retreated into the Most Holy place, and Moses was then able to enter there in order to speak with the Lord who dwelt between the cherubim. Also, as is the case with Exodus, the words should read “tent of meeting,” not “tabernacle of congregation.” It is ohel moed; the “tent of meeting.” 4 demerits.

 

Leviticus 1:3 –

The words are not well translated. It should not say, “of his own voluntary will.” Rather, it should say, “that it may be accepted.” The word is ratson, and it can be translated either way, but many other passages in Exodus and Leviticus explain the meaning which is to be used. See Exodus 28:38; Leviticus 19:5; Leviticus 22:19-20; Leviticus 22:29; Leviticus 23:11. It is also explicitly explained in Leviticus 22:19-21. 1 demerit

 

Leviticus 1:5

The translation does not give the correct sense of what is done with the blood. It is not sprinkled, but splashed or scattered. The word is zaraq. The word for “sprinkle” is nazah, and it will not be seen in Leviticus until verse 4:6. Secondly, it is “the sons of Aaron, the priests,” not “the priests, Aaron’s sons.” It is an exclusive term, limiting the priesthood to the sons of Aaron.” Otherwise, it could be inferred that other priests from other lines existed, but were not selected from Aaron’s sons. The same term is used seven times, five in Leviticus, once in Numbers, and once in Joshua 21:19. It is always consistent in the Hebrew in order to show that the sons of Aaron alone are designated as priests suitable to perform functions under the Law of Moses and before the Lord. Finally, the term is ohel moed – tent of meeting, not tabernacle of the congregation. 4 demerits.

 

Leviticus 1:8

It is “the sons of Aaron, the priests,” not “the priests, Aaron’s sons.” It is an exclusive term, limiting the priesthood to the sons of Aaron.” Otherwise, it could be inferred that other priests from other lines existed, but were not selected from Aaron’s sons. The same term is used seven times, five in Leviticus, once in Numbers, and once in Joshua 21:19. It is always consistent in the Hebrew in order to show that the sons of Aaron alone are designated as priests suitable to perform functions under the Law of Moses and before the Lord. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 1:11

It is “the sons of Aaron, the priests,” not “the priests, Aaron’s sons.” It is an exclusive term, limiting the priesthood to the sons of Aaron.” Otherwise, it could be inferred that other priests from other lines existed, but were not selected from Aaron’s sons. The translation does not give the correct sense of what is done with the blood. It is not sprinkled, but splashed or scattered. The word is zaraq. The word for “sprinkle” is nazah, and it will not be seen in Leviticus until verse 4:6. 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 3:2

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits. It is “scatter” or “splash” the blood, not sprinkle. 1 demerit. Total for this verse – 4 demerits.

 

Leviticus 3:17

Although not specifically an error, the KJV is inconsistent in their translation of these words. Charles Ellicott explains why this is important. He say, “Better, a statute for ever throughout your generations in all your dwellings; so the Authorised Version in the only three other passages in which it occurs. (Comp. Leviticus 23:14; Leviticus 23:21, where it is inverted; and 31.) That is, the law not to eat fat of beeves, sheep, or goats, is to be binding upon the Israelites throughout all their future generations, and is applicable to any place wherever they may dwell. As the full legislative formula only occurs four times in the Pentateuch, and is restricted to this book, it is important to render it uniformly in all the four passages.” 4 demerits for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 4:13-15

Two different words are used here for “congregation” and “assembly” in the Hebrew. The words are edah and qahal. The KJV says congregation, assembly, congregation, congregation. However, the Hebrew reds, congregation, assembly, assembly, congregation. The KJV is not consistent in its translation. No need to point such errors out again. They get demerits here and anywhere else that these are incorrectly confused.

 

Leviticus 6:10

KJV says, “which the fire hath consumed with the burnt offering on the altar.” The burnt-offering is not taken out with the ashes. Rather, it is ashes of the burnt offering which was consumed on the altar. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 6:16

The word “with” was incorrectly inserted by the translators. The grain offering was to be eaten as unleavened bread, not with unleavened bread. See Leviticus 6:17 and 10:12. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 6:18/27

The same phrase kol asher yigga is used in both. However, the KJV translates one correctly and one incorrectly, it being explained in this very chapter. They both pertain to the people who would touch the article. 2 demerits for lack of consistent translation.

 

Leviticus 6:30

The term l’kapper is used here as it is in Leviticus 1:4. It signifies to make atonement (a covering). KJV was not consistent in the two translations. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 7:19 –

The verse reads “… and as for the flesh, everyone that is clean may eat of the flesh.” The repetition of the word “flesh” in the second clause of this verse is specific to ensure that no error is made in the allowances and prohibitions. The KJV does not accurately reflect the Hebrew.

 

Leviticus 7:38 –

It is “at” or “by” Mount Sinia, not “in” Mount Sinai. This was explained in Leviticus 1:1. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 8:2

There is a definite article in front of “rams.” It is “the two rams” previously described in Exodus 29. This is significant. It is also “the unleavened bread,” properly following the definite article there as well. 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 8:3/4

The same word, edah, is translated here as “congregation” and in verse 4 as “assembly.” This is inconsistent and fails to show the distinction of other words used by the Lord which are similar in meaning. Verse 8:3 should say “assembly.” Further, it is ohel moed, or tent of meeting. It is not “tabernacle.” 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 8:15/19/23

The KJV confuses the rite by saying “slew” in verse 15 & 23, and “killed” in verse 19. It is the same word. Consistency here is necessary, but not provided in this translation. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 8:19

The word is not “sprinkle” but “cast” or “scatter.” The word for “sprinkle” is entirely different. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 8:31

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 8:33

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits. Also, it does not indicate “you shall not go out of the door” as if they are inside. Rather they are at the door (as verse 8:35 clearly states). They are not to leave the court. If they were inside the door, how could they place their hands on the animal offerings each day, there by the altar? Lots of demerits.

 

Leviticus 8:35

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 9:4

The verb is in the past tense, “…for today the Lord has appeared unto you.” It is an accomplished fact, though it has not yet occurred. The sense is lost in the KJV. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 9:5

The translation is incorrect. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 9:12

“Splash” not “sprinkle.” 1 demerit

 

Leviticus 9:13

It should say “its pieces” not “the pieces.” The KJV gives the impression of two separate things. It is one animal which has been divided. Further in both 9:12 and 9:13, a different Hebrew verb is used than in 8:18 for “presented.” The KJV fails to show this distinction. It should say “handed.” 1 demerit for lack of clarity. 2 demerits on the verbs.

 

Leviticus 9:18

It says “And he slew,” not “He slew also.” Also “splashed” not “sprinkled.” 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 9:23 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 10:7

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 10:9

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 10:10

There are four definite articles which are left out by the translators; the holy, the unholy, the clean, and the pure. 4 demerits for not being precise.

 

Leviticus 10:13

There is no definite article in this verse before “holy.” It is not “the holy place,” but “a holy place.” 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 10:17

There is no definite article in this verse before “holy.” It is not “the holy place,” but “a holy place.” 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 10:18

Really botched up. It should say “…it was not brought in within the holy place: ye should indeed have eaten it in a holy place,” Two different things are being indicated here. The first is speaking of the holy place in the tent of meeting. The second is speaking of a place which is holy where the meat could be eaten. For this reason, and to avoid misunderstandings, a new word was introduced into the Bible, penimah. It means “inside.” In this case, it is specifying “inside the holy place.” Even with this helpful addition, the KJV still did not get it right. Translating both as “the holy” completely messes up what is being relayed. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 11:2

Two different words are used in this verse khayah and behemah. The KJV muddies the distinction by calling them “beasts.” It should say “living things” and “beasts.” The verse covers all of what is said in the chapter concerning living things. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 11:20

The KJV obscures the meaning of the words in their translation. It is not at all sufficient to convey the meaning of what is being said. It should read “…all creeping things which have wings.” 1 demerits

 

Leviticus 11:24

It should say, “And by these.” It is speaking of what will be described in verses 26 & 27, not that which was just described. 1 demerit for a lack of clarity, thus causing confusion.

 

Leviticus 11:25

“Ought” is represented in the Hebrew, and it should not be italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 11:47

Better, “to put a difference” as they translate it in Leviticus 10:10. There is a difference, and they people were to acknowledge it as such. Even better, a more modern word like “to distinguish” would work. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 12:2/7

The same word, zakar, is translated once as “male child,” and once as “male.” This is unacceptable, especially considering the short nature of the chapter. Precision of translation is especially important in this. 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 12:5/7

The same word, neqevah, is translated once as “maid child,” and once as “female.” This is unacceptable, especially considering the short nature of the chapter. Precision of translation is especially important in this. 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 12:6

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 13:14

This was a sloppy translation. It says, “And on the day when raw flesh appears…” 1 demerit

 

Leviticus 13:46

The word alone is technically not correct. The person could live with other lepers (as is seen elsewhere in Scripture, e.g., 2 Kings 7:3), but they were to be isolated or separated from the community. 1 demerit

 

Leviticus 14:11

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 14:18

A different word is used concerning what to do with the oil. It should say “put,” not “pour.” 1 demerit

 

Leviticus 14:23

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 14:24 –

There is no article in front of “land.” “The” should be italicized or not used. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 14:29

A different word is used concerning what to do with the oil. It should say “put,” not “pour.” 1 demerit

 

Leviticus 15:14

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 15:29

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 16:4

There is no definite article before “holy linen tunic.” It is “a holy linen tunic,” but it is not his regular priestly garments. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 16:6 & 9

The same word qarav, is translated differently in these verses. Once it says “offer,” and then it says “bring.” This is incorrect. The word means “bring near.” 2 demerits for inconsistency leading to a misunderstanding of what is presented.

 

Leviticus 16:7

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 16:16

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 16:17

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 16:20

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 16:23

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 16:23/32 – In this verse, it translates bidge ha’bad as “linen garments”. In verse 32 it says, “linen clothes.” This is “equivalent to depriving it of its identity. Now the priest has been deemed worthy to succeed to this high office to put on the holy white garments on the Day of Atonement” (Ellicott). 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 16:29/31/34

The same term, khuqat olam, is translated two ways in these three verses. It gives the sense that there is a difference in them, when there is not. It is poorly translated. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 17:4

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 17:6

The word zaraq means “spalsh” or “scatter” not “sprinkle.” 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 17:8

The exact same legislative phrase is used four times in this chapter (3, 8, 10, 13) and yet it is translated differently in one use or another, thus diminishing the authority of the phrase itself. 4 demerits for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 17:11

The wording in the first clause is “the soul of the flesh is in the blood.”  In the final clause it says, “the blood itself makes atonement through the soul that is in it.” A theological point is missed in the KJV. 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 17:14

The wording in the first clause is “the soul of the flesh is in its blood.”  In the third clause it says, “for the soul of all flesh.” A theological point is missed in the KJV. 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 18:5

The word khuqqah is translated as ordinances in verses 18:3 & 4. They then translate it as “statutes” in this verse. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 18:5

There is a definite article in front of “man” in the Hebrew. It should read “the man.” It is pointing to Christ. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 18:7

The translation is faulty. The second clause explains the first. This is speaking of the mother only, which then indirectly uncovers the father because the two are one flesh. The ESV gets this right – “The nakedness of thy father, even the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.” 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 18:28

The term qo or “vomit” is used three times in this chapter. The KJV makes a most unfortunate translation of it here by changing “vomiteth” of verse 25 to “spue” and “spued” here. The entire force of the passage is severely diminished. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 18:30

The word mishmereth is translated here as “ordinance,” when they have already translated khuqqah as “ordinance” and “statute” in both previous verses. This is very confusing and unacceptable. The people of Israel are being told to stay awake, be alert, and not allow themselves to fall into error by failing to be attentive to the Lord’s charge. Translate as “charge” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 18:30

Charles Elllicott notes: “‘Do not any one of these abominable statutes which were done,’ as the Authorised Version translates the word in Deuteronomy 6:24; Deuteronomy 16:12; Deuteronomy 26:16. These abominations were not practised simply as customs, but were legally enacted as statutes of the land, and formed part of their religious institutions (see Leviticus 18:3). A similar state of degeneracy is described by Isaiah, who tells us that the Divine statutes, which is the same word used in the passage before us, were changed. By deviating here from the usual rendering of this phrase the Authorised Version mars the import of the passage.” Demerits for inconsistency and therefore marring the importance of what is said.

 

Leviticus 19:8

The KJV renders the phrase “shall be cut off from his people” in four out of the six instances (Leviticus 7:20-21; Leviticus 7:25; Leviticus 7:27) in which this phrase occurs in  Leviticus. As Ellicott says, “When so important a legal formula, threatening death by excision, is used in a limited number of cases, it is most important that it should be rendered uniformly in a translation.” 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 19:17

The words “suffer sin upon him” are ambiguous. It should say, “bear sin on his account.” 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 19:19

The words “a garment mingled of linen and woollen” should be translated as “a garment of divers sorts” as in Deuteronomy 22:11. The rendering here isn’t even a good paraphrase. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 19:20

“And whosoever lieth” is translated in the KJV in Leviticus 22:14; Leviticus 24:19; Leviticus 25:29; Leviticus 27:14 as “If a man lie.” 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 19:21

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 19:23

Citing Charles Ellicott – “And when ye shall come.—Rather, And when ye be come, as the Authorised Version renders the same phrase in Leviticus 14:34. This is one of the four instances in Leviticus of a law being given prospectively having no immediate bearing on the condition of the people of Israel (viz., Leviticus 14:34; Leviticus 19:23; Leviticus 23:10; Leviticus 25:2), and though all the four enactments are introduced by the same phrase, they are translated in three different ways in the Authorised Version:—“When ye be come into the land,” in Leviticus 14:34; Leviticus 23:10; “When ye shall come into the land,” in Leviticus 19:23; and “When ye come into the land,” in Leviticus 25:2; thus giving the impression as if the phrases in the original were different in the different passages. In legislative formulae it is of importance to exhibit uniformly the same phraseology in a translation.” demerits for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 20:1

There is no “again” in the Hebrew. It says, “And unto the children of Israel you shall say.” Also, the phrase “whosoever he be” should be translated consistently with Leviticus 17:3, where the same phrase is “What man soever there be.” 2 demerits. One for addition without cause, 1 for inconsistency. 3 demerits total.

 

Leviticus 20:2

The Hebrew says, “…shall stone him with the stone.” It is singular, not plural. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 20:5

The Hebrew says, ha’molech. The KJV leaves off this important article, “the Molech.” 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 20:7

The exact same phrase in the Hebrew is translated differently here, showing a lack of consistency. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 20:22

The same phrase is translated as vomit in 18:25 and spue here. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 20:25

The word just translated as “separated,” badal, is now inconsistently translated as “put difference.” This diminishes the very intent of what is being said. The Lord has separated, therefore Israel is to separate. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 20:27

The verse begins with “And” which is left off by the KJV. Thus it fails to show the conjoining nature of what is being relayed. The actual meaning is obscured. Further, the Hebrew says, “…shall stone him with the stone.” It is singular, not plural. 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 21:1

The same word, amar, is used in both clauses, but is translated by KJV as “said” and then “speak.” It should be “said” and then “say.” 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 21:4

The Hebrew reads, lo yitama baal b’amav l’he-khalow. No shall defile husband in his people to profane himself. This is making a picture of Christ and the church. That is missed because of the poor translation of the KJV. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 21:17

The word “whosoever” here is inappropriate. The word is “man” and it means, “any man.” As some have already been shown in the preceding verses to be disqualified through illegal alliances, it cannot mean “whosoever.” 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 22:3

The KJV is inconsistent in translating the Hebrew here, and the same term in Leviticus 23:14 & 23:21. “throughout your generations” is to be maintained in all three. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 22:14

The KJV is inconsistent in translating the Hebrew here. Five other times this is used, it is translated as “ignorance.” Here it is “unwittingly.” Although not incorrect, there is still levied 1 demerit for a lack of consistency.

 

Leviticus 22:18

The KJV is inconsistent in translating the Hebrew here. The exact same phrase is translated “what man soever there be” in 17:3. Secondly, the same phrase now translated as “offer his oblation” was “offer his offering” in Lev 3, 7, and 17. 2 demerits for a lack of consistency.

 

Leviticus 22:19

Rather than “at your own will” this should say, “that it may be accepted.” See verse 22:21. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 22:27

Bulls, sheep, and goats are not brought forth. Calfs, lambs, and kids are brought forth. 3 demerits for placing adults in the mother’s womb!

 

Leviticus 22:29

The word ratson in this verse means it should be translated as, “offer it for your acceptance.” This is not speaking of a free will offering, but of what follows next which will make the offering acceptable. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 23:2

It should say, “ye shall do no manner of work,” just as it does where the same phase is seen in this same chapter, verse 23:31. Further, it should say “sabbath to the Lord.” Otherwise, it seems like the Lord is even now working six days and taking the seventh off. Further more, there is no definite article in front of either “Sabbath” in this verse. And finally, “Sabbath” is a proper noun, to be capitalized. 1 demerit for inconsistency, 1 demerit for inappropriate theology, 2 demerits for illegal insertion of article, and 1 demerit for bad grammar. 5 demerits total.

 

Leviticus 23 –

The term “feast” in this chapter is translated from two different words, moed & khag. One is an appointed time, the other is a feast. What is being relayed in type and picture is completely missed because of the botched translation. 6 demerits for every time moed is translated as “feast.” Additional demerits for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 23:20

The verse is punctuated incorrectly and thus makes no sense. It should read, “And the priest shall wave them (the two lambs) with the bread of the firstfruits (the two loaves) for a wave offering before the Lord; with the two lambs they (the loaves) shall be holy to the Lord for the priest” (Pulpit Commentary). 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 23:24

The word “sabbath” is incorrect. The word translated here is shabathon it is used only 11 times in the Bible, all in Exodus and Leviticus, and all but three are conjoined with the word shabbath, saying either shabath shabathon, or shabathon shabath. That would then indicate a sabbath of complete rest. Because this is not conjoined with the word Sabbath, it is not a Sabbath per say, but rather simply a rest. This is explained in later in this same verse. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 23:28

The same Hebrew words here and in verse 31 and not translated the same by the KJV. This should read, “And ye shall do no manner of work.” This was the one day of the year which no manner of work at all was to be done, just like a Sabbath. It is not a regular holy convocation. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 23:29

The word nephesh, or soul, is used here. It should say, “That soul shall be cut off from his people,” as the KJV translated it in four out of the six instances (see Leviticus 7:20-21; Leviticus 7:25; Leviticus 7:27) in Leviticus. This is a most important legal formula, and therefore uniformity in translation is called for. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 23:32

First, the exact same Hebrew phrase is not rendered the same here as when it was translated in Leviticus 16:31. It should read “It shall be a sabbath of rest unto you.” This is not acceptable to vary this theologically important phrase differently. Secondly, the ending phrase “celebrate your sabbath” is rendered “keep your sabbath” in Leviticus 25:2. This is inconsistent, but it is still not a good translation. The Hebrew repeats the word “rest.” It is literally, and more accurately “rest the day of rest.” Finally, “Sabbath” is a proper noun. It has not been rightly capitalized numerous times in this chapter. Count this simply as “many” demerits.

 

Leviticus 23:39

These are not “a Sabbath” per se, but a day of rest – the word is shabaton. It is used 11 times, but for three of them, including these two, it stands alone, indicating only a rest, and not a “complete rest.” 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 23:40

Two different words are translated as “boughs” in this one verse – peri (fruit), and anaph (branch). That destroys the symbolism. 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 23:41

In your generations should be “throughout your generations” as the KJV rendered it in verses 14, 21, & 31 of this very chapter. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 24:2

The word is ner, lamp (singular). 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 24:3

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. Further, it should say, “a statute for ever throughout your generations” as it is rendered by the KJV in 23:14 & 23:31. 3 demerit for mistranslation; 1 for inconsistency. 4 total.

 

Leviticus 24:6

The translation is incorrect. They were arranged in two piles. The table is not big enough to place them in two rows. The word used signifies an arrangement, whatever that arrangement may be. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 24:7

On (or by) each pile, not on each row. Also, it should say, “that it may be for the bread as a memorial,” The symbolism is of Christ’s perfect works on behalf of His people. 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 24:12

For consistency, it should say, “that he might direct them according to the command of the Lord,” as it does in Exodus 17:1, Numbers 4:37; Numbers 4:41; Numbers 4:49, etc. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 24:16

Both times the word “name” is used in this verse, there is no article in front of it. The word “the” is not italicized by the KJV. 2 demerits for incorrectly adding to the word of God.

 

Leviticus 24:23

It does not say “and stone him with stones.” The word “stone” is singular. It is making a theological point, missed by the KJV. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 25:2

The same phrase, “When ye come into the land,” is translated differently here and in verse 14:34. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 25:8

1) The same word is translated differently here (And you shall number) and in verse 23:15. 2) “Seven sabbaths of years” is translated as “seven weeks of…” in 23:15. 2 demerits for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 25:16 –

A completely different word is used here than that in verse 15, but the KJV translates both as “according to.” It should say, “in proportion to” twice in this verse. 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 25:17 –

A completely different word is used here than that in verse 14, but the KJV translates both as “oppress.” It should say, “ye shall not mistreat” in this verse. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 25:33 –

The first clause is not speaking of purchase, but of redemption. For a better possibility of the meaning of this verse, refer to the HCSB. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 25:35 –

The words, “though he be a stranger, or a sojourner,” are incorrect. He is already identified as a “brother,” meaning an Israelite. He is to be cared for, even as if he were a stranger or a foreigner (see Leviticus 19:33, 34). 1 demerit for failure to translate intent.

 

Leviticus 25:53 –

The insertion of “And” at the beginning is completely unnecessary. It is not implied in the text, and is is thus wholly superfluous. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 26:6 –

The same term here is used in Ezekiel 35:25, but there it is translated differently. 1 demerit for lack of consistency in translation.

 

Leviticus 26:9 –

The same phrase here, For I will have respect to you,” is used in Ezekiel 36:9, but there it is translated differently. 1 demerit for lack of consistency in translation.

 

Leviticus 26:16 –

The two diseases, consumption and the burning ague, are used together again in Deuteronomy 28:22, but the term “fever” is used instead of “burning ague.” Also, each disease is prefixed by the article. 3 demerits.

 

Leviticus 26:17 –

The phrase “slain before your enemies” is translated as “smitten before your enemies in Numbers 14:42, Deuteronomy 1:42 & 28:25. The phrase “shall reign over you” is translated as “shall rule over you” in Isaiah 14:2, Ezekiel 29:15 & 34:4. 2 demerits for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 26:19 –

The phrase geon uzekem, or “pride of your power” is found restated in Ezekiel 24:21 where the KJV translates it as “the excellency of your strength.” The meaning of what is being said is completely obliterated by this lack of consistency. Also, it should say “land,” rather than “earth.” 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 26:20 –

The same expression used in this verse, “yield her increase” is translated as “yield her fruit” in Deuteronomy 11:17. This is remarkably poor because the word “fruit” is used in this verse when translating a different word. Thus 2 demerits for inconsistency.

 

Leviticus 26:22 –

The verse begins with “and” in the Hebrew. There is no “also” to be found there. “And I will send among you beasts wild. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 26:35 –

This is not a well translated verse. The Hebrew reads, “all the days of its desolation.” 1 demerit for not being literal when it is supposed to be a literal translation.

 

Leviticus 26:36 –

The phrase here is repeated in verse 39 of the chapter, but is translated differently there. Here the word “alive” is inserted. There is a strong inconsistency in translation. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 26:40 –

There is no “if” in the Hebrew here. The Hebrew reads, “And they shall confess their iniquity.” There is nothing conditional about this. The entire point of all of the horrifying curses which came upon Israel was to correct them. Further, the warning is announced here, and it is repeated by the prophet Daniel in Daniel 9:7. However, the KJV inconsistently translates the same thought in these two verses. 2 demerits.

 

Leviticus 27:26 –

The verse should begin with “Notwithstanding” as this particle is translated by the KJV in verse 28. The words “which should be the Lord’s firstling” poorly render what is intended. It should read, “which are born as firstlings to the Lord.” There is no “should.” They belong to Him (See Exodus 13:2). 2 demerits – inconsistency and poor rendering of intent.

 

Leviticus 27:30 –

The Hebrew says, “tithe,” not “the tithe.” There is no article. 1 demerit.

 

Leviticus 27:31 –

The Hebrew says, “tithe,” not “tithes.” It is singular. 1 demerit.

 

 

Numbers 1:1 –

Like Genesis 1:1, the KJV immediately begins this book with an error. As was seen previously, the term ohel moed is used. It is appropriately the tent of meeting, not the tabernacle of the congregation. 3 demerits to start off the book.

 

Numbers 1:2  & Numbers 1:18 –

The same phrase b’mispar shemot, is translated differently in these two verses. 2 demerits for inconsistency in translation.

 

Numbers 1:20 –

The word “by” before “their generations” should have been in italics as it is not in the original. 1 demerit for either inserting a word inappropriately, or failing to italicize it.

 

Numbers 1:48 –

The past tense is incorrect. This has never been relayed to Moses before. It is a new thought. This agrees with the LXX. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 2:2 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. Also, the word “emblem” is plural. It should say “emblems.” 1 demerit. Total for this verse: 4 demerits.

 

Numbers 2:17 –

The word says ohel moed, tent of meeting. 3 demerits. If the KJV were correct here, there would be a contradiction in the Bible based on Numbers 10:17. However, an entirely different word is used (mishkan), and no contradiction exists. 1 more demerit for causing a contradiction in the Bible that is not a contradiction. 4 demerits total.

 

Numbers 3:7 –

The importance of proper translation of ohel moed, or “tent of meeting” which the KJV so constantly botches is brought to the forefront in this verse. First, it is “tent of meeting,” not “tabernacle of the congregation.” Secondly, the second use of “tabernacle” in this verse is a completely different word, mishkan. Thirdly, two different words are translated by the KJV as “congregation in this verse, edah and moed. This is not acceptable. Rightly, the words read “before the tent of meeting, to do the service of the tabernacle.” 4 demerits for a very poorly rendered translation. 1 extra demerit for good measure. 6 total.

 

Numbers 3:8 –

The same errors which plague verse 3:7 are found here again. It is “tent of meeting,” not “tabernacle of the congregation.” Secondly, the second use of “tabernacle” is again mishkan, tabernacle. 4 demerits.

 

Numbers 3:25 –

Another very poor job. The terms b’ohel moed, ha’miskan, and v’ha’ohel are all used in this one verse. It should read “in the tent of meeting” and then “the tabernacle” and then “and the tent” and then “tent of meeting” again. 5 demerits for incorrect translation. 1 demerit for utter confusion of translation. 5 total.

 

Numbers 3:31 –

Regardless what “candlestick” may have once meant, it is an outdated term. Its use in modern English is no longer valid. It is a “lampstand.” 1 demerit for outdated terminology.

 

Numbers 3:25 –

Another botched job. The terms ha’miskan, and ohel moed are used in this verse. It should read “the tabernacle” and then “the tent of meeting.” 3 demerits for incorrect translation. 1 demerit for utter confusion of translation. 4 total.

 

Numbers 3:40

Two different words are used with are both translated as “number.” This confuses what is being said. The NIV does a far better job with, “Count all the firstborn Israelite males who are a month old or more and make a list of their names.” 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:3 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:4 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. The word “about” although italicized is irrelevant and should not have been inserted. 4 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:5 –

It is aron ha’edut, “ark the testimony.” There are testimony’s and there is “the testimony.” Poor translation; 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 4:7 –

These are not covers, but jars. It should read “jars which to pour.” 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:11 –

The exact same words v’shamu eth badav, that are seen in verses 4:6, 4:8, and 4:14 are now inconsistently translated. It should say, “and shall put in the staves thereof.” This equals 4 demerits for inconsistent translation of like thought.

 

Numbers 4:14 –

The same thing translated as “firepans” in Exodus 27:3 (in the same context), makhtah, is translated here as “censers.” 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Numbers 4:15 –

The word “sanctuary” here should be translated as “the holy things.” The sanctuary includes everything in the compound, including all those things yet to be listed in the rest of this chapter (see exodus 25:8). Therefore, “sanctuary” is contextually inaccurate. Also, there is no “it” in regards to bearing the articles. Although italicized, it is incorrect. The words speak of all those things, not a single “it.” Further, it is ohel moed, “tent of meeting;” not “tabernacle of the congregation. 5 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:16 –

Again, the word “sanctuary” here should be translated as “holy place.” The sanctuary is more than just the area being discussed. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 4:20 –

The literal translation is “for a gulp.” It is explained in Job 7:19 as “for an instant.” The Kohathites were not to look at the holy things for even a split second. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 4:23 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:23 –

The Hebrew word for “burdens” is singular, not plural. Read: “burden.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 4:25 –

This is not a well translated verse. First, unlike the most holy objects, these items now mentioned will not be carried. They will asah “lifted up” and then be placed on carts for transport (see Numbers 7). Secondly, two separate words and ideas are both sadly translated as “tabernacle” here. It should read, “And they shall lift up the curtains of the tabernacle and the tent of meeting.” Then the end of the verse repeats “tent of meeting.” Also, it is not “badger skins” but the skins of sea animals. 7 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:26 –

The verse should say “which are,” not “which is.” These things combined form the surrounding of the sanctuary and access into it. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 4:27 –

In both instances, the Hebrew word for “burdens” is singular, not plural. Read: “burden.” Also, “ye” should read “you.” This section is directed to Moses alone (see verse 4:21 & refer to the Septuagint). 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:28 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. Also, b’yad, should be translated as “by the hand” as in 4:37, 45 & 49. 4 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:29 –

The words “As for” are not in the original and should be italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 4:30 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:31 –

It is ohel moed, “tent of meeting;” not “tabernacle of the congregation.” Further, ha’mishkan, or “the tabernacle” is then stated in the same verse. Thus there is an inconsistency in translation. 3 demerits

 

Numbers 4:33 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. Also, b’yad, should be translated as “by the hand” as in 4:37, 45 & 49. 4 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:35 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:37 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:41 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:47 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 4:49 –

The term al pi Yehovah is used 3 times in this chapter. It is used in the last verse. Each time it is translated as, “the commandment of the Lord.” However, in verse 49, it then says asher tsivah Yehovah, “according to the command of Yehovah.” Translating two different words – pi and tsivah – as “command” confuses the text. Pi, meaning “mouth,” should be translated “at the mouth of the Lord, or “at the word of the Lord” to avoid this confusion. 4 demerits.

 

Numbers 5:24 –

The word “bitter” in the Hebrew contains a prefix which makes the idea, “shall enter into her, and become as bitterness.” It is speaking of the effects of the water on her. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 5:27 –

The word “bitter” in the Hebrew contains a prefix which makes the idea, “shall enter into her, and become as bitterness.” It is speaking of the effects of the water on her. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 6:10 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 6:13 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 6:18 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 7:4 –

It should say, “And the LORD said unto Moses saying.” Not “spoke.” The KJV has consistently translated amar, or “said” in this way, but fails to do so here. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 7:5 –

What an unhappy translation! Twice already (in 7:1 & 7:3) the term, mishkan, or “tabernacle” has been used. Now, ohel moed is used. It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 4 demerits – 3 for the usual blunders, but 1 extra for doing it within a single passage.

 

Numbers 7:9 –

The word “sanctuary” is inappropriate here. The “sanctuary” is the entire compound in which the Tent of Meeting and Tabernacle reside, inclusive of its exterior borders. That is the miqdash, (see Exodus 25:8). The Kohathites didn’t carry the whole sanctuary. Rather, they carry – as the verse says – ha’qodesh, or “the holy things.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 7:89 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. Also, it is “over” the mercy seat, not off of it. And more, it is “the ark of the Testimony.” There is a definite article in front of “testimony.” Further, “cherubims” is incorrect. Either two cherubs, or two cherubim. 6 demerits.

 

Numbers 8:9 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 8:11 –

The wording is insufficient. It literally reads, “And Aaron shall wave the Levites as a wave-offering before the Lord.” Without explaining the type of offering, no symbolism can be derived by the reader. 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 8:13 –

The wording is insufficient. It literally reads, “and wave them as a wave-offering to the Lord.” Without explaining the type of offering, no symbolism can be derived by the reader. 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 8:15 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. And more, the second clause should say, “and wave them as a wave-offering to the Lord.” Without explaining the type of offering, no symbolism can be derived by the reader. 5 demerits.

 

Numbers 8:19 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. Also, the words “as a gift” are incorrect. It is a verb and should read, “given.” 4 demerits.

 

Numbers 8:21 –

The wording is insufficient. It literally reads, “And Aaron waved them as a wave-offering before the Lord.” Without explaining the type of offering, no symbolism can be derived by the reader. 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 8:22 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 8:24 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 8:26 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 9:2 –

The verse begins with “And.” And “let” is not sufficient. It is not as if they could, or could not, observe. They were being instructed to observe. “And the children of Israel shall keep.” 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 9:3 –

The term “according to all the rites of it, and according to all the ceremonies thereof” gives a poor sense of what was to be done. The words are “statutes” and “ordinances.” These were those things which were permanent obligations. Some of the things recorded in Exodus 12 were one-time events, such as putting blood on the lintels of the houses. 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 9:12 –

The word “ordinance” is singular in the Hebrew. “According to all the ordinance.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 9:15 –

The KJV incorrectly says, “the tabernacle, namely, the tent of the testimony,” signifying that the two terms are synonymous. This is incorrect. Exodus 40:34 clearly shows that they are two separate things, one inside the other. As Charles Ellicott says, “There is, therefore, no sufficient ground for the supposition that the cloud rested on that part of the Tabernacle exclusively in which the two tables of the testimony were kept, i.e., the Holy or Holies.” Render this: “the tabernacle of the tent of the testimony.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 10:2 –

The KJV has consistently translated the word miqsheh as “beaten.” Now, t hey divert from this and say, “of a whole piece.” The word means either “hammered,” “beaten,” or “turned.” 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Numbers 10:3 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 10:5 –

The verse in Hebrew begins with “And.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 10:6 –

The verse in Hebrew begins with “And.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 10:9 –

The words “And if” are not sufficient. It is determined in the Pentateuch that they will, in fact, be going to warn. The word v’ki signifies, “And when.” Further, two different words are translated as “enemy” in this one verse. The fist is tsar, adversary. The second is oyev, enemy. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 10:29 –

The name is Reuel, not Raguel, as it is rendered all 11 times in Scripture. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 11:1 –

There is no article in front of “fire.” It is “fire Yehovah.” The word “the” may be implied, but it is not italicized by the KJV. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 11:4 –

First, here is a word found only once in the Bible, asaphsuph. It is a reduplication of the word asaph which signifies to gather together, or take away. Translating this as “the mixed multitude” is misleading. The “mixed multitude” who came out of Egypt, and who are mentioned in Exodus, is a completely different pair of words. It is obvious that the different word is intended not to speak of that group, but to speak of a gathering together of miscreants. Secondly, The words, wept again, don’t make any sense. The last time that any weeping was recorded was in Leviticus 10 at the time of the deaths of Nadab and Abihu. The word is shuv, and it indicates to return, or turn back. What is happening here isn’t that they are weeping again, as if connected to the account in verses 1-3. Instead, they turned back and wept. The words of verse 5 explain the “turning back.” It is in memory of what they once had in Egypt. 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 11:8 –

The word “baked” means properly to boil. Baked just doesn’t cut it. The word “pan” signifies something deeper, like a pot. 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 11:18 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 11:24 –

It is “the tent,” not “the tabernacle.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 11:25 –

The words, “and did not cease” are wrong. They prophesied and “did not do it again.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 11:26 –

It is “the tent,” not “the tabernacle.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 11:27 –

There is an article in front of “young man.” It is “the young man.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 11:28 –

It doesn’t say “one of his young men.” It says, “from his youth.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 12:4 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 12:5 –

It is ha’ohel, “the tent,” not ha’mishkan, or “the tabernacle.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 12:10 –

It is ha’ohel, “the tent,” not ha’mishkan, or “the tabernacle.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 12:13 –

Although translators preference allows the KJV’s translation, the words are out of intended order, and they translate the same word na (I pray) differently. It should say, “God, I pray, heal, I pray, her.” (or “heal her, I pray.”) 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 13:17 –

They are not going “southward.” They are heading north. The Hebrew reads, “into the Negev,” or “into the south.” It is a location, not a direction of movement. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 13:19 –

The Hebrew says “camps,” not “tents.” It is referring to open villages in contrast to the strongholds next mentioned. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 13:22 –

The Hebrew says “the Anak.” Thus it is a tribe. It can be “the Anak,” or “the Anakim” (see Deuteronomy 1:28). 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 13:28 –

The Hebrew says “the Anak.” Thus it is a tribe. It can be “the Anak,” or “the Anakim” (see Deuteronomy 1:28). 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 13:29 –

The term is Negev. It means South, or it can be called the Negev.” “The land of the south” doesn’t convey the proper thought. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 14:2 –

The word “God” is not in the Hebrew. The rendering is unnecessarily strong. Further it is the Lord God who they are actually complaining against. The words should saying, “If only we had died,” or something comparable to that. 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 14:3 –

The words “why has the LORD brought us to this land” are incorrect. They are future – “Why does the LORD bring us to this land.” It is speaking of Canaan, as the context clearly implies. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 14:10 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 14:14 –

The Hebrew does not say “face to face.” It says “eye to eye.” See Isaiah 52:8 where it is properly translated by the KJV. 2 demerits. One for not being literal and 1 for inconsistency of translation.

 

Numbers 14:21 –

There is an “and” missing from the translation which bears on the rest of the passage. It says, “…and all the earth shall…” The punishment of the people is a part of the earth being filled with the Lord’s glory. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 14:28 –

The word translated as “says” is not the regular word so translated. Rather, it is neum, and utterance or oracle. It should be translated with another word to signify this awesome distinction which the Lord is to pronounce. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 14:32 –

The KJV misses the stress of the words by translating the thought backwards. It says, “And your carcasses, you…” The stress is lost in the KJV. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 14:33 –

The verb roim means to shepherd. It is not that the people will wander, but that they will feed their flocks, or shepherd the flocks, in the wilderness. The KJV followed the Latin Vulgate on this and missed the mark. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 14:34 –

The words, “breach of promise,” are wholly incorrect. The Lord doesn’t break His promise. That is actually unthinkable – see Psalm 89:34. The word signifies “rejection” or “alienation,” as in turning away – even to active punishment. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 15:7 –

The KJV makes the thought, “a sweet savour unto the Lord,” appear to be connected to only the drink offering. It is for the entire offering of verses 5 and 6. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 15:15 –

The Hebrew reads, “The assembly ordinance one.” The KJV makes a separation between the congregation and the stranger. This is incorrect. They are united in thought here. A good rendering would be, “As for the assembly, one law for you, and for the stranger…” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 15:22 –

The verb is in the imperfect tense – “if ye shall err and not observe.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 15:23 –

The word “henceforward” should read “onward.” As Charles Ellicott says, “There is nothing in the word which is here used to denote whether the reference is or is not to legislation of a later date than that at which the words were spoken. The terminus a quo is expressed in the preceding words.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 15:24 –

The words, “if ought be committed” need to say “if it be committed.” These are sins of omission and it is speaking of the non observance of “all these commandments.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 15:25 –

The words, “for it is ignorance” do not convey the thought correctly. It should say, “for it is a sin of ignorance,” or “for it is unintended sin.” Ignorance itself is not always wrongdoing. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 15:26 –

Again, the words, “the people were in ignorance” do not convey the thought correctly. It should say, “it was done in ignorance,” or “it was unintended sin.” Ignorance itself is not always wrongdoing. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 15:32 –

It says, “and the found,” not, “they found.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 15:37 –

It says, “And the Lord said to Moses,” not “And the Lord spake unto Moses.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 15:38

These are tassels, not fringes. In the tassel is to be a cord of blue. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 16:3 –

Two different words are translated as “congregation” in this one verse. One, edah, is the natural organization of Israel. The other qahal, is the assembly which is divinely called as set apart. The KJV fails to make this important distinction, and they receive 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 16:5 –

It doesn’t say, “Even to morrow.” It says, “Morning.” No demerit would have been given if the KJV said “tomorrow morning,” but they didn’t. Thus, 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 16:9 –

It says, “Is it too little to you,” not “Seems it but a small thing to you.” Moses is asking them to consider their position in relation to what the Lord has done for them (Is it less than your own dignity demands?), not how they regard what the Lord has done. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 16:18 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 16:25 –

There is no article in front of “elders.” It simply says “elders of Israel followed him.” 1 demerit for inserting a word without italicizing it.

 

Numbers 16:26 –

The word translated as “consume” is completely different than verse 16:21. It signifies to sweep or snatch away. 1 demerit for failure to show proper distinctions between these words.

 

Numbers 16:33 –

The word qahal, not edah, is used here. It is the “assembly,” not the “congregation.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 16:37 –

There are three nouns, not an adjective and two nouns. 1) an expansion, 2) plates, 3) a covering. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 16:39 –

The censers were bronze or copper. Brass was not yet invented or used at this point in history; it is an alloy. Further, it was not the censers that were offered. It was the incense in them. The translation should, “which were brought near.” 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 16:42 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 16:43 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 16:46 –

It is “the censer,” not “a censer.” Aaron’s censer is set to reverse what had begun with the censers of Korah’s rebellion. It is also “the wrath” not “wrath” that went out from the Lord. The pictures of Christ are completely demolished by the KJV. 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 16:47 –

The word is qahal, assembly; not edah, congregation of the previous verse. 1 demerit for failure to make a proper distinction between these words.

 

Numbers 16:50 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 17:4 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. Also, it is “where I meet you,” not “where I will meet with you.” 4 demerits.

 

Numbers 17:7 –

It is not the “tabernacle of witness;” it is “the tent of the testimony.” It is the same word, eduth, used in verse 4 and 10. For a reference, see Numbers 1:53 where the KJV translates the same words using “testimony. 4 demerits (I added in an additional demerit for lack of consistency).

 

Numbers 17:8 –

It is not the “tabernacle of witness,” it is “the tent of the testimony.” It is the same word, eduth, used in verse 4 and 10. For a reference, see Numbers 1:53 where the KJV translates the same words using “testimony.” For the proper use of “tabernacle” instead of “tent” see Numbers 17:13. 4 demerits (I added in an additional demerit for a complete lack of consistency).

 

Numbers 18:2 –

It is not the “tabernacle of witness,” it is “the tent of the testimony.” For a reference, see Numbers 1:53 where the KJV translates the same words using “testimony. Further, the words “but you and your sons with you shall minister” do not convey the appropriate meaning. It reads “and you and your sons with you.” It is saying that the Levites were to minister unto the priests before the tent of meeting. The NKJV clears up this incorrect translation. This was clearly explained earlier in Numbers 3:6-9. 5 demerits.

 

Numbers 18:2 –

It is not the “tabernacle”, it is the “tent.” The Levites – apart from duties for Kohath as specifically detailed, were not allowed to serve any of the tabernacle. They only served outside of the tent. Further, it is not “the sanctuary” but “the Holy.” They were specifically to serve the in and for the sanctuary. 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 18:4 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation.  There is also no “the” in the words. And, again, the second time it says, “the tent,” not “the tabernacle.” 4 demerits.

 

Numbers 18:5 –

It does not say, “the sanctuary,” it says, ha’qodesh, “the holy,” not ha’miqdash, or “the sanctuary.” Translating it as “sanctuary,” then causes a contradiction in Scripture based on Exodus 25:8. 1 demerit for causing a contradiction in Scripture.

 

Numbers 18:6 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 18:10 –

The idea is not “in the most holy place,” which would cause a contradiction in Scripture, but “As the most holy things, you shall eat it.” 1 demerit for causing a contradiction in Scripture.

 

Numbers 18:12 –

It is “in all the wave offerings,” not “with all the wave offerings,” as in verse 18:8. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 18:17 –

The word zaraq signifies to splash, not to sprinkle. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 18:21 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. Further, it is “every tenth,” not “all the tenths.” There is no article in the Hebrew, and the word is singular. This is important based on Deuteronomy 14:28. 5 demerits.

 

Numbers 18:22 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 18:23 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 18:24 –

The Hebrew says, “For tithe…” There is no “but” in the Hebrew, there is no “the” in the Hebrew, and the word “tithe” is singular. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 18:26 –

First, it says, “the tithe,” not “the tithes,” in the first clause. Secondly, in the final clause, it makes no sense to say “a tenth of the tithe,” when the same word is used both times. Further, it is then described in the next verses as being a tithe. Render “a tithe of the tithe.” And it does not say “to the Lord.” It says “heave offering the Lord.” It is Yehovah’s heave offering. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 18:28 –

It does not say “to the Lord.” It says “heave offering the Lord.” It is Yehovah’s heave offering. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 18:31 –

The word “reward” doesn’t get it. It is their “wages.” They have worked; this is their recompense. Unless one feels that what they have earned is a reward, it is incorrect. Also, it is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 4 demerits.

 

Numbers 19:4 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 19:12 –

Though the Hebrew is ambiguous, verse 19:19 explains the rite. The person is sprinkled on both the third and the seventh day. 1 demerit for faulty translation.

 

Numbers 19:13 –

The word translated as “sprinkling” is not the same as used four other times in the chapter. It signifies to “scatter.” Thus, there is the sprinkling by the one who does the work, and there is a scattering received on the one to whom the work is done. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 19:15 –

There are actually two nouns, bracelet and cord. The two are probably used in apposition, one identifying the other. In this, it then would say, “and every open vessel, which has no covering, a cord on it, is unclean.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 19:17 –

The word “heifer” is not in the original. It simply says, “of the burning of the sin.” 1 demerit for adding to Scripture.

 

Numbers 19:20 –

The word translated as “sprinkling” is not the same as used four other times in the chapter. It signifies to “scatter.” Thus, there is the sprinkling by the one who does the work, and there is a scattering received on the one to whom the work is done. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 20:1 –

The Hebrew says, “And came,” not “Then came.” This is translator’s preference, but because there is no way of determining where or when their last stop was, the word “And” should be translated exactly that way. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 20:6 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 20:22 –

The KJV gets the verse completely out of order. It says, “And they journeyed from Kadesh, and the sons of Israel came, the whole congregation, unto Mount Hor.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 21:7 –

The word “serpent” is singular in the Hebrew. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 21:8 –

The word nes signifies a standard. “Pole” is a poor choice of words for such a special word with such special signification. No demerit, but no bonus point either.

 

Numbers 21:9 –

The serpent was bronze or copper. Brass was not yet invented or used at this point in history; it is an alloy. 1 demerits.

 

Numbers 21:13 –

The KJV says, “on the other side of Arnon,” and it is incorrect. The Hebrew says, me’eber. It simply means, “on the side,” and can speak of either side. However, Deuteronomy 2:24 and Judges 11:18 both indicate that they had not crossed over the Arnon into Moab. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 21:32 –

The place, with the same spelling, is called Jaazer here, and Jazer in Numbers 32:1, Isaiah 16:9, and elsewhere. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Numbers 22:1 –

The Bible is written from the perspective of one living in Canaan. Therefore, the word me’eber should be translated as “across the Jordan from Jericho.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 22:5 –

The Hebrew reads, “the eye of the earth.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 22:10 –

The Hebrew reads ha’elohim, “the God.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 22:11 –

The Hebrew reads, “the people which has come out,” not “a people come out.” Also, it reads “the eye of the earth.” 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 22:20 –

“If” should be translated as “Since.” They have come to call, and so he is to rise and go. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 22:22 –
The word “went,” should read, “was going.” It is a present participle to show Balaam was actively pursuing his reckless course. 1 demerit.

Numbers 22:33 –

The word is not “unless,” it is “perhaps.” The verbs are in the prefect tense – “Now I have killed you; and she lives.” 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 23:3 –

Wrong. The word is shephi, it signifies a barren height, not a “high place.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 23:16 –

The exact same Hebrew words used in verse 23:4 are used here, but are inconsistently translated. “Return to Balak, and thus you shall speak.” 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Numbers 23:19 –

Two words are both translated as “man,” ish and adam. The parallelism is lost in this. 1 demerit for destroying the parallelism.

 

Numbers 23:22 –

It is not “among them.” It is third person, masculine, singular. The shout of a king is in him.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 23:22 –

Unicorn? Not! Unicorns have one horn. See Deuteronomy 33:17 and receive 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 23:23 –

The word “enchantment” is not correct. It is an augury. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 23:27 –

It says, ha’elohim, the God. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 24:1 –

The word “enchantment” is not correct. It is an augury. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 24:13 –

The same phrase, pi Yehovah, or “mouth of the Lord,” is translated in 22:18 as “word of the Lord,” but here it is “commandment of the Lord.” 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Numbers 24:14 –

The word “advertise,” no longer carries the same meaning as it did eons ago. 1 demerit for being outdated.

 

Numbers 24:16 –

It does not say, “the knowledge” it says, “knowledge.” Also – “hears” and “knows,” not “heard” and “knew.” 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 24:17 –

The words are in the perfect tense – “has come,” “has arisen,” “has battered,” “has destroyed.” It is a done deal. Also, “the sons of Sheth” is not correct. He is never spoken of as representing humanity, and it would be contrary to the gospel to destroy all of the sons of men (as this would imply). 5 demerits.

 

Numbers 24:18 –

There is no “for” in the Hebrew. 1 demerit for adding without italicizing.

 

Numbers 24:22 –

The KJV gives entirely the wrong translation of these words. It is not a prediction of destruction upon these folks, but rather a promise of safety as they dwell among Israel. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 25:6 –

It says, “the Midianitish woman,” with a definite article. Also, it is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 4 demerits.

 

Numbers 25:11 –

It says “he was zealous with my zeal,” not “for my sake.” Three times, the same word is used in this verse, and all three times the KJV translates them different, but without cause. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 25:14 –

The Hebrew reads “of a father’s house,” not “of a chief house.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 25:15 –

The Hebrew reads “of a father’s house,” not “of a chief house.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 27:2 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation.” There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 27:18 –

There is not “the” before “spirit” in the Hebrew. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 27:19 –

“Stand,” not “set.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 27:22 –

“Stand,” not “set.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 29:1 –

The word “trumpets” is incorrect. It is a singular noun. “Shouting,” “acclamation,” etc., but not “trumpets.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 29:33 –

The word translated as “numbers” is plural in the Hebrew. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 31:14 –

The KJV leaves the sense of the verse lacking by failing to fully translate the noun tsaba. Instead of “who came from the battle,” it should say something like, “who came in from the host of the battle.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 31:20 –

The word “your” is incorrectly inserted, even if italicized. It doesn’t only mean one’s raiment, but any raiment – belonging to an individual or a part of the plunder. Also, the words “all that is made of skins” is insufficient. It says “and all vessels (or article)…” This is directly connected to the same word (keli), with accompanying instructions, in Numbers 19:15. 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 31:22 –

It should says “brass”  or “copper” instead of “bronze.” At this point in history, brass was not yet used. 1 demerit

 

Numbers 31:25 –

It says, “And the Lord SAID to Moses, saying,” It does not say, SPOKE. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 31:54 –

It is “the tent of meeting,” not the “tabernacle of the congregation.” The word is ohel, signifying a tent, not mishkan, which would be the tabernacle itself. Further it is moed, “meeting” not “congregation. There is also no “the” in the words. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 32:1 –

There is an emphasis completely missing in the KJV’s translation. It reads, “And livestock many (rav) had sons Reuben and sons Gad mighty very (atsum meod). And when they saw land Jazer and land Gilead – and behold – the place a place for livestock.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 32:2 –

It reads, “The children of Gad and the children of Reuben came and said…” It does not say, “spoke.” The same word is used again at the end of the verse (saying). 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 32:3 –

The name Shebam is incorrect. It is a Sin, not a Shin. It is Sebam. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 32:21 –

The KJV says, “And will go all of you armed,” but the Hebrew reads, “And cross over you men, every-armed.” In other words, the word “all” does not qualify “you,” but rather that those men who do go will be “every-armed.” Otherwise, a contradiction arises in what is said in Joshua 4 where only about 1/3 of the men go. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 32:22 –

Two different expressions are translated by the KJV as “before the Lord” in this one verse. One is liphne Yehovah, or “before the Lord.” the other is m’Yehovah, or “from the Lord.” 1 demerit for leading the reader to a false impression about the distinctions.

 

Numbers 32:25 –

The word is amar, said, not daber, spoke. 1 demerit.

 

 

Numbers 32:26 –

It says, “the Gilead,” not “Gilead.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 32:27 –

The KJV says, “every man armed for war,” but the Hebrew reads, “every-armed for war.” 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 32:29 –

The KJV says, “every man armed to battle,” but the Hebrew reads, “every-armed for battle.” Also, it says, “the Gilead,” not “Gilead.” 2 demerit2.

 

Numbers 32:35 –

“And Atroth, Shophan” should read “Atroth-Shophan.” Also, the place, with the same spelling, is called Jaazer here, and Jazer in Numbers 32:1, Numbers 32:3,  Isaiah 16:9, and elsewhere. 1 demerits.

 

Numbers 32:38 –

The name Shibmah is incorrect. It is a Sin, not a Shin. It is Sibmah. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 32:39 –

The words should be in the past tense. It is referring to the battle already conducted and described in Numbers 21. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 32:40 –

It says, “the Gilead,” not “Gilead.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 33:8 –

The Hebrew says, “Hahiroth,” not “Pihahiroth.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 33:9 –

Here the KJV translates the word enot as “wells.” However, in Exodus 15:27, the same word speaking of the same place with the same springs, says “fountains.” Demerit already credited in Exodus 15

 

Numbers 33:45 –

Iim should read Iyim. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 33:47 –

It is ha’abarim, or “the Abarim.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 33:48 –

It is ha’abarim, or “the Abarim.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 33:49 –

The KJV says Bethjesimoth here, but translates the same word as Bethjeshimoth in Joshau (twice) and Ezekiel. It also leaves out the article from Jeshimoth each time. The Hebrew says, ha’yeshimoth, or “the Jeshimoth.” Also, it says, abel ha’shittim. The KJV leaves out the article. 3 demerits.

 

Numbers 34:2 –

The word “coasts” is obsolete, and no longer carries the same meaning. No demerit, just a note that a better version would be appropriate to not have to retranslate the obsolete KJV into modern English.

 

Numbers 34:5 –

The word “river” is both misleading and erroneous. It is not a river, but a wadi. It is not speaking of the Nile, but of the winter torrent which today ends at El Arish in Egypt. 1 demerit for lack of clarity.

 

Numbers 34:15 –

It doesn’t said “on this side of the Jordan.” It says, “on side of the Jordan,” a term which can mean on either side. It then explains what that means by saying “eastward, toward the sunrise.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 35:2 –

The word “suburbs” – if it ever meant something other than what it means today – is incorrect. It is common-land for the animals. 1 demerit for either being just plain wrong, or for being an obsolete word.

 

Numbers 35:6 –

The word “among” is inserted, but not italicized. Further, it should be omitted. The first half of the verse grants the cities of refuge. The second half then adds in the forty-two cities. The focus is on the cities of refuge. Also, there is a definite article before “manslayer.” It is “the manslayer.” 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 35:11 –

The word translated as “unawares” is a noun which is here prefixed by a preposition. It is more precisely translated, “in his inadvertance.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 35:12 –

It should say “for judgment,” not “in judgment.” Also, the KJV consistently uses the word “slayer” instead of “manslayer” in the translation of this word, except here. This is inconsistent. 2 demerits.

 

Numbers 35:17 –

The word “throwing” is not in the Hebrew. 1 demerit for adding without italicizing.

 

Numbers 35:20 –

It should say “And if” not “But if.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 35:23 –

The word “cast” is not correct. The Hebrew word is naphal, meaning “to fall.” One might think of a person working brick building. He loses hold of the brick and it goes careening over the wall. Unfortunately, someone happens into the work area and the brick plunks down on his head, killing him. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 35:24 –

The word “slayer” is not appropriate. It is not the standard word ratsakh that is used so frequently in this chapter. Rather, it uses the word nakah, to strike. Thus, it should say, “the striker.” 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 35:32 –

The word “satisfaction” is incorrect. It is “ransom.” See Exodus 21:30. 1 demerit.

 

Numbers 36:1 –

There is no article in front of “chiefs,” and there is an article in front of “fathers.” It reads, “And came near chiefs, the fathers of the families…” The KJV confuses these divisions so that the reader has no idea they properly exist. 2 demerits.

 

 

Deuteronomy 1:1 –

It’s always a bad note to see a translation blow it in the first verse of a book. But the KJV was able to accomplish this. Here they say, “on this side Jordan.” The word is b’ever, and it can signify either side. However, the reference is Canaan. Therefore, it should read, “on the other side of the Jordan,” or simply “on the side of the Jordan.” See Deut 3:20 & 3:25 & 4:46. Also, the Hebrew reads, “between Paran, and between Tophel and Laban and Hazeroth.” Finally, Di-Zahab is two words. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 1:5 –

Here the KJV again says, “on this side Jordan.” Like in verse 1, the word is b’ever, and it can signify either side. However, the reference is Canaan. Therefore, it should read, “on the other side of the Jordan,” or simply “on the side of the Jordan.” See Deut 3:20 & 3:25 & 4:46. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:7 –

The words “in the hills” is incorrect. It says, b’har – “in the mount.” Also, “the Amorite” is singular, not plural. Also, it says, “and the coast the sea, land of the Canaanite.” Canaanite is singular, and the clause speaks of the land as a designation, ending the clause. It is not a further designation as the KJV indicates by adding in the word “the” before “land.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 1:8 –

The Hebrew reads, “which swore Yehovah to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 1:9 –

The word is amar, “said,” not dabar, “spoke.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:10 –

It is ha’shemayim, “the heavens.” There is an article and the word is plural. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 1:15 –

“Chief” is a masculine now, plural construct. Render “chiefs,” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:19 –

There is no “when.” It should have been italicized. It should say, “And went through.” There is an article before “wilderness.” The words “by the way of” are insufficient. They traveled “the way to.” Further, it is “the Amorite.” It is singular. 5 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 1:20 –

Again, it says, “mountain the Amorite.” It is singular. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:21 –

It is not “hath said.” The word is dabar – spoke, “hath spoke.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:22 –

It is “the cities” not “what cities.” There is a definite article there. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:23 –

The word “saying” is inappropriate. It is dabar. It can be a plan, a word, a thing, but not “saying.” Amar is “said.” He did not use amar. Also, it says “good in my eyes,” rather than “pleased me well.” A literal translation would be far preferable, but we will let it go with just 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:24 –

The word “the” before “valley” is not in the original and should be italicized. As it is a designation, “valley” should be capitalized. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 1:25 –

It says, ha’eretz, “the land” – “the land is good.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:26 –

The word is pi, “mouth,” not “command.” The Lord did not “command” the people to go up. He promised to lead them, and they failed to follow. A theological point is made which is missed here. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:27 –

It says, “the Amorite” in the singular, not “the Amorites.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:28 –

There is no “the” before cities and it should be italicized. Also, “heaven” is plural with an article – “the heavens.” There is no “the” before either “sons” or “Anakim” and they shoud be italicized.  Further, “Anakims” is incorrect. The im at the end is a plural marker. 6 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 1:36 –

The words “because he has wholly followed the Lord,” should be an independent clause. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:39 –

It is “today,” not “that day.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:41 –

Instead of “Then ye answered and said,” it says, “And ye answered and ye said.” Instead of “we will go up and fight,” it says, “we will go up and we will fight.” Instead of, “into the hill,” it says, “into the mountain. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 1:43 –

Instead of, “into the hill,” it says, “into the mountain. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 1:44 –

It is “the Amorite.” The noun is singular. It says “the bees” with the article. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 2:2 –

It is “said,” not “spoke.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 2:6 –

Two different words for “buy” are used in this one verse. Thus, two different words should be translated, such as “buy” and “purchase.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 2:10 –

The name “Emims” is wrong. The “im” on the name is a plural marker. Thus, it is the “Emim.” This is the same for the “Anakims.” That is wrong too. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 2:11 –

The name “Emims” is wrong. The “im” on the name is a plural marker. Thus, it is the “Emim.” This is the same for the “Anakims.” That is wrong too. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 2:11 –

The KJV translates Rephaim as “giants.” This is contrary to the translation of Genesis 14 & 15 (inconsistent), and it is a faulty translation. Rephaim does not mean “giants.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 2:12 –

The name “Horims” is incorrect. The “im” on the name is a plural marker. Thus, it is the “Horim.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 2:13 –

The words “said I” are inserted and are inappropriate. This is the conclusion of the quote from the Lord which began in verse 9. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 2:15 –

The words “the host” are incorrect. It is “the camp.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 2:18 –

There is no “through” in the Hebrew. If it was italicized, that would have been fine. But it isn’t. Thus… 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 2:20 –

The KJV translates Rephaim as “giants.” This is contrary to the translation of Genesis 14 & 15 (inconsistent), and it is a faulty translation. Rephaim does not mean “giants.” Also, Zamsummims is wrong. The “im” at the end is a plural marker. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 2:10/12/20 –

The KJV translates the same phrase l’pannim in three ways in these three verses. Their inconsistency is highly damaging to understanding the context. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 2:21 –

The name “Anakims” is incorrect. The “im” on the name is a plural marker. Thus, it is the “Anakim.” 1 demerit

 

Deuteronomy 2:22 –

The name “Horims” is incorrect. The “im” on the name is a plural marker. Thus, it is the “Horim.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 2:23 –

The names “Avims” and “Caphtorims” are incorrect. The “im” on the names are plural markers. Thus, it is the “Avim” and the “Caphtorim.” Also, the word Hazerim should be translated. It comes from khatser, meaning “court,” or “town” (see Genesis 25:16). As it says, “as far as Gaza,” it is obviously not speaking of a single location, but rather they lived in villages as far as Gaza. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 2:25 –

The word “heaven” is plural in the Hebrew. The translation could be excused, except for the inconsistency of translating the same word elsewhere in the plural. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 2:34 –

There is not “the” before “men” in the Hebrew. It should have been italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 2:36 –

The word “the” before “brink” and before “river” in the first clause should be italicized. The words “By the river” should read “in the river.” The word “Gilead” is prefixed by an article. It should read “the Gilead.” The words “too strong for us” say “too high for us,” and thus they should be translated. 5 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 2:37 –

The word “the” before “land” and before “sons” in the first clause should be italicized. The word “the” before river should be italicized and “River” should be capitalized. The word “the” before “cities” should be italicized. The word “mountains” is singular, not plural, in the Hebrew. 6 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 3:1 –

The word “the” before “king” is not in the Hebrew and should have been italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 3:3 –

The word “the” before “king” is not in the Hebrew and should have been italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 3:4 –

The word “the” before “kingdom” is not in the Hebrew and should have been italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 3:5 –

The word “bars” is singular in the Hebrew. It signifies gates and a bar. And thus it means 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 3:6 –

The words, “The men, women, and children,” are not correct. It says, “men, the women, and the children.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 3:7 –

The word “the” before “spoil” is not in the Hebrew and should have been italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 3:8 –

The word “the” before “hand,” “two kings,” and “river” is not in the Hebrew and should have been italicized. There is an article before “Jordan” which is missing in the KJV. Finally, it simply says, “on side the Jordan.” It is not “this side.” 5 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 3:9 –

The word “the” before “Sidonians,” is not in the Hebrew and should have been italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 3:10 –

The word “the” before “cities” and before “kingdom” is not in the Hebrew and should have been italicized. The word “Gilead” is prefixed by an article and should read “the Gilead.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 3:11 –

The word “the” before “remnant,” “length,” “breadth,” and “cubit” is not in the Hebrew and should have been italicized. 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 3:13 –

There is no article before “land.” It should be italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 3:14 –

The KJV translates the same word from 3:13 (region) as “country” here. It is inconsistent and causes confusion. Also, because the word “Bashan” is prefixed by an article in the Hebrew, the term “Bashanhavothjair is incorrect. It is “the Bashan” and it is separate from Havoth-Jair (as is noted in Numbers 32:41). 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 3:16 –

The same term is used in this verse and in Joshua 12:2. One time it is translated as “the middle of the river” (Joshua 12:2) and “half the valley” (this verse). But both are speaking of the same land division. Due to the article before “river” in the Hebrew, it should read “middle of the river” in both. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Deuteronomy 3:17 –

It says, “the Jordan,” not “Jordan.” Also, it says “Ashdothpisgah,” but it shoud either say “Ashdothha’pisgah” (with the article), or simply “slopes of the Pisgah” or “springs of the Pisgah.” No matter what, they KJV will later call it “the springs of Pisgah” in Deuteronomy 4:49, demonstrating a complete lack of consistency. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 3:23 –

Though not dermitable, the word is khanan, “to be gracious.” It should be translated appropriately – “And I entreated for grace unto the Lord.”

 

Deuteronomy 3:24 –

“What God” should read, “What god” (see Psalm 86:8, etc). The Hebrew reads, “the heavens” (with the article and plural). It says, “in the earth,” with the article. 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 3:25 –

There is no “thee” after “I pray.” It should be italicized. The Hebrew says, “the Jordan.” The Hebrew says, “the Lebanon.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:5 –

Rather than “in the land,” it says, “in the midst of the land.” See Deuteronomy 17:20 (and etc) and receive 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 4:9 –

It says, “to thy sons, and to thy son’s sons.” The KJV fails to include both prepositions and thus receives 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:10 –

The word “Specially” is a pointless addition.

 

Deuteronomy 4:11 –

The Hebrew says, “heart of the heavens,” not “the midst of heaven.” The next verse (4:12) uses the word tavek, or midst. Thus, this is a confusing, inappropriate, translation. Also, instead of “darkness, clouds, and thick darkness,” it says “darkness, cloud (it is singular), and thick gloom (it is a different word.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:15 –

Rather than “on the day,” it should read, “in the day,” as in Gen 2:4 and etc. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 4:19 –

The word “heaven” should be as follows in the three instances of the verse – “the heaven,” “the heavens,” and “the heavens.” The word “the” before “hosts” should be italicized. Instead of “nations,” it should say, “peoples.” Also, “shouldest be driven” should say, “let thyself be drawn.” It is a reflexive verb. 8 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:19 –

The words, “for your sakes,” in Hebrew are “for your words,” and they are to be translated as such. 1 demerit-ola.

 

Deuteronomy 4:21 –

The word “But” is not appropriate. It is not a contrasting statement, but an affirmation. The Hebrew says, “For.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 4:23 –

The Hebrew says, “commanded” not “forbidden.” It is referring back to Exodus 20:4, 5. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 4:25 –

There is an article before “evil.” The evil. On might say, “the evil thing,” but the KJV fails to include the article and thus receives… 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 4:26 –

It says, “the heavens and the earth,” not “heaven and earth.” It says, “the Jordan,” not “Jordan.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:27 –

The word “nations” should read “peoples,” as in Hosea 7:8 (and etc.) And, “heathen” should be “nations,” as in Joshua 23:7 (and etc). 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:28 –

It says “man’s,” not “men’s.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 4:29 –

Because of the article “and” before “you will find Him,” the rendering of the KJV is impossible. There is no “if” in the Hebrew. It says, “And you will seek … and you will find.” The second “if” is likewise wrong. It should read “when.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:30 –

The Hebrew says “return” not “turn.” Classic replacement theology error resulting in 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 4:32 –

The word says “the heavens” twice. 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:33 –

The word “the” before “voice” is not in the Hebrew and should be italicized. Further, there is an emphasis in the words, “as you have heard, you, and live?” The KJV ignores it and diminishes the meaning 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:35 –

The KJV bypasses the emphatic statement, “You, you have been shown it.” Also, it says, ha’elohim, the God. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:36 –

It says, “the heavens,” not “heaven.” It is “the earth,” not just “earth.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:37 –

The words “their” and “them” are incorrect. The words are singular, not plural. It says, “and chose in his seed after him.” 2 demeritos.

 

Deuteronomy 4:39 –

It says, ha’elohim, the God. It also says, “the heavens.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:40 –

The word translated as “earth” is different than the last two uses in this section. It should say “land” or even better, “ground.” The comma after “thee” at the end of the verse is incorrect. 2 demeritolas.

 

Deuteronomy 4:41 –

It should say, “on the side.” This is obvious by the explanatory second clause. Also, it is “the Jordan.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:42 –

It should either say, “a manslayer,” or the “the” before “manslayer” should be italicized. 2 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 4:43 –

The KJV completely ignores a word here – arets, or land. It says, “in the wilderness in the land the plain.” There are also articles before Gilean and Bashan which the KJV skips. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:44 –

It does not say “after.” It says, “in their coming out.” It is a continuous process. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 4:45 –

It should say, “on the side.” This is obvious by the explanatory second clause. Also, it is “the Jordan.” Also, it is “the Amorite.” It is singular. Further, it does not say “after.” It says, “in their coming out.” It is a continuous process. 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:46 –

Amorite is singular. It should say “on the side of the Jordan.” There are other articles which should be included, and some words not italicized which should be. But I am feeling charitable. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:47 –

It says “the Amorite.” It is singular. It should say, “on the side of the Jordan.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 4:49 –

It should say “the side of the Jordan.” It should say, “the Pisgah.” There are other articles which should be included, and some words not italicized which should be. But I am again feeling charitable. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 5:4 –

The Lord did not “talk” with Israel. He dabar, or “spoke” to Israel. There was no conversation from Israel. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 5:8 –

It says, “in the heavens,” not “in heaven.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 5:9 –

Three definite articles inserted by the KJV are not in the original and should be italicized. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 5:10 –

The Hebrew reads, “to those who love Me and to those keeping my commandments.” It is two different thoughts, carefully worded as such. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 5:11 –

It does not say “in vain.” It says, “to vanity.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 5:14 –

It is A Sabbath TO the Lord, not THE Sabbath OF the Lord. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 5:15 –

The word “the” before “land” should be italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 5:22 –

It says, “on two tablets,” not “in two tablets.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 5:23 –

It is not, “did burn with fire,” but “did burn in the fire.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 5:24 –

It says, “God doth speak with the man,” not “God doth talk with man.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 5:26 –

There is no article before “living God.” Thus, the word “the” should be italicized. 2 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 5:31 –

The words, “the commandments” are incorrect. It is singular – “the commandment.” That is then defined by “the statutes and the judgments. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 6:1 –

Nothing like starting out a new chapter with an error. The words, “the commandments” are incorrect. It is singular – “the commandment.” That is then defined by “the statutes and the judgments. The word “wither” is incorrect. It says, “crossing over.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 6:3 –

The word “in” does not belong before “the land.” It is not in the Hebrew, and it should have been italicized or the sentence should have been structured differently. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 6:6 –

The Hebrew says al, “on” or “upon” your heart, not b’, or “in” your heart. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 7:1 –

All seven peoples are stated in the singular. For example, “the Amorite.” 7 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 7:4 –

It is “he” not “they,” “he will turn.” It is singular, following after the seven errors of verse 1. One thing leads to another. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 7:6 –

The Hebrew says, “out of all,” not “above all.” It is a major error in translation leading to a major error in theology. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 7:9 –

It says, ha’elohim – “He is the God.” It says, “keeping the covenant.” It says, “the mercy.” Futher, the word “generation is singular – “to thousandth generation.” This, plus the missing articles in translation results in 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 7:11 –

It is “commandment,” singular. 1 demeritola.

 

Deuteronomy 7:12 –

The word “if” is incorrect. It is a word signifying consequence. They do and it happens – because, as a consequence of, etc. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 7:13 –

The KJV is inconsistent in the word translated as “wine.” The same word, in the same context, is translated as “new wine” in Nehemiah 10:39 (and elsewhere). 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 7:14 –

The words, “all people,” are incorrect. It is “all the peoples.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 7:16 –

The words, “all the people,” are incorrect. It is “all the peoples.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 7:19 –

The KJV fails to include definite articles – “His hand, the mighty, and His arm, the outstretched.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 7:21 –

The words “among you” are not right. It says, “in your midst.” Also, “terrible” is wrong. It is a verb, not an adjective “God, great and feared.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 7:23 –

The words “and shall destroy them with a mighty destruction, until they are destroyed” are not in accord with the Hebrew. It says, “And confusing, disquieted greatly until they are destroyed.” It goes from a verb to a noun and then to an adjective. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 7:24 –

The word is heavens (plural). 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 7:25 –

There is no article before “silver,” and thus it should be italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 8:1 –

The word “commandments” is wrong. It is singular – “every commandment.” 1 demerit-ola.

 

Deuteronomy 8:3 –

Four important articles are left off by the KJV – “the manna” “the bread,” “the man,” and “the man.” Also, it is “on” or “upon” every word. Not “by” (2 instances). 6 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 8:7 –

It is “in the valley and in the hill.” Missing articles, wrong prepositions, nouns are singular. 6 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 8:8 –

No need for “tree” after “fig.” See Nehemiah 13:15 for inconsistency. Also, it is zet shemen – olive oil, not oil olive. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 8:11 –

The word “commandment” is singular. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 8:15 –

Both “serpent” and “scorpion” are singular. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 8:20 –

The word “nations” is incorrect. That would mean that Israel (the nation) would perish like all the other nations. But Moses has switched from the second person singular to the second person plural. It should read “peoples,” “heathen,” or something else. But not “nations.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 9:1 –

The word “possess” should be translated as “drive them out,” “disposses,” or etc. as in Deuteronomy 2:12 (and etc). Also, the word “heaven” is plural, and it is prefixed by an article – “in the heavens.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 9:2 –

“Anakims” is incorrect. The “im” at the end is a plural marker. Also, it says, “Children of Anakim” with no prefixed articles. No article is before “children” in the second clause too. 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 9:3 –

The word “which” is inappropriate. God is not an “it.” The Hebrew says, ha’ober – “the Passer.” But “Who” will suffice. Further, two different words are translated as “destroy” by the KJV. This is sloppy. Also, it is not “hath said,” but dibber – “hath spoken.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 9:4 –

It is not “Speak not,” but tomar – “Say not.” It is not “For my righteousness,” but “In my righteousness. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 9:5 –

Each name is prefixed by “to.” “To Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 9:7 –

The word “and” after “Remember” ruins the stress of the verse and should not be inserted. “Remember! Do not forget!” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 9:13 –

It is not “spake,” but “said.” “And the Lord said unto me, saying.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 9:14 –

It is not “heaven, it is “under the heavens,” plural. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 9:15 –

It doesn’t say, “with fire.” It says the mountain burned “in the fire.” It is also not “in my two hands,” but “upon my two hands.” The KJV blows the symbolism 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 9:18 –

It is not, “doing wickedly” (an adverb), rather it is ha’ra – “the evil” (an adjective). 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 9:19 –

It says, “the anger and the hot displeasure.” 1 demerit for leaving off the article.

 

Deuteronomy 9:21 –

“Stamped” is probably not correct. The word signifies to beat or crush.

 

Deuteronomy 9:22 –

It is “Anakim,” not “Anakims.” The “im” is the plural. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 9:23 –

The word “commandment” is incorrect. No command was given. It says, “mouth of Lord.” Entrance was to be based on faith, not on a command, hence the use of the next words “believe” and hearkened.” The symbolism is destroyed by the KJV. 1 demerit for destroying the symbolism.

 

Deuteronomy 9:27 –

It says, “Remember to Your servants – to Abraham, to Isaaac, and to Jacob. 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 10:1 –

The word “stone” is plural – “stones.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 10:2 –

It is not b’ or “in” the tablets, but al or “on” or “upon.” See verse 4 for inconsistency. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 10:3 –

The word “stone” is plural – “stones.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 10:4 –

It says, “in the mount,” not “on the mount.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 10:7 –

It says, “the Gugodah.” There is an article before the name. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 10:14 –

The words “the heaven and the heaven of the heavens” are wrong. It is plural, “the heavens and the heavens of the heavens.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 10:15 –

“People” is prefixed by an article and it is plural “the peoples.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 10:17 –

This is a major botch job, missing countless articles. It says, “HE God of the gods and Lord of the lords, the God, the great, the mighty, and the terrible.” 7 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 10:17 –

There is no article before “judgment,” – “He administers justice.” There is no article before fatherless, widow, or stranger. Those included should have been italicized. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 10:21 –

With definite articles, it says, “the great and the terrible – these which your eyes have seen.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 10:22 –

It is not “heaven,” but “the heavens.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:1 –

The word “always” is archaic. Time to update to a new version.

 

Deuteronomy 11:2 –

The KJV fails to include definite articles – “His hand, the mighty, and His arm, the outstretched.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:3 –

The word “miracles” is incorrect. It is “signs,” as in 7:19 and elsewhere. Also, it says, “to Pharaoh, king of Egypt.” The KJV wrongly inserts the definite article. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:4 –

The word “water” is plural construct – “waters.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 11:6 –

It doesn’t say “and Abiram,” but “and to Abirm.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 11:7 –

“But your eyes have seen” is incorrect. It says. “For your eyes the seers.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 11:8 –

It does not say “all the commandments.” It is singular – “all the commandment.” It is a single body of law. Further, it is not “go to” but “cross over.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:9 –

It doesn’t say “in” the land, but “upon.” And, two different words are translated as “land” in this verse. It should say, “the ground,” and “land.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:10 –

It is “as the herb garden,” it is singular with an article. It is not “a garden of herbs.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:11 –

It says, “the heavens.” It is plural. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:14 –

A bit nitpicky, but there are no articles before early and latter. It should simply say “in his due season – early and later – that…” Further, the KJV is inconsistent in the word translated as “wine.” The same word, in the same context, is translated as “new wine” in Nehemiah 10:39 (and elsewhere). 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:15 –

The word is “give” as in the previous verse, not “send.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 11:16 –

The KJV leaves off some pronouns – “you serve,” and “you worship.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:17 –

It reads, “the heavens.” There is an article, and it is plural. It is either “the ground will not yield” or “the. Earth will not yield,” not “land.” It is different that the word for land in the final clause. Also, the word “fruit” should be “produce,” or “increase.” (See Leviticus 26:4). 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:18 –

Rather than “in” heart and “in” soul, it says “upon.” Also, the words “that they shall be” are incorrect. It should say, “and they shall be.” One is not the consequence of the other. The exact same phrase is found in Deuteronomy 6:8 and is correctly translated there. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:19 –

Each thought begins with “in” – “in your sitting,” in your walking,” and etc. 5 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:20 –

This are the exact same words as Deuteronomy 6:9, and yet the translation is inconsistent in 3 separate words. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:21 –

Instead of “in the land,” it should say “upon the ground.” It should also say, “the heavens.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:22 –

It is “all the commandment.” The word is singular. Also, it says, “to do it,” or “to do,” not “to do them.” It is singular. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:23 –

The same word, yarash, is used in both clauses. It should be more precisely translated – “And the Lord will dispossess; and ye shall dispossess.” 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Deuteronomy 11:24 –

There is an article before “Lebanon.” It is “the Lebanon.” Also, it is not the “uttermost” sea, but either “the hindermost” (as one looking east) or “the western.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:25 –

The word “There” is superfluous. The KJV skips a preposition “in.” It should say, “in your presence.” The KJV skips the word pene, or face – “face of all the land.” The KJV skips another preposition “in” – the land you tread in. 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:27 –

Wrong. It is “The blessing,” not “A blessing.” The word “if” is insufficient. It makes the entire thought sound conditional in the doing. Rather it is in the receiving after the doing. It will happen. Translate as “when,” “after,” or etc. Finally, it is “hearken unto the commandments.” The KJV gives the wrong sense of the words by leaving off a preposition (el). 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:28 –

It is “the curse,” not “a curse.” It should say, “hearken unto,” not “obey.” Also, it should say “from” instead of “out of,” but we will not demerit that. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 11:29 –

It is not “put” but “give.” The blessings and the curses were written on the altar on Mt. Ebal. However, they were called out (given) by the people from both mountains. 1 demeritola.

 

Deuteronomy 11:30 –

It reads “in side the Jordan.” It reads “’after’ (or ‘west”) the way setting the sun.” It reads “in the plain.” Saying “in the champaign” is inconsistent (see Numbers 22:1, etc). It reads “beside the oaks (or terebinths) of Moreh,” not “the plain.” It is a masculine plural construct – “oaks.” 5 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 11:31 –

It is “the Jordan” with an article. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 11:33 –

It says, “watch to observe.” Also, it says “the judgments.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 12:1 –

It is not “and judgments,” but “and the judgments.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 12:3 –

It is not “overthrow,” but “tear down” as in Judges 2:2. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 12:4 –

 

The word “unto” should be italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 12:6 –

There is no “the” before “firstlings.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 12:10 –

It is “the Jordan.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 12:11 –

It is not “a place,” but “the place.” (See verse 12:14). 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 12:16 –

A different word is used here than is used in verse 19. One should read ground, the other earth. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 12:17 –

It is “a tithe,” not “the tithe.” It is “firstlings of they herds or your flocks” without the articles. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 12:22 –

Although not really dermitable, the KJV confuses the vese. The word “alike” qualifies “clean and unclean,” not “them” (meaning the animals). It is a poor translation.

 

Deuteronomy 12:23 –

There is no “you” in the first clause. It is an infinitive absolute that says, “be sure to not eat the blood.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 13:1 –

Not really wrong, but a poor translation. Instead of “among you,” it reads “in your midst.”

 

Deuteronomy 13:2 –

It says, “let us walk after other gods.” The same word is rightly translated as “walk” in verse 13:4 and is given to contrast what is stated here, incorrectly by the KJV. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 13:4 –

The KJV ignores the pronouns which provide the necessary emphasis, “and ye fear him, and ye keep his commandments, and ye obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and ye cleave unto him.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 13:5 –

It is a constant problem with olde English. The Lord is not a “which” but a “who.” No demerit, but it is time to update your Bible.

 

Deuteronomy 13:6 –

The words “entice thee secretly” do not properly translate the Hebrew. It is a preposition (in) followed by an article and a noun. Translate as “in the secret” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 13:7 –

Three articles are added by the KJV which should be eliminated or italicized (here in bold) – “from the gods,” and “the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth.” Also, the words “far off” are more precise in the Hebrew – “the farthest.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 13:11 –

The KJV ignores a noun and several articles. A literal rendering would be “as the thing the wicked the this among you.” 2 demerit3.

 

Deuteronomy 13:13 –

There is no article before “children of Belial” and it is unnecessary. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 13:17 –

The word “mercy” is plural – “mercies,” as in Jeremiah 42:12. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 14:2 –

The Hebrew says, “out of all,” not “above all.” It is a major error in translation leading to a major error in theology. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 14:4 –

The word “animal” is singular – “This is the animal.” The word “shall” is inappropriate. They were not required to eat these, but they were rather permitted to eat them – if they so chose. Also, the definition of the animals is poor. It says, “ox, lamb (of) sheep, and kid (of) goats.” 8 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 14:5 –

Moses continues without any definite articles, thus rendering the KJV a very poor translation. Add in the archaic words, and this entire verse should be completely reworked.

 

Deuteronomy 14:6 –

As with verse 4, the word “shall” should be “may.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 14:7 –

The word “these” should be “this.” It is singular. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 14:9 –

The word “These” should be “This.” It is singular. Also, it is not “shall eat,” but “may eat.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 14:11 –

“Bird” is singular, and it is “may,” not “shall.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 14:23 –

There is no “the” before tithe and it should importantly be left off or italicized. Also, the KJV is inconsistent with the words ha’yammim, or “all the days.” For example, in verse 4:10 it says, all the days, but here it says “always.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 14:26 –

The word “lust” no longer carries the same meaning it once did. It is obsolete.

 

Deuteronomy 15:4 –

The word “Save,” (meaning “except”), is incorrect. What is being conveyed is, “For the end purpose of there being no poor among you.” This was to be a remedy to alleviate the poor from the land. As more poor cropped up in the next six year, they were to then be given the same relief. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 15:5 –

It says, “all of this commandment.” It is singular. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 15:6 –

The words, “blesseth thee,” are not strong enough. Saying, “shall have blessed thee” conveys the intent. See Deuteronomy 2:7 or 12:7 to get a better rendering of the same form of the word. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 15:7 –

It reads “in one of thy gates,” not “within any of thy gates.” See Deuteronomy 23:16 for correct translation. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 15:9 –

The words “wicked heart” are incorrect. It is the thought which is worthless, not the heart that is wicked. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 15:11 –

The KJV has consistently translated evyon as “poor” in this passage. Now, because another word is translated as “poor” is introduced, they change evyon to “needy.” This is inconsistent. 1 demerit for all 5 other uses of evyon in this chapter. 5 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 15:12 –

Using definite articles, it says, “the Hebrew man, or the Hebrew woman.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 15:17 –

It says, “the awl,” not “an awl.” It says, “in his ear and in the door.” The KJV is more of a paraphrase. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 15:19 –

The Hebrew reads “in they heard and in thy flock.” Precision would be nice.

 

Deuteronomy 16:1 –

Twice it says, “the Abib,” with the article. Also, it says “a Passover,” not “the passover.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 16:2 –

It says, “a Passover,” not “the Passover.” Also, there is no article before “flock” and “herd” and they should be italicized 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 16:5 –

It reads “in one of thy gates,” not “within any of thy gates.” See Deuteronomy 23:16 for correct translation. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 16:12 –

The KJV is inconsistent. The same context with the same word is translated as “servant” in Deuteronomy 5:15 and “bondman” here. There should be one demerit for every such lack of consistency.

 

Deuteronomy 16:13 –

The Hebrew reads, “in your gathering in…” not “after that thou hast.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 16:14 –

It says, “and the stranger,” not “the stranger.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 16:15 –

The word “solemn” is not in the original and should be italicized. See Exodus 23:14 where the same expression is rightly translated. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 16:21 –

The word “grove” is incorrect. The connecting verbs make the translation unacceptable. Further, the word “trees” is singular – “tree.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 17:1 –

The word “evilfavoredness” is wholly obsolete. No average reader of the Bible should have to pull out a lexicon to find out what is being said. This is not a demeritable offense, but it shows the great need to update from the archaic KJV.

 

Deuteronomy 17:2 –

It reads “in one of thy gates,” not “within any of thy gates.” See Deuteronomy 23:16 for correct translation. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 17:3 –

Some prepositions and articles are left off and “heavens” is plural – “either to the sun or to the moon or to any host the heavens.” 6 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 17:4 –

Instead of “and inquired diligently,” it should say, “and thou inquired diligently.” Also, an article before “abomination” is missing – “this” or “the” abomination. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 17:7 –

The word “hand” is singular (x2). There is an article before “first” and before “afterward.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 17:10 & 11 –

The same word, yarah, is used in verses 10 and 11, and should – for clarity, be translated the same. Translate “teach” and receive 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 17:12 –

The KJV modifies the Hebrew from a preposition and a noun to an adverb – “presumptuously.” It should read, “in presumption.” It then reads “to not listen” instead of “and will not hearken.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 17:13–

The word “presumptuously” is rong. It is a verb, not an adverb. Render “presume” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 17:16 –

The word “horse” after “multiply” is singular. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 17:17 –

The verse begins with “And.” The second clause begins with “and.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 17:18 –

The preposition is “‘upon’ a book,” not “in.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 17:20 –

It says, “over (or upon) his kingdom,” not “in his kingdom.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 18:2 –

An emphasis is omitted by the KJV: “…the Lord, He, is their inheritance.” Also, the same expression is used in Deuteronomy 10:9 where it is translated as he, his, his, him instead of they, their, their, them. This verse is incorrect. 5 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 18:3 –

It is “the sacrifice,” not “a sacrifice.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 18:4 –

The word “firstfruit” should say “first,” just as it does in the second clause (same word, same context). Also, it says. “and first fleece of your sheep.” The KJV’s first “the” is ok for clarity. The second “the” is an unnecessary addition. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 18:5 –

It says, “the Levite,” not “a Levite.” It says, “from one,” not “from any.” It says, “his soul,” not “his mind.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 18:8 –

The word “besides,” don’t convey the intent well. It can mean “apart from,” but it can also mean “in addition to.” Change to “apart from” for clarity.

 

Deuteronomy 18:11 –

The words “an abomination unto the Lord” are incorrect. It should say, “abomination of the Lord.” (see Exodus 8:26 for the same construct). 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 18:15 –

Although not incorrect from a translation standpoint, the same “m” preposition is used twice in a row and should be translated that way – “from the midst” and “from thy brethren.” 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Deuteronomy 18:18 –

The words “and will put my words” should say, “and I will put my words.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 18:19 –

Rather than “whosoever,” it says, “the man.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 18:22 –

Like in verse 20, it says, “the prophet,” not “a prophet.” Also, the word translated as “presumptuously” is a noun, not an adverb. Say “in presumption.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 19:1 –

There is a huge amount of inconsistency in the translation of yarash, here translated as “succeedest.” Translate as “possess” as it is so often done (for an exact use of the same verb, see Deuteronomy 31:3). Also, the word lekha signifies “to thee” not just “thee.” This is a common error and is not mentioned every time. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 19:3 –

It says, “the way,” not “a way.” (See 19:6). 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 19:5 –

The words “a man” are not in the Hebrew. It is a continuation of the previous clause. They should have been italicized. Next, the KJV translates two different words as “wood.” It should say, “goes to the woods to cut timber.” Also, instead of “the head slippeth from the helve,” it says, “the iron slips from the wood.” Though not wrong, it is a paraphrase of the true wordage. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 19:6 –

The KJV completely omits two words – “Lest the avenger of the blood pursue AFTER the slayer.” Also, instead of “and slay him” it says, “and strikes him – the soul (or life)” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 19:9 –

Verse 19:8 began with, “And if.” This begins with a completely different word. It should read “When thou shalt keep.” It is not if, if. But if, when. Next, the word “commandment” is singular, not plural. Hence, it is not “to do them” but “to do it.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 19:10 –

The word “blood” is plural and it should be so translated in this verse – “bloods.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 19:14 –

The words, “they of old time” are unfortunate. It is speaking of the first leaders who would define the boundaries of the land, not some group who came from antiquity. No demerit, but this was not well translated.

 

Deuteronomy 19:20 –

Rather than, “any such evil,” it should say “any such evil thing.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 20:1 –

The word “which” is not correct when speaking of the Lord. It should say “who brought you up.” But, even then, the word is a verb, not a noun. It says, “the Bringer up of you.” The KJV could have done better. Despite this, no demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 20:2 –

Inconsistent. The word “approach” is translated as “come near” countless times. It should remain that way. No demerit though.

 

Deuteronomy 20:4 –

Again, it is a verb, not a noun – the Lord is “the Goer with you.” Also, the word is “with” not “against.” He goes to fight “with” you. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 20:5 –

Rather than, “What man is there,” it says, “Who is the man.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 20:6 –

Rather than, “And what man is he,” it says, “And who is the man.” Also, it doesn’t say “eat of it.” The word signifies to make it common. It could be to eat, sell, whatever. This is true in both clauses. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 20:7 –

Rather than, “And what man is there,” it says, “And who is the man.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 20:8 –

Rather than, “And what man is there,” it says, “And who is the man.” Also, the word “faint” is not the same as used in “fainthearted.” It means to melt and should be translated that way. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 20:13 –

The KJV is more of a paraphrase of the original. The Hebrew reads, “with the mouth of the sword.” Despite this, no demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 20:14 –

The word “But” could have been more precisely translated as “Only.” The word translated as “take” signifies to take as plunder, and it should have been translated as such. Despite this, no demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 20:15 –

The reading of the final clause more rightly says, “you shall not let remain alive all that breathes.” 1 demerit for cumbersome translation.

 

Deuteronomy 20:15 –

The words Hittite, Amorite, Canaanite, Perizzite, Hivite, and Jebusite are all singular. 6 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 20:20 –

Moses speaks in the singular – “Only the tree which though knowest that it be not tree for meat…” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 21:1 –

Rather than ha’eretz, the land, it is ha’adamah, the ground. The distinction should be made. Although not a hard and fast rule, here it is an important distinction. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 21:2 –

There is no pronoun. It should say, “round about the slain.” See verse 21:6 for correct translation. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 21:3 –

The KJV skips over a word. The Hebrew says, eglat baqar – “heifer of the herd.” The word “man” is not in the original. It should say, “the slain.” See verse 21:6 for correct translation. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 21:4 –

It should say, “break the heifer’s neck,” as in Exodus 13:13, 34:20; Isaiah 66:3. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 21:5 –

It should say, “and upon their mouth.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 21:6 –

Rather than “beheaded” it is “whose neck was broken.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 21:8 –

It is true that mercy is tied up in the petition, but the word signifies atonement, as the second clause says by using the same word. Use “forgive,” or “make atonement.” Also, it is not “unto thy people of Israel’s charge.” Rather, it says “in the midst of thy people.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 21:10 –

Though not an error, the KJV misses the poignant nature of the words, repeating the idea of captivity – “and you take captive its captivity.”  However, the word “enemies” should read “enemy.” This is because of the singular “him” (twice) in the subsequent clauses which the KJV also blew. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 21:11 –

The word “them” should read “him.” The expression yephat toar, means “beautiful in form.” The KJV ignores the second word, thus receiving 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 21:13 –

The KJV mistranslates the word al, or upon, but it also is an error in the English. It should say, “And she shall put the raiment of her captivity from upon her.” However, even if the word “off” is used, the translation is confused – “put…from off” makes no sense. In this case, it should say, “put…off,” or better, “take…off.” Therefore, there must be two demerits for this.

 

Deuteronomy 21:14 –

The KJV leaves off definite articles that could, and thus should, be translated – “the one beloved, and the other hated,” and also “and it is the son, the firstborn, is to the hated.” 5 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 21:16 –

Rather than “when” it should say, “in the day,” such as it is commonly translated (e.g., Leviticus 14:2 and so on) 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 21:18 –

The same word here is translated as obey and hearken in one verse. It is translator’s preference, but it sure is inconsistent.

 

Deuteronomy 21:21 –

It says, “the evil,” with the article. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 21:22 –

It doesn’t say “if” but “when.” Also, it says “in a man,” and “judgement of death.” The KJV is a paraphrase at best. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 21:23 –

The word “body” does not give the correct sense. It should say “carcass” as in Joshua 8:29. Rather than ha’eretz, the land, it is ha’adamah, the ground. The distinction should be made. Although not a hard and fast rule, here it is an important distinction. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 22:2 –

The second clause does not say “or if thou know him not.” It says, “and you do not know him.” Further, the KJV simply ignores the word tavek, or “midst,” “unto the midst of thy house.” This is necessary to indicate the personal nature of what should take place. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 22:3 –

It is a mangled translation. A literal reading says, “and so thou dost to his ass, and so thou dost to his garment, and so thou dost to any lost thing of thy brother’s, which is lost by him, and thou hast found it; thou art not able to hide thyself” (YLT).

 

Deuteronomy 22:4 –

Rather than “by the way,” it says, “in the way, as in verse 6 of this same chapter. It is inconsistent. Also, the word “again” should be italicized. It is not in the original. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 22:8 –

It says, “In thine house,” not “upon thine house,” as in Deuteronomy 21:13. Inconsistent. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 22:9 –

The KJV translates two completely different words as “fruit.” The first signifies “fullness” and could be translated as “harvest,” “produce,” or whatever. This will then allow the second word, signifying “harvest” or “increase” to be translated differently. Translates the first “fruit” as “fulness” as in Numbers 18:27, and the second as “increase” as in Leviticus 25:13, and receive 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 22:12 –

The word “vesture” should be rendered as “covering” as in most other uses in the KJV. Although whoever translated this portion of the text was more eloquent in his vocabulary, this shows a lack of consistency by the final editors. Further, the word “coverest” in this same verse is from the same root, kasah. Thus, it should rightly be “covering.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 22:13 –

One can see the archaic nature of the KJV here. A man “takes” a wife, he doesn’t “take” a wife.” Likewise with the word “hate.”

 

Deuteronomy 22:15 –

It does not say, “in the gate.” The word “in” should be italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 22:22 –

Rather than a possibility – “If a man,” the words are set forth as a positive command – “When a man,” or “For a man.” The difference is negligible, but it should be consistent. This is the same countless times in Deuteronomy, such as in 22:27 – “For he found her.”

 

Deuteronomy 22:28 –

A person is a “who,” not a “which.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 22:31 –

“Discover” has a completely different meaning now. Translate as “uncover” as in countless other verses.

 

Deuteronomy 23:1 –

The KJV is more of a paraphrase. The Hebrew literally reads, “No shall enter – wounded, a crushing and cutting, male organ – in assembly Yehovah.” Further, the word is qahal, assembly, not edah, congregation. 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 23:2 –

The word is qahal, assembly, not edah, congregation. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 23:3 –

The word is qahal, assembly, not edah, congregation. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 23:4 –

The word “when” is incorrect. Israel came out of Egypt almost 40 years earlier. The Hebrew says, “in your coming out of Egypt.” It was a long, extended process that includes the travels after leaving. This must be considered incorrect. Also, the word is “from” not “of” (twice). Finally, the verb is singular – “he hired,” not “they hired.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 23:5 –

It says, “sons, not “children.” It says “assembly,” not “congregation.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 23:9 –

Rather than “host” the word should read “camp” as it does twice in the next verse. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 23:10 –

The word “any” is superfluous and is not in the Hebrew. Also, “chanceth” is a verb. The word qareh is a noun. It reads, “from occurrence.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 23:12 –

The verse begins with “And.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 23:13 –

The Hebrew says, “a peg upon your ear.” Thus, it is describing a spade with a handle, not a paddle on a weapon. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 23:13 –

The KJV simply ignores the word “after” that is clearly in the Hebrew – “that he see no unclean thing in thee, and turn away from after thee.” See Isaiah 30:21. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 23:14 –

A person is not a “which” but a “who.” You really need a better, more update, translation.

 

Deuteronomy 23:17 –

The KJV is inconsistent. Every use of the word qedeshah is translated as “harlot” except this one. No demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 23:20 –

It says, “upon the land,” not “in the land.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 23:23 –

Rather than “promised,” it says “spoken,” as in Deuteronomy 1:14 and etc. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 23:25 –

It says, “in your hand,” not “with your hand.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 24:1 –

It does not say “then let him.” It says, “and he writes her.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 24:3 –

These two clauses are identical in the Hebrew, letter for letter. But they KJV has changed them to read differently –

 

then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. (24:1)

 

and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house (24:3)

 

Three changes. Also, the word “to” should not be italicized in the last clause. 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 24:4 –

The verb is hithpael (causative, reflexive). “She has allowed herself to be defiled,” not “she is defiled.” Secondly, it does not say “that is an abomination before the Lord.” It says, “she is an abomination before the Lord.” Thirdly, “thou shalt not cause the land to sin” is incorrect. It says, “you shall not sin the land” (meaning: “You shall not bring sin on the land.”  3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 24:5 –

The words “cheer up” give the sense of first being down. Render as “cheer,” “bring joy to,” or something similar. No demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 24:6 –

The wording doesn’t say “nether or the upper.” It speaks first of both, and then the “rider” or “upper.” To understand the meaning, the CSB gives the sense – “Do not take a pair of grindstones or even the upper millstone as security for a debt, because that is like taking a life as security.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 24:9 –

It says, “in the way,” and it says, “in your coming forth.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 24:10 –

The word “lend” is incorrect. It is a noun. “When you make a loan of anything.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 24:12 –

The words “sleep with his pledge” should read, “lie down in his pledge.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 24:13 –

The Hebrew literally reads, “In his day.” Leviticus 23:37 (KJV) says, “upon his day.” Jeremiah 52:34 (KJV) uses the same expression and says, “every day.” 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

Deuteronomy 24:15 –

It does not say, “setteth his heart.” It says, “lifts his soul.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 24:21 –

It is not “afterward,” but “after thee.” One does not go back and follow up after oneself. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 25:1 –

The Hebrew says, ha’mishpat, “the judgment” with the article. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 25:2 –

The words, “a certain” should be italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 25:3 –

The words “unto thee” are literally “to your eyes.” It should be rendered “in your sight,” “in your eyes,” or something more understandable than “unto thee.” For example, see Leviticus 25:53. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 25:6 –

It is not “in the name of” but “upon” or “over the name of.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 25:9 –

Rather than “loose,” it signifies “to draw off.” His shoe is completely removed. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 25:10 –

Rather than “loosed,” it signifies “drawn off.” His shoe is completely removed. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 25:11 –

The Hebrew says, “one with his brother” instead of “one with another.” This is based on the brother-in-law relation of the previous set of verses and is making a Christological point. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 25:13 –

“Diver’s weights” nowadays are lead weights that keep a diver submerged. An update to the English is needed.

 

Deuteronomy 25:15 –

Rather than “in the land,” it reads, “upon the earth (or ground).” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 25:16 –

The word “unrighteously” is rong. It is a noun, not an adjective – “All who do unrighteousness” (See Lev. 19:35). Also, it is not “unto the Lord they God.” It says, “the abomination of the Lord thy God.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 25:17 –

It says, “in the way,” and it says, “in your coming forth.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 25:18 –

Again, it says, “in the way.” Also, the word “feeble” is a verb. It should say, “enfeebled.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 25:19 –

Rather than “giveth thee,” it says, “giveth to thee.” It is not “under heaven,” but “under the heavens.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 26:3 –

It says, “to give to us.” The word “to” is stated twice. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 26:5 –

It should say, “And thou shalt answer and say.” The word is that used, for example, in Genesis 18:27. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 26:9 –

 

It says “hath given to us this land.” Also, the word “with” before “milk” should be italicized. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 26:10 –

It is two words, both singular – “I have brought the first fruit” (see Deuteronomy 26:2). Also, it is the same word as in 26:2 – “the earth,” not “the land.” Also, it is “hast given to me.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 26:11 –

It should say, “and the stranger who is in your midst.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 26:12 –

It does not say “the tithes.” It says, “tithes.” It says “‘in’ the third year.” It says, “year of ‘the’ tithe.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 26:13 –

The word “things” should be italicized. It simply says, “the holy.” Also, it says, “I have not transgressed from thy commandments.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 26:14 –

It says “and neither” in the second clause. It says, “and not given… for the dead.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 26:15 –

It says, “from the heavens.” Also, two words are used which the KJV both translate as “land.” The first should say, “the earth.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 26:19 –

It says “‘the’ nations.” It is not “in” praise, name, and honor, but “for” or “to.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 27:1 –

The KJV is more of a paraphrase. It more exactingly says, “And Moses and the elders of Israel.” No demerit for that, but the word is “commandment” (or “command”). It is singular, not plural. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 27:2 –

It says, “in the day,” not “on the day.” It is referring to the timeframe, not a specific day. Also, it is “the Jordan.” And, twice, it says “to thee,” not just “thee.” Also, it says “and thou shalt plaister.” 5 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 27:3 –

It says, “giveth to thee,” not “giveth thee.” Same in the last clause, “to thee.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 27:4 –

The Hebrew is identical in the last clause to that of verse 27:2. Therefore, there is a demerit for inconsistency. The demerit was applied in verse 2 –

 

“and plaister them with plaister:”

“and thou shalt plaister them with plaister.”

 

Deuteronomy 27:6 –

It does not say “the altar.” There is no article. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 27:11 –

The KJV is inconsistent. It repeatedly says “commanded” but at times says “charged.” The editorial committee was not careful.

 

Deuteronomy 27:12 –

The words read, “in your passing (crossing) over the Jordan.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 27:13 –

The Hebrew reads, “And these shall stand upon the curse, in Mount Ebal.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 27:14 –

Rather than, “shall speak,” It should say, “and answer,” as in 27:15. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 27:15-26 –

The word “be” as in “Cursed be the man,” is incorrect. It is a statement of fact. “Cursed is the man.” 12 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 27:21 –

The words “manner of” should be italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 28:2 –

The words, “if thou shalt” are incorrect. This is not condition, im, as in verse 1. Rather it is a statement of fact, ki. Render “because” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 28:6 –

The Hebrew says, “in they coming,” and “in thy coming out.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:7 –

The same word, l’phanekha, is used twice. The KJV should have translated both instances as “before thy face,” or “before thee.” 1 demeritola.

 

Deuteronomy 28:8 –

The word asam, or “barn” is used only twice, here and in Proverbs 3:10. The KJV is inconsistent – they say both storehouses & barns. Also, it says “to thee.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:9 –

It says “when,” not “if.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 28:10 –

The word “people” is plural, “peoples.” Also, the Hebrew reads, “that the name of the Lord has been called upon you.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:11 –

It says, “abundant in good,” not “goods.” It is singular. It doesn’t say, “in the land.” It repeats the same word from the previous clause. It says, “on the ground.” Also, it says “to thee.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:12 –

It is “the heavens.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 28:13 –

It does not say “if,” but rather, “when.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 28:13 –

It simply says, “right and left,” not “to the right hand, or to the left.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:18 –

“Thy land” is incorrect. It is the same word as in verse 28:4. It should say, “thy ground.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 28:20 –

It is not “cursing.” It is a noun preceded by the article – “the curse.” Also, it is “the confusion,” (rather than vexation, which is incorrect)  Again, it is “the rebuke.” 4 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:21 –

The word translated as “land” should say, “ground.” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 28:22 –

There is an article before each of the seven categories that the KJV fails to include. 7 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:23 –

It is “thy heavens,” plural. Also, brass was not invented at this time. It is copper or bronze. It is “and the land,” not “and the earth.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:24 –

It says, “the heavens,” not, “heaven.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:26 –

The words bird and beast are singular, and instead of “air” it says, “the heavens.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:27 –

Nobody even knows what an emerod is today. Time for a newer version.

 

Deuteronomy 28:28 –

The KJV fails to include three prepositions, “in madness, and in blindness, and in astonishment of heart.” 3 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:29 –

Rather than “in darkness,” it says, “in the darkness.” Also, rather than “no man shall save thee,” it reads “no deliverer (or savior).” See Judges 3:9/Isaiah 19:20. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:30 –

The written (rather than the spoken) Hebrew uses the term “ravish” or “rape” instead of “lie.” (No demerit for this). The word translated as “gather” signifies “to make common.” It is explained by Leviticus 19:23-25 and should be rendered as such. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 28:31 –

Rather than “none to rescue them,” it reads “no deliverer (or savior).” See Judges 3:9/Isaiah 19:20. 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 28:32 –

The word translated as “fail” is not a verb, but an adverb. Translate as “failingly” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 28:33 –

The word “land” should be “ground.” The word “labours” should be singular. 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:34 –

The word translated as “mad” is a verb, not an adjective – “So that thou shalt be maddened…” 1 demerit.

 

Deuteronomy 28:35 –

It says, “upon the knees” and “upon the legs.” 2 demerits.

 

Deuteronomy 28:37 –

Rather than “nations,” it should say, “the peoples.” 2 demerits.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deuteronomy 33:17 –

Unicorns (?) have one horn. This is so obviously wrong that they receive 2 demerits for this translation.

 

Joshua 12:3 –

The KJV leaves out the article before Jeshimoth. The Hebrew says, ha’yeshimoth, or “the Jeshimoth.” 2 demerits here.

 

Joshua 13:20 –

The KJV leaves out the article before Jeshimoth. The Hebrew says, ha’yeshimoth, or “the Jeshimoth.” 2 demerits here.

 

Joshua 15:36 –

Sharaim is incorrect. It is Shaaraim (see 1 Sam 17:52 and 1 Ch 4:31). 1 demerit.

 

 

Judges 6:20 –

The verse says “the God” not just “God.” It is making a theological point. 1 demerit.

 

Judges 19:24 –

The word aras is consistently translated as “virgin.” This is how it should be here as well. For example, see Genesis 24:16. 1 demerit.

 

 

Ruth 4:4 –

The word “advertise,” no longer carries the same meaning as it did eons ago. 1 demerit for being outdated.

 

 

 

1 Samuel 17:2 –

It says, “in the valley,” not “by the valley.” It says, “the Elah,” not “Elah,” 2 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:3 –

It twice says, “on the mountain,” not “a mountain.” Also, the word translated as “valley” here is not the same as that of the previous verse. This is a demeritable offense. 3 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:4 –

It says, “the champion,” not “a champion.” It says, “camps,” not “camp.” 2 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:5 –

The alloy brass had not yet been used by people. It is bronze. Also, “coat of mail” is incorrect. It is a “breastplate of scales.” 3 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:6 –

The alloy brass had not yet been used by people. It is bronze. Also, the same word translated here as “target” is translated as “shield” in verse 17:45 (inconsistency). Further, it is a type of weapon, not a shield (see Joshua 8:18, etc). 4 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:8 –

The word “armies” is an insufficient translation. The word signifies an arrangement, as its root is used in this same verse. Thus, “ranks,” or “battle lines,” signifies what is going on. Also, it doesn’t say, “Am not I a Philistine?” It says, “Am not I THE Philistine?” 2 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:10 –

The word “armies” is an insufficient translation. The word signifies an arrangement, as its root is used in this same verse. Thus, “ranks,” or “battle lines,” signifies what is going on. 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:11 –

It says, “and they were dismayed.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:16 –

It doesn’t say “morning and evening.” It says, “rising early and growing dark.” They are verbs, not nouns. 2 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:19 –

The words of this verse are Jesse’s words to David, not those of the narrator. This is evidenced by the words “and they.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:21 –

It should say, “rank against rank,” or “battle array against battle array,” but not “army.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:22 –

“And came and saluted his brothers” should say, “and asked his brothers of their welfare.” Also, the archaic word carriage needs updating. Time for a newer and better translation. 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:23 –

The KJV blows the force of the title. It says, “Goliath the Philistine, his name, from Gath.” 1 demerit for blowing this.

 

1 Samuel 17:25 –

“And the men of Israel said” is incorrect. It is singular. “And a man of Israel said.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:26 –

It does not say, “And Davie spake.” It says, “And David said.” It is amar, not daber. 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:30 –

It is “said,” not “spake.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:34 –

There is a preposition and an article before “sheep” – “among the sheep.” There is an article before “lion” and “bear.” 3 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:36 –

There is a stress sadly missing in the KJV (along with two definite articles) – “Also the lion and also the bear…” Also, it says, “the Philistine, the uncircumcised.” 4 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:38 –

1 Samuel 18:4 (and elsewhere) shows that the word “armor” is incorrect. It is garments under the armor. 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:39 –

1 Samuel 18:4 (and elsewhere) shows that the word “armor” is incorrect. It is garments under the armor. 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:41 –

The KJV skips over one use of the word holek. In this, it takes away from the lively nature of the account – “and came the Philistine, coming, and drawing near unto David.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:43 –

It says, “the dog,” not “a dog.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:44 –

“Fowls of the air” should read, “fowls of the heavens.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:45 –

“Shield” is incorrect. It is an offensive weapon, like a javelin. But even if one were to get dogmatic and say it is defensive, it is still translated differently (and thus inconsistently) in 1 Samuel 17:6. Also, it is “ranks of Israel,” not “armies of Israel.” 2 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:46 –

“Fowls of the air” should read, “fowls of the heavens.” “Carcass” is singular and the word is not “host” but “camp” – “I will give the carcass of the camp of the Philistines. 3 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:48 –

It is not “the army,” but rather, “the rank.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:50 –

It is not “a sling and a stone,” but “the sling and the stone.” 2 demerits.

 

1 Samuel 17:51 –

The word “champion” is not the same as used twice before. 1 demerit for obscuring the intended meaning.

 

1 Samuel 17:52 –

It is not “the valley,” but “a valley.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Samuel 17:53 –

It says “camps,” not “tents.” It speaks of the grand scale of the various camps of the different Philistine villages. 1 demerit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 Samuel 7:23 –

The word translated as “God” is incorrect. The verb is plural and the verse should thus say “gods.” There is a reason for this which is missed by the translators. One demerit.

 

2 Samuel 22:5, 6

Two different words for “compassed” are used in the Hebrew, savav and aphaph. Translating them the same, though not incorrect, fails to reveal the intent of David, and the position he felt he was in. Thus 1 demerit is necessary.

 

 

2 Kings 9:20

The word translated as “furiously” is a noun and it is preceded by an article – “in furiousness.” 2 demerits.

 

 

 

 

1 Chronicles 9:2 –

“Nethinims” is a redundancy. The word Nethanim is plural. To add the “s” in English is inappropriate. 1 demerit.

 

 

1 Chronicles 21:1 –

The name “Satan” is incorrect. in the Hebrew, there is no article before “Satan.” Instead of ha’satan, or “Satan,” it simply says, satan – an adversary. It is the exact same expression used when referring to the Lord in Numbers 22:22. The KJV causes a contradiction in Scripture with 1 Samuel 24:1. 1 demerit for introducing a contradiction into Scripture.

 

 

2 Chronicles 22:2 –

Thirty and two years old was he when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem eight years, and departed without being desired. Howbeit they buried him in the city of David, but not in the sepulchres of the kings. 2 Chronicles 21:20

Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri. 2 Chronicles 22:2

How is it that Ahaziah was 2 years older than his father when he died? See 2 Kings 8:26 and receive 1 demerit.

 

2 Chronicles 36:17 –

The word aras is consistently translated as “virgin.” This is how it should be here as well. For example, see Genesis 24:16. 1 demerit.

 

 

 

 

Nehemiah 12:36 –

The Hebrew says, “David, man of the God,” not “David the man of God.” The emphasis is on God, not David. Epic fail and receive 1 demerit.

 

 

 

Esther 1:5 –

The word translated as “green,” karpas, is of Persian origin, and it signifies a type of linen, not a color. The royal colors of the Persians were white and blue (actually more violet). 1 demerit.

 

Esther 1:11 –

“People is plural here” it should read “peoples.” 1 demerit.

 

Esther 1:22 –

The final clause is incorrect. It reads ammow “his people,” and therefore should say, “speaking according to the language of his own people.” 1 demerit.

 

Esther 2:2 –

The translation is insufficient. Four words are used to describe these beauties. YLT does a far better job than the KJV – “young women, virgins, of good appearance” 1 demerit.

 

Esther 2:9 –

Although nor really an error, the words “with such things as belonged to her” make no sense. The word is manah, and it means a portion. It is a special diet for the lady to look her best when she goes into the king. 1 demerit for a very dubious, meaningless translation.

 

Esther 2:14 –

The term is not “on the morrow” but “in the morning.” Biblical days go from evening to morning. This is a technical error as much as a failure to properly translate the words. 2 demerits.

 

Esther 2:19 –

There is no article in front of “virgins.” There is no definite article in front of “second.” It should read, “And when virgins were gathered a second time.” 2 demerit.

 

Esther 3:14 –

There is no article before “copy.” It should read “A copy…” 1 demerit.

 

Esther 4:8 –

There is no article before “copy.” It should read “a copy…” 1 demerit.

 

Esther 4:10 –

The word “Again” is entirely without merit. “And” or “then.” 1 demerit.

 

Esther 4:11 –

The KJV makes the king the subject (one law of his). This is incorrect. The law pertains to the one entering the king’s presence. “one law for him.” 1 demerit.

 

Esther 4:13 –

The word “commanded” has no place here. It is a different word than previous verses, and it simply means “said.” Huge lack of simply checking here. Therefore, there will be 2 demerits. One is for incorrect translation; the other is for not even checking for correctness.

 

Esther 4:15 –

The word “to” was incorrectly left out – “unto (or to) Mordecai.” Further, they have taken the word amar which was mistranslated in 4:13 as “commanded” and translated it as “bade.” 2 demerits. 1 for not adding necessary word; 1 for inconsistency.

 

Esther 5:9 –

The word “moved” should say “tremble” or “showed fear.” The word zua indicated to move, but in a quaking or trembling fashion, as if awed by a greater. See Esther 3:2. 1 demerit.

 

Esther 6:8 –

The KJV implies that the royal crown is the one which is upon the king’s head. This is incorrect. It is speaking of placing a royal crown upon the horse’s head. The construct of the Hebrew renders this plainly obvious. 1 demerit.

 

Esther 7:7 –

There is an article in front of “evil.” It is “the evil.” It signifies total disaster; doom rather than just a bad day at the office. 1 demerit.

 

Esther 8:1 –

There is no article in front of “house.” The word “the” should be italicized. This is speaking of more than a physical house, but that which is connected to the man. 1 demerit.

 

Esther 9:2 –

It is kal ha’ammim, all the people; not all people. Words are place in Scripture by God for a reason. 1 demerit.

 

Esther 9:19 –

“Dwelt” is incorrect. The verb should be in the present tense. 1 demerit.

 

Esther 9:25 –

The name “Esther” does not fit the context here. It is referring to the matter at hand coming before the king. No demerit; just a better solution.

 

Esther 9:30

There is no “the” in front of letters. This actually matters. 1 demerit.

 

Job 31:1 –

The word aras is consistently translated as “virgin.” This is how it should be here as well. For example, see Genesis 24:16. 1 demerit.

 

Job 39:9

This is not a unicorn. The Hebrew of Deuteronomy 33:17 clearly shows it had two horns, not one. 1 demerit.

 

Psalm 16:10 –

The word “hell” is incorrect. 1 demerit.

 

Psalm 18:4, 5

Two different words for “compassed” are used in the Hebrew, savav and aphaph. Translating them the same, though not incorrect, fails to reveal the intent of David, and the position he felt he was in. Thus 1 demerit is necessary.

 

Psalm 22:1 –

Unicorns (?) have one horn. This is so obviously wrong that they receive 2 demerits for this translation.

 

 

Psalm 58:11

The word translated as “God” is incorrect. The verb is plural and the verse should thus say “gods.” There is a reason for this which is missed by the translators. One demerit.

 

 

Psalm 65:1 –

The KJV says “Sion” instead of “Zion.” It is an inconsistent translation. Sion is a different mountain, also known as “Hermon.” This is found in Deuteronomy 4:48, and is spelled shin, yod, aleph, nun. Zion is spelled tsaddi, yod, vav, nun. This is a confused mistranslation. KJV gets 1 demerit. Note: the fact that the term “Sion” is used when speaking of “Zion” in the New Testament based on the rendering of the Greek letters does not justify this mistranslation of the Hebrew in the Old Testament. The translators simply, and blindly, followed along from the mistranslation of the Geneva Bible.

 

Psalm 78:63 –

The word aras is consistently translated as “virgin.” This is how it should be here as well. For example, see Genesis 24:16. 1 demerit.

 

Psalm 84:6 –

There is a definite article before Baca. It says, “the Baca.” 1 demerit.

 

Psalm 102:16

The verbs are past tense, “has built up,” “has appeared.” 2 demerits.

 

Psalm 109:6

There is no article before satan in the Hebrew. Thus, it is not the proper noun “Satan.” Translate as “an accuser,” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Psalm 120: 4 –

The word “broom tree” in Hebrew is plural. It is “broom trees.” 1 demerit.

 

Psalm 148:12 –

The word aras is consistently translated as “virgin.” This is how it should be here as well. For example, see Genesis 24:16. 1 demerit.

 

 

 

Song of Solomon 1:8 –

The term mishkan, or dwelling place is used, not ohel, or tent. 1 demerit.

 

Isaiah 14:29 –

The KJV uses the term “Palestina.” This is utterly ridiculous. The word signifies “Philistine,” coming from the Hebrew pelesheth. There was no such thing as “Palestine,” until so named by the Romans  in the second century AD. Out of 8 occurrences of the word, the KJV botched four of them. 1 demerit.

 

Isaiah 14:31 –

The KJV uses the term “Palestina.” This is utterly ridiculous. The word signifies “Philistine,” coming from the Hebrew pelesheth. There was no such thing as “Palestine,” until so named by the Romans  in the second century AD. Out of 8 occurrences of the word, the KJV botched four of them. 1 demerit.

 

Isaiah 16:9 –

The place, with the same spelling, is called Jaazer here, and Jazer in Numbers 21:32. 1 demerit for inconsistency was applied in Numbers.

 

Isaiah 47:6 –

The word “mercy” is plural – “mercies,” as in Jeremiah 42:12. 1 demerit.

 

Isaiah 65:16 –

The Hebrew twice reads (and should be translated) “in God Amen,” or “in the God of Amen.” (See Revelation 3:14). 2 demerits.

 

 

Jeremiah 7:23 –

The words are in the singular and it says “the heavens.” “And the carcass of this people to food to bird the heavens and to beast the earth.” (See Deuteronomy 28:26) 4 demerits.

 

 

 

Ezekiel 25:9 –

The KJV leaves out the article before Jeshimoth. The Hebrew says, ha’yeshimoth, or “the Jeshimoth.” 2 demerits here.

 

Daniel 9:27 –

The is no article before “covenant” in this verse. 1 demerit.

 

 

 

 

 

Joel 3:4 –

The KJV uses the term “Palestina.” This is utterly ridiculous. The word signifies “Philistine,” coming from the Hebrew pelesheth. There was no such thing as “Palestine,” until so named by the Romans  in the second century AD. Out of 8 occurrences of the word, the KJV botched four of them. 1 demerit.

 

Amos 4:10

The word “camps” in the Hebrew is singular, not plural. 1 demerit.

 

Jonah 1:17 –

Although not technically an error, the words are misleading. The word translated as “had prepared” is manah. It means “to count.” Thus the fish has been “appointed,” not “prepared.” Using “prepared” gives the sense of an act of creation. Rather, God has created, and he has appointed his creation to act at certain counts, or times, in order to meet His needs. He employs His created agents to do His bidding at His will.

 

Jonah 1:17 –

Secondly, the “great fish” here is incorrectly translated in the New Testament by some versions as “whale.” This is wholly unjustifiable and it is incorrect. The word in Hebrew is dag. It indicates a prolific beast; one that greatly multiplies, as is seen in fish, not in mammals. Great studies have been done on this, which, if you want to learn more just go browse the internet. This was probably a sea-dog or a type of shark which are found in the Mediterranean Sea.

 

Jonah 2:3/2:5 –

Two different words for “compassed” are used in the Hebrew, savav and aphaph. Translating them the same, though not incorrect, fails to reveal the intent of the author as Jonah’s cataclysmic demise is at hand. Thus 1 demerit is necessary.

 

Micah 5:5 –

There is no article in front of “peace” in the Hebrew. Even if it can be implied, it still must be italicized. Further, there is to be a full stop after “peace.” The thought is tied to the previous verses, not what is coming in the rest of verse 5. 2 demerits.

 

 

Habakkuk 3:4 –

This is a mistranslation of the word qeren which should be translated as “rays” instead of “horns.” The word means “horns,” but the intent is that of flashing rays of light. The word here denotes the form rather than the substance.

 

Zechariah 14:20

The exact same phrase is used on the gold plate of the high priest in Exodus 28:36. The KJV inconsistently says “HOLINESS TO” and “HOLINESS UNTO.” They are hereby demerited (1 demerit) for this.

 

Zechariah 15:15

The word “tents” is incorrect. It is makhaneh, a camp, not ohel, a tent. 1 demerit.

 

 

 

John 5:24 –

There are articles before “death” and “life” which are ignored by the KJV. 2 demerits.

 

John 16:21 –

The Greek says, “The woman.” It then also says, “the joy.” 2 demerits for skipping the definite articles.

 

John 19:13 –

The word Gabbatha is Aramaic, not Hebrew. 1 demerit.

 

John 19:17 –

The word Golgotha is Aramaic, not Hebrew. 1 demerit.

 

John 21:15-17 –

The KJV completely obliterates what is going on in these three verses. Jesus uses two different words for “love” – agape, agape, phileo. He also uses two different words translated by the KJV as “feed” – boskó, poimainó, boskó. Hence, the passage loses its intent entirely. 6 demerits.

 

 

Acts 1:1 –

The word “former” is the “first,” and it should be translated as such. (see Matthew 10:2). Also, the words “I have made” should be “I made.” Of this, Cambridge states, “The time is indefinite, and we have no warrant in the text for that closer union of the two books, in point of date, which is made by the language of the A. V.” 2 demerits.

 

Acts 1:3 –

The words “forty days” should read, “through forty days.” 1 demerit.

 

 

 

Acts 2:6 –

The words “When this noised abroad” are incorrect. It says, “And this sound having taken place.” It is the sound of the rushing wind. 1 demerit.

 

Acts 2:47 –

The words, “such as should be saved,” are incorrect. It is a present participle. It should say, “those who were being saved.” 1 demerit.

 

Acts 4:8 –

It is clear that the name Jesus is speaking of Joshua. The name is the same in the Greek. 1 demerit.

 

Acts 7:45 –

It is clear that the name Jesus is speaking of Joshua. The name is the same in the Greek. 1 demerit.

 

Acts 24:11 –

The word for “sect” here is the same as was used in 24:5 – hairesis. It is connected to the word heresy that we use today and so some versions incorrectly say “sect” in verse 5 and “heresy” here. However, this makes no sense. Paul explains, that what they call a “sect” is what he calls the Way. They should both be translated as sect because the word specifically means “a strong, distinctive opinion.” To say verse 5 should be “sect” and verse 14 should be “heresy” causes a logical contradiction in thought because he uses the term “they call.” If “they called” it something in verse 5, then all he is doing is repeating what “they called” it, not stating something new.

 

Acts 27:33 –
The wording of the KJV is confused in this verse. There is no article in front of angel, but there is an article in front of God. It should read “an angel of the God.” Instead the KJV says “the angel of God.” As usual, they blindly followed the Geneva Bible and err in the intent of the passage.

 

Acts 27:40 –

The KJV botches this verse by saying that “they had taken up the anchors.” This is not at all what occurred. Instead, they cut away the anchors which held them. Their intent was to run up on shore in as light a manner as possible. There was no benefit to be derived from pulling in the immense anchors for this purpose. Further, the KJV uses in the next clause the word “themselves,” as if it is speaking of those on the ship committing themselves to whatever the sea would do to them. This is incorrect. The action of committing is referring to the anchors, not to those on the ship. They committed the anchors to the deep, where they would not further encumber the ship.

 

Acts 28:9 –

There is an article here which is unfortunately lacking in the KJV. They say, “others also.” However, it rightly should say, “the rest” or “the others.” It gives the sense that there was a rush upon Paul once the word had gotten out. It is therefore a tie to Luke 5:13-15 where the word went out about Jesus miracles to the point that everyone came to Him to be healed.

 

Romans 15:16 –

It is not “we are sanctified,” but “having been sanctified. It is in the perfect tense. It is not speaking of progressive sanctification, but completed sanctification. 1 demerit.

 

 

1 Corinthians 13:12 –

It is “a mirror,” not “a glass.” Glass was not used for mirrors at this point in time. Instead, it was polished metal. Oops. 2 demerits.

 

 

 

2 Corinthians 6:12 –

The word used here (σπλάγχνα splangchna) commonly means in the Bible the tender affections. The Greek word properly denotes the upper viscera; the heart, the lungs, the liver. It is applied by Greek writers to denote those parts of victims which were eaten during or after the sacrifice – Robinson (Lexicon). Hence, it is applied to the heart, as the seat of the emotions and passions; and especially the gentler emotions, the tender affections, compassion, pity, love, etc. Our word “bowels” is applied usually to the lower viscera, and by no means expresses the idea of the word which is used in Greek.

 

2 Corinthians 7:8 –

Paul now refers to the previous letter that he sent them by saying, “For even if I made you sorry with my letter…” The KJV incorrectly states “with a letter.” There is an article in front of “letter” and therefore either “the letter” or “my letter” is appropriate here. He isn’t referring to any letter, but to the specific letter which brought about their sadness.

 

2 Corinthians 7:8, 9 –

Paul now introduces repentance of the Corinthians into his thoughts. Unfortunately, the KJV makes the entire thought convoluted by using the term “repent” in both the previous verse and this one –

 

“For though I made you sorry with a letter, I do not repent, though I did repent: for I perceive that the same epistle hath made you sorry, though it were but for a season.

Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing.”

 

2 Corinthians 8:16 –

KJV says “put” as if it was something instilled in Titus in the past. This is not correct. The verb is in the present tense; it is an on-going action. God put and continued to put earnest care for those in Corinth into Titus’ heart. This is important because it indicates that he still had that care for them and he continued to be burdened for them as Paul wrote the letter which would then be carried by Titus back to them.

 

2 Corinthians 12:18 –

Concerning that visit, Paul asks them to reflect on his conduct while there. He had come with “our brother,” meaning someone well known to them who could then substantiate to the character and demeanor of Titus. The KJV incorrectly says “a brother,” not acknowledging the article which precedes “brother.” But the definite nature of the person is highlighted to show that this person could be checked with for a confirmation of the conduct of Titus at any time.

 

Galatians 1:6 –

The KJV says “that ye are so soon removed.” Thus it misses the sense of the verb which indicates the on-going nature of what is occurring. They are in the process of being deluded.

 

Galatians 1:6, 7 –

The NKJV wisely departs from the older KJV in their translation of verses 6 and 7. Notice the difference between the two –

 

I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. NKJV

 

I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. KJV

 

Two entirely different words are translated as “another” by the KJV. The first is héterosanother (of a different kind). This stands in contrast to állos (“another of the same kind”). The KJV confuses this. Should verse 6 be cited alone, which is not an uncommon thing for people to do, there could be a misunderstanding of what Paul is saying. Thankfully, there are other versions one can refer to in order to get a fuller meaning of the intent of what is being said.

 

Galatians 4:14 –

This verse is incorrectly translated. It is not Paul’s trial that he is referring to, but that of the Galatians. The Greek reads “and the test of you which was in the flesh of me.”

 

Galatians 5:12 –

The rendering entirely misses what Paul is saying. They use the “cut off” in the sense of the false teachers being “cut off from the Galatians.” This verse is speaking of the right of circumcision. Paul is thus referring to continuing their cutting, even unto emasculation.

 

Ephesians 1:11 –

This seems evident by the opening words, because Paul says that “In Him we have obtained an in heritance.” The KJV and the NKJV make the verb active, but it is not. Rather, it is passive. The correct reading is that “we were made a heritage.” Thus it literally is worded to suggest that we were designed as an inheritance.

 

Ephesians 2:7 –

 

The Greek word en or “in” is given to show that only those who are “in Christ Jesus” are the recipients of this. The KJV unfortunately translates this as “through.” It does not convey the sense of “being within” which is intended by Paul. Without proper context, “through” could include anyone. But such is not the case. It is only those who are “in Christ” that will receive this marvelous grace. As usual, the KJV simply follows on with what the Geneva Bible first submitted.

 

Ephesians 2:12 –

He next notes that they were “aliens form the commonwealth of Israel.” The word in Greek is a verb, not a noun. It reads “being alienated from the commonwealth of Israel.” They were out, and they were kept out by the state they were in. With few recorded exceptions, this was the state of all people on the planet. They were born, lived, and died apart from the access to God which was provided through Christ to all who were of Israel’s commonwealth. The importance of “being alienated” rather than “being aliens” is understood in the promise to Abraham that “all the families of the earth shall be blessed” through him. The alienation came from the fall; the commonwealth of Israel is a restoration of that. Until Christ came, this was the default position for all people outside of Israel. It should be noted that this is a spiritual, not a national commonwealth. Paul explains this in Romans 9:6 stating that “not all Israel who are of Israel.” For those who lived by faith in the hope of Christ, they were set apart within this spiritual commonwealth, enjoying the benefits that are derived from it.

 

To further highlight the plight, he moves onto “strangers from the covenants of promise.” The Greek reads “the promise.” Further, the word “covenants” is plural and the word “promise” is singular. A promise was made right after the fall that restoration would be made and that man would be brought back into a right relationship with God. After that time, a series of covenants was made in order for this to come about based on that one promise.

 

Ephesians 4:16 –

The KJV gives and unfortunate paraphrase of the Greek with the words, “by that which every joint supplieth.”

 

It is from Christ that “the whole body” finds its source, its growth, its strength, and its direction. The Greek says, “every joint of supply.” The sustenance is not from the joints (which every joint supplieth), but is from Christ through each joint of supply. Each person who fulfills a role within the church does so based on what Christ has given them, not based on what they have independent of Christ. (For a correct understanding, refer to Colossian 2:19).

 

Ephesians 5:13 –

Whatsoever doth make manifest is light (πᾶν τὸ φανερούμενον φῶς ἐστίν)

Wrong. The A.V. renders doth make manifest, as in the middle voice, but the verb is in the passive voice. It occurs nearly fifty times in the New Testament, and never as middle. Hence Rev., correctly, everything that is made manifest. (Vincent’s Word Studies)

 

Ephesians 5:26 –

Christ “gave Himself” for the church “That he might sanctify and cleanse it.” The words actually should be rendered “…might sanctify having cleansed her.”

 

We are cleansed through the work of Christ. We stand forgiven and justified before God because of the giving of His life. After that act, we are to be sanctified “with the washing of the water by the word.” This is seen in Jesus’ words of John 13:10 –

 

“Jesus said to him, ‘He who is bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you.’”

 

It is further explained in John 17:17 –

 

“Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth.”

 

We are cleansed (having bathed); we require sanctification (periodic washing). It is a two-fold and distinct process which is missed by some translations.

 

Ephesians 6:12 –

The word “wrestle” is a noun, not a verb – “our wrestling is…” Nitpicky, but so are KJV only people.

 

Ephesians 6:12 –

The order is “blood and flesh” in the Greek, not “flesh and blood.” Nitpicky, but so are KJV only people. 1 demerit.

 

Ephesians 6:14 –

The verb is in the middle voice, not passive. It is correctly rendered “having girded.”

 

Philippians 1:1 –

There is no “the” before “servants” in the original. It simply says douloi, or “servants.”

 

Philippians 1:13 –

The reading of this verse is disputed, but the overall sense is still available. Several translations will help us to see this –

 

  • As a result, it has become clear throughout the whole palace guard and to everyone else that I am in chains for Christ. NIV

 

  • For everyone here, including the whole palace guard, knows that I am in chains because of Christ. NLT

 

  • So that my bonds in Christ are manifest in all the palace, and in all other places; KJV

 

  • so that my bonds have become manifest in Christ in the whole praetorium, and to the other places — all, YLT

 

As you can see, the KJV says “bonds in Christ.” The YLT says “bonds have become manifest in Christ.” The latter is correct. The spacing in the Greek is too far apart to tie “bonds” in with “Christ.” It undermines the intent of what Paul is saying. The NIV takes those same words and paraphrases them for the sake of clarity. As far as “the whole palace guard.” The words are translated by the KJV as “palace” and “praetorium” by the YLT. “Palace” is not correct. “Praetorium” is a literal rendering of the Greek, but it doesn’t explain what is the case for us to understand. The term “palace guard” does.

 

Philippians 1:14

The translation is incorrectly translated. It would be a redundancy to say “brethren in the Lord.” If one is a brother, he is in the Lord. The words “brethren” and “in the Lord” are never connected in the Bible in this way. Instead, the words “in the Lord” should be connected to the word “confident.” This follows along with the same connection as is found in Galatians 5:10, 2 Philippians 2:24, and 2 Thessalonians 3:4. Therefore, this verse should be translated as is found in the Berean Study Bible –

 

“And most of the brothers, confident in the Lord by my chains, now dare more greatly to speak the word without fear.”

 

As you can see, the Berean Bible makes sense, and it avoids what would otherwise be a theological error.

 

Philippians 1:26 –

The Greek reads “in Christ Jesus in me” not “for me.” The parallelism of the verse is lost in the KJV. 1 demerit

 

Philippians 2:10 –

The Greek reads “in the name of Jesus” not “at the name of Jesus.” Though it doesn’t substantially change the meaning, the KJV is not literally correct. 1 demerit

 

 

Philippians 2:17 –

Although technically not incorrect, the metaphor is completely lost in this translation. The word translated as “offered” is spendó. It means “to pour out.” There are many types of offerings, this is a particular type, a drink offering. It is the same word that is also used in 2 Timothy 4:6. The KJV cannot be given credit for a proper translation. 1 demerit.

 

Philippians 3:2 –

“Beware of dogs.” The translation unfortunately leaves off an article before “dogs.” It is necessary and it makes the warning less forceful than it should be. “Beware of THE dogs.” Likewise, “…beware of evil workers.” Again, the KJV fails to include the article. The translation gets 2 demerits for failing to stress the urgency in Paul’s words.

 

Philippians 3:4

Vincent’s word  studies is correct in saying that the KJV “is needlessly verbose.” It is supposed to be a literal translation of the Bible, but their translation of this verse is not. It must receive, by virtue of the translation, 1 demerit.

 

Philippians 3:7 –

The word “gain” in Greek is plural. For proper understanding, it should read “gains.” 1 demerit.

 

Philippians 3:8

“Mine own righteousness” would have required the article with “mine.” It makes the assumption that a personal righteousness exists. But Paul says otherwise. He say in this matter of justification, he has none. Secondly, it is not the “faith of Christ,” but “faith in Christ.” We believe in what He has done, and we are sealed with the spirit and declared righteous. The wording is awkward and gives a faulty sense. 2 demerits.

 

Philippians 3:20

There is no article in front of the word “Savior.” Vincent’s Word Studies gives the thoughts of Paul which are being relayed. He says “its emphatic position in the sentence indicates that it is to be taken predicatively with Jesus Christ, and not as the direct object of the verb. Hence render: we await as Savior the Lord…” 1 demerit

 

Philippians 3:21

Where to start? KJV incorrectly mixes “fashion” and “form” of Philippians 2:6 & 2:8. It is “form” here, not “fashion.” Secondly, “our vile body” is incorrect. Nothing God has created is vile. It is what we do with our body which is vile. Man’s body carries a distinct beauty (Isaiah 44:13, etc.) which bears God’s handiwork. It should read “the body of humiliation.” Thirdly, “his glorious body” is incorrect. It should read, “the body of His glory.” Three demerits.

 

Philippians 4:2

The name is Euodia, no Euodias. Euodias is a male name and the context is quite clear that Paul is speaking of a female. 1 demerit.

 

Philippians 4:3

The word “women” is not in the original even if the word “these” is feminine, and it is not italicized in the KJV. It correctly reads “help them.” The format of the Berean Literal Bible, or the NET Bible should be used. 1 demerit.

 

Philippians 4:17

It is not “a gift,” but “the gift.” The article is speaking of the specific gift. 1 demerit.

 

Philippians 4:20 –

It says, “Our God and Father.” Our is to be ascribed to both “God” and “Father.” Also, the KJV leaves off an important article before “glory.” It says “the glory.” 2 demerits.

 

Colossians 1:10

 

The Greek translated here as “worthy” is an adverb. I should read “worthily.” 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 1:12

There is an article in front of “light.” The original reads “in the light.” 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 1:14 –

In the Greek, there is an article before “redemption.” It states “the redemption” and thus it sets the thought apart as the great act of redemption to which any other act (such as the redemption of Israel from Egypt) was only a type and shadow. 1 demerit

 

Colossians 1:16 –

“Were created” is in the aorist tense in the first instance, but in the perfect tense in the second. The KJV fails to make this distinction, by using the words “were created” both times. It gives a faulty sense of what has occurred. The second instance should say “have been created” to indicate the change in tense. 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 1:19

There is an article before “fullness;” to pleroma – “the fulness.” 1 demerit

 

Colossians 1:21

The Greek reads “in” your wicked works. “The enmity of heart is not properly caused by wicked works, but shown in them, and probably intensified by reflex action through them” (Ellicott) 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 1:22

The Greek reads “through the death.” There is a masculine article in front of death, and so it should be “through the death” or “through His death.” The stress is on the humanity of Christ. This is missing in the KJV. 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 1:27

There is an article in front of “glory.” It says “the glory.” 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 2:2

The word “acknowledgment” does not give the sense of the Greek. Acknowledgment is a mental assertion of something. Rather, it is a “full understanding” of the matter, and so “knowledge” is what it should say. They had already acknowledged the matter; they needed to grasp what the matter meant in its fullness. 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 2:6

There is an article in front of “Christ” which is left off by the KJV. It says ton Christon Iesoun ton Kurian, “the Christ Jesus the Lord.” They got one article right, but missed the other. There is a reason for this specificity, and it is completely missed in the translation. 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 2:8

There is an article in front of “philosophy.” It says, “the philosophy.” Not all philosophy is bad; Paul cites some in Acts 17. However, there is specific philosophy which is then described by Paul as “vain deceit.” These words explain “the philosophy.” The KJV blew the intent of Paul’s words. 2 demerits.

 

Colossians 2:12

There is an article in front of “baptism” in the original which the KJV fails to translate. It is either “the baptism” or possibly “your baptsim,” but articles carry meaning and are not to be ignored. 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 2:21

The words translated as “touch” and “handle” are actually just the opposite. The last “denotes a lighter and less deliberate touch than the first” (Cambridge). There is a climax of prohibition in the verse which is lost in the KJV translation. Paraphrasing, it would say “Don’t handle, don’t taste, AND DON’T EVEN TOUCH!” 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 3:1

The correct rendering is “where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God.” “Is” is to be taken separately. “Seated” is a secondary predicate. 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 3:3

“For ye are dead” does not give the sense of what is being said. It should say, “For you died.” To say, “For ye are dead” without an explanation, is a contradiction. It is like saying, “You are a table.” The table isn’t alive and therefore the words are pointless. Paul is making a theological statement to living people about what happened to them in Christ. See Colossians 2:20.

 

Colossians 3:16

There is an article in front of “grace.” Thus it says “the grace.” The construction of the Greek forbids the wording “with grace in your hearts.” Rather, it should say, “in the grace, singing in your hearts to the Lord.”  2 demerits

 

Colossians 3:19

The word “bitter” is in the passive tense. It should read “be embittered” or “grow not bitter.” 1 demerit

 

Colossians 4:1

There is an article in front of “equal.” It is not an adjective but a noun. The sense of what is being relayed is lost in the KJV translation. 1 demerit

 

Colossians 4:2

The word translated as “continue” is much stronger. It means “continue steadfastly.” 1 demerit.

 

Colossians 4:9

There is a definite article in front of “faithful.” It is “the faitful and beloved brother,” not “a faithful and beloved brother.” One demerit.

 

1 Thessalonians 4:4

This major error in translation is explained by Vincent’s Word Studies – “Incorrect. Const. of or by (ὑπὸ) God with beloved. Ἑκλογὴ election…” It should rightly be translated as “…knowing brothers beloved by God, your election…” 1 demerit

 

1 Thessalonians 1:10

It should say, “delivering us,” and  “the wrath that is coming.” The Greek verbs are present participles. 2 demerit.

 

1 Thessalonians 2:3

Should read “is.” This is based on the verb of the next verse. 1 demerit

 

1 Thessalonians 2:4

Should read “have been.” The verb is in the perfect, not the past, tense. 1 demerit

 

1 Thessalonians 2:6

There is no definite article in front of “apostles” in the Greek. The KJV gives a misleading impression of what the word signifies because of this. Strike the definite article and receive 1 demerit

 

1 Thessalonians 2:7

 

“Her” is a reflexive pronoun in the Greek. It should thus say “her own.” 1 demerit

 

1 Thessalonians 2:12

“Hath called” is incorrect. It is a present participle, active. It should read “calls” or “is calling”. The KJV error is probably made by a misunderstanding of the difference between this and Galatians 1:6. 1 demerit

 

1 Thessalonians 4:7

There is a change in the preposition here which the KJV simply ignores. It is first epi, then en. Correctly translated – “For God did not call us for uncleanness, but in holiness.” 2 demerits.

 

1 Thessalonians 4:14

The preposition dia means “through.” We fall asleep through Jesus, not en, or in Jesus. The KJV really blows the symbolism here. He is the Door. Also, the verb for “sleep” is passive. Thus it should be translated as “which have been laid asleep,” or “who have fallen asleep.” 2 demerits.

 

1 Thessalonians 4:15

There is a double negative in this verse which the KJV overlooks, and thus it diminishes the emphasis which Paul presents. The Greek reads, “remaining unto the coming of the Lord no not shall precede those who have fallen asleep.” double demerit.

 

1 Thessalonians 5:3

There is a double negative in this verse which the KJV overlooks, and thus it diminishes the emphasis which Paul presents. The Greek reads, “shall in no ways escape” double demerit.

 

1 Thessalonians 5:5

Rather than “children,” this should say “sons.” The metaphor of our upbringing from the law “children,” to “sons” with full privileges (see Galatians 3), is entirely missed by this translation. 2 demerits.

 

1 Thessalonians 5:22

“Appearance” is incorrect. To demonstrate how this is so, an example might be that of a person walking down a street where prostitutes congregated. Another person might see this and say, “Ooooh, that supposed ‘Christian’ is hanging out with prostitutes.” In fact, however, he was going down the street handing out tracts about Jesus. Thus “appearance” is a faulty idea here, and it actually matches what the leaders of Israel accused Jesus of. They were judging by appearance, and not by what actually occurred. If one thinks it through, one cannot abstain from everything that “looks like evil,” and this is not the intent. The words “form of” rightly explain what is meant. Evil comes in many forms – thoughts, actions, words, etc. These are things which are morally wrong, and with which the Lord would be displeased.  Whatever “type” or “form” of evil is there, we are to abstain from it. 1 demerit

 

1 Thessalonians 5:23

“Wholly” should be tied to “preserved,” not to “spirit.” The word entirely “is predicative, not attributive…. It signifies having the entire allowment; complete in all parts.” (Vincent’s Word Studies). Paul is not hoping that God will preserve our whole spirit and body, as if they could be partially preserved! Rather, he is anticipating that God will preserve us so that we will be entirely blameless at the Lord’s coming. In other words, it is the efforts of God of the previous clause, not man’s efforts of the preceding verse, which Paul is putting his hopes on. Man’s efforts could never be so relied upon, but God’s power can be trusted.1 demerit

 

2 Thessalonians 1:8

The term “in flaming fire” belongs to angels; it is not the instrument of judgment. This follows from OT symbolism where angels, or seraphim, are “the burning ones.” Much of the tribulation judgment does not come in the form of fire. Thus, there would otherwise be an inconsistency in the text. Secondly, the term “taking vengeance” is inappropriate. The Greek reads, “giving” or “rendering.” “Taking” implies personal vindictiveness. There no such hint of this in the unchanging God. Thirdly, the word “them” is repeatedin the Greek twice, showing two different categories – “on them that know not God, and on them that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.” The important distinction is missed by the KJV. 3 demerits.

 

2 Thessalonians 1:11

“Wrong. Paul does not mean all the goodness which God is pleased to bestow, but the delight of the Thessalonians in goodness” (Vincent’s Word Studies). 1 demerit.

 

 

2 Thessalonians 2:4

The phrase “or that is worshiped” is not literally correct. It is a noun, not a verb. Thus it should read, “object of worship.” See Acts 17:23.

 

2 Thessalonians 2:6

There is a definite article in front of “withholds,” and, therefore, it should read “that which,” not “what.” The Thessalonians were not being reminded of a mere doctrine, but of a specific and familiar object. 1 demerit.

 

2 Thessalonians 2:9

Vincent’s Word Studies corrects the KJV – “…signs and wonders of a lie. Of a lie characterizes the three words, power, signs, wonders. All bear the stamp of fraud.” Each of these descriptors has been used to speak of Jesus. They are now being used to contrast the working of Antichrist. 1 demerit.

 

2 Thessalonians 2:11

There is a definite article in front of “lie.” It is not “a lie,” but “the lie.” 1 demerit.

 

2 Thessalonians 2:12

The word krino which is used here means “judged.” It does not here, or elsewhere, convey the idea of condemnation, even if that is what is implied by the context. 1 demerit.

 

2 Thessalonians 2:13

The word translated as “hath chosen” is an aorist verb. It is righly translated as “chose.” It is a set point in time in which it occurred. “Hath chosen” could mean any point in time, but “chose” is a specific point in the eternal decree of God. 1 demerit.

 

2 Thessalonians 3:2

There is an article in front of “unreasonable” which the KJV fails to include. Paul is speaking of a specific group, of whom he requests specific prayers about. The lacking article leaves a void in the prayer. Would you want prayers for you incorrectly prayed? No, neither would Paul. There is a second article missing before “faith.” It is “the faith.” Paul is conveying to us a a truth about the true faith which is in Christ. 2 demerits.

 

2 Thessalonians 3:3

There is an article in front of “evil” which the KJV fails to include. It says “the evil,” 1 demerits.

 

2 Thessalonians 3:5

Although flowery and painful to correct, the words “patient waiting for Christ” are incorrect. It says, “patience of Christ” in the Greek. 1 demerit.

 

2 Thessalonians 3:9

The word “power” is incorrect. It is “authority” which is power combined with legitimacy. 1 demerit.

 

2 Thessalonians 3:15

The verse begins with the common Greek conjunction kai (and), not yet. There is nothing adversative in this thought. The words are intended as a saving measure only. There is no hint of bitterness or unkindness in Paul’s thoughts to substantiate “yet.” 1 demerit.

 

2 Thessalonians 3:17

There is no article in front of “token” in the Greek. It is “a token,” not “the token.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Timothy 1:11

The KJV tranlsation is very forced in its construction. Rather than it saying, “according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God,” it is better translated as, “according to the gospel of the glory of the blessed God.” This then speaks of “the glory” in relation to God. In other words, the gospel which tells of righteousness apart from the law is seen in “the glory of the blessed God.” It is a reference to the work of Christ Jesus who is “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God” (2 Corinthians 4:6). The gospel may be glorious, but it is only in relation to the One who brought it forth.

 

1 Timothy 2:7

Although not an error per se, the word “ordained” here no longer carries the meaning that it originally did. This has nothing to do with the ordination process; it simply means “appointed.” 1 demerit for obsolescence and thus modern confusion.

 

1 Timothy 2:8

There is an article which precedes “men” in the Greek. In leaving this article off, the KJV misses the intent and purpose of the verse. It is “the men” who are to pray. Using “men” without the article could be inferred to be speaking of both genders. This is exactly what has happened because of this error in the KJV. The word “doubting” gives the sense of not feeling confident. That is not what is being relayed here. The word is tied to “wrath” and it signifies dissension or dispute. It is an attitude which is directed towards those whom the wrath is also directed. 2 demerits.

 

1 Timothy 3:1

The exact same term, pistos ho logos, is translated in 1 Timothy 1:15 as “This is a faithful saying.” There is no reason to depart from that. Further, although it has been established that only men are to be ordained as bishops, it is incorrect to insert the word “man” here without italicizing it. Finally, the word translated the second time as “desireth” is a completely different Greek words. 3 demerits; inconsistency, non-literal translation, and picking one work to translate two different words, thus obscuring the true meaning..

 

1 Timothy 3:8

There is no article before “deacons.” It is inserted without italics. 1 demerit.

 

1 Timothy 3:10

Although not an error specifically, the word “use” here is wholly unsuited to the verse. It should say (way better than use) “let them serve as deacons.” 1 demerit for not way better-ness.

 

1 Timothy 4:6 –

There is an article in front of “faith” and in front of “good doctrine” which is left out of the KJV, thus leaving an incorrect idea about what Paul is saying. Lastly, the words “whereunto you have attained” or incorrect. He had not attained, but had closely followed.” If he had attained, he would have no need to be implored to continuously be nourished in the words of faith and good doctrine.” 3 demerits.

 

1 Timothy 5:4 –

Though not originally incorrect, the word “nephews” which once carried the intended meaning is wholly obsolete. Today we say “grandchildren.” The Greek word is not inclusive of “nephews,” but only those in a direct line. The KJV is here demerited, not for inaccuracy, but for obsolescence leading to a wholly false idea by the modern reader. 1 demerit.

 

1 Timothy 5:12 –

What a preposterous translation! Regardless of what the word “damnation” meant in 1611, it is entirely and wholly incorrect in modern English. Render as “judgment,” and receive 1 demerit for a wholly faulty translation.

 

1 Timothy 5:14 –

The word “women” is incorrectly supplied. It is speaking of “widows” who are referenced in the preceding verses, and who are connected in this verse with the conjunction οὖν, or “therefore.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Timothy 6:5 –

The translation is incorrect. It is a well-known violation of the KJV of the law concerning an article being placed with the subject. The article in the Greek before the word “godliness” requires it to read, “supposing that godliness is a source of gain.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Timothy 6:8 –

“Let us be content” does not carry the appropriate meaning off the Greek. Rather it should read, “we shall be content.” The idea is that of sufficiency in those things is realized. 1 demerit.

 

1 Timothy 6:10 –

The Greek reads, “Root indeed of all the evils.” There is no article in front of “root,” but Charles Ellicott says that by not including it, one is watering down the intent. He says that “the article disappears before the predicate, in accordance with the well-know rule respecting subject and predicate.” Vincent’s word studies disagrees saying this is incorrect because, “It is not the only root.” Vincent’s is correct; the KJV is incorrect. The love of money is not the root of all evil. Money did not cause Satan to fall, nor did money cause man to eat the forbidden fruit. Pride was the cause of those evils. Further, the article and the adjective translated as “the evil” are plural. Is should read these evils.” 3 demerits.

 

1 Timothy 6:12 –

It is “the faith” not “faith.” Paul is making a metaphor as if Timothy is a participant in the Grecian games fighting for THE FAITH. The KJV completely misses the symbolism. It is “the eternal life,” not “eternal life.” Everybody will live somewhere forever, but only those who are in Christ will have the eternal life Paul speaks of. And it is “the good confession,” not “a good confession.” Timothy may have made many good confessions, but Paul is speaking of a specific one which he then describes. 3 demerits for overlooking 3 very important articles in the Greek.

 

2 Timothy 1:1 –

There is an article connected to “life.” Thus it should say, “the life which is in Christ Jesus.” 1 demerit.

 

2 Timothy 1:3 –

The Greek reads “in” a pure conscience, rather than “with.” It is referring to t he sphere which Paul served God. 1 demerit.

 

2 Timothy 2:5 –

“Also” belongs prior to “man,” not after. It is a new subject with a different man conducting his affairs. 1 demerit.

 

2 Timothy 2:8 –

Incorrect translation. There is no “that” to be included. Vincent’s rightly states: “Μνημόνευε remember, only here in Pastorals: often in Paul. Ἑγείρειν to raise, very often in N.T., but only here in Pastorals. The perfect passive participle (ἐγηγερμένον) only here. The perfect marks the permanent condition – raised and still living.” The words, “of the seed of David” come after, not before, “was raised from the dead.” 2 demerits.

 

2 Timothy 2:9 –

Although translator’s preference allows for various words to be used, the word “evil doer” is simply not suitable. A person can be charged with a crime when not having actually done evil. The word signifies a criminal. This incarceration is according to the Roman law, not a moral standard. Bad selection of chosen translation, and thus 1 demerit.

 

2 Timothy 2:11 –

The aorist verb should be translated “if we died.” The KJV misses the force of the intent. 1 demerit.

 

2 Timothy 2:12 –

Translator’s preference allows “suffer,” but the word means “to endure.” It is one thing to suffer, and it is another thing to endure through it. The word speaks of the latter. 1 demerit.

 

2 Timothy 2:19 –

Vincent’s explains the error here – Στερεὸς sure is attributive, not predicative. Rend. the firm foundation of God standeth. 1 demerit.

 

2 Timothy 3:10 –

The KJV says, “you have fully known my doctrine.” The word means, “to follow.” Someone can know to do right and not do it. Timothy was being complimented for following Paul’s doctrine. Although not necessary an incorrect translation, it fails to convey Paul’s meaning sufficiently. 1 demerit.

 

2 Timothy 3:15 –

The word translated as “child” indicates a baby; a child in arms. Using “child” provides an incorrect evaluation of Timothy’s time of learning. 1 demerit.

 

2 Timothy 4:2 –

The word “doctrine” should be rendered as “teaching.” Doctrine is the substance or the result of teaching. The word longsuffering naturally ties in with teaching. 1 demerit.

 

2 Timothy 4:6 –

“For I am now ready to be offered” is in the present tense and more accurately ready, “For I am already being offered.” However, even better is to translate the meaning of spendomai as, “For I am already being poured out.” The word refers to the drink offering. 2 demerits.

 

2 Timothy 4:7 –

There are three definite articles in this verse. The KJV simply ignores them and botches Paul’s intent completely. The Greek reads – “The good fight I have fought, the race I have finished, the faith I have kept. 3 demerits. 2 for skipping the definite articles, and 1 for blowing the intent of the verse.

 

2 Timothy 4:8 –

There is an article in front of “crown.” It is not “a crown” but “the crown.” 1 demerit.

 

Titus 1:2 –

“In hope” does not meet the thoughts of Paul properly. It should say, “Resting upon the hope” or “Which is based upon the hope.” Paul has already defined the surety of the truth of the gospel. 1 demerit.

 

Titus 2:1 –

There is a definite article before “sound doctrine.” It is “the sound doctrine.” One can have a variety of sound doctrines, but one is being spoken of. 1 demerit.

 

Titus 2:4 –

The words “to be sober” are incorrectly supplied. The word is found only here in the NT, but it is common in classical Greek as “correct,” “control,” “teach.” Paul instructs the older women to “school” the younger women. 1 demerit.

 

Titus 3:1 –

Although not necessarily an error, translating this as “principalities and powers” confuses the subject (human rules) with that of how “principalities is translated at times elsewhere, meaning an order of spiritual beings; angels. “Rulers and authorities” is a better translation. 1 demerit for confusing the reader.

 

Titus 3:6 –

The term “shed” as referring to the Holy Spirit is wholly inconsistent with other uses of the concept  – OT and New. It is more appropriately stated “poured.” 1 demerit.

 

Titus 3:15 –

The KJV closes out the book of Titus with two errors. It is “that love us in faith,” not “the faith.” There is no article in front of the word. And it is “The grace be with you,” not “Grace be with you.” There is an article in front of “grace.” 2 demerit.

 

Philemon 1:5 –

It is “all the saints,” not “all saints.” 1 demerit.

 

 

Philemon 1:15 –

The verb is passive, not active. It is not “departed,” but “was parted.” It is an important point Paul is making which was botched by the translation. 1 demerit.

 

Philemon 1:20 –

The word translated as “let me have joy” is oninémi. Though it can be translated as the KJV, it more correctly means profit. It is Paul, making a pun on the name Onesimus. The KJV completely misses the intent of what is stated. Further, there is no article before “Lord.” The word “the,” though rightly supplied, should be italicized. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 1:4 –

“Being made” should be replace with “Having become.” It is to be taken in connect with “sat down” not with “being” of the previous verse. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 1:6 –

The construction of the verse is wrong. The word “again” in the Greek is connected to “bring” as the margin notes indicate. “When he a second time bringeth the first-begotten into the world.” It is speaking of the second coming of Christ. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 1:7 –

The word “spirits” should read “winds.” The thought is seen numerous times in Scripture, such as in 1 Kings 19:11, 12. This verse in Hebrews is not speaking of the creation of angels as spirit-beings, but the employment of angels as directed beings, likened to the forces of wind and fire. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 1:8 –

The same word, in the same context, is used in both 1:7 and 1:8, pros. In 1:7, the KJV translates it “of.” In 1:8, it translates it “to.” This is an inconsistency which robs the intent of the verses. Further, it is not “a” scepter of righteousness, but “the” scepter. The definite article he in the Greek actually bears on the translation. 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 1:14 –

Two different words are translated with the word “minister” by the KJV. It causes confusion in the English reader. An appropriate translation would be “Are they not all ministering spirits, for service…” Further, the word “to” indicates that the service is to the humans. This is incorrect. The service is to God and for them humans. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 2:2 –

It is the word spoken “through” angels, not “by” angels. It is God’s word that is being conveyed. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 2:4 –

The Greek reads more forcefully than the KJV. Instead of, “God bearing them witness,” it says, “God bearing witness with them.” For a confirmation of this verse, see Mark 16:20. 1 demerit for weak wording.

 

Hebrews 2:6 –

The words “certain place” are inappropriate. The word pou is the genitive case of an indefinite pronoun pos. It should, therefore, be indefinite as in “somewhere.” Not so much is the KJV wrong, as they are simply off target. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 2:9 –

Although not specifically incorrect, the order of the Greek highlights and emphasizes the work of Jesus. The KJV fails to give this highlight. The NAS rightly structures it with, “But we do see Him who has been made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 2:11 –

Both uses of the term “sanctify” in this verse are in the present tense, active voice. Thus it should say, “…both He who is sanctifying and those who are being sanctified.” 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 2:14 –

The order is “blood and flesh” in the Greek, not “flesh and blood.” Nitpicky, but so are KJV only people. Also, the words “destroy him” are incorrect. It should say, “make him ineffective” or “render him powerless.” The devil is not now destroyed.  He won’t be removed from the scene until during the millennium (Revelation 20:3), and he won’t be cast into the Lake of Fire until after the millennium (Revelation 20:10). Even in the Lake of Fire, he will continue on in eternal punishment. However, his power has been brought to nothing for the redeemed of the Lord. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 2:16 –

The KJV inappropriately follows the Geneva Bible in this verse, thus bringing confusion in the argument which is being made. The Greek indicates, “take hold of.” It is referring to aid given, such as in the Isaiah 41:8, 9. It is not speaking about taking on the nature of angels as opposed to men. As a confirmation of this, the verb is in the present tense. That is wholly unsuited to the past act of the incarnation. The KJV confuses what is being said and is to be rejected. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 3:2 –

“Who was” is a present participle, and so “was” doesn’t convey the meaning of what the author is saying. It is more appropriately rendered “is faithful,” or “being faithful.” We aren’t asked to merely “consider” Him as Jesus the Person, but to think of Him in His faithfulness to God and on our behalf. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 3:6 –

This should say, “over His house,” not “over His own house.” It is speaking of “the house of God” (see Hebrews 10:21). Moses was a servant in His house; Jesus is the Son over His house. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 3:8 –

It should say, “in the day of the temptation.” There is an article before “temptation.” This is referring to two incidents in the wilderness. One was at Massah (the provocation) and one was at Meribah (the temptation). They came at the beginning and end of the wanderings and form a picture of what occurred. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 3:9 –

It should say, “Where  your fathers tempted me,” not “When your fathers tempted me.”1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 3:11 –

There is an inconsistency in the translation. The same words are translated as “So” here and “As” in verse 4:3. Render as one or the other (the Greek word is hos) and receive 2 demerits for inconsistency.

 

Hebrews 3:12 –

The word “the” is inserted. It reads “living God.” As the KJV did not italicize this, it is 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 3:13 –

There are two articles not translated by the KJV. “The Today” and “the sin.” The author is being specific with the inclusion of these articles, and the KJV fails to show what was given for us to learn. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 3:14 –

Two different words are translated as “confidence” in verses 3:6 and 3:14. The first signifies a confidence as in boldness. The second, a confidence such as in assurance. Although this is translator’s preference, the reader is left with no comprehension that two different ideas are being relayed. 1 demerit for lack of clarity.

 

Hebrews 3:16 –

The verse is a set of questions, not statements. It would be utterly absurd to say, “For some,” when speaking of over six hundred thousand men when only two entered into Canaan. Further, it is shown, quite clearly, that Joshua did not enter the promised rest because the passage is speaking of the collective whole, not individuals. The Greek is in the interrogative, forming a question – “For who, having heard, rebelled?” Likewise, the second clause is also question, not a “howbeit.” This is confirmed then by the word “all.” It is further confirmed by the continued use of questions in the next two verses of the chapter. 2 giant demerits.

 

Hebrews 3:18 –

The word translated as “believed not” should be “disobeyed.” The author is using each example from the quoted psalm in a rhetorical question. “provoked” in 3:16, “sinned” in 3:17, “disobeyed” in 3:18, and “unbelief” in 3:19. The KJV fails to make this literary connection. Thus, there is disharmony in the parallels. The disobedience was that of unbelief, but that is explained in the final verse of the chapter. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 4:2 –

This is an unhappy and misleading translation. The word “gospel” is wholly inappropriate here because it is being equated with the technical and standard idea of preaching the gospel which belongs to this dispensation. It is rather the “good news” that God has a place of rest for his people. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 4:3 –

This is a poor translation. It says, “They shall not enter my rest” as in verse 3:11. 1 demerit for inconsistency and lack of clarity.

 

Hebrews 4:4 –

The words “certain place” are inappropriate. The word pou is the genitive case of an indefinite pronoun pos. It should, therefore, be indefinite as in “somewhere.” Not so much is the KJV wrong, as they are simply off target. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 4:5 –

This is a poor translation. It says, “They shall not enter my rest” as in verse 3:11. 1 demerit for inconsistency and lack of clarity.

 

Hebrews 4:6 –

The word translated as “unbelief” should be “disobedience.” It is the noun form of the word used in 3:18 and which should have been translated as “disobeyed.” As Vincent’s Word Studies says, “Ἀπείθεια disobedience is the active manifestation of ἀπιστία unbelief.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 4:9 –

The author has been building his case for numerous verses, using the term “rest” to indicate what was once denied Israel. He now indicates that this remains open. However, he uses a completely different word than ever before. It indicates a “Sabbath rest,” and is rightly translated as such. The KJV fails to make this most remarkable distinction. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 4:10 –

Of course there is translator’s preference to be considered, but the KJV’s translation here is inadequate instead of “ceased,” it should say, “rested.” The entire passage has spoken of resting and all of a sudden they change from that concept, distorting what is being relayed. Further, the word “own” should be supplied at the end “His own,” because it is there (idios) in the Greek. It is an emphatic adjective speaking of one’s personal possession. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 4:12 –

The KJV leaves out the word “and” before “piercing.” The Greek is precise, so should the KJV be. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 4:14 –

The word “into” does not convey the proper meaning. It is “through.” Jesus passed “through” the heavens, even up to the throne of God. The symbolism is that of the high priest of the Old Testament passing through the Holy Place, through the veil, and into the Most Holy Place. The KJV fails to convey this. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 5:1 –

“Being taken,” not “taken.” The focus is not on the taking, but on the fact that he is a man. The point is that he is taken from among men, otherwise he would not be a suitable priest. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 5:5 –

There is an article prior to “Christ” which the KJV fails to include. It is “the Christ.” The author is making a particular point to the Hebrew people. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 5:7 –

The KJV says, “and was heard in that he feared.” The Greek word eulabeia signifies a godly, reverent, fear. It should say, “and having been heard for His reverent fear.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 5:8 –

“Though he were a Son…” leaves an incorrect idea. Jesus wasn’t a Son only in the past. He is still a Son. The verb is in the present tense, and should say, “Though being a Son.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 5:9 –

The KJV places the verb in the present tense, “being made perfect.” This could be taken as meaning “still in the process,” which is not correct. The verb is in the aorist tense, “having been made perfect.” Tenses matter. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 5:11 –

The word “whom” should be “which.” It is speaking of the subject of Christ being made High Priest on the order of Melchizedek. The words “hard to be uttered” should read, “hard of interpretation (or explained).” The KJV completely misses the intent. And the words, “ye are dull of hearing” should read, “…have become dull of hearing.” See next verse (and the parsing of the Greek word) to figure this out. 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 5:12 –

The KJV completely obscures the meaning and intent of this verse. “For when for the time ye ought to be teachers,” (a clause that makes no sense at all) should read, “For though by this time you ought to be teachers.” Next, the KJV incorrectly ties “again” in with “teach you,” but it is in the emphatic position and should be tied in with “you have need.” It should say, “Again, you have need…” And thirdly, the KJV takes the word “which” as an interrogative – “which be the first principles.” Rather, it more correctly reads – “Again, you have need that someone teach you the first principles.” 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 6:5 –

The KJV translates this verse the same as Hebrews 2:5, but two different words are used. One should say “world.” The other should say “ages.” 2 demerits for confusion of translation.

 

Hebrews 6:6 –

There is no “if” in the Greek. It simply says, “And having fallen away.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 6:7 –

“Drinketh in” is incorrect. It is an aorist participle, “has drunk.” It is a thing which is accomplished at a set point. Further, it doesn’t say, “by whom it is dressed.” It reads, “for whom it is tilled.” First, it shows that nothing is lacking for those who till the land, and secondly, “dress” means to “trim.” The ground isn’t trimmed; vines are. The land is “tilled.” 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 6:8 –

Explained by Vincent’s Word studies – “Wrong. As given in A.V. the illustration throws no light on the subject. It puts the contrast as between two kinds of soil, the one well-watered and fertile, the other unwatered and sterile. This would illustrate the contrast between those who have and those who have not enjoyed gospel privileges. On the contrary the contrast is between two classes of Christians under equally favorable conditions, out of which they develop opposite results.” It should say, “But if it…” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 6:9 –

There is an article before “better things.” It reads, “the better things.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 6:12 –

“That you be not slothful” should be “That you do not become slothful.” It is an aorist verb. The word “followers” fails to give the sense of what is said. The Greek indicates “imitators.” One can follow without imitating. “Inherit” should be “are inheriting.” It is a present participle. 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 6:16 –

The word “oath” has an article before it – “the oath.” Further, the word confirmation is tied in with “end,” not “oath.” Thus, it more correctly reads, “and the end of all controversy to them for confirmation is the oath” (YLT). 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 6:17 –

There is an article in front of “promise.” It is the “heirs of the promise.” That makes a substantial difference. The word “confirmed” means “mediated,” and it should be rendered as such. This is because the author’s point is directly connected to the mediatorial work of Christ as will be revealed in Chapter 7. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 6:20 –

The theological error of the translation is explained by Vincent’s Word Studies: “It expresses an entirely new idea, lying completely outside of the Levitical system. The Levitical high priest did not enter the sanctuary as a forerunner, but only as the people’s representative. He entered a place into which none might follow him; in the people’s stead, and not as their pioneer. The peculiarity of the new economy is that Christ as high priest goes nowhere where his people cannot follow him. He introduces man into full fellowship with God. The A.V. entirely misses this point by rendering “the forerunner,” as if the idea of a high priest being a forerunner were perfectly familiar. Rend. whither as a forerunner Jesus entered. Comp. Hebrews 10:19. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 7:14 –

“Sprang” should be “has sprung.” It is in the perfect tense. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 7:22 –

The word “testament” should be “covenant.” This is contrasting the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31) with that of the Old Covenant given through Moses. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 7:23 –

Instead of “were many priests,” it should say, “have been made priests many.” The act of them being made priests because of the law is what is being relayed. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 7:24 –

The KJV misses the possessive intent of the article. The words in the Greek place the emphasis on “unchangeable,” not on “priesthood.” In other words, it reads more correctly, “has his priesthood unchangeable.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 7:27 –

The translation is incomplete. It should say “once for all” rather than “once.” Without this, there is the possibility of theological error. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 8:8 –

The verb is in the present participle and should read, “Now in the things which we are saying…” The author hasn’t just spoken, but continues to speak. Further, the words mean “in consideration of,” not “in addition to.” what his being spoken. Next, it is not “the sum” as if it is totaling up what precedes in the discussion, but the main point of the continuing discussion. It should say, “the chief point.” In the next clause, the words “is set” are wrong. It should say, “sat down.” The aorist verb indicates an accomplished action. 4 demerits.

 

Hebrews 8:5 –

The words, “of God,” are not in the original. However, they are also not italicized. Although it is obviously God who said this (Exodus 25:1 says “the Lord”), it should still be italicized. This is great error and irresponsible. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 8:7 –

There is no definite article in front of “second.” It should read, “for a second.” It is connected to the previous verse which said, “a better covenant.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 9:1 –

The KJV fails to include a definite article in front of “sanctuary.” It is “the sanctuary” which is being highlighted, not any sanctuary. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 9:2 –

The term “candlestick” does not convey what the menorah was. There were no candles on it. Further, based on the present participle in verse 9:6, it should say “are,” not “was.” 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 9:4 –

The words, “the golden censer” are incorrect. It is “the golden altar.” The tense should be present also, “wherein are.” 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 9:6 –

The word “went” should be changed to the present tense (as previous examples). 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 9:7 –

Verbs should again be in the present tense. The word “errors” means “ignorances.” Errors is too broad and does not properly define what is being said. Though not an error, it is not a suitable translation. 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 9:9 –

A very botched up verse. The tenses are wrong. The “in which” is r eferring to the parable and not the tabernacle. It should say, “according to which,” and it should say, “make the worshiper perfect.” It is not the priest, but the one bringing the offering who is being spoken of. Multiple demerits.

 

Hebrews 9:10 –

The “and” before “carnal ordinances” is incorrect. It is not in the Greek, nor implied there. The phrase, “carnal ordinances,” is a general description of what was previous stated. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 9:11 –

“Of good things to come” is wrong. It is “of good things having come.” One might says, “of the good things realized.” As Vincent’s Word Studies says, it speaks of “Blessings not merely prophetic or objects of hope, but actually attained; free approach to God, the better covenant, personal communion with God, the purging of the conscience.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 9:12 –

The word “once” is insufficient to convey the author’s intent. It is “once for all.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 9:14 –

There is no article in front of “eternal Spirit.” This is not speaking of the Holy Spirit, but of the nature of Christ and the accomplishment of His work. It should read “an eternal Spirit.” 1 demerit for incorrectly adding to God’s word, and 1 demerit for not italicizing it.

 

Hebrews 9:15 –

The words “new testament, and “first testament” are wholly inappropriate. It should read, “new covenant,” and “first covenant.” It is a huge theological mistake. This fails to even match internal consistency found in verses 9:1 and 9:4. 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 9:15 –

The word “testament,” is inappropriate. The entire thought has been concerning the covenant previously enacted and described. Further, the address is to the Hebrews, among whom the covenant was made, and to whom the New Covenant is being introduced. It should read, “covenant.” There is a failure to match internal consistency found in verses 9:1 and 9:4. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 9:18 –

The word, “Whereupon,” should be translated as “Wherefore,” or “Therefore.” The statement is based upon what he has said… for this reason, therefore.” Secondly, the word “testament” is wholly incorrect. Is should read “covenant.” 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 9:20 –

The word, “testament” is incorrect. It is, “covenant.” Also, “enjoined” should read “commanded.” 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 9:21 –

Bizzaringly, the KJV simply omits the word “likewise,” or “in like manner.” It is a part of the original and it is necessary to understand what is occurring. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 9:22 –

The word “almost” is prefixed to the entire statement and applies to both clauses. The NAS rightly translates the verse, “And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 9:23 –

Major error – The word “patterns” is exactly the opposite of what is being indicated. It is the “copies,” not the originals that are being referred to. See Exodus 25:9 & Hebrews 8:5. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 9:26 –

The KJV gives a false impression of what is being said. It is not “the end of the world,” as if the physical world is being spoken of, but “the end of the ages.” It is a plural noun, not a singular noun, and it is speaking of Christ’s appearance “when the former ages had reached their moral consummation under the old Levitical economy. Comp. Hebrews 1:2” (Vincent’s Word Studies). 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 9:28 –

There is an article before Christ, “So the Christ.” Articles have meaning. Further, the participle is an aorist in the passive voice – “once having been offered.” 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 10:2 –

The verb is a present participle. The words, “cease to be offered,” should read, “cease being offered.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 10:6 –

The word is holokautóma. It is a “whole burnt offering,” not merely a burnt offering. A study of Leviticus will show the error of the translation. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 10:7 –

Instead of “I come,” it should read, “I have come.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 10:8 –

The words, “which are offered by the law,” don’t make any sense. The law instructs, it doesn’t “do.” It should read, “which are offered according to law.” There is no “the” in the Greek as well. The KJV inserts a word without italicizing it. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 10:10 –

It is not “we are sanctified,” but “having been sanctified. It is in the perfect tense. It is not speaking of progressive sanctification, but completed sanctification. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 10:14 –

The words “are sanctified,” are incorrect. The Greek is a present participle. It says, “are being sanctified.” It is not speaking of the individual who is sanctified, but all who are being sanctified through the one, final, and complete sacrifice of Christ. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 10:16 –

The words, “I will put” are incorrect. The verb is a present participle, active. Thus it says, “putting my laws in their hearts.” Further, the word “mind” is singular, not plural. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 10:19 –

It is not “holiest” but “holy places.” The noun is plural. It is not “by” the blood, but “in” the blood. See Ephesians 2:18 & 3:12. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 10:20 –

The words “a new and living way,” are incorrect. There never was a way for us to enter. Only the priests could do so in an earthly sanctuary, and theirs was only prefiguring the true access. Now there is “a way, new and living.” There is one way and only one way to enter, and that is through Christ. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 10:21 –

The Greek says, “a great priest.” The word megas, or great, is used, not archiereus, or “high.” He is our High Priest, and the term certainly signifies “High Priest,” as is seen in both the Hebrew and the Greek, but translating a completely different word, purposefully used by the translator, in the same manner as the normally used word, misleads the reader. If the KJV had said, “great high priest,” they could not be faulted, but they didn’t. Thus, they receive 1 demerit for misleading the reader.

 

Hebrews 10:22 –

The words “our bodies” are incorrect. Both words are singular in the Greek. It is not speaking of individuals, but of the corporate body as was prophesied in Ezekiel 36:25. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 10:23 –

The word is “hope,” not “faith.” As Vincent’s Word Studies states, “Faith does not appear among Ms. readings. It is an innovation of the translators.” Reference also Hebrews 6:11 & 6:18, 19. 1 demerit for trying to reinvent God’s word.

 

Hebrews 10:24 –

The word “provoke” no longer carries the same meaning it did in 1611. 1 demerit for continuing to use a word with an archaic meaning which confuses the modern reader.

 

Hebrews 10:28 –

“Despised” is incorrect. It is an aorist participle active (not past tense), and it also means “to set at naught.” A person can despise their boss and still be obedient to him. Translate as “disregards.”  Further, the word “died” is incorrect. It is a present indicative active verb – “dies.” The author is writing about the present time, and of what actually occurred at that time. 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 10:32 –

The word translated as “illuminated” is the same word, using the same context and parsing, was translated as “enlightened” in verse 6:4. In order to maintain consistency of thought, it should be translated as such here as well. Likewise, the word translated as “afflictions,” was translated as “sufferings,” in Hebrews 2:9 and 10. The word is certainly being used on a comparative basis to that of the sufferings of Christ. 2 demerits for inconsistency of translation.

 

Hebrews 10:33 –

The word “companions” does not convey the meaning. One can be a companion and not share in the other’s suffering. The meaning is a sharer, or a partaker. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 10:35 –

The word translated as “confidence,” should be translated as “boldness.” The author is making a connection to verse 3:6 where the reader was admonished to “hold fast the boldness of hope.” This was explained by the verses which preceded 10:35. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 10:37 –

The KJV skips a “very.” It says, “Yet for a VERY little while. Secondly, the words, “He that shall come will come,” should be redered, “He that is coming (Literally: THE COMER) will come. The verb is future, indicative, active. 1 demerit for skipping a word; one demerit for mis-translating a verb.

 

Hebrews 11:3 –

“By faith,” not “Through faith,” as is consistently translated from verse 2 on. The same word is used, carrying the same meaning, each time. The KJV, as usual, simply copied the Geneva Bible and went off to tea. Next, the word translated as “worlds” is “ages.” It is more than just the bodies which are a part of the universe. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 11:5 –

The verb rendered as “had translated” is an active verb. It should read, “translated.” The words, “he had this testimony,” should read, “he has had witness born to him.” The verb is in the perfect tense. The record of his witness still stands. And again, the words “he pleased God” should read, “he has pleased God.” 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 11:17 –

The words “of God” are not in the Greek. 1 demerit for adding a thought (even if implied) without italicizing it.

 

Hebrews 11:8 –

Incorrect rendering. Vincent’s Word Studies explains:  Ἐξελθεῖν to go out should be construed with ὑπήκουσεν obeyed, and καλούμενος being called is to be taken absolutely. Καλούμενος, the present participle, indicates Abraham’s immediate obedience to the call: while he was yet being called. Rend. “when he was called obeyed to go out.” The infinitive explains the more general obeyed, by specifying that in which his obedience was shown. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 11:9 –

The term “the land of promise is incorrect.” The article is before “promise,” not “land.” It is “a land of the promise.” It is the promise, not the land, which receives the focus of attention. 1 demerit for skewing the focus of attention.

 

Hebrews 11:10 –

It appears that the KJV translators did everything possible to obscure the intent of the word. There are two definite articles which they failed to include, thus rendering the verse completely ineffective in conveying the proper meaning. It says, “he was looking for the city has the foundations.” We are giving three demerits. 2 for failure to include the articles, and 1 for failing to convey the intended meaning.

 

Hebrews 11:11 –

Again, to be consistent, it should say “By faith.” The lack of consistency shows a lack of care for precision in the word. Further, the wording is simply wrong. It says, “By faith Sarah herself also with an emphasis on Sarah. Thus it demonstrates her period of unbelief before her faith. 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 11:12 –

Although it is translator’s preference which would should be used for a particular translation, the word “sky” does not really convey the meaning. It is “heaven.” The stars in the sky at any given time aren’t a jillionth of those in heaven. In fact, one might not see any stars in the sky depending on conditions. 1 demerit for not translating “heaven” as “heaven.”

 

Hebrews 11:13 –

The KJV destroys the symbolism the author is attempting to convey. The word translation of “embraced,” can be inferred from the original Greek, but to translate it this way ruins the symbolism. To embrace is to hold. These people of faith saw the promises from a distance and “saluted” them, or “greeted” them, knowing they could not meet in this life. It is as ships passing by which can only be hailed with a salute. The only possible way of translating this “embraced” and still conveying the proper intent would be to make a lengthy paraphrase, such as “embraced them in their minds,” or something to that effect. 1 demerit for ruining the intended meaning of the Greek word aspazomai,

 

Hebrews 11:15 –

It is not “might have had,” as if there was a chance, but lost at some point. Rather, it is “would have had.” The verb is imperfect and signifies a continuing possibility of occurrence. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 11:17 –

The KJV misses the intent of what is said. The verb “offered up” is in the perfect tense. Abraham “had offered up.” The intent is to show that while the sacrifice was in the process of happening, Abraham had – for all intents and purposes – actually offered him up in his mind. It was an accomplished fact (see James 2:21). 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 11:18 –

“Of whom” is to be rendered “To whom.” It is referring to Abraham (as in Luke 19:9). See Genesis 21:12. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 11:21 –

“Both” is misleading at best. It is “each of his sons.” Though the blessing was made upon both at the same time, the passage goes to great lengths to demonstrate that the one blessing resulted in two blessings with two different intents, not one. By saying both, the significance and flavor of these two separate blessings is lost. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 11:22 –

The verb translated as “when he died,” is a present participle (active). Thus, it is “when he was dying,” or “when he was drawing to his end.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 11:23 –

Although not an error, the word “proper” is outdated. Today, unless one reads olde English, there would be no comprehension at all of what the verse is saying. However, the exact same word, in the exact same context – which is Hebrew 7:23 – translates the word as “fair.” That is inconsistent. The word means, “beautiful,” “handsome,” “fair,” etc. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

 

Hebrews 11:25 –

The verb is aorist. It should say, “Having chosen.” The choice was made; it is not ongoing. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 11:26 –

The Greek says “the Christ.” 1 demerit for failure to include article.

 

Hebrews 11:28 –

Again, as has been seen a couple times, it reads “By faith.” The changing of the same word from “by” to “through” is inconsistent and confusing. Further, it reads, “By faith he has brought forth the Passover.” It is in the perfect tense, signifying the completion of the act in the original Passover, and its continued significance of the observance, even down to the time of the author’s writing of the epistle. Also, rather than, “he that destroyed the firstborn” does not reflect the Greek. It says, “lest the destroyer of the firstborn,” or “the one destroying the firstborn.” It is a present participle, active. 3 demerits for destroying the sense of the passage.

 

Hebrews 11:29 –

The word translated as “were drowned” means “were swallowed up.” The KJV destroys the symbolism which comes directly from the Song of Moses in Genesis 15:12. 1 demerit for destroying symbolism.

 

Hebrews 11:31 –

This is a poor choice of translation. It should read, “those who were disobedient,” as the word is rendered elsewhere in Hebrews. The people were disobedient to the natural knowledge of God, and they were set for destruction even before Israel’s entry into Canaan. Their time had come, but Rahab knew this and believed in the power of God and the surety of what was to come upon Jericho. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 11:34 –

Although the KJV is more a poor paraphrase, it should stick to the original Greek as much as possible. Instead of “the violence of fire,” it should more appropriately read, “the power of the fire,” as it is a reference to Daniel 3. Secondly, the word translated as “edge” (which in the Greek is literally “mouths”) is plural. It should say, “edges.” The symbolism is that of cutting both ways and causing maximum damage. Third, it should say “from weakness” instead of “out of.” As Vincent’s says, The meaning is not confined to sickness, as in the case of Hezekiah (2 Kings 20; Isaiah 38). The main reference is probably to Samson, Judges 16:28ff.” And finally, there is no article before “armies” or “aliens.” It should simply say, “armies of aliens.” 5 demerits for this poorly translated verse.

 

Hebrews 11:35 –

“Women received their dead raised to life again.” The Greek literally reads, “by a resurrection,” and it should be translated that way. This is because it is the same word used in the next sentence of this same verse. 1 demerit for obscuring the original Greek.

 

Hebrews 12:1 –

“Wherefore” should be “Therefore.” As Vincent’s Word Studies notes: “An emphatic particle, strongly affirming the facts on which the following exhortation is based.” Next, “we also are compassed,” is wrong. Again, to Vincent’s – “According to this the sense would be, those described in ch. 11 were compassed with a cloud of witnesses, and we also are so compassed. Wrong. The we also should be construed with let us run. “Therefore let us also (as they did) run our appointed race with patience.” 2 demerits.

 

Hebrews 12:2 –

The NKJV inserts the word “our” in the verse, but this is brings in a false sense of the meaning. There is actually a definite article before “faith,” and so it can rightly be translated as simply “faith,” or as “the faith.”As Vincent’s notes, “Not our Christian faith, but faith absolutely, as exhibited in the whole range of believers from Abel to Christ.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 12:3 –

The KJV fails to include the adverb me, or not. Thus it poorly translates the verse. Instead of “lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds,” it reads, “that you may not be wearied in your souls – being faint.” Although this is translator’s preference, the translation does not give the proper sense of the Greek, and so it receives 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 12:4 –

In the Greek, there is an article which comes before the word sin. Young’s translates it as, “Not yet unto blood did ye resist — with the sin striving.” In other words, “sin” is personified here by the author. Although not an error in this case, the KJV obscures the intended meaning. 1 demerit for obscuring the intended meaning.

 

Hebrews 12:10 –

The words “after their own pleasure,” indicate a perverseness not indicated in the text. The father is disciplining his child for good, not for pleasure. 1 demerit for bizarre choice of wording.

 

Hebrews 12:11 –

The KJV incorrectly ties “no” to “all.” It should read, “All chastening… does not seem.” This is referring to both human and divine chastening. As Vincent’s says, “The A.V., by joining οὐ not to πᾶσα all, and rendering no chastisement, weakens the emphasis on the idea every kind of chastisement.” 1 demerit for weakening the emphasis.

 

Hebrews 12:12 –

How does one “lift up” feeble knees? The translation makes no sense. The word signifies “to straighten.” It is referring to dislocated joints which need to be realigned. It should say, “straighten,” or “strengthen.” 1 demerit for making no sense.

 

Hebrews 12:14 –

The word “follow” is insufficient. It means to “follow after,” or “pursue.” 1 demerit for weakening the intent of the verb.

 

 

Hebrews 12:15 –

The verb “fail” is a present participle, active. It should say, “lest any be failing.” It is an on-going process. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 12:24 –

It says, “a new covenant,” not “the new covenant.” It also says, “and to blood of sprinkling,” not “and to the blood of sprinkling.” The words “better things,” should simply read “better.” Here, the blood of Abel is personified. Also, the words “than that of Abel” are not a good insertion. The Greek reads, “than Abel.” This is how it should be rendered. Abel’s blood calls out for vengeance; Christ’s for mercy. No demerit for this, but just a note of “better” in translation. 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 12:25 –

The word translated as “turn away” is a present participle. It says, “turning away.” It is referring to turning away from the word and back to Judaism, which had already begun, and which continues today. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 13:5 –

The word “conversation” means “way of life,” “conduct,” or “manner.” “Conversation” is too broad, and it is archaic. The words, “He hath said,” do not convey the thought. It should say, “He Himself has said.” It is God directly speaking. 2 demerits for lack of clarity.

 

Hebrews 13:6 –

The words “what man shall do to me,” are an independent clause. This follows Psalm 118:6. 1 demerit for not rightly dividing clauses.

 

Hebrews 13:7 –

The tense of the verb is “spoke” not “hath spoken.” The word “follow” should be “imitate.” “Conversation” is an outdated word. 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 13:8 –

The KJV completely destroys the beauty of the original with a very slipshod rendering. The Greek reads: “Jesus Christ yesterday and to-day the same, and to the ages;” (YLT). 1 demerit for destroying the beauty.

 

Hebrews 13:10 –

The symbolism of what is being spoken of here is completely destroyed by the KJV. The word “serve” should be “worship.” The word “tabernacle” should be “tent.” This is not merely referring to the priests, but all the people of Israel who brought forward sacrifices and offerings, and who – at times – participated in those by eating a portion of the meal. They came to the “tent of meeting,” to make their offerings. 2 demerits for destroying the symbolism.

 

Hebrews 13:11 –

The translation, is inconsistent with Old Testament usage. Instead of “sanctuary,” it should say, “tabernacle.” The “sanctuary” is the entire compound of the Lord’s dwelling. The Tent of Meeting is the main edifice within the compound, and the tabernacle is within the Tent of Meeting. It is to the place within the tabernacle – meaning the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place – that is being referred to. 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 13:14 –

There is an article in the second clause specifying the city. It should read, “we seek after that city which is to come.” It has already been identified in verse 11:10, and it was named in 12:22. We aren’t looking forward to any city, but the promised heavenly Jerusalem. 1 demerit for failure to specify.

 

Hebrews 13:15 –

It is “Through Him,” not “By him.” For the rest of the verse, it should read, “let us offer up a sacrifice of praise continually unto God, that is, fruit of lips making confession to His name” (Ellicott) 3 demerits.

 

Hebrews 13:16 –

Though not an error, it is a failing. The word “communicate” no longer carries the same meaning as it did in 1611. The KJV is outdated and incomprehensible to the modern readier.

 

Hebrews 13:19 –

The phrase should say, “But I exhort you the more abundantly.” The KJV misses the heavy stress being petitioned by the author. 1 demerit for missing the stress.

 

Hebrews 13:20 –

There is an article missing from the translation. The Greek reads, “the God of the peace.” 1 demerit.

 

Hebrews 13:22 –

It should say, “bear with,” not “suffer.” Also, it should say, “I have written unto you.” The words “a letter” do not belong. 2 demerits.

 

James 1:2 –

The word “temptations” no longer carries the intended meaning that it may have meant for the context of this verse. It signifies “trials” and should be thus rendered. 1 demerit for use of obsolete English.

 

James 1:5 –

The KJV completely skips a conjunction, as if it didn’t matter – Ei de tis hymon – “If now any of you,” which could be translated as “and,” “but,” etc, if it wasn’t ignored. 1 demerit for ignoring the conjunction.

 

James 1:8 –

Vincent’s Word Studies explains the error – The A. V. puts this as an independent apophthegm, which is wrong. The sentence is a comment and enlargement upon that man. “Let not that man think,” etc., “a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.” 1 demerit.

 

James 1:9 –

The KJV omits the article de, or “but.” The word translated as “is exalted” is a noun, not a verb. It says, “in his exaltation.” 2 demerits.

 

James 1:12 –

Incorrect. It is not “is tried,” but “has become approved.” The KJV makes it sound like “when the trial is finished.” This is not what the Greek conveys. It is when the person has been approved by trial. 1 demerit.

 

James 1:13 –

The KJV completely skips over the possessive pronoun – “He Himself tempts no man.” 1 demerit for skipping a word.

 

James 1:14 –

The word translated as “drawn away,” is a present participle. It should read, “is being drawn away.” Likewise, the word translated as “enticed” is also. It should read, “is being enticed.” 2 demerits.

 

James 1:15 –

There is an article before “lust.” It is “the lust.” It is a particular entity of its own. Further, it is not “when it is finished,” as if the course of the matter is complete. Rather, it is “when it is full grown.” It signifies the full development of sin – which can continue on from that point. 2 demerits.

 

James 1:17 –

Two different words are translated as “gift.” One is a verb; one is a noun. It should read, “every good giving and every perfect gift” (YLT). Also, the verb is a present participle. It should read, “is coming down.” Also, there is an article before “lights.” It says, “the Father of ‘the’ lights.” This is important because it is then revealed what that means in the rest of the verse. The KJV leaves the reader with no understanding of that though. 3 demerits.

 

James 1:21 –

The KJV did a poor job on this verse. “Superfluity” does not give the sense at all. It is “abundance.” The idea is overflowing of wickedness. The word “naughtiness” may have meant something different in 1611, but for hundreds of years, it is something ascribed to the wrongdoing of little children. The sense of that is, as Vincent’s says, “out of the question here.” And finally, the word “engrafted” is incorrect. This is something innate, not something brought in from outside. Grafting is a different word, used by Paul, in Romans 11. The two are not comparable. 3 demerits.

 

James 1:23 –

The words, “he is like” actually state, “this one is like.” Although not an error that one would normally highlight, we are dealing with the KJV and so all such slips must be counted. Further, it is “a mirror,” not “in a glass.” Glass was not used for mirrors at this point in time. Instead, it was polished metal. Oops. 2 demerits.

 

James 1:25 –

The KJV poorly translates the entire verse, but for simple errors: 1) the verb translated as “looketh” is an aorist verb. It should say, “having looked.” 2) The word “forgetful” is not suitable. In the Greek it is a noun. It is literally, “a hearer of forgetfulness.” 3) There is no article before “work.” It should say something like, “a doer that works.” Forgetfulness characterizes the hearer. At least 3 demerits.

 

James 1:26 –

The KJV obscures the intent of the first clause completely. The Greek says, “If anyone seems religious to be among you.”  What is intended is self-deceit, not fooling others. 1 demerit for obscuring the intent.

 

James 1:27 –

The Greek reads with the article before “God.” And so it says “our God and Father,” or “the God and Father.” The article unites the two together. Separating them as is done in the KJV is an unfortunate error which could lead to faulty theology. 1 demerit.

 

James 2:3 –

“Gay” is a little outdated. Though not an error, it demonstrates a definite need for more modern translations. Whoowee.

 

James 2:4 –

The KJV misses the intent of the word diakrinó. It does not signify “partial” as if speaking about others. It signifies “divided” as speaking of one’s own mind. Vincent’s explains – “The meaning here is, therefore, that, in making a distinction between the rich and the poor, they expressed a doubt concerning the faith which they professed, and which abolished such distinctions.” Also, it should say “with” evil thoughts, not “of.” 2 demerits.

 

James 2:6 –

The KJV fails to give the sense here. The word “despised,” signifies “dishonored.” One can despise without dishonoring. But it is dishonoring which has occurred. The word “draw,” fails to show the nature of what occurred. It should say, “drag.” 2 demerits.

 

James 2:10 –

The word translated as “offend,” means “to stumble.” So it should be translated. The idea is that of walking and tripping, thus falling into sin. The KJV completely blows the imagery. Further, the word “guilty” is in the perfect tense. It should read, “he has become guilty.” 2 demerits.

 

James 2:17 –

As Vincent’s says, “Wrong. Rev., correctly, in itself. The phrase belongs to dead. It is dead, not merely in reference to something else, but absolutely.” 1 demerit.

 

James 2:18 –

The word translated “yea”  is better rendered by “but.” James introduces an objection, not an affirmation. No demerit, just better.

 

James 2:19 –

The Greek reads: “You believe that the God one is.” God is the formal object, and it is speaking of the oneness of God, not so much the fact that there is one God – although that is to be understood. 1 demerit.

 

James 3:1 –

The word “masters” is incorrect. It should read “teachers” as it is rendered in John 3:2; Acts 13:1; Romans 2:20; 1 Corinthians 12:28-29; Ephesians 4:11; 1 Timothy 2:11; 1 Timothy 4:3; Hebrews 5:12. Further, James is speaking to believers. Therefore, the word “condemnation” is wholly incorrect (See Romans 8:1). 2 demerits.

 

James 3:2 –

The KJV gives exactly the opposite sense of the words. Instead of “we offend all,” it says, “we all offend.” The words do not mean that believers offend everyone, but that all believers err and make mistakes. 1 giant demerit.

 

James 3:4 –

It is a rudder. The helm and the rudder are one in these ancient ships. Though not incorrect, it is better to say rudder to secure the imagery which James is portraying. Secondly, the word “governor” now longer means what it did in ancient English. It is outdated. It should say, “pilot,” “helmsman,” etc. 1 demerit for being outdated.

 

James 3:5 –

The word “matter” should be translated as “forest.” Vincent’s explains why – “The word ὕλη (only here in New Testament) means wood or a forest, and hence the matter or raw material of which a thing is made. Later, it is used in the philosophical sense of matter – “the foundation of the manifold” – opposed to the intelligent or formative principle νοῦς, mind. The authorized version has taken the word in one of its secondary senses, hardly the philosophical sense it would seem; but any departure from the earlier sense was not only needless, but impaired the vividness of the figure, the familiar and natural image of a forest on fire.” 1 demerit for impairing the vividness of the figure.

 

James 3:7 –

Concerning the word “kind,” Vincent’s notes: “Wrong. James is not speaking of the relation between individual men and individual beasts, but of the relation between the nature of man and that of beasts, which may be different in different beasts. Hence, as Rev., in margin, nature.” Also, it should say, “by mankind,” not “of mankind.” It is dealing with the general nature of man. 2 demerits.

 

James 3:11 –

There is an article before “fountain,” “the fountain.” The article is given to emphatically generalize the question, but the KJV fails to follow through, thus diminishing the emphasis. 1 demerit.

 

James 3:12 –

The English is not good. Probably because it is outdated, but nobody says “olive berries.” It should say, “olives.” Further, it should say “or” rather than “either.” No demerit; just update to standard usage.

 

James 3:14 –

The KJV translators wrongly state “strife,” because they have founded their translation on a mistaken word origin. Rather than “strife,” it should say, “self-seeking,” or “factions.” 1 demerit.

 

James 3:15 –

The translation fails to convey the meaning properly. By saying “This wisdom,” it is implying that it is a type of wisdom, when it is, in fact, just the opposite. Rather, there is an article before “wisdom” and the Greek more correctly reads “That is not the wisdom which comes down from above” (Weymouth NT). 1 demerit.

 

James 4:3 –

Though not incorrect, the word “amiss” fails to give the proper sense. The word signifies “evilly” and this is explained by the following verse. Further, the words “consume it” do not follow properly. As Vincent’s notes, “The sense is not lay out expense upon your pleasures, but spend in the exercise of; under the dominion of.” 1 demerit for this poorly translated verse.

 

James 4:13 –

“Go to now” is obsolete. It means, “Come now.” There is an article before “city.” It is “this city.” The word for “buy and sell” means “trade.” 1 demerit for the second item noted.

 

James 5:1 –

Again with the “Go to now.” It’s obsolete. See comment on James 4:13. The Greek reads, “weep, howling.” There is no “and” in the words. And the words “that shall come upon” are from a present participle. It should read, “that are coming.” 2 demerits.

 

James 5:2 –

The words, “are moth-eaten,” are rightly translated as “have become moth-eaten.” The verb is perfect-indicative-active. 1 demerit.

 

James 5:3 –

The words, “and the rust of them,” are incorrect.  The word translated as “cankered” is found only here in the Bible. It comes from a root, ios, meaning either rust or poison. That word, ios, is used in the next clause and is translated as “rust.”That, in turn, comes from a word which signifies “to send.” A viper will send forth poison (as is the idea in both Romans 3:13 and James 3:8 where the same word is used as in this verse). The gold and silver will wear, sending away their mass. This is important to understand because gold neither rusts nor tarnishes. Therefore, saying “corroded” or “worn away,” rather than “rust” is appropriate. Also, the words, “Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days,” are incorrect. The verb is aorist indicative active. Read, “Ye heaped treasure together in the last days,” and receive 3 demerits.

 

James 5:9 –

The word “grudge,” is as much of a silent condition as anything else. However, the word used by James signifies and audible moaning. The sense of the verse is lost. Translate as “grumble.” The word “condemned” should be translated as “judged.” James is repeating the exact words of Matthew 7:1. Further, there is the obvious truth that there is now no condemnation for those in Christ. James is speaking to believers (brethren). The RT is wrong and should have been diverted from. 2 demerits.

 

James 5:10 –

The word translated as “suffering affliction” does not indicate the endurance of affliction as the KJV implies. Rather, it indicates the affliction itself. It is rightly translated as “suffering.” 1 demerit.

 

James 5:12 –

The KJV fails to include two important articles – “neither by the heaven, nor by the earth.” The definite nature of James’ words is lost in the obscurity of the KJV translation. 2 demerits.

 

James 5:13 –

The word “merry” have once meant something different, but if so, it no longer means what is intended here. James is not referring to being jovial or which is accompanied by laughter. Rather, he is referring to the opposite of being “afflicted” which he had just mentioned. It simply means being freed from affliction or trouble. No demerit, but the English terminology is outdated and needs revision.

 

James 5:19 –

The word translated as “err” signifies to wander or stray from the truth. The KJV gives a false idea here because it includes intentional or willful erring. Likewise, the word “convert” is misleading. It does not mean convert as from unbelief to belief, but rather to restore the wanderer to the proper path. No demerit, but the choice of translation is not acceptable in today’s world.

 

 

 

1 Peter 1:1 –

The KJV wrong separates the words “elect sojourners of the Dispersion.” By doing this, it gives a false assumption that all of those in the Dispersion are elect. Rather, only those in Christ are elect. The rest of the dispersed Jews are not. 1 demerit to start off the book.

 

1 Peter 1:3 –

The word “lively” does not reflect the Greek. The word is a verb, not an adjective. It should say “living” as it is translated elsewhere by the translators. The words “has begotten” need to be translated as “begat.” It is an aorist participle showing a historical act which occurred. 2 demerits.

 

1 Peter 1:6 –

The words, “for a season,” do not reflect the Greek word oligos. It means, “little,” or “few.” It is never used as “for a season.” The idea is that this life is is being referred to, not a part of this life. This is based on the “living hope” of verse 3 which comes after this life. Also, the word “temptations” is not sufficient. As Vincent’s says, “since the word includes more than direct solicitation to evil. It embraces all that goes to furnish a test of character.” 2 demerits.

 

1 Peter 1:7 –

“Of” should be removed. As Vincent’s says, “The comparison is between the approved faith and the gold; not between the faith and the proof of the gold.” The word “trial” signifies a process. This is a noun looking to the outcome of the process. Therefore, it should say, “genuineness.” The same is true with the kindred noun translated by the KJV as “be tried.” It should say something like, “be proven.” Finally, it should say “revelation” not “appearing.” The kindred verb was used in verse 1:5 and translated as “revealed.” The KJV is inconsistent and confuses the reader. 4 demerits.

 

1 Peter 1:11 –

The words “the glory” are incorrect. The word “glory” is plural. It says, “the glories.” It is speaking the many aspects of the glory of Christ, from His crucifixion to the resurrection, the ascension, His coming again, and etc. 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 1:12 –

The words “did minister” are incorrect. They are in the imperfect, active. It should read, “were ministering.” The prophets of old are still ministering to us today. 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 1:13 –

The words, “gird up” are in the aorist tense. It should read “having girded up.” The words, “be sober,” are a present participle – “being sober.” The words, “that is to be brought,” are a present participle – “being brought.” 3 demerits.

 

1 Peter 1:14 –

The Greek says, “children of obedience.” Both words are nouns. As Vincent’s says, “The Christian is represented as related to the motive principle of his life as a child to a parent.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 1:17 –

There is no “the” before “Father” in the original. It should read, “And if you call on Him as Father.” The reason is that anyone can call on the Father – whether in Christ or not. The difference is that it is Jesus who brings us into the Father/Son relationship. Further, the words are connected to the idea of Him as Judge. As Vincent’s Word Studies says, “the point being that God is to be invoked, not only as Father, but as Judge.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 1:20 –

The word “foreordained,” should be “foreknown.” He was forordained to be the Lamb slain, but He was foreknown as to what He would do, when He would do it, etc. The KJV blows the sense of the verse. 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 1:24 –

“Withereth” is not correct. It is an aorist verb. It says, “withered.” It happened and it is done. 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 1:25 –

The tense is wrong. It does not says “is preached to you.” Rather, it says, “was preached unto you.” It is an aorist participle. 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 2:3 –

The words “you have tasted,” should read, “if ye tasted.” It is an aorist verb. 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 2:5 –

The word “lively” is incorrect. It is a verb, not an adverb. Translate as “living” and receive 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 2:6 –

The word “Wherefore,” should appropriately read, “Therefore.” Peter is making a conclusion. 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 2:8 –

The words, “Unto you therefore who believe he is precious,” are incorrect. The word is a noun, preceded by an article, and the verb is present and active. Render, “For you that are believing is the preciousness.” The words, “is made,” are incorrect. It is an aorist participle. It should say, “was made.” He has become the head of the corner in fulfillment of Scripture. 3 demerits.

 

1 Peter 2:12 –

The word “whereas” is incorrect. It should say “wherein.” It is referring to “in the matter in which.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 2:15 –

The KJV leaves off an important article. It is not “of foolish men,” but “of the foolish men.” It is referring to those just previously mentioned. 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 2:16 –

There is no “the”  before “servants.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 3:4 –

The wording is confused. As Ellicott says, “it makes ‘the hidden man’ an ornament to be worn in preference to the gold and braided hair, which would be both illogical, and dishonouring to ‘the hidden man.’” 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 3:6 –

The name “Sara” should read “Sarah.” By this time in the Genesis narrative, both Abraham and Sarah had received addition of the letter hey to their names. The KJV fails to acknowledge this. Also, “whose daughters ye are” is incorrect. It is an aorist passive verb. “Whose daughters you have become.” There is a definite point in time that they were made daughters. 2 demerits.

 

1 Peter 3:8 –

The phrase “having compassion for one another” is (as stated by Vincent’s Word Studies “needlessly diffuse.” Though not an error, a simple expression such as “compassionate,” “sympathetic,” or etc would suffice. Next, “love as brethren” comes from an adjective, not a noun. “Loving as brethren.”  Also, the word “pitiful” no longer carries the same meaning as it did a jillion years ago. Something like “tenderhearted” is needed to update the obsolete KJV. 2 demerits.

 

1 Peter 3:9 –

It should read “were called” as in 1 Peter 2:21. The verb is aorist. 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 3:10 –

The KJV provides an unnecessary ambiguity. The word “will” does not signify the future, but the state of intent. Render as “would” and receive 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 3:14 –

Rather than “happy,” it should be translated as “blessed.” This is not because “happy” is wrong, but because Peter is linking his words to the beatitudes. The word blessed is used there when translating the same Greek word, and thus it is proper and fitting for it to be used here as well. Further the next statement is a quote from Isaiah 8:12. Again, the KJV fails to cite it as it is cited. Thus, the harmony of Peter’s words is diminished. 2 demerits for a lack of consistency.

 

1 Peter 3:17 –

There is a play on words which is completely missed by the KJV. The verse reads, “if the will of God wills it.” 1 demerit for missing the play.

 

1 Peter 3:18 –

The word “hath” is incorrect, being a form of the present tense. The verb is aorist. The act is done and complete. Render “suffered.” There is no article before “just,” “unjust,” of “flesh.” The KJV inserts these, without being italicized, thus presenting a false impression of what is being conveyed. 4 demerits.

 

1 Peter 3:21

There are two theologically grievous errors in the KJV translation. The first is that the word “whereunto” should be translated as “which.” The second is that “us” is second person plural in the Greek and should be “you.” The bias of the translation is cause for 2 demerits.

 

1 Peter 4:7 –

The KJV does something bizzaro here. They translate the word sóphroneó, which means “be sound minded,” as be “sober.” If they had said “sober-minded,” they could get a pass, but no. And then, they translate, néphó, or “be sober,” as “watch.” Even more nutty, the KJV translates néphó as “sober” every time but now, demonstrating a complete lack of consistency. Also, the word translated as “prayer” is plural. It is “prayers.” 3 demerits.

 

1 Peter 4:9 –

The KJV renders the adjective as a noun and thus breaks up the clauses inappropriately. It is “Being hospitable.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 4:10 –

There is no definite article in the Greek before “gift.” 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 4:12 –

The KJV renders two present participles incorrectly. “Which is to try you” should be present tense – “Which is trying you.” “Happened” should be “happening,” or “taking place.” 2 demerits.

 

1 Peter 4:13 –

It is “the sufferings of the Christ,” not “Christ’s sufferings.” Big theological difference. Also, “be glad” is the same verb as at the beginning of the verse, which is then followed by a second verb. It should say, “rejoice exulting.” 2 demerits.

 

1 Peter 4:14 –

It says, “in the name of Christ,” not “for the name of Christ.” It is a title bestowed upon the individual. Also, the KJV fails to translate an important article. Vincent’s explains — Lit., the spirit of glory and that of God. The repetition of the article identifies the spirit of God with the spirit of glory: the spirit of glory, and therefore the spirit of God: who is none other than the spirit of God himself. Hence Rev., better, the spirit of glory and the spirit of God. Finally, the words “he is evil spoken of” are literally “blasphemed,” and they are rightly translated as such. 3 demerits.

 

1 Peter 5:1 –

The words, “who am also an elder, who am also an elder,” are insufficient. He uses a word which signifies “fellow-elder.” He is placing himself on an even level with the others. The KJV could mean that his position as an elder is above or below the other elders. But the word shows that he is on the same level. Also, the KJV leaves out an important article. It says, “the sufferings of ‘the’ Christ.” Peter’s specificity is completely lost in the KJV translation. There is one Christ, and it is Jesus. 2 demerits.

 

1 Peter 5:2 –

The KJV destroys the meaning by saying “feed.” It means “to shepherd.” It is a job which includes feeding, and so much more. The elders are to tend to the flock in all ways. 1 demerit.

 

1 Peter 5:3 –

“As being lords,” should read, “as lording it.” It is a present participle, active. “God’s heritage” is literally, “over the lots,” but the meaning is someone entrusted to another’s care. Better to say “entrusted to you.” The word “ensamples” is out. The KJV needs revision to an understandable tongue. 1 demerit, but a poor verse, and one which is not suited for the modern reader.

 

1 Peter 5:9 –

“Resist” should be “withstand.” Resist was used in 5:5 from a different Greek word. The word here more rightly translated as “withstand” as it is translated by the KJV in Ephesians 6:13. Next, the word “afflictions” is better as “sufferings,” as in Hebrews 2:10. Also, there is an article which was passed over by the KJV. It reads “the same things of sufferings.” Also, “are accomplished” is incorrect. It is a present infinitive – “are being accomplished.” And finally, the word “brothers” is “brotherhood” as in 1 Peter 2:17. 4 demerits.

 

1 Peter 5:10 –

Ignoring the various differences between manuscripts, which can be argued over, one point cannot be. The KJV fails to even translated a portion of this verse from their own source text. – αὐτὸς καταρτίσαι. shall Himself perfect. The stress is lost and the force of the verse is blown to smithereens by the KJV’s inept omission. Further, though the word can be translated as “by,” the calling is ”in Christ,” rather than “by Christ” as in 1 Corinthians 1:2. 2 demerits.

 

1 Peter 5:12 –

It does not say “a faithful brother.” It says, “the faithful brother.” The failure to translate the article diminishes the intent and stress of the verse. The words “to you” are tied to “written,” not “brother.” The words “I suppose” are too weak. There is no hint of doubt in the verse as the KJV seems to presuppose. The word signifies sure confidence. It should say, “as I reckon him,” or “as I count him.” 3 demerits.

 

 

 

 

2 Peter 1:1 –

The name in the Greek is Symeon, not Simon. There is a reason for the Hebraized use of the name. This doesn’t bode well for the KJV translation of 2 Peter. They got the very first word in the epistle wrong. Also, the correct rendering is not “of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.” Using the same general construction five more times, Peter says –

 

“of our God and Savior Jesus Christ” 2 Peter 1:1

“of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” 2 Peter 1:11

“of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” 2 Peter 2:20

“of the Lord and Savior” 2 Peter 3:2

“of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” 2 Peter 3:18

 

Thus, it is “of our God and Savior Jesus Christ.” 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 1:2 –

The Greek reads “in” not “through.” It is in the sphere of knowledge that these things are multiplied (as in Ephesians 1:17). 1 demerit.

 

2 Peter 1:4 –

The verse begins with “Through which,” not whereby. It then later says, “through these,” not “by these.” Peter is using “through” in verses 3&4 purposefully. The KJV is willy-nilly and arbitrary in its translation. The words “are given” are wrong. It is middle voice, not passive – “He hath granted.” Next, there is an article before “great and precious” which the KJV ignores. It is “the great and precious.” “Might be” should be “may become” to give the sense of growth. Finally, after ignoring the word “through” earlier, they end with “through lust.” It should say “in lust.” The specificity of Peter’s pen is destroyed through the translation. One must wonder why the KJV so greatly departs from the original? 6 demerits.

 

2 Peter 1:5 –

The words “beside this” are completely in error. There is not an exception being made, rather, there is a building onto what has been said. It should read, “But for this very reason.” Next, the KJV says, “add to your faith.” That is not the intent. There is not an additive force to the words, but rather an increase by growth. One grace perfects the previous one. The word “supply” is appropriate. 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 1:7 –

The KJV uses the word “charity” here and elsewhere when translating the same word as “love” in the gospels and at other times in the epistles. Vincent’s Word Studies notes here, “Charity has acquired two peculiar meanings, both of which are indeed included or implied in love, but neither of which expresses more than a single phase of love – tolerance and beneficence. The A. V. in the great majority of cases translates love; always in the Gospels, and mostly elsewhere. There is no more reason for saying “charity suffereth long,” than for saying, ‘the charity of God is shed abroad in our hearts,” or “God is charity.’” In other words, the word “charity” does not sufficiently translate the word agape here and is, thus, worthy of 1 demerit.

 

2 Peter 1:8 –

The words “be in you” speak of possession. It is more rightly translated as “belong to you,” or “are yours.” The word translated as “barren” is the negative a together with “work.” Therefore, it means “idle” or “inactive” (see Matthew 12:36). Peter has been speaking of actively supplying one thing to another and so “barren” fails to convey the meaning. Lastly, “in the knowledge” does not convey the intent. As Vincent’s Word Studies says, “The idea is not idleness in the knowledge, but idleness in pressing on and developing toward and finally reaching the knowledge.” 3 demerits.

 

2 Peter 1:9 –

The word “But” makes no sense. Peter has just developed a case and now he presents the results. Translate as “For.” The words, “he that lacketh these things” are rightly translated as “to whom these things are not present.” Vincent’s explains – “Note that a different word is used here from that in 2 Peter 1:8, are yours, to convey the idea of possession. Instead of speaking of the gifts as belonging to the Christian by habitual, settled possession, he denotes them now as merely present with him.” Next, the words, “and hath forgotten” are incorrect. It is a noun, not a verb. The expression is found only here in the NT. Translate as “having taken forgetfulness.” And then, “that he was purged” is a noun, “the cleansing.” 5 demerits.

Note before proceeding: The KJV has done an immensely sloppy job of conveying the intent of Peter so far in this epistle. It is hoped that the first 9 verses were just a warm up and that the translation will improve. The errors so far give the KJV a maximum of a 2 out 10 for quality work.

2 Peter 1:10 –

The adverb, translated by the KJV as “rather,” belongs to the word “give diligence.” It should say, “give the more diligence.” Also, the word translated as “fall” should be “stumble” as in Romans 11:11. 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 1:11 –

The word translated as “everlasting” should be “eternal.” It is not just an age of time. Rather it also speaks of the quality of life. As this is referring to believers, even now, HELPS Word Studies says, “Eternal (166 /aiṓnios) life operates simultaneously outside of time, inside of time, and beyond time – i.e. what gives time its everlasting meaning for the believer through faith, yet is also time-independent.” It deals with more than just time, but the better life in that time which is experience by those who possess it. 1 demerit.

 

2 Peter 1:12 –

The words “present truth” are not incorrect, but they are poorly worded. Truth is immutable. Something like “the truth present with you” would be far better.

 

2 Peter 1:14 –

The KJV gives an incorrect idea of what Peter is saying. The words are literally, “swift is the putting off of my tabernacle.” He is not speaking about something that will occur soon, but something that will occur with quickly. In other words, what lies ahead for Peter is known to him, and when it comes, it will happen without notice and it will be over with suddenness. Therefore, he must take every opportunity to convey his words of exhortation, not knowing when his last chance to do so will occur. Also, the words hath shewed are not right. It is an aorist verb – “showed.” 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 1:17 –

“For he received” should be “Having received” (it is an aorist participle active). The word “came” does not reflect the unique expression that Peter uses. Nor does the word “from” reflect his thought. Change “came such a voice to him from the excellent glory” to “such a voice being borne to him by the excellent glory” and receive 3 demerits.

 

2 Peter 1:18 –

The same word, with the same meaning, that was used in the previous verse is used again here. The voice is “borne” out of heaven. 1 demerit.

 

2 Peter 1:19 –

The KJV is wrong. Vincent’s Word Studies explains – “more sure is used predicatively, and word has the definite article.” One cannot simply ignore what the original is saying and come up with a suitable translation. Thus far in 2 Peter, the KJV gets a 1 out of 10 rating for acceptability. 1 demerit.

 

2 Peter 1:20 –

The word translated as “is” means to come about, emerge, transition from one point to another, etc. It is not an exact match for the word “is,” and should not be translated this way here. Rather, it should say something like “no prophecy of Scripture comes about.” Saying “is” results in a wrong conclusion concerning the subject. 1 demerit.

 

2 Peter 1:21 –

The same word used in verses 17 & 18 is used twice in this verse. It means to bear. It should rightly be translated consistently in all cases to ensure that the proper idea is conveyed by Peter. Render both as “borne” and give the KJV 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 2:1 –

The word ginomai signifies becoming or coming into being. Instead of “there were,” it should say, “there arose.” Also, the same tense is used for both “denying” and “bring.” It should say, “denying” and “bringing.” 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 2:3 –

It is “in covetousness,” not “through” (Greek en, not dia). Covetousness is the sphere in which these people operate. After that, it should say “from of old,” not “of a long time.” The duration of time is not what is being relayed, but that the coming judgment has been ordained all along. Next, “lingereth not” should be “is not idle.” It isn’t the time which is being considered as much as what occurs during the time. There is nothing idle in the process. Their judgement is being worked out the whole time that their actions are also being worked out. Also, it should read “destruction” as in 2 Peter 2:1 rather than “damnation.” 4 demerits.

 

2 Peter 2:4 –

The word “the” before “angels” does not exist in the Greek. As it is not noted as such in italics, the KJV has another error to be tallied up. “That sinned” should be “having sinned.” It is an aorist participle, active. Also, “to be reserved” is “being reserved.” It is a present participle. 3 demerits.

 

2 Peter 2:5 –

The word “saved” implies “from something.” Noah wasn’t saved but “preserved” or “kept” as the Greek word phulassó implies. He was kept from the flood that later came, the Lord having shut the door. Further, the words, “the eighth person,” make no sense – even if literally translated. The KJV sounds like a genealogical record, but Noah was the tenth from Adam. It should be more defined, “one of eight,” or “and seven others,” “one of eight,” etc. Despite being literal, the translation is lacking and is worthy of demerit. Thus, 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 2:6 –

It is not an error, but the word “ensample” hasn’t been used in modern language for about 15000 years. Time to start reading a more reliable and modern translation.

 

2 Peter 2:7 –

The word “wicked” should be “lawless.” It is a word used in ancient Greek to signify that which is contrary to a statute. 1 demerit.

 

2 Peter 2:9 –

There is no article before either “godly” or “unjust.” Also, it is not “to be punished.” It is a present participle, “being punished.” The KJV is not doing so well in 2 Peter. 3 demerits.

 

2 Peter 2:10 –

The word translated as “government” signifies dominion, as the KJV translates it everywhere else. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

2 Peter 2:13 –

The KJV translates the same word, misthos, as “reward” and “wage” in verses 2:13 and 2:15. This is a troubling lack of consistency, especially when Peter refers to Balaam who was hired to accomplish his mission. Both should be rendered “hire,” and the KJV gets 2 more demerits. The word “as” is unnecessary. The verb is a present participle. It should read, “counting riot a pleasure.” 3 total demerits.

 

2 Peter 2:14 –

The tense of the verb is incorrect. The Greek reads “having been exercised.” Also, “cursed children” is incorrect.” Peter uses two nouns – say “children of a curse,” or “children of malediction.” 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 2:15 –

The verb is an aorist participle, active. Instead of “They have left,” it says, “Having left.” Next, “and are gone astray,” is 3rd person plural and should be stated as such, “they have gone astray.” Again, the next verb is an aorist participle, active. Instead of “following the way,” it should say, “having followed the way.” Also, see 2:13 where 2 demerits were assigned. 3 (plus 2) demerits.

 

2 Peter 2:16 –

“Was” is incorrect. The verb is aorist, indicative, active – He “had a” rebuke. The word “wickedness” may describe the action, but it is not a suitable translation. The Greek word signifies a violation of the law, and thus a transgression. There is no article before “donkey” even though the KJV decided arbitrarily to add to God’s word without so indicating it. The word “donkey” is only known because of the story from the OT. The Greek means “beast of burden” and should be translated as such. The word “speaking” is an aorist verb. It should say, “having spoken.” The word “forbade” is incorrect. The Greek signifies to hinder or restrain. IT would be hard to mistranslate this verse any more than the KJV did. 6 demerits.

 

2 Peter 2:17 –

The KJV ignores an article before “darkness.” It is “the darkness.” It speaks of a doom which was known and understood as such. 1 demerit.

 

2 Peter 2:18 –

The word translated as “allure” is the same one used in verse 14 and which was translated as “beguiling.” The lack of consistency, when speaking of the same issue, damages the intent of Peter’s words. Next, the Greek reads “in lusts of the flesh,” not “through lusts of the flesh.” It is the sphere in which these people exist and entice others. The words “through much” before the word “wantonness” are not in the original and should have been italicized. 3 demerits.

 

2 Peter 2:19 –

Although the words “servants” and “bondage” are not incorrect, they are better translated as “slaves” and “enslaved.” There is an obvious reference to John 8:34, and the comparable words of Paul in Romans 6:16 were not carefully considered by the KJV translators. They did a sloppy job here.

 

2 Peter 2:20 –

Rather than, “through the knowledge,” the Greek reads, “in knowledge.” There is no article and the preposition en, or in, is used by Peter. The escape consists in knowledge of the Lord. 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 3:1 –

The word “now” (meaning “already”) is an adverb speaking of the time interval between the first and second letters. It is not a qualifier of “write” as the KJV implies. The word “mind” is singular. 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 3:5 –

There is no article before either “heavens” or “earth.” There is also no article before “water” x 2. And finally, the word “standing” is not sufficient. It is a compound verb which signifies “union, together with,” and “stand.” It should be “formed,” “compacted,” “consisted,” etc. The intent of the verse is — “that heavens existed long ago, and earth, formed out of water and through water – by the word of God.” One can see how the theology of the verse is damaged, almost beyond repair, by the KJV. 5 demerits.

 

2 Peter 3:7 –

The word translated as “kept in store” is a perfect participle in the Greek – “stored up” or “having been stored up.” 1 demerit.

 

2 Peter 3:12 –

The words, “shall be dissolved,” are a present participle – “being dissolved.” Both “holy conversation” and “godliness” are plural in the Greek. 3 demerits.

 

2 Peter 3:13 –

There is no “unto” in the Greek. It says, “hastening” with the intent of bringing it to pass. Further, “wherein” is incorrect. It signifies “by reason of which.” 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 3:17 –

“Led away” should be “carried away” as in Galatians 2:13, it being passive. Also, the word “wicked” should be “lawless.” It is a word used in ancient Greek to signify that which is contrary to a statute. 2 demerits.

 

2 Peter 3:18 –

There is no article in front of “knowledge,” and thus the word “the” should have been italicized. The Greek has an article before “glory.” It is “the glory.” 2 demerits.

 

In all, there are 66 errors in the teeny weeny, itsy bitsy book of 2 Peter. It really is time for you to start reading another translation of the Bible which corrects these things.

 

1 John 1:1 –

The KJV, as is often the case, starts off the epistle with error. There is no article before “beginning.” Thus “the” should be italicized. The words “have looked upon” are in the aorist tense. As Vincent’s says, “marking not the abiding effect of the vision upon the beholder, but the historical manifestation to special witnesses.” Render “beheld.” Again, “have handled” should read “handled” as it is in the aorist tense. The words “of life” fail to include the article. Render “of the life.” The word “of” is better rendered as “concerning,” but that will not be marked down. 4 demerits.

 

1 John 1:2 –

The word “show” is inappropriate. The message comes from the Father and is thus proclaimed or declared. Further, it is rightly translated in the very next verse as “declare.” Next, the words, “the eternal life,” are especially faulty. The Greek reads, “the life, the eternal.” He is the life; He provides the eternal life. 2 demerits.

 

1 John 2:1 –

There is no article before “righteous.” The KJV did not italicize the article they inserted, and thus, it receives 1 demerit.

 

1 John 2:5 –

The verb translated as “is perfected” is in the perfect tense, and is more rightly translated as “has been perfected.” It is done and complete. 1 demerit.

 

1 John 2:8 –

The words “is past” are wrong. It is a present verb. Render “is passing” and receive 1 demerit.

 

1 John 2:12 –

The words “I write” are present indicative active and should say, “I am writing.” The words “are forgiven” are in the perfect tense in the Greek. Render “have been forgiven,” and receive 2 demerits.

 

1 John 2:13 –

The words “I write” (two instances) are present indicative active and should say, “I am writing.” The words “have known” (two instances) are present indicative active and should say, “you are knowing.” 4 demerits.

 

1 John 2:17 –

Instead of “passeth,” the Greek is present participle, passive. It should read “is passing.” Instead of “does,” the Greek is a present participle, active. It should read “doing.” 2 demerits.

 

1 John 2:18 –

Instead of “are there,” it should “have arisen.” It is present indicative active. 1 demerit.

 

1 John 2:19 –

The words “no doubt” are superfluous. They are italicized, so there is no demerit, but they add nothing to the content. The words “they were not all” are from a present tense, active voice verb. It should be “they all are not.” 1 demerit.

 

1 John 2:20 –

The word “unction” is the same as used twice in 1 John 2:27 where it is translated as “anointing.” It should be so here as well. 1 demerit for inconsistency.

 

1 John 2:22 –

There is an article before “liar” – “Who is THE liar.” Again, there is an article before “antichrist” – THE antichrist. 2 demerits.

 

1 John 2:23 –

It should say, “he who confess confesses the Son.” It is the same word used in 1 John 1:9; 4:2, 3; 4:15, & 2 John 1:7. More to the point, it is the same word used by Paul in Romans 10:9, 10. 1 demerit for confusing the reader.

 

1 John 2:24 –

The Greek begins with “You” as an emphatic statement which makes a contrast to the antichrists of verse 2:22. The KJV places you in a nominative position to “you have heard,” thus destroying the intent of John’s intent. This cannot go without being demerited. 1 demerit.

 

2 John 2:27 –

The word “you” is in the emphatic position and the word “received” is aorist. It should read, “And you, the anointing you received.” 2 demerits.

 

1 John 2:29 –

The words “is born of him” are insufficient. It is in the perfect tense. Render “has been begotten of Him,” and receive 1 demerit.

 

1 John 3:1 –

The word “sons” is “children” in the Greek, and it should be translated as such. It is the same word used consistently by the KJV as “children.” 1 demerit.

 

1 John 3:2 –

The verb in “not yet appear” is aorist in the Greek and needs to be kept as such – “it is not yet made manifest.” The same is true with “when he shall appear.” It should read, “when he has appeared,” or “when he has been made manifest.” 2 demerits.

 

1 John 3:3 –

The words “in him” are ambiguous. The Greek reads “on Him.” 1 demerit.

 

1 John 3:4 –

The word is “do.” Further, there are two important articles missing. Whoever does the sin also does the lawlessness. As Vincent’s says, “The phrase to do sin regards sin as something actually realized in its completeness. He that does sin realizes in action the sin (note the article τὴν) that which includes and represents the complete ideal of sin. Compare do righteousness, 1 John 2:29.” In the second clause, “for” should be “and” and there is another missing article, “and the sin is the lawlessness.” 6 demerits.

 

1 John 3:7 –

There is an article before “righteousness.” It is “the righteousness.” It isn’t simply doing a good act, but a way of living.” 1 demerit.

 

1 John 3:14 –

There are articles before “death” and “life” (2x) which are ignored by the KJV. 3 demerits.

 

1 John 3:16 –

“Perceive” is in the perfect tense. It literally reads, “we have perceived,” and thus “we know.” The inserted words “of God” are incorrect. God did not die. The human part of Christ – the Man – died. Remove inserted words and receive 2 demerits.

 

1 John 3:18 –

There is an article before “tongue,” – “let us not love in word, neither with the tongue.” 1 demerit.

 

1 John 4:5 –

The KJV produces an intolerable ambiguity – “speak they of the world.” The Greek reads “out of the world,” meaning “as the world speaks.” 1 demerit.

 

1 John 4:6 –

John uses a different term than in 4:2. There, it says, en toutou. Here, it says, ek toutou. Completely different and should be translated as such. “From this,” is acceptable. 1 demerit.

 

1 John 4:9 –

The words “toward us” are incorrect. John is speaking of the state of love found in believers. This verse continues that. It is “in us.” Further, the KJV damages the structure of John’s writings by leaving off a definite article in the words, “His Son, the only begotten.” 2 demerits.

 

1 John 4:16 –

It should say “in us” (as the Greek reads), rather than “to us.” This is explained by the next sentence which says that God dwells in the believer. He is making a one to one comparison to the love of God and the abiding. 1 demerit.

 

1 John 4:17 –

The KJV incorrectly assumes that the love being made perfect is speaking of what follows “that we may have boldness…” This is incorrect for several reasons (see Charlie Garrett commentary on this verse). Further, there is an article before “love” and “judgment.” It is THE love, and the day of THE judgment – an important point which the KJV fails to prepare God’s people for. Hence, 3 demerits.

 

1 John 4:18 –

There are five missing articles in this one verse before “love,” “fear,” and “perfect.” John is being precise and definite. 5 demerits.

 

1 John 5:4 –

“Overcometh” is present indicative. The verb, however, is an aorist participle – “having overcome,” or “overcame.” 1 demerit.

 

1 John 5:6 –

The KJV misses several important articles – “not by the water only, but by the water and by the blood.” Also, “the Spirit is the truth.” These articles actually have a purpose which is obliterated by the KJV. 4 demerits.

 

1 John 5:7 –

It is “the heaven.” 1 demerit.

 

1 John 5:8 –

It is “the earth.” Also, “these three agree in one,” leaves off another important article. It says, “these three are in the one.” 2 demerits.

 

1 John 5:9/10/11 –

The same word is used six times, in the same context, in verses 9-11, alternatingly translated as “witness” and “record.” Because of this, the reader has no idea that John is referring to the same thing. All should be translated as either “witness” or “testimony” for clarity of understanding. Rewrite and receive a demerit.

 

1 John 5:12 –

There is an article in front of both instances of “life.” These articles have value and are instructive. 2 demerits.

 

1 John 5:16 –

The verb “sin” is a present participle. It should say, “sinning a sin.” Further, the words, “there is a sin unto death,” are incorrect. It should say, “there is sin leading to death.” It is any sin that does not lead to death – a general proposition. 2 demerits.

 

1 John 5:17 –

The words, “there is a sin,” are incorrect. It should say, “there is sin.” It is any sin that does not lead to death – a general proposition. 1 demerit.

 

1 John 5:19 –

The words “in wickedness” are incorrect. It is masculine and says, “the evil,” signifying “the evil one,” meaning the devil. 1 demerit.

 

1 John 5:21 –

There is an article before “idols.” It says, “the idols.” 1 demerit.

 

 

2 John -1 –

There is no article before “elect lady.” The word “the” should be italicized due to the complicated nature of who is actually being addressed. Secondly, there is no article before “truth.” It says, “whom I love in truth.” That completely changes the dynamic of the words and is a demeritable offense for not italicizing (see 1 John 3:18). Also, “have known” does not cover the sense of the verb. It is a perfect participle. It isn’t something they once knew, but something that is known and continues to be known. Render “having known,” or “have come to know.” 3 demerits.

 

2 John 1:3 –

The verb in the first clause is in the future tense. It is not “be with you,” but “will be” or “shall be” with you. The entire dynamic of the verse is blown apart by the KJV. Further, in the Greek, it simply reads, “God Father.” There is no article. However, there will be an article before both “Son” and “Father” in the following words. Therefore, John is conveying the thought of “God our Father.” He is the Father of His people who have been brought into the covenant through Christ. It should either read “our” or “the” should be italicized. 2 demerits.

 

2 John 1:4 –

“I found” should be “I have found.” It signifies an unexpected event which is rarely encountered. It is not that John went looking to inspect them, but that his observance of them was surprising. 1 demerit.

 

2 John 1:6 –

There is an article before love – “The is the love.” 1 demerit.

 

2 John 1:7 –

The KJV really butchered this one. The words, “are entered into,” should read “have gone into.” The verb is aorist. Next, the words, “who do not confess,” are a present participle with a definite article. It reads, “those not confessing.” The words, “is come,” are entirely wrong. It is a present participle – “that Jesus Christ cometh.” Further, there are definite articles before both “deceiver” and “antichrist.” 5 demerits.

 

2 John 1:9 –

Both instances of “Christ” are preceded with a definite article and should be translated as such – “the Christ.” 2 demerits.

 

2 John 1:12 –

“Full” does not carry the weight of John’s words. The verb is a perfect participle. It is literally, “having been completed,” and thus “fulfilled,” or even, “filled full.” Also, the words, “face to face” are literally, “mouth to mouth.” As Paul uses the term, “face to face,” in 1 Corinthians 13:12, John’s words here should be translated as he says them, thus avoiding the confusion of having two separate thoughts translated in the same way. 2 demerits.

 

2 John 1:13 –

The word translated as “greet” hopelessly waivers between “greet” and “salute” in the KJV – even though in the exact same context. No demerit here, but the lack of consistency is annoying and is – thankfully – corrected by many modern translations.

 

 

Note: 3 John is just an itty bitty book with only 14 verses. It would appear the KJV translators could get this close to correct. Unfortunately, it was not to be. From the first verse to the last, they receive 18 translational demerits –

 

3 John 1:1 –

As is common, the KJV starts out the book with errors. The word “well” (as in wellbeloved) is not in the Greek and should have been left off. Elsewhere, (even in verses 2, 5, & 11 in this epistle) is it rightly translated as “beloved.” Also, there is no article before “truth,” “whom I love in truth.” 2 demerits.

 

3 John 1:2 –

The word “above” is incorrect. The Greek word, peri, means “concerning.” “Beloved, I pray in all things…” The last thing on this planet is that John would pray “above” all things for what he then describes. 1 demerit.

 

3 John 1:3 –

Both “came” and “testified” are incorrect. They are present participles – “coming” and “testifying.” The visits are on-going and the testimony is continuously faithful. Also, there is no article before the second use of “truth.” It says, “just as you walk in truth.” 3 demerits.

 

 

3 John 1:4 –

The word “greater” begins the verse for emphasis and should have been kept that way. This will not be demerited, but it is sloppy. The word “walk” is incorrect. It is a present participle – “walking.” The KJV really can’t seem to get this right. 1 demerit.

 

3 John 1:5 –

It is an adjective, “faithful,” not an adverb, “faithfully.” Hence, “you do a faithful thing.” Also, two different words are translated as “do.” They should be translated differently to show this important distinction. 2 demerits.

 

3 John 1:6 –

The words “bring forward” are in the aorist tense = “having brought forward.” It is as an action completed. The words, “godly sort,” do not match the intent. It says, “worthily of God.” 2 demerits.

 

3 John 1:7 –

The KJV says, “for his name’s sake.” It is incorrect. The Greek reads, “for the sake of the Name.” The KJV unfortunately weakens the effect of John’s statement. 1 demerit.

 

3 John 1:8 –

The word “fellowhelpers” should read “fellowlabourers” as in Philemon 1:24. It is a compound adjective from “with” and “work.” The lack of consistency in the KJV when referring to the same situations demonstrates a lack of care for precision. Further, the word “to” should be “with,” or maybe even “for.” 2 demerits.

 

3 John -11 –

The word translated as follow means “mimic.” Follow does not give the true sense. The reader of the KJV misses out on the fulness of the letter because of this. However, no demerit will be given for this.

 

3 John -12 –

The words “hath good report,” do not convey the tense of the Greek. It is in the perfect tense – “witness has been given.” The witness has been given, and it still continues. 1 demerit.

 

3 John 1:14 –

The words, “face to face” are literally, “mouth to mouth.” As Paul uses the term, “face to face,” in 1 Corinthians 13:12, John’s words here should be translated as he says them, thus avoiding the confusion of having two separate thoughts translated in the same way. Next, it does not say, “Our friends.” It says, “The friends.” Our cannot even be implied. When “our” is intended, it is stated in the Greek, such as in John 11:11. Finally, the words “salute” and “greet” are the same in the Greek. Choose one and stick with it! 3 demerits.

 

Jude -1 –

Not unsurprisingly, the KJV starts off Jude with errors. It does not say “the servant.” There is no article in the Greek. It is “a servant.” It is “in God,” not “by God.” 2 demerits.

 

Jude -3 –

The words, “I gave all diligence” are wrong. It is a present participle, “in giving all diligence.” 1 demerit.

 

Jude -5 –

The words, “I will therefore put you in remembrance,” completely skip over the “intent” given in the Greek. It should read, “Now I want to remind you.” Also, the words, “ye once knew,” are completely wrong. It is a perfect participle and the word “once” does not indicate they have forgotten, but that it is “once for all.” The word is written and it is known. Render “you know all things once for all.” Also, there is no article before “people.” It says “a people,” not “the people.” Finally, the word “afterward” is insufficient. The Greek reads to deuteron, in the second place. 4 demerits.

 

Jude -6 –

The words, “giving themselves,” should be “having given themselves.” The words, “going after,” should be, “having gone after.” They had completely gone over (aorist verbs), utterly and completely. The word “vengeance” is inappropriate. God isn’t vengeful or changing. He is just and righteous by nature. Change to “punishment.” 3 demerits.

 

Jude -8 –

The word mentoi is right there in the Greek, but it is ignored by the KJV. Rather than “Likewise…” it should say, “Yet likewise…” 1 demerit.

 

Jude -10 –

Two different words are translated as “know” in this one verse, thus obscuring Jude’s intent. Render the second “understand,” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Jude -12 –

The word translated as “spots” should read, “hidden reefs,” or “hidden rocks.” It speaks of rocks just below the surface of the water that tear into ships. The KJV tied this word in with that in 2 Peter 2:13 (spiloi), but the word here is spilades. The words, “feeding themselves,” speak of shepherding. It should say, “shepherds that feed themselves,” thus they ignore the flock. The words, “whose fruit withereth,” are completely wrong. It is referring to trees that don’t have fruit at gathering time. 3 demerits.

 

Jude -13 –

The word translated as “shame” is plural, “shames.” Also, it says, “the darkness,” with an article. It is pointing back to the darkness Jude mentioned in 1:6. 2 demerits.

 

Jude -14 –

The tense of the verb in the quote is aorist. Rather than, “the Lord cometh,” it says, “The Lord has come.” 1 demerit.

 

Jude -15 –

The word “convince” no longer means what it did four hundred years ago. It is “convict.” Time to get a better translation.

 

Jude -17 –

The KJV, without any textual support, drops off the word “you” – But you, beloved…” 1 demerit.

 

Jude -18 –

The words, “ungodly lusts,” are incorrect. It is two nouns – “lusts of ungodliness.” The word translated as “mockers” here is used only one other time in the Bible, in 2 Peter 3:3. Same word, same context, translated there as “scoffers.” 2 demerits for imprecision.

 

Jude -19 –

The word “themselves” is no in the Greek and should have been italicized. There is no article before “Spirit.” The word “the” should have been italicized. 2 demerits.

 

Jude -23 –

It says “in fear,” not “with fear.” We are to be in fear, and thus watchful, of being stained by their infection while rescuing them. 1 demerit.

 

Jude -24 –

“From falling” is “from stumbling.” Se Romans 11:11 (etc). 1 demerit.

 

 

Revelation 1:2 –

“All things that he saw” should read, “as many things as he saw.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 1:8 –

The Greek reads, “the Alpha and the Omega.” The definite articles have purpose. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 1:10 –

There is no article before “Spirit.” It should be italicized. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 1:13 –

There is no article before “Son of man.” Thus, “the” should be italicized or changed to “a.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 1:18 –

The KJV makes this a separate sentence from the previous verse. It is not. It says, “and the Living One.” Next, it says, “and became dead,” using the word ginomai. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 1:20 –

There is no article before “angels.” There is also no “the” before the second “churches.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 2:5 –

It should say, “I am coming,” or “I come.” It is present tense. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 2:8 –

It should read “became dead” and “lived.” The KJV is more of a paraphrase here. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 2:10 –

It is not “a crown of life,” but “the crown of life.” The KJV completely blows the beauty of what is presented in the original. See James 1:12 where it is correctly rendered. Thus, an additional demerit for inconsistency is necessary. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 2:13 –

Although not a demeritable translation, the word “seat” fails to convey the correct meaning. It should read “throne.”

 

Revelation 2:19 –

The KJV sets forth an unacceptable tautology by saying, “I know thy works…and thy works.” It can be corrected in several ways. Check other translations and choose the one that doesn’t make this error. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 2:21 –

Though translator’s preference, saying “space” instead of “time” when translating the word kronos is very liberal. The KJV truly failed in this.

 

Revelation 2:22 –

“I will cast” should be “I cast” or “I am casting.” It is a present tense verb. It is right now. The strumpet has had her chance. “Those who commit” is wrong. It is a present participle. Read “those committing.” They still have a chance to repent. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 2:24 –

The words, “as they speak” are wrong. It should say, “as they say.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 2:27 –

The verb translated as “shall be broken” is present tense. It should read, “as the vessels of the potter are broken.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 3:2 –

It is “Be waking.” It is a present participle. Further, the word, “perfect” fails to give the sense. The Greek signifies “to be fulfilled.
Thus, “I have not found your words completed (fulfilled, etc.).” But we will not demerit this second point. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 3:5 –

It is “the book of the life.” Further, changing the same Greek word from “garment” to “raiment” between verses 3:4 and 3:5 is too egregious to not demerit and to provide a scolding as well. Consider the translation scolded and accept 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 3:16 –

“I will” does not give the correct sense. It should say, “I am about to.” This is obvious from the use of the word melló (about), and the fact that verse 3:19 shows a chance to change is given. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 3:17 –

There is an article before “wretched” to highlight their state – “the wretched.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 4:1 –

The words, “After this,” are in correct. It is plural, “After these.” The word “looked” as if redirecting attention is incorrect. It should be “I saw,” as in a vision. The word “was” before “opened” conveys an incorrect sense, as if the door is opening before John’s eyes. The door stood open when John looked. The word “was” before “as it were of a trumpet” is misleading. It should be omitted. 4 demerits.

 

Revelation 4:4 –

The word “seats” should be “thrones.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 4:5 –

The word “proceeded” is rong. It is present tense in the Greek. The change to the present tense has purpose that is completely missed by the KJV. Translate as “proceed” and get 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 4:6 –

The word “glass” is an adjective. It should say “glassy.” It describes the appearance, not the material. The words “beasts” is a horribly unfortunate translation. “Beasts” is an entirely different word. This signifies “living creatures.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 4:9 –

The word “give” is in the future tense – “shall give.” Again, “beasts” is rong. It is “living creatures.” The word translated as “sat” is a present participle – “is sitting.” 3 demerits.

 

Revelation 4:10 –

All three verbs are future tense – “shall fall,” “shall worship,” and “shall cast.” 3 demeritos.

 

Revelation 5:2 –

The same word is used to translate this angel as “strong” and the angel in 10:1 as “mighty.” This is inconsistent. 2 demerits for inconsistency.

 

Revelation 5:3 –

To avoid the error of Mary being a co-Redemptrix, as argued for by certain cults, and to avoid the error of theology concerning angels, and also the deity and the humanity of Christ, the term “no man,” should read “no one,” or “none.” Next, there is an article before “heaven.” Next, it should say “on” or “upon” the earth, not “in.” 3 demerits.

 

Revelation 5:4 –

As in the previous verse, render it “no one,” or “none,” instead of “no man,” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 5:6 –

The word “stood” is a perfect participle. It should say, “standing.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 5:7 –

There is an intentional alternating of the tenses here that the KJV misses. Thus, the graphic nature of what occurs is missed. “And he came, and he has taken the book…” (it goes from the aorist to the perfect tense). 1 demerit

 

Revelation 5:8 –

The aorist tense resumes here – “And when he took…” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 5:9 –

The word “sang” is a present tense verb. It should read, “sing” or “are singing.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 5:12 –

There is an article before “power.” It says, “the power.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 5:13 –

The Greek reads, “on the sea,” not “in the sea.” There is an article before “heaven,” “blessing,” before “honor,” before “glory,” and before “power.” 6 demerits.

 

Revelation 6:3 –

The words “he had opened” should simply read “he opened” to reflect the aorist verb. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 6:4 –

There is a definite article before “peace” that must be translated. It is “the peace.” Thus, 1 demeritola.

 

Revelation 6:8 –

There are articles before “hades” and “death” which are ignored by the KJV. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 6:17 –

There is a stress that is left out of the KJV. It literally say, “for the day the great.” Thus, a literal translation, or an emphasis such as “the day – that great day” is to be rendered. Also, the verb is present tense – “is able,” not “shall be able.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 7:3 –

It is epi, meaning “on” (or upon) the forehead, not en, meaning “in” the forehead. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 7:11 –

The word “stood” is pluperfect, thus is it used in this as an imperfect. Translated as “were standing,” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 7:12 –

There is an article in front of each of the seven descriptors which are sloppily omitted by the KJV. If you want to have very little idea of what the Bible is telling you, just stick with the KJV. 7 demerits.

 

Revelation 7:14 –

Rather than, “And I said,” it is “And I have said.” The verb is in the perfect tense. Rather than, “Sir,” it says, Kurie mou, or “My Lord.” Rather than, “which came,” it reads as a present participle, “which come,” or even, “which are coming.” Rather than “have washed,” it reads in the aorist, “they washed.” 4 demerits.

 

Revelation 7:17 –

It is not “all tears.” It says, “every tear” (singular). 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 8:2 –

“Stood” is incorrect. It is in the perfect tense. Render “stand” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 8:3 –

It says, “stood over the altar,” or “upon the altar,” not “at the altar.” It is the same word, epi (upon) used again in this same verse. The typology of Christ it obliterated by the KJV translation. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 8:5 –

The word translated as “took” is in the perfect tense. Render “has taken.” Also, it says “from” or “out of” the fire. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 9:1 –

Incorrect. It is not “a star fall from heaven.” Rather, it says, “from heaven, fallen.” The star had fallen and is seen as fallen. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 9:6 –

It says “shall the men.” The article defines which men. It (twice) says “the death,” thus personifying death. 3 demerits.

 

Revelation 9:15 –

The translation is wrong. Instead of “an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year,” it reads “the hour, and a day, and a month, and a year.” By omitting the definite article, the KJV sloppily causes the times to be cumulative. They are not. It is a set hour, day, month, and year. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 9:16 –

The word “army” is plural, “armies.” It is a coalition of forces. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 10:3 –

The correct rendering is “the seven thunders.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 10:6 –

The Greek reads “in him that liveth,” not “by him that liveth.” Also, the words “that there should be time no longer,” should read “shall be…” It is future tense. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 10:7 –

The words, “shall begin to sound,” are incorrect. It says, “is about to sound.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 11:6 –

The Greek reads in the singular, “every plague,” not “with all plagues.” It is demeritable and thus the KJV gets 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 11:8 –

The Greek reads “upon the street,” not “in the street.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 11:10 –

The words “shall rejoice over them, and make merry,” are present tense. It should say, “rejoice over them, and make merry.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 11:19 –

The KJV is confused. Instead of “And the temple of God was opened in heaven,” it should read, “And the temple of God in heaven was opened.” Secondly, it is “the ark of his covenant,” not “the ark of his testament.” Incorrect terminology. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 12:1 –

The word translated as “wonder” means “sign” and it should be translated as such. See Hebrews 2:4 (and etc). 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 12:3 –

The word translated as “wonder” means “sign” and it should be translated as such. See Hebrews 2:4 (and etc). 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 12:5 –

The words, “a man-child,” are insufficient. The Greek reads, “a son, a male.” As Vincent’s says, “The correct reading is ἄρσεν, the neuter, not agreeing with the masculine individual (υἱὸν son) but with the neuter of the genus. The object is to emphasize, not the sex, but the peculiar qualities of masculinity – power and vigor.” The words “was to rule” are wrong. It is present tense and should say, “is about to rule.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 12:10 –

The KJV omits two definite articles. It should read, “Now is come the salvation, and the strength, and the kingdom of our God.” Also, it does not say “a loud voice saying in heaven.” It says, “a loud voice in heaven saying.” Further, the word “accused” is incorrect. It is a present participle and should read “accuses.” 4 demerits.

 

Revelation 13:1 –

The verb “rise up” is a present participle. It should say, “rising up.” Also, there is no article before “name.” It is “a name of blasphemy.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 13:13 –

The word translated as “wonder” means “sign” and it should be translated as such. See Hebrews 2:4 (and etc). Also, there is a preposition not translated by the KJV. It should say “also maketh” or “even maketh.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 13:14 –

The word translated as “miracles” means “signs” and it should be translated as such. See Hebrews 2:4 (and etc). 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 13:16 –

The mark is epi (on or upon) instead of en (in). 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 14:1 –

The same preposition, epi or “on,” is used twice in this verse. The KJV translates the second us “in.” It is “on their foreheads,” not “in their foreheads.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 14:3 –

It says “the sing,” not “the sung.” The verb is present tense. It is “living creatures,” not “beasts.” It says, “purchased (or bought),” not “redeemed.” They were purchased from the earth. 3 demerits.

 

Revelation 14:6 –

There is no article before “everlasting gospel.” Render “eternal good news” or something similar and receive 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 14:7 –

The KJV leaves off articles and inserts articles from the Greek. The Greek reads, “the heaven and the earth, and sea and springs of waters.” 3 demerits.

 

Revelation 14:13 –

Instead of “a voice from heaven,” it says “a voice from out of the heaven.”

 

Revelation 14:15/16 –

Two different words are used in these two verses that are both translated as “thrust.” They should be translated differently so that the reader understands this. As they were not, a demerit is issued.

 

Revelation 14:18 –

There is an article before “fire,” it is “the fire.” 1 demeritola.

 

Revelation 15:1 –

Instead of “is filled up,” the Greek reads “was complete.” It is a prophetic aorist. The KJV inconsistently translates the Greek word etelesthē between here and verse 10:7 as well. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 15:2 –

The word “glass” is an adjective. It should say “glassy.” It describes the appearance, not the material. This is found in both instances in this verse. Also, the words “had gotten victory over the beast” are incorrect. It is a present participle that says, “and those conquering over the beast.” Also, the verb “stand” is a perfect participle, active voice. It should read “standing” as in Revelation 7:1. 4 demerits.

 

Revelation 15:4 –

The words “are made manifest” are not correct. The verb is aorist and thus says, “have been made manifest.” The prophetic past speaks of the future. 1 demeritation.

 

Revelation 15:3 –

The same word, translated as “just” here, is found in the same context in 16:7 and should be translated the same to avoid confusion. Translate 15:3 as “righteous,” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 15:5 –

The KJV’s rendering hardly allows the reader to know what was opened. Is it the temple or the tabernacle of the testimony? It should be offset or reworded to clarify this. The temple … was opened in heaven. Further, the Greek includes an article – “the heaven.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 16:4 –

The verb “came” is singular. There is no need to say, “they became.” It should say, “and it became,” or “and there came.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 16:4 –

The word “power” is inserted and should have been italicized. It says, “and there was given to him to scorch.” Also, it says, “in fire,” not with fire.” 2 demeritolas.

 

Revelation 16:10 –

There is an article before pain intended to highlight it. Render “because of the pain” and receive 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 16:14 –

The word translated as “miracles” means “signs” and it should be translated as such. See Hebrews 2:4 (and etc). 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 17:4 –

The Greek says “precious stone” in the singular. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 17:8 –

The words, “in the book,” are incorrect. It is epi, upon. Upon the book, or upon the scroll. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 17:11 –

The KJV completely confuses the meaning of the verse. There is no article before “eighth.” By adding that in, what is being conveyed no longer makes any sense at all. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 17:16 –

The word translated as “desolate” is a perfect participle. It should read “desolated.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 18:7 –

“Sorrow” (2x) should be translated as James 4:9, “mourning.” It is a sorrow that cannot be hidden and thus “mourning.” 2 demerits

 

Revelation 18:11 –

The words “shall weep and mourn” are incorrect. The passage has moved from the future to the present. Render “weep and mourn.” Also, the word gomos is used. It signifies the lading of a ship. Render “lading, or “cargo.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 18:12 –

The word gomos is used. It signifies the lading of a ship. Render “lading, or “cargo.” Also, “precious stones” should read “precious stone.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 18:14 –

The word “fruits” is singular – “fruit.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 18:15 –

Merchants are people. Change “which” to “who.” Also, the “weep and mourn” of verse 11 is changed to “weeping and wailing” here. It is inconsistent. Read “weeping and mourning.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 18:16 –

It is not “precious stones,” but “precious stone.” It is singular. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 18:16 –

The Greek reads, “in thy sorcery,” not “by thy sorceries.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 19:3 –

The Greek reads, “And a second time they said.” It is the same expression as in John 3:4, for example. The inconsistency demands 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 19:4 –

The word “beasts” is an unfortunate translation. “Beasts” is an entirely different word. This signifies “living creatures.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 19:6 –

The word reigneth is not correct. It is an aorist verb. Read “reigned” or “has reigned.” It is once for all. The word omnipotent should be prefixed by the article. It is in the emphatic position – “the omnipotent.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 19:6 –

The word “followed” should say, “were following.” The Greek is in the imperfect tense which reveals advancing movement. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 19:17/21 –

The same word translated as “bird” in 18:2 is translated as “fowls” in these two verses. There is a lack of consistency by the editing committee. No demerit for this. However, the Greek reads “one angel” and should be translated as such. It is a single angel standing in the sun. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 19:20 –

The word “worshipped” should read “worshipping.” It is a present participle. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 20:1 –

The chain is epi, upon or over, his hand, not “in his hand.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 20:3 –

The seal isn’t on the devil. He is shut up in the preceding clause. Therefore, the seal is over him, not upon him. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 20:10 –

The word “deceived” is a present participle. It should say, “deceiveth” or “is deceiving.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 20:11 –

It is not “him that sat,” but “him who is sitting.” It is a present participle. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 20:12 –

There is no “the” before books – “and books were opened.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 20:13 –

There are articles before “hades” and “death” which are ignored by the KJV. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 21:4 –

Rather than “all tears,” it reads (singular) “every tear.” Also, “sorrow” should be rendered as in James 4:9, “mourning.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 21:5 –

It is not “him that sat,” but “him who is sitting.” It is a present participle. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 21:6 –

The Greek reads, “the Alpha and the Omega.” The definite articles have purpose. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 21:7 –

The Textus Receptus includes an article before “son” that demands to be translated. Render as Young’s – “and I will be to him — a God, and he shall be to me — the son.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 21:12 –

Rather than “And had,” it says, “And having.” Both times, it is a present participle. 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 21:15 –

Again, a present participle is used – “And he who is talking with me.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 21:18 –

The same word is used twice in this verse which the KJV translates as “pure” and then “clear.” Both should say “pure.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 21:21 –

The words, “every several gate,” are incorrect. It is plural and in the genitive case, “each several one of the gates.” 2 demerits.

 

Revelation 21:23 –

Rather than, “and the Lamb is the light thereof,” it reads, “and the Lamb is the lamp thereof.” Saying “light” sets up an internal contradiction within the verse itself. See verse 22:5 and receive 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 21:27 –

The words “that defileth” are an adjective and should be “unclean” or “common” as in Acts 10:14, etc. 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 22:4 –

The Greek reads “on” or “upon” the forehead, not “in.” 1 demerit.

 

Revelation 22:8 –

The Greek consists of an article with the participle, and thus, the article is to be translated. Further, being present participles, they are to be translated as such – “And I, John, am the one who is seeing these things and hearing.” Also, in the next clause, the verbs are aorist and should not be rendered in the pluperfect, “And when I heard and saw.” And again, in the final clause, the verb is a present participle – “of the angel who is showing me these things.” 6 demerits.

 

Revelation 22:11 –

The words “unjust” should be “unrighteous.” “The final words of the verse, “let him be holy” are passive. It should read, “let him be made holy.” 3 demerits.

 

Revelation 22:12 –

The word “give” is insufficient. It signifies “to give back,” or “to return for.” Thus, it should read “render” or “repay.” No demerit.

 

Revelation 22:12 –

The KJV fails to express the articles which are necessary to render each category in its signification – “the dogs, and the sorcerers, and the whoremongers, and the murderers, and the idolaters.” Also, the final two verbs are present participles, “loving and making a lie.” 7 demerits.

 

 

 

 

 

 

————————————————————-

 

One of the most irrational and annoying cults of our time, because it is so unscholarly and so easy to disprove, is that of King James Onlyism. In the original preface to the KJV, the translators state that holding to only one version of the Bible is unwise, and they defend this rationally and objectively. However, that original preface is no longer published, and so unless you read it on-line, you would have no idea that they actually said this.

 

If you are a KJV-only person who wants to argue, please don’t email me until you have disproved EVERY SINGLE ONE of my submissions here. If there is ONE ERROR in translation, then it is not what you claim. There are countless errors and it is certainly not what you claim. In fact, the KJV is a rather mediocre translation. The number of errors in it excludes it from be a great or exceptional translation.

 

From time to time, I update this list as I evaluate another book of the Bible. Why do I feel this is necessary? It is because KJV-onlyism is a damnable twisting of reason, and it has led so many sound Christians down a path of bondage and bad doctrine.

 

If one person reads this page (and the other that I have linked) and realizes the error of this cult, it will be worth all the effort that I have put into it. Study! Show yourself approved! And stop listening to lies of people who are there to profit off you by selling you “their version” of the King James Version which they can print without any royalties at all. It is Public Domain, and so it is all profit to them. Don’t fund their greed any longer.

 

For those who are honestly seeking the truth, just check out these errors and then be pleased to join the ranks of normal, rational thinking Christians who are willing to put this nutty theology behind them, once and for all. And as a question you should ask yourself as you contemplate this cult, “Where in Scripture does God reveal that the KJV is the only acceptable translation?” If it were so, He would have clued us into this. Rather, it is a translation by man, fallible man, and it contains man’s fallible errors.

 

Blessings to all in Christ the Lord.

 

Charlie

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Timing of the Rapture

These are the notes from the Prophecy Update entitled The Timing of the Rapture

1 Corinthians 15 speaks of the resurrection and it details the rapture, explaining what will happen to the body we have and what will come next and why. 20-23 (resurrection) / 35-49 (type of body) / 50-53 (how the event will occur).

1 Thessalonians 4:13-17 (order of the actual rapture events)

5:1-3 (Times and Seasons repeat from Jesus – Acts 1:6, 7 / Day of the Lord warning; thief in the night)

5:4, 5 (not in darkness; sons of the light – this is an obvious pretrib inference. If the Day of the Lord – the Tribulation period – is darkness, and we are sons of the light, then we are not to be found in darkness).

2 Thess 1:6-10 refers to the tribulation coming upon the world. After that, 2 Thessalonians 2 gives the timeline for what will occur as laid out next… 

2:1 – Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, This is an issue which he has already addressed in his first letter, especially in Chapter 4 of it. Therefore, his words are to be taken along with what he said there. Without getting too far ahead, it is evident from his coming words that people were making false claims about the events of 1 Thessalonians 4, and these statements were troubling the fellowship. Paul wants them (and thus us!) to know the proper sequence of events which will occur in and around the Lord’s coming “and our gathering together to Him.”

The word Paul uses, translated as “gathering,” is found only here and in Hebrews 10:25 in regards to Christians assembling together for worship and instruction. In this case, it must be referring to all who are in Christ, both the dead and the living. The words of 1 Thessalonians 4 are being further explained. Therefore, it is certainly referring to the time of the rapture at the Lord’s coming for His church.

2:2 – not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. First he says that those in Thessalonica are “not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled.” This is based on what he said in verse 1 about the rapture. He is asking them to be sound in their doctrine, and thus they will not be led astray in their minds. Their hope will remain steadfast, and their faith will not be weakened.

He then says that this should be the case if presented with a false claim “either by spirit or by word or by letter.” The reason why it is false lies yet ahead in Paul’s words, but if a claim is made which contradicts the word of the Lord, then it is false.

Such a claim could be “by spirit.” This would be a supposed “prophetic utterance” by someone in a Christian setting. It would be a claim to divine revelation. Today we have the word of God. We do not need, nor will we receive, such a word of “prophetic utterance” concerning the rapture. Any claim of such a prophecy is to be rejected, and the supposed recipient is to be disregarded as a lunatic.

Next, Paul says, “by word or by letter.”  If a supposed letter or writing is received which contradicts what Paul will say, then it should be tossed into the garbage can, soaked with gas, and lit on fire. Be careful to not burn down your house in the process!

With this thought of the importance of what he will now say out of the way, he finishes the verse with, “as though the day of Christ had come.” The focus here is on the day of Christ. This is the main thought of Paul’s words of this section. The “coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering to Him” is being set in relation to “the day of Christ, not the other way around. If one does not properly follow this thought, then there will be confusion in end-times theology. When is the rapture? When is the anti-Christ revealed? These things have to be taken in connection with what is now said by Paul. Otherwise, an incorrect analysis of the timing of these events is inevitable. This is why Paul has specifically started with the rapture, and then set it in relation to “the day of Christ.”

What is “the day of Christ’ then? It needs to be understood that various manuscripts say “day of the Lord” and “day of Christ.” They both have the same meaning. Christ is the Lord. This is speaking of the 7 years of tribulation which are coming upon the world. It is not merely the last 3 ½ years of this period. These seven years are what are spoken of in Daniel 9:24-27. The details of these seven years are given in numerous places in the Old Testament, and they are described in greater detail in Revelation 4:2 – 19:10. This is what Paul is referring to.

2:3 –  Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, The opening clause of this verse, “Let no one deceive you by any means,” is based on what was said in the previous verse. They were “not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us.”

At that early day in church history, there were deceivers who were making crazy stuff up out of their own heads, and passing it off as prophecies from the Lord. Paul is showing those at Thessalonica (and thus us!) that only the instructions of true apostles were to be regarded as authoritative. Now that the apostolic age is over, our only source for divine revelation is the word of God. Any supposed word from the Lord, or any supposed divine instruction apart from the Bible, is to be wholly rejected.

Paul’s next words have a thought inserted in them by the translators, “for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first.” The Greek simply reads, “because if not shall have come the apostasy.” However, the words which were inserted by the translators are rightly supplied. It is speaking not of the rapture of verse 1, but of the “day of Christ” (or day of the Lord) of verse 2. The day of Christ (meaning the tribulation period) will not come “unless the falling away comes first.”

It has become common to teach that this word, apostasia, or “falling away,” is actually speaking about the rapture because the word signifies “leave” or “depart.” However, this is an unnecessary stretch of the intent of his words. The word is only used elsewhere in Acts 21:21 when speaking of forsaking Moses, meaning the Law of Moses. The departure is one of purposeful turning away from set doctrine.

There will be a falling away from the true faith of Christ before the day of Christ comes upon the world. What is implied here is that the true church will be gone by then, but that will be explained in verse 7. It is not explained by the word apostasia of this verse. Along with this thought, Paul finishes the verse with, “and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition.”

Here he speaks of “the man of sin.” The term is unique in the NT. It is applied to a specific person who will be a man of lawlessness, as the word anomia implies. The word signifies “the utter disregard for God’s law (His written and living Word). Paul further describes him as “the son of perdition.” This is a term used only one other time in the Bible, in John 17:12, when speaking of Judas who betrayed Jesus.

Judas, in essence, “fell away” from the truth of the apostolic office which otherwise could have been his. He chose the evil path, and he was essentially born to be destroyed. Like Judas, this person will be set on a course which can only lead to ruin. The word Paul uses which is translated as “revealed” is apokaluptó. It will be as if a covering is pulled away and this person, bent on disregarding God’s law, will be unveiled. He then is a counterfeit to Christ, and thus he is known to us as the Antichrist. What we have so far is the understanding that the day of Christ (the day of the Lord), will not actually commence until the Antichrist is revealed. However, he will not be revealed until after the rapture, as is implied in this verse, but which will be made explicit in verse 7. And so thus far, we see the sequence of events – 1) Rapture of the church; 2) The falling away and the revealing of the Antichrist; 3) Day of Christ (Day of the Lord)

2:4 –  who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.  The words which begin this verse are actually in the present tense. Rightly translated, it says, “…the [one] opposing and exalting himself.” If taken substantially, it would read “…the opposer, and exalter of himself.” It clearly references the Antichrist. The words are reflective of Satan himself, but are being applied to a man; and so it is one who is wholly in league with the goals and intents of Satan. It is this man of lawlessness who places himself “above all that is called God or is worshiped.”

In this phrase, it is understood that the Antichrist will place himself above the true God as well as all other false gods. Total allegiance to him will be required. In essence, he will be believed to be the fulfillment of whatever hope is laid out in any religion. For those who say they are Christians, he will appear to be their Christ. For the Jews, he will appear to be their Messiah. For the Muslims, he will appear to be their Mahdi, etc. But he will even exalt himself above the God or gods that he claims he is from, demanding worship of himself only.

There are things that are not “gods” which receive worship or adoration, but he will exalt himself above any such thing. This self-exaltation will be seen in a demand for total allegiance above power, money, or even life itself. This will be fully seen and realized on the day that “he sits as God in the temple of God.” These words, for countless years of the church age, have been taken to mean something other than a Jewish temple.

That temple was destroyed, and there seemed no chance of one ever being rebuilt. Some have taken this to mean “the Vatican” where the pope sits. Others argue it is referring to the Christian church in general. Charles Ellicott took it to mean “a poetical or prophetical description of usurping divine prerogatives generally.” These and other analyses were based on a misunderstanding that the church had somehow replaced Israel, or that there would never be a “temple of God” in Jerusalem again.

However, it is understood from the dispensational model that the Jews do have another temple coming (Daniel 9:24-27), and that is now possible with Israel back in their land. The temple implements are ready, and the temple itself will be built. This is actually in accord with Revelation 11:1 where John was told to “measure the temple of God.” One doesn’t measure a universal church or a “poetical or prophetical description,” and the Vatican doesn’t sit in Jerusalem. Paul’s words, combined with those of Daniel and John, clearly indicate a rebuilt Jewish temple in Jerusalem. It is in this temple that the Antichrist will sit “as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.”

To sit in the temple, where only God is allowed to reside, is to claim the authority and personage of God. No priest is said to sit in the temple. There are duties to be conducted and then they are to depart. No such furniture exists for the priests to sit down. Only in the Holy of Holies of the temple was there a place of rest. This is where God dwelt above the cherubim on the mercy seat above the ark. The high priest would enter behind that veil once a year to make atonement for the sins of the people, but other than that, there was no sitting of any kind involved in temple duties. (See Hebrews 10:12 & 12:2!)

Antichrist sitting in the temple will be his claim that he is entitled to sit there because he is the one who “is God.” As it is known that Jesus is God incarnate and the Christ, this then is the “Antichrist.” He will make a false claim against the true God who has revealed Himself in the Person of Jesus.

2:5 – Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? here Paul takes time to upbraid the church at Thessalonica, and he does it in the form of a question. Further, in a change unique to this verse alone, he switches from the third person to the first person. Whereas he has been saying “we” to include those with him, he now departs from that in his zeal to correct his audience and says, “I.”

He begins with, “Do you not remember.” It is a way of saying, “You obviously didn’t pay attention.” Jesus used this same type of questioning in order to rebuke the disciples. Paul has done it elsewhere as well, such as in his letters to the Romans and those at Corinth. Now, having chided them for not having remembered, and for instead having become shaken by someone’s introduction of false doctrine (see verse 2), he goes on to say, “that when I was still with you.”

As noted, he speaks here in the first person – “I personally was there, and I personally instructed you on this matter.” Paul’s frustration is obvious. He wanted soundness of mind for his beloved brethren, but they had instead been disturbed in their thinking because of the introduction of incorrect information.

To finish the verse, he says, “I told you these things.” The word translated as “told” in the Greek is in the imperfect tense. In other words, “I repeatedly told you these things.” The use of the imperfect, when read by the church, would be an embarrassing moment for them. Paul had spoken of the end times as a core part of his doctrine, and one of the things he told them was that it would probably be a long time before the Lord returned. Further, before “the day of Christ” came, certain things would precede it.

If they had paid attention, they would not now be unsettled. The same imperfect tense is used in 1 Thessalonians 3:4 when reminding them that they would face tribulation. Paul and those with him didn’t just tell them this, they told them it often. The same is true with his words of end-times events. The entire thought of this verse is reminiscent of that of Hebrews 5:12 –

“For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food.” Hebrews 5:12

There are things which people hear, and of which they should pay close attention, but they instead take brain-naps while the instructor is imparting his wisdom to them. In this, they are only harming themselves. HEY YOU…WAKE UP !

2:6 – And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. Paul continues with his thoughts on the revealing of the Antichrist. He said that the Antichrist would not be revealed until after the rapture of the church. This is implied in the previous verses, and it will be implied again in the coming verses. Only then will Antichrist be revealed, and the world enter the day of Christ (the Lord). But something is restraining that from occurring, something they have already been told about. This is reminded to them with the words, “And now you know what is restraining.”

The words, “And now” are not speaking of anything he has said in this letter. Instead of being in a temporal sense, the word “now” is being used in an introductory sense. They are being asked to call to memory what had already been told them. The reason for explaining it this way is because the church had been fooled; they had been misdirected by false information claiming that “the day of Christ” had come. The reminder now is that the revealing of the Antichrist is actually purposefully hindered, and it would continue to be so until the right time arrived.

The words, “what is restraining” are insufficient here. There is a definite article in front of  “restraining” in the Greek. This is not a mere doctrine that they are aware of, but rather of a specific and familiar object. It should say, “that which is restraining.” A known entity is restraining the coming of Antichrist, and the time for that entity to cease restraining will come as planned by God. And so there was absolutely no reason for those in Thessalonica (and thus us!) to speculate about having already entered into the tribulation period.

The truth holds for us even until this day. And yet, how many have claimed that the day of Christ (the day of the Lord) has arrived? How many speculations about the tribulation period have been laid out in chart upon chart! But there is one restraining, and that will continue to be the case so “that he may be revealed in his own time.” The “he” is speaking of Antichrist.

What is restraining the revealing of the Antichrist is not specifically mentioned, but it can be readily inferred based on several things in the verses to come. But suffice it to say that 1) the Antichrist is one who stands in opposition to Jesus. If this must be restrained for even 2000 years now, it shows that even though Antichrist is a person, there is more involved. He is a person who will be specifically filled by Satan. And 2) if this could be at any given time, then there is a set time – known even 2000 years ago – when this would come about. What could could restrain Satan from so filling whatever person he chose for that long? Stay tuned.

The words, “that he might be revealed in his own time,” have the meaning of “with a view to.” What this means is that God’s purposes will come about because the power of Antichrist will stop being restrained when He sees fit. Just as God ordained Israel to be exiled to Babylon for 70 years, and then that exile ended as prophesied, and then just as the same is true with the ending of their second exile at a pre-prophesied moment to effect His purposes, the ending of the restraint of the power which will be given to the Antichrist is intended to meet God’s purposes for judgment on the unrepentant world.

The word translated as “time” indicates a set and purposeful time. It is a particular season. Just as Christ Jesus was said to have come in the fullness of the time set by God, so Antichrist will come at a particular season to fulfill God’s purposes.

2:7 – For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.  The word “For” is given based on the words of the previous verse. Paul said something was restraining the Antichrist. This was “that he may be revealed in his own time.” From this, Paul continues with “For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work.” A mystery is something not revealed. There is a lawlessness which is working (and it has been working for 2000 years or more) which is not yet fully revealed. It has been slowly working out a plan. In the Greek, there is an article in front of both “mystery” and “lawlessness.” It reads, “For the mystery of the lawlessness.”

The state of lawlessness which is still not fully revealed is “already at work.” The idea of the work is that of an inward action, as if yeast causing bread to swell. It is an infection, not a personal thing. It is a state of lawlessness which is working, and which will eventually be revealed. This mystery is then sharply contrasted to the word “revealed” which is found in verses 6 & 8. There is a time when the lawlessness will come forth to effect its purposes on earth. It will be when the Antichrist is revealed, because he will then embody this lawlessness. This working of lawlessness, however, is kept in check until the appropriate time.

At some point, the restraining force of verse 6 will no longer restrain. As it says, “only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.” Here, the words “will do so” are supplied by the translators for clarity. The use of the masculine word “He” is based upon the masculine, singular article in the Greek. In verse 6, the restraining force was described with a neuter article, “that which restrains.” That is converted now to a masculine noun. The question is, “Who is He?”

The NKJV capitalizes the word. This is a presupposition that it is speaking of the Holy Spirit. Others continue to translate this as “the one,” “he” (not capitalized), “that which,” “the person,” etc. Each translation is based on a best guess of the nature of this “restrainer.” But Paul uses the masculine here for a reason, and so it is not appropriate to continue to translate it in the neuter. Further, this cannot be a “person” in the regular sense. The restraining has gone on for millennia. It is also not something belonging to the lawlessness. To be restrained is an external force, not an internal one.

Therefore, the NKJV is correct. God is restraining. However, and more specifically, it is the restraining power of the third member of the Godhead – the Holy Spirit. One analysis is that the restrainer is the church itself, but as the word is masculine, it is more appropriately the One who is intimately identified with the true church. The Holy Spirit is given to all who believe in Christ (Ephesians 1:13, 14). As this is so, the church is involved in the restraining process, but it is the Holy Spirit who is the one who actively restrains the lawlessness. And He will do so “until He is taken out of the way.”

What this means is that there is a time when the Holy Spirit’s restraining influence will no longer be effected. A releasing of the restraint will come about, and then only will the lawless one be revealed. What is certain then is that if the Holy Spirit is taken out of the way, the church too must be taken out of the way. If the effect of the Holy Spirit is to end, and the church were to remain, then the “guarantee” of the sealing of the Spirit which Paul notes in Ephesians 1:14 would not be a sound “guarantee” at all. We would be left abandoned. This is completely contrary to the nature of God and His word. Thus, this taking “out of the way” of the Holy Spirit is simultaneous with the taking away of the church at the rapture. Both occur, and only then will the mystery of lawlessness (and thus the Antichrist) be revealed. This is explicitly stated next…

2:8 – And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming.   “And then.” In Greek it is kai tote. It is correctly translated… “And then.” So here we have a clear sequence of events –

1) The Restrainer (meaning the Holy Spirit, and thus the body of believers whom the Holy Spirit has sealed) will be “taken out of the way.” 2) And then the lawless one will be revealed, which will be in conjunction with… 3) The tribulation period (the day of Christ/the Lord)

The timeline is set. There is no reason at all to debate who the Antichrist is, and there is no need to wonder if Christians will have to endure some (mid-trib) or all (post-trib) of the tribulation period. Paul is the one to define these things. Going to the words of Jesus in the synoptic gospels to determine the timing of these events is inappropriate, because Jesus is not speaking to the church about these things. He is speaking to Israel about things which will affect them, including the tribulation period.

In using the words of the gospels to form a prophetic timeline for the church, one mixes dispensations. In doing so, a convoluted theology will always result. We are to stick to the epistles of Paul for proper church-age doctrine. It is only after the removal of the Restrainer that “the lawless one will be revealed.” It is this Satan-filled person “whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth.” This is alluded to by John in the book of Revelation – “Now out of His mouth goes a sharp sword, that with it He should strike the nations.” Revelation 19:15

Isaiah 11:4, which Paul is actually loosely citing, is another reference to this –

“But with righteousness He shall judge the poor,
And decide with equity for the meek of the earth;
He shall strike the earth with the rod of His mouth,
And with the breath of His lips He shall slay the wicked.”

One can see that this doesn’t merely mean that Christ will exhale and the Antichrist will evaporate. Rather, the symbolism of the sword and the rod reveals a destroying weapon which will come against the forces of Antichrist and destroy them all. They will be destroyed so easily that it will be as if He simply breathes out and they are vanquished. The details are explained in Revelation 19:19 & 21. It also is further defined by Paul with the words, “and destroy with the brightness of His coming.” The supposed power and majesty of the Antichrist will pale in comparison to the glory of Christ Jesus. After defeating the armies gathered together to make war against Him, it then says in Revelation 19:20 –

“Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone.”

Bad times lay ahead for this sick dood. Instead of ruling the world, he should have been reading his Bible. Jesus said as much to us in Matthew 16:26. There he asked an obvious question, “For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?” The answer is, “None.” This vile person will have gained the whole world, and yet his soul will be eternally condemned. Not a very bright choice in the end.

2:9-12 will give details about the time after the rapture and what it will be like for those left behind.

3:6-12 sums up Paul’s thoughts concerning rapture date setters who spend their time in that insanity instead of remaining productive people of God. Verse 10 is how they should be treated.  For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat.

Revelation 1-3 are addressed to the church. Revelation 4:1 is the rapture. The church is not mentioned at all from 4:2 until 19:10. In 19:11 is the return of Christ. Rev 19:14 notes that we are there with Him in this return.

NOTE: Not a single word of the three synoptic gospels are spoken to the church, and Matt 24:36 is spoken to Israel, while under the law and has nothing to do with the rapture. The rapture was a “mystery” only revealed by Paul in 1 Cor 15:51. This was the first time it is ever directly and explicitly addressed in human history and to the redeemed. That was 20-25 years after Christ’s ascension.

Pictures of a pretribulation rapture are carefully recorded in the Old Testament. If you want to see them, email me for the sermon link.

Lord Jesus has made us His pledge / By rapture surround us with hedge / We don’t know the date

He’ll never be late / But the world is surely on edge. // It is fact and not theory, pre-trib / To say anything else is a fib / If you think it’s absurd / To be truth of the Word / You best don a big diaper and bib

Such is the world in which we live… From Sarasota, Florida to UB Mongolia (),  I’m Charlie Garrett, this is the Superior Word, and that’s your PU for the Week

 

Chiasms in the Bible

Something fun from the Bible and a refutation of the Documentary Hypothesis – I hope you’ll enjoy it. It’s a pattern known as a Chiasm. “Chiasm” comes from the Greek letter Chi which is shaped like our “X.” It’s a pattern which starts in one direction and then turns around and repeats itself in the opposite direction.

I found most of them in this list. Any not found by me are noted as such. I hope after you see these, that you will look for them yourself and share them with me if you find any. Remember, these have been right in plain sight – for up to 3500 years. What a joy it is to share it with others – we are the recipients of God’s favor!

These first two are actually one inside the next, showing great intricacy –

 

Genesis 3:5 – 3:22 – That Serpent of Old, called the Devil and Satan.
The Fall of Man (4/8/2008)

a 3:5  You will be like God, knowing good and evil
—–b 3:7  They made coverings of fig leaves
———-c 3:8  Wife as yet unnamed
—————-d 3:9  Adam questioned
——————–e 3:12-13a  Eve accused and questioned
————————-x 3:13b  Serpent accused
————————-x 3:14  Serpent’s curse
——————–e 3:16  Eve’s curse
—————-d 3:17-19 Adam’s curse
———-c 3:20  Wife is named Eve
—–b 3:21  The LORD God made them tunics of skin and clothed them.
a 3:22 Man is like one of Us, to know good and evil.

 

Genesis 3:6 – 3:22 – Where are you?
Hard Questions (4/8/2008)

a 3:6  She ate the fruit from the tree and then gave it to her husband.
—–b 3:7  They realized they were naked.
———-c 3:8  Adam and Eve hid themselves.
—————x 3:9  Then the LORD God called to Adam and said to him, “Where are you?”
———-c 3:10  “I hid myself.”
—–b 3:11a  “Who told you that you were naked?”
a 3:11b  “Have you eaten from the tree?”

 

Genesis 19:10-16 (Sergio Voitenko, 3 January 2021
a Angels grabbed and saved Lot from the angry mod (v10-11)
—–b Angels inquire Lot about sons-in-law (v12)
———-c Destroy the place (v13)
—————x Because the outcry against it is so great (v13)
———-c Destroy it (v13)
—–b Lot begs sons in law to get up (v14)
a Angels grabbed them and saved them from destruction (v15-16)

Genesis 23:7-18 – Abraham Buries His Dead
A Purchase of Land (10/15/2012)

a (7) sons of Heth
—–b (9) the cave of Machpelah which he has, which is at the end of his field
———-c (10) in the presence of the sons of Heth, all who entered at the gate of his city
—————d (11) the field and the cave that is in it
——————–e (11) in the presence of the sons of my people
————————-f (11) Bury your dead!”
——————————g (12, 13) Abraham spoke to Ephron
———————————–x (13) “If you will give it, please hear me. I will give you
———————————–money for the field; take it from me and I will bury my dead there.”
——————————g (14) Ephron answered Abraham
————————-f (15) So bury your dead.”
——————–e (16) in the hearing of the sons of Heth
—————d (17) the field and the cave which was in it
———-c (18) in the presence of the sons of Heth, before all who entered at the gate of his city
—–b (19) the cave of the field of Machpelah
a (20) sons of Heth

 

Genesis 23:17-20 – Abraham Buries Sarah
A Purchase of Land (10/16/2012)

a so the field of Machpelah… before Mamre…the field and the cave in it… were deeded to Abraham by the sons of Heth
—–x And after this, Abraham buried Sarah his wife in the cave of the field of Machpelah
a so the field of Machpelah… before Mamre…the field and the cave in it… were deeded to Abraham by the sons of Heth

 

Genesis 37:5-8 – Joseph’s Dream
Israel Bows to the King (08/26/13)

a Concerning Joseph’s dream spoken to his brothers
—–b they hated him even more
———-c So he said to them, “Please hear this dream which I have dreamed: (giving of the
———-dream)
—————x There we were, binding sheaves in the field. Then behold, my sheaf arose and
—————also stood upright; and indeed your sheaves stood all around and bowed
—————down to my sheaf.”
———-c And his brothers said to him, “Shall you indeed reign over us? Or shall you
———-indeed have dominion over us?” (explanation of the dream)
—–b they hated him even more
a Concerning his dreams and his words to his brothers

 

Genesis 50:22-26 – Joseph Made the Sons of Israel Swear
The years of Joseph (Found by Sergio Voitenko – 01/25/2017)

a Joseph stayed in Egypt (v22)
—–b Joseph lived 110 years and is about to die (v22-23)
———-c God will help his brothers to go to Israel (v24b)
—————x Joseph made sons of Israel swear (v25a)
———-c God will help his brothers take his bones to Israel (v25b)
—–b Joseph dies at 110 (v26a)
a Joseph placed in a coffin in Egypt (v26b)

What is special about this chiasm concerning Joseph is that the last words of Joseph’s life are not only recorded in the hall of fame of faith but they are also the center of the chiasm that ends the book of Genesis.

 

Exodus 3:8 – 3:17 – I AM WHO I AM
The God Who Sees Promises Deliverance (8/22/2011) (Susan Garret and Charlie Garrett)

a 3:8(a) a land flowing with milk and honey
—–b 3:8(b) to the place of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the
—–Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites.
———-c 3:9(a) the cry of the children of Israel has come to Me
—————d 3:9(b) I have also seen the oppression with which the Egyptians oppress them.
——————–e 3:10 I will send you to Pharaoh
————————-f 3:12 this shall be a sign to you that I have sent you
——————————g 3:13(a) The God of your fathers has sent me to you,
———————————–h 3:13(b) What is His name?
—————————————-i 3:13(c) What shall I say to them
———————————————x 3:14 And God said to Moses, “I AM WHO I AM.”
—————————————-i 3:14(b) Thus you shall say to the children of Israel,
———————————–h 3:14(c) I AM has sent me to you.
——————————g 3:15(a) The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the
——————————God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.
————————-f 3:15(c) This is My name forever, and this is My memorial to all
————————-generations.
——————–e 3:16(a) Go and gather the elders of Israel
—————d 3:16(b)I have surely visited you and seen what is done to you in Egypt
———-c 3:17(a) I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt
—–b 3:17(b) to the land of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the
—–Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites
a 3:17(c) a land flowing with milk and honey

 

Exodus 6:1-11 – Words of Covenant Surety (Seven “I Wills)
A Promise of Redemption and Inheritance (1/5/2015)

a (vs 1) Then the Lord said to Moses, “Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh. For with a strong hand he will let them go, and with a strong hand he will drive them out of his land.”
—–b (vs 3) I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob,
———-c (vs 4) I have also established My covenant with them, to give them the land of
———-Canaan,
—————d (vs 5) The groaning of the children of Israel whom the Egyptians keep in
—————bondage,
——————–e (vs 6) ‘I am the Lord;
————————-f (vs 6) I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians,
————————-x (vs 6) I will rescue you from their bondage,
————————-x (vs 6) I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great
————————-judgments.
————————-f (vs 7) I will take you as My people, and I will be your God.
——————–e (vs 7) Then you shall know that I am the Lord your God
—————d (vs 7) The burdens of the Egyptians.
———-c (v 8) And I will bring you into the land
—–b (vs 8) I swore to give to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and I will give it to you as a heritage
a (vss 10, 11) And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, “Go in, tell Pharaoh king of Egypt to let the children of Israel go out of his land.”

 

Exodus 6:12-30 – The Family of Moses and Aaron
A Foreshadowing of the Coming Prophet and Priest (1/12/2015)

a (vs 12) And Moses spoke before the Lord, saying, “The children of Israel have not heeded me. How then shall Pharaoh heed me, for I am of uncircumcised lips?”
—–b  (vs 13) Then the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron … for Pharaoh king
—–of Egypt, to bring the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt.
———-c (vss 14-15) Families of Reuben and Simeon (rejected as leaders)
—————d (vss 16-19) Genealogies of Levi “according to their generations.”
——————–x. (vs 20) The family of Moses and Aaron
—————d (vss 21-25) Houses of Levi “according to their families.”
———-c (vss 26, 27) Moses and Aaron (selected as leaders)
—–b (vss 28, 29) The Lord spoke to Moses … “Speak to Pharaoh king of
—–Egypt all that I say to you.”
a (vs 30) But Moses said before the Lord, “Behold, I am of uncircumcised lips, and how shall Pharaoh heed me?”

 

Exodus 9:33, 34 – A Heavenly Plague
Pharaoh Changes His Mind

a thunder
—–b hail
———-c rain
—————x Pharaoh
———-c rain
—–b hail
a thunder

 

Exodus 13:21-14:20 – In the Wilderness (4/23/08)
Miracles and Complaints

a 13:21, 22 The pillar of cloud/fire led the way.
—–b 14:4 Harden Pharaoh’s heart to gain honor over him.
———-c 14:9 Israel lifted their eyes and were very afraid.
—————d 14:11 …to die in the wilderness
——————–e 14:11 Why have you so dealt with us, to bring us up out of Egypt?
————————-f 14:12 Let us alone that we may serve the Egyptians
——————–e 14:12 It would have been better for us to serve the Egyptians
—————d 14:12 … we should die in the wilderness.
———-c 14:13 Do not be afraid. Stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD.
—–b 14:17 Harden Egyptians hearts to gain honor over Pharaoh and all his army.
a 14:19, 20 The pillar of cloud went behind them.

Exodus 14:21-31 – Stretch Out Your Hand Over the Sea (4/23/08)
The Great Miracle

a 14:21 LORD produced miracle through Moses.
—–b 14:22 Through sea on dry ground, the waters a wall to their right and left.
———-c 14:23-25 Army of Pharaoh troubled
—————d 14:26 “Stretch out your hand over the sea.”
——————–x The waters may come back upon the Egyptians, on their chariots,
—————and on their horsemen.
—————d 14:27 And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea
———-c 14:28 Army of Pharaoh destroyed.
—–b 14:29 Through sea on dry ground, the waters a wall to their right and left.
a 14:30, 31 Israelites saw the miracle and feared the LORD and Moses.

Exodus 22:28-23:13 – Help your enemy if his donkey/ox is in trouble
“Love your neighbor as yourself” (01/30/13)

a 22:28 shall not revile God
—–b 22:30 oxen and your sheep shall be with its mother seven days
———-c 22:31 “you shall not eat meat torn by beasts in the field”
—————d 23:1 “You shall not circulate a false report.”
——————–e 23:3 not to show partiality to a poor man in his dispute.
————————-x 23:4 enemy’s ox or donkey going astray, help him
————————-x 23:5 donkey of one who hates you lying under its burden, help him
——————–e 23:6 not to pervert the judgment of your poor in his dispute.
—————d 23:7 “Keep yourself far from a false matter;”
———-c 23:11 “and what they leave, the beasts of the field may eat.”
—–b 23:12 rest on seventh day, so ox and donkey may rest
a 23:13 no mention of the name of other gods

 

Exodus 23:24-33 – Covenant Promises and Expectations
Upon Entering the Land of Canaan (2/9/2016)

a v.24 You shall not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do according to their works
—–b v.24 You shall utterly overthrow them and completely break down their sacred
—–pillars
———-c v.25 So you shall serve the Lord your God
—————d v.25&26 (Blessings of prosperity within the land)
——————–e v.27 I will send My fear before you, I will cause confusion among all
——————–the people to whom you come, and will make all your enemies
——————–turn their backs to you
————————-x v.28 And I will send hornets before you, which shall drive out the
————————-Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite from before you
————————-x v.29 I will not drive them out from before you in one year, lest the
————————-land become desolate and the beasts of the field become too
————————-numerous for you
——————–e v.30 Little by little I will drive them out from before you, until you have
——————–increased, and you inherit the land
—————d v.31 (Blessing of boundaries of the land)
———-c v.32 You shall make no covenant with them, nor with their gods
—–b v.33 They shall not dwell in your land, lest they make you sin against Me
a v.33 For if you serve their gods, it will surely be a snare to you

 

Exodus 24:1-9 The Cutting of the Covenant
Israel’s Verbal Agreement to the Words of the Lord (2/9/2016)

a v.1 Now He said to Moses, “Come up to the Lord, you and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel…”
—–b v.3 Moses submits the covenant for acceptance
———-c v.3 “All the words which the Lord has said we will do.”
—————d v.4 Wrote out the words of the Lord.
——————–e v.4 Built an altar
————————-x v.4 The twelve tribes of Israel
————————-x v.5 The children of Israel
——————–e v.6 Sanctified the altar
—————d v.7 Read the words of the Lord
———-c v.8 “All that the Lord has said we will do, and be obedient.”
—–b v.8 Moses seals the covenant after acceptance
a v.9 Then Moses went up, also Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel

 

Exodus 24:9-18 Moses Went Up
Designation of Aaron and Hur to Lead During Moses’ Absence (3/2/2016)

a 9 Then Moses went up
—–b 10 (Description of the Lord’s glory)
———-c 12 The Lord said to Moses, “Come up to Me on the mountain and be there;
—————d 13 Moses went up to the mountain of God.
——————–x 14 (instructions to the elders/designation of Aaron and Hur as leaders
—————d 15 Then Moses went up into the mountain,
———-c 16 And on the seventh day He called to Moses out of the midst of the cloud.
—–b 17 (Description of the Lord’s glory)
a 18 So Moses went into the midst of the cloud

 

Exodus 29:43-45 – Sanctified by My glory
I Will Dwell Among Them and be Their God (05/25/2016)

a And there I will meet with the children of Israel, and they shall be sanctified by My glory
—–x So I will consecrate the tabernacle of meeting and the altar
—–x I will also consecrate both Aaron and his sons to minister to Me as priests
a I will dwell among the children of Israel and will be their God

 

Exodus 31:13-17 – The Sabbath Rest
A Sign between the Lord and Israel (7/11/2016)

a Surely My Sabbaths you shall keep
—–b For it is a sign between Me and you
———-c Throughout your generations,
—————d You shall keep the Sabbath, therefore, for it is holy to you
——————–e Everyone who profanes it shall surely be put to death
————————-f For whoever does any work on it
————————-x Work shall be done for six days,
————————-but the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord
————————-f Whoever does any work on the Sabbath day
——————–e He shall surely be put to death
—————d Therefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the
—————Sabbath
———-c Throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant
—–b It is a sign between Me and the children of Israel
a On the seventh day He rested and was refreshed

 

Exodus 32:1-34:17 – The Glory of the LORD (8/31/11)
A Call to Holiness

a 32:1-35 Example of idolatry.
—–b 33:2 And I will send My Angel before you, and I will drive out the Canaanite and the
—–Amorite and the Hittite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite.
———-c 33:3 for I will not go up in your midst, lest I consume you on the way, for you are
———-a stiff-necked people
—————d 33:7-11 Moses meets the Lord in the Tent of Meeting.
——————–e 33:12 You have said, “I know you by name.”
————————-f 33:12 You have also found grace in My sight
——————————g 33:13 Now therefore, I pray, if I have found grace in Your sight,
——————————show me now Your way, that I may know You and that I may
——————————find grace in Your sight.
——————————h 33:13 And consider that this nation is Your people
—————————————-i 33:14 And He said, “My Presence will go with you, and I will
—————————————-give you rest.”
———————————————x 33:15 If Your Presence does not go with us, do not bring
———————————————us up from here.
—————————————-i 33:16 For how then will it be known that Your people and I
—————————————-have found grace in Your sight, except You go with us?
——————————h 33:16 So we shall be separate, Your people and I, from all the
——————————people who are upon the face of the earth.
——————————g 33:17 I will also do this thing that you have spoken
————————-f 33:17 You have found grace in My sight
——————–e 33:17 I know you by name
—————d 33:18-34:8 Moses meets the Lord on Mt. Sinai.
———-c 34:9 O Lord, let my Lord, I pray, go among us, even though we are a stiff-necked
———-people
—–b 34:11 Behold, I am driving out from before you the Amorite and the Canaanite and
—–the Hittite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite.
a 34:12-17 Warning against idolatry.

 

Leviticus 6:9-13 – Handling of the burnt offering and its ashes (5/13/08)
The Burnt Offering
a 6:9 The fire shall be kept burning
—–b 6:10 The fire shall be kept burning/the ashes of the burnt offer shall be taken up
———-x 6:11 Carry the ashes outside the camp to a clean place.
—–b 6:12 The fire shall be kept burning; and the burnt offering shall be lain on it
a 6:13 The fire shall be kept burning; it shall never go out

Numbers 9:18-23, Traveling by the Cloud;
A chiasm of obedience.

a At the command of the LORD the people would camp (18).
—–b The people would not journey as long as the cloud continued (19).
———-x So it was, they would remain and they would journey by the cloud (20).
———-x So it was, they would remain and they would journey by the cloud (21).
—–b The people would not journey as long as thc cloud continued (22).
a At the command of the LORD the people remained encamped (23).
Vince found this one.

 

Numbers 9:18-23 (The Charge of the Lord)
Should we stay, or should we go?

a at the command of the Lord
—–b v. 19 Israel kept the charge of the Lord
———-c  v. 20 according to the command of the Lord they would remain encamped, and
———-according to the command of the Lord they would journey
—————d  v. 21 when the cloud was taken up in the morning, then they would journey;
——————–x v.22 Whether it was two days, a month, or a year that the cloud remained
——————–above the tabernacle, the children of Israel would remain encamped and not
——————–journey
—————d v. 22 but when it was taken up, they would journey
———-c v. 23 At the command of the Lord they remained encamped, and at the command of
———-the Lord they journeyed
—–b v. 23 they kept the charge of the Lord
a at the command of the Lord

 

Deuteronomy 3:18-20 – Much Livestock
A Chiasm of Contrasts (23 March 2020)

a “Then I commanded you at that time, saying (Moses’ command)
—–b ‘The Lord your God has given you this land to possess (east of Jordan)
———-c All you men of valor shall cross over armed before your brethren,
———-the children of Israel (prepared for battle)
—————d But your wives, your little ones, and your livestock (needing security)
——————–x (I know that you have much livestock)
—————d shall stay in your cities which I have given you (given security)
———-c until the Lord has given rest to your brethren as to you (given rest)
—–b and they also possess the land which the Lord your God is giving them
—–beyond the Jordan (west of Jordan)
a Then each of you may return to his possession which I have given you
(Moses’ command)

 

Deuteronomy 3:25-4:22 – Call upon Him.
Israel’s Instruction (11/07)

a 3:25  Moses wants to cross Jordan
—–b 3:26  Lord angry with Moses
———-c 3:27  “Lift your eyes toward the west, the north, the south, and the east.”
—————d 4:2-4  Example of apostasy (idolatry)
——————–e 4:5  Taught statutes and judgments
————————-f 4:6  Be careful to observe them (judgments)
——————————g 4:7  Great nation
———————————–x 4:7  Call upon Him
——————————g 4:8  Great nation
————————-f 4:9  Diligently keep yourself (judgments)
——————–e 4:10-14  Taught statutes and judgments.
—————d 4:15-18  Warning of apostasy (idolatry)
———-c 4:19  “Lift your eyes to heaven.”
—–b 4:21  Lord angry with Moses
a 4:22  Moses must not cross over the Jordan

 

Deuteronomy 5:23-5:27 – A Consuming Fire
When God Speaks with Man (06/22/20)

a “So it was, when you heard (shama) the voice from the midst of the darkness,
—–b while the mountain was burning with fire, that you came near to me (qarav)
———-c His voice from the midst of the fire. We have seen this day that God speaks with man;
———-yet he still lives.
—————d Now therefore, why should we die?
——————–e For this great fire will consume us;
—————d then we shall die
———-c the voice of the living God speaking from the midst of the fire, as we have, and lived?
—–b You go near (qarav) and hear all that the Lord our God may say,
a and tell us all that the Lord our God says to you, and we will hear (shama) and do it.

 

Deuteronomy 6:17-25 – What is the Meaning?
To Keep is to Observe (17/8/2020)

a You shall diligently keep the commandments of the Lord your God, His testimonies, and His statutes
—–b That it may be well with you
———-c Possess the good land of which the Lord swore to your fathers
—————d To cast out all your enemies from before you (The Lord’s action)
——————–e When your son asks
————————-x What is the meaning of the testimonies, the statutes, and the
————————-judgments which the Lord our God has commanded you?’
——————–e Then you shall say to your son
—————d  He brought us out from there, that He might bring us in (The Lord’s action)
———-c To give us the land of which He swore to our fathers.
—–b For our good always, that He might preserve us alive
a If we are careful to observe all these commandments before the Lord our God

 

Deuteronomy 7:9-12 – The Covenant and the Mercy
A Promise and a Warning (08/31/2020)

a He is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and mercy
—–b For a thousand generations with those who love Him and keep His
—–commandments
———-c And He repays those who hate Him to their face
—————x He will not be slack with him who hates Him
———-c He will repay him to his face
—–b Therefore you shall keep the commandment, the statutes, and the judgments
—–which I command you today, to observe them
a That the Lord your God will keep with you the covenant and the mercy

 

Deuteronomy 8:3-16 – Beware that you do not forget the Lord your God
In Abundance, Keep his Commandments, Judgments and Statutes (Discovered by Sergio Voitenko – 03/09/2016)

a 3 “humbled you.. And fed you with manna.. Nor did your fathers know”
—–b 4 garments did not wear out, foot didn’t swell for 40 years
———-c 6 “Keep the commandments of the Lord, walk His ways, fear Him”
—————d 7-9 you will lack nothing
——————–e 10 “when you have eaten and are full”
————————-x 11 “beware that you do not forget the LORD your God”
——————–e 12 “lest when you have eaten and are full”
—————d 13 when in abundance of everything
———-c 14 “when you forget the Lord your God”
—–b 15 the Lord who led you through the great and terrible wilderness
a 16 “who fed you in the wilderness with manna which your fathers did not know.. And Humbled you”

 

Deuteronomy 9:6-13 – Breaking the Covenant
While Moses was on the mountain of God (6/3/2008 – refined in 2020)

a 9:6 You are a stiff-necked people
—–b 9:7, 8 You who came out of Egypt provoked the LORD to wrath
———-c 9:9, 10 I received two tablets of stone when on the mountain 40 days and nights
—————x 9:10 the words which the LORD had spoken to you on the mountain from the
—————midst of the fire
———-c 9:11 At the end of 40 days and nights, the LORD gave me the two tablets of stone
—–b 9:12 The people who came out of Egypt acted corruptly and disobeyed the LORD
a 9:13: Indeed, they are a stiff-necked people

 

Deuteronomy 11:1-8 (The Acts of the Lord)
From Egypt to the Bank of the Jordan (11/9/2020)

a “Therefore you shall love the Lord your God, and keep His charge, His statutes, His judgments,
and His commandments always
—–b And you have known today … His greatness and His mighty hand and His
—–outstretched arm—His signs and His acts which He did
———-c in the midst of Egypt
—————d to Pharaoh king of Egypt, and to all his land; what He did to the army of
—————Egypt, to their horses and their chariots: how He made the waters of the
—————Red Sea overflow them as they pursued you, and how the Lord has
—————destroyed them to this day (judgment on Egypt via the waters)
——————–x what He did for you in the wilderness until you came to this place
—————d and what He did to Dathan and Abiram the sons of Eliab, the son of
—————Reuben: how the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up, their
—————households, their tents, and all the substance that was in their
—————possession (judgment on Israel via the earth)
———-c in the midst of all Israel
—–b but your eyes have seen every great act of the Lord which He did
a “Therefore you shall keep every commandment which I command you today

 

Deuteronomy 11:17-21 (Instruction of the Word)
Truth or Consequences (11/16/2020)

a and He shut up the heavens so that there be no rain
—–b and the land (ha’adamah) yield no produce, and you perish quickly from the good
—–land which the Lord is giving you
———-c “Therefore you shall lay up these words of mine in your heart and in your soul,
———-and bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between
———-your eyes.
—————x You shall teach them to your children, speaking of them when you sit in your
—————house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up
———-c And you shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates,
—–b that your days and the days of your children may be multiplied in the land
—–(ha’adamah) of which the Lord swore to your fathers to give them
a like the days of the heavens above the earth

 

Deuteronomy 12:12-18 (Rejoicing Before the Lord)
Allowances and Prohibitions (12/7/2020)

a And you shall rejoice before the Lord your God.
—–b You and your sons and your daughters, your male and female servants, and the Levite
—–who is within your gates.
———-c In the place which the Lord chooses, in one of your tribes, there you shall offer
———-your burnt offerings.
—————d And there you shall do all that I command you.
——————–e “However, you may slaughter and eat meat within all your gates, whatever
——————–your heart desires.
————————-x The unclean and the clean may eat of it.
——————–e Of the gazelle and the deer alike. Only you shall not eat the blood; you shall
——————–pour it on the earth like water.
—————d (Commands) You may not eat within your gates the tithe of your grain or your
—————new wine or your oil, of the firstborn of your herd or your flock, of any of your
—————offerings which you vow, of your freewill offerings, or of the heave offering of your
—————hand.
———-c But you must eat them before the Lord your God in the place which the Lord your ———-God chooses.
—–b You and your son and your daughter, your male servant and your female servant, and the
—–Levite who is within your gates.
a And you shall rejoice before the Lord your God.

 

Deuteronomy 13:2-5 – You Shall Walk After the Lord Your God
Contrasts and Confirmations (12/21/2020)

a he spoke to you, saying, ‘Let us walk after other gods’
—–b which you have not known (unknown)
———-c you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams
—————d for the Lord your God is testing you to know whether you love the Lord
—————your God with all your heart and with all your soul
——————–x You shall walk after the Lord your God
—————d fear Him, and keep His commandments and obey His voice; you shall serve
—————Him and hold fast to Him
———-c But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death
—–b the Lord your God (known)
a to entice you from the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk

 

Joshua 22:10-34 – The LORD, God of gods.
A great misunderstanding. (11/22/07)

a 22:10  Impressive Altar
—–b 22:12  Preparation for war against tribes across Jordan.
———-c 22:13  Phinehas sent.
—————d 22:16-18  Turn away from following the LORD; He will be angry with us.
——————–e 22:18  Discussion of rebellion.
————————-f 22:19  The land is defiled by an unauthorized altar.
——————————g 22:20  Wrath on Israel because of Aachan’s trespass.
———————————–x 22:22 – The LORD God of gods, the LORD God of gods.
——————————g 22:23  “If because of trespass, let God require it of us.”
————————-f 22:26-28  The land is not defiled; it is not an altar for sacrifice.
——————–e 22:29  Denial of rebellion against the LORD.
—————d 22:31 The LORD is among us; we are delivered from His hand.
———-c 22:32  Phinehas returns.
—–b 22:33  Cancellation of war preparation against tribes across Jordan.
a 22:34 – Altar called “Witness”

Judges 1 – So the LORD was with Judah.
A Chiasm of Contrasts – Judah Prevails (11/26/2007)

a Judah/Simeon overcome Canaan’s inhabitants.
—–b 1:6  Adoni-Bezek has thumbs and toes cut off.
———-c 1:8  Jerusalem taken by Judah.
—————d 1:10  Sheshai, Ahiman, Talmai killed.
——————–e 1:15  Caleb’s daughter given land in the South.
——————————f 1:15  Upper springs/lower springs.
———————————–x 1:19  So the Lord was with Judah.
——————————f 1:19  Mountains/lowland.
——————–e 1:20  Caleb given Hebron
—————d 1:20  Three sons of Anak killed.
———-c 1:21  Jebusites in Jerusalem not driven out by Benjamin.
—–b 1:24  Man shown mercy at destruction of Beth’el.
a 7 other tribes fail to overcome Canaan’s inhabitants.

 

1 Samuel 18:11–19:1 – David – Saul’s Son in Law.
The price of obtaining a bride. (12/12/07)

a 18:11 Saul tries to kill David
—–b 18:14 David behaved wisely
———-c 18:15 Saul afraid of David
—————d 18:16 All Judah and Israel loved David
——————–e 18:17a Saul Promises Merab, his daughter, to David
————————-f 18:17b Saul sets David against Philistines
——————————g 18:18 David questioned right to be son-in-law
——————————h 18:21 Saul sets David against the Philistines
—————————————-i 18:22a Saul commands his servants
———————————————x 18:22 David told to become Saul’s son-in-law
———————————————x 18:23 David questions right to be son-in law
—————————————-i 18:24 Saul’s servants respond to him
——————————h 18:25 Saul sets David against the Philistines
——————————g 18:26 David pledged to become Saul’s son-in-law
————————-f 18:27a David fights the Philistines
——————–e 18:27b Saul gives Michal, his daughter to David
—————d 18:28 Michal, Saul’s daughter, loved David
———-c 18:29 Saul afraid of David
—–b 18:30 David behaved wisely
a 19:1 Saul instructs that David be killed.

 

2 Samuel 7:19-29 – Prayer for the Davidic House
King David’s Prayer of Thanksgiving (04/03/2011)

a 7:19 “You have spoken about your servant’s house in the distant future”
—–b 7:21 You have revealed all these great things to your servant.
———-x 7:24 God establishes the people Israel
———-x 7:26 God establishes the House of David
—–b 7:28 “Your words are true and you have promised grace to Your servant.
a 7:29 “You have spoken and Your servant’s house will be blessed forever.

 

1 Kings 1:10-19 – Awaiting the king’s decision.
Adonijah’s attempt to usurp the throne. (12/17/05)

a 1:10 Strategic guests not invited to Adonijah’s party, including Solomon.
—–b 1:11 Nathan tells Bathsheba Adonijah has become king and David doesn’t know it.
———-c 1:13 Bathsheba told to remind king that Solomon was to reign after David.
—————x 1:15 Bathsheba appears before the king.
—————-x 1:16 Bathsheba pays homage to the king.
———-c 1:17 Bathsheba reminds the king that Solomon was to reign after David.
—–b 1:18 Bathsheba tells David Adonijah has become king and David doesn’t know it.
a 1:19 Strategic guests invited to Adonijah’s party, but not Solomon.

 

2 Kings 2:2-25 – …and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.
Elisha assumes Elijah’s position.  (12/22/07)

a 2:2 Elijah and Elisha go from Gilgal to Bethel (SE – NW)
—–b 2:4 Elijah and Elisha go from Bethel to Jericho.
———-c 2:4 Elijah and Elisha came to Jericho.
—————d 2:7 Sons of the prophets stood facing Elijah and Elisha.
——————–e 2:8 Elijah took his mantle and struck the water.
————————-f 2:10 …if you see me when I am taken from you…
——————————g 2:11 …a chariot of fire appeared with horses of fire.
———————————–x 2:11 …and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.
——————————g 2:12…the chariot of Israel and its horsemen!
————————-f 2:12 So he saw him no more.
——————–e 2:14 Elisha took the mantle and struck the water.
—————d 2:15 Sons of the prophets came to meet Elisha.
———-c 2:18 Elisha stayed in Jericho.
—–b 2:23 Elisha went up from Jericho to Bethel.
a 2:25 Elisha goes from Bethel to Mount Carmel (SE-NW)

 

For these next two, one is actually inside the other just like the two from Genesis 3 above.  This is really exciting! Plus the second one spans 9 chapters of the Bible!

2 Chronicles 5:12-7:6 – The Dedication of the Temple. (12/31/07)
Solomon’s Prayer

a 5:12 Levites with instruments and sounding of trumpets, etc.
—–b 5:13 For He is good, For His mercy endures forever
———-c 5:14 The priests could not continue ministering because of the cloud; for the
———-glory of the LORD filled the house of God.
—————d 6:1, 2 Solomon makes poetic introduction to his speech.
——————–x  6:3-6-40 Solomon’s prayer for the dedication of the Temple
—————d 6:41, 42 Solomon makes poetic closing to his speech.
———-c  7:2 And the priests could not enter the house of the LORD, because the glory of
———-the LORD had filled the LORD’s house.
—–b 7:3 For He is good, For His mercy endures forever
a 7:6  Levites with instruments and sounds of trumpets, etc.

 

2 Chronicles 1:1 – 9:31 – the Life of Solomon, King of Israel.
The Builder of the Temple (1/1/8)

a 1:1 Solomon’s rule introduced.
—–b 1:14-16 Solomon’s wealth displayed – chariots, horsemen, silver and gold in
—–Jerusalem as abundant as stones, cedars as abundant as sycamores, horses
—–imported from Egypt and elsewhere.
———-c 2:11 Hiram says, “Because the LORD loves his people, he has made you their
———-king.”
—————d 2:17, 18 Aliens in the land conscripted.
——————–e 3:1 Solomon begins work on the Temple then his house.
————————-x3:2-5:1 Temple Construction.
————————-x 5:2-7:1 Temple Dedication.
——————–e 8:1 Solomon completes work on the Temple and his house.
—————d 8:7, 8 Aliens in the land conscripted.
———-c 9:18 Queen of Sheba says, “Because of the love of your God for Israel and
———-his desire to uphold them forever, he has made you king over them…”
—–b 9:25-28 Solomon’s wealth displayed – chariots, horsemen, silver and gold in
—–Jerusalem as abundant as stones, cedars as abundant as sycamores, horses
—–imported from Egypt and elsewhere.
a 9:31 Solomon’s rule completed.

 

Jonah 1:3 – Fleeing from the Face of the Lord
Rebellion carries a high cost (11/14/2016)

a from the presence of the LORD
—–b and he went down to Joppa, and found a ship going to Tarshish
———-x so he paid the fare
—–b and went down into it, to go with them to Tarshish
a from the presence of the LORD

 

Of all of them I’ve found, the one from Deuteronomy 3:25 and the next one are two of my favorites. This next one is simply a song of love – clear and simple!

Hosea 1:9-2:23 – “But Me she forgot,” says the LORD.
A Chiasm of Contrasts – Our Unfaithfulness and God’s Unlimited Mercy (11/23/07)

a 1:9  You are not my people, I will not be your God.
—–b 1:10  Jezreel (God will sow.)
———-c 2:3  Dry Land, thirst.
—————d 2:5  Wife departs from her husband.
——————–e 2:7  Wife returns to her husband.
————————-f 2:9  Take away the new wine.
——————————g 2:10-12  God punishes Israel.
——————————h 2:13  God will punish her.
———————————–x 2:13  “But Me she forgot,” says the LORD
——————————h 2:14a  God will allure her.
——————————g 2:14b  God comforts Israel.
————————-f 2:15  Give vineyards.
——————–e 2:16  LORD says, “That you will call me ‘My Husband.’”
—————d 2:19  Husband betroths wife.
———-c 2:21, 22  Grain, new wine, oil.
—–b 2:22  Jezreel (God will sow.)
a 2:23  You are my people; You are my God.

You won’t find this next one in a Bible based on the critical text. It will only be apparent in one based on the Textus Receptus.

1 Corinthians 11:27-29 – Each man should examine himself when taking sacraments
A short chiasm on The Lord’s Supper (5/13/08)

a 11:27 Eating and drinking in an unworthy manner brings guilt.
—–x 11:28 – Each man should examine himself when taking sacraments
a 11:29 Eating and drinking in an unworthy manner brings judgment.

I did a chiasm search on the next one and found that the entire book of Ephesians is laid out in a chiastic structure and that there are chiasms that run through the entire book. It is an amazing thing to see and I noticed that this chiasm had already been isolated, but it wasn’t well defined. As I noticed it and defined it, I am including it here, but the site that I checked should be noted as having found it first.

 

Ephesians 2:12-19 – Nothing but the Blood
Once without Hope, Now Saints of God.

a at that time you were without Christ
—–b being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers
———-c having no hope and without God in the world
—————d But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near
——————–e by the blood of Christ
————————-f For He Himself is our peace
——————————g made both one
——————————h broken down the middle wall of separation
———————————–x having abolished in His flesh the enmity
——————————h the law of commandments contained in ordinances
——————————g one new man from the two
————————-f thus making peace
——————–e through the cross
—————d And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who
—————were near
———-c For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father
—–b Now, therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners
a but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God

 

Jude 1:5 – 1:8 – Likewise Also These Dreamers
The Just Punishment of the Unrighteous (7/14/2020)

a the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe (v. 5)
—–b And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode (v. 6)
———-c given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh (v.7)
—————x Likewise also these dreamers (v. 8)
———-c defile the flesh (v. 8a)
—–b reject authority (v. 8b)
a speak evil of dignitaries (v. 8c)

 

Revelation 2:2, 3 – Testing the church.
The Lord knows His own

a works
—–b labor
———-c patience
—————x tested the claims of the liars
———-c patience
—–b labor
a haven’t become weary (works)

 

Revelation 21:23-27, The Gates of New Jerusalem
There shall be no night there. (11/22/2012)

a The glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is its light.
—–b And the nations of those who are saved shall walk in its light,
———-c And the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it.
—————x Its gates shall not be shut at all by day (there shall be no night there).
———-c And they shall bring the glory and the honor of the nations into it.
—–b But there shall by no means enter it anything that defiles, or causes an abomination or a lie,
a But only those who are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life.

 

Here is another I didn’t find. Rather, it’s from the book Before Abraham Was, by Isaac M. Kikawada and Arthur Quinn. This one spans the beloved Noah account from Genesis 6:10 – 9:19. You’ve certainly read this account, but now look at it in a whole new way:

The Flood of Noah

A Noah (6:10a)
B   Shem, Ham and Japheth (6:10b)
C     Ark to be built (6:14-16)
D      Flood announced (6:17)
E        Covenant with Noah (6:18-20)
F          Food in the Ark(6:21)
G           Command to enter the Ark(7:1-3)
H             7 days waiting for flood (7:4-5)
I                7 days waiting for flood (7:7-10)
J                  Entry to ark (7:11-15)
K                   Yahweh shuts Noah in (7:16)
L                     40 days flood (7:17a)
M                     Waters increase (7:17b-18)
N                        Mountains covered (7:18-20)
O                          150 days waters prevail (7:21-24)
P                            God Remembers Noah (8:1)
O’                         150 days waters abate (8:3)
N’                       Mountain tops become visible (8:4-5)
M’                     Waters abate (8:6)
L’                     40 days (end of) (8:6a)
K’                   Noah opens window of ark(8:6b)
J’                   Raven and dove leave ark (8:7-9)
I’                  7 days waiting for waters to subside (8:10-11)
H’               7 days waiting for waters to subside (8:12-13)
G’             Command to leave the ark (8:15-17)
F’            Food outside the ark(9:1-4)
E’          Covenant with all flesh(9:8-10)
D’        No flood in future(9:11-17)
C’      Ark (9:18a)
B’    Shem, Ham, Japheth (9:18b)
A’  Noah (9:19)

 

Think about this….these things prove the single authorship of the account each comes from. Some people deny that Moses, for example, was responsible for the first five books of the Bible and that instead many people worked on it over the centuries. However, this is certainly not the case. Instead, God selected Moses to transmit His own words with all these fun patterns tucked away for us to find. Don’t be a doubter, be a believer and cherish God’s holy Word!

 

Note:  Grammatical structure can also be used to determine meaning via a chiasm. Here is the structure of Acts 2:38, which clearly indicates what is being related and why when taken in the original Greek.  Baptism is not required for salvation. I didn’t find this one.

a Repent [second person plural]
—–x be baptized [third person singular]
—–x each [third person singular] of you
a for the remission of your [second person plural] sins.

 

Romans10:9-10 (I didn’t find this one)
Confess, mouth, believe, heart – SAVED – heart, believe, mouth, confess

I Didn’t Find This One

a having seated around about us such a cloud of witnesses,
—–b setting aside every weight and every clinging sin . . .
———-c with patient endurance . . .
—————d  let us run the race that is set before us
——————–e keeping our eyes on Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of the faith,
—————d who for the joy that was set before Him . . .
———-c  patiently endured the cross . . .
—–b despising shame . . .
a and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.”[1]

This structure focuses attention on the central element, Jesus, rather than on the first element, us.[2]