Did God Use Adulterers And A Homosexual Union Supporter To Preserve His Words?

Wrong, God used 60 Christian men to bring forth his words in the KJV, not adulterers as is seen in the new Greek text supporting the new Bible perversions, created by (Kurt Aland & Barbara Nee Ehlers Aland) "Adulterers", Jesuit Catholic (Carlo Maria Martini) a "Homosexual Union Suplorter"

Kink James Bible Translators

INTRODUCTION​

At least sixty men were directly involved in the translation of the King James Bible (hereinafter KJB). Most were Translators, while a few were project overseers, revisers and editors. Some served in several roles. Who were these men? What were their backgrounds? What did they share? In what ways were they different? They were a diverse group. While some were born in large cities and towns, most were from small villages scattered throughout England. Several were the children of university graduates, most were not. They were sons of mariners, farmers, school teachers, cordwainers (leather merchants), fletchers (makers of bows and arrows), ministers, brewers, tailors, and aristocrats. All were members of the Church of England, but their religious views ran the gamut. Some were ardent Puritans, others staunch defenders of the religious establishment. Some believed in pre-destination and limited salvation as taught by John Calvin, while others believed in self-determination and universal access to heaven as taught by Jacobus Arminius.

All of the Translators were university graduates. Oxford and Cambridge claimed nearly equal numbers of Translators as alumni. All of the Translators except one were ordained Church of England priests. While several of the Translators had traveled to the Continent, only one had ventured to the New World. Most of the Translators were married men (38 of 60) with families. Most of the Translators spent a significant portion of their career associated with their colleges and universities as fellows, involved in teaching and administration. As fellows, they were not allowed to marry. As a result many delayed marriage until they had established themselves in church office away from the university. When the translation commenced in 1604-1605, the majority of the Translators, 22, were in their forties, 16 men were in their thirties, 15 in their fifties, 3 in their sixties and 3 in their twenties.
One Translator died in his thirties, six in their forties, nineteen in their fifties, sixteen in their sixties, four in their seventies, three in their eighties and one, over one hundred. Nine of the Translators died before the KJB was published in the 1611.

Most of the Translators were in comfortable economic circumstances during and after their time involved in the translation. The association and friendships they developed during the translation project generally advanced their careers. Some of the Translators went on to high church and academic office. Five went on to serve as bishops and two as archbishops.

They all had a familiarity with the ancient languages of Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and often many more. They came on the historical scene at a time when the knowledge of early biblical texts and language was exploding. Such a flowering of interest and expertise was unique. Bible historian, Gordon Campbell, has observed:

For such a diverse group, they worked together in harmony during a generally contentious time. They had disagreements, to be sure, but they labored on, year after year. There were no "tell all books" published after the fact. Miles Smith remarked in his preface to the KJB, the Translators "were greater in other men's eyes than in their own, and sought truth rather than their own praise". They approached the task of translation with humility, understanding they were standing on the shoulders of giants like William Tyndale. Believers all, the Translators, according to Smith "craved the assistance of God's Spirit by prayer" as they proceeded in their work.

Though almost all were well known within the religious and academic community of the time, their involvement in the translation went largely unnoticed by the public. Their individual and group effort was not the subject of historical inquiry until many years after the fact. As a result, little information about the process of translation survived. The lives of the Translators and sometimes their very identity became obscured with time. In certain instances, the place of their birth and burial is unknown, and their family circumstance in doubt. Until this anniversary year, few could name even one Translator, let alone sixty. The following brief biographies are written in the hope to shed further light on these men who contributed so much.
William Tyndale was the translator of the English Bible, especially the New Testament. The KJV Translators copied most of their translation straight from Tyndale. They were right to do so.
 
“I had perceived by experience, how that it was impossible to stablish the lay people in any truth, except the scripture were plainly laid before their eyes in their mother tongue, that they might see the process, order, and meaning of the text.”

—William Tyndale, Preface to the Pentateuch, 1530

 
Too simple in the light of 1 Cor 7:15. We need facts. How do you know his wife didn't apostatize from the faith and leave him? Happens all the time.
God's words allows for "Separation" on the grounds of "Fornication" meaning a spouse was sexually unfaithful

"No Place" in God's word is a spouse of a marriage allowed to remarry while the spouse is living "The Facts"

"Kurt Aland" divorced his wife and married his college student, Kurt Aland died in this sin being married to his college student while his wife lived (Adultery)
 
William Tyndale was the translator of the English Bible, especially the New Testament. The KJV Translators copied most of their translation straight from Tyndale. They were right to do so.
False, you don't have a clue

Try reading the qualifications of the KJV translators then get back with a response
 
“I had perceived by experience, how that it was impossible to stablish the lay people in any truth, except the scripture were plainly laid before their eyes in their mother tongue, that they might see the process, order, and meaning of the text.”

—William Tyndale, Preface to the Pentateuch, 1530

That doesn't address the fact that the new Bible perversions are backed by a Greek text created by adulterers and a homosexual union supporter

Was William Tyndale a Adulterer or a homosexual union supporter?
 
False, you don't have a clue

Try reading the qualifications of the KJV translators then get back with a response
I have compared their Bibles. You are in the Dark. Read the reformation Bibles. You know, the Bibles before the 1611 KJV. They, and mostly Tyndale are what makes the KJV. It was the last of the Bibles, not the first. All you have to do is compare them.

https://archive.org/details/englishhexaplaex00schouoft/page/n5/mode/2up

https://archive.org/details/0410Tyndale1534NT/page/n17/mode/2up

 
That doesn't address the fact that the new Bible perversions are backed by a Greek text created by adulterers and a homosexual union supporter
And the fact that they sometimes, no matter how rarely, corrected errors in the TR. How can that be so?


Was William Tyndale a Adulterer or a homosexual union supporter?
William Tyndale is the father of the English Bibles. All Bible up until WW2 and even after use his language. It was God's good will. It is historical fact.
 
Wrong, God used 60 Christian men to bring forth his words in the KJV, not adulterers as is seen in the new Greek text supporting the new Bible perversions, created by (Kurt Aland & Barbara Nee Ehlers Aland) "Adulterers", Jesuit Catholic (Carlo Maria Martini) a "Homosexual Union Suplorter"
You're so confused you don't even distinguish between English and Greek. The KJV is an inaccurate English translation, whereas the bible scholars you allude to never produced an English translation, as they only produced a Greek text, as to which Greek texts there have been many in the vein of the Nestle-Aland translation in the last 200 years, starting with Lachmann in the 1830s. Almost no Greek scholars today rely on the Textus Receptus, whatever Greek text they espouse. You're fighting against almost the whole world of scholarship here.
 
I have compared their Bibles. You are in the Dark. Read the reformation Bibles. You know, the Bibles before the 1611 KJV. They, and mostly Tyndale are what makes the KJV. It was the last of the Bibles, not the first. All you have to do is compare them.

https://archive.org/details/englishhexaplaex00schouoft/page/n5/mode/2up

https://archive.org/details/0410Tyndale1534NT/page/n17/mode/2up

Not a clue!
 
You're so confused you don't even distinguish between English and Greek. The KJV is an inaccurate English translation, whereas the bible scholars you allude to never produced an English translation, as they only produced a Greek text, as to which Greek texts there have been many in the vein of the Nestle-Aland translation in the last 200 years, starting with Lachmann in the 1830s. Almost no Greek scholars today rely on the Textus Receptus, whatever Greek text they espouse. You're fighting against almost the whole world of scholarship here.
False
 
You're wrong. Reread 1 Cor 7:15. Desertion by an unbelieving spouse does not bind a believer.
If a husband or wife divorces and marries another while the spouse lives this is (Adultery), there is no biblical exclusion to be married to another while the spouse lives "None"

Romans 7:2-3KJV
2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

Mark 10:11-12KJV
11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

If separation occurs in a marriage the spouse is to remain (Unmarried) or be reconciled

1 Corinthians 7:10-11KJV
10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
 
Last edited:
If a husband or wife divorces and marries another while the spouse lives this is (Adultery), there is no biblical exclusion to be married to another while the spouse lives "None"
Desertion is divorce. A subsequent legal divorce is not the substantial divorce is preceded by deliberate desertion.

Romans 7:2-3KJV
2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

Mark 10:11-12KJV
11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

If separation occurs in a marriage the spouse is to remain (Unmarried) or be reconciled
This is only in a marriage between believers where the believers are beholden to the law of Christ.

1 Corinthians 7:10-11KJV
10 And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband:
11 But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife.
`
 
Last edited:
Absolutely true. In hundreds of ways the KJV is defective. I can tell you don't even read the 19th commentaries, let alone the modern ones. Don't you think that our understanding of ancient Greek has improved somewhat in the last 400 years?
 

Common lies about Westcott and Hort.
I've watched some of this video, and I have to say that I'm unimpressed. To take one example, they claim that Hort affirmed the authority of the Bible, based on one of his letters, and that he disagreed with Liberals on this matter. This is either a bare-faced lie, or their reading comprehension is sadly lacking (I suspect the latter, since Hort wrote in convoluted and very British English). I happen to have the book in question, in PDF format, so I'll quote the portion of the letter in question.

"...
The positive doctrines even of the Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue. There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the Bible; and this alone would make my position among you sufficiently false in respect to the great questions which you will be chiefly anxious to discuss."

[Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, p400, by Arthur Fenton Hort (FJA Hort's son)]

Since Evangelicals adamantly affirm the authority of the Bible (and even more so in those days), this means that Hort disagreed with them strongly on that point.
 
Since Evangelicals adamantly affirm the authority of the Bible (and even more so in those days), this means that Hort disagreed with them strongly on that point.
Hort might have meant the authority of the KJV, as it was the only English bible in his day, and the only one evangelicals knew. So from a scholarly point of view, he was right to say it, given his knowledge of Greek manuscripts.
 
Back
Top