May truth abound

We agree here as well the situation of truthfulness matters the historical information and the trends set by misinformation have played a role in the fast bond state found  static Christianity today, tradition has replaced spirit led and formalism which avoided the priesthood of the believers, we're seeking to restore  vitality of the whole body not just a few, we feel that the article here speaks to the issues well. A life of Spirit led life operating in faith were soem of thr questions s we were ask by a group of young people. We endorse the Young's literal and Kj3 translations as an improvement over the political vernacular ecclesiastical tranaltions still in use today.

Yes, we performed our own research etc on the life and translational terms activities surround in the King James  issues where words were changed in order to sustain the political structures  and people under the sway of it's control.

 New testament brotherhood was reclassified into non scriptural functions into laity and clergy neither of which mirroed the early ekklesia, we felt our desire is to get back to the truth avoiding pitfalls along the way that generated the peope who were shot rhoughand through of the spirit into a old covanant like preisthood which we feel was done away with in the NT age..

Our personal research was in Constantine, King James and the Tyndale event, the word church,and it;s orgins, forms and the ekklesia which was community function not mere lecture hall forum,  and why it replaced the people as the temple of God making location and wealth  a factor as well as buildings.

 Hopwood Religious experience of the primitive church 1927, Barclay 1 Corinth letter on the body activities Spirit led 1957,, the ekklesia early church history, etc.... Thank those in ekkelesia, seeking to restore the body origanal functions who have desired to learn the differences we thank you for the invite to have shared some of the details with you.

The quote from the author, of this paper.

In spite of the title of this article, you are still probably asking yourself if the English-speaking world really needs another New Testament translation. The answer is a definitive -- YES!
There are many reasons but I will give you the best reason first. The Kings James Version proved to be so popular that other versions that came along afterward were forced into using much of the same vernacular in order to be economically viable.

In other words, if these companies expected to sell their versions, they were forced to keep much of the KJV vernacular and many obvious transliterations.
For an example of transliteration you can examine the Greek word "angelos." Angelos correctly translated would render messenger, every time. However, Instead of translating angelos into the English word messenger the KJV scholars transliterated it angel.
You might ask yourself why would they do such a thing in the first place? Only God knows for sure but one safe bet would be that the term was already in common use when the manuscripts were translated.
Besides, "angel" held a strong connection with the human psyche then and now because of the images it conjures up in the mind. You have a multitude of paintings of angels in many different situations -- the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel is just one example. The word messenger simply doesn't stir the same imagination and emotion in the human heart.
An even more telling example of transliteration found in the KJV and those that followed is the Greek word "christos." Instead of translating christos into "anointed" which is the exact rendering and carried a profound meaning to the Jewish culture in which Jesus appeared, the KJV transliterated it and capitalized it Christ.
This error - and make no mistake it was an error even though the scholars knew better - has caused obvious interpretative difficulties to the reader. If fact, it is well known that most actually use the term "Christ" as Jesus' last name, causing them to miss the deeper meaning that is put forth by the correct translation "anointed."

Some of you may be saying to yourself, big deal. However, if you were actually interest in learning while you study, you would have been forced into digging deeper into the biblical significance of the word "anointed."
In reality, the KJV has many more significant biases than those caused by the transliteration of certain words. The Bible student must keep in mind that scholars with a very definite ecclesiastical paradigm translated the KJV. They were members of the Church of England. This denomination had its own sordid history of persecuting and torturing heretics (those who disagreed with the "powers that be"). They were also under certain strictures of the King of England.
As if this wasn't compromising enough, they had no personal experience of any other form than sacerdotal hierarchy. Because of this, they translated scriptures that had to do with leadership and "followship" in the strongest English terms. I will only mention one example here in this article.
In Hebrews 13:17 the verse states.
"Obey them that have the rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch for your souls, as those who must give account, let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable to you."
There are several words in the Greek language for "obey", but the one translated "obey" in Hebrews 13:17, is NOT one of them. For an example, hupakouo, is usually translated obey in Matthew 8:27,..."the winds and the sea obey him."

And yet the word peitho, rendered "obey" by the KJV in the Hebrews text under discussion, NEVER implies unwilling obedience and is never used in regard to obedience to congregational leaders.
Peitho, the word translated "obey" in Hebrews 13:17, is translated 23 times "persuade", 10 times "trust", and one time "agree". It is translated 5 times "obey," but only in Hebrews 13:17, 21, does it refer to obedience to another person (See Acts 5:36,37; Romans 2:8; Galatians 3:1; James 3:3). Don't you think it just a little strange that it is translated "obey" when speaking of "leadership" in this place?
Another scripture that is a blatant example of ecclesiastical bias is found in 1 Timothy 3:1-2. The Kings James Version renders it thus:
"This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the office of a Bishop, he desires a good work. A Bishop then must be blameless..."
The translators, under the king's injunction to keep the main terms of the Church of England's ecclesiastical form, make two main errors. The first is adding a word to the text that doesn't appear in the Greek, i.e. "office". There is neither a word in the text for office NOR the idea of office outside their own paradigm.
The second is an error in translation. The word translated "Bishop" is episkopos. The word means to "oversee", to "tend".
Vine defines it thus: "EPISKOPOS, lit., an overseer (epi, over, skopeo, to look or watch), whence Eng. "bishop"..." The passage in 1st Timothy actually reads, "If a man wants to oversee, he desires a good work."
One reformer wrote,
"I am convinced that the King James Translators, laboring under an 'institutional church' mentality, selected the strongest words possible which conveyed the idea that the people must submit to the authority of the Clergy. In this way King James could control the people through the Church, of which he was Supreme Ruler."
Another prominent bias that was handed down and instilled in the mind of countless churchmen was the unbiblical limiting of women's role in the churches. One example among many should suffice here.
The King James translators, as previously mentioned, were well acquainted with "ministers" within the Church of England hierarchy. They consistently translated the word diakonos "minister" when referring to a worker of the congregation except when it came to Phoebe, and then they translated it "servant" (Romans 16:1-2). Are you surprised? By the way, Phoebe is the only person in the entire New Testament who is referred to as a diakonos of a specific church and yet the KJV translators and most others that have followed suit purposefully dilute her "position".


As we know from experience, "minister" is a word that has become a title. This word is taken from the Latin translation of the Greek word diakonos meaning "servant," or properly "table servant." The word group is translated 38 times "minister" by the KJV. It is translated "ministry" 16 times, "ministering" 3 times, and "ministration" 6 times. It is translated "serve", "servant", and "service" 21 times. It would be correct to translate it "serve" and its derivatives every time.

These examples are just an hint of ecclesiastical biases included in the KJV New Testament that definitely effects the students beliefs and practices. Countless others could have been noted but it was not the purpose in this article to detail all translator biases that have adversely effected generations of Bible students but to point out the reasons why a non-ecclesiastical rendition of the New Testament is due.

If you want to read more on the subject you can view my thesis, "Men Who Would Be Kings" on my site under the article tab. Well praise God; there is such a translation now on the market. In fact, it is called "A Non-Ecclesiastical New Testament." The author is a self-taught Greek scholar with a PhD in math from the University of Florida. He spent more than 10 years researching, compiling and revising his translation and used only the earliest manuscripts. It is available in both PDF and hard copy and a preview is provided before purchase so that you can examine it for yourself. All the information can be found at [http://biblemaverick.com/Frank.html]

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/2646015

We posted this knowing little of the writer but the facts were matching the historical research performed at narrowway, both in word study and checking the back ground of the historical mechanisms used to making the shift stick over the centuries.Thanks much, for those asking, we're as interested as you are on those truth issues.

Yes we also were able to recover some of the documents  in our work which reveled the intentions in the tyndale case and why the words were not used from the greek but were subject to slanting them into the offices and wealth and power.