if the king james is so accurate,then why did they leave out?
830536
Though there is uncertainty about how God’s name was pronounced in ancient Hebrew, its meaning is not a complete mystery. His name means “He Causes to Become.” Jehovah God thereby identifies himself as the Great Purposer. He always causes his purposes and promises to become reality. Only the true God, who has the power to do this, can rightfully bear that name.—Isaiah 55:11.\n\nUnquestionably, the name Jehovah serves to distinguish Almighty God from all other gods. That is why that name appears so often in the Bible. While many translations fail to use the divine name, Psalm 83:18 clearly states: “You, whose name is Jehovah, you alone are the Most High over all the earth.” During his ministry, Jesus Christ taught his followers: “You must pray, then, this way: ‘Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified.’” (Matthew 6:9) We should, then, use God’s name when we pray, speak of him, and praise him before others.\n\nJehovah's Witnesses are being called like that, because they are witnesses of God Jehovah. They want people to know what God's Name is. How else can God's name being sactified?\n\nThe American Standard Version uses almost 7000 times the name Jehovah, as does the New World Translation wich is published and distributed to more that 235 countries in many languages. \n\nThat the King James version leaves the name out of it, shows that the writes gave in to the churches wishes to leave the name out. In the origional text the Name is used almost 7000 times.\n\nEven in Afrcan cultures and countries, the Name Jehovah is known throughout history. \n\nLike in the movie with Indiana Jones he has to follow the steps of Jehovah, but in Latin it was spelled wit "Y" So Yehovah. In English it's being accepted as Jehovah. In Italian it's Geova, In Danish and German it's Jehova. \n\nIf the name is so formilliar to people throughout history, (The Jews know the name very well, but decline to use it because it's to holy to pronounce or writing it down) than why should people nowadays remove the name?\n\nIn Denmark, the name Jehovah is even linked with one of their kings, Christian IV, as he has inbedded the name in many churches and royal buildings throughout the country. (Christian IV lived in the 16 century)\n\nIn The Netherlands you can find the Bible museum in Amsterdam, where you can find the name Jehovah.\n\nThe name is recognized by many scientific and religious authorities. \n\nSo think again, The Name is very important to us people, because that is how The True God distinguishes himself from the fals god's.\n\nHow would you like to go in to history?\nAs Captain? Chief? Sir? Or as Robert, Hendrik, Christian, Ali, Sara?\n\nIt distinguishes you from the others when someone is calling out your name. Isn't The Name of God not more important than that of us people?
315921
You can say the same thing about the bible.  Other than faith there is nothing to say it is true just because some of the stuff mentioned existed in that time doesn't make the whole book true.
410921
I've always held the belief that the Bible has been changed to fit the beliefs of whoever commissioned the latest translation.  It's no surprise to me at all that some of the stories were tacked on later as some were removed when they didn't fit in with what was being taught at the time.  \n\nWhy is the Bible supposedly above scrutiny?  Why is it that when people question whether or not it was written and re-written by men, people freak out?  In this day and age, if somebody were to claim they were divinely inspired to write a holy book, we'd call them nuts.  But, we should just believe that this particular group of men really were divinely inspired?
933623
The bible is complete if anyone adds to it you will regret it.And if you follow them. So there is no truth but the bible.You choose your choices.
960100
You have to understand that the Bible was an oral tradition for hundreds of years.  People told the stories long before they were written down.  Do you remember the story of Goldilocks and the three bears?  Do you remember the exact words in the story from the first time you heard it?  I doubt it.  But you remember the message and could still tell the story to your children.\nWhen the Bible was first written it was in Hebrew (atleast, the Old Testament was).  You're reading an English translation.\nIn all of this, things change, and we shouldn't focus on one word "Us."\n\nMore to think about: Royalty in medieval brittain referred to themselves in the plural (i.e. "We are not amused.")  When the Bible was translated by King James (the most famous English translation) any royal attributes of the day may have been given to God as the Almighty King.  \n\nNo one knows for sure.  You could study this for years and not know.  I hope this summation here does the subject justice.\n\np.s. many people referred to the Trinity (I don't want to say they are wrong, but I don't agree with them).  \nThe trick with that is that the Trinity as a concept wasn't known to humans until the Coucil of Nicea in 325.
936247
Just because Bible doesn't mention other humans prior to or alongside Adam and Eve does not mean other people didn't exist.\nIt makes sense for others to be there.  \nI know this opens a whole other can of worms but it is an interesting thought.
637305
It messes with people's comfort zone.\n\nThe people that have used the bible to control the masses\nhave taught us to never question the content that THEY \nprovided.\nSo most of us are trained to believe that if we use the brain that God gave us, and actually applied critical thinking to the provided bible,--we go straight to hell.\n\nGreat form of control.\n\nAnyway, please remember that King James only printed what King James felt we needed to know.\nHow biased is that?\n\nFurthermore, don't forget that Jesus was indeed a man, with\na penis, and carnal desires.\nHe was only human.\n\nBottom line---If King James had his writers include the books that told the account of Jesus marrying and having offspring, it would not be disputed today.\n\nDoes anyone ever question how the Catholic bible has a full\nten books MORE than the KING JAMES Version?\nWhat is in those books?\nIs there knowledge that KJ wanted to keep from us?\nOr are the Catholics on to something?\n\nAnd by the way, to see a true account of the real King James, see Mel Gibson's "Braveheart".
481373
Most of the books of the current bible were choosen and edited by King James to suit his political aspirations.  There are many other letters written during the history of the bible, just recently we are hearing about the letters of Judas.  While all the writtings are inspired by God, man has choosen what he wants to read of them.
49145
Heh, heh... thanks bro. ;)\n\nI have seen some rare textual changes that have changed the meaning or even elimination of a word because they could not see how it fits. Hebrew letters can look very close to one another, much like our "l" and "i". So any distortion in the leather parchment could be a problem or the flaking of the ink could cause problems as well.\nMy mentor once told me that when the military creates a complex code, they transmit it with parity, or multiple times, so that if the coded message is in any way garbled, they can compare it to earlier or later transmissions. The Bible does the same thing by repeating the important messages several times. This is why Deuteronomy is called Deuteronomy. It's "repeating what we already know is true".\nCan these people explain to me why the entire 2,000 year old Isaiah scroll found in Qumran is virtually identical with the modern copies found in every synagogue in the world?\nRemember that Revelation carries an eternal curse of damnation for anyone who adds or subtracts from the text of scripture, and I do not think King James was hoping for political advantage at the expense of his soul.\nToday, we still have the original Hebrew and Greek text. Changing the scriptures would offer us ZERO political gain. Yet is still translates the same as the original King James, only with todays vernacular. \nI wonder if these people even research beyond their own notions. Do they have such skepticism when they read their dosage instructions for medication?
487880
Jesus had a half brother named James.  He wrote one of the books in the bible.  There is no proof Jesus was married, that was a made up fact to promote a book and a movie.
1060158
It's all a load of nonsense. The whole 666 thing came from the Bible, which was put together by a bunch of Romans who wanted to control people. Why is it people still believe in the Bible despite the fact it is just a selective history? They take it as gospel, at face value. There were hundreds of books but only a few were chosen to go in the Bible, the ones that reflected the view of the Romans and gave across the views that they wanted to give across. Know a story when you read one!
1168440
That's because parts of it seem contradictory or counter-intuitive if you take them literally, or out of historical or literal context.  After all, the Bible is a set of books written by different people in different languages thousands of years ago.  It is only reasonable that there would be something lost in the translation, especially given the ambiguity of the English language.  It may also require a great deal of research to resolve the issues you confront them with, and they satisfied themselves of what they believe and do not remember how to explain it to you.  Ignorance and laziness are also sometimes reasons, but there are some people who are able to explain those issues to you.  If you really want good answers to your questions, you should try a few apologetics websites.
922273
I had this very same problem with my last King James! It was all falling apart and held together with elastic bands which I wrapped  around it to keep it all together. I could nor bring myself to throw it out even after a I Got a brand new, red letter edition of a King James so I placed it in a cupboard and waited for for what I didn't know. One day when we were packing to return to our country I was taking out all the rubbish we didn't want to ship back home and I saw the security guard reading his little pocket Bible (this was in Papua New Guinea) I went back into the house and took down the old King James and took it out to him and asked him if he wanted it. He took it straight away and to him, it was a precious gift. Only the Lord would have known that it would be required by some one years later. Just keep your old Bible and the Lord will give you proper disposal instructions in time
939916
Intersting that the only reference cited outside the bible is Josefus, who never mentioned Jesus. Any reference to Jesus in his writing was added 1000 years later by other 'christians 'trying to strengthen their arguement.\n\nGreenleaf may have decided that the story was real but I don't believe that it would stand up in court. It would be interesting to look at his background.
1090013
It's absurd to believe that ANYTHING passed down for hundreds of years, and translated into hundreds of languages could be EXACTLY the way it was in it's original form. Not to mention that there are now different versions of the bible, King James Version, etc. \n\nLike now with all the hype over the Da Vinci code, people should ask questions and understand the origin of the religion that they believe so deeply in instead of just following it blindly.
300429
It is not. Back then, each copy of the Bible had to be handwritten when they were reproduced. This means the scribes had free will to add/change anything they wanted. Also the Bible was translated from Greek and Hebrew to English. So its changed a lot, because there are no originals in existence. KJV went through the hands of countless scribes before being translated.  Even the dead sea scrolls are not the originals, just really old, close to original copies. And no, they're not in English
739717
The KJV was meticulously translated.  By man.  And, no surprise, it isn't perfect.\nThere IS no perfect translation because, even if you have a Hebrew, Greek or Chaldean lexicon, you don't have the meaning of the words from 2,000 years ago.  Meanings change.  Take the word "gay" for example - means something VERY different today than it did 20 years ago.\nWithout taking the time to learn the original languages, then do have the lexicons as well as a Strongs (or other) Concordance.  Read the same passages in different versions for richer comprehension.  A passage read from the KJV, the NIV and The Message takes on new dimension.\nRead it - and read it sloooowly and patiently!  Read it reguarly.  And read it again and again.  What had no relevance (seemingly) last month can suddenly leap out at you today.