Were KJV Translators Inspired?
|
King James Version (KJV) ONLY??? Irrefutable proof the translators were not inspired 69 Questions for "KJV only" advocates 1611 marginal notes devastating!!! Indisputable, universally recognized errors in the KJV A Good Translation, But Nothing More Egyptian Corruption Argument refuted Historical bloodline of "KJV only" false teachers Archaic Language of the KJV: 419 examples! |
|
If you have an argument for us that we missed... Let us know: Click here |
Can you read the original KJV 1611 edition? Click to see the whole page of the original 1611 Edition of the KJV Parable of the Sower Matthew 13:1-29 |
|
|
|
Steve Rudd
Click here to tell us of how we misrepresented KJV only position
|
|
Photo gallery of 1611 edition, KJV marginal variations the translators were inspired in their work of translation. By Steve Rudd |
|
|
|
Proof #1: that the translators were NOT inspired in their work of translation: |
|
|
|
"But his concubine played the harlot against him, and she went away from him to her father's house in Bethlehem in Judah, and was there for a period of four months." Judges 19:2, NASB |
|
|
|
Proof #2: that the translators were NOT inspired in their work of translation: |
|
|
|
"Machnadebai, Shashai, Sharai" Ezra 10:40, NASB |
|
|
|
"For my days have been consumed in smoke, And my bones have been scorched like a hearth" Ps 102:3, NASB |
|
|
|
"and to Josiah were born Jeconiah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon." Mt 1:11, NASB |
|
|
|
"All things have been handed over to Me by My Father, and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, and who the Father is except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him." Lk 10:22, NASB |
|
|
|
" *["Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other will be left."]" *Margin: "Many manuscripts do not contain this verse" Lk 17:36, NASB |
|
|
|
"And after he had spent not more than eight or ten days among them, he went down to Caesarea; and on the next day he took his seat on the tribunal and ordered Paul to be brought." Acts 25:6 NASB |
|
|
|
"And, masters, do the same things to them, and give up threatening, knowing that both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no partiality with Him." Eph 6:9, NASB |
|
|
|
But someone may well say, "You have faith, and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works." James 2:18, NASB |
|
|
|
" For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps" 1 Peter 2:21, NASB |
|
|
|
"And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned" 2 Peter 2:2, NASB |
|
|
|
"whereas angels who are greater in might and power do not bring a reviling judgment against them before the Lord" 2 Peter 2:11, NASB |
|
|
|
"For speaking out arrogant words of vanity they entice by fleshly desires, by sensuality, those who barely escape from the ones who live in error" 2 Peter 2:18, NASB |
|
|
|
"Watch yourselves, that you might not lose what *we have accomplished, but that you may receive a full reward" *Margin: "Some ancient mss. read you" 2 John 8, NASB |
|
|
|
KJV ONLY advocates will make these incredible arguments: (actual arguments from those who defend the infallibility of the KJV) |
|
KJV ONLY argument: |
Refutation of this argument: |
#1: The original KJV in 1611 AD when it first came out had no marginal notes. |
|
|
|
#2: These marginal notes were added by the publishers and did not originate with the inspired translators. |
|
|
|
#3: The original translators preface was not written by or authorized by the translators but was inserted against their wishes by the publishers. |
|
|
|
#4: The fact is, the marginal readings are NOT THE WORDS OF GOD and the TEXT IS. The translators did not KNOW that they were being guided to translate His word correctly, that much is certain. Just because they wrote in the margins doesn't mean the text is not accurate! |
|
By Steve Rudd |
|
|
|
Some questions by Steve Rudd, who compiled the remaining questions from others.
KJV translates... |
Textus Receptus actually says... |
"robbers of churches." Acts 19:37 |
Every known Greek manuscript has HIEROSULOUS, "robbers of temples" |
"Lucifer" Is 14:12 |
"O Day Star" (Lucifer is a human origin nickname for the Devil in the 1600's refers not to the devil but the king of Babylon) |
"Easter" Acts 12:4 |
"Passover"(Easter very poor choice as it confuses the pagan origin Roman Catholic "Easter" holy day with what the TR clearly says is the Jewish Passover!) |
"Baptism" (entire New Testament) Acts 2:38; 22:16 |
immersion, because sprinkling was the mode of baptism in 1611AD, they jelly-fished out and transliterated the Greek "baptizo" but refused to translate it. |
"Tithes of all I possess" Lk 18:12 |
"all I acquire" (Not only variant with the TR, but quite wrong. Tithes were never paid on capital, only increase) |
"Schoolmaster" Gal 3:24 |
"attendant" (the law was the one who brought us to Christ, not taught us about Christ) |
"God save the King": 1Sam 10:24, 2Sam 16:16, 1Kings 1:25 |
"May the king live" ("God" not in TR, but reflects the British culture of the 1600's. Proof that the translators used dynamic equivalents.) |
"God Forbid." Ro. 3:4,6,31; 6:2,15; 7:7,13; 9:14; 11:1,11; 1 Co. 6:15; Ga. 2:17; 3:21; 6:14 |
"may it not be" or "let it not be." (KJV adds the word God where it is absent in the TR because it was a common expression in 1600's. Proof that the translators used dynamic equivalents.) |
"sweet savour" Lev 6:21; 8:28; 17:6; 23:18 |
"soothing aroma" (KJV appeals to wrong senses- taste instead of smell in the TR) |
"ashes upon his face" 1 Kings 20:38 |
"bandage over his eyes" (KJV varies from TR by using ashes) |
"flagon" 2 Sam 6:19; 1 Chron 16:3; SoS 2:5; Hosea 3:1 |
These verses contain the word "flagon" which is a fluted cup from which liquid is drunk. However, the Hebrew word is "ashishah" which has always meant raisins or raisin cakes. This is especially true in Hos 3:1 because raisin cakes were often offered to idols. This is an obvious error in translation. |
Inconsistency in translating identical words and phrases in the KJV |
|
Rom 4:3, 9, 22; Gal 3:6 Quotes Gen 15:6 |
KJV translates identical Greek phrases differently in each NT verse |
Rom 12:19, Heb 10:30 quotes Deut 32:35 |
KJV translates identical Greek phrases differently in each NT verse |
Heb 3:11; 4:3 quotes Ps 95:11 |
KJV translates identical Greek phrases differently in each NT verse |
1 Cor 3:17 |
KJV translates identical Greek words into: "defile" & "destroy" |
Mk 15:33, Lk 23:44 |
KJV translates identical Greek phrases: "whole land" & "all the earth" |
Rev 4:4 |
KJV translates identical Greek words into: "seats" & "thrones" |
Mt 25:46 |
KJV translates identical Greek words into: "everlasting" & "eternal" |
Rom 4:3,4,5,6,9,10,11, 22,24 |
KJV translates identical Greek verbs: "counted", "reckon", "impute" |
Rom 7 |
KJV translates identical Greek "epithumeo": "lust", "covet", "concupiscence" |
The King James Version, or "Authorized Version," of the Bible, first published in 1611 under the authority of England's King James (hence the designation, "Authorized"), was in that day a very good translation, and is yet today a useful translation. However, it has never been due the reverence which many people have toward it. In fact, no translation is due the reverence which many have toward the King James Version.
The inspired word of God was and is free from error, being the work not merely of men, but of men directed by the Spirit of God (2 Pt. 1:20-21, Acts 1:16, 2 Tim. 3:16). Translations of that word, however, are subject to the limitations of human ability, and therefore, are imperfect. Moreover, errors arise not only in the process of translating from the original languages utilized by God to other languages, but also due to the fact that translations are made from texts of God's word in the original languages, texts which are themselves imperfect in varying degrees. This last point is that with which we shall concern ourselves in this study, and especially as it has to do with the King James Version. No scriptures exist today in the hand of the original writer. Rather hand-made copies, and in reality, copies of copies, of the originals exist, some very ancient. These are called manuscripts. These manuscripts are imperfect copies, containing the same kinds of errors that slip into hand-made copies of any piece of literature, whether it be a work of Shakespeare, Homer, or a book report for school.
Translators work with compilations of these manuscripts. These compilations represent the efforts of men to weed out the errors (interpolations, omissions, and substitutions) of each individual manuscript by comparing various manuscripts, and arrive at a text which represents as accurately as possible the original text of the scriptures. This process is referred to as textual criticism.
Over five thousand manuscripts, including several from as early as the third century, are available to textual critics today. Some of these include virtually the entire Bible, while others contain only certain books, or groups of books of the Bible. Some are mere fragments. Such extensive manuscript evidence contributes to the ability of modern textual critics to present us with a reliable text of God's word.
However, such extensive and ancient manuscript evidence was not available at the time the King James Version was translated. Even such manuscript evidence as was available was not used as effectively as it could have been in attempting to determine the original text.
The Greek text used by the translators who made the King James Version is commonly referred to as the Received Text, which in turn had its beginnings in the early 1500's when the first printed Greek texts were made. The Complutensian Bible was a polyglot Bible, published in several volumes. The fifth volume, which included a Greek text of the New Testament, was printed in 1514. However, Erasmus' Greek text, printed in 1516, was the first to be marketed. For this reason, and others, the text prepared by Erasmus surpassed the Complutensian text in popularity, and exerted the greatest influence on all the texts to follow for the next few centuries.
After Erasmus' text had seen several revisions, Robert Estienne, commonly referred to as Stephanus, published successive editions of a Greek text. His first two editions were compounds of Erasmus' text and the Complutensian text. However, the third edition (1550) was based primarily on the fourth and fifth editions of Erasmus' text. This 1550 edition gained wide acceptance in England, and for many is synonymous with the Received Text.
However, it was not until 1624 that the phrase, Received Text, or in the Latin, Textus Receptus, was actually coined, and then it was from the preface to the third edition of a Greek text published by Bonaventure and Abraham Elzevir. The words were, as described by Bruce Metzger, part of "a more or less casual phrase advertising the edition (what modern publishers might call a 'blurb')." The phrase boasted in Latin that the text presented was "the text which is now received by all." Thus came the phrase Textus Receptus, or Received Text.
The text published by the Elzevir brothers was mainly taken from a text published by Theodore de Beza in 1565. Beza's text showed its heritage from that of Stephanus, and ultimately from that of Erasmus. It is this basic text, common to Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza, and the Elzevir brothers, which lies behind all the protestant translations into English that were made from the Greek language prior to the nineteenth century, including the King James Version. According to The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, "The textus receptus...resolves itself essentially into that of the last edition of Erasmus."
As we stated before, no translation is due the reverence which many have toward the King James Version. Moreover, while the King James Version represents a scholarly translation from the Greek, because of the Greek text which lies behind it, it is perhaps even somewhat less deserving of such high esteem than some other translations. Bruce Metzger writes,
So superstitious has been the reverence accorded the Textus Receptus that in some cases attempts to criticize or emend it have been regarded as akin to sacrilege. Yet its textual basis is essentially a handful of late and haphazardly collected minuscule manuscripts, and in a dozen passages its reading is supported by no known Greek witness. (The Text of the New Testament, p. 106)
The vast majority of textual variations between the Textus Receptus and later texts (which are based to a large extent on older manuscripts that have been discovered or made available only in the last 150 years) are of no significance whatever. Often, variants are such that they are not at all distinguishable after being translated into English. At other times the variants merely represent the attempt of some scribe to supplement one synoptist's account with a detail legitimately provided in the account of another synoptist. However, occasionally the variations are more serious.
Although much credit is due to Erasmus for having made a Greek text available at all, the text which he presented was not of good quality. The half dozen manuscripts used by Erasmus were all of late origin. Most, if not all, were from the fifteenth century, while two may have been made as early as the twelfth century. He had only one manuscript which contained the book of Revelation, and it was missing the final leaf, which had contained the last six verses of Revelation. For these verses, Erasmus turned to the Vulgate, a Latin translation of the scriptures. Erasmus translated the Latin back to Greek. Thus, for those verses, it was a contrived Geek text which eventually came to be translated into English in the King James Version. Trying to discover the original Greek text by looking at a Latin translation is a little like trying to discover the exact ingredients used in making a German chocolate cake by tasting it. While your guess may be close, you will not be exactly right. Thus some words which have never been found in any Greek manuscript were incorporated into Erasmus' text, and in turn, into the Textus Receptus and the King James Version. For example, at Revelation 22:19, the phrase, "book of life" in the King James Version should be "tree of life" according to all known Greek manuscripts.
In other passages also, Erasmus took into his text words and phrases found in the Latin Vulgate, but supported by virtually no Greek manuscripts. Thus in Acts 9:5-6, the King James Version inherits from the Vulgate by way of Erasmus the following words:
...it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him...
We should note that these words do legitimately belong in Paul's account of his conversion as recorded by Luke in Acts 26 (verses 14-15), and therefore no factual error has been introduced in this instance.
An appalling case of a spurious passage coming from the Latin Vulgate down to the King James Version by way of Erasmus is described by Bruce Metzger:
Among the criticisms levelled at Erasmus one of the most serious appeared to be...that his text lacked part of the final chapter of I John, namely the Trinitarian statement concerning 'the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth' (I John v. 7-8, King James version). Erasmus replied that he had not found any Greek manuscript containing these words, though he had in the meanwhile examined several others besides those on which he relied when first preparing his text. In an unguarded moment Erasmus promised that he would insert the Comma Johanneum, as it is called, in future editions if a single Greek manuscript could be found that contained the passage. At length such a copy was found - or made to order! As it now appears, the Greek manuscript had probably been written in Oxford about 1520 by a Franciscan friar named Froy (or Roy), who took the disputed words from the Latin Vulgate. Erasmus stood by his promise and inserted the passage in his third edition (1522), but he indicates in a lengthy footnote his suspicions that the manuscript had been prepared expressly in order to confute him. (The Text of the New Testament, 1st-2nd Edition, Oxford, p 101) Marginal note in 3rd edition: See also p. 291 n.2
Footnote to the above comment by Metzger in the same book in a later edition:"What is said on p. 101 above about Erasmus' promise to include the Comma Johanneum if one Greek manuscript were found that contained it, and his subsequent suspicion that MS 61 was written expressly to force him to do so, needs to be corrected in the light of the research of H. J. De Jonge, a specialist in Erasmian studies who finds no explicit evidence that supports this frequently made assertion; see his "Erasmus and the Comma Johanneum,' Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, lvi (1980), pp. 381-9 (The Text of the New Testament, 3rd Edition, Oxford, p 291 fn 2. Footnote Retraction)
In the time since Erasmus, among all the Greek manuscripts that have been examined, only three more, all of late date, have been found which include the passage, and it apparently comes to these from the Vulgate, not from earlier Greek exemplars. These three include one sixteenth century manuscript, one manuscript which is said to be from either the fourteenth or sixteenth century, and one twelfth century manuscript which has the passage added in the margin by a seventeenth century hand. In spite of the obvious lack of authenticity this passage, which probably originated as an attempt to augment the case for trinitarianism, is today included in the King James Version as if it were part of the inspired word.
Clearly, some of the passages included in the Textus Receptus, and consequently in the King James Version, are woefully lacking in credentials. But as the Textus Receptus became stereotyped, even later editors who were more abundantly supplied with manuscripts, including some from the fourth or fifth century, dared not stray too far from the text of the Vulgate and the Textus Receptus. This was the case until the nineteenth century.
In all our discussion we have not touched upon allegations of much more fundamental shortcomings of the text behind the King James Version. These have to do, not so much with the inclusion of passages supported by virtually no Greek manuscripts, but rather with readings found throughout the Textus Receptus which are supported by many late manuscripts, but which are not found in most of the earliest manuscripts.
While there are perhaps no more than a dozen passages where the Received Text has an interpolation supported by no known Greek manuscript, there is a vastly greater number of passages where the Received Text has variant readings that are supported by Greek manuscripts. Often the manuscripts supporting such readings are in the majority. However, these manuscripts are generally of much later date than those which are deemed by most scholars to have the authentic reading.
These variations are almost always insignificant with respect to the practical meaning of God's word. Typical is the case of Mt. 13:9, where the King James Version has, "Who hath ears to hear, let him hear," while most modern translations (including the American Standard Version, the Revised Standard Version, and the New American Standard Bible) omit the words, "to hear". Most manuscripts include the words. However, the oldest manuscripts, and those considered most reliable by most scholars, omit the words. With reference to the meaning of the text, the variation is insignificant, especially because the words are included in the parallel accounts (Mk. 4:9, Lk. 8:8). Most scholars believe the variation is the result of scribes adding words to Matthew's account from the accounts of Mark and Luke. Such additions to the text seem to be characteristic of the manuscripts on which the Received Text, and therefore the King James Version, is based.
Some may wonder why we have spent so much time discussing variant readings if, in fact, they are as inconsequential as we have asserted. The very point we wish to make is that while the King James Version is a good and reliable translation of the inspired word, it is not itself inspired. It is not due any greater reverence than any other good translation, and it is certainly not due the reverence which it receives among some who believe it alone ought to be used and all others are "innovations". (The King James Version itself was considered a vile innovation by many when it first came out.) The fact is, the King James Version is a good translation, and far better than the paraphrases which are so popular today (e.g. The Living Bible, and The Book, which is a new edition of The Living Bible), but it is not perfect.
Today, some scholars are again asserting that although the manuscripts behind the Received Text are generally of very late date, they should be followed in passages where a variant occurs, even though the oldest manuscripts stand against the reading. Simplistically put, these scholars believe we should follow the reading of the majority of manuscripts instead of the reading of the oldest manuscripts.
In the midst of this debate, the New King James Bible has been published in an attempt to capitalize on the King James Version market. The New King James Bible updates the language of the King James Version, but again follows the Received Text. Hence the New King James Bible includes many readings which are found in a majority of manuscripts but not in the oldest manuscripts. Whether or not this can be justified, the inclusion of passages which have no support among the extant Greek manuscripts certainly cannot be justified. However, the translators of the New Kings James Bible inexplicably duplicated this blunder earlier made by the translators of the King James Version (e.g. see Acts 9:5-6, 1 John 5:7-8, and "book" in Rev. 22:19).
One should not adhere to any translation to the exclusion of all others, and this is certainly true of the King James Version and the New King James Bible. One who uses either of these should also have a copy of one of the newer translations which are not based upon the Received Text. Especially recommended are the American Standard Version and the New American Standard Bible.
Note: This article first appeared in 1985 in "The Thayer Street Messenger." It is based, in part, on Bruce Metzger's THE TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, Oxford University Press, 2nd ed.,
Jeff Smelser
"KING JAMES-ONLYISM" and the "Egyptian Corruption" Argument
by Gary R. Hudson
A friend recently asked me about one of the common objections raised by the KJV-Only movement to the use of "any manuscripts that come from Egypt." One particular preacher he sat under was very fond of launching into a tirade against "those evil modern bibles" because "they're based on manuscripts out of Egypt" and "the Bible says Egypt is a type of the WORLD!" This is obviously typical of Peter Ruckman, Chick Publications, Gail Riplinger, J. J. Ray, and other KJV "defenders" who recklessly throw every device they can concoct against the early manuscripts of the Greek New Testament. They reason as thus: "The Bible says Egypt is a type of the world; the world is associated with sin; therefore, it must logically follow that Alexandrian manuscripts are evil." This is certainly a "case study" in one of the best examples of "guilt by association" ever imagined.
Actually, the Bible making "Egypt a type of the world" (which, by the way, is not explicitly stated in the Bible, only implied), does not mean it teaches that all other regions of the planet are untainted by sin. In fact, it implies the very opposite! If the Bible teaches that "Egypt is a type of the WORLD," then it DOES "logically follow" that "the whole WORLD is typified by Egypt" - which, in the case of KJV-Onlys, would make no region of the entire planet safe for preserving Bible manuscripts! (read 1 John 5:19).
Bob Ross comments: We should also remember the wonderful Providence of the Lord in regard to Moses, Joseph and the Israelites in Egypt, as well as how the infant Jesus was taken to Egypt as a means of escaping death in Israel during the time of Herod's campaign of infanticide. The Lord is Sovereign in Egypt as well as in Antioch, Jerusalem, and Rome! He works His wonders all over! In fact, if you had to have the "right place" in which the Lord could do His work, it would have to be a "wrong place," as the whole world is defiled by sin.
The TRUE Genealogy & Genesis of "KJV - Onlyism"
by DOUG KUTILEK
BENJAMIN WILKINSON
J. J. RAY
DAVID OTIS FULLER
PETER S. RUCKMAN
Self-described " Restorer " of the ' Missing Link ' of KJV ' Final Authority ' Peter S . Ruckman on the KJV - |
|
EDWARD F . H ILLS & OTHERS
GAIL RIPLINGER
SUMMARY
Example of why archaic language of the KJV is a barrier to knowing about Jesus. All the archaic words in this paragraph are found in the KJV:
"Sith the noise of the bruit of this school hath reached to thee-ward, we trust that our concourse liketh you well-particularly those who blaze abroad that there is error here. Whoso setteth thee against us-whoso saith we offend all-speaketh leasing. We be not affrighted, but withal, we are straightened in our bowels. We knoweth well that what thou wilst hear straightway wilt fast close up thy thoughts. With som we be abjects, some have defied us; but there has been no daysman betwixt us. They subvert the simple!" (References where these words are found: Ez 35:6, Jer 10:22, 1Sam 19:4, Prov 1:21, Esther 8:8, Mk 1:45, Prov 25:14, Jas 3:2, Ps 4:2, Lk 24:37, Acts 25:27, 1Tim 5:13, 2Cor 6:12, Mt 4:20, Ge 20:18, Ps 35:15, Num 23:8, Job 9:33, Ge 31:37, Lam 3:36, Prov 14:15 [Questions You've Asked About Bible Translations, by Dr. Jack Lewis])
Below are 484 examples of how the KJV uses outdated language. This is the primary reason why there is a need for modern translations. One should not need to use a dictionary to understand the Bible. Rather, it should convey the message of God as understandable as a city newspaper!
1. Abject: Psalm 35:15. |
2. Adamant: Ezek. 3:9; Zech. 7:12. |
3. Agone: 1 Sam. 30:13. |
4. Alamoth: 1 Chron. 15:20. |
5. Almug: 1 Kings 10:11-12. |
6. Aloes: Prov. 7:17; John 19:39. |
7. Ambassage: Luke 14:32. |
8. Ambushment: 1 Chron. 13:13 |
9. Amerce: Deut. 22:19. |
10. Angle: Isa. 19:8; Hab. 1:15. |
11. Anon: Matt. 13:20; Mark 1:30. |
12. Apothecary: Exo. 30:25, 35; 37:29 |
13. Ariel: Isa. 29:1,2,7. |
14. Armhole: Jer. 38:12. |
15. Artificer: 1 Chron. 29:5. |
16. Assay: Job 4:2; Acts 9:26. |
17. Assupim: 1 Chron. 26:15,16. |
18. Asswage: Job 16:5. |
19. Astonied: Ezra 9:4. |
20. Attent: 2 Chron. 6:40; 7:15. |
21. Aul: Exo. 21:6. |
22. Balances: Lev. 19:36; Jer. 32:10. |
23. Bald Locust: Lev. 11:22. |
24. Bason: 2 Chron. 4:8; Exo. 24:6. |
25. Beeves: Lev. 22:19; Num. 31:28 |
26. Behemoth: Job 40:15. |
27. Bekah: Exo. 38:26. |
28. Besom: Isa. 14:23. |
29. Bestead: Isa. ;8:21. |
30. Betimes: Gen. 26:31; Job 8:5. |
31. Bewray: Isa. 16:3; Prov. 29:24. |
32. Bittern: Isa. 34:11; Zeph. 2:14. |
33. Blain: Exo. 9:9,10. |
34. Bloody Flux: Acts 28:8. |
35. Bolled: Exo. 9:31. |
36. Bondman: Gen. 44:33 |
37. Botch: Deut. 28:27,35. |
38. Bray: Job 6:5; Prov. 27:22. |
39. Breeches: Exo. 38:42; Lev. 16:4. |
40. Brigandine: Jer. 46:4. |
41. Broidered: Ezek. 16:10; Exo. 28:4. |
42. Bruit: Jer. 10:22; Nahum 3:19 |
43. Buckler: 2 Sam. 22:31; Song 4:4. |
44. Burning Ague: Lev. 26:16. |
45. Byword: 2 Chron. 7:20; Psalm 44:14. |
46. Cab: 2 Kings 6:25. |
47. Calamus: Ezek. 27:19; Exo. 30:23. |
48. Calves of our lips: Hos. 14:2. |
49. Camphire: Song of Sol. 1:14; 4:13. |
50. Canker: 2 Tim. 2:17. |
51. Cankerworm: Joel 1:4; Nahum 3:15. |
52. Carbuncle: Exo. 28:17; Ezek. 28:13. |
53. Cassia: Exo. 30:24; Psalm 45:8. |
54. Cast in the teeth: Matt. 27:44. |
55. Castor and Polux: Acts 28:11. |
56. Caul: Isa. 3:18; Lev. 3:4 |
57. Censer: 2 Chron. 26:19; Luke 1:9. |
58. Chalcedony: Rev. 21:19. |
59. Chalkstone: Isa. 27:9. |
60. Chamberlain: Acts 12:20. |
61. Chamois: Deut. 14:5. |
62. Champaign: Deut. 11:30. |
63. Chancellor: Ezra 4:8,9,17. |
64. Chapiter: 1 Kings 7:16-18. |
65. Chapmen: 2 Chron. 9:14. |
66. Chapt: Jer. 14:4. |
67. Checker Work: 1 Kings 7:17. |
68. Cheek Teeth: Joel 1:6. |
69. Chemosh: 1 Kings 11:7; 2 Kings 3:27. |
70. Cherub: Ezek. 1:5-11; Psalm 18:10. |
71. Choler: Dan. 8:7; 11:11. |
72. Churl: Isa. 32:5,7. |
73. Ciel: Jer. 22:14. |
74. Clave: Ruth 1:14. |
75. Clift: Exo. 33:32. |
76. Close Place: 2 Sam. 22:46; Psalm 18:45. |
77. Coat of Mail: 1 Sam. 17:5. |
78. Cockatrice: Jer. 8:17. |
79. Cocle: Job 31:40. |
80. College: 2 Kings 22:14; 2 Chr. 34:22. |
81. Collop: Job 15:27. |
82. Concision: Phil. 3:2. |
83. Concourse: Acts 19:40. |
84. Concupiscence: Rom. 7:8; Col. 3:5. |
85. Coney: Lev. 11:5. |
86. Confection: Exo. 30:35. |
87. Confectionary: 1 Sam. 8:13. |
88. Contemn: Psalm 10:13. |
89. Convocation: Exo. 12:16; Lev. 23:7. |
90. Coping: 1 Kings 7:9. |
91. Cor: Ezek. 45:14. |
92. Corban: Mark 7:11. |
93. Coriander: Exo. 16:31; Num. 11:7 |
94. Cormorant: Lev. 11:17; Isa. 34:11. |
95. Couch: Gen. 49:9; Deut. 33:13. |
96. Coulter: 1 Sam. 13:20,21. |
97. Countervail: Esth. 7:4. |
98. Covert: 2 Kings 16:18; Job 38:40. |
99. Creeping Thing: Gen. 1:26. |
100. Crisping Pin: Isa. 3:22. |
101. Crookbackt: Lev. 21:20. |
102. Cruse: 1 Sam. 26:11; 1 Kings 14:3. |
103. Cubit: Deut. 3:11; Matt. 6:27. |
104. Cumi: Mark 5:41. |
105. Cummin: Isa. 28:25,27. |
106. Curious Arts: Acts 19:19. |
107. Cuttings: Lev. 19:28; 21:5. |
108. Discomfit: Judg. 4:15; Psalm 18:14 |
109. Dragon: Psalm 74:13;; Isa. 27:1 |
110. Dulcimer: Dan. 3:5, 10, 15 |
111. Earnest: 2 Cor. 1:22; Eph. 1:14 |
112. Emerods: Deut. 28:27. |
113. Endamage: Ezra 4:13 |
114. Endue: Gen. 30:20; 2 Chron. 2:12. |
115. Engine: Ezek. 26:9; 2 Chron. 20:15. |
116. Ensample: Phil. 3:17; 2 Pet. 2:6. |
117. Ensign: Isa. 11:12; Zech. 9:16. |
118. Ephah: Lev. 5:11; Ezek. 45:11. |
119. Ephod: Exo. 28:6-12. |
120. Ephphata: Mark 7:34. |
121. Espouse: 2 Sam. 3:14; Matt. 1:18. |
122. Euroclydon: Acts 27:14. |
123. Exactor: Isa. 60:17. |
124. Exorcist: Acts 19:13. |
125. Extreme Burning: Deut. 28:22. |
126. Eyeservice: Col. 3:22; Eph. 6:6. |
127. Fain: Job 27:22; Luke 15:16. |
128. Fairs: Ezek. 27:12, 14, 16. |
129. Fallow Ground: Jer. 4:3; Hos. 10:12. |
130. Familiar Friend: Job 19:14; Psalm 41:9. |
131. Familiar Spirit: 2 Kings 23:24. |
132. Farthing: Matt. 5:26. |
133. Fast: 1 Sam. 31:13; Esth. 4:16. |
134. Fat: Joel 2:24; Lev. 3:16. |
135. Fatling: 1 Sam. 15:9; Isa. 11:6. |
136. Fen: Job 40:21. |
137. Fetched a compass: Acts 28:13 |
138. Fillet: Exo. 27:10,11. |
139. Fining Pot: Prov. 17:3; 27:21. |
140. Firepan: 2 Kings 25:15. |
141. Firkin: John 2:6. |
142. Fitch: Isa. 28:25, 27. |
143. Flagon: Isa. 22:24. |
144. Fleshhook: Exo. 27:3. |
145. Fleshpot: Exo. 16:3. |
146. Flote (Floats): 2 Chron. 2:16. |
147. Footman: 1 Sam. 22:17; Jer. 12:5. |
148. Footstool: 2 Chron. 9:18. |
149. Foreship: Acts 27:30. |
150. Foul Spirit: Mark 9:25; Rev. 18:2. |
151. Foursquare: Exo. 27:1; Rev. 21:16. |
152. Fowler: Psalm 91:3; Hos. 9:8. |
153. Fray: Deut. 28:26; Jer. 7:33. |
154. Freckled Spot: Lev. 13:39. |
155. Fretting: Lev. 13:51,52. |
156. Frontlet: Exo. 13:16; Deut. 6:8. |
157. Fuller: 2 Kings 18:17; Mark 9:3. |
158. Gabbatha: John 19:13. |
159. Galbanum: Exo. 30:34. |
160. Gall: Job 15:13; 20:25; Matt. 27:34. |
161. Gallant Ship: Isa. 33:21. |
162. Galley: Isa. 33:21. |
163. Gat: 1 Kings 1:1; Eccl. 2:8. |
164. Gerah: Lev. 27:25. |
165. Ghost: Gen. 49:33. |
166. Gin: Amos 3:5; Psalm 141:9. |
167. Girt: 2 Kings 1:8; John 21:7. |
168. Glean: Lev. 19:10. |
169. Glede: Deut. 14:13. |
170. Glister: 1 Chron. 39:2; Luke 9:29. |
171. Graff: Rom. 11:17, 19, 23, 24. |
172. Greaves: 1 Sam. 17:6. |
173. Greyhound: Prov. 30:31. |
174. Grisled: Gen. 31:10; Zech. 6:3. |
175. Habergeon: Exo. 28:32; 2 Chron. 26:14. |
176. Haft: Judg. 3:22. |
177. Hale: Luke 12:58; Acts 8:3. |
178. Halt: Mark 9:45; Luke 14:21; John 5:3. |
179. Handbreadth: Exo. 37:12; 1 Kings 7:26. |
180. Handstaves: Ezek. 39:9. |
181. Hap: Ruth 2:3. |
182. Haply: Mark 11:13; Acts 5:39. |
183. Hart: Deut. 12:15; Isa. 35:6. |
184. Hasty Fruit: Isa. 28:4. |
185. Havock: Acts 8:3. |
186. Heath: Jer. 17:6. |
187. Heave Offering: Num. 18:8. |
188. Heave Shoulder: Lev. 10:14. |
189. Helve: Deut. 19:5. |
190. Higgaion: Psalm 9:16. |
191. Hindmost: Num. 2:31. |
192. Hiss: Jer. 19:8. |
193. Hoar Frost: Exo. 16:14; Psalm 147:16. |
194. Hoar: Isa. 46:4. |
195. Hoary: Job 41:32. |
196. Hoise: Acts 27:40. |
197. Holpen: Dan. 11:34; Luke 1:54. |
198. Horseleach: Prov. 30:15. |
199. Hosen: Dan. 3:21. |
200. Hough: Josh. 11:6, 9; 2 Sam. 8:4. |
201. Hungerbitten: Job 18:12. |
202. Husbandry: 1 Cor. 3:9. |
203. Ill Savour: Joel 2:20. |
204. Implead: Acts 19:38. |
205. Inclosing: Exo. 28:20. |
206. Infolding: Ezek. 1:4. |
207. Issue: Ezek. 47:12; Rev. 9:17. |
208. Jachin and Boaz: 1 Kings 7:15-22. |
209. Jacinth: Rev. 21:20. |
210. Jah: Psalm 68:4. |
211. Jeopard: Judg. 5:18. |
212. Jod: 1 Chron. 22:3. |
213. Jot: Matt. 5:18. |
214. Jubile: Lev. 25:8-17. |
215. Kerchief: Ezek. 13:18,21. |
216. Kindred: Gen. 24:4. |
217. Kine: 1 Sam. 6:10,12,14; Amos 4:1. |
218. Kite: Lev. 11:14; Deut. 14:13. |
219. Kneadingtrough: Exo. 8:3: 12:34. |
220. Knop: Exo. 25:31, 34, 36.; 1 Kings 6:18. |
221. Lade: Gen. 47:17; 1 Kings 12:11. |
222. Lancet: 1 Kings 18:28. |
223. Lapwing: Lev. 11:19; Deut. 14:18. |
224. Latchet: Isa. 5:278; Mark 1:7. |
225. Latter Rain: Deut. 11:14; Zech. 10:1. |
226. Laver: Exo. 31:9; 1 Kings 7:40, 43. |
227. Leasing: Psalm 4:2; 5:6. |
228. Legion: Mark 5:9, 15; Luke 8:30. |
229. Leviathan: Psalm 74:14; Isa. 27:1; Job 41:1. |
230. Libertines: Acts 6:9. |
231. Lien: Gen. 26:10; Psalm 68:13. |
232. Lign Aloes: Num. 24:6. |
233. Lily Work: 1 Kings 7:19, 22. |
234. Lintel: Exo. 12:22,23; Amos 9:1. |
235. Log: Lev. 14:10, 21. |
236. Lowring: Matt. 16:3. |
237. Lucre: 1 Sam. 8:2; 1 Tim. 3:3,8. |
238. Lunatick: Matt. 4:24; 17:15. |
239. Magnifical: 1 Chron. 22:5. |
240. Mail: 1 Sam. 17:38. |
241. Malefactor: Luke 23:32,33; John 18:30. |
242. Mallow: Job 30:4. |
243. Mammon: Matt. 6:24; Luke 16:11,13. |
244. Manch: Ezek. 45:12. |
245. Mandrake: Gen. 30:14-16. |
246. Maranatha: 1 Cor. 16:22. |
247. Maschil: Psalm 32 (Title). |
248. Matrix: Exo. 13:12,15;34:19; Num. 18:15. |
249. Maul: Prov. 25:18. |
250. Maw: Deut. 18:3. |
251. Meat Offering: 1 Chron. 21:23. |
252. Mete: Exo. 16:18; Isa. 40:12. |
253. Meteyard: Lev. 19:35. |
254. Michtam: Psalm 16,56-60 (in title). |
255. Milcom: 1 Kings 11:5, 33; 2 Kings 23:13. |
256. Mincing: Isa. 3:16. |
257. Mingled People: Jer. 25:20, 24; Ezek. 30:5. |
258. Minish: Psalm 107:39; Exo. 5:19. |
259. Mite: Mark 12:42; Luke 12:59. |
260. Mitre: Zech. 3:5. |
261. Mortar: Num. 11:8; Prov. 27:22. |
262. Morter: Exo. 1:14; Nahum 3:14; |
263. Mote: Matt. 7:4; Luke 6:41,42. |
264. Moving Things: Gen. 1:20. |
265. Muffler: Isa. 3:19. |
266. Munition: Isa. 29:7; 33:16. |
267. Murrian: Exo. 9:3. |
268. Musick: 1 Sam. 18:6; Luke 15:25. |
269. Myrrh: Gen. 37:25; Matt. 2:11. |
270. Naught: Prov. 20:14; 2 Kings 2:19. |
271. Necromancer: Deut. 18:11. |
272. Neesing: Job 41:18. |
273. Nehushtan: 2 Kings 18:4. |
274. Nergal: 2 Kings 17:30. |
275. Nether: Deut. 24:6; Job 41:24. |
276. Nethermost: 1 Kings 6:6. |
277. Nethinim: 1 Chron. 9:2; Ezra 7:7. |
278. Nettle: Isa. 34:13. |
279. Nigh: Deut. 22:2; Luke 21:28. |
280. Nitre: Prov. 25:20; Jer. 2:22. |
281. Noisome: Psalm 91:3; Ezek. 14:21. |
282. Oblation: Lev. 2:4,12; Ezek. 45:1. |
283. Occurrent: 1 Kings 5:4. |
284. Offscouring: Lamen. 3:45; I Cor. 4:13. |
285. Oil Tree: Isa. 41:19. |
286. Omega: Rev. 1:8, 11. |
287. Omer: Exo. 16:16, 18, 22. |
288. Onycha: Exo. 30:34. |
289. Onyx: Exo. 28:20; 39:13; Ezek. 28:13. |
290. Oracle: 1 Pet. 4:11. |
291. Orion: Job 9:9; 38:31; Amos 5:8. |
292. Osprey: Lev. 11:13. |
293. Ossifrage: Lev. 11:13; Deut. 14:12. |
294. Outwent: Mark 6:33. |
295. Overcharge: 2 Cor. 2:5; Luke 21:34. |
296. Overlive: Josh. 24:31. |
297. Overpast: Psalm 57:1; Isa. 26:20. |
298. Overrun: 2 Sam. 18:23; Nahum 1:8. |
299. Paddle: Deut. 23:13. |
300. Palmerworm: Joel 1:4; 2:25; Amos 4:9. |
301. Pannag: Ezek. 27:17. |
302. Parbar: 1 Chron. 26:18. |
303. Pavement: Esth. 1:6. |
304. Peculiar: Exo. 19:5; Titus 2:14. |
305. Pence: Mark 14:5; Matt. 18:28. |
306. Penury: Prov. 14:23; Luke 21:4. |
307. Peradventure: Gen. 24:39; Rom. 5:7. |
308. Pestle: Prov. 27:22. |
309. Phylacteries: Deut. 11:13-22. |
310. Pill: Gen. 30:37,38. |
311. Plaister: Dan. 5:5; Lev. 13:43,48. |
312. Plaiting: 1 Pet. 3:3. |
313. Plat: 2 Kings 9:26. |
314. Pleasant Plants: Isa. 17:10. |
315. Pleiades: Job 9:9; 38:31. |
316. Plummet: 2 Kings 21:13; Isa. 28:17. |
317. Pommegranate: Num. 20:5; Deut. 8:8. |
318. Pommel: 2 Chron. 4:12. |
319. Porter: 1 Chron. 23:5; Neh. 7:73. |
320. Potsherd: Prov. 26:23; Isa. 45:9. |
321. Pottage: Gen. 25:29,30,34; 2 Kings 4:38. |
322. Pourtray: Ezek. 4:1; 8:10. |
323. Pransing: Judg. 5:22; Nahum 3:2. |
324. Pressfat: Hag. 2:16. |
325. Prick: Num. 33:55; Acts 9:5; 26:14. |
326. Privily: 1 Sam. 24:4; Gal. 2:4. |
327. Profane: Lev. 21:7; Heb. 12:16. |
328. Propitiation: Rom. 3:25; 1 John 2:2; 4:10. |
329. Proselyte: Matt. 23:15; Acts 2:10. |
330. Provender: Gen. 42:27; Isa. 30:24. |
331. Pruninghook: Isa. 2:4; Joel 3:10; Micah 4:3 |
332. Psaltery: 1 Sam. 10:5; Psalm 144;9 |
333. Publican: Matt. 9:11; Luke 18:10; 19:2. |
334. Pur: Esth. 3:7; 9:24. |
335. Purifying Sores: Isa. 1:6. |
336. Purrim: Esth. 9:21-32. |
337. Purtenance: Exo. 12:9 |
338. Pygarg: Deut. 14:5. |
339. Quarternion: Acts 12:4. |
340. Quick: Num. 16:30; Acts 10:42. |
341. Quit: 1 Sam. 4:9; 1 Cor. 16:13. |
342. Rainment: Gen. 45:22. |
343. Rampart: Lamen. 2:8; Nahum 3:8. |
344. Ravening: Psalm 22:13; Matt. 7:15. |
345. Ravin: Gen. 49:27; Nahum 2:12. |
346. Recorder: 2 Sam. 8:16; 2 Chron. 34:8. |
347. Redound: 2 Cor. 4:15. |
348. Reins: Psalm 16:7; Isa. 11:5. |
349. Remphan: Acts 7:43. |
350. Rereward: Num. 10:25; 1 Sam. 29:2. |
351. Ribband: Num. 15:38. |
352. Rie: Exo. 9:32; Isa. 28:25. |
353. Ringstraked: Gen. 30:35,39,40. |
354. Roe: Isa. 13:14. |
355. Ruddy: 1 Sam. 16:12. |
356. Rude: 2 Cor. 11:6. |
357. Sackbut: Dan. 3:5. |
358. Sackcloth: Gen. 37:34; 2 Kings 19:1. |
359. Saffron: Song of Sol. 4:14. |
360. Satyr: Isa. 13:21; 34:14. |
361. Savour: Lev. 26:31; Matt. 16:23. |
362. Scabbard: Jer. 47:6. |
363. Scall: Lev. 13:30-37; 14:54. |
364. Scrabble: 1 Sam. 21:13. |
365. Screech Owl: Isa. 34:14. |
366. Scum: Ezek. 24:6,11,12. |
367. Seethe: 2 Kings 4:38; Job 41:20. |
368. Selvedge: Exo. 26:4; 36:11. |
369. Servitor: 2 Kings 4:43. |
370. Shambles: 1 Cor. 10:25. |
371. Sheaf: Gen. 37:7; Deut. 24:19. |
372. Sheepcote: 2 Sam. 7:8; 1 Chron. 17:7. |
373. Sheminith: 1 Chron. 15:21; Psa 6 (title). |
374. Sherd: Isa. 30:14; Ezek. 23:34. |
375. Shewbread: 1 Sam. 21:6; 1 Chron. 9:32. |
376. Shibboleth: Judg. 12:6. |
377. Shigionoth: Habbakkuk 3:1. |
378. Shiloh: Gen. 49:10. |
379. Shittah Tree: Isa. 41:19. |
380. Silverling: Isa. 7:23. |
381. Sith: Ezek. 35:6. |
382. Snuff: Jer. 2:24; 14:6. |
383. Snuffdish: Exo. 25:38; 37:23; Num. 4:9. |
384. Snuffers: 1 Kings 7:50; 2 Chron. 4:22. |
385. Sod: 2 Chron. 35:13. |
386. Sodden: Exo. 12:9; 1 Sam. 2:15. |
387. Sodpdoiler: Judg. 2:14; 1 Sam. 13:17. |
388. Sojourn: Judg. 19:16; Isa. 52:4. |
389. Sottish: Jer. 4:22. |
390. Spikenard: Mark 14:3; John 12:3. |
391. Stacte: Exo. 30:34. |
392. Stomacher: Isa. 3:24. |
393. Strait: Isa. 49:20; Acts 26:5. |
394. Strake: Gen. 30:37; Lev. 14:37 |
395. Supple: Ezek. 16:4 |
396. Sycamine: Luke 17:6 |
397. Sycomore: Amos 7:14 |
398. Taber: Nah. 2:7 |
399. Tache: Exo. 26,11; 36:13,18 |
400. Target: 1 Kings 10:16; 2 Chron 9:15; 14:8. |
401. Tender eyed: Gen. 29:17 |
402. Thence: Acts 28:13 |
403. Trow: Luke 17:9 |
404. Unction: 1 John 2:20 |
405. Unicorn: Num. 23:22; Deut 33:17; Job 39:9 |
406. Victual: Exo. 12:39 |
407. Visage: Dan. 3:19 |
408. Void place: 1 Kings 22:10 |
409. Wax: 2 Sam. 3:1; Rev. 18:3 |
410. Wen: Lev. 22:22 |
411. Wheaten: Exo. 29:2 |
412. Whelp: 2 Sam. 17:8; Ezek. 19:3 |
413. Wimple: Isa. 3:22 |
414. Winefat: Isa. 63:2; Mark 12:1 |
415. Wist: Josh. 8:14; Mark 9:6 |
416. Wit: Gen. 24:21; Ex. 2:4; 2 Kings 10:29 |
417. Wizard: Lev. 19:31; 20:27; 1 Sam. 28:3 |
418. Wot: Gen. 39:8; Rom. 11:2 |
419. Wreathen: Exo. 28:14; 39:15; 2 Kings 25:27 |
|