Using the KJV as point of reference to criticize "new bibles" is quite ironic...
People often fall back to the KJV because it's one of the oldest versions and they think that therefore, it's the closest to the original meanings... Too bad it's not the case... Non sequitur... The irony is that the guy criticizes christians for not thinking for themselves...
https://biblehub.com/exodus/20-13.htm
King James Bible Thou shalt not kill.
Amplified Bible “You shall not commit murder (unjustified, deliberate homicide).
It's a miracle that the KJV didn't give birth to hordes of vegans or people incapable to kill an enemy in the process of murdering their entire family
The KJV has many translation errors. But so do many newer ones. Many bibles, especially coming from catholicism, has simply omitted large portions of the bible. Many newer translations are driven by theological interpretation or non-conical contribution rather than literal and proper translation.
IMHO, a good litmus test for translation correctness is to look at what it says about Adam, Eve, dual seed lines, allegory of trees (racial lines of different hominids permitted in Eden), the people of Nod to which Cain was exiled, and so on. If they can't properly translate Eve screwed (sex, forbidden fruit) fallen angels (tree of good and evil) and Cain is nephilim (child of fallen angels, murderer from the beginning), then their translations are extremely problematic.
(post is archived)