This verse or word could be better translated....

[Walt]

Here is another one from Bro. Hyles.

Rev 1:6:
"AND HATH MADE US KINGS" is better translated, " And hath made us a kingdom of priests."

Each believer carries the keys to Heaven to the world (the gospel).

I don't know; elsewhere, Scripture calls us a "royal priesthood"; the KJV "kings and priests" seems to fit this well.  The RT version I looked at says "kings and priests".

A kingdom of priests leaves out the royal aspect.  Surely, adopted children of the King of Kings must be royalty as well.

Its interesting to note that "kings and priest" is pretty much exclusive to the Latin text. So much for all those other "Catholic Bibles".

The oldest copies give a sense of "a kingdom, priests."

We are His kingdom. We are His priests. I don't think is correct to say we are "Kings".

The issue reminds me of

1Co 4:8  Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you.

Noted, but then, the KJV, following the received text, is not mistranslated, which was the point of the OP.  You are taking issue with the Greek text that the various versions follows.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Here is another one from Bro. Hyles.

Rev 1:6:
"AND HATH MADE US KINGS" is better translated, " And hath made us a kingdom of priests."

Each believer carries the keys to Heaven to the world (the gospel).

I don't know; elsewhere, Scripture calls us a "royal priesthood"; the KJV "kings and priests" seems to fit this well.  The RT version I looked at says "kings and priests".

A kingdom of priests leaves out the royal aspect.  Surely, adopted children of the King of Kings must be royalty as well.

Its interesting to note that "kings and priest" is pretty much exclusive to the Latin text. So much for all those other "Catholic Bibles".

The oldest copies give a sense of "a kingdom, priests."

We are His kingdom. We are His priests. I don't think is correct to say we are "Kings".

The issue reminds me of

1Co 4:8  Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you.

Noted, but then, the KJV, following the received text, is not mistranslated, which was the point of the OP.  You are taking issue with the Greek text that the various versions follows.

I'm saying the KJV, here in Rev 1:6 doesn't really follow most any Greek text. Its relying on a Latin text for its translation. The book of Revelation is a rather unique study when it comes to textual tradition. The text really wasn't accepted to a great degree for many centuries. Thus, we don't have that many "Greek" texts to examine. The TR doesn't follow the majority of texts and never has. I think you're aware of the issue with Revelation to some degree and the TR. Most anyone is that has taken to defend the TR.

Codex Alexandrinus is a good source of study for Revelation.

 

[Thomas Cassidy]

The P Cursives read βασιλεῖς. (2814, 025, 2015, 2019, 2036).

Aleph, A, and B read βασιλείαν.

It seems fairly obvious to me Revelation 1:6, when compared to 1 Peter 2:9 "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light"  is quoting at least in part from Exodus 19:6  "And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel."

But it would be presumptuous to dogmatically assert this is an error in the KJV for there is minority Greek manuscript evidence to support the "kings and priests" reading not to mention the earlier English versions, Tyndale (1525) "kinges." Cranmer/Great Bible (1539) "kynges". Geneva (1557/1560/1599) "Kynges (Kings in 1560/1599). And, of course, the Bishops Bible (1568), from which the KJV was revised, reads "kynges."

 

[bgwilkinson]

God Forbid

Rom 3:6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world? KJV

The KJV is more of a paraphrase while the NAS is a literal translation.

Rom 3:6 May it never be! For otherwise how will God judge the world? NAS

Only in English do we get a rendering like “God forbid” This is not found in any other language.

The Greek is μὴ γένοιτο· literally, “Let it not be,” that is, “Away with such a thought” - a favorite expression of our apostle, when he would not only repudiate a supposed consequence of his doctrine, but express his abhorrence of it. “The Scriptures do not authorize such a use of God’s name as must have been common among the English translators of the Bible” [Hodge].

Mat 5:33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:
Mat 5:34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:
Mat 5:35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.
Mat 5:36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.
Mat 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

My mother who was Swedish always called this a profane translation using God's name in vain.  There was nothing like it in the Swedish Bible.

The Vulgate has absit
abs.it V 5 1 PRES ACTIVE SUB 3 S
absum, abesse, abfui, abfuturus  V  [XXXDS] lesser
absum, abesse, afui, afuturus  V  [XXXAO]
be away/absent/distant/missing; be free/removed from; be lacking; be distinct' [Logos Dictionary of Latin Forms]

So it didn't come from the Vulgate, nothing like it in the Vulgate.

It appears almost universally in English translations from 1390 to 1901.

To be charitable it seems to be an English only rendering. No other language seems to have used this expression.

 

[praise_yeshua]

The P Cursives read βασιλεῖς. (2814, 025, 2015, 2019, 2036).

Aleph, A, and B read βασιλείαν.

It seems fairly obvious to me Revelation 1:6, when compared to 1 Peter 2:9 "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light"  is quoting at least in part from Exodus 19:6  "And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel."

But it would be presumptuous to dogmatically assert this is an error in the KJV for there is minority Greek manuscript evidence to support the "kings and priests" reading not to mention the earlier English versions, Tyndale (1525) "kinges." Cranmer/Great Bible (1539) "kynges". Geneva (1557/1560/1599) "Kynges (Kings in 1560/1599). And, of course, the Bishops Bible (1568), from which the KJV was revised, reads "kynges."

Your references to Peter and Exodus agree with the Alexandrian text. The reading in the KJV is admittedly a minority reading. sim not being dogmatic. Just trying to be accurate. I agree it maybe splitting hairs a little.

 

[bgwilkinson]

The P Cursives read βασιλεῖς. (2814, 025, 2015, 2019, 2036).

Aleph, A, and B read βασιλείαν.

It seems fairly obvious to me Revelation 1:6, when compared to 1 Peter 2:9 "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light"  is quoting at least in part from Exodus 19:6  "And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel."

But it would be presumptuous to dogmatically assert this is an error in the KJV for there is minority Greek manuscript evidence to support the "kings and priests" reading not to mention the earlier English versions, Tyndale (1525) "kinges." Cranmer/Great Bible (1539) "kynges". Geneva (1557/1560/1599) "Kynges (Kings in 1560/1599). And, of course, the Bishops Bible (1568), from which the KJV was revised, reads "kynges."

Your references to Peter and Exodus agree with the Alexandrian text. The reading in the KJV is admittedly a minority reading. sim not being dogmatic. Just trying to be accurate. I agree it maybe splitting hairs a little.

Here is the commentary of Andreas on the Johannesapokalypse

Hat tip Digital Collections of Augsburg University Library

Link to GA2814

http://www.nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:384-uba003076-1


This is the commentary on Revelation from which Erasmus produced his text. It was hard to tell what was commentary and what was scripture.

 

[bgwilkinson]

...and in fact it is, in the NIV. The NIV supports the deity and mediator-ship of Christ unlike the KJV. NIV has ,"
through Jesus Christ our Lord", which the KJV omits.


Jude 1:25 To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen. (Jude 1:25 KJV 1769)


If I argued as a KJVO I could say, ?The translators of the KJV were heretical modernists who were trying to remove clear references to Jesus as mediator.?

These kinds of arguments  do not demonstrate the authenticity of any particular version but are an example of begging the question and therefore are fallacious. They are however, widely used by KJV onlyists. It is frankly a  dishonest way to argue.



The NIV removes ?wise? and clearly supports the deity of Christ which the KJV does not do.

Jude 1:25 to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen. (Jude 1:25 NIV 2011)


Jude 1:25 to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.
(Jude 1:25 NIVO 1984)