Jump to content
IGNORED

King James Version Bible vs. Modern English Bibles 2


Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  21
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  1,573
  • Content Per Day:  0.52
  • Reputation:   723
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/10/2015
  • Status:  Offline

19 minutes ago, Yowm said:

We don't have the originals, which  is a major part of my point. We have to compare what we have. And as Shiloh mentioned early commentators, we have differences in translations of what they said.

Sorry I was talking about the texts in the original languages, naturally we dont have the actual ORIGINAL 1st century Gospel/Epistle texts. And of course we no longer possess the OT texts penned by the hand of the original authors . But the KJV uses the best of what we do have that is what I was saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest shiloh357
13 minutes ago, Yowm said:

That takes us back to the start. We can only make comparisons of the manuscripts we have and come up with our best judgments.

The NT has 25,000 manuscripts dating back to with 30 years of the originals and covering a span of 500 years.  No other ancient documents have that kind of manuscript evidence, not even close.  Most of the copies of ancient documents are with 1,000 years of the originals and we only have like 7 or 8 copies of the Greek texts ( like the writings of Plato) and we have no problem accepting them as being accurate.   It's only the Bible that gets this level scrutiny despite having an embarrassment of manuscript evidence and all of it agrees internally.  There is complete unity between the texts.

I really don't see why there is a question about the accuracy of the NT text and why there would be any concern that something is added to or taken out.   The evidence simply mitigates against it entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  385
  • Topics Per Day:  0.10
  • Content Count:  7,692
  • Content Per Day:  1.94
  • Reputation:   4,809
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  05/28/2013
  • Status:  Offline

34 minutes ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

 but that the KJV uses the best of the originals and is more accurately translated than other English version.

Except that it is not. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yowm said:

I don't want to continue this topic, because it goes round and round and more importantly it is liable to upset the faith of some weaker brethren.

How could questioning the text of the Bible do that?  Your last comment to Matrix told me all I needed to know.  I don't have the original manuscripts so it is subjective.  John, but not the text in John is canon, so I could erase all of it and do a re-write and it would still be canon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Mars Hill
  • Followers:  17
  • Topic Count:  18
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  13,256
  • Content Per Day:  5.40
  • Reputation:   1
  • Days Won:  62
  • Joined:  07/07/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  03/25/1972

13 minutes ago, Yowm said:

I realize that. But on the other hand  I don't take a conspiratorial position on some of the better translations either.

Since I cant persuade you which ones are accurate and which ones are false .

Let us start with the MESSAGE.    now yowm.   YOU HAVE TO KNOW that one is all buggered up .   at least that one , RIGHT .

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  385
  • Topics Per Day:  0.10
  • Content Count:  7,692
  • Content Per Day:  1.94
  • Reputation:   4,809
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  05/28/2013
  • Status:  Offline

11 minutes ago, Yowm said:

I don't want to continue this topic, because it goes round and round and more importantly it is liable to upset the faith of some weaker brethren.

I agree. I too shall step down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  552
  • Content Per Day:  0.21
  • Reputation:   104
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/24/2016
  • Status:  Offline

It's just a rant.

The KJV bible was certainly a high point in history, but to now be beating it over the heads of people, is just a rant and not a service. The KJV and history speak for themselves.

In an age and time when the very scriptures in the KJV tell us that we have gone "from death to life", and that it is by the Holy Spirit that we go from seeing "through the glass dimly" unto "all truth" in spirit - this rant is like Israel ranting for the law without understanding.

On the contrary, we should be ranting for the Holy Spirit. But this - this grieves the Holy Spirit.

But they rebelled and grieved His Holy Spirit; So He turned Himself against them as an enemy, And He fought against them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  24
  • Topic Count:  40
  • Topics Per Day:  0.02
  • Content Count:  1,459
  • Content Per Day:  0.61
  • Reputation:   2,377
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  08/23/2017
  • Status:  Offline

Human language is ever-changing; God's Truth is eternal.  I believe that God empowers each generation of believers to re-express His eternal Truth in the words of their current native language.  Among other things, the Reformers had had it with church services conducted in Latin that the common person did not know.  There is overlap of language from generation to generation so that each generation does learn from the previous ones, but as time passes, the common language of the people in a given place changes.  The Reformation ignited a love and passion for scripture in its original languages and for every Christian to have scripture in their own common language.  The continuing dedication and love for scripture, the text of scripture, and for expressing this as clearly as possible in as many hundreds and thousands of native languages in the world is an ongoing passion and mission of many Christians.  If we allow Christian scholarship, textual studies, and language studies to die out because "God laid out His Word and the only correct translation once and for all centuries ago", we are becoming one of the very things that the Reformers rebelled against.

If it was primarily about the TR being the restored and preserved text of the Greek New Testament, I would expect to see modern proponents of the TR as God's chosen text be enthusiastically embracing translating it into people's common languages (and embracing attempts to issue new English translations that use modern dialects of English).  Instead, most of what I see is an elevation of the actual words of the KJV to the level of God's sacred Truth rather than being one expression of God's sacred and eternal Truth in an older dialect of English that was common centuries ago.  Instead of seeing enthusiasm and passion for a TR to English translation in simpler or basic English that those who know English as a second language can better understand, I am often hearing advocacy for teaching old dialects of English to people instead or hearing people's difficulties with understanding older dialects being dismissed (or blaming them for being lazy).  This is part of why I question whether KJV-onlyism is truly about commitment to scripture or if it is a commitment to a particular translation.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • This is Worthy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...