Jump to content
IGNORED

King James Bible


Guest

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Junior Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  30
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  108
  • Content Per Day:  0.11
  • Reputation:   512
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/30/2021
  • Status:  Offline

:24:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Junior Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  30
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  108
  • Content Per Day:  0.11
  • Reputation:   512
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/30/2021
  • Status:  Offline

An actual 1611 KJV is extremely hard to read, the English is so archaic. The 1769 version is what most have, it still has words like "trow" and "wist" for KNOW - "waxed exceeding great", etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, dhchristian said:

There is something about the KJV that is far more in tune to the Holy Spirit, and its not the antiquated language. Although I use the other versions out there, My preference is the KJV, but unlike some I am not religious about it. When I returned to the Lord, from my prodigal ways, all I had was an NIV and ESV. God used them to speak to me but as I have studied more, I have come to see the weaknesses in these translations. Do the research on this from Both sides of the debate, Both the KJV only crowd and their opponents, and then Let the Holy Spirit teach you what is the best version. I Also use Strong's concordance to help with the meaning of the text as well. Here is a link to the BLB with this concordance.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/jhn/1/1/ss1/s_998001 

Be careful using this though as I have seen people rewrite entire passages who are unskilled in using this, so that those passages mean exactly the opposite of what they mean. It's a tool, and it's free to use online. The default is the KJV but you can also pull up other versions there as well. 

I understand. I have added the KJV to my Kindle Bibles shelf and will be reading it alongside other versions. It has a valuable part to play. 

 

 

 

On 11/2/2019 at 9:42 AM, Worship Warriors said:

I use the KJVER( easy Read).

They have removed all the thee and thought and updated all the ancient words.

I did a study and research on all the modern translation.  The grammer has improved but the text has deterioated because man had added and taken away from the word of God.

Only the Byzantine text has the imprint of divine Preservation. The modern translation don't.

Check it out from Maurice Robinson and pierpoint , Greek translation of NT. They spent 30 yrs in extensive research for it.  Their Greek translation of the NT is free for download.

In their book,  they have a list of all variant that has departed from the preserved text.

That's why I stay with the KJV.  It's my treasure and it's from the preserved text.

Interesting info! I will look into it. Thankyou. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  22
  • Topic Count:  194
  • Topics Per Day:  0.12
  • Content Count:  11,053
  • Content Per Day:  6.58
  • Reputation:   9,010
  • Days Won:  36
  • Joined:  09/12/2019
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/09/1956

18 hours ago, Episcopius said:

If that King James Version was GOOD ENOUGH FOR PAUL AND SILAS, it's good enough for me!

 

No, seriously, I like KJV, NRSV, and Orthodox Study Bible, whose OT is based on Septuagint.

 

Thanks for the chuckle. I haven't heard that one in about 40 years. Those were the days, my friend.

:-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Senior Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  20
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  536
  • Content Per Day:  0.31
  • Reputation:   323
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  08/16/2019
  • Status:  Offline

18 hours ago, Alive said:

THe NIV is not a strict translation--none are perfect translations because of the different languages involved and the nuances of meaning attached to the multiple possible word matches from the original. The NIV admits to not even making that attempt in many cases.

The NIV is not a 'translation' but rather an 'interpretation'.

This is a significant difference.

Hello Alive,

I think you were referring to the translation approach.  Defining the terms gets important when the conversation gets to the level of differentiating between versions.

NIV is considered a literal translation, just as many others, some of which are mentioned in this thread.

There are (in one method of categorization) at least three approaches in English Bibles:  word-for-word, thought-for-thought, and paraphrase. 

Word-for-word and thought-for-thought are both considered literal translation approaches.

I wrote a longer explanation of the approaches and the difficulties encountered in each.  But then I remembered the nature of these forums and deleted it. 

Before one makes a decision about how to view a particular approach and the resulting version of the Bible, it is wise to understand the approach.

ESV and Holman advertise hybrid approaches.  I think all approaches are hybrids.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  26
  • Topic Count:  61
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  9,604
  • Content Per Day:  3.98
  • Reputation:   7,795
  • Days Won:  21
  • Joined:  09/11/2017
  • Status:  Offline

Go to Logos.com. They have a free downloadable interlinear plus dictionaries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  22
  • Topic Count:  194
  • Topics Per Day:  0.12
  • Content Count:  11,053
  • Content Per Day:  6.58
  • Reputation:   9,010
  • Days Won:  36
  • Joined:  09/12/2019
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/09/1956

Kinda sorta. This is not difficult to understand.

Some that claim a literal approach are less so than others.

I pasted in a couple things that I thought might help some folks who aren't experts.

Let each judge for themselves...the Holy Spirit can handle it.

:-)

  • Well Said! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  34
  • Topic Count:  1,990
  • Topics Per Day:  0.48
  • Content Count:  48,688
  • Content Per Day:  11.83
  • Reputation:   30,343
  • Days Won:  226
  • Joined:  01/11/2013
  • Status:  Offline

On 11/2/2019 at 12:42 AM, Melinda12 said:

Would you say it is the best version? 

I own several Bible versions but find my King James somehow the most satisfying. I dislike any very modern versions as i feel i lose vitality and power of the words. If you understand me! I want to feel the authority and majesty of these precious words of God. 

 

I do not read the King James Bible. I do not like the thees and thous. There are several really nice Bible versions out there. There is the New King James version, the English Standard version and the American Standard version. There are some people who adhere to the King James only theology. I am not into that at all.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...