This is fun on our KJV only basis

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
RedTent

RedTent

Banned
#21
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
182
0
#21
With the need to study and absorb the principles of our God, to live the life God tells us about living, getting side tracked on this trivia is pathetic. Putting that time in the study of Hebrew and Greek would be doing something much more worthwhile. We have access to biblical history as never before, productive study.

I never could get the hang of olde English, Shakespeare leaves me cold. I wonder if he gave those 37 guys who worked at this translation a hand? Some say he did. I've heard the translation is very poetic. I am serious about learning to know my Lord and all about Him, don't have time for all the KJV stuff.

You KJV people, why not just read Shakespeare if you like old English poetry so much?
 
oldhermit

oldhermit

Senior Member
#22
Jul 28, 2012
9,143
612
113
70
Alabama
#22
RickShafer said:
Yea, I know.
I'm telling you they had access to manuscripts and papyri well back into the early ages - 2nd, 3rd century.
All of which are on display or hidden away at various museums throughout europe.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you could supply some documentation to that effect. I THINK can provide you with a list of the documents that Erasmus used in his work.
 
RickShafer

RickShafer

Banned
#23
Sep 8, 2012
4,367
58
0
#23
I can't scan fifty pages onto this site.
The American Bible Association might have a website that lists the manuscripts online.
I can tell you right now the Textus Vaticanus is a complete New Testament document dating to the third century.
I remember that one. Erasmus would have had access to that.
Plus there are many more fragments, - pages and pages of papyri.
 
RickShafer

RickShafer

Banned
#24
Sep 8, 2012
4,367
58
0
#24
If I remember correctly there are three ancient complete manuscripts of the new testament. (one is the Textus Sinaticus which he wouldn't have had access to)
Plus maybe two dozen books of three or four epistles., as well as many gospels.
The papyri are fragments of the N.T. that count into the thousands.
 
Last edited:
notuptome

notuptome

Senior Member
#25
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
#25
It is not profitable to argue over the KJV. No translation is perfect. 2 Tim 2:16 Very few can read the originals so we need honest accurate translations. God has blessed the 1611 KJV as many folks have gotten saved by reading it. I might even have an inclination to say that the Christians who read it and loved it over the last 400 years were closer to the Lord than most of the recent versions have produced. Some of that is likely due to environmental differences but it seems like today's believers want an easy walk with the Lord.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 
RickShafer

RickShafer

Banned
#26
Sep 8, 2012
4,367
58
0
#26
The great thing is, they can compare the texts against each other.
And if there is a difference it will be notated with a signet of what text differed, and what it said in lower case margins.
It's great. There is so little divergence between all of these copies it's almost scary.
You want to see God's hand in something, look at how He preserved His Word.
Omnipotent indeed.
 
oldhermit

oldhermit

Senior Member
#28
Jul 28, 2012
9,143
612
113
70
Alabama
#28
RickShafer said:
If I remember correctly there are three ancient complete manuscripts of the new testament. (one is the Textus Sinaticus which he wouldn't have had access to)
Plus maybe two dozen books of three or four epistles., as well as many gospels.
The papyri are fragments of the N.T. that count into the thousands.
Click to expand...
Yes. There were numerous mss in existence but he was in many cases denied access to them. I think I may have misspoken though. I was thinking of an argument I made one time regarding 1 John. The earliest Mss he had available for THAT work was a tenth century mss.
 
oldhermit

oldhermit

Senior Member
#29
Jul 28, 2012
9,143
612
113
70
Alabama
#29
notuptome said:
It is not profitable to argue over the KJV. No translation is perfect. 2 Tim 2:16 Very few can read the originals so we need honest accurate translations. God has blessed the 1611 KJV as many folks have gotten saved by reading it. I might even have an inclination to say that the Christians who read it and loved it over the last 400 years were closer to the Lord than most of the recent versions have produced. Some of that is likely due to environmental differences but it seems like today's believers want an easy walk with the Lord.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct.
 
RickShafer

RickShafer

Banned
#30
Sep 8, 2012
4,367
58
0
#30
Most of the new bible translations are from the 1889 Wescott and Hort translation.
Interesting reading is comparing that to the Textus Receptus.
People go round and round about that.
 
Agricola

Agricola

Senior Member
#31
Dec 10, 2012
2,638
88
48
#31
notuptome said:
It is not profitable to argue over the KJV. No translation is perfect. 2 Tim 2:16 Very few can read the originals so we need honest accurate translations. God has blessed the 1611 KJV as many folks have gotten saved by reading it. I might even have an inclination to say that the Christians who read it and loved it over the last 400 years were closer to the Lord than most of the recent versions have produced. Some of that is likely due to environmental differences but it seems like today's believers want an easy walk with the Lord.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
Click to expand...
One of the miss-conceptions that King James Only Cult gives the impression of, is that People like myself who hate this cult are also against the King James Bible and endorse every translation after. THis is totally wrong and further from the truth, I love the King James, it is a very important Bible and played a huge part in the spread of Christianity. However it is not the difinitive version there is no such thing. Yes there aer a lot of rubbish versions of the Bible out there, many fit for the bin, rejection of King James Onlyism is not an automatic endorsement of every version to come into print. far from it.
 
notuptome

notuptome

Senior Member
#32
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
#32
Agricola said:
One of the miss-conceptions that King James Only Cult gives the impression of, is that People like myself who hate this cult are also against the King James Bible and endorse every translation after. THis is totally wrong and further from the truth, I love the King James, it is a very important Bible and played a huge part in the spread of Christianity. However it is not the difinitive version there is no such thing. Yes there aer a lot of rubbish versions of the Bible out there, many fit for the bin, rejection of King James Onlyism is not an automatic endorsement of every version to come into print. far from it.
Click to expand...
It does no good to label others as a cult. It only provokes strife. Those who deny the blood of Christ out to be identified but we need to cut each other a little slack as to which bible we read. It would be great if we all had one bible to study but that is not the case. I do think that each church should have a preferred version to use in their services so that all can read the passages in some form of unity. It only serves to hurt the weaker brethren if we squabble over which version the super cool hyper spiritual Christians use. I can tell you that the publishers love all the controversy over the different versions. They are making money selling every new re-write to come down the rosy path.

The cross is after all made from a tree. A little antiquated English never hurt anyone. One must admit that the KJV is easy to memorize.
Col 4:6 Let your speech be always with grace seasoned with salt that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 
Agricola

Agricola

Senior Member
#33
Dec 10, 2012
2,638
88
48
#33
I could not make my post clearer, I am not arguing against using the King James. I Use the King James. What I am against is the Cult of King James Only who have all the characteristics of a cult and make all sorts of threats to people who dont agree with them. This is what I am against.
 
RickShafer

RickShafer

Banned
#34
Sep 8, 2012
4,367
58
0
#34
Well, it is more a preference between the Textus Receptus and the newer versions that use the Wescott and Hort translation.
I personally like the King's English because it is easier to memorize.
Also there are some verses that are left out of some of the Wescott - Hort versions.
But I'm certainly not a KJV or die fanatic.
 
Agricola

Agricola

Senior Member
#35
Dec 10, 2012
2,638
88
48
#35
notuptome said:
The cross is after all made from a tree. A little antiquated English never hurt anyone. One must admit that the KJV is easy to memorize.
Col 4:6 Let your speech be always with grace seasoned with salt that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
Click to expand...
I assume you are refering to the comments I made in my signature.

Your comments actully prove the point I am making. The King James Only Cult state that the 1611 bible is Gods FINAL COMPLETE Bible, that it is now so complete that we do not need another version. They claim that ALL Bibles after 1611 are Satans Bibles, fake corrupt Bibles aimed at destroying the 1611 version.

Now, point is language changes over time, words in early 17th have changed over time, archaic language is ...archaic and not many people really understand some words as they have fallen out of miss use. therefore, many people today will read that passage , they will read it that Jesus was killed, then Hanged on at tree.. Double killing? Strung up like a slave by KKK maybe?
If the King James was so perfect, we would not have these ambiguities


King James is a good Bible, a good read, especally for those people like myself who understand 17th century English, but it is not Gods final perfect Bible which this cult claim it is. Certainly I am not putting my spiritual welfare at risk by reading another Bible, despite what this cult claims.

Look how many threads end up derailed because someone who we all know decides to claim King James Only is the answer and derails threads such as on spiritual warfare because of an objection to a tiny difference in the text being used.

I put to you, that it is the King James Only Cult who are in league with satan, just look at the division and mayhem just one of its followers creates on here.
 
C

CoooCaw

Guest
#36
#36
you have all been fooled into the wrong argument

the fact that you have modern PERversions is the result of a conspiracy formulated in the vatican to defeat protestantism; and it has succeeded
 
Agricola

Agricola

Senior Member
#37
Dec 10, 2012
2,638
88
48
#37
CoooCaw said:
you have all been fooled into the wrong argument

the fact that you have modern PERversions is the result of a conspiracy formulated in the vatican to defeat protestantism; and it has succeeded
Click to expand...
ORLY owl says...
ORLY+Wallpapers.png
 
Angela53510

Angela53510

Senior Member
#38
Jan 24, 2011
11,783
2,947
113
#38
I serve a perfect God. The Bible is God's Word to his people, but whether it is 100% perfect is not the issue. The issue is whether Christ is revealed.

For me, Christ was never revealed in the KJV, because I could not make sense of the archaic English. I was saved reading a modern version of a Catholic Bible, although I am not, and never have been Catholic.

I did switch versions shortly thereafter, just because I didn't want to be accused by the "brethren" of being apostate in my church because I was reading it. But it was a beautiful translation, really revealing Christ.

In future, the topic should be "Does this translation reveal Christ?" If it does, then it is a good Bible to use. I am not against people using the KJV - I have a friend from Jamaica, and his English is so close to the KJV, it makes sense for him to use it. I have memorized many passages in KJV when I was a child.

But now, I use the Bibles that rely on the earliest manuscripts, not the later ones like KJV and Erasmus. I wish some people could understand that the missing parts are missing because they are NOT in any of the early Greek manuscripts. The Old Testament is a bit more complex, because the Hebrews destroyed any worn out manuscript, so not many in existence. But it is interesting that the copy of Isaiah in the Dead Sea Scrolls, which is complete is virtually the same as our modern versions.

God will preserve his word, but he does want us to remember that the whole purpose of the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation is Jesus Christ, not about the literal words in the book, but the person and Saviour that they are about!
 
notuptome

notuptome

Senior Member
#39
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
#39
Agricola said:
I assume you are refering to the comments I made in my signature.

Your comments actully prove the point I am making. The King James Only Cult state that the 1611 bible is Gods FINAL COMPLETE Bible, that it is now so complete that we do not need another version. They claim that ALL Bibles after 1611 are Satans Bibles, fake corrupt Bibles aimed at destroying the 1611 version.

Now, point is language changes over time, words in early 17th have changed over time, archaic language is ...archaic and not many people really understand some words as they have fallen out of miss use. therefore, many people today will read that passage , they will read it that Jesus was killed, then Hanged on at tree.. Double killing? Strung up like a slave by KKK maybe?
If the King James was so perfect, we would not have these ambiguities


King James is a good Bible, a good read, especally for those people like myself who understand 17th century English, but it is not Gods final perfect Bible which this cult claim it is. Certainly I am not putting my spiritual welfare at risk by reading another Bible, despite what this cult claims.

Look how many threads end up derailed because someone who we all know decides to claim King James Only is the answer and derails threads such as on spiritual warfare because of an objection to a tiny difference in the text being used.

I put to you, that it is the King James Only Cult who are in league with satan, just look at the division and mayhem just one of its followers creates on here.
Click to expand...
Since the kinder gentler approach is falling short let me be blunt. You demean your own testimony with your unkind remarks. God has clearly used the KJV to bring many souls to a saving knowledge of Christ. It doesn't matter what bible you have if it is a bible that you actually read and study to learn of Christ. The virtue is in Christ not in what translation of the bible you read. I find it quite discomforting to read posts that attack other believers because of the bible they have on their lap. I know the KJV only crowd is a little fried hard on one side but they will give account to God just like you and me for what has been done since we have received Christ. Don't add to the problem but over come with sound doctrine and speech seasoned with salt. Pure speech and holy conduct will carry the day.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 
RickShafer

RickShafer

Banned
#40
Sep 8, 2012
4,367
58
0
#40
- "I put to you, that it is the King James Only Cult who are in league with satan, just look at the division and mayhem just one of its followers creates on here."

Pure hyperbole.
Or dangerous accusations.
You think that goes lightly with God?
You must really believe that because you put a ton on the line saying it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.