Which Bible?

[hornetguy]

and it certainly shouldn't be made some sort of "litmus test" for translation accuracy...

If it WAS, the KJV would have failed....

 

[John146]

and it certainly shouldn't be made some sort of "litmus test" for translation accuracy...

If it WAS, the KJV would have failed....

True brother, I agree, but truth should be the test. If a version, whether KJV,ESV,NIV,NASB or any other, has anything within it's pages that is not truth, then that version cannot be considered the word of truth.

 

[BeyondET]

True brother, I agree, but truth should be the test. If a version, whether KJV,ESV,NIV,NASB or any other, has anything within it's pages that is not truth, then that version cannot be considered the word of truth.

Well how about just the mere title of the KJV, The King James is this not trying to imortalize a name a form of pride?

 

[John146]

Well how about just the mere title of the KJV, The King James is this not trying to imortalize a name a form of pride?

It was originally called the Authorized Version

 

[BeyondET]

Little history on the KJV, In May 1601, Prince James VI of Scotland attended the "General Assembly of the Church of Scotland"
at St Columba's Church in Burntisland, Fife, at which proposals were being put forward for a new translation of the Bible into English. Two years later, he ascended to the throne of England as King James I of England. The newly crowned King James convened the Hampton Court Confernece in 1604. That gathering proposed a new English version in response to the perceived problems of earlier translations as detected by the Puritan faction of the Church of England.

Three examples of the problem the Puritans perceived with the bishops and great Bibles were.

1. Galatians iv. 25 (from the Bishops bible) the Greek word susoichei is not well translated as now it is, bordereth niether expressing the force of the word,nor the apostles sense,nor the situation of the place.

2. Psalm cv. 28 (from the Great Bible), They were not obedient; the original being, they were not disobedient.

3. Psalm cvi. 30 (also from the Great Binle), " then stood up Phiees and prayed", the Hewbrew hath,executed judgment.

King James knowing the Church of Scotland was considering a new version before becoming King of England and with the Puritan faction of the Church of England was not happy with the bishop's Bible or the Great Bible. Did the king see a avenue to imortalize himself which ever the case may be, God works in mysterious ways and can use anything for his glory rather it be a King or servent of a King.

 

[LaurenTM]

It was originally called the Authorized Version

yeah...authorized by King James

back when kings were kings and you did what they said or off with your head

hey that rhymes!

if you really believe the Bible, then you only have one king, right?

so confusing..........

 

[BeyondET]

It was originally called the Authorized Version

Yes it was Authorized by King Kames but there is no record in any archives of England that states this being the KJV is the Authorized Version of the holy Bible in the beginning when the bible was translated, the title of the book was basically as you find it today in Cambridge Bibles (The Holy Bible). It's possible the King was a visionary and knew people would one day call it the Authorize version AKA the King James Version.

 

[Billyd]

Yes I think they're inspired by Satan under the direction of God. I've already covered this in a another post on this thread. God sends false prophets with false prophecies to people who reject His prophets. Go read 1 Kings 22.

Are you telling us that God directs Satan to create a translation of the scriptures to deceive anyone who reads them?

 

[Billyd]

It was originally called the Authorized Version

And who authorized it?

 

[fredoheaven]

your arguements are past silly...people post the errors with facts about the errors and you KJ folk insult us and basically ignore the facts

your all just playing out of your KJ apologetics handbook...

what you do, is ignore the actual rebuttal and make personal comments to the responder

it's a silly and immature tactic and is not an actual conversation or a proper response

many of us here have told you that same thing in different words, but the same thing

nothing is off topic, nothing is desperate save your own lack of actual ability to respond

what you folks are actually doing, is defending yourselves, because your defense of an inspired English translation of the Bible, is indefensible

Well it seems you try to ignore a more factual researched. stilll I see some inability to demonstrate errors of the KJV, actually you are on the off topic as what per OP is concerned.,Your bashing of the KJVo's is a bit of example. I could respond to all name calling but but I try no to just to stay the topic. The record sets here. Many of you are quick to criticize the words of God and few of us is defending His words. Nevertheless, I see many of you does unreasonable reasons as far as I am concerned or as the same line your gave me your "illogical logic".

You see, you are believing with mss with blemishes and that blemishes can be override by faith. I do understand your logic of faith as KJVO does, except the KJVO's believes in the logic of faith with a pure, preserve, given by inspiration of God. That makes the difference.

 

[fredoheaven]

To the Jews and Greeks first.....so the rest come after.

Look mate, I am not really interested in your cult, and I won't be engaging any more with you.

I do understand you, we are just starting to study about His words but you abort. Anyway can't do anything with that. So I can respectfully conclude....one thing for sure is that it's not what you said, but "every word".

God bless you

 

[tanakh]

I look back to the days of my youth when the only choice to be had was the KJV or the Revised standard version. People were blissfully ignorant of all the controversy thrown up about the subject and just got on with reading them.

 

[fredoheaven]

I look back to the days of my youth when the only choice to be had was the KJV or the Revised standard version. People were blissfully ignorant of all the controversy thrown up about the subject and just got on with reading them.

Yap sir, but the controversy is even before the W-H era, the KJV issue exist since it's inception. There was even a plot of the Jesuits to destroy it.

God bless

 

[fredoheaven]

Well, the way I understand it.... God gave the words to the original writers... you know, Matthew, Mark, etc....

These words have been preserved in several ways since they were first put to papyrus... our "translations" have ALL come from the conversion of those Greek words to another language by people who are educated enough to DO that.

You seem to be saying that the men that translated the KJV just wrote it down, purely from words that they "received" from God in their minds??

This sort of goes against what the men themselves said, when they gave references of the original Greek texts they used to do their "translation", doesn't it?

Look... it's a TRANSLATION, done by men, and guided by the Spirit, we assume.

Just like the other, more recent translations are.

And, how do you know that there wasn't a closet homosexual in the group of men that translated the KJV?

Since when has "being a sinner" kept someone from having knowledge and ability?

Your legalism is showing.... again.

One thing for sure, the KJ Translators do not have the "original Greek Text" only they possessed copies of faithful extant mss in the "Original Tongues" as you can see on the title page of the KJV.

 

[fredoheaven]

I just want an honest answer. When somebody presents you with bogus doctrine where do you go to verify if the doctrine is right or wrong.

Even Apostle Paul was scrutinized by the Berean Christians.

 

[Eternallife]

I have two different bibles at this time. The NIV and a Life Application Study Bible. I like using the study bible because it has all sorts of notes and cross references listed and book overviews. I was wondering does it matter the kind of Bible you use, or is it more of a preference thing?

I use the kjv NT and compare it to the original Greek. I used to read all different versions, but it was real hard to let the word sink into my mind because I noticed that many verisions tend to show the translator's opinion and not God's or His personality. Also I have seen versions that will cut you off from Christ.

 

[tanakh]

Yap sir, but the controversy is even before the W-H era, the KJV issue exist since it's inception. There was even a plot of the Jesuits to destroy it.

God bless

You are probably right but at ''Pew Level'' what I said holds true. The KJV was the 'The Bible to most people although we used the RSV at School. As for the Jesuits well they have always been a dubious bunch. I should add that the standard RC Bible then was the Douay translation

 

[fredoheaven]

You are probably right but at ''Pew Level'' what I said holds true. The KJV was the 'The Bible to most people although we used the RSV at School. As for the Jesuits well they have always been a dubious bunch. I should add that the standard RC Bible then was the Douay translation

Okay, thanks

 

[posthuman]

this wasn't written in English.

 

[Demi777]

this wasn't written in English.

View attachment 161733