King James Bible ONLY? Or NOT?
- Thread starter Dai3234
- Start date
-
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.
The teachings of Christ are my final authority. They are contained in manuscripts written many centuries before the KJV existed. So if you’re asking me if I have a single English translated “authoritative” Bible that I consider 100% inerrant from earlier manuscripts, my answer would be no. I do not have a problem reading English translations, I do, but it is ridiculous to assume (out of sheer faith) that everything was copied into the KJV without “any” variances unless investigating it yourself.
I speak English, so I read from English translations. Many English translations are very accurate to the earlier Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. The English language has one of the largest vocabularies in the world. This allows for various types of language to be used within translation. However, to say that the KJV is the only one without the possibility of any discrepancy, is downright falsehood. Would God only favor those with an English speaking tongue?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the French speakers?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the German speakers?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the Russian speakers?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the Arabic speakers?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the Spanish speakers?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the Mandarin speakers?
You get the point. To say that God made the KJV Bible the only “authoritative” and “perfectly” translated Bible that we should read from, is utter nonsense. Unless of course, you believe that He is favorably biased towards those who only speak the English language. I believe that God loves all, which is why Christ told His disciples to “go into all the world and preach the gospel”.
Nothing about how only English speakers would get the true revelation 1500 years later.
I speak English, so I read from English translations. Many English translations are very accurate to the earlier Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. The English language has one of the largest vocabularies in the world. This allows for various types of language to be used within translation. However, to say that the KJV is the only one without the possibility of any discrepancy, is downright falsehood. Would God only favor those with an English speaking tongue?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the French speakers?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the German speakers?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the Russian speakers?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the Arabic speakers?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the Spanish speakers?
What is the “authoritative” Bible for the Mandarin speakers?
You get the point. To say that God made the KJV Bible the only “authoritative” and “perfectly” translated Bible that we should read from, is utter nonsense. Unless of course, you believe that He is favorably biased towards those who only speak the English language. I believe that God loves all, which is why Christ told His disciples to “go into all the world and preach the gospel”.
Nothing about how only English speakers would get the true revelation 1500 years later.
Has God promised to preserve His pure words for us? Yes. Where are they?
Have you ever heard of the fullness of times? God works in the fullness of time. Why did God wait so long to be made flesh and die on the cross? Because it was in His perfect timing. Why, for thousands of years, did God only choose to communicate to the nation of Israel? Did God not love the rest of the world? If we had the "originals" available to us, what language would they be in? What good would that do for English speakers? French? Spanish? German?
Have you ever heard of the fullness of times? God works in the fullness of time. Why did God wait so long to be made flesh and die on the cross? Because it was in His perfect timing. Why, for thousands of years, did God only choose to communicate to the nation of Israel? Did God not love the rest of the world? If we had the "originals" available to us, what language would they be in? What good would that do for English speakers? French? Spanish? German?
You have merely deferred "final authority" to the translators of the KJV, rather than to the Bible itself. The knowledge, tools and sources available today are far better and more numerous than those available in 1611. What you have is a belief that the KJV is correct which you choose to call a certainty. Saying something is reliable and trustworthy doesn't make it so, and it doesn't make less valid the reliance that others place on Scripture. You have lots of rhetoric but little in the way of evidence to support your belief.
God’s words are in manuscripts that precede the KJV by over a millennium. It would make no sense (at least to me) that Jesus would tell His disciples to go into all the world preaching and sharing the gospel, if indeed, the real gospel couldn’t be comprehended until 1500 years later by reading a KJV. Did the disciples use the KJV when spreading God’s words?
KJV1611, I have to get ready for work, but just wanted to say that if you ever decide that you may want to actively scrutinize the KJV a little more, instead of taking for granted every single passage, you may want to get a parallel Bible. Mine has the KJV and three others lined up side by side. If you find a significant discrepancy within a verse, you can always look it up in from an interlinear source like what was posted in #1479. Just something to consider.
The problem with the interlinear source posted in #1479 is that it presents Scrivener's textus receptus as the basic Greek text.
Scrivener took the KJV and made the Textus Receptus to say what the KJV says, so he simply reconstructed the Greek according to the KJV, which is nonsense and therefore the comparison of the two will not be effective.
Scrivener took the KJV and made the Textus Receptus to say what the KJV says, so he simply reconstructed the Greek according to the KJV, which is nonsense and therefore the comparison of the two will not be effective.
Yes, but that’s the only manuscript that he would currently view to be authentic as of now. So by seeing an error from the Textus Receptus into the King James, it may be more effective than from another manuscript that he wouldn’t consider authentic. I already posted one such discrepancy on page 73 Post# 1450.
Our first assumption on any scripture should be that it's inspired and inerrant because we have no biblical reason to assume otherwise. If however, we find contradictions in a particular translation then we can rule inspiriation out because God inspired scripture will never be in error nor contradiction.
This is the post you are talking about.
I checked several other translations and none of them translates as her. And with all due respect, this is exactly why I hate to see people do what you did with that verse. That candlestick is a veiled reference to Christ the Word of God. Someone or something inspired the KJV translators to use "his" rather "its" wouldn't you agree? Every other translation that I looked at says "it's". If you can see that the candlestick is a veiled reference to Christ the Word of God, doesn't it makes sense to say "His shaft", "His bowls" and "His bowls" instead of "her's" or "it's"?
So either the KJV translators recognized this OR they were led by the Holy Spirit to use those words.
I checked several other translations and none of them translates as her. And with all due respect, this is exactly why I hate to see people do what you did with that verse. That candlestick is a veiled reference to Christ the Word of God. Someone or something inspired the KJV translators to use "his" rather "its" wouldn't you agree? Every other translation that I looked at says "it's". If you can see that the candlestick is a veiled reference to Christ the Word of God, doesn't it makes sense to say "His shaft", "His bowls" and "His bowls" instead of "her's" or "it's"?
So either the KJV translators recognized this OR they were led by the Holy Spirit to use those words.