KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE

[preacher4truth]

That's not as bad as a well-respected member insulting a newcomer is it?

Hasn't happened here.

 

[Depleted]

The discussion is about "English Bibles"
& God's word has been around, in my opinion obviously in the Textus Receptus, if we are looking at the New Testament before it was in English.

English has been around since about the 7th century, so King Jimmy is still modern. Oh, and this isn't a discussion. This is you thinking you're all that and a bucket of chips out to teach everyone. But, don't let me hold you back. You think it, so it must be true, right?

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

And yet, none of you new version guys can point to anything as your final authority on what God has said. It doesn't exist.

That's right. We don't have a cult leader.

 

[Depleted]

In a Christian endeavor I don't understand why I should have to teach a lost person that I would rather feel the sanctification of God then refer to Sodomy in separation.

- Walking in the New man.​

Don't worry, child. You're teaching no one. You have to understand the subject matter to teach it, then you have to learn how to teach, and then you have to recognize your audience.

Given you have no interest in any of the above, you really don't have to worry about teaching. You're not-a-teacher. That I know.

Still deciding on if you're a Christian, and leaning towards, "No, not yet."

 

[Depleted]

Wut?

Is there any connection at all between this post and your opening post?

Boy, oh boy! You're just not getting this are you? We're being graced with the one and only man-who-knows-it-all, and should be bowing down to his almighty-understanding-and-knowledge.

 

[Depleted]

- 2 Cor. 11:3-4
This is very old scripture, yet you are so ignorant.

& look at in KJV text.​

23-year-old-new-boy-here-to-learn-us-ignorant-hicks-into-all-things-important (KJV is God) is talking arrogance of others?

Have you considered taking this show on the road? You're very funny in a Steve-Wright-meets-Jack-Benny way.

 

[Depleted]

My authority, first, is the Greek and Hebrew, which God actually inspired. The original or the copies Angela?

So, here’s the thing for you English-only speakers. There are many possible definitions of a word, when going from one language to another. For instance, think about how many definitions of the word “run” there are in English. Well, Greek and Hebrew are the same. There is no straight word for word possible. Because there are numerous possibilities. Some translations get it right, some don’t. That is why revisions are necessary, and the KJV certainly went through a lot of those, in the first couple of centuries, didn’t it? The changes in the King James Bible were merely to correct things such as standardized spelling and typographical errors. The context of the King James Bible has never once been changed.

My authority is the Bible! Which Bible Angela? Can you hold and read anything that you can say is your final authority on all matters of faith and practice? Or is it your scholarship that determines what God has said?

The "originals?" You mean what The 70 took from the Geneva?

 

[Depleted]

OOOHHHHHHHHHH..... I GET it now..... how could I have missed it before?

You're a TROLL!!

Why didn't you just tell us at the start?

Seriously, though.... what point are you trying to make?

Yay! I am not the last person on earth to figure it out this time.

 

[Depleted]

Some things I wanted you to add to your side of the argument.
Wanted you to see it, Together we are stronger:

Your pointing out the KJV revisions in the past, when those revisions were only old english words to newer modern english words that mean the same thing in meaning. Most of Revisions i would absolutely think were were v to u , F to s ect. You can sit the 1611 AV King James and set it right next to the 1769 (Modern day Standard text for the King James Version Bible) and look at every inch of this book and never find a single versse thats meaning was changed by revision. Because it is so very easy to physicaly do so the English Christian culture cannot at at all disagree or find an argument and the whole world but you recognices that.
......................
Then you turn around and so bravely worship out of a book that has meaning revisions & it is evadent in all modern english failed attempts of translation. I am safer Christian.
.....................
Have you people never heard the phrase "Better safe than sorry?"
- This is your eternal afterlife you are gambeling with, yet chose to roll the dice?​

Together you are stronger. Here got you something that will help with that.

 

[finaldesire]

In 1611, the 54 scholars who produced the King James Bible drew significantly from Tyndale, as well as from translations that descended from his.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Tyndale

 

[Depleted]

How do you ignore the fact that the KJV Bible was the book that landed as the foundation for English language Bibles? How could you possibly walk away from the largest possible hint (of God) in the History of English Christianity. In my eyes it is just the proof of God, and I am so fortunate to clearly notice his very obvious works.

Simple. I have the Geneva too. You know the English Bible the 70 years often used to work on their new-and-improved version?

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Something else I wanted you to see:
Your pointing out the KJV revisions in the past, when those revisions were only old english words to newer modern english words that mean the same thing in meaning.

And here we see the overt sense of entitlement to a DOUBLE STANDARD.

Sorry, double standard not granted. Updated English is either permissible in ALL TRANSLATIONS or it is permissible in none.

 

[John146]

How do you ignore the fact that the KJV Bible was the book that landed as the foundation for English language Bibles? How could you possibly walk away from the largest possible hint (of God) in the History of English Christianity. In my eyes it is just the proof of God, and I am so fortunate to clearly notice his very obvious works.

Yes, the proof is in the fruit. The KJV spurred on the largest revival to Jesus Christ the world has ever seen. The greatest missionaries and preachers the world has ever seen used the KJV and knew they were holding the very preserved words of God.

What's the fruit of the new versions? How about casting doubt on God's word? How about the ushering in of the Laodicean Age? How about a luke warm church where no real revival occurs or soul winning?

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Yes, the proof is in the fruit. The KJV spurred on the largest revival to Jesus Christ the world has ever seen. The greatest missionaries and preachers the world has ever seen used the KJV and knew they were holding the very preserved words of God.

What's the fruit of the new versions? How about casting doubt on God's word? How about the ushering in of the Laodicean Age? How about a luke warm church where no real revival occurs or soul winning?

.....LIES That's all you have

There are multitudes saved who have NEVER read a single word from the King James VERSION.

 

[Angela53510]

Yes, the proof is in the fruit. The KJV spurred on the largest revival to Jesus Christ the world has ever seen. The greatest missionaries and preachers the world has ever seen used the KJV and knew they were holding the very preserved words of God.

What's the fruit of the new versions? How about casting doubt on God's word? How about the ushering in of the Laodicean Age? How about a luke warm church where no real revival occurs or soul winning?

I was saved reading a modern Catholic translation in a revival where KJV wasn’t used! The fact is, the KJV was the only version available in the days of the Great Awakening and other revivals. But I bet they used Welsh Bibles in the revival in Wales.

Besides, it was not the KJV that saves people, in a revival, awakening or any other move of God. It is GOD! The Holy Spirit is the one who brought these revivals to pass. And apostasy, does abound, no doubt about. But whoever brainwashed you to believe losing a Bible translation is the reason we do not have revivals is ridiculous!

There actually are revivals going on in many parts of the world, where NO English Bible is used. Like in China, and in the Muslim world. Don’t be so America-centric! And don’t doubt God for his ability to save people with the gospel in any translation or any language.

God is sovereign, not a translation!

 

[stand2]

We grow our wheat with the promise of harvest. We harvest in the faith that our wheat is suitable for bread. We do not examine every single grain for perfection, because we would starve long before the bread was made. Nor do we condemn the grains of wheat our neighbor relies on for nourishment, for he has also raised his wheat with the same promise of harvest, and has harvested in the same faith for bread. Father in Heaven, we pray for a mutual rejoicing that we may gather together, giving thanks in the sharing of the bread each of us has raised in faith for nourishment, not perfection, lest we should starve while seeking it. Bless each of us with the wisdom and understanding, that we may be able to sit down with our neighbor and rejoice in the true spirit of love of one for another.........We humbly ask these things in the name of our Blessed Savior, Jesus our Lord..AMEN.

 

[Namiette]

Well, I always watched this kind of discussions from the "outside", I have never joined them before, 'cause I didn't feel knowledgeable enough to do so. But "only reading" looks like a good idea, ´cause no matter the arguments, this seems to be neverending story...

 

[John146]

I was saved reading a modern Catholic translation in a revival where KJV wasn’t used! The fact is, the KJV was the only version available in the days of the Great Awakening and other revivals. But I bet they used Welsh Bibles in the revival in Wales.

God used the KJV to spur on the Great Awakening.

 

[John146]

Again, why do you trust a Bible with so many added parts? Like the longer ending of Mark 16, for example. Different, theology than the rest of Mark, including words that are not found in the rest of Mark and a high Christology which Mark never uses elsewhere.

In Mark chapter 16 from verse 9 and on are not found in the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus. These manuscripts are the basis of most of the new bibles since 1880. In 1481, Codex Vaticanus was found in the Vatican library. It is still under lock and key in that pagan library. It omits Genesis 1:1-46:28; Psalms 106-138; the Pastoral Epistles(I wonder why since it came from the Vatican); Hebrews 9:14-13:25; the book of Revelation; and many other passages. It adds the Apocrypha. The Sinsiticus was found in a garbage pile in St. Catherine's Monestary in 1844. It omits many words, phrases, clauses, and entire verses. It adds two books, the Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistle of Barnabas. If these manuscripts are the best, they should agree, yet the Sinaiticus differs from the Vaticanus over 3,000 times in the Gospels alone.

Over 600 manuscripts bear witness to Mark 16:9-20 which are part of the Byzantine family of manuscripts.

 

[dcontroversal]

Why can’t you just trust God? That he has conveyed everything he wanted to in the original autographs, and the over 6000 manuscripts handed down, have basically the same message, in the nearly identical words as the autographs.

Again, why do you trust a Bible with so many added parts? Like the longer ending of Mark 16, for example. Different, theology than the rest of Mark, including words that are not found in the rest of Mark and a high Christology which Mark never uses elsewhere.

You trust a version, which certainly is useable for correction, instruction and rebuking! But by what authority do you claim they KJV to be the perfect version? Because when compared even with Stephanus, there quite simply are mistakes, let alone the earlier manuscripts which are much closer to the original autographs than the corrupt versions which existed at the time the KJV was translated.

So, your “authority” is because a homosexual Anglican King, who believed in the Divine Right of Kings, pulled together a translation committee, who got it mostly right, given the knowledge and the manuscripts that were available, but still so many mistakes? Why do you trust a homosexual Anglican King?

God is truly the final authority on all things, and we are just his imperfect followers, trusting the inspiration of God, in spite of translations, mistakes and other things. There is no perfect, final authority on this earth, except God. Too bad you worship a Bible instead of God. And that you are so terrified of losing your faith if it turns out the KJV is not the perfect authority. Biblioidolatry is a very sad thing.

My trust has always been in God, and that is why I have the freedom to learn and grow, including using different Bible versions. That means I have been able to change my theology, as I read the Bible, and the Holy Spirit shows me new things, or clarifies things, including the way I formerly read it.

Sorry you are so afraid that you have to defend a Bible translation, instead of trusting God.

AMEN....I started to mention the addition to Mark when it was thrown out as evidence in a "tongues" thread and emphatically stated that if one does not have the two of the three signs mentioned that they are not saved and do not possess the spirit, but knew that this particular person would reject it and then argue so I just left it.....funny thing.....they ALL leave off the drinking any deadly thing.....I have asked them how many times have they had a cup of bleach or a glass of acid but the answer is always they same........we speak in tongues and it proves we are saved.........I am fairly confident that JESUS understand my English just fine.......