KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES

[trofimus]

i think it would be cool to discuss some of the significant changes. Which do you feel is the most significant? Same question to all. I'm on iPhone so please forgive typos.

To me, a significant change can be:

1) a change of persons (you vs they)
2) a change of tenses (he said vs he says)
3) opposites (poured it vs poured it not)
4) different theological implication (he is Christ vs he is the Christ).

---

By "significant" I mean significant regarding some theoretical textual perfection.

Of course, I do not say that these changes are significant in the meaning that such Bible will not lead to Christianity. Such small errors will get lost in the overall context.

 

[Dino246]

She does not understand that there can be only one Bible that can be considered the pure, holy word of God since they all contain different words and different truths. If one of them is the true word of God, that would make all others false Bibles. There is no other choice. One or none.

Why do you keep repeating this assertion and not deal with my refutation of it? Gird thyself up like a man! Let's hear your response!

Step up, John146. Let's hear your response. Stop being cowardly. Either give a reasoned response, or stop repeating your silliness.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

You gotta love Blackadder.

Or is it "Ye musteth loveth blackadderith?

Did you ever watch the Vicar of Dibley?
The one where Geraldine had to step in when Alice read from the KJV when they were on songs of praise?

Awe! RIP Emma Chambers


It's not the best quality but is this the one?

[video=youtube;GJpoOlCbBrw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJpoOlCbBrw[/video]

 

[Dino246]

i think it would be cool to discuss some of the significant changes. Which do you feel is the most significant? Same question to all. I'm on iPhone so please forgive typos.

2 T 2:14 Read our Lord Jesus Christ instead of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I pick this one because one of the other KJV-o's was making an issue about a similar difference between two translations. Many of the criticisms made by KJV-o's centre around such things as a single letter or word, when the overall meaning is unchanged to any impartial reader.

It seems to me that any time a KJV-o addresses a minor difference, it's a major issue, but any time someone points out a similar difference within the KJV or between KJV editions, it's a minor or insignificant issue and is glossed over. The root problem (to me) is the double standard, not the issue in question. There is almost always an excuse made to justify their indignation, instead of a conciliatory recognition that minor differences really aren't a big deal.

 

[KJV1611]

2 T 2:14 Read our Lord Jesus Christ instead of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I pick this one because one of the other KJV-o's was making an issue about a similar difference between two translations. Many of the criticisms made by KJV-o's centre around such things as a single letter or word, when the overall meaning is unchanged to any impartial reader.

It seems to me that any time a KJV-o addresses a minor difference, it's a major issue, but any time someone points out a similar difference within the KJV or between KJV editions, it's a minor or insignificant issue and is glossed over. The root problem (to me) is the double standard, not the issue in question. There is almost always an excuse made to justify their indignation, instead of a conciliatory recognition that minor differences really aren't a big deal.

I see what you mean. I don't get caught up in the little things like that, as long as it means the same thing then I'm good with it. The KJV translator changed and added hundreds of words.

 

[MarcR]

I believe the KJV is the God inspired inerrant word of God for the English language. I believe God directed the translators to write every single word exactly the way God wanted it written. Yes I do believe God is capable of doing this.

I believe that God is capable of doing this too; but I don't believe that He did.

There are many errors in the KJV [which don't keep me from using it as my primary Bible].

Luke 1:1-3

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are fulfilled (or accomplished) among us,

The Greek word used is πεπληροφορημένον (accomplished, fulfilled, or completed) not πἐρίστευένων (believed).

While many accounts were published, few were accurate and undistorted.

2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and servants of the Word;

servants (ὑπηρέται ) literally under-rowers.) Ones under the command of another.
the Word a reference to the LORD.

These could be the apostles or any other of His regular followers such as the seventy of Luke chapter 10.

3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
3 It seemed good to me also, having accurately followed after all things from above, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

having NOT having had This is the perfect active participle NOT the pluperfect!
diligently (or accurately) NOT perfect this is the adverb ἀκριβῶς NOT the adjective τέλειον.
pursued (or followed) NOT understanding this is the verb παρηκολυθηκότι NOT the noun συνέσει.
all things NOT of all things this is the dative NOT the genitive case.
above NOT the very first this is ἄνωθεν not ἀρχῆ.

The accuracy of most of this translation demonstrates that the translators had better scholarship than one would deduce from their rendering of this verse. I believe that this is an example of allowing one’s theology to drive translation. One should rather translate the text as strictly as possible; and allow the unaltered text to drive one’s theology.

Theophilus Friend of God. There is some scholarly disagreement whether the name is intended to apply to all believers, or to an individual. In my opinion the title ‘most excellent’ suggests an individual; but, the content is certainly applicable to and pertinent to all believers

 

[KJV1611]

I believe that God is capable of doing this too; but I don't believe that He did.

There are many errors in the KJV [which don't keep me from using it as my primary Bible].

Luke 1:1-3

1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are fulfilled (or accomplished) among us,

The Greek word used is πεπληροφορημένον (accomplished, fulfilled, or completed) not πἐρίστευένων (believed).

While many accounts were published, few were accurate and undistorted.

2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and servants of the Word;

servants (ὑπηρέται ) literally under-rowers.) Ones under the command of another.
the Word a reference to the LORD.

These could be the apostles or any other of His regular followers such as the seventy of Luke chapter 10.

3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
3 It seemed good to me also, having accurately followed after all things from above, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

having NOT having had This is the perfect active participle NOT the pluperfect!
diligently (or accurately) NOT perfect this is the adverb ἀκριβῶς NOT the adjective τέλειον.
pursued (or followed) NOT understanding this is the verb παρηκολυθηκότι NOT the noun συνέσει.
all things NOT of all things this is the dative NOT the genitive case.
above NOT the very first this is ἄνωθεν not ἀρχῆ.

The accuracy of most of this translation demonstrates that the translators had better scholarship than one would deduce from their rendering of this verse. I believe that this is an example of allowing one’s theology to drive translation. One should rather translate the text as strictly as possible; and allow the unaltered text to drive one’s theology.

Theophilus Friend of God. There is some scholarly disagreement whether the name is intended to apply to all believers, or to an individual. In my opinion the title ‘most excellent’ suggests an individual; but, the content is certainly applicable to and pertinent to all believers

Thank you for your reply MacR.

See your statement in red above. Were those accounts inaccurate prophecies or beliefs of what was happening at that time?

Hopefully this question makes sense because Luke is trying to give an accurate account, in chronological order, of the STORIES that had been passed around about Jesus.

Where do you see fulfilled prophecies in any of those verses? Thanks.

 

[preston39]

I see what you mean. I don't get caught up in the little things like that, as long as it means the same thing then I'm good with it. The KJV translator changed and added hundreds of words.

K...,

If it doesn't mean any difference...then why change it...there is usually ... an ulterior motive,most often hidden under the guise of...change to make it more simple.

How about the one where language is changed from;....only begotten son.....to.....His son....and many others.

We must be leery with any changes in G-d's words...especially in current era....with new age religion so intrusive into scriptures........... true meaning.

 

[KJV1611]

K...,

If it doesn't mean any difference...then why change it...there is usually ... an ulterior motive,most often hidden under the guise of...change to make it more simple.

How about the one where language is changed from;....only begotten son.....to.....His son....and many others.

We must be leery with any changes in G-d's words...especially in current era....with new age religion so intrusive into scriptures........... true meaning.

The changes do make a difference, they bring clairty to otherwise obscure verses.

Edit: I do agree that changes are to be supect seeings how the devil likes to decieve, but that's where we have to examine the changes and see if they line up with the character of God.

 

[Chester]

[h=1]So, to those of you who believe the KJV text is the inspired word of God rather than the original manuscripts, I have two questions:[/h]
(1) Can you give me a verse from Scripture that says that the KJV is the inspired word of God rather than the actual words given to the writers?

(2) What about this KJV verse:

And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not Jonah 3:10 KJV

If the actual KJV words chosen are inspired and the very best possible word choice - then this verse literally says that God was planning to do "evil". If you believe the word choice of the KJV was inspired, then don't tell me that this word "evil" means something other than "evil".

And thus you have God planning to do evil - . . . really?
​

 

[KJV1611]

So, to those of you who believe the KJV text is the inspired word of God rather than the original manuscripts, I have two questions:


(1) Can you give me a verse from Scripture that says that the KJV is the inspired word of God rather than the actual words given to the writers?

(2) What about this KJV verse:

And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not Jonah 3:10 KJV

If the actual KJV words chosen are inspired and the very best possible word choice - then this verse literally says that God was planning to do "evil". If you believe the word choice of the KJV was inspired, then don't tell me that this word "evil" means something other than "evil".

And thus you have God planning to do evil - . . . really?
​

1) God promised to preserve his word forever, it exists somewhere.
2) Considering God sends lying spirits and prophets to decieve people who reject his word, I would say God intended to do evil to the Ninevites.

 

[Joseppi]

I believe that God is capable of doing this too; but I don't believe that He did.

So, the opinion of man is of no value.
The opinion of the translators didn’t matter either.

What in truth did happen?
How did God do what is impossible for man to do?
What does faith in Jesus say?

Jesus didn’t say he’d find good willed men to do the works of God.
Jesus didn’t say men of great scholarship, sincerity, diligence and humility would publish the written word of God.

Jesus said he would send us the Comforter.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
John 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
John 16:8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
John 16:9 Of sin, because they believe not on me;
John 16:10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
John 16:11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.uote]John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
John 15:27 And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.

John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
John 15:27 And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.

Do you see that the publishing of the scriptures is the work of the Holy Ghost.
It was God that authorized and determined all things concerning his scriptures, not man.
Translators would've failed to publish anything of God if left
to them. God didn’t leave anything for man to do for him, but to believe on Jesus Christ.
If God hasn’t published his Holy Bible then, it’s the same as God said about the temple of God, that, If God doesn’t build the temple, they labor in vain that build it.

Jesus when he left the temple of the Jews left it desolate of God.
All that former labor condemned.

Will unbelieving men find fault with God’s Holy Bible?
Yes they will find fault.
But they are blind and so their judgments are evil.

 

[trofimus]

1) God promised to preserve his word forever, it exists somewhere.
2) Considering God sends lying spirits and prophets to decieve people who reject his word, I would say God intended to do evil to the Ninevites.

1) No, He promised to preserve his people for ever

 

[KJV1611]

1) No, He promised to preserve his people for ever

It depends on which bible you read.

 

[KJV1611]

Context for God sending lying spirits.

1 Kings 22:20-23 King James Version (KJV)

20 And the Lord said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner.
21 And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the Lord, and said, I will persuade him.
22 And the Lord said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.
23 Now therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee.

 

[trofimus]

It depends on which bible you read.

What do you think is more important?

a) A theoretical physical preservation of Scriptures in a perfect shape "somewhere", even if not used or known
b) A preservation of his holy people, i.e. church?

 

[preston39]

The changes do make a difference, they bring clairty to otherwise obscure verses.

Edit: I do agree that changes are to be supect seeings how the devil likes to decieve, but that's where we have to examine the changes and see if they line up with the character of God.

K...,

With our hearts right with G-d and a committed approach to scriptures...G-d will make sure we have a proper under standing of His intent.

I haven't seen it fail yet.

I follow this approach in studies of The Bible;

Take the Bible literally where ever possible.....if typical, figurative or symbolic language is used ....look for a literal interpretation..... it intends to convey.
Look for scriptures which interpret scriptures.
Do not spiritualize The Bible.

Remember..."some things are reserved for our Father's knowledge ...only"...

It works for me.

 

[Chester]

1) God promised to preserve his word forever, it exists somewhere.
2) Considering God sends lying spirits and prophets to decieve people who reject his word, I would say God intended to do evil to the Ninevites.

#1) I asked for a verse that the KJV is the inspired word of God rather than the actual words given to the writers of Scripture. You did not answer my question, nor did you give me a verse. There is no verse that says that!
#2) God sending lying prophets to deceive people who reject his word is one thing (that is not "evil" if God does it), but to say that God intended to do "evil" is making a statement about the character of God. And don't try to change the meaning of the word "evil" if the KJV word choice in Jonah 3:10 is inspired.

(See posts #230,231)

 

[Joseppi]

So, to those of you who believe the KJV text is the inspired word of God rather than the original manuscripts, I have two questions:


(1) Can you give me a verse from Scripture that says that the KJV is the inspired word of God rather than the actual words given to the writers?

(2) What about this KJV verse:

And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not Jonah 3:10 KJV

If the actual KJV words chosen are inspired and the very best possible word choice - then this verse literally says that God was planning to do "evil". If you believe the word choice of the KJV was inspired, then don't tell me that this word "evil" means something other than "evil".

And thus you have God planning to do evil - . . . really?
​

What is evil?
The scripture says, Ye thought evil against me, but God meant it unto good.
I think you know that evil is not as simple as you’d like it to be for your arguments sake.

You say that you require a verse for you to believe there is only one Holy Bible.
Do you have a verse for what you believe about the bibles you trust?

Why don’t you go look and see all that the scriptures teach about truth?
Do you follow the leading of the Holy Ghost?
Do yo believe the Holy Ghost will lead you into all truth?

Its easy to doubt and judge others as seems right to you.
But where do you get truth?
And what told you where to look for truth?

I was given the Authorized Bible by the Holy Ghost to read and believe.
And that is what I did.
Now you say you have found fault with the Authorized Version.
Where is your word of God unto me to be found?

 

[John146]

#1) I asked for a verse that the KJV is the inspired word of God rather than the actual words given to the writers of Scripture. You did not answer my question, nor did you give me a verse. There is no verse that says that!
#2) God sending lying prophets to deceive people who reject his word is one thing (that is not "evil" if God does it), but to say that God intended to do "evil" is making a statement about the character of God. And don't try to change the meaning of the word "evil" if the KJV word choice in Jonah 3:10 is inspired.



(See posts #230,231)

Evil, as defined by Scripture is the opposite of good. The first mention tells us of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

That being said, God had pronounced destruction upon Nineveh. Nineveh repented of their evil ways and God repented of the evil He said He would do unto them. God did not pronounce good unto Nineveh, but evil. Good would be a blessing. Evil would be destruction, the opposite of good.