BELIEFS ABOUT THE KJV

  • 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.
chess-player

chess-player

Active member
#1
Jul 14, 2022
205
102
28
#1
I would like to know your thoughts about the KJV in relation to what is being said below (I did not write this, unfortunately, I lost the link). šŸ˜•

1661103652248.png

Here are the SIX common misconceptions or false beliefs about the King James Version (KJV)

1) The KJV was the first English translation of the Bible. The KJV was not the first, but the tenth English translation of the Bible.

1. Wycliffe's Bible (1388)
2. Tyndale's Bible (1516)
3. Coverdale's Bible (1535)
4. Matthew's Bible (1537)
5. Taverner's Bible (1539)
6. The Great Bible (1540)
7. The Geneva Bible (1560)
8. The Bishop's Bible (1568)
9. The Douay-Rheims Version (1609)
10. The King James Version (1611)

2) The KJV was authorized by God.

The belief that the KJV was authorized by God to be translated is just an assumption with no biblical basis. The KJV was called the ā€œAuthorized Version (AV)ā€ because its translation was approved and mandated by King James I, and it was appointed to be read in churches. This was stated in the original title page of the KJV:

THE HOLY BIBLE
Containing the Old and New Testaments
Translated out of the Original Tongues
And with the Former Translations
Diligently Compared and Revised

BY HIS MAJESTY'S SPECIAL COMMAND APPOINTED TO BE READ IN CHURCHES

3) The King James is always true to the literal words of the Hebrew and Greek texts.

While the King James Version is generally a very literal translation, it is not always literal in all of its renderings. In Luke 20:16 and Romans 3:4, the KJV paraphrased the Greek "me genoito" ("may it never be") into "God forbid". And in Matthew 27:44 the Greek "oneididzon auton"("they reviled him") was paraphrased by the KJV into "cast the same in his teeth".

4. The KJV is a perfect translation.

There is no such thing as a perfect translation. The only perfect texts of the Bible were the texts that came from the hands of the Biblical writers written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Perfect translation is not possible because of the nature of language. Receptor languages, such as English, canā€™t always reflect perfectly the concepts or meanings of the Greek and Hebrew words. And in some cases the meaning of Hebrew and Greek words are difficult to decipher.

Translations are just approximations to the original text. The goal of each translation is to be closer as much as possible to the message of the original text, thatā€™s why translations are continually revised to be more accurate. The King James Bible was not exempt from revisions. There were four major revisions of the KJV (1629, 1638, 1762, 1769) and more than twenty minor revisions. The changes in these revisions are due to not only printing errors or spelling standardization, but also to textual or translation errors.

5) The KJV is a better translation than the modern versions.

The truth is modern versions are much better than the KJV. The KJV is not a readable version compared to many modern versions because of its archaisms and obscure literal renderings. The KJV was based on late and inferior Greek texts while the modern versions are based upon much older and much more reliable Greek texts. The so-called omissions in the NIV and other modern versions is not a conspiracy nor a malicious intent to distort the Bible, but it's due to variation in the Greek manuscripts. There are Greek manuscripts that have those verses and there are also Greek manuscripts that do not have those verses. This happened because of scribal copying errors, alterations, or emendations. Through the science of textual criticism, it is possible to determine with high accuracy which variant is reliable or not.

6) The KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

There are Christians who believe that the KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit in the same manner as the biblical writers. But this is denied by the translators themselves. In the original preface to the King James Version of 1611 the translators admitted that their work was not perfect and not on a par with the inspired authors of Scripture. There were instances where the translators were not absolutely sure of the original reading of the Greek or Hebrew text, and they indicated that in the margin with textual variant notes.

Those who believe that the KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit must use a King James Bible with Apocryphal books because the translators, who were mostly Anglicans, added these books in their original translation. The Apocrypha was a part of the King James Bible for 274 years, until 1885 when the British and Foreign Bible Societies excluded them from the revised version.
 
oyster67

oyster67

Senior Member
#3
May 24, 2014
11,887
8,705
113
#3
chess-player said:
The belief that the KJV was authorized by God to be translated is just an assumption with no biblical basis. The KJV was called the ā€œAuthorized Version (AV)ā€ because its translation was approved and mandated by King James I, and it was appointed to be read in churches. This was stated in the original title page of the KJV:
Click to expand...
And who pray-tell-me authorized Mister James?

chess-player said:
There are Christians who believe that the KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit in the same manner as the biblical writers. But this is denied by the translators themselves. In the original preface to the King James Version of 1611 the translators admitted that their work was not perfect and not on a par with the inspired authors of Scripture. There were instances where the translators were not absolutely sure of the original reading of the Greek or Hebrew text, and they indicated that in the margin with textual variant notes.
Click to expand...
This in no way indicates that they were not aided by the Hoy Spirit. We are still aided by the HS every time we read it. God does not sleep or slumber. Neither does His Spirit.

The KJV is sufficient to be used by God to speak to me. (y)
 
chess-player

chess-player

Active member
#5
Jul 14, 2022
205
102
28
#5
oyster67 said:
And who pray-tell-me authorized Mister James?


The KJV is sufficient to be used by God to speak to me. (y)

If you like the KJ, by all means, use it. God speaks in diverse ways, but He doesn't speak old English to the modern believer.
Click to expand...
 
J

John146

Senior Member
#8
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
#8
chess-player said:
I would like to know your thoughts about the KJV in relation to what is being said below (I did not write this, unfortunately, I lost the link). šŸ˜•

View attachment 242653

Here are the SIX common misconceptions or false beliefs about the King James Version (KJV)

1) The KJV was the first English translation of the Bible. The KJV was not the first, but the tenth English translation of the Bible.

1. Wycliffe's Bible (1388)
2. Tyndale's Bible (1516)
3. Coverdale's Bible (1535)
4. Matthew's Bible (1537)
5. Taverner's Bible (1539)
6. The Great Bible (1540)
7. The Geneva Bible (1560)
8. The Bishop's Bible (1568)
9. The Douay-Rheims Version (1609)
10. The King James Version (1611)

2) The KJV was authorized by God.

The belief that the KJV was authorized by God to be translated is just an assumption with no biblical basis. The KJV was called the ā€œAuthorized Version (AV)ā€ because its translation was approved and mandated by King James I, and it was appointed to be read in churches. This was stated in the original title page of the KJV:

THE HOLY BIBLE
Containing the Old and New Testaments
Translated out of the Original Tongues
And with the Former Translations
Diligently Compared and Revised

BY HIS MAJESTY'S SPECIAL COMMAND APPOINTED TO BE READ IN CHURCHES

3) The King James is always true to the literal words of the Hebrew and Greek texts.

While the King James Version is generally a very literal translation, it is not always literal in all of its renderings. In Luke 20:16 and Romans 3:4, the KJV paraphrased the Greek "me genoito" ("may it never be") into "God forbid". And in Matthew 27:44 the Greek "oneididzon auton"("they reviled him") was paraphrased by the KJV into "cast the same in his teeth".

4. The KJV is a perfect translation.

There is no such thing as a perfect translation. The only perfect texts of the Bible were the texts that came from the hands of the Biblical writers written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Perfect translation is not possible because of the nature of language. Receptor languages, such as English, canā€™t always reflect perfectly the concepts or meanings of the Greek and Hebrew words. And in some cases the meaning of Hebrew and Greek words are difficult to decipher.

Translations are just approximations to the original text. The goal of each translation is to be closer as much as possible to the message of the original text, thatā€™s why translations are continually revised to be more accurate. The King James Bible was not exempt from revisions. There were four major revisions of the KJV (1629, 1638, 1762, 1769) and more than twenty minor revisions. The changes in these revisions are due to not only printing errors or spelling standardization, but also to textual or translation errors.

5) The KJV is a better translation than the modern versions.

The truth is modern versions are much better than the KJV. The KJV is not a readable version compared to many modern versions because of its archaisms and obscure literal renderings. The KJV was based on late and inferior Greek texts while the modern versions are based upon much older and much more reliable Greek texts. The so-called omissions in the NIV and other modern versions is not a conspiracy nor a malicious intent to distort the Bible, but it's due to variation in the Greek manuscripts. There are Greek manuscripts that have those verses and there are also Greek manuscripts that do not have those verses. This happened because of scribal copying errors, alterations, or emendations. Through the science of textual criticism, it is possible to determine with high accuracy which variant is reliable or not.

6) The KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

There are Christians who believe that the KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit in the same manner as the biblical writers. But this is denied by the translators themselves. In the original preface to the King James Version of 1611 the translators admitted that their work was not perfect and not on a par with the inspired authors of Scripture. There were instances where the translators were not absolutely sure of the original reading of the Greek or Hebrew text, and they indicated that in the margin with textual variant notes.

Those who believe that the KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit must use a King James Bible with Apocryphal books because the translators, who were mostly Anglicans, added these books in their original translation. The Apocrypha was a part of the King James Bible for 274 years, until 1885 when the British and Foreign Bible Societies excluded them from the revised version.
Click to expand...
1. Doesn't matter
2. Opinion only
3. Doesn't matter, only concerned about the exact English words
4. Disagree
5. Superior yes, Satan has always tried to pervert the words of God
6. Doesn't matter, words are inspired not people...Apocrypha was never part of the KJV, just an insert that was later removed.
 
oyster67

oyster67

Senior Member
#9
May 24, 2014
11,887
8,705
113
#9
"He doesn't speak old English to the modern believer."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



- He does to me! :giggle:

.
 
R

Runningman

Banned
#10
Mar 4, 2020
8,614
3,691
113
#10
chess-player said:
4. The KJV is a perfect translation.

There is no such thing as a perfect translation. The only perfect texts of the Bible were the texts that came from the hands of the Biblical writers written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Perfect translation is not possible because of the nature of language. Receptor languages, such as English, canā€™t always reflect perfectly the concepts or meanings of the Greek and Hebrew words. And in some cases the meaning of Hebrew and Greek words are difficult to decipher.

Translations are just approximations to the original text. The goal of each translation is to be closer as much as possible to the message of the original text, thatā€™s why translations are continually revised to be more accurate. The King James Bible was not exempt from revisions. There were four major revisions of the KJV (1629, 1638, 1762, 1769) and more than twenty minor revisions. The changes in these revisions are due to not only printing errors or spelling standardization, but also to textual or translation errors.

5) The KJV is a better translation than the modern versions.

The truth is modern versions are much better than the KJV. The KJV is not a readable version compared to many modern versions because of its archaisms and obscure literal renderings. The KJV was based on late and inferior Greek texts while the modern versions are based upon much older and much more reliable Greek texts. The so-called omissions in the NIV and other modern versions is not a conspiracy nor a malicious intent to distort the Bible, but it's due to variation in the Greek manuscripts. There are Greek manuscripts that have those verses and there are also Greek manuscripts that do not have those verses. This happened because of scribal copying errors, alterations, or emendations. Through the science of textual criticism, it is possible to determine with high accuracy which variant is reliable or not.
Click to expand...
It seems like on these two points it would apply to all other Bible versions and language translations that arenā€™t the original manuscripts. In translating a language, sometimes they just use their opinions to translate something. How can we guarantee any translation is 100% accurate?
 
J

John146

Senior Member
#11
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
#11
chess-player said:
I would like to know your thoughts about the KJV in relation to what is being said below (I did not write this, unfortunately, I lost the link). šŸ˜•

View attachment 242653

Here are the SIX common misconceptions or false beliefs about the King James Version (KJV)

1) The KJV was the first English translation of the Bible. The KJV was not the first, but the tenth English translation of the Bible.

1. Wycliffe's Bible (1388)
2. Tyndale's Bible (1516)
3. Coverdale's Bible (1535)
4. Matthew's Bible (1537)
5. Taverner's Bible (1539)
6. The Great Bible (1540)
7. The Geneva Bible (1560)
8. The Bishop's Bible (1568)
9. The Douay-Rheims Version (1609)
10. The King James Version (1611)

2) The KJV was authorized by God.

The belief that the KJV was authorized by God to be translated is just an assumption with no biblical basis. The KJV was called the ā€œAuthorized Version (AV)ā€ because its translation was approved and mandated by King James I, and it was appointed to be read in churches. This was stated in the original title page of the KJV:

THE HOLY BIBLE
Containing the Old and New Testaments
Translated out of the Original Tongues
And with the Former Translations
Diligently Compared and Revised

BY HIS MAJESTY'S SPECIAL COMMAND APPOINTED TO BE READ IN CHURCHES

3) The King James is always true to the literal words of the Hebrew and Greek texts.

While the King James Version is generally a very literal translation, it is not always literal in all of its renderings. In Luke 20:16 and Romans 3:4, the KJV paraphrased the Greek "me genoito" ("may it never be") into "God forbid". And in Matthew 27:44 the Greek "oneididzon auton"("they reviled him") was paraphrased by the KJV into "cast the same in his teeth".

4. The KJV is a perfect translation.

There is no such thing as a perfect translation. The only perfect texts of the Bible were the texts that came from the hands of the Biblical writers written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Perfect translation is not possible because of the nature of language. Receptor languages, such as English, canā€™t always reflect perfectly the concepts or meanings of the Greek and Hebrew words. And in some cases the meaning of Hebrew and Greek words are difficult to decipher.

Translations are just approximations to the original text. The goal of each translation is to be closer as much as possible to the message of the original text, thatā€™s why translations are continually revised to be more accurate. The King James Bible was not exempt from revisions. There were four major revisions of the KJV (1629, 1638, 1762, 1769) and more than twenty minor revisions. The changes in these revisions are due to not only printing errors or spelling standardization, but also to textual or translation errors.

5) The KJV is a better translation than the modern versions.

The truth is modern versions are much better than the KJV. The KJV is not a readable version compared to many modern versions because of its archaisms and obscure literal renderings. The KJV was based on late and inferior Greek texts while the modern versions are based upon much older and much more reliable Greek texts. The so-called omissions in the NIV and other modern versions is not a conspiracy nor a malicious intent to distort the Bible, but it's due to variation in the Greek manuscripts. There are Greek manuscripts that have those verses and there are also Greek manuscripts that do not have those verses. This happened because of scribal copying errors, alterations, or emendations. Through the science of textual criticism, it is possible to determine with high accuracy which variant is reliable or not.

6) The KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

There are Christians who believe that the KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit in the same manner as the biblical writers. But this is denied by the translators themselves. In the original preface to the King James Version of 1611 the translators admitted that their work was not perfect and not on a par with the inspired authors of Scripture. There were instances where the translators were not absolutely sure of the original reading of the Greek or Hebrew text, and they indicated that in the margin with textual variant notes.

Those who believe that the KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit must use a King James Bible with Apocryphal books because the translators, who were mostly Anglicans, added these books in their original translation. The Apocrypha was a part of the King James Bible for 274 years, until 1885 when the British and Foreign Bible Societies excluded them from the revised version.
Click to expand...
Btw, a translation can be inspired by God. There are several examples throughout scripture.
 
Beckie

Beckie

Well-known member
#12
Feb 15, 2022
2,516
939
113
#12
Isaiah 55:11

1599 Geneva Bible

11 So shall my word be, that goeth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I will, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

I like the KJ just cause i grew up with it. Although Daddy has been gone about 25 years some times i still can hear his voice when reading . :) No matter the publisher, it is paper, ink print and binding. And now days electronic . It is a translation there for it can not be exact or perfect. Nor do i believe the paper and binding are holy.
I have read the living and Amplified. Dont much care for the newer KJ versions .I believe they have been influenced too heavily by dispensationalism .
Isaiah 55:11 is important to me. When God's Word is printed on the Hallmark card it is still His Word. If and when His Word are spoken they are HIs Words.

I am thankful for the blessings we have today very glad i dont have to learn Greek or Hebrew.. English is hard enough.
 
J

John146

Senior Member
#13
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
#13
Beckie said:
It is a translation there for it can not be exact or perfect.
Click to expand...
There are numerous examples throughout scripture where the translation was part of the "original." We should never elevate the originals more than God. If God thought he couldn't preserve his word perfectly in any language other than the original, then God would have preserved the original. Moses broke the original commandments. God didn't panic. He simply preserved his word through a copy.
 
chess-player

chess-player

Active member
#14
Jul 14, 2022
205
102
28
#14
John146 said:
Btw, a translation can be inspired by God. There are several examples throughout scripture.
Click to expand...
Impossible. Only the original languages were inspired. As trustworthy as a translation might be, however, it cannot be considered "inspired." No translation is "breathed out by God", a translation is the compilation of biblical books that God has breathed.

I'm not afraid to use several translations and compare them with each other because a good translation needs to be updated from time to time since language changes continuously.
 
CS1

CS1

Well-known member
#15
May 23, 2012
13,067
4,349
113
#15
chess-player said:
I would like to know your thoughts about the KJV in relation to what is being said below (I did not write this, unfortunately, I lost the link). šŸ˜•

View attachment 242653

Here are the SIX common misconceptions or false beliefs about the King James Version (KJV)

1) The KJV was the first English translation of the Bible. The KJV was not the first, but the tenth English translation of the Bible.

1. Wycliffe's Bible (1388)
2. Tyndale's Bible (1516)
3. Coverdale's Bible (1535)
4. Matthew's Bible (1537)
5. Taverner's Bible (1539)
6. The Great Bible (1540)
7. The Geneva Bible (1560)
8. The Bishop's Bible (1568)
9. The Douay-Rheims Version (1609)
10. The King James Version (1611)

2) The KJV was authorized by God.

The belief that the KJV was authorized by God to be translated is just an assumption with no biblical basis. The KJV was called the ā€œAuthorized Version (AV)ā€ because its translation was approved and mandated by King James I, and it was appointed to be read in churches. This was stated in the original title page of the KJV:

THE HOLY BIBLE
Containing the Old and New Testaments
Translated out of the Original Tongues
And with the Former Translations
Diligently Compared and Revised

BY HIS MAJESTY'S SPECIAL COMMAND APPOINTED TO BE READ IN CHURCHES

3) The King James is always true to the literal words of the Hebrew and Greek texts.

While the King James Version is generally a very literal translation, it is not always literal in all of its renderings. In Luke 20:16 and Romans 3:4, the KJV paraphrased the Greek "me genoito" ("may it never be") into "God forbid". And in Matthew 27:44 the Greek "oneididzon auton"("they reviled him") was paraphrased by the KJV into "cast the same in his teeth".

4. The KJV is a perfect translation.

There is no such thing as a perfect translation. The only perfect texts of the Bible were the texts that came from the hands of the Biblical writers written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Perfect translation is not possible because of the nature of language. Receptor languages, such as English, canā€™t always reflect perfectly the concepts or meanings of the Greek and Hebrew words. And in some cases the meaning of Hebrew and Greek words are difficult to decipher.

Translations are just approximations to the original text. The goal of each translation is to be closer as much as possible to the message of the original text, thatā€™s why translations are continually revised to be more accurate. The King James Bible was not exempt from revisions. There were four major revisions of the KJV (1629, 1638, 1762, 1769) and more than twenty minor revisions. The changes in these revisions are due to not only printing errors or spelling standardization, but also to textual or translation errors.

5) The KJV is a better translation than the modern versions.

The truth is modern versions are much better than the KJV. The KJV is not a readable version compared to many modern versions because of its archaisms and obscure literal renderings. The KJV was based on late and inferior Greek texts while the modern versions are based upon much older and much more reliable Greek texts. The so-called omissions in the NIV and other modern versions is not a conspiracy nor a malicious intent to distort the Bible, but it's due to variation in the Greek manuscripts. There are Greek manuscripts that have those verses and there are also Greek manuscripts that do not have those verses. This happened because of scribal copying errors, alterations, or emendations. Through the science of textual criticism, it is possible to determine with high accuracy which variant is reliable or not.

6) The KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

There are Christians who believe that the KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit in the same manner as the biblical writers. But this is denied by the translators themselves. In the original preface to the King James Version of 1611 the translators admitted that their work was not perfect and not on a par with the inspired authors of Scripture. There were instances where the translators were not absolutely sure of the original reading of the Greek or Hebrew text, and they indicated that in the margin with textual variant notes.

Those who believe that the KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit must use a King James Bible with Apocryphal books because the translators, who were mostly Anglicans, added these books in their original translation. The Apocrypha was a part of the King James Bible for 274 years, until 1885 when the British and Foreign Bible Societies excluded them from the revised version.
Click to expand...
love the KJV and the NKJV and the NIV pre 1984 and the NLT and the NASB
 
J

John146

Senior Member
#16
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
#16
chess-player said:
Impossible. Only the original languages were inspired. As trustworthy as a translation might be, however, it cannot be considered "inspired." No translation is "breathed out by God", a translation is the compilation of biblical books that God has breathed.

I'm not afraid to use several translations and compare them with each other because a good translation needs to be updated from time to time since language changes continuously.
Click to expand...
What language was the OT written?
 
J

John146

Senior Member
#17
Jan 13, 2016
17,130
3,689
113
#17
chess-player said:
I'm not afraid to use several translations and compare them with each other because a good translation needs to be updated from time to time since language changes continuously.
Click to expand...
This makes you the final authority. I don't want that responsibility. I believe every single word of my KJV.
 
HealthAndHappiness

HealthAndHappiness

Well-known member
#19
Jul 7, 2022
10,300
4,349
113
Almost Heaven West Virginia
#19
oyster67 said:
"He doesn't speak old English to the modern believer."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



- He does to me!:giggle:

.
Click to expand...
My friend oyster,

There are so many problems with the first post, I don't know where to begin. It's really not worth my time to correct and debate this man. His pastor probably passed along all of that nonsense just as he is doing with the Word of God in our language. I give those posting here benefits of the doubt in God's Word that they are simply repeating that which their pastors told them. I did that too until I did some digging for myself.

I agree with you that our Lord speaks to me through our Bible as he does you. It's not difficult in 98% after getting saved and reading it cover to cover a time or two.
I will look up a conference of a couple preachers discussing this subject for your edification. Please feel free to ask me if you would like any faith building videos or articles on this subject. I hate to see believers faith or unbelievers potential faith to be undermined. Here you go.

https://www.kjv1611only.com/video/12other/Why_Were_KJV_Only.mp4
 
Nehemiah6

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
#20
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,777
113
#20
chess-player said:
Here are the SIX common misconceptions or false beliefs about the King James Version (KJV)
Click to expand...

SOME OF THESE SO-CALLED "BELIEFS" ARE COMPLETELY FALSE, BUT OTHERS ARE TRUE.

NO ONE BELIEVE THIS NONSENSE
1) The KJV was the first English translation of the Bible.

ONE COULD SAY "BLESSED BY GOD", SO NO ONE BELIEVES THIS NONSENSE
2) The KJV was authorized by God.

THIS IS TRUE AND PROVABLE SINCE IT IS A WORD-FOR-WORD TRANSLATION
3) The King James is always true to the literal words of the Hebrew and Greek texts.

ONE COULD SAY "ALMOST" PERFECT SINCE IT CAN BE FURTHER IMPROVED
4. The KJV is a perfect translation.

THIS IS ABSOLULTELY TRUE SINCE ALL MODERN VERSION ARE CORRUPT
5) The KJV is a better translation than the modern versions.

"GUIDED AND LED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT" WOULD BE MORE ACCURATE
6) The KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.