KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES
- Thread starter KingJamesVersionBibleOnly
- 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.
No I'm not a JW. Maybe take a look at Romans 8:9 for more info on who indwells the believer. What do you think, does the Spirit of God, the Holy Spirit or the Spirit of Christ dwell in the believer?
[h=1]Romans 8:9 King James Version (KJV)[/h][FONT="]9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.[/FONT]
I think he meant that the KJV translators used Greek (original language) and did not translate from Latin.
He did not mean that this Greek was "original" in the meaning of being totally the same as autographs.
IMHO.
1. My argument was based on KJV translators actually using manuscripts whereas NIV used w&h. 2. You should have noticed I wasn't KJV only 3. You have a bad attitude and are ignorant of my position before you quoted me. I love the KJER the most where Nestle Aland was compared, in fact the only version modernly that was.
Who has the "attitude" ? I say it's the KJV Only fraternity that won't drop the attacks.
Some of us are fed up to the back teeth of hearing these accusations. It's a pointless diversion to keep slagging off W&H.
And the alleged "missing verses" argument. Old. tired. untrue. Dismissed. Had enough of it. None of this is of any benefit to The Body of Christ. Language changes, it's a fact of life. If people can't accept it and move on that's their right. It isn't their right to keep creating such a fuss over something so rudimentary as updated English.
Okay, why do people keep saying King James only just cause I love the kjv? I've mentioned plenty that I love NIV and I am currently going through the Nkjv.
But you still had to throw in the fable about "missing verses" and run down W&H.
I don't think there is anything wrong with people preferring the KJV. I don't think it should be done away with. It's a rich heritage to have several good translations. I'm just not going to accept that a version like The NIV is "corrupt"
It's not really fable if you study. Some of the divinity of Christ is missing in modern verses. I've study this verse by verse. Chick publications puts out good books about it. You should never throw out the KJV.
Bible is a library of books.
The simple fact that some verse is different does not mean that the Bible as a whole is missing "the divinity of Christ".
---
The KJV has "the only begotten son" instead of "the only begotten God" in J 1:18. Does that make the KJV being inferior regarding Christ´ divinity?
Not letting you off the hook that easy. You said W&H altered the Greek. You made this accusation, now its up to you show where and how they altered it. You made the accusation, you back it up.
With respect it is pretty clear that it is not just a case of "I love the kjv"...
You are denigrating other translations - and not from a position of knowledge but ignorance.
Westcott and Hort got plenty of criticism when it was first published but the discovery of so many very early manuscripts since has more than vindicated nearly all their textual decisions.
As for your "criticism" of newer translations "missing" certain verses etc is vindicated by these much older MSS than anyone 400 hundred years ago had access to because they do not contain those verses either!
If you really investigate the process behind the creation of the textus receptus as well as the translation of the KJV then you will discover why! Interestingly enough, those six manuscripts I mentioned, in what they cover of the NT also often demonstrate much the same omissions....
Reading different translations helps. And example is KJV Gen 2:8 I looked up the word eastward once and it says in antiquity, before time. Clearly denoting past tense. The NIV unlike the KJV puts in the word God HAD planted a garden leading you to understand that. Also the KJV calls the Holy Spirit a ghost which I find rather disconcerting.
Maybe that's the NIV - the Never Intended Version...
Disclaimer: absolutely posted in jest!
I have heard the histories about different translations and they're interesting, agnostics blah blah. Wonder how many of the people on the site are spending as much time reading any version as they are arguing about it. What did God say to d
h that's right, read it.
h that's right, read it.
That version is unauthorized. Of course, no one can prove who authorizes the authorizing of the various versions and translations of the written word of God. You could probably pick up a used copy of the Queen James version at Amazon.
It gives me Catholic flashbacks
I associate "holy ghost' with 'ever virgin' 'Queen of heaven' saints, statues, priests, nuns.
We've studied that right here in THIS thread. And it's a false accusation. If anything it was the KJVO advocates that had the problem with the divinity of Christ. You would be about the 4th or 5th person that has tried to accuse the NIV in THIS thread alone of downgrading Jesus. It's a falsehood.
K....,
See post 1982;
He was a sinner.... as a thief.
He knew Christ...strongly suggesting a previous following and study of scripture content.
He was confident of Christ power/position.
He exhibited faith......only a believer would.
His actions acknowledged that he was wrong and appealed for forgiveness....."remember me when"....