My Thoughts on the KJV

Sure they don't!

Learn Jacobean English,I guess.

 

Actually, Gail Riplinger argues in her 1998 book "The Language of the King James Bible" that you don't need a dictionary at all -- the KJB "contains a Built-in Dictionary" (Introduction, p. xvi) that explains all its' diffcult words (notice she does not deny that there are such).

I just recently acquired her second 'book' very inexpensively at a secondhand store and am just beginning to look at it. Any one read it? Should I start a new thread about it?

 

Riplinger's second book about the Bible translation issue printed in 1994 by Hearthstone Publishing was entitled: Which Bible is God's Word: Answers to Common Questions Concerning Modern Versions and Translations. This book may have first been the text taken from her appearance on radio programs. Later Riplinger did print a revised edition of this book.

The Language of the King James Bible [printed in 1998] would be her third book on this topic. I have a copy of it, and I have read it.

 

Sure why not?

I remember when her books came out. Fundamentalists around here became angry when they found the author of the book is a woman.

But, they soon forgot that, and embraced her "work" and preachers harped on it for years and used her "studies" as proof the KJB is the only true Word of God.

Their nonsense never ceases to amaze me.

I actually had a deacon stand in the pulpit while we were gone for a weekend and tell the folks "I don't care what the preacher says, if you use anything other than the KJB, you are going to hell!"

How sweet to come back and have to take care of that mess.

BTW, I used the KJB then. I preached from it, never about it.

 

It has served the Church well, but there are now far, far better translations to use. To ignore that fact is a disservice to the Gospel.

 

I'm sure you are right. I wrote "second book" based on the information on the back cover "About the Author" on my copy of LotKJB which states after her academic creditials that Riplinger "authored six college textbooks" and that "the seventh textbook, New Age Bible Versions, was an international best seller" and concludes with "this, the eighth textbook".

According to that sequence, I was led to believe that LotKJB followed NABV. While I've not seen her alleged college textbooks, I do have a copy of New Age Bible Versions and I certainly don't consider it a 'textbook'; neither is The Language of the King James Bible a 'textabook'. Thus, I had concluded just two "books". Apparently, the misinformation is not limited to only the pages on the inside.

 

Amen! I totally agree. Besides, the Holy Spirit teaches us. This is why the Bible is foolishness to those who are perishing. It is spiritually discerned.

 

I contend the KJV, with its many revisions, is still the best English translation. I am not a KJVO. If your native language is Swahili, by all means use the Swahili translation. Faith comes by hearing, hearing by the Word of God; how can they hear without a preacher? The Holy Spirit bears witness to The Word.

Dumb questions: What happened to all the lost folks who never spoke English before the 17th century, and the advent of the KJV.

The Geneva Bible(English) predates the KJV. There is evidence the pilgrims had Geneva Bibles at Plymouth Rock, 1620. Is there something defective about the preaching of the Geneva Bible in the Colonies?

Why did the KJV translators not translate the word baptizo?

Will we allow such errors with the superintendence of God?

God does not author confusion or error.

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Peace,

Bro. James

 

What about, I love the KJV, it's an excellent translation, yet old, but there are better ones out today that I prefer to use.

 

Well I prefer the interlinear as the best translation but it would confuse most congregations, so I use the KJV. Niv has at least one error in the text. Nas has corrected that error, but there were some others I just can't remember the others I found. So after those two with their errors what are the better ones you have found today?

 

The KJV may confuse at least some of the people. Is the average age of your congregation 55?

What interlinear? There are a few. Would you actually call an interlinear a translation?

I'm a big fan of the 2011 NIV. Are you referencing the 84 NIV?
Whether the older one,or the latest -- I am sure there a number of errors. No translation is error free. The KJV is particularly prone to error.

Do you recall the error?

 

I posted the verse a while back where it says Jesus sent out 72 instead of 70.

The interlinear translates from Greek to English with no grammatical changes it gives word for word meaning. When I refer to original language I mean as wrtitten in the greek and seen in the interlinear.

 

Just curious...

WHICH Greek text used for basis of the Interlinear?

 

I'll check when I get to the apt.

 

The Stephens 1550 textus receptus

 

that is same text as used by KJV translaters in 1611?

I have two on my software, one is a Greek critical text, other uses the 26th edition of nestle-Aland...

is there an interlinear in MT for the Greek?

 

Yes, The NKJV Greek English Interlinear New Testament printed by Thomas Nelson in 1994.