• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Are you not satisfied with .....?

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Askjo

New Member
The KJV was revised 4 times. We used 1769 KJV today. Therefore the 1611 KJV and the 1769 KJV are the SAME title – KJV. No new translation until NKJV was appeared.

However modern versions are not revised because they are different versions, i.e. NIV and NIRV. Why not revised? For example, The KINGDOM of the CULTS by Walter Martin was revised 3 times, but it is SAME title of this book.

When the NIV was not satisfied, then NIRV is next new version.
When the ASV was not satisfied, then NASB is next new version.
When the NIV was not satisfied, then TNIV is next new version.
When the KJV was not satisfied, then NKJV is next new version.

See the difference between a revision and a new version. Why is a new version necessary after an old version? Who needs a new version after not satisfied with an old version?
 
J

jbh28

Active Member
Askjo said:
The KJV was revised 4 times. We used 1769 KJV today. Therefore the 1611 KJV and the 1769 KJV are the SAME title – KJV. No new translation until NKJV was appeared.

However modern versions are not revised because they are different versions, i.e. NIV and NIRV. Why not revised? For example, The KINGDOM of the CULTS by Walter Martin was revised 3 times, but it is SAME title of this book.

When the NIV was not satisfied, then NIRV is next new version.
When the ASV was not satisfied, then NASB is next new version.
When the NIV was not satisfied, then TNIV is next new version.
When the KJV was not satisfied, then NKJV is next new version.

See the difference between a revision and a new version. Why is a new version necessary after an old version? Who needs a new version after not satisfied with an old version?
Click to expand...

When the Bishops Bible was not satisfied, then the KJV is the new version.

btw, still waiting for you 800 examples of the NKJV ignoring the TR.
 
R

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Askjo said:
When the NIV was not satisfied, then NIRV is next new version.
Click to expand...

You mean satisfactory. The NIrV was designed for young native english speakers and ESL students. It's a sister version to the more advanced reading level of the NIV.

When the NIV was not satisfied, then TNIV is next new version.
Click to expand...

You're behind the times. The TNIV was yesterday's version. Currently it's the 2011 NIV.

Why is a new version necessary after an old version?
Click to expand...

Because the new version makes improvements to the older one. Or don't you think the KJV was an improvement over the Bishop's Bible?

Who needs a new version after not satisfied with an old version?
Click to expand...
You answered your own question. If folks are not entirely satisfied with an older version --they certainly would want or need a newer version. It's only reasonable.
 
L

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Askjo said:
The KJV was revised 4 times. We used 1769 KJV today. Therefore the 1611 KJV and the 1769 KJV are the SAME title – KJV. No new translation until NKJV was appeared.
Click to expand...

The KJV was revised more than 4 times. Some revisions to the 1611 edition were made in 1613, 1617. More revisions of the 1611 edition were made in the 1629 Cambridge edition. Other revisions to the 1611 edition were made in the 1638 Cambridge edition. Revisions to the 1611 edition were made in the 1743 Cambridge edition. Revisions to the 1611 edition were made in the 1762 Cambridge edition. Revisions to the 1611 edition were made in the 1769 Oxford edition. Revisions to the KJV were made in the 1817 Cambridge edition [and the same basic text as the 1817 Cambridge was printed in some KJV editions printed in America in the early 1800's]. Revisions to the KJV were made in the 1829 Oxford edition. Revisions to the KJV were made in 1800's American Bible Society editions, especially in ABS's 1852 edition. Revisions to the KJV were made in the 1873 Cambridge edition. At least one change or revision found in present Oxford and Cambridge editions was not introduced until the 1873 Cambridge edition.

Today's KJV editions are not actually the same as the 1769 Oxford.
The ten to twenty varying editions of the KJV in print today are not 100% identical in text to the 1769 Oxford edition. There are likely over 200 differences between the English text of the 1769 Oxford edition and any KJV edition in print today. In addition, there are some KJV editions in print today that are based on the 1873 Cambridge edition, not the 1769 Oxford.

Are you admitting that the 1833 revision of the KJV by Noah Webster and the 1842 revision of the KJV by Baptists and other believers do not count as new translations but as revisions of the KJV?

The 1611 edition of the KJV used the same title as the Bishops' Bible had used. Does that mean that the KJV could be considered the same Bible as the Bishops' Bible? According to the first rule given the KJV translators, the KJV was officially a revision of the Bishops' Bible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
L

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Askjo said:
We used 1769 KJV today.
Click to expand...

Do you really use a KJV edition today that is identical in its English text to the 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV?

An actual 1769 Oxford KJV has "LORD" [Jehovah] at Genesis 18:27, 30, 31, 32, and in around 70 other places where most present KJV editions have "Lord" [Adonai].

The Old Testament of an actual 1769 Oxford KJV has "houshold" (Gen. 18:19), "falsly" (Gen. 21:23), "ews" (Gen. 31:38), "foles" (Gen. 32:15), "yern" (Gen. 43:30), "scepter" (Gen. 49:10), "fole" (Gen. 49:11), "thy progenitors" (Gen. 49:26), "houshold" (Exod. 1:1), "Zithri" (Exod. 6:21), "the LORD God" (Exod. 34:23), "grashoppers" (Num. 13:33), "travel" (Num. 20:14), "most high" (Num. 24:16), "brakedst" (Deut. 10:2), "thy tithe" (Deut. 12:17), "thy earth" (Deut. 12:19), "ax" (Deut. 19:5), "the widow's" (Deut. 24:17), "befel" (Josh. 2:23), "Beer-sheba, Sheba" (Josh. 19:2), "children of Gilead" (Jud. 11:7), "all the coast" (Jud. 19:29), "priest's custom" (1 Sam. 2:13), "music" (1 Sam. 18:6), "shamelesly" (2 Sam. 6:20), "milstone" (2 Sam. 11:21), "God" (2 Sam. 12:22), "falshood" (2 Sam. 18:13), two mules burden (2 Kings 5:17), "Shimei" (1 Chron. 6:30), "vallies" (1 Chron. 12:15), "whom God alone" (1 Chron. 29:1), "on the pillars" (2 Chron. 4:12" instead of "on the top of the pillars," "loath" (Job 7:16), "thy companions" (Job 41:6), "unto me" (Ps. 18:47), "my foot" (Ps. 31:8), "feared" (Ps. 60:4), "in the presence" (Ps. 68:2), "part" (Ps. 78:66), "most high" (Ps. 91:1), "most high" (Ps. 91:9), "When there were" (Ps. 105:12), "gates of iron" (Ps. 107:16), "perversly" (Ps. 119:78), "O God the LORD" (Ps. 140:7), "O GOD THE LORD" (Ps 141:8), "falshood" (Ps. 144:8), "wholsome" (Prov. 15:4), "the latter end" (Prov. 19:20), "riches, honour" (Prov. 22:4), "king of Jerusalem" (Eccl. 1:1), "grashoppe" (Eccl. 12:5), "gone to" (Isa. 15:2), "dunghil" (Isa. 25:10), "founntains" (Isa. 41:18), "milstones" (Isa. 47:2), "astonished" (Isa. 52:14), "The LORD God" (Isa. 56:8), "the Lord God" (Isa. 61:1), "travel" (Lam. 3:5), "expresly" (Ezek. 1:3), "waggons" (Ezek. 23:24), "carelesly" (Ezek. 39:6), "Thus saith the Lord God" (Ezek. 45:9), "a brier" (Micah 7:4) instead of "as a brier," and "mighty is spoiled" (Zech. 11:2).
 
T

TomVols

New Member
However modern versions are not revised because they are different versions
Click to expand...
This is not entirely accurate. The NASB and NIV underwent revisions numerous times, as did the KJV. So did the ESV (multiple times), the HCSB has underwent a major overhaul in its young life, and the NLT has been significantly redone. Translations are revised. Debt celings get raised. It just happens. Sometimes it makes news, and sometimes it doesn't :)
 
J

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
TomVols said:
This is not entirely accurate. The NASB and NIV underwent revisions numerous times, as did the KJV. So did the ESV (multiple times), the HCSB has underwent a major overhaul in its young life, and the NLT has been significantly redone. Translations are revised. Debt celings get raised. It just happens. Sometimes it makes news, and sometimes it doesn't :)
Click to expand...

using newer source texts, such as when NASB went from the CT 23 ed to CT 26Th version ed, to translate from is a good reason to revise, as is the fact that English has changed through time, not a "static" language!
 
R

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
C4K said:
In Evangelical circles in approximate order
1- NIV
2 -NKJV
3 -ESV
4 -NLT
5 -KJV

NLT and ESV are rising. I suspect the NLT will be at the top in the next five-ten years
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that the NASBU isn't even on the radar. Is it because of the word "American" in the name?
 
A

Askjo

New Member
jbh28 said:
I don't think you understood. The KJV was a revision of the Bishops Bible.
Click to expand...
I am aware of some versions prior to the KJV.

My point is your "lifetime" reflecting to modern versions. For example, you are born in 1955 and are alive since birth. I would say from NASB to NIV 2011 in your lifetime. If you are not satisfied with NIV, then grab NIV 2011, will you? If not, then why is a new version necessary in your lifetime?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top