What would be the Best Translation and Greek text then for KJVO position?

[JesusFan]

Which Edition of both would be the one seen as those holding to the KJVO position to being the "perfect and true one?"

 

[Salty]

Greek Text ?! - How could the original Greek text even mention it? Old English only goes back to about 400 AD.
Middle English began about 1,000 AD.
And NO KJV has any verses stating it is the perfect translation.

From the first page of my 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

 

[JesusFan]

Greek Text ?! - How could the original Greek text even mention it? Old English only goes back to about 400 AD.
Middle English began about 1,000 AD.
And NO KJV has any verses stating it is the perfect translation.

From the first page of my 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

Was just asking if KJVO has in mind a specific edition of Greek text and Kjv, is it 1611,1769,1873,1900?
And which of the many TR Greek texts?

 

[KJB1611reader]

Which Edition of both would be the one seen as those holding to the KJVO position to being the "perfect and true one?"

None, see Edwardpf123's video and Gail's book.

There is no perfect T.R. and second, it can't be KJBO if go back to Greek.

 

[David Lamb]

None, see Edwardpf123's video and Gail's book.

There is no perfect T.R. and second, it can't be KJBO if go back to Greek.

Do KJVO proponents really deny that the New Testament was originally written in Greek, and that the KJV is a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament?

 

[Deacon]

Which Edition of both would be the one seen as those holding to the KJVO position to being the "perfect and true one?"

A good question.

One of the first tasks of every translator of the Bible is to establish the text.

Before translations begin, translators have to determine what they are translating; variants need to be addressed and a decision need to be made regarding which one will be used.

EVERY translation of the NT uses a slightly different Greek text based upon these decisions;
Generally these don't make doctrinal changes, just minor language adjustments.

So, to answer your question:
Almost 300 years after the KJV was introduced (1881), Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener introduced a Greek text constructed from the English text of the Authorized Version of 1611.
Scrivener’s Textus Receptus (1894) @Logos Bible Software

In the same way, the more recent Tyndale House Greek Testament, is the closest Greek text to Luther's Translation.

Most modern texts generally use a base text of the Nestle Aland Greek New Testament (the "Critical Text) but may address variants differently.
Along this line, The Reader's Greek New Testament (2nd Edition) is the Greek text for "Today's NIV".

Rob

 

[JesusFan]

A good question.

One of the first tasks of every translator of the Bible is to establish the text.

Before translations begin, translators have to determine what they are translating; variants need to be addressed and a decision need to be made regarding which one will be used.

EVERY translation of the NT uses a slightly different Greek text based upon these decisions;
Generally these don't make doctrinal changes, just minor language adjustments.

So, to answer your question:
Almost 300 years after the KJV was introduced (1881), Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener introduced a Greek text constructed from the English text of the Authorized Version of 1611.
Scrivener’s Textus Receptus (1894) @Logos Bible Software

In the same way, the more recent Tyndale House Greek Testament, is the closest Greek text to Luther's Translation.

Most modern texts generally use a base text of the Nestle Aland Greek New Testament (the "Critical Text) but may address variants differently.
Along this line, The Reader's Greek New Testament (2nd Edition) is the Greek text for "Today's NIV".

Rob

Rarely have ever received an answer to my OP by KJVO, but the few that have do mention the Cambridge 1873 as the "pure Kjv text", and the Scrivener TR as the definitive TR text to use

 

[JesusFan]

Do KJVO proponents really deny that the New Testament was originally written in Greek, and that the KJV is a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament?

No, but they would see the Holy Spirit giving to the 1611 inspiration in regards to creating that translation and allowing them to make a perfect English translation

 

[KJB1611reader]

Do KJVO proponents really deny that the New Testament was originally written in Greek, and that the KJV is a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament?

No, we just deny the manuscripts are all identical and were perfect.

We consider the KJB as a t.r. type.

 

[Logos1560]

No, we just deny the manuscripts are all identical and were perfect.

Who is "we"? All KJV-only advocates would not agree with your statement. Some KJV-only authors try to suggest that the Greek manuscripts on which the KJV is based were all identical and perfect. Those KJV-only authors are uninformed or misinformed concerning the Greek manuscripts on which the varying Textus Receptus editions and the KJV were based.

Troy Clark asserted that “he [Erasmus] perfectly copied” and that “there was not one Word change from its original form” (Perfect Bible, p. 121). Bob Kendall contended that “the TR has not one footnote” and that “the TR has no footnotes” (How Firm, pp. 28, 41). Troy Clark claimed: “Stephanus used the 16 Majority Text Greek manuscripts in the library of King Francis I and son Henry II. These were all identical, even down to the letter” (Perfect Bible, p. 144). Troy Clark asserted: “The Textus Receptus will always represent the undisputed majority of 95-99% of Greek texts that mirror agreement with each other” (p, 72). Michael Hollner claimed that “the Authorized King James Version is backed up by the majority of all existing manuscripts” and “this majority, being well over 95% in number out of some 5800 manuscripts, is called the ‘Majority Text’” (KJ Only Debate, p. 18). Al Lacy asserted: "From God's pure manuscripts came the AV1611" (Can I Trust My Bible, p. 18). Al Lacy maintained that “there is a set of manuscripts that are free of error” (p. 85) and that God “kept us error-free COPIES in the Masoretic manuscripts of the Hebrew and the Received Text of the Greek” (p. 116).



David W. Daniels claimed that the KJV “was accurately translated from perfect copies of God’s words” (BattleCry, Sept/Oct., 2007, p. 11). Wayne Williams asserted: "There are many infallible manuscripts such as the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus to verify the preserved Scripture" (Does God Have a Controversy, p. 21). Bruce Borders claimed that “over 5000 Antiochian manuscripts or parts of manuscripts are in existence today” and that “each completely agrees with the others, with absolutely no discrepancies” (The Only Bible, p. 14). Jeffrey Khoo asserted: “The Lord has certainly kept these [Byzantine] manuscripts pure and uncorrupted throughout the centuries” (Kwok, VPP, p. 129). James Rasbeary claimed that “the Greek texts used by the [KJV] translators were not marred by mistakes and accumulated errors” and that “these [5300] Greek manuscripts are in agreement with each other and with the King James Bible” (What’s Wrong, p. 103).

 

[Aaron]

Which Edition of both would be the one seen as those holding to the KJVO position to being the "perfect and true one?"

Paul preached from the Septuagint in the Book of Hebrews.

 

[JesusFan]

No, we just deny the manuscripts are all identical and were perfect.

We consider the KJB as a t.r. type.

Do you consider the TR as an exact copy of the Originals then?

 

[KJB1611reader]

Who is "we"? All KJV-only advocates would not agree with your statement. Some KJV-only authors try to suggest that the Greek manuscripts on which the KJV is based were all identical and perfect. Those KJV-only authors are uninformed or misinformed concerning the Greek manuscripts on which the varying Textus Receptus editions and the KJV were based.

Troy Clark asserted that “he [Erasmus] perfectly copied” and that “there was not one Word change from its original form” (Perfect Bible, p. 121). Bob Kendall contended that “the TR has not one footnote” and that “the TR has no footnotes” (How Firm, pp. 28, 41). Troy Clark claimed: “Stephanus used the 16 Majority Text Greek manuscripts in the library of King Francis I and son Henry II. These were all identical, even down to the letter” (Perfect Bible, p. 144). Troy Clark asserted: “The Textus Receptus will always represent the undisputed majority of 95-99% of Greek texts that mirror agreement with each other” (p, 72). Michael Hollner claimed that “the Authorized King James Version is backed up by the majority of all existing manuscripts” and “this majority, being well over 95% in number out of some 5800 manuscripts, is called the ‘Majority Text’” (KJ Only Debate, p. 18). Al Lacy asserted: "From God's pure manuscripts came the AV1611" (Can I Trust My Bible, p. 18). Al Lacy maintained that “there is a set of manuscripts that are free of error” (p. 85) and that God “kept us error-free COPIES in the Masoretic manuscripts of the Hebrew and the Received Text of the Greek” (p. 116).



David W. Daniels claimed that the KJV “was accurately translated from perfect copies of God’s words” (BattleCry, Sept/Oct., 2007, p. 11). Wayne Williams asserted: "There are many infallible manuscripts such as the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus to verify the preserved Scripture" (Does God Have a Controversy, p. 21). Bruce Borders claimed that “over 5000 Antiochian manuscripts or parts of manuscripts are in existence today” and that “each completely agrees with the others, with absolutely no discrepancies” (The Only Bible, p. 14). Jeffrey Khoo asserted: “The Lord has certainly kept these [Byzantine] manuscripts pure and uncorrupted throughout the centuries” (Kwok, VPP, p. 129). James Rasbeary claimed that “the Greek texts used by the [KJV] translators were not marred by mistakes and accumulated errors” and that “these [5300] Greek manuscripts are in agreement with each other and with the King James Bible” (What’s Wrong, p. 103).

I see, well, we don't go back to the Greek.

Shawn

 

[David Lamb]

I see, well, we don't go back to the Greek.

Shawn

Who doesn't go back to the Greek? The 1611 translators certainly did. They translated the New Testament from Greek into English. Greek is the Language the New Testament was originally written in.

 

[KJB1611reader]

Who doesn't go back to the Greek? The 1611 translators certainly did. They translated the New Testament from Greek into English. Greek is the Language the New Testament was originally written in.

That wasn't my point, my point we teach and preach with the English text.

We don't use the Greeke or the Hebrew concordance to define the words or try to make a doctrine like some.

We use the English words, I am not saying the 1611 kings men didn't use Greeke.

Shawn

 

[KJB1611reader]

Did the 1611 kings men mainly used on one Greeke and the rest used other resources?

My point is that is no Greeke text matching 100% the King James Bible.

 

[David Lamb]

That wasn't my point, my point we teach and preach with the English text.

We don't use the Greeke or the Hebrew concordance to define the words or try to make a doctrine like some.

We use the English words, I am not saying the 1611 kings men didn't use Greeke.

Shawn

Thanks for explaining. Even so, I see nothing wrong in a preacher in an English-speaking country saying something such as: "Jesus gave His disciples a new commandment, that they should love one another. In the original Greek, the New Testament has four different words for "love." The one in the commandment of Jesus is "agape," a self-sacrificing love." Anyway, thanks again.

 

[KJB1611reader]

Thanks for explaining. Even so, I see nothing wrong in a preacher in an English-speaking country saying something such as: "Jesus gave His disciples a new commandment, that they should love one another. In the original Greek, the New Testament has four different words for "love." The one in the commandment of Jesus is "agape," a self-sacrificing love." Anyway, thanks again.

The agape word game being debunked already, by many pastors.

Please check Sam Gip's list of tests on Agape.

 

[David Lamb]

The agape word game being debunked already, by many pastors.

Please check Sam Gip's list of tests on Agape.

I have never heard of an agape word game. Are you saying that the Greek New Testament doesn't use four different words, all translated into English as "love"?

 

[KJB1611reader]

I have never heard of an agape word game. Are you saying that the Greek New Testament doesn't use four different words, all translated into English as "love"?

Well, I suggest doing the agape quiz and reply back.