• 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!

Question on how KJVO Regard the 1611 Kjv?

atpollard

atpollard

Well-Known Member
Ben1445 said:
As far as the translation, if I knew anyone who was one of the translators, I would ask them why they came up with this Easter instead of Passover.
It’s not something that I would consider throwing out my Bible for.
Click to expand...
My best guess ... the average Anglican Church attendee knew when Easter was but was unfamiliar with Jewish Holidays. The Jewish feast of Passover varied in its time (sunset to sunset across two days) but Easter was always celebrated on Resurrection Sunday starting at dawn. The Translators knew it would be read at Church (the primary purpose for the KJV was to be clear when read from a pulpit) and probably wanted to emphasize the link in Acts to the Resurrection of Jesus over the Jewish feast that most Englishmen were likely unfamiliar with in 1611.
 
J

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
Ben1445 said:
So is there some KJVO person who is telling you that you are going to miss salvation because you don’t use the KJV?
The only thing I have seen is people who are upset about some people who only use the KJV.
Unless they are coming into your house to take your preferred version, let them use the Bible they have convictions about.
If they are not against us they are for us. So what difference does it make which version someone else uses?
Click to expand...
It matters not to me what version one chooses to use, but KJVO makes it such that NONE should ever use ANY other version save Kjv, and yes, some even state that the 1611 kjv can "fix" any problems in the NT Greek text, and that unless one was saved while using Kjv, not a valid salvation
 
B

Ben1445

Active Member
JesusFan said:
It matters not to me what version one chooses to use, but KJVO makes it such that NONE should ever use ANY other version save Kjv, and yes, some even state that the 1611 kjv can "fix" any problems in the NT Greek text, and that unless one was saved while using Kjv, not a valid salvation
Click to expand...
Anyone here?
 
B

Ben1445

Active Member
JesusFan said:
The reformed doctrine though has always been that the Original books only were inspired, and that English translations made off of them are valid, so were not KJVO
Click to expand...
I am not by definition KJVO. I just only use the KJV.
I’m just trying to figure out who we disagree with.
 
B

Ben1445

Active Member
JesusFan said:
Wonder how KJVO refute that some of their meanings came over from the Latin Vulgate?
Click to expand...
Maybe the translators agreed with the Latin translation.
If you mean Lucifer as an example, it is a commonly accepted English word. I don’t consider myself as speaking Latin any time I say that word.
Examples please if there is more than that.
 
KJB1611reader

KJB1611reader

Member
atpollard said:
My best guess ... the average Anglican Church attendee knew when Easter was but was unfamiliar with Jewish Holidays. The Jewish feast of Passover varied in its time (sunset to sunset across two days) but Easter was always celebrated on Resurrection Sunday starting at dawn. The Translators knew it would be read at Church (the primary purpose for the KJV was to be clear when read from a pulpit) and probably wanted to emphasize the link in Acts to the Resurrection of Jesus over the Jewish feast that most Englishmen were likely unfamiliar with in 1611.
Click to expand...
That was my point.
 
KJB1611reader

KJB1611reader

Member
Ben1445 said:
Maybe the translators agreed with the Latin translation.
If you mean Lucifer as an example, it is a commonly accepted English word. I don’t consider myself as speaking Latin any time I say that word.
Examples please if there is more than that.
Click to expand...
What's wrong with word 'Lucifer?'

Alot of our English words come from Latin?

Also, there was an old Latin vulgate before Jerome.
 
KJB1611reader

KJB1611reader

Member
JesusFan said:
It matters not to me what version one chooses to use, but KJVO makes it such that NONE should ever use ANY other version save Kjv, and yes, some even state that the 1611 kjv can "fix" any problems in the NT Greek text, and that unless one was saved while using Kjv, not a valid salvation
Click to expand...
I disgree with last point.
 
KJB1611reader

KJB1611reader

Member
I have a 1611 version since I wanted to have a copy.

I of course prefer the PCE.

The marginal notes are interesting and do help me defend it more.

I do like how the marginal notes say the Acropyhra had corruptions.
 
B

Ben1445

Active Member
KJB1611reader said:
What's wrong with word 'Lucifer?'

Alot of our English words come from Latin?

Also, there was an old Latin vulgate before Jerome.
Click to expand...
I don’t have a problem using English words that are derived from other languages. I have been challenged before because it is not his Hebrew name. I was asking if that was what was supposed to be problematic.
 
J

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
KJB1611reader said:
I have a 1611 version since I wanted to have a copy.

I of course prefer the PCE.

The marginal notes are interesting and do help me defend it more.

I do like how the marginal notes say the Acropyhra had corruptions.
Click to expand...
Do you have ANY translator of the 1611 Kjv stating though that they viewed their translation as perfect. inspired, and error free, and so no further translations would have to be done?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top