• 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!

How to Improve Our English Translations of Scripture

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
Marooncat79 said:
Whats the authority for Japanese speaking peoples or Chichewa?
Click to expand...

Did the command to take the Gospel to the world end with the apostles? I don't think it did.

So what do we English speaking people take to the world?

What do our brothers in the UK take to the world, and what did they take to the world in the past?

We take what we have from God. So what version of the Word of God do we take to the world?

The KJVO folks will tell you we should take the KJV to the world, and some are doing that.

I say the same message of the Gospel is found in the most modern versions.

Our church supports missionaries in several countries around the world, they use the KJV to teach from.
 
C

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
Charlie24 said:
Did the command to take the Gospel to the world end with the apostles? I don't think it did.

So what do we English speaking people take to the world?

What do our brothers in the UK take to the world, and what did they take to the world in the past?

We take what we have from God. So what version of the Word of God do we take to the world?

The KJVO folks will tell you we should take the KJV to the world, and some are doing that.

I say the same message of the Gospel is found in the most modern versions.

Our church supports missionaries in several countries around the world, they use the KJV to teach from.
Click to expand...

We have here in town many Spanish, and from our Church some Spanish believers created a sister Church to ours.

They use the Reina-Valera which is the closest you can get (so they say) to the KJV.
 
C

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
Charlie24 said:
We have here in town many Spanish, and from our Church some Spanish believers created a sister Church to ours.

They use the Reina-Valera which is the closest you can get (so they say) to the KJV.
Click to expand...

This Bible used by the Spanish is translated from the Textus Receptus the same as the KJV.
 
SovereignGrace

SovereignGrace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Ascetic X said:
Some of the most famous KJVO fanatics were Peter Ruckman, David Otis Fuller, D.A. Waite, Gail Riplinger, and Jack Hyles. It might be a good idea to closely examine the proponents of an opinion before zealously embracing their quarrelsome viewpoints.
Click to expand...
Then there is Sam Gipp. He went so far to say Jesus isn’t his Messiah. He stated Jesus was the Jews’ Messiah, but not Gentiles. In fairness, many KJVO folk spoke out against that, so I’m sure he’s in the extreme minority of the KJVO movement who hold to that hot take.
 
SovereignGrace

SovereignGrace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Charlie24 said:
The biggest problem the KJVO folks have is all the quarreling among the modern version holders with all their opinions on how the revisions of the modern version should have been dealt with and what the Scripture is actually saying and what precise words should be used.

That would tempt the KJVO folks to believe serious doubt is being established throughout the Scripture, and they don't like that.
Click to expand...
None of us who prefer the modern versions deny they’ve been through revisions. However, the KJVO stick their heads in the sand when shown the many revisions the KJV has had since its inception in 1611.

1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1626. 1630, 1631, 1633, 1634, 1640. 1644, 1650. 1652, 1655, 1657, 1698

They keep saying the KJV is inerrant, but all those revisions show it cannot meet the standard of inerrancy.

Inerrant:

free from error
incapable of being wrong
If a religious book is inerrant, it contains no faults or mistakes (from Cambridge dictionary)
not erring; making no mistakes; infallible

None of these can the KJV meet, seeing all the revisions they went through.
 
C

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
SovereignGrace said:
None of us who prefer the modern versions deny they’ve been through revisions. However, the KJVO stick their heads in the sand when shown the many revisions the KJV has had since its inception in 1611.

1611, 1613, 1614, 1616, 1617, 1626. 1630, 1631, 1633, 1634, 1640. 1644, 1650. 1652, 1655, 1657, 1698

They keep saying the KJV is inerrant, but all those revisions show it cannot meet the standard of inerrancy.

Inerrant:

free from error
incapable of being wrong
If a religious book is inerrant, it contains no faults or mistakes (from Cambridge dictionary)
not erring; making no mistakes; infallible

None of these can the KJV meet, seeing all the revisions they went through.
Click to expand...

What the KJVO folks will stress is that the original 1611 KJV is so old it had to be revised for spelling, ect, and the words that are no longer in vocabulary.

They believe all the effort in revisions, as the KJV needed, should be invested in the KJV only and the Alexandrian Text is not what God gave us.

They say all the versions of the AT have placed doubt on the Word of God and should have never been used.
 
SovereignGrace

SovereignGrace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Charlie24 said:
What the KJVO folks will stress is that the original 1611 KJV is so old it had to be revised for spelling, ect, and the words that are no longer in vocabulary.

They believe all the effort in revisions, as the KJV needed, should be invested in the KJV only and the Alexandrian Text is not what God gave us.

They say all the versions of the AT have placed doubt on the Word of God and should have never been used.
Click to expand...
And if it had to be revised, then it doesn’t meet the criteria of inerrant. So, they use a double standard, and are hypocrites.
 
SovereignGrace

SovereignGrace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Charlie24 said:
Did the command to take the Gospel to the world end with the apostles? I don't think it did.

So what do we English speaking people take to the world?

What do our brothers in the UK take to the world, and what did they take to the world in the past?

We take what we have from God. So what version of the Word of God do we take to the world?

The KJVO folks will tell you we should take the KJV to the world, and some are doing that.

I say the same message of the Gospel is found in the most modern versions.

Our church supports missionaries in several countries around the world, they use the KJV to teach from.
Click to expand...
But the command was originally given to non-English speaking ppl to spread the gospel, and there was no KJV to quote from. How were they able to take the word of God to ppl back then? The scriptures they had, that were written in Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic.
 
C

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
SovereignGrace said:
But the command was originally given to non-English speaking ppl to spread the gospel, and there was no KJV to quote from. How were they able to take the word of God to ppl back then? The scriptures they had, that were written in Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic.
Click to expand...

The same way we initially do it today, interpreters.

There are some organizations that are using interpreters to take the Gospel message to countries through the KJV translated in their language.

Similar to the Reina-Valera with the Spanish.
 
Salty

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
SovereignGrace said:
But the command was originally given to non-English speaking ppl to spread the gospel, and there was no KJV to quote from. How were they able to take the word of God to ppl back then? The scriptures they had, that were written in Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic.
Click to expand...
But I thought when Peter spoke in Tongues - he spoke in King James English!
(sorry, I know what I said before - but I could not resist it)
 
SovereignGrace

SovereignGrace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Charlie24 said:
The same way we initially do it today, interpreters.

There are some organizations that are using interpreters to take the Gospel message to countries through the KJV translated in their language.

Similar to the Reina-Valera with the Spanish.
Click to expand...
But I don’t believe it has to be solely the KJV used, but the ESV, NASB, HCSB, CSB, NIV, NLT, et al can suffice as well.
 
C

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
SovereignGrace said:
But I don’t believe it has to be solely the KJV used, but the ESV, NASB, HCSB, CSB, NIV, NLT, et al can suffice as well.
Click to expand...

Nothing can replace my 1611 KJV as far as I'm concerned, and if I can't believe it is the inspired Word of God, I can't trust it.

But if you choose the modern versions then that's what you prefer.
 
SovereignGrace

SovereignGrace

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Charlie24 said:
Nothing can replace my 1611 KJV as far as I'm concerned, and if I can't believe it is the inspired Word of God, I can't trust it.

But if you choose the modern versions then that's what you prefer.
Click to expand...
But you’re not reading the 1611 KJV, unless you’re reading the version that has son spelled “sonne”. Or Apoftle Pavl.
 
C

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
SovereignGrace said:
But you’re not reading the 1611 KJV, unless you’re reading the version that has son spelled “sonne”. Or Apoftle Pavl.
Click to expand...

No doctrine or Biblical theme has been changed in the 1769 revision of the 1611 Authorized KJV.

That's why it's still called the 1611 KJV. If a direct change had taken place it would have been named the 1769 KJV.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top