-
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!
I Bought A New Bible Today
- Thread starter Nicholas25
- Start date
- Status
Joshua Rhodes
<img src=/jrhodes.jpg>
rbell said:
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :applause:
Joshua Rhodes said:
No, I don't suppose many would in America. The point being, why should the Word of God be lowered, dumbed down, watered down, whatever way you want to say it, because the education level of a society is going down. If anything, the reading of the King James would rather increase the vocabulary of many people.
Joshua Rhodes
<img src=/jrhodes.jpg>
USMC71 said:
I guess I just don't see it that way... but that's ok! I'm thankful that you and I serve the same Christ, no matter what Bible we read from!
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Actually both Boaz and Ruth ended upLeBuick said:
in the city (actually a small village) at the house of Naomi, Ruth's
Mother-in-law. And thus the Moabite Ruth became the grandmother
of King David and an ancestor of Jesus Barjoseph of Nazareth.
But some say that all the changes to the KJV are 'spelling'
changes. This shows a change that was made, then
remade.
Ruth 3:15 (Geneva Bible, 1587 Edition):
Also he sayd, Bring the sheete that thou hast vpon thee,
and holde it. And when she helde it,
he measured sixe measures of barly, and layde them on her,
and she went into the citie.
Why did we need the KJV of 1611 when the Geneva of 1587
had it right already?
Ed Edwards
<img src=/Ed.gif>
Anti-Alexandrian said:
I have a free Geneva Bible. It is electronic (it's on my computer so when
my Internet Service Provider isn't provinding internet, I can do my
Bible studies). It is from e-sword.com . I created my own trilogy:
the Geneva Bible of 1587;
the KJV1611 Edition,
the KJV1769 Edition with Strong's Numbers.
USMC71 said:
Well, I don't think putting the Word of God into understandable English would be "lowereed, dumbed down" and "watered down". That's just what the KJV is - a Bible that was written so that the common man could read it. I think the KJV is a beautiful version but I prefer to read something with the words in modern English so I tend to use either the NKJV or the ESV.
Joshua Rhodes said:
I would like to see proof of this. How many people were tested? How were they tested? What is the level of education they have? ect, ect, ect, ... It is real easy to take small samples and skew them so they say whatever someone wants them to say.
Now back to the topic.
If you bought The Message you did not buy a bible, you bought a paraphrase of the bible. The last bible I bought was a NKJV large print.
Joshua Rhodes
<img src=/jrhodes.jpg>
TC said:
Don't know.
TC said:
Pretty sure they didn't just say, "Hey, can you read?"
TC said:
I didn't ask.
TC said:
Not sure if you're accusing me of skewing anything. If you are, that was not my intent. I used to work in a Christian bookstore, and I'm pretty familiar with the standards of each translation, and how to help people match up with a Bible. Anyway...
Reading levels of translations:
http://bible.com/community/biblebasics.php
http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/cms_content?page=652502&sp=1003&event=1003MAIN%7C58674%7C1003
http://www.geocities.com/bible_translation/glossr.htm#readinglevel
http://www.sundayschoolresources.com/biblechoices.htm
Reading level of Americans:
http://www.informatics-review.com/FAQ/reading.html
http://www.nifl.gov/nifl/facts/reading_facts.html#sadults
Dear USMC71 ,
I will bet ( if I was a wagering kind of guy ) that you do not know the KJV as much as you think . There are hundreds of words that haven't been used for centuries in the KJV . There are strings of phrases that would defy anyone to define . Why do you consider it a litmus test if folks do not have a good grasp of an ancient form of English ? Benjamin Blayney "updated" it in 1769 . Within 60 years at the latest there was a real need to revamp the language . English has changed substantially . Outside of "churchy" things , do you ever use the kind of language the KJV does ? Have you heard anyone else that has ? Have you seen any articles or books ( outside of churchy things ) that have employed such antiquated speech ? Do you understand many of the lines from William the bard ? Do you have perfect comfort and ease of reading any secular works from that era ?
I will bet ( if I was a wagering kind of guy ) that you do not know the KJV as much as you think . There are hundreds of words that haven't been used for centuries in the KJV . There are strings of phrases that would defy anyone to define . Why do you consider it a litmus test if folks do not have a good grasp of an ancient form of English ? Benjamin Blayney "updated" it in 1769 . Within 60 years at the latest there was a real need to revamp the language . English has changed substantially . Outside of "churchy" things , do you ever use the kind of language the KJV does ? Have you heard anyone else that has ? Have you seen any articles or books ( outside of churchy things ) that have employed such antiquated speech ? Do you understand many of the lines from William the bard ? Do you have perfect comfort and ease of reading any secular works from that era ?
Rippon, I would put my knowedge of the KJV, probably very close to most on this board. As I stated in a previous post, I do not use the Ole' English on a daily basis nor do I know anyone who does.
My point is not to authenticate the KJV nor to disclaim other versions or translations. My point being, is that because the reading level and education level of America has dramatically lowered in the past 20 years people are more apt to go for newer versions because they are easier to read instead of studying to shew themselves approved unto God.
My point is not to authenticate the KJV nor to disclaim other versions or translations. My point being, is that because the reading level and education level of America has dramatically lowered in the past 20 years people are more apt to go for newer versions because they are easier to read instead of studying to shew themselves approved unto God.
Every version out there is a newer version ! To put the language of the KJV as a determiner of literacy is silly . They should be able to read the WSJ , not the KJV .
You were quoting part of the KJV rendering of 2 Timothy 2:15 . It concerned Paul's counsel to Timothy . -- Study to shew yourself approved unto God...
The modern day understanding of "study" is different from the intent of Paul . Studying is part of it , but the force of the verse means to make every effort .
What about 1 Timothy 5:12 in the KJV ? -- "having damnation..." . Wouldn't incurring judgment or something like that be better ?
How about 1 Timothy 3:13 ? KJV __ purchase to themselves a good degree
NET __ gain a good standing for themselves
There are so many examples that could be given . Go and get a good modern version ! I do not think folks in other language groups have this kind of ancient language disease .
You were quoting part of the KJV rendering of 2 Timothy 2:15 . It concerned Paul's counsel to Timothy . -- Study to shew yourself approved unto God...
The modern day understanding of "study" is different from the intent of Paul . Studying is part of it , but the force of the verse means to make every effort .
What about 1 Timothy 5:12 in the KJV ? -- "having damnation..." . Wouldn't incurring judgment or something like that be better ?
How about 1 Timothy 3:13 ? KJV __ purchase to themselves a good degree
NET __ gain a good standing for themselves
There are so many examples that could be given . Go and get a good modern version ! I do not think folks in other language groups have this kind of ancient language disease .
Rippon said:
Although you asked someone else, I'll throw in my two-cents. I know the KJV very well. I have read and studied it most of my life. I have a very large vocabulary, but I do have to look up some words on occasion - even words in modern versions. I would never use ability to read old English as a litmus test. I read from The Complete Works of William Shakespear and other old English Literature fairly well (but not perfectly).
I don't think he was promoting the KJV as a test of literacy, but just saying that people with a higher level of literary proficiency will have an easier time reading the KJV.
There are hard to read parts in modern versions as well. It seems according to this logic that I should throw out all my Shakespear plays and other old English Literature. I hate to break it to you, but liking and reading old English is not a disease.
BTY, what part of Korea are you in? In 1991-1992 I was stationed at Osan, AB south of Seol by about 35 miles.
Rippon said:
I just took my eleven year old son and asked him if he understood "having damnation" he gave me the correct response. Then I asked him about the words you spoke, "incurring judgement", he has no idea what I was speaking of.
As to buying a newer version, I did when I got saved back eleven years ago. I was comparing a KJV text to the NIV "Life Application Bible", guess what, the verse was not in the NIV. Don't ask me now what verse it was, but I know it was back in the Psalms. So, as to diving into another version, not a chance.
I have no problem with you using other version/versions to study and read, so do not recommend to me that I change mine.
So, in your own words, "make every effort" to study and understand, if people would do that, there would be no need for new modern translations that have been written due to the laziness and lack of study from our country.
I have four children, 15 years, 11 years, nine years and five years old. The three oldest read from the KJV and whenever they come to a word they do not underdstand, they get their concordance and dictionaries out and study it for themselves. Myself for example, I am a reader, reading about one book a week. There are some authors whose vocabulary is higher than mine, so what do I do? I get a dictionary out and study to see and understand what the author is saying. I do not forsake the book because of my lack of intelligence, I use it to build my knowledge and understanding. I think the same concept can apply to the KJV. When I first read, "Can Man Live Without God", by Ravi Zacharias, man was I lost. But the more I read from him, the more I know what he is saying, because I studied the words that he uses and understand the context in which he is using them.
Anyway, enough rattling from me. By the way, I was not putting the KJV as the determiner of literacy. I was using an example as to why people say that they cannot understand it.
I guess then, in the next four to ten years, your version will be out dated due to the lower level of English in the country and the change of the language. What is next, the Bible at a K-1 reading language for the adult, because of his ignorance?
If you would just consider the point I am trying to make, but you won't. You came and attacked a KJV position. Noboady attacked your version of preference, especially me.
Your only counsel for me is to get a newer version, "I guess that is what Westcott and Hort said to many. Not once did I challenge any version or persons who use other versions, I challenged the education system in which the USA is now under. If you would address that issue, maybe we could get somewhere.
- Status