Some Who Approved Other Versions

[Harold Garvey]

Maybe it was just choice and the foreknowledge the KJV would surpass the Geneva as som many calvonicst like to claim about the Sovereignty of God.

The KJV will reamin in print no matter how many new version come along or old versions came along.

I answered his question. I did not fall for the subtility underlying in his question.:smilewinkgrin:

 

[Harold Garvey]

There were no printers of Bibles in colonial America, so in a way you're right, but the point is moot. It's not what was being printed that matters, but what was being read and used.

There are many printers of the KJV in America so God's Sovereignty in this proves the Geneva needed to be replaced.:smilewinkgrin:

 

[FlyForFun]

There are many printers of the KJV in America so God's Sovereignty in this proves the Geneva needed to be replaced.:smilewinkgrin:

By that logic we should replace the KJV with The Shack.

Volume and inertia do not imply divine intent.

 

[Harold Garvey]

By that logic we should replace the KJV with The Shack.

Volume and inertia do not imply divine intent.

Preservation and clarity do.

 

[FlyForFun]

Preservation and clarity do.

:BangHead:

My first language was French.

The KJV was not very clear to me.

Or are all non-English speakers consigned to outer darkness?

 

[Mexdeaf]

:BangHead:

My first language was French.

The KJV was not very clear to me.

Or are all non-English speakers consigned to outer darkness?

According to HG you are predestined to learn English in order to know the true words of God. Don't mind him- he doesn't have one.

 

[Jerome]

The Geneva Bible was more popular in the American colonies until the end of the 18th Century, when the KJV was authorized by Congress.

"Within fifty years of its introduction, the King James Bible had replaced the Geneva Bible as the most popular version of the Bible in English. Nowhere was this more true than in New England, where Puritans were quick to adopt the King James Version over the Geneva Version. Thus, beginning in the 1640s, the King James Version would become the dominant version of the Bible for Protestants in the United States." ---An American Bible: A History of the Good Book in the United States, p. 92

 

[Baptist4life]

Don't mind him- he doesn't have one.

Is this not a "personal attack"? I thought those were not allowed. Or since it was about a person defending the KJV, is that allowed? Such double standards on this forum, it's hard to tell.

 

[Plain Old Bill]

You may purchase a Geneva Bible at CBD with price discounted. $39.99 You can also purchase Mathews Bible $39.95

 

[John of Japan]

I recently received in an email the testimony of someone who attended a college in the 1970's that would later be considered KJV-only. It would seem to relate to this thread.

_____________________________________
This person wrote:

"Perhaps I should mention that I attended Midwestern Baptist College, in Pontiac, Michigan from 1970 to '73. Two of the many instructors teaching there at that time were my pastor, Oliver Allbright, and Dr. Herbert Noe.
Dr. Noe pastored the church (Galilean Baptist Church, of Livonia, Michigan) where, according to the writings of Peter Ruckman, a Bible Conference was held (in 1982?) in which the "KJV Only" movement got started.

Though "Old" and, by then, even the "New" Scofield KJVs were almost exclusively used by those instructing and attending Midwestern Baptist College in the early 1970s, there were plenty of folks who wanted to understand the scripture "in more depth" too. So, "the Greek" and other Bible references (like the Amplified Bible, Phillips, Weust and NASB) were quoted quite freely too, without condemnation, by those doing study or preaching "back in the day."

_____________________________________

My wife graduated from Midwestern Baptist College in 1977, and during her time there was not taught the KJV Only viewpoint, though the KJV was the Bible taught and used. I have other close friends who were there at that time and did not come out KJVO. So I believe your information is accurate.

I remember Dr. Malone (a great preacher) used to refer to the original languages in his messages and preface his remarks by saying something like, "I know a little Greek and a little Hebrew. The little Greek runs the grocery store down on the corner, and the little Hebrew runs a clothing store." :laugh:

 

[Mexdeaf]

Is this not a "personal attack"? I thought those were not allowed. Or since it was about a person defending the KJV, is that allowed? Such double standards on this forum, it's hard to tell.

Hmmm, if HG can call me a "hypocrite" and Johnv "depraved" (although he spelled it "dperaved") and get away with it perhaps I should have a little leeway. I'll leave it up to the mods.

:wavey:

 

[rsr]

"Within fifty years of its introduction, the King James Bible had replaced the Geneva Bible as the most popular version of the Bible in English. Nowhere was this more true than in New England, where Puritans were quick to adopt the King James Version over the Geneva Version. Thus, beginning in the 1640s, the King James Version would become the dominant version of the Bible for Protestants in the United States." ---An American Bible: A History of the Good Book in the United States, p. 92

That is all true, as far as it goes, but it gives no clue as to why the Geneva fell into disuse. The Geneva was suppressed for political, religious and commercial reasons; the last edition was in 1644, and that was published in Amsterdam. Consequently, after the 1640s it was certain that the KJV would be ascendant because there was no real alternative.

(The final nail in the Geneva's coffin was the English Civil War; many of the Parliamentary party - including Cromwell - used the Geneva, and after the Restoration it was highly impolitic to use a version flaunted by regicides.)

The Geneva, though continued to be in use for many years, including in New England. For example, when Increase Mather published his sermon "The Day of Trouble Is Near" in 1674, he quoted from the Geneva.

 

[Baptist4life]

Hmmm, if HG can call me a "hypocrite" and Johnv "depraved" (although he spelled it "dperaved") and get away with it perhaps I should have a little leeway. I'll leave it up to the mods.

:wavey:

Oh, I see, so if you have an affair with my wife, that means it's OK for me to steal your car? After all, you started it, right? Somehow I don't thin k someone else doing something wrong gives YOU the right to do something wrong too. I think Jesus would agree.

 

[FlyForFun]

"Within fifty years of its introduction, the King James Bible had replaced the Geneva Bible as the most popular version of the Bible in English. Nowhere was this more true than in New England, where Puritans were quick to adopt the King James Version over the Geneva Version. Thus, beginning in the 1640s, the King James Version would become the dominant version of the Bible for Protestants in the United States." ---An American Bible: A History of the Good Book in the United States, p. 92

Quoting a marginally documented source does not buttress your argument.

This Doctoral dissertation is incomplete and this quote is an example of a weak leap that was probably not questioned by his examiners, as they probably didn't know much more Bible history than he.

The shift in popularity was due to many factors. Price and availability played and important role. So did generational innovation, political pressure, and denominational preference.

The KJVO folks have some 'splainin' to do:

1. Why did it take nearly 200 years before the KJV eclipsed all other versions (1611 issuance, did not overtake Geneva et al until 1800?
2. What are non-English speakers to do?

By the way -- please let us know which version of the KJV is the "correct" one: 1611 or 1769 revision?



:wavey:

 

[Mexdeaf]

Oh, I see, so if you have an affair with my wife, that means it's OK for me to steal your car? After all, you started it, right? Somehow I don't thin k someone else doing something wrong gives YOU the right to do something wrong too. I think Jesus would agree.

I don't think Jesus would be KJVO either. :laugh:

 

[Baptist4life]

I don't think Jesus would be KJVO either. :laugh:

What does that have to do with your personal attack? You're a "pastor to the deaf", God will hold you more accountable than others.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

As this thread has become an exchange of personal attacks, and now a discussion of personal attacks, it is closed.

Folks, please use the 'report post' button instead of just complaining publicly about perceived attacks.