Featured A Timeline of the KJVO Movement

I respect their work into getting the bible out into the world, but just wish that they would make it clear that they really are Kjvo.

 

Right. It would've been forgotten had not J. J. Ray & Dr. D. O. Fuller not gotten hold of it. They based their books on Dr. W's book.

 

The KJVO seems to be a strictly 20th century movement!

 

Who's fighting what? J of J is simply giving a history of the KJVO myth.

 

So that Sda author did launch the Kjvo indirectly!

 

There were older KJVO movements that didn't have too many homeboys & didn't last long. Several were against newer versions ever being made, especially when the British govt. was trying to stifle the older Geneva & Bishop's versions & prevent any other English versions but the AV from being printed or sold within the British Empire. Later ones came after several shipwreck translations were made, such as the RV of 1881. (The ASV wasn't too bad, but it wasn't very popular.)

That's why I refer to "the current edition" of the KJVO myth when I think it's necessary to clarify a view. Past ones don't matter now, except as historical items.

 

Right. He was responding to a squabble within his cult, not trying to launch a rebirth of an old, dormant false doctrine.

 

Think that the 1881 RV caused some heartburn among the Kjv faithful, but strange thing is that some who were Kjv actually liked the asv 1901!

 

Nope, against the perfect Bible "myth" - any Bible of any kind anywhere - not just KJB.
Some Christianity that.

 

While there was not an uproar in 1769, there would be somewhat of one in the 1820's-1830's. Thomas Curtis accused KJV publishers such as Oxford and Cambridge of corrupting the text of the 1611 KJV. Thomas Curtis collected lists of differences or variations in KJV editions and took them to Oxford Press and Cambridge Press. His book was entitled The Existing Monopoly: an inadequate Protection of the Authorized Version. (London, 1833). One of KJV editors, Thomas Turton, replied to Curtis's accusations. His book was entitled The Text of the English Bible. 1833. It was because of this "uproar" that Oxford University Press reprinted the 1611 edition of the KJV in 1833. This 1611 reprinting was intended to show that printers of the KJV in the 1800's could not go back to printing the 1611 because of its errors.

There was also an uproar in America in the 1850's about differences in KJV editions. The American Bible Society made a revision of the KJV that they published in 1852. For six years it was their standard KJV text until a few people caused an uproar about it so they dropped it. Thomas Curtis had moved to America so he may have been also involved in this uproar about differences in KJV editions.

 

no translation is perfect!

 

was this a big uproar when the RV came out in 1881 also then?

 

Many have been unaware of the important 1743 Cambridge KJV revision or edition. For many years in histories of our English Bible, there has been overemphasis on the 1762 Cambridge edition and neglect of this earlier important 1743 Cambridge edition.

David Norton wrote: “The long-missing element of careful proof-reading and correction of the text was resumed in this 1743 Bible” (KJB: a Short History, p. 161). Gordon Campbell wrote: “The folio Bible that Parris produced for Cambridge University Press in 1743 was an important edition because of the principles on which it was edited” (Bible, p. 136). Campbell does not even refer to the later 1762 Cambridge edition. David Crystal referred to present KJV editions being derived from “F. S. Parris’s Cambridge edition of 1743” along with the 1769 Oxford (Begat, p. 9). David Norton observed: “Parris shows himself to have been a very perceptive editor, highly attentive to the relationship between the translation and the original, and sensitive to small details of language and punctuation” (KJB: a Short History, p. 162). John Anthony Nordstrom observed: “Parris’s great accomplishments were printed in the next Cambridge Bible of 1743” (Stained with Blood, p. 224). Changes introduced in the 1743 Cambridge can be found in London, Oxford, and Cambridge editions before the 1762 Cambridge edition was printed. A 1747 London KJV edition was likely based mainly on the 1743 Cambridge. Among whatever earlier editions he may have used or compared, F. S. Parris may have consulted the 1660 London edition or have been aware of its editing concerning the use of nominative case “ye.” It was the 1743 Cambridge edition that introduced [perhaps reintroduced from the 1660 London] the nominative case “ye” for “you” in over 200 places. The 1743 Cambridge also introduced many of the uses of an apostrophe to indicate possession.

 

Yeah, we hear you: no Bible is perfect, there's no perfect word of God anywhere.
This is Christianity in the 21st Century in the West. God help us.

 

We do not need a perfect translation, as have a perfect God!

 

Does the KJV teach you to put words in the mouths of others that they did not state and thus bear false witness?

The Church of England makers of the KJV maintained that no translation would be perfect.

Do you hide behind subjectively chosen English renderings despite no Biblical warrant for doing so?