-
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!
Do the KJVO consider any translation valid then to use?
- Thread starter JesusFan
- Start date
KJB1611reader
Active Member
Foreign versions on the kjb.
KJB1611reader
Active Member
No!!!!!
This is an interesting article:
KJB1611reader
Active Member
That's funny.
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
Do you mean translations of the KJV into other languages, like French, Mongolian, Icelandic, Turkish? If so, why do you believe that speakers of languages other than English should have to make do with a translation of a translation? Or do you mean translations of the Hebrew Old Testament and Greek New Testament into languages other than English, based on the same texts that the KJV translators used?
KJB1611reader
Active Member
American Bible society did that once.
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
Did what? Make a translation of a translation? Why didn't they do as the 1611 translators did and translate from the original languages?
When translations into foreign languages are made from the KJV, they would usually be less accurate than if they were made from the preserved Scriptures in the original languages. The fact that it has sometimes been done does not suggest that it is best.
The 1637 Dutch Statenvertaling Bible, also known as the Dutch States-General Version, was commissioned by the Synod of Dort (1618-1619). The Cambridge History of the Bible noted that “the great event in the history of the Dutch Bible was the completion of the States-General Bible (Statenvertaling)“ (p. 352). Samuel Ward, one of the KJV translators, had presented a report on the procedures used in the making of the KJV to this Synod of Dort. David Sorenson maintained that the Received Text was the basis for “the Dutch Statenvertaling Version of 1637” (Touch Not, p. 84). David Cloud listed the 1637 Dutch Statenvertaling as being “produced from the TR” (Modern Bible Versions, p. 16). He again confirmed that the Received Text was translated into Dutch in 1637 (Faith, p. 153; see also Way of Life Encyclopedia, p. 53). Peter Ruckman indicated that the Dutch “had a Bible translated from the same manuscripts the King James translators used” (Bible Babel, p. 91). Gail Riplinger listed this Dutch Version as a Reformation Bible (In Awe, p. 989). Seeming to link the KJV, this Dutch Bible, and others together as reliable translations, Gail Riplinger asked “how did the translators of Reformation Bibles, like the King James Bible of 1611, the French Olivetan, the Dutch Statenvertaling, the German Luther Bible, the Italian Diodati, and the Spanish Valera know what readings were accepted by the true body of Christ” (p. 959)? Robert Harbach, a KJV defender, described this Dutch Bible as “a very eminently trustworthy translation” (Bible Archaisms, p. 9). This 1637 Dutch Bible was the authorized version in Dutch.
This standard and authorized Dutch Bible was translated into English in 1657. Would you accept and recommend this 1657 English Bible translation the same way that you advocate foreign Bible translations being made from the KJV? If not, you suggest that you are being inconsistent.
What is funny - and please be specific.
KJB1611reader
Active Member
The article,.its being debunked.
History of the Bible from 1400 BC
Foreign translators CAN'T use the same Greek the Anglicans used in 1611 since that collection of Greek texts DOES NOT EXIST. Remember, it is not ONE document, but many that were compiled as considered the "best" and history records that compilation was burned.
Now the sect simply has to say the Majority Text (a later compilation of Greek documents) is closest to what the 1609-11 scholars used. And worship the Majority Text (mostly copies of copies of copies of copies of late Byzantine Greek Orthodox Church).
Now the sect simply has to say the Majority Text (a later compilation of Greek documents) is closest to what the 1609-11 scholars used. And worship the Majority Text (mostly copies of copies of copies of copies of late Byzantine Greek Orthodox Church).
Did God have a translation in English for use before 1611 then?
Translations based off tgher Kjv itself, or made off the TR texts and Hebrew text?
The Kjv history seems a lot like the Muslim Koran, as their Uthman made his Koran and then burnt up all of them that disagreed with him
How can factual and historical information be debunked though?