-
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!
In a perfect world
- Thread starter stilllearning
- Start date
- Status
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Whatever it took to bring the Geneva Bible into 21st century English - kind of like the NKJV did with the KJV. I would also want it to fix places like Romans 6v2 where the English equivalent of 'God forbid' is not found in the TR.
The KJV did much more than just 'replace old words,' partly because they were not that old.
Just curious - would you have supported a translation that the King ordered published and was meant to replace the Bible you were using?
Last edited by a moderator:
Stilllearning...
You have given us a very good post.
Where some people have trouble is they lose sight of the fact that for KJB users, the KJB is Scripture exactly as it is. Scholarship and publishing products do not really matter. America is a consumer society and many people follow the lingo and chase after whatever is "new and improved." And for some, whatever the original manuscripts contain, do not really matter all that much, because they are interested in the Scripture that is their hands.
Thank you for your post.
You have given us a very good post.
Where some people have trouble is they lose sight of the fact that for KJB users, the KJB is Scripture exactly as it is. Scholarship and publishing products do not really matter. America is a consumer society and many people follow the lingo and chase after whatever is "new and improved." And for some, whatever the original manuscripts contain, do not really matter all that much, because they are interested in the Scripture that is their hands.
Thank you for your post.
Last edited by a moderator:
And where some people have trouble is they lose sight of the fact that for us ESV users, the ESV is Scripture exactly as it is. Same goes for the NIV user, the Geneva Bible user, the Greek NT user, and the Hebrew OT user.
I have access to a 1599 Geneva Bible (restoration Project). It is published by Tolle Lege Press. It's in easily to see modern type,and has very slight modifications. The original notes are retained.
The volume is wonderful!
I prefer the NASV myself, but isn't it interesting that a majority of the reformers woulld had perfered the Geneva to the KJV!
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
I certainly had read the OP to the end, and yes, you did write:
The Bible is not like an encyclopedia; It is God’s Holy Word, that He gave to mankind.
It was “completed”, hundreds of years ago(long before the KJB), and at that point, it became somewhat “untouchable”.
But that came only after you had already mentioned the King James Version, and the KJV controversy, in relation to updating. The natural inference, IMO, was that you were using the KJV as the standard.It was “completed”, hundreds of years ago(long before the KJB), and at that point, it became somewhat “untouchable”.
I'm sorry I misunderstood you. To save further confusion, when you say, "It was “completed”, hundreds of years ago(long before the KJB)," do you mean God's Word in its original languages, or in English?
stilllearning
Active Member
Sorry for the confusion.
No David, I wasn’t talking about English Bibles(the earliest one of those was about 1526 or so); But God had preserved His Word long before that.
Therefore the issue is, since God’s Word was preserved so long ago, than any new discoveries of manuscripts are of no real use; (Because we already have God’s preserved Word.)
-------------
I know this will be offensive to many here, because of our propensity to always be improving things; But God’s Word is one of those things that just does not need to be improved upon.
If it’s not broken, stop trying to fix it!
Last edited by a moderator:
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
So the English Bible was 'broken' until 1611?
stilllearning
Active Member
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
If it wasn't broken, why did we need another government mandated translation only fifty years later and the King's mandate that it should not be published?
Last edited by a moderator:
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
Thanks for that! Looking back through this thread, it seems that most of the posts assumed (as I did) that you were talking about English bibles.
There English Bibles before that. What about the two Wycliffe versions 1380's --1405 or so? What about translations of parts of the Bible before then by the likes of Richard Rolle and others?
You would brush aside discoveries of older manuscripts? Why would you deliberately want to remain in the dark? I'm glad the KJV revisers didn't feel the way you do about this. They would certainly want to have access to ancient manuscripts.
Offensive is not quite the word. Stupid is more appropriate.
franklinmonroe
Active Member
I can imagine that the believers who read those old manuscripts as their cherished Scriptures would be deeply offended that you say that their personal Bibles "are of no real use". I would be honored to use a genuine 5th Century (or 9th, 13th, etc.) Christian's incomplete and imperfect sacred manuscript.
Last edited by a moderator:
The KJV is not perfect.
I'm going to give a good quote by PastorLarry from back on 6/21/08 :"The KJV is a wonderful testimony to God's will and power to work through imperfect means."
In a perfect world that God created and before sin entered it, there was no Bible in it. Adam and Eve did not have a Bible.
Needless to say, there was no need for it because they had God Himself.
Which leads me to ask, what is more important for a Christian- a perfect Bible or a close relationship to the Lord?
franklinmonroe
Active Member
Is this a 'trick' question?
- Status