<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TomVols:
Dr. Lowry,
When looking at the differences between the 1611 and the 1769 KJVs, be sure to weigh the evidence. The KJVo argument is that the changes are not significant. Yet when the same standard is applied to changes or variants in the MVs, many KJVos tend to argue that there is no such thing as a minor change.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Dr. Robert Joyner says this:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Every translation is God’s word in so far as it is translated correctly. Out of the 31,124 verses in the Bible, there are only about 200 or less that are even questioned, regardless of what translation you use or what family of Greek manuscripts you use. This means there are over 30,900 verses that are God’s word. So in any translation you use, the vast majority of it is the word of God. This is why the KJV translators said, “The meanest translation is the word of God.”
The differences between translations has been grossly exaggerated by some. The differences between families of Greek manuscripts have also been magnified and blown out of proportion by Ruckman, Riplinger, Waite, and others. These people make a lot of money appealing to the ignorance of God’s people. The fact is, both the Textus Receptus and the Alexandrian manuscripts set forth every doctrine that God has inspired. There is no important doctrinal difference. It is the same with the different English translations. Peter Ruckman said he had problems with only 152 verses of the New Testament (THE CHRISTIAN’S HANDBOOK OF MANUSCRIPT EVIDENCE, page 89).
Some people go to great extremes to magnify the differences between translations and families of Greek manuscripts. These same people go to great extremes to play down the differences in the KJV and the Textus Receptus. In II Timothy chapter two, I counted 55 changes from the 1611 KJV to the 1769 version of the KJV that we use today. If you multiply 55 by 1189, (the number of chapters in the Bible), you can see there are at least 50,000 differences between the original KJV and the one we use today. The KJV Only people scream about the differences between the KJV and the NIV but excuse the changes within the KJV. They say the differences in the five major editions of the KJV were corrections in spelling, words, etc. The changes did not affect doctrine, they say. This is also true of the changes between the KJV and the NIV. However, the KJV Only group magnify the changes in the NIV and minimize the changes in the KJV.
The same is true when it comes to Greek Manuscripts. The KJV Only crowd screams about the differences in the families of manuscripts, but say nothing about the differences in the 18 editions of the Textus Receptus. Yes, there have been 18 different editions of the Textus Receptus with no two alike (some say 30 editions). When they say the Textus Receptus are the only inspired manuscripts, which edition do they mean? Why do the differences in the other manuscripts mean so much, and the differences in the Textus Receptus mean nothing? It sounds like someone is abandoning all logic and is trying to prove a point with no facts or Scripture.
CONCLUSION
When you read the Bible, you can be sure you are reading the word of God. Since God never promised a perfect translation, you may have to occasionally check some detail in the original or compare translations. But this is the exception rather than the rule.
The believer should read his Bible searching for blessings and to see Christ, not searching for flaws. Let the textual scholars work these few problems out. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://www.kjvonly.org/robert/we_can_be_sure.html
