KJV versus New Versions

[MISSIONARY]

One thing that disturbs me is not the language updates so much but the scriptural changes that have taken place.

Just for a start: the doctrine of fasting

KJV: Matt. 17:21 "This kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting"

NIV: omit
NASB: omit

KJV: 2 Cor. 6:5 in fastings
2 Cor. 11:27 in fastings

NIV: OMIT
NASB: OMIT

KJV: MARK 9:29 This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting

NIV: this kind can come out only by prayer
NASB: same

KJV: I Cor. 7:5 "give yourselves to fasting and prayer

NIV: devote yourself to prayer
NASB: same

KJV: Acts 10:30 "Four days ago I was fasting . . . and prayed"

NIV: Four days ago I was prayiing
NASB: same

Here the great doctrine of fasting is omitted. Believers lose this great power over extreme difficulties in their spiritual lives.

objectionable reference to Bible versions snipped

[ January 14, 2006, 01:51 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Please limit your comments to mss evidence and translational issues only. At the first sign of degeneration into personal attacks or attacks on versions it will be closed without notice.

[ January 14, 2006, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

[Ransom]

Here the great doctrine of fasting is omitted.

There is no "great doctrine of fasting."

There is no command that Christians are to fast, nor is its practice regulated by Scripture, except insofar as Jesus warns his listeners not to do so hypocritically.

Scripture simply treats fasting as a fact of first-century life.

objectionable reference to a group of posters snipped

[ January 14, 2006, 01:49 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Orignally posted by Phil310

Of course, I respect the moderator's decision should he decide to close any topic. However, I must admit that when I happened upon the BB I observed the Translation issue very closely. I was KJVO but have since changed my position and am no longer KJVO. This arguement might have been had previously but there is always new eyes and ears to listen and see. I'm glad the forums were not prematurely closed before I came to the board so I can see others rehash the same old arguements for me.

Of course this is submitted with the utmost respect for C4K and other moderators. Just wanted to put in my two cents for what its worth.

Phil310 (former KJVO)

 

[Askjo]

The story of Jesus in the NT is to face the Satan when he tempted Jesus DURING Jesus was fasting. Is the doctrine of fasting so important?

Let's see: modern versions omitted this doctrine of fasting in many passages because they did not reverence God's speaking that He taught us about this doctrine.

 

[MISSIONARY]

Ok, I disagree about there not being a doctrine for us to fast and that many difficult problems can be solved by fasting.

We all agree in the Doctrine of Christ, right?

Here goes:

KJV: Acts 15:11 Lord Jesus Christ
NIV: Lord Jesus
NASB: Lord Jesus

KJV: Romans 1:3 Jesus Christ our Lord
NIV: omit
NASB: omit

KJV: 2 Cor. 11:31 Lord Jesus Christ
NIV:Lord Jesus
NASB:Lord Jesus

KJV: I Thess. 3:11 Jesus Christ our Lord
NIV: Jesus our Lord
NASB: Jesus our Lord

KJV: 2 Thess. 1:8 our Lord Jesus Christ
NIV: Our Lord Jesus
NASB: Our Lord Jesus

KJV:I Cor. 5:4 our Lord Jesus Christ
NIV: our Lord Jesus
NASB: our Lord Jesus

The doctrine of Christ is without a doubt weakened in the new versions.

This is just a very, very small sample of what the enemy is doing to the true Word of God.

Leaves the door open any religion to say their man is the Christ. Since Jesus is not identified as Christ.

Think on these things !

 

[MISSIONARY]

Dear moderator this is not an attack on any particular version, I am just letting the different versions speak for themselves.

Missionary

 

[4His_glory]

Hey missionary look up all those passages in CONTEXT in the MV and you will see that the doctrine is by no means weakened at all. Oh and how about the times the MV's add referances to Jesus Christ that the KJV leaves out?

 

[Gold Dragon]

[sarcasm]I suggest we should strengthen the "Doctrine of Christ" found in the KJV by adding more instances of the words Jesus, Lord and Christ. I really don't think it is strong enough in the KJV and more instances of those words will definitely strengthen this important concept.[/sarcasm]

 

[tinytim]

Originally posted by C4K:
Orignally posted by Phil310

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Of course, I respect the moderator's decision should he decide to close any topic. However, I must admit that when I happened upon the BB I observed the Translation issue very closely. I was KJVO but have since changed my position and am no longer KJVO. This arguement might have been had previously but there is always new eyes and ears to listen and see. I'm glad the forums were not prematurely closed before I came to the board so I can see others rehash the same old arguements for me.

Of course this is submitted with the utmost respect for C4K and other moderators. Just wanted to put in my two cents for what its worth.

Phil310 (former KJVO)

</font>[/QUOTE]I too came to BB looking for answers. I too used to be KJVO until I discovered somethings.
It saddens me to see Christians put down other translations, but I do feel we need to discuss them, and their usefulness. There are so many people still trapped by bad teaching.

Please do not make personal insults or slander God's word. (in any translation)

Thank you.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

This thread is quickly degenerating folks and faces imminent closure unless it discusses the topic.

 

[nate]

"But this kind does not come out except by prayer and fasting" Matthew 17:20 ISV

"He told them, "This kind can come out only by prayer and fasting." Mark 9:29 ISV

"in toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night, through hunger and thirst, through many periods of fasting, through coldness and nakedness" 2 Corinthians 11:27 ISV

The versions(NIV,NASB) you mention have fine ground to stand on in their choices but remember monks in monastaries usually copied the Scriptures and they really believed in "fasting". So using the methods of textual critiscism we can tell in many instances Acts 10:30 for instance that it was probably added later by a scribe who thought it ought read "fasting" and IMO I wouldn't call fasting a doctrine either.

 

[4His_glory]

Originally posted by C4K:
This thread is quickly degenerating folks and faces imminent closure unless it discusses the topic.

I thought it was a violation of the rules to even start a thread pitting one version against another.

 

[Ransom]

MISSIONARY said:

The doctrine of Christ is without a doubt weakened in the new versions.

The "doctrine of Christ" is not a count of capitalized words piled up in front of "Christ."

 

[nate]

On the deity of Christ issue~

Christ Jesus
KJV 58
NKJV 69
NASB 86
NIV 86

Christ Jesus our Lord
KJV 5
NKJV 7
NASB 7
NIV 7

Jesus our Lord
KJV 7
NKJV 9
NASB 12
NIV 10

Again using textual critiscism we can discern that scribes always tended to elaborate and add things rather than delete things. For instance the title of Revelation in one mss reads "the Glorious beloved and most revered disciple of our Lord in the days when He walked the earth"... yadda yadda. It goes on for nearly a small paragraph. Scribes loved to elaborate things. But anyway from the evidence above I will allow the versions to speak for themselves.

 

[Ransom]

MISSIONARY said:

Dear moderator this is not an attack on any particular version

Your claim that the NIV or NASB "omit" this or that was prejudicial from the very beginning.

 

[4His_glory]

Originally posted by Ransom:
MISSIONARY said:

Dear moderator this is not an attack on any particular version

Your claim that the NIV or NASB "omit" this or that was prejudicial from the very beginning.

I agree, which is I thought a violation of the rules unless I am mistaken.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

This is not technically a "Pitting of one version against another" so it is within the limits of the rules.

It is questioning different translations of various passages.

It does not appear to be long for this world though since it keeps veering from the passages in question.

 

[MISSIONARY]

Ransom, that was no claim, examine the facts. compare the versions and verses yourself, with your own eyes instead of what you have been told.

Facts not claims ! !

I challenge anyone to disagree that these mentioned verses were not left out as I said.

Think on these things!

 

[Ransom]

This is not technically a "Pitting of one version against another" so it is within the limits of the rules.

Certainly sounded to me like the conclusion we were supposed to draw was "KJV good, NIV bad."