• 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!

My Thoughts on the KJV

How I see the King James Bible

  • I love the KJV, and should be the only version ever used

    Votes: 2 4.3%
  • I love the KJV and should be the only version used by English speakers

    Votes: 3 6.5%
  • It is a very good version, one that I normally use

    Votes: 15 32.6%
  • Its an good version - I use it more than other versions

    Votes: 1 2.2%
  • Its an acceptable version - I use it about the same as other versions

    Votes: 3 6.5%
  • Its a fair version, I use it sometimes

    Votes: 4 8.7%
  • Its a poor version, I hardly ever use it

    Votes: 4 8.7%
  • Its a very poor version I never use it

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Its a horrbile version, I refuse to use it

    Votes: 1 2.2%
  • Other answer

    Votes: 13 28.3%

  • Total voters
    46
Status
Not open for further replies.

Japheth10

New Member
What I find interesting is the KJO crowd say all they need is the KJV - they don't need commentaries, other versions, notes, ect, because the KJV is self-sufficient. But they say you need that dictionary for certain words.

So which is it, is the KJV self sufficient or not
Sure they don't!
5175.jpg







(and I'm still waiting on an answer from the two who voted option one - how are non-English speakers able to be saved?
Learn Jacobean English,I guess.
 

franklinmonroe

Active Member
... But they say you need that dictionary for certain words. ...
Actually, Gail Riplinger argues in her 1998 book "The Language of the King James Bible" that you don't need a dictionary at all -- the KJB "contains a Built-in Dictionary" (Introduction, p. xvi) that explains all its' diffcult words (notice she does not deny that there are such).

I just recently acquired her second 'book' very inexpensively at a secondhand store and am just beginning to look at it. Any one read it? Should I start a new thread about it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

annsni

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Actually, Gail Riplinger argues in her 1998 book "The Language of the King James Bible" that you don't need a dictionary at all -- the KJB "contains a Built-in Dictionary" (Introduction, p. xvi) that explains all its' diffcult words (notice she does not deny that there are such).

I just recently acquired her second 'book' very inexpensively at a secondhand store and am just beginning to look at it. Any one read it? Should I start a new thread about it?

I'd love to hear an example.
 

Logos1560

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I just recently acquired her second 'book' very inexpensively at a secondhand store and am just beginning to look at it. Any one read it? Should I start a new thread about it?

Riplinger's second book about the Bible translation issue printed in 1994 by Hearthstone Publishing was entitled: Which Bible is God's Word: Answers to Common Questions Concerning Modern Versions and Translations. This book may have first been the text taken from her appearance on radio programs. Later Riplinger did print a revised edition of this book.

The Language of the King James Bible [printed in 1998] would be her third book on this topic. I have a copy of it, and I have read it.
 

preacher4truth

Active Member
Actually, Gail Riplinger argues in her 1998 book "The Language of the King James Bible" that you don't need a dictionary at all -- the KJB "contains a Built-in Dictionary" (Introduction, p. xvi) that explains all its' diffcult words (notice she does not deny that there are such).

I just recently acquired her second 'book' very inexpensively at a secondhand store and am just beginning to look at it. Any one read it? Should I start a new thread about it?

Sure why not?

I remember when her books came out. Fundamentalists around here became angry when they found the author of the book is a woman.

But, they soon forgot that, and embraced her "work" and preachers harped on it for years and used her "studies" as proof the KJB is the only true Word of God.

Their nonsense never ceases to amaze me.

I actually had a deacon stand in the pulpit while we were gone for a weekend and tell the folks "I don't care what the preacher says, if you use anything other than the KJB, you are going to hell!"

How sweet to come back and have to take care of that mess.

BTW, I used the KJB then. I preached from it, never about it.
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
I had a deacon stand in the pulpit and tell the folks "I don't care what the preacher says, if you use anything other than the KJB, you are going to hell!"

BTW, I used the KJB then. I preached from it, never about it.

P4T - I think those two statemens sum it up!:thumbsup:
 

jaigner

Active Member
It has served the Church well, but there are now far, far better translations to use. To ignore that fact is a disservice to the Gospel.
 

franklinmonroe

Active Member
...The Language of the King James Bible [printed in 1998] would be her third book on this topic. ...
I'm sure you are right. I wrote "second book" based on the information on the back cover "About the Author" on my copy of LotKJB which states after her academic creditials that Riplinger "authored six college textbooks" and that "the seventh textbook, New Age Bible Versions, was an international best seller" and concludes with "this, the eighth textbook".

According to that sequence, I was led to believe that LotKJB followed NABV. While I've not seen her alleged college textbooks, I do have a copy of New Age Bible Versions and I certainly don't consider it a 'textbook'; neither is The Language of the King James Bible a 'textabook'. Thus, I had concluded just two "books". Apparently, the misinformation is not limited to only the pages on the inside.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Johathan01

New Member
NIV BIBLE VERSE AV
jeered 2 Ki 2:23 mocked
joists 2 Chr 34:11 couplings
jowls Deut 18:3 cheeks
kingship 1 Sam 10:16 kingdom
lifeboat Acts 27:30 boat
magi Matt 2:1 wise men
mainstay Jer 49:25 chief
marauders Job 12:6 robbers
marshaled Job 32:14 directed
mattocks 1 Sam 13:20 courter
maxiums Job 13:12 remembrances
melodious Ps 81:2 pleasant
memorandum Ezra 6:2 record
mina Lk 19:16 pound
misdemeanor Acts 18:14 wrong
naive Rom 16:18 simple
nationality Est 2:10 people
naught Is 40:23 nothing
Negev Gen 12:9 south
Nephilim Gen 6:4 giants
nightfall 2 Sam 19:7 night
noonday 2 Sam 4:5 noon
Nubians Dan 11:43 Ethiopians
nuggets Job 22:24 gold
nurtured Lam 4:5 brought
oarsmen Ezek 27:26 rowers
oblivion Ps 88:12 forgetfulness
obscenity Eph 5:4 filthiness
offal Ex 29:14 dung
officiate 2 Ki 17:32 sacrificed
opportune Mk 6:1 convenient
ore Job 28:2 stone
overawed Ps 49:16 afraid
overweening Is 16:6 very
parapet Deut 22:8 battlement
piled Lk 23:9 questioned
pinions Deut 32:11 wings
porphyry Est 1:6 red
portent Is 20:3 wonder
portico 1 Ki 6:3 porch
poultice 2 Ki 20:7 lump
Praetorium Matt 27:27 common hall
prefects Dan 3:3 governors
proconsul Acts 13:8 deputy
profligate Deut 21:20 glutton
promiscuity Ezek 16:26 whoredoms
NIV BIBLE VERSE AV
qualm Jude 12 fear
rabble Num 11:4 mixed multitude
ramparts Hab 2: 11 tower
rawboned Gen 49:14 strong
reeked Ex 8:14 stank
repointing 1 Sam 13:21 sharpen
reposes Pro 14:33 resteth
reputed Gal 2:9 seemed
resound 1 Chr 16:32 roar
resplendent Ps 76:4 glorious
reveled Neh 9:25 delighted themselves
revelry Is 22:13 gladness
revening Jer 2:30 destroying
rifts Jer 2:6 pits
sachet Song 1:13 bundle
satraps Est 3:12 lieutenants
sheathed Ps 68:13 covered
siegeworks Ecc 9:14 bulwarks
simplehearted Ps 116:6 simple
sistrums 2 Sam 6:5 cornets
squall Mk 4:37 storm of wind
stadia Rev 14:20 furlongs
stag Song 2:9 hart
stipulations Deut 4:45 testimonies
suckling 1 Sam 7:9 sucking
sullen 1 Ki 21:5 sad
temperate 1 Tim 3:11 sober
tempest Ps 55:8 storm
terebinth Hos 4:13 elms
tethered 2 Ki 7:10 tied
thong Lk 3:16 latchet
thornbush Is 55:13 thorn
thundercloud Ps 81:7 thunder
timidity 2 Tim 1:7 fear
tinder Is 1:31 tow
torrent Rev 12:15 flood
tranquillity Ecc 4:6 quietness
transcends Phil 4:7 passeth
transplanted Ezek 17:10 planted
tresses Song 7:5 galleries
tumult 1 Sam 14:19 noise
turbulent Gen 49:4 unstable
tyrannical Proverbs 28:16 oppressor
tyranny Isaiah 54:14 oppression
NIV BIBLE VERSE AV
underlings 2 Kings 19:6 servants
vassal 2 Kings 24:1 servant
vaunts Job 15:25 strengtheneth
vent Job 20:23 cast
verdant Song 1:16 green
vestments Ezra 3:10 apparel
vexed Psa 112:10 grieved
wadi Num 34:5 river
waylaid 1 Sam 15:2 laid wait for
waywardness Hosea 14:4 backsliding
wily Job 5:13 froward
wrenched Genesis 32:25 out of joint
wretches Matthew 21:41 wicked men
yearling Isaiah 11:6 fatling

There you go. You're never going to convince me that the KJV is just too hard to understand using the "antiquated words" excuse.

Amen! I totally agree. Besides, the Holy Spirit teaches us. This is why the Bible is foolishness to those who are perishing. It is spiritually discerned.
 

annsni

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Amen! I totally agree. Besides, the Holy Spirit teaches us. This is why the Bible is foolishness to those who are perishing. It is spiritually discerned.

So are you saying that if I do not understand what the Scripture is saying because it is not written in my own language that I'm unsaved?
 

Bro. James

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I contend the KJV, with its many revisions, is still the best English translation. I am not a KJVO. If your native language is Swahili, by all means use the Swahili translation. Faith comes by hearing, hearing by the Word of God; how can they hear without a preacher? The Holy Spirit bears witness to The Word.

Dumb questions: What happened to all the lost folks who never spoke English before the 17th century, and the advent of the KJV.

The Geneva Bible(English) predates the KJV. There is evidence the pilgrims had Geneva Bibles at Plymouth Rock, 1620. Is there something defective about the preaching of the Geneva Bible in the Colonies?

Why did the KJV translators not translate the word baptizo?

Will we allow such errors with the superintendence of God?

God does not author confusion or error.

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Peace,

Bro. James
 

jbh28

Active Member
What about, I love the KJV, it's an excellent translation, yet old, but there are better ones out today that I prefer to use.
 

revmwc

Well-Known Member
What about, I love the KJV, it's an excellent translation, yet old, but there are better ones out today that I prefer to use.

Well I prefer the interlinear as the best translation but it would confuse most congregations, so I use the KJV. Niv has at least one error in the text. Nas has corrected that error, but there were some others I just can't remember the others I found. So after those two with their errors what are the better ones you have found today?
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Well I prefer the interlinear as the best translation but it would confuse most congregations, so I use the KJV.

The KJV may confuse at least some of the people. Is the average age of your congregation 55?

What interlinear? There are a few. Would you actually call an interlinear a translation?

Niv has at least one error in the text.

I'm a big fan of the 2011 NIV. Are you referencing the 84 NIV?
Whether the older one,or the latest -- I am sure there a number of errors. No translation is error free. The KJV is particularly prone to error.

Nas has corrected that error,

Do you recall the error?
 

revmwc

Well-Known Member
The KJV may confuse at least some of the people. Is the average age of your congregation 55?

What interlinear? There are a few. Would you actually call an interlinear a translation?



I'm a big fan of the 2011 NIV. Are you referencing the 84 NIV?
Whether the older one,or the latest -- I am sure there a number of errors. No translation is error free. The KJV is particularly prone to error.



Do you recall the error?

I posted the verse a while back where it says Jesus sent out 72 instead of 70.

The interlinear translates from Greek to English with no grammatical changes it gives word for word meaning. When I refer to original language I mean as wrtitten in the greek and seen in the interlinear.
 

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
I posted the verse a while back where it says Jesus sent out 72 instead of 70.

The interlinear translates from Greek to English with no grammatical changes it gives word for word meaning. When I refer to original language I mean as wrtitten in the greek and seen in the interlinear.

Just curious...

WHICH Greek text used for basis of the Interlinear?
 

JesusFan

Well-Known Member
The Stephens 1550 textus receptus

that is same text as used by KJV translaters in 1611?

I have two on my software, one is a Greek critical text, other uses the 26th edition of nestle-Aland...

is there an interlinear in MT for the Greek?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top