New version? The Seemless Bible

[franklinmonroe]

The Seemless Bible (2005), which has only the text of the entire New Testament, is described as --

The Seamless Bible presents these chronicles of the original translation – for the first time ever – in a seamless chronological order as they happened.

Adapted from the King James Version, the fabric of the Gospel has been rewoven into an easy-to-read narrative that presents the story of Christ and His Apostles in sequential order to provide new insights about His life and times. Words that may have obscured the simple power, beauty, and truth of Jesus’ life and teachings have also been updated to contemporary language.​

The text is set in paragraph form without intervening verse numbers or traditional chapters (although the beginning of each section indicates all the referrences of the passages included). It seems that none of the original KJV text is left out (complete index in back).

Is this a genuine KJV or not?

BTW, there is now a Seemless Gospels by the same publisher also. Similarly, there is a chronological Gospels in the TNIV text by Zondervan called The Story.

 

[Johnv]

It's simply an adaptation of the NT of the KJV text, sans chapter and verse divisions.

Chapter and verse divisions are not required for a bible to be a bible, so, yes, it's a bible. That said, chapter and verse divisions are important man-made tools used for reference. I wouldn't recommend it for referential study, but for spiritual enrichment, it's probably fine.

 

[Rippon]

Since it has been updated to contemporary language I wouldn't consider it to be a genuine KJV.

 

[Dale-c]

Since it has been updated to contemporary language I wouldn't consider it to be a genuine KJV.

Not that it matters what you or I think anyway Rippon
I am sure that many would oppose a KJV that simply had the verse divisions removed.

Afterall, if God inspired the translation of the KJV, then the chapters are inspired.

 

[Tater77]

I have a New King James archeological study bible in chronological order. Seems more like a molehill that doesn't need to become a mountain. They are good study helps.

 

[HankD]

Not that it matters what you or I think anyway Rippon
I am sure that many would oppose a KJV that simply had the verse divisions removed.

Afterall, if God inspired the translation of the KJV, then the chapters are inspired.

What about the Book of Maps?


HankD

 

[robycop3]

I wouldn't recommend it to a newer Christian by itself. I would tell'em to have a copy of a "regular" version at hand. I believe the NT is in a reasonable chronological order anyway, but not the OT. However, the order of the OT boox has been what it is for a long time, & I am against making a version or edition that changes it.