Regarding the King James Bible

[Dr. Gerald Click]

One can find inaccuracies of translation in ANY bible version, simply because they are translations. Anytime one goes from one language to another, the subtleties get lost. The KJV may not be a perfect translation from the Greek/Hebraic texts, but if you ever waded through Middle English classic literature, you have to love the richness of the language in the KJV.

 

[BonnieStormcloud]

I agree,,, the KJV has the most of all the translations of the original text. Our Pastor recently gave us a handout on all the translations of the bible such as the NIV and the New KJV.. which showed how much of the original verses was ommitted from the original text and scrolls. I would read no other Bible!

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by BonnieStormcloud:
I agree,,, the KJV has the most of all the translations of the original text. Our Pastor recently gave us a handout on all the translations of the bible such as the NIV and the New KJV.. which showed how much of the original verses was ommitted from the original text and scrolls. I would read no other Bible!

You should ask your pastor how he knows those verses were originally there in the original text, and not added later. Maybe the NIV is simply removing later additions to the original text!

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by QuickeningSpirit:

You just can't get over the fact Paul wrote the Book of the Romans and whether you approve of the italicized words or not, the meaning isn't changed and there is NOTHING added "Baal" is an image, also a graven image that Israel bowed down on their knees before to worship.

The issue is that the KJV adds words to Rom. 11:4 which are not found in the original language text from which it was translated. Suppose a new edition of the KJV came out in which 1 Kg. 19:18 read like this:

"Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto the image of Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him." (1 Kg. 19:18, 2004 KJV)

Would you object to the addition of the italicized words?

 

[Precepts]

Originally posted by Archangel7:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by QuickeningSpirit:

You just can't get over the fact Paul wrote the Book of the Romans and whether you approve of the italicized words or not, the meaning isn't changed and there is NOTHING added "Baal" is an image, also a graven image that Israel bowed down on their knees before to worship.

The issue is that the KJV adds words to Rom. 11:4 which are not found in the original language text from which it was translated. Suppose a new edition of the KJV came out in which 1 Kg. 19:18 read like this:

"Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto the image of Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him." (1 Kg. 19:18, 2004 KJV)

Would you object to the addition of the


italicized words? </font>[/QUOTE]No, sir I don't believe I could, and it wouldn't matter if I did, this is truly a waste of time.

 

[Archangel7]

Originally posted by QuickeningSpirit:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Archangel7:

The issue is that the KJV adds words to Rom. 11:4 which are not found in the original language text from which it was translated. Suppose a new edition of the KJV came out in which 1 Kg. 19:18 read like this:

"Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto the image of Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him." (1 Kg. 19:18, 2004 KJV)

Would you object to the addition of the italicized words?

No, sir I don't believe I could.... </font>[/QUOTE]Why not? Why would you object to a revised 2004 KJV doing exactly the same thing that the 1611 KJV did -- adding italicized words to the word of God?

 

[robycop3]

Originally posted by QuickeningSpirit:

Archangel 7-"Would you object to the addition of the italicized words?

QS: No, sir I don't believe I could, and it wouldn't matter if I did, this is truly a waste of time.

robycop: Why is it a waste of time to point out that a command of God was clearly ignored by the addition of words to His direct statement made originally to Elijah? This is not the rephrasing of a thought, but a copy of God's direct words. The addition cannot be accounted for by language differences nor context, nor need for clarification of a passage which doesn't translate readily into English. There's NO EXCUSE to justify it. Sure, Baal had an image and the 3 words don't alter any doctrine, but why were they added? This is NOT a waste of time.

 

[Precepts]

Sure, Baal had an image and the 3 words don't alter any doctrine, but why were they added? This is NOT a waste of time.

Surely you jest?

You contradict your self, Cranston

 

[BonnieStormcloud]

[ January 13, 2004, 07:58 PM: Message edited by: BonnieStormcloud ]

 

[BonnieStormcloud]

[/qb][/QUOTE]You should ask your pastor how he knows those verses were originally there in the original text, and not added later. Maybe the NIV is simply removing later additions to the original text!

[/qb][/QUOTE] [/QB][/QUOTE]

My Pastor has researched as most Pastors have and the minor texts and the underlying Hebrew texts are most closley related to the KJV.. There are many studies done about the KJV and the Hebrew Text, the Minor Texts and the Underlying Texts.. and the KJV version is the most accurate. The Pastor also gave us a personal expierence about the KJV but considering it is in the realm of the supernatural most uptight Baptist scoff.
But the story coming from an Independant Fundimental Baptist with back up from other family members is believable..
It deals with demonic possesion and the Light of the Word of God.. the pastor showed the sufferer words from the NIV and the sufferer said take it away it glows slightly and then the (not sure of edition) the Bible that has the new translation with the KJV on the outer edges.. the person possesed saw only the light around the outside of the bible.. Then the pastor pulled out his KJV and the demon screamed in pain at the bright words of God. This is a true and documented story.. If the fallen angels cannot bear the sigght of the KJV then I know it is the one for me. I am sure other pastors have had expierence in this area as well. Although mosts Baptists like to scoff.. But there was demonic possesion in the Bible and there is today as well. But no matter your version of the Bible there is enough in each version of the Bible to lead a soul to Christ and after all that is what is most important.

 

[BrianT]

There are many studies done about the KJV and the Hebrew Text, the Minor Texts and the Underlying Texts.. and the KJV version is the most accurate.

Yes, there have been many studies done. You can even study it for yourself, all the info is readily available. Most who have studied it in extreme detail would disagree with your pastor.

As for the rest of your post, I won't scoff, but I will say that I don't believe that story really happened. I do like your screen name though - very cool!

 

[LadyEagle]

QuickeningSpirit, that was a wonderful post. It brought me to tears. Wonderful. Thank you.

I'll keep my King James Bible, thank you--It has served generations of our forefathers well in our family circle - most of whom are waiting over there for me, including my Daddy who LOVED, preached, and served the Lord for over 50 years from his KJB. I praise God for my Bible.

I wonder how many millions of people have been born into God's family from the "horrible, corrupt, full of errors, and maligned" old King James? We will know some day.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by BonnieStormcloud:
the KJV version is the most accurate.

Amen!

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by BonnieStormcloud:
I agree,,, the KJV has the most of all the translations of the original text.

Amen! Praise the Lord!

 

[Precepts]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
QuickeningSpirit, that was a wonderful post. It brought me to tears. Wonderful. Thank you.

I'll keep my King James Bible, thank you--It has served generations of our forefathers well in our family circle - most of whom are waiting over there for me, including my Daddy who LOVED, preached, and served the Lord for over 50 years from his KJB. I praise God for my Bible.

I wonder how many millions of people have been born into God's family from the "horrible, corrupt, full of errors, and maligned" old King James? We will know some day.

Thank you, Lady, that humbles me.

 

[Askjo]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
I'll keep my King James Bible, thank you--It has served generations of our forefathers well in our family circle - most of whom are waiting over there for me, including my Daddy who LOVED, preached, and served the Lord for over 50 years from his KJB. I praise God for my Bible.

Praise the Lord! Amen!

 

[rsr]

BonnieStormCLoud said:

Our Pastor recently gave us a handout on all the translations of the bible such as the NIV and the New KJV.. which showed how much of the original verses was ommitted from the original text and scrolls.

I wonder if this isn't a transcription of some Internet site we've already dealt with. Chick, maybe?

I really find the slam against the NKJV to be puzzling. The NKJV retains the Johannine Comma, which is rejected by most recent versions.

 

[BrianT]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
I'll keep my King James Bible, thank you

Good! I'll keep mine too!

It has served generations of our forefathers well in our family circle - most of whom are waiting over there for me, including my Daddy who LOVED, preached, and served the Lord for over 50 years from his KJB. I praise God for my Bible.

We are very similar! Many generations of my family have used, loved and preached from the KJV as well, and are waiting for me in heaven.

I wonder how many millions of people have been born into God's family from the "horrible, corrupt, full of errors, and maligned" old King James? We will know some day.

It is a very large number, for sure. But who said it was "horrible, corrupt, full of errors, and maligned"? Send them my way, I'll straighten them out.

God bless,
Brian

 

[Ed Edwards]

---------------------------------------
Originally posted by LadyEagle:
I'll keep my King James Bible, thank you

----------------------------------------
BrianT: "Good! I'll keep mine too!"

I'll keep all three of my King James Versions (KJVs)

 

[LadyEagle]