The Changeable, Revisable, Improvable KJV

[Logos1560]

The Scriptures had been translated into English years before 1611. The Church of England makers of the KJV changed the pre-1611 word of God in English.

From its beginning as a revision of earlier English Bibles and as a translation, the fact is that the 1611 KJV has been considered to be changeable, amendable, improvable, or revisable. Later printers and editors made many changes, amendments, improvements, or revisions to the 1611 edition of the KJV. Later printers or editors added some words to the 1611 edition and omitted some words found in the 1611 edition.

The varying editions of the KJV printed in the 1600's differ from the varying editions of the KJV printed in the 1700's.

The varying editions of the KJV printed in the 1700's differ from the varying editions of the KJV printed in the 1800's.

Besides the 1611 reprint editions, the present thirty or more varying editions of the KJV in print today are a revision or revised version of the 1611 edition of the KJV or are a revised version of the 1769 Oxford edition of the KJV. Today's varying KJV editions are not the same as the 1611 edition of the KJV.

Do KJV-only advocates use the actual 1611 edition of the KJV or do they use a later revised, amended, improved, changed, corrected edition of the KJV?

Do KJV-only advocates consistently apply the assertion that things that are different are not the same?

How would it be sound, scriptural reasoning to suggest that an English Bible revision/translation in 1611 that is evidently claimed by some to have been given by inspiration of God, to have every word of God, or to be absolutely pure and perfect was actually changeable, amendable, improvable, and revisable?

 

[Squire Robertsson]

I think the 1769 Oxford text is the most common one in print.

 

[heisrisen]

So what exactly should we all have? I mean this is a very serious matter. God's word has very SERIOUS implications, warnings, and instructions. So I guess he can't blame me for getting it wrong since I don't have an accurate translation? I mean I just don't get it when people say there are no accurate translations. Well God promised to preserve his word, and I believe he can do that for all languages.

 

[Van]

Post #3 made me smile. We do not have a perfect translation of the CT, TR, or Byzantine text. But we do have sufficiently accurate translations for God's purpose. Yes sometimes the KJV provides a better translation of a verse or passage than the NKJV, but when they differ, usually the NKJV is the more accurate rendering of the TR. But if you think the Byzantine text is the best, you should use the WEB.

 

[annsni]

I believe God has preserved His Word in many translations. Not one doctrine of Scripture is compromised or removed from the Bibles we have today that are orthodox (I'm not speaking about the Jehovah's Witness bible or something like that).

 

[tyndale1946]

So what exactly should we all have? I mean this is a very serious matter. God's word has very SERIOUS implications, warnings, and instructions. So I guess he can't blame me for getting it wrong since I don't have an accurate translation? I mean I just don't get it when people say there are no accurate translations. Well God promised to preserve his word, and I believe he can do that for all languages.

I believe as this Sister but I won't be adamant about it but leave these scriptures for your examination... As I say Consider what I say and the Lord giveth thee understanding in all things... Brother Glen

2 Timothy 3:14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;

3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[Internet Theologian]

There are lots of good translations out there, NASB, ASV, YLT, KJV, NKJV, ESV, and more, none of them should be worshiped or castigated though!

 

[annsni]

I love that passage Tyndale. Here it is in the version I use - the ESV

But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

 

[Rippon]

To the best of my knowledge, the NIV was the first English version to have replaced "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God" to :"All Scripture is God-breathed ..."

 

[robustheologian]

To the best of my knowledge, the NIV was the first English version to have replaced "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God" to :"All Scripture is God-breathed ..."

Lol...Rippon you really love the NIV.

 

[Logos1560]

I think the 1769 Oxford text is the most common one in print.

Most of the present varying KJV editions are based on the 1769 Oxford edition, but they are not identical to it. There would be around 400 differences between the 1769 Oxford edition and a typical present KJV edition [not even including the fact that the 1769 Oxford included the Apocrypha while most present KJV editions at least in America do not].

There are some present KJV editions that are based on the 1873 Cambridge KJV edition. There are also the 2005 and 2011 Cambridge KJV editions edited by David Norton that are not based on the 1769.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

That's why I hedged my statement with "I think". I was intentionally not being dogmatic.

Most of the present varying KJV editions are based on the 1769 Oxford edition, but they are not identical to it. There would be around 400 differences between the 1769 Oxford edition and a typical present KJV edition [not even including the fact that the 1769 Oxford included the Apocrypha while most present KJV editions at least in America do not].

There are some present KJV editions that are based on the 1873 Cambridge KJV edition. There are also the 2005 and 2011 Cambridge KJV editions edited by David Norton that are not based on the 1769.

 

[time2plough]

I went down the KJV only rabbit hole for about a year. At the time it seemed very exciting, their argument of the two different lines of text, the line from Antioch being legit and the line from Alexandria being corrupt. I bit hook line and sinker. Even joined a couple groups when I was on Facebook, which then led me to see some of the holes in the King James Only position. These days I still enjoy reading from KJV, but no longer subscribe to KJV Onlyism. I've been reading mostly from the World English Bible lately. It's one of the few translations that uses majority text and in the footnotes tells me what certain words and passages are different between Nestle-Aland and Textus Receptus.

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

 

[Yeshua1]

To the best of my knowledge, the NIV was the first English version to have replaced "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God" to :"All Scripture is God-breathed ..."

Does it not mean the same thing though?
Just as saying Jesus was the One and Only Son of God and him being only begotten both refer to Him being divine?

 

[time2plough]

inspiration of God and God-breathed mean pretty much the same thing to me. I kind of prefer the God-breathed rendering, as to me it seems more directly from God, the 'of' in inspiration of God seems like it could leave unnecessary wiggle room.

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

 

[John of Japan]

So what exactly should we all have? I mean this is a very serious matter. God's word has very SERIOUS implications, warnings, and instructions. So I guess he can't blame me for getting it wrong since I don't have an accurate translation? I mean I just don't get it when people say there are no accurate translations. Well God promised to preserve his word, and I believe he can do that for all languages.

This brings up an interesting point. I was a missionary to Japan for 33 years. You cannot buy a Bible in Japan translated from the traditional texts. There has only been one NT (not a whole Bible) in Japanese from the TR, and it is in the very difficult classical Japanese and is out of print.

So, what criteria should a missionary use to determine God's preserved Word in a foreign language?

 

[Logos1560]

I mean this is a very serious matter. God's word has very SERIOUS implications, warnings, and instructions.

Concerning which actual words were those warnings and instructions given?

Those warnings and instructions would evidently have to concern directly the exact, specific original language words given by inspiration to the prophets and apostles.

Since all Bible translators have to add some words in translating for which there is no original language word, would they be disobeying those instructions and warnings if they were directly meant for Bible translations?

Perhaps those instructions could be applied indirectly as general guidelines in translating in order to encourage translating as accurately and faithfully as possible. Would it be possible for any Bible translators to follow those warnings or instructions literally, completely, and directly?

Well God promised to preserve his word, and I believe he can do that for all languages.

According to the definition or meaning of the terms preserve and preservation and according to what the Scriptures state, the sound deduction and inference would follow that preservation of the words given by inspiration of God to the prophets and apostles would concern the exact, specific original language words that were given.

If the Scriptures teach exact word preservation as KJV-only advocates suggest, how would different words in a different language be a preservation of the exact, specific original language words given by inspiration?

Did God promise to provide a perfect Bible translation in all languages?

What God can do and what God choose to do may be two different things.