The KJV’s respect for God’s Words

[stilllearning]

Hello franklinmonroe

You said.......

“From your above statement it seems that you must believe that "it" (referring back to the KJV) is not precisely the same thing as "the Bible". Apparently, you believe the genuine 'Bible' is actually found in it's original languages.”

That was an interesting observation; I have never really thought about it like that.
I think my response will be, that the KJV, is “my Bible”:
(Because I don’t read Gk or Hb, and don’t have access to them anyway.)
--------------------------------------------------
You also asked........

“How did you determine that the KJV does not add "even one word"?”

Another great question.

I have come to this conclusion, because for about 300 years or so, 99% of the Christians on earth that spoke English, believed that it was God’s Word(100% accurate),

And it was during that same time, that God wonderfully blessed His Church.

Now compare that time, to the last 120 years or so, and you see how getting away from the KJV, has effected the English speaking Church.
--------------------------------------------------
Next you added........

“Did you find a direct correspondence between all the individual words in the original language texts and the total number of words in the KJV text? If every word is important, shouldn't the counts match? You are suggesting that literal words are translated and not just their concepts or ideas, right?”

Now this is silly.

One Greek word, may translate to 3 or 4 English words.

No, I am simply standing on faith. Not faith, in those who made accurate copies of the originals; and not faith, in those who translated those copies into English.

But faith in the LORD; That He has seen fit, to preserve His Word for “me”.
--------------------------------------------------
I wouldn’t trust a man, any farther than I could throw him.

And I think that every other English Bible available today, has been messed with by man, much more than the old KJV.

 

[Rippon]

I have come to this conclusion, because for about 300 years or so, 99% of the Christians on earth that spoke English, believed that it was God’s Word(100% accurate),

From the 1660's to the start of the 20th century most English-speaking Christains have used a KJV of one sort or another. They believed it is God's Word -- but that doesn't mean that they thought it was was 100% accurate.

Now compare that time, to the last 120 years or so, and you see how getting away from the KJV, has effected [sic]the English speaking Church.

Shall I blame the KJV for how it has affected your English?

How has the fact that many Christian folks are not using one of the KJV's affected the Church in the negative?

And I think that every other English Bible available today, has been messed with by man, much more than the old KJV.

Which edition of the variety of old KJV's are you referencing?

Has the NASB been messed with by man?

 

[preachinjesus]

I'm sorry, I've gotta reply to this...way too much misinformation...

I have come to this conclusion, because for about 300 years or so, 99% of the Christians on earth that spoke English, believed that it was God’s Word(100% accurate),

This just isn't true. There have been a multitude of other translations, even before the recent development of so many within the past 75 years. These other translations were faithful and well received. It is only conjecture to suggest that 99% of Christians did anything during this period on your part.

And it was during that same time, that God wonderfully blessed His Church.

That's in the eye of the beholder. Some of the worst inter-Church persecution also happened in this time.

Now compare that time, to the last 120 years or so, and you see how getting away from the KJV, has effected the English speaking Church.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc

You have a limited view of Church history and I am sorry for that. On the one hand you say because of the KJV the Church flourished, but when the Church hasn't "flourished" (in your estimation) it is because Christians have gotten away from the KJV. Doesn't follow. That's a bad argument.

The KJV is a supremely important text, but there is more going on that just that.

No, I am simply standing on faith. Not faith, in those who made accurate copies of the originals; and not faith, in those who translated those copies into English.

So your faith is men? How about the men who translated the text from the originals? How about the homos3xual King who commissioned the translation? How about the Church of England leadership who persecuted others, especially Baptists, through "Authorizing" this text?

In reality all you have is faith in spite of the historical evidences that this, while a good translation, has flaws.

But faith in the LORD; That He has seen fit, to preserve His Word for “me”.

The KJV is absolutely not the Word of God...Jesus is the Word of God. The KJV is simply a translation of God's revelation for mankind.

I wouldn’t trust a man, any farther than I could throw him.

And I think that every other English Bible available today, has been messed with by man, much more than the old KJV.

Yeah I think this is your most spurious point yet. It doesn't make sense. "I don't trust men" but "I do trust these men more" doesn't follow. Actually most OT and NT I know prefer more modern translations to the KJV because of the more recent version are more faithful to the truly original text. Either way unless you learn the original languages you are, in the end, just trusting a man's opinion.

 

[stilllearning]

Hi everyone

Before I start responding to your questions, let me make some observations.

I have been here for over a year, and I have learned some interesting things, in that time.
--------------------------------------------------
I used to post on this part of the BB,(Bible Versions/Translations), but over and over again, I discovered, that every time that I started to prove my point, about the KJV, that the thread would mysteriously be CLOSED and soon REMOVED.

About 6 months ago, I realized that whoever runs the “General Baptist Discussions” part of this forum, has more integrity, and will let the discussions continue and does not remove a thread, simply because it may not be popular.

I have said all of this, because I just learned that this thread was moved from “General Baptist Discussions”, to the “Bible Versions/Translations”, because it is about Bible versions.

So I am on notice, that when my arguments start to strike a chord, that this thread will be shut down and removed.
--------------------------------------------------
And it seems as though, that my last post #41, is starting to cause trouble, so I had better hurry up.

 

[sag38]

Don't we just love the victim mentality displayed by KJVOnlyist? In whose eye did you start proving your point? That's a matter of opinion at best not to mention that you haven't even come close in this thread to proving your point. The KJV is no more a respector of God's word than the NASB that I have sitting on my desk right now and italics have nothing to do with it.

 

[stilllearning]

Hi Rippon

You said.......

“From the 1660's to the start of the 20th century most English-speaking Christains have used a KJV of one sort or another. They believed it is God's Word -- but that doesn't mean that they thought it was was 100% accurate.”

So your saying, that you believe that those Christians back in the 1700's, had the same doubts about God’s Word as most Christians do today.
(Do you documentation for that.)
--------------------------------------------------
Next you ask..........

“How has the fact that many Christian folks are not using one of the KJV's affected the Church in the negative?”

You know the answer to this question, as well as I do. There are more lukewarm Christians in America today, than there has ever been.
(And the proof is in the dramatic drop in attendance, that Bible believing Churches are experiencing.)

Now you will say, “how do I know that the Bible version choice, has anything to do with it. (Maybe it’s because Church buildings are air conditioned now or something.)

Note: This “air conditioned” point, was made by someone else years ago, and I just borrowed it.
--------------------------------------------------
Next you ask........

“Which edition of the variety of old KJV's are you referencing?
Has the NASB been messed with by man?”

You must use the NASB, and that just fine; but to answer your question, here is what it says about itself..........

Originally produced in 1971, the NASB has been widely embraced and trusted as a literal English translation. Today, the updated NASB offers increased clarity and readability for greater understanding and smoother reading while maintaining accuracy. The NASB speaks with fresh power to each generation, to give wisdom that leads to salvation so that men and women may serve Christ for the glory of God.

Every time the Bible is “updated”, for reasons other than spelling or typo’s, it is messed with.

 

[Rippon]

I used to post on this part of the BB,(Bible Versions/Translations), but over and over again, I discovered, that every time that I started to prove my point, about the KJV, that the thread would mysteriously be CLOSED and soon REMOVED.

I seriously doubt that you had proved any point.

There is no mystery why certain translational threads get closed. Personal animosity is the # 1 reason.

Many times the posts have nothing to do with the OP.

Sometimes there are too many posts which demean the Word of God.

About 6 months ago, I realized that whoever runs the “General Baptist Discussions” part of this forum, has more integrity, and will let the discussions continue and does not remove a thread, simply because it may not be popular.

Well, that's not so sage of you. And in fact quite wrong. You want to pit mods against one another? That's not cool.

I told you above why threads tend to close down.

So I am on notice, that when my arguments start to strike a chord, that this thread will be shut down and removed.

People will respond in droves when you make wild assertions which can be easily disproved.

And it seems as though, that my last post #41, is starting to cause trouble, so I had better hurry up.

Hurry up and what?

 

[Rippon]

So your saying, that you believe that those Christians back in the 1700's, had the same doubts about God’s Word as most Christians do today.

What in the world are you talking about?

Now you will say, “How do I know that the Bible version choice, has anything to do with it.

Now that you have mentioned it -- the particular Bible version that people choose really has nothing to do with your contention.

You must use the NASB, and that just fine; but to answer your question, here is what it says about itself..........

I use the NASB and a lot of other versions -- these days I use God's Word.

Every time the Bible is “updated”, for reasons other than spelling or typo’s, it is messed with.

Are you just messing around with that response?

 

[Johnv]

So your saying, that you believe that those Christians back in the 1700's, had the same doubts about God’s Word as most Christians do today.

If you mean "had the same doubts about God's Word" to mean there were those who found the translation to be poor, the answer is yes.

It's a matter of historical fact that many religious people opposed the KJV when it was published, finding it to be a poor translation. In fact, the English Puritans vehemently opposed it and chose instead to use their Geneva translation. The English Government finally had to make it illegal to have any translation except the KJV. They did so in part to stem the opposition to it. This edict by the government forced the KJV to be the sole translation for about 250 years.

 

[stilllearning]

Hello preachinjesus

You said.......

“I'm sorry, I've gotta reply to this...way too much misinformation...”

Don’t be sorry.
--------------------------------------------------
I said.......
“I have come to this conclusion, because for about 300 years or so, 99% of the Christians on earth that spoke English, believed that it was God’s Word(100% accurate),”

And you said........

“This just isn't true. There have been a multitude of other translations, even before the recent development of so many within the past 75 years. These other translations were faithful and well received. It is only conjecture to suggest that 99% of Christians did anything during this period on your part.”

First what does the year 1935, have to do with anything:
I was talking about the years 1611 to 1911.

Sure enough there were other English Bible’s around, during this time;
(But the KJV, was the best selling English Bible, and some of the GREATEST REVIVALS the world has ever known, took place during this period.

So, in what way, is what I said “not true”.
--------------------------------------------------
Next you quoted me........
“And it was during that same time, that God wonderfully blessed His Church.”

And you said.....

“That's in the eye of the beholder. Some of the worst inter-Church persecution also happened in this time.”

What’s so bad about “inter-Church persecution”:
A lot of it goes on right here, and it doesn’t bother me all that much.
--------------------------------------------------
Next you said...........

“You have a limited view of Church history and I am sorry for that. On the one hand you say because of the KJV the Church flourished, but when the Church hasn't "flourished" (in your estimation) it is because Christians have gotten away from the KJV. Doesn't follow. That's a bad argument.
The KJV is a supremely important text, but there is more going on that just that.”

This may be a “bad argument”, but it mine.

As you have said.......”The KJV is a supremely important text”.
Well I will take it a step further.....
“The Bible, is supremely important!”

Without question, “the Bible” has been being changed(updated), more in the last 100 years, than it was in the previous 300 years.
And what has all this updating done for us.

(Most of the people on this forum, use at least 2 or 3 different Bibles, in an attempt to find out exactly what God actually said.)
When 200 years ago, people knew what God’s Word said, and that solid foundation, made a defiance in their lives.

No, I am not saying.......”Post hoc ergo propter hoc”.
What I am saying, is that the foundation of our faith(the Bible), is messed with, it has an effect upon the Church.
--------------------------------------------------
Next, I said........
“No, I am simply standing on faith. Not faith, in those who made accurate copies of the originals; and not faith, in those who translated those copies into English.

And you said........

“So your faith is men? How about the men who translated the text from the originals? How about the homos3xual King who commissioned the translation? How about the Church of England leadership who persecuted others, especially Baptists, through "Authorizing" this text?
In reality all you have is faith in spite of the historical evidences that this, while a good translation, has flaws.”

As I said, my faith is in the LORD.
--------------------------------------------------
Next I said........
“But faith in the LORD; That He has seen fit, to preserve His Word for “me”.

Then you said........

The KJV is absolutely not the Word of God...Jesus is the Word of God. The KJV is simply a translation of God's revelation for mankind.

Hebrews 4:12
“For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.”
--------------------------------------------------
Next I said.......
I wouldn’t trust a man, any farther than I could throw him.
And I think that every other English Bible available today, has been messed with by man, much more than the old KJV.

Then you said........

Yeah I think this is your most spurious point yet. It doesn't make sense. "I don't trust men" but "I do trust these men more" doesn't follow. Actually most OT and NT I know prefer more modern translations to the KJV because of the more recent version are more faithful to the truly original text. Either way unless you learn the original languages you are, in the end, just trusting a man's opinion.

Your entire argument, ignores the Holy Spirit.

If my study of God’s Word, brings me into communion with the LORD, by the person of the Holy Spirit, am I still trusting in man?

I think where you are missing the point, is in the fact the Bible, is a supernatural document. It is just paper & ink, but the Words found within it have supernatural power.

I am not talking about magic; I am talking about the power of the Gospel message.
(That God has promised to preserve for all eternity.)

Now you talk about the Bible as “a book”; That is at the whim of copyists and translators.
But I am talking about the Bible as God’s Word, that is being providentially protected by God.

 

[Mexdeaf]

And yet the Holy Spirit is not limited to using KJV 1769 English as you presume.

Yours are the same old tired arguments that do not have any basis in substance nor fact. The only reason to choose the KJV over any other version is personal preference. The Holy Spirit has spoken to me through the RVR1960, KJV, NIV, RSV, ESV, NIRV, the ASL (sign language) Bible and even paraphrased verses.

Yes, the words are important, they are powerful, they are precious. But they are NOT BOUND by our language, our prejudices or our traditions.

If you stop telling God what He can and cannot use and what are and are not His Words you will be better off for it.

 

[robycop3]

Still Learning:And I think that every other English Bible available today, has been messed with by man, much more than the old KJV.

In what ways, besides correcting some of the goofs found in the KJV?

For example, in Acts 12:4, newer versions replace the incorrect "Easter" with "passover", the CORRECT translation of the Greek 'pascha' as used by Luke. In 1 Tim. 6:10. they replace the incorrect "the love of money is THE root of ALL evil" with the correct "the love of money is A root of ALL SORTS of evil." And later versions are in OUR English, just as the KJV is in the English of 400 years ago.

And the KJV was as much man-made as any other English translation is.

 

[Ed Edwards]

SL in #46: // Every time the Bible is “updated”, for reasons other than spelling or typo’s, it is messed with. //

Ed notes the obvious: Every time the Bible is “updated”, for reasons OF spelling or typo’s, it is messed with.

 

[franklinmonroe]

... I think my response will be, that the KJV, is “my Bible”:
(Because I don’t read Gk or Hb, and don’t have access to them anyway.) ...

You may be being a bit disingenuous here; you probably have better access to those languages than previous generations and most current Christians worldwide, and you could learn Greek and Hebrew with a little effort.

Basically, you have made an assertion in your OP that the KJV has not added one word to the Bible (except when identifying them with italics) which you can not support with any legitimate objective evidence.

If a translator renders one Greek word with 4 English words rather than just 3, has he added to the Bible?

Since you seem to believe that the KJV is 'your Bible' then you must not really believe that those italicized words were simply added (because they're integral and neccessary). So then, they really shouldn't be in italics after all.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Every time the Bible is “updated”, for reasons other than spelling or typo’s, it is messed with.

So I assume you would contend that the KJV translating team messed with earlier English translations?

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Hi everyone

Before I start responding to your questions, let me make some observations.

I have been here for over a year, and I have learned some interesting things, in that time.
--------------------------------------------------
I used to post on this part of the BB,(Bible Versions/Translations), but over and over again, I discovered, that every time that I started to prove my point, about the KJV, that the thread would mysteriously be CLOSED and soon REMOVED.

About 6 months ago, I realized that whoever runs the “General Baptist Discussions” part of this forum, has more integrity, and will let the discussions continue and does not remove a thread, simply because it may not be popular.

I have said all of this, because I just learned that this thread was moved from “General Baptist Discussions”, to the “Bible Versions/Translations”, because it is about Bible versions.

So I am on notice, that when my arguments start to strike a chord, that this thread will be shut down and removed.
--------------------------------------------------
And it seems as though, that my last post #41, is starting to cause trouble, so I had better hurry up.

You broke the rules you agreed to when you posted this topic in the wrong forum.

9. Post in the right forum. Keep posts on-topic, relative to the forum it's posted in.

Methinks though thinkest too highly of thyself that thou mightest garner such attention.

All those who choose to ignore the rules are dealt with. Nobody is picking on you.

 

[wfdfiremedic]

I am in a little confusion over those that proclaim KJV as superior/inferior. The pastor I listen to most, besides my local, is that of John MacArthur. I would consider him a conservative "mainline" pastor. He uses the NASB, he has also utilized the KJV. What is the big deal?

A big deal to me would be NWT vs NASB. Now, there we have a good argument.

I don't mean to harp, but let's focus more on bible translations that attack the deity of Christ than on KJV vs NASB, ESV, etc. I can derive the same conclusions via the NASB, KJV, NIV etc. You need to learn to utilize them all. The cults may attack the KJV/AV, and they will. They will claim the CT is superior to the TR/MT. That is fine, you can prove your doctrine with the NASB just as well. IMHO.


YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND...ONE OF THE CHIEF ARGUMENTS OF CULTS ETC....IS TO SAY THE KJV WAS INFLUENCED BY THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND CONTAINED MANUSCRIPTS THAT WERE ALTERED (FATHER, SON, HOLY SPIRIT BEING ONE ETC...). FINE, THEY CAN SAY SO. I CAN ALSO PROVE THE SAME DOCTRINE WITH THE NASB, WHICH REFLECTS THEIR W AND H. THEREFORE, ALL THIS FIGHTING OVER THESE TRANSLATIONS IS MOOT IMHO.


"Who do you say that I am?"

-Chris

 

[Johnv]

Every time the Bible is “updated”, for reasons other than spelling or typo’s, it is messed with.

That's a rather hypocritical position: You abhor updating the Bible post-KJV, but you are okay with the the KJV translators updating previous versions to come out with the KJV.

 

[TomVols]

The NASB and NKJV do the same thing. That said, choosing words to italicize or not is still a matter of interpretation, be it KJV or others.

 

[stilllearning]

Hello robycop3

Sorry for the delay in getting back hereI have a lot going on).
--------------------------------------------------
You started off talking about......

“correcting some of the goofs found in the KJV”

And you ended by saying.....

“And the KJV was as much man-made as any other English translation is.”

[personal attack deleted]
(Just like more and more of today’s Christians are developing.)
--------------------------------------------------
The first “goof” you point out is.......

“For example, in Acts 12:4, newer versions replace the incorrect "Easter" with "passover"”

I have never claimed to have all the answers, but the reason that word Easter was used in Acts 12:4, is because Tyndal, in his translation of the Bible into English in 1526, used this word instead of passover, and therefore the translators of the KJV, in 1611 decided to use it also.

Now, the question still remains unanswered:
Why would Tyndal choose to use this word in the first place?
And then why would the translators of the KJV, decided to follow his lead?

Certainly, they were men of God, who fervently prayed and sought the Lord’s will(after all this is the Bible they were translating). Yet this is the word, they ended up using.

I am not sure of the answer. But it could have been part of the LORD’s plan; For all those Bible haters, who would look for an excuse to reject the Bible;
So He decided to give them one.
--------------------------------------------------
The next “goof” you point out is.........

“In 1 Tim. 6:10. they(the newer versions), replace the incorrect "the love of money is THE root of ALL evil" with the correct "the love of money is A root of ALL SORTS of evil."

In this statement, you prove my point:
1 Timothy 6:10 KJV
“For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.”

1 Timothy 6:10 NASB
“For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.”


While it is true, that these two versions say “roughly” the same thing, there are subtle differences.

While verse statement in the KJV, points out a clear and present danger and warning;
This same verse in the NASB et.al, states the danger as being a little more vague.

Clearly for those Christians, who have the pet sin of covetousness: Their choice of Bibles would be, the NASB.
--------------------------------------------------
The point, that you are making with your post, is a clear demonstration, of a loss of respect for the words found in the Bible.

The Bible is GOD’S WORD, not man’s, and God is obligated to preserve His Word for us;
So the Bible should never be referred to as, “man made”.