The KJV Update Project

[Conan]

INSTRUCTIONS TO THE TRANSLATORS.

History of the King James Version

1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops' Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the original will permit.
2. The names of the prophets and the holy writers, with the other names in the text, to be retained, as near as may be, accordingly as they are vulgarly used.
3. The old ecclesiastical words to be kept, as the word church, not to be translated congregation.
4. When any word hath divers significations, that to be kept which hath been most commonly used by the most eminent fathers, being agreeable to the propriety of the place and the analogies of faith.
5. The division of chapters to be altered either not at all, or as little as may be, if necessity so require.
6. No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words, which cannot, without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed, in the text.
7. Such quotations of places to be marginally set down as shall serve for the fit reference of one Scripture to another.
8. Every particular man of each company to take the same chapter or chapters; and, having translated or amended them severally by himself where he thinks good, all to meet together to confirm what they have done, and agree for their part what shall stand.
9. As any one company hath dispatched any one book in this manner, they shall send it to the rest, to be considered of seriously and judiciously; for his Majesty is very careful on this point.
10. If any company, upon the review of the book so sent, shall doubt or differ upon any places, to send them word thereof, to note the places, and therewithal to send their reasons; to which if they consent not, the difference to be compounded at the general meeting, which is to be of the chief persons of each company, at the end of the work.
11. When any place of special obscurity is doubted of, letters to be directed by authority to send to any learned man in the land for his judgment of such a place.
12. Letters to be sent from every bishop to the rest of his clergy, admonishing them of this translation in hand, and to move and charge as many as, being skillful in the tongues, have taken pains in that kind, to send their particular observations to the company, either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford, according as it was directed before in the king's letter to the archbishop.
13. The directors in each company to be the Deans of Westminster and Chester, for Westminster, and the king's professors in Hebrew and Greek in the two universities.
14. These translations to be used, when they agree better with the text than the Bishops' Bible: Tyndale's, Coverdale's, Matthew's [Rogers'], Whitchurch's [Cranmer's], Geneva."
15. By a later rule, "three or four of the most ancient and grave divines, in either of the universities, not employed in translating, to be assigned to be overseers of the translation, for the better observation of the fourth rule".

History of the King James Version

 

[JD731]

By that logic all the KJV translators would be in hell because they transliterated certain words instead of literally translating them. Baptize should be immerse, Church should be assembly, etc.

I did not say anything about transliterated words so that was not my logic.

INSTRUCTIONS TO THE TRANSLATORS.

History of the King James Version

1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops' Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the original will permit.
2. The names of the prophets and the holy writers, with the other names in the text, to be retained, as near as may be, accordingly as they are vulgarly used.
3. The old ecclesiastical words to be kept, as the word church, not to be translated congregation.
4. When any word hath divers significations, that to be kept which hath been most commonly used by the most eminent fathers, being agreeable to the propriety of the place and the analogies of faith.
5. The division of chapters to be altered either not at all, or as little as may be, if necessity so require.
6. No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words, which cannot, without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed, in the text.
7. Such quotations of places to be marginally set down as shall serve for the fit reference of one Scripture to another.
8. Every particular man of each company to take the same chapter or chapters; and, having translated or amended them severally by himself where he thinks good, all to meet together to confirm what they have done, and agree for their part what shall stand.
9. As any one company hath dispatched any one book in this manner, they shall send it to the rest, to be considered of seriously and judiciously; for his Majesty is very careful on this point.
10. If any company, upon the review of the book so sent, shall doubt or differ upon any places, to send them word thereof, to note the places, and therewithal to send their reasons; to which if they consent not, the difference to be compounded at the general meeting, which is to be of the chief persons of each company, at the end of the work.
11. When any place of special obscurity is doubted of, letters to be directed by authority to send to any learned man in the land for his judgment of such a place.
12. Letters to be sent from every bishop to the rest of his clergy, admonishing them of this translation in hand, and to move and charge as many as, being skillful in the tongues, have taken pains in that kind, to send their particular observations to the company, either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford, according as it was directed before in the king's letter to the archbishop.
13. The directors in each company to be the Deans of Westminster and Chester, for Westminster, and the king's professors in Hebrew and Greek in the two universities.
14. These translations to be used, when they agree better with the text than the Bishops' Bible: Tyndale's, Coverdale's, Matthew's [Rogers'], Whitchurch's [Cranmer's], Geneva."
15. By a later rule, "three or four of the most ancient and grave divines, in either of the universities, not employed in translating, to be assigned to be overseers of the translation, for the better observation of the fourth rule".

History of the King James Version

Why wasn't this written in Old English if that was the language of the day?

 

[Baptizo]

I did not say anything about transliterated words so that was not my logic.

The point is that some words are not literal translations from the Greek, they deviated from the original meaning under the direction of King James who had a bias for Church State rule. Would you say they were handling God’s Word accurately?

Why wasn't this written in Old English if that was the language of the day?

Elizabethan English was becoming obsolete by 1611. English translations up to that point were basically copying Tyndale.

 

[JD731]

The point is that some words are not literal translations from the Greek, they deviated from the original meaning under the direction of King James who had a bias for Church State rule. Would you say they were handling God’s Word accurately?

I do not think God acts sovereignly in the affairs of men but I do know he accomplishes his purposes by his providence.

Ro 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

God did not will Pharoah to be his enemy but he directed circumstances in time that brought Pharoah to the throne of Egypt because he, God, is omniscient and knew beforehand that he (Pharoah) would act as he did because he wanted to. That is what V 17 says. Because God was ready to transition the church West away from the corruption of Europe and the influence of Catholicism and her daughter Calvinism, he governed circumstances to prepare an English Bible for the transition and for King James to take the throne in order to accomplish it, knowing he would. It is called the providential working of God in the affairs of men, saved and unsaved.

Es 4:14 For if thou altogether holdest thy peace at this time, [then] shall there enlargement and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place; but thou and thy father’s house shall be destroyed: and who knoweth whether thou art come to the kingdom for such a time as this?

Elizabethan English was becoming obsolete by 1611. English translations up to that point were basically copying Tyndale.

If you say so.

 

[Conan]

I did not say anything about transliterated words so that was not my logic.



Why wasn't this written in Old English if that was the language of the day?

Early Modern English or Archaic Modern English.

Old English = Anglo Saxon, beowulf.
Middle English = Wycliffe, Chaucer.
Early Modern English = Tyndale, KJV.

 

[John of Japan]

John 10:12 (KJV) - But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.

John 10:12 (NKJV) - But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them.

The TR contains the last word of the verse (πρόβατα = sheep) and is in the KJV. The NKJV follows the CT which does not.

Your statement is incorrect. Here is the TR: ὁ λύκος ἁρπάζει αὐτά, καὶ σκορπίζει τὰ πρόβατα. My literal translation: "the wolf seizes them, and scatters the sheep."

Here is the KJV: "the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep."

Here is the NKJV: "the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them." The "them" refers to the antecedent of "sheep."

The NKJV thus does translate "sheep" (πρόβατα), but simply changes the word order, no doubt for literary effect.

The NASB, from the Nestle's critical text, has " the wolf snatches them and scatters them," thus following the UBS4 Rev. and other critical texts, ὁ λύκος ἁρπάζει αὐτά, καὶ σκορπίζει, thus leaving out "sheep" (τα πρόβατα). The NASB has added what UBS4 deleted, "them." In none of these cases is meaning actually lost.

 

[Baptizo]

I do not think God acts sovereignly in the affairs of men but I do know he accomplishes his purposes by his providence.

I believe He did accomplish His purpose in preserving His word throughout all of the centuries with the Greek manuscript traditions that we have. That did not begin to happen with Anglicans 400 years ago.

If you say so.

It is not just my say so, it is a fact of history.

 

[Baptizo]

The NKJV thus does translate "sheep" (πρόβατα), but simply changes the word order, no doubt for literary effect.

Please see my response on post #14.

 

[JD731]

I believe He did accomplish His purpose in preserving His word throughout all of the centuries with the Greek manuscript traditions that we have. That did not begin to happen with Anglicans 400 years ago.

All the prophetic utterances written by the apostle Paul concerning the last few generations reveals that someone who could see these days gave him the information of what it would be like just before the return of Christ as it relates to his church. The attitudes of most of you men does not match the record of God concerning his words. You will of course disagree with me because we are not believing the same words. Few people so far have registered agreement with you, or me, because they likewise have their own words that they believe and it is not the words either of us have. The chaos and division over what the word of God is is not my fault. I am asking that we all believe his words, something you refuse to do.The best you can muster is to believe the message, however it is expressed, not believing there are mysteries and deeper truths hidden in the words that only God can reveal.

Why do you think God would have Paul to write 1 Cor 1:10 to his church? Just for a laugh? Well, I am laughing if what you teach is true.

It is not just my say so, it is a fact of history.

No one has quoted anything from that era that was written in old English. This tells me that style was not common at that time. You have been lied to.

 

[robycop3]

John 10:12 (KJV) - But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.

John 10:12 (NKJV) - But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them.

The TR contains the last word of the verse (πρόβατα = sheep) and is in the KJV. The NKJV follows the CT which does not.

So, please tell me, who or what else could "them" be?

 

[tyndale1946]

So what does husbandman mean?

John 15:1 I Am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

Well Conan, this was taken from the Geneva Bible and they were not brave enough to call God the Father a famer... And you want to translate it farmer?... FYI a portion of the KJV is Geneva... You want to destroy the lineage?... The KJV is a compilation of the true word of God, that went before and has been going for 400 plus years now... There is no need to change High English for the mundane English of our day... I understand it fine but you brethren do what you need to do and leave this KJV believer alone... Oh and Logos1560 you want to know what KJV I'm reading now?... Well my compact is Holman and my church Bible is Nelson and I do have a Cambridge and a Thompson Chain... Brother Glen

 

[JD731]

Check these comments from the Greek scholars. Is there unity or division here? This kind of comparisons never happens in my church. The wisdom of 1 Cor 1:10 is making more sense to me all the time.

Which one of the twenty to thirty present post-1900 KJV editions do you claim to be the "tried and true" one?

Perhaps you use one of the post-1984 KJV editions that used computer-based texts that introduced some new variations and new errors into KJV editions.

Those varying post-1900 KJV editions differ in places from the 1611 edition, the 1629 Cambridge edition, the 1638 Cambridge edition, the 1679 Oxford edition, the 1743 Cambridge edition, the 1762 Cambridge edition, the 1769 Oxford edition, the 1835 Oxford edition, the 1873 Cambridge edition, etc. When some renderings needed to be changed, revised, or corrected, how are those renderings "tired and true"?

John 10:12 (KJV) - But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.

John 10:12 (NKJV) - But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them.

The TR contains the last word of the verse (πρόβατα = sheep) and is in the KJV. The NKJV follows the CT which does not.

Your statement is incorrect. Here is the TR: ὁ λύκος ἁρπάζει αὐτά, καὶ σκορπίζει τὰ πρόβατα. My literal translation: "the wolf seizes them, and scatters the sheep."

Here is the KJV: "the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep."

Here is the NKJV: "the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them." The "them" refers to the antecedent of "sheep."

The NKJV thus does translate "sheep" (πρόβατα), but simply changes the word order, no doubt for literary effect.

The NASB, from the Nestle's critical text, has " the wolf snatches them and scatters them," thus following the UBS4 Rev. and other critical texts, ὁ λύκος ἁρπάζει αὐτά, καὶ σκορπίζει, thus leaving out "sheep" (τα πρόβατα). The NASB has added what UBS4 deleted, "them." In none of these cases is meaning actually lost.

Wrong. "Probata"=Sheep is used 3 times in both the Textus Receptus and Byzantine Text. But only 2 times in the Critical Text. Please note the NKJV uses "sheep" 3 times. The NKJV was translated from the Textus Receptus, and not the Critical Text. That is a lie cooked up by non-truth telling, insecure Onlyist.

English Majority Text Version 2009
But a hired hand, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them.

Interlinear Bible: John 10:12 - Textus Receptus Bibles

 

[Baptizo]

So, please tell me, who or what else could "them" be?

Please see my response on post #14.

 

[Baptizo]

You will of course disagree with me because we are not believing the same words.

I guess I am in the same camp as Paul then because he wrote and spoke Greek words, not English words.

You have been lied to.

Apparently all historians are liars.

 

[Baptizo]

you want to know what KJV I'm reading now?

Nahum 3:16 (Oxford) - Thou hast multiplied thy merchants above the stars of heaven: the cankerworm spoileth, and fleeth away.

Nahum 3:16 (Cambridge) - Thou hast multiplied thy merchants above the stars of heaven: the cankerworm spoileth, and flieth away.

Which one is correct?

 

[Conan]

John 15:1 I Am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

Well Conan, this was taken from the Geneva Bible and they were not brave enough to call God the Father a famer... And you want to translate it farmer?... FYI a portion of the KJV is Geneva... You want to destroy the lineage?... The KJV is a compilation of the true word of God, that went before and has been going for 400 plus years now... There is no need to change High English for the mundane English of our day... I understand it fine but you brethren do what you need to do and leave this KJV believer alone... Oh and Logos1560 you want to know what KJV I'm reading now?... Well my compact is Holman and my church Bible is Nelson and I do have a Cambridge and a Thompson Chain... Brother Glen

And don’t forget William Tyndale. Oh, you didn’t, it’s in your name! Thank you. Instead of “High English”, I think you meant “Early Modern English”

here is from an 2016 KJV edition. Meant to only update archaic words. Not asking you to accept it brother. You have excellent Bibles.

Parallel Bible: John - Chapter: 15 - Textus Receptus Bibles

15:1 "I am the true vine, and My Father is the vinedresser“.

almost as good as “earth tiller”.
https://textusreceptusbibles.com/Parallel/43015001/WSG/GNV/TYN
Ic eom soð wingearð. & min fæder ys eordtilia

 

[Conan]

All the prophetic utterances written by the apostle Paul concerning the last few generations reveals that someone who could see these days gave him the information of what it would be like just before the return of Christ as it relates to his church. The attitudes of most of you men does not match the record of God concerning his words. You will of course disagree with me because we are not believing the same words. Few people so far have registered agreement with you, or me, because they likewise have their own words that they believe and it is not the words either of us have. The chaos and division over what the word of God is is not my fault. I am asking that we all believe his words, something you refuse to do.The best you can muster is to believe the message, however it is expressed, not believing there are mysteries and deeper truths hidden in the words that only God can reveal.

Why do you think God would have Paul to write 1 Cor 1:10 to his church? Just for a laugh? Well, I am laughing if what you teach is true.




No one has quoted anything from that era that was written in old English. This tells me that style was not common at that time. You have been lied to.

This is Old English. Or Anglo Saxon.
John 15:1
Ic eom soð wingearð. & min fæder ys eordtilia
Parallel Bible: John - Chapter: 15 - Textus Receptus Bibles

 

[JD731]

I guess I am in the same camp as Paul then because he wrote and spoke Greek words, not English words.



Apparently all historians are liars.

Actually they were God's words and he did not speak Greek words to me and I am sure they are translated exactly as God wanted them. I often look at the source word from Strong's. I do not approach my Bible in unbelief or doubt.

I do not believe a man needs a Bible of any kind to be saved from the penalty of sin, which is eternal separation from God in the lake of fire. The church of Jesus Christ did not have a Bible when it was first formed. The first book was written in 45 AD. The gentiles began to be saved in 40 AD. No Bible of any kind around until much later..

Men who preached to me when I was saved had a testimony themselves of believing the testimony of God. Now I believe the testimony of God that he saved me because he said he would if I believe with my heart the Lord Jesus and what he did for me..

God has his own testimony that began in Ge 1:1 and not a single word was written until 2500 years of human history was over yet multitudes were justified by believing what he revealed to them in times past, and by various means..

1 Cor 2:1 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.
2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

However, the Bible is for saved people and it is full of treasures to those who will believe the words. No one here will testify that they do.

 

[tyndale1946]

Actually they were God's words and he did not speak Greek words to me and I am sure they are translated exactly as God wanted them. I often look at the source word from Strong's. I do not approach my Bible in unbelief or doubt.

I do not believe a man needs a Bible of any kind to be saved from the penalty of sin, which is eternal separation from God in the lake of fire. The church of Jesus Christ did not have a Bible when it was first formed. The first book was written in 45 AD. The gentiles began to be saved in 40 AD. No Bible of any kind around until much later..

Men who preached to me when I was saved had a testimony themselves of believing the testimony of God. Now I believe the testimony of God that he saved me because he said he would if I believe with my heart the Lord Jesus and what he did for me..

God has his own testimony that began in Ge 1:1 and not a single word was written until 2500 years of human history was over yet multitudes were justified by believing what he revealed to them in times past, and by various means..

1 Cor 2:1 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.
2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

However, the Bible is for saved people and it is full of treasures to those who will believe the words. No one here will testify that they do.

Galatians 2:19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.

20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

Brother Glen

 

[Baptizo]

I do not believe a man needs a Bible of any kind to be saved from the penalty of sin

Would you agree that I can preach the Gospel to a lost soul using the NIV and if they believe then God will save them?