Sure it is accepted by lots of folks. Why not a history lesson? You know what they say about those who don't pay attention to history;don't you?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Yes,the KJV has mistakes too
- Thread starter Rippon
- Start date
Sure it is accepted by lots of folks. Why not a history lesson? You know what they say about those who don't pay attention to history;don't you?
And you are...
You're not that new to the BB.
saturneptune
New Member
not a person that strains a gnat and swallows a camel as you are. Also, try reading Matthew 23 while looking in the mirror.
The subject is the mistakes in the KJV.Do you have anything worthy to contribute? Get off your thread-spoiling kick.
Well said, Brother.
As I've said before, my father couldn't read or write his name. Think it mattered to him whether the word was spirit or Spirit in various versions of the Bible? Since he's gone on before me, perhaps I can ask him when it's my turn to be called home.
One of the devil's goals has to be to destroy belief in God's word. Scriptures warn us there will be a famine in the land of hearing His word. Folks, IMO, "nitpicking the Word of God" is doing a pretty good job of bringing that about.
Folks, we're not talking about the works of Chaucer, Shakespear, or Margaret Mitchell. I don't give a hoot about how much "textual criticism" is applied to those. I do care, deeply, about the work that begins with "In the beginning" and ends with "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen".
Often, it makes me want to :tear: when God's Word is treated like yesterday's newspaper. Especially, by those professing to be members of the body of Christ who are waiting for the time to be with Him.
Accurate translation DOES matter.
The Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic Scriptural mss are what GOD HIMSELF chose to pass down to us. And, since 99.9% of us can't read any of them, we depend upon translations to make God's word accessible to us.
Now, while the KJV is an excellent translation, it's not perfect. Nothing wrong with pointing out its mistakes and supplying the correct wording.
But there's PLENTY wrong with KJVO, as it's false on its own "merit", and not supported whatsoever in the KJV itself.
And, there's PLENTY wrong with the extremists on BOTH sides of this issue. There's PLENTY wrong when OPINION is stated as FACT.
-- Accurate translation DOES matter. Agree. Accurate translation of what and by whom?
-- depend upon translations to make ... Which one(s)?
-- supplying the correct wording. In who's opinion? Based on what?
IMO, there's nothing wrong with discussing the "merits" of any version of the Bible. For example:
Bible Org.
http://bible.org/article/net-niv-esv-brief-historical-comparison
-- as it's false on its own "merit" , and not supported whatsoever in the KJV itself.
How does statements such as this one further advance the gospel of our Saviour?
I'm not a scholar. Far from it, as many folks posting here leave me scratching my head with a "what in the heck are they talking about?". Yet, there's so much in that statement that ......(pause) ...... left unsaid, as it's already been beaten to death. Over and over again. :tear:
no, but by adressing the 'flaws" in the Kjv, you appear to be going beyond saying that the KJVO position is wrong, to saying the Kjv just doesn't compare to your Niv!
I'm "going beyond"? Did I say anything slanderous as you have done? I am merely pointing out some documented things especially concerning the history of the KJV. I have supported my info. On the other hand you believe in spreading untruths I suppose in the nname of freedom of speech.
God's Bestseller by Brian Maynahan
Some select quotes from his book.
"Where the KJ strays away from him,Tyndale is often more vivid and more plain." (p.58)
"Read aloud,Tyndale almost always beats all comers,King James or more modern." (p.59)
From Ephesians 4. First Tyndale:
Blinded in their understanding,being strangers from the life which is in God.
King James :
having the understanding darkened,being alienated from the life of God.
Moynahan says :"The pulse is gone." (p.60)
Regarding the title page of the KJV: Little of it was,as claimed,'newly Translated out of the Originnall Tongues.' " (p.389)
Some select quotes from his book.
"Where the KJ strays away from him,Tyndale is often more vivid and more plain." (p.58)
"Read aloud,Tyndale almost always beats all comers,King James or more modern." (p.59)
From Ephesians 4. First Tyndale:
Blinded in their understanding,being strangers from the life which is in God.
King James :
having the understanding darkened,being alienated from the life of God.
Moynahan says :"The pulse is gone." (p.60)
Regarding the title page of the KJV: Little of it was,as claimed,'newly Translated out of the Originnall Tongues.' " (p.389)
God's Secretaries by Adam Nicolson
"By 1870,it had become obvious not only that the manuscripts on which the King James Bible had been based upon were no longer the best available,but that the Jacobean Translators had made many mistakes in translation." (233)
"By 1870,it had become obvious not only that the manuscripts on which the King James Bible had been based upon were no longer the best available,but that the Jacobean Translators had made many mistakes in translation." (233)
In The Beginning by Alister E. McGrath
He says,and it is well-known,that the KJV translators (I call them revisers) didn't have access to "additional ancient Near Eastern texts.' (p.234)
"The KJV translators used classical Greek instead of a much later form of Greek which had more fluid grammatical rules." (237)
He gives as an example of this Isaiah 2:12-16 in the KJV :"For the day of the Lord of hosts shall be upon...all the ships of Tarshish,and upon all pleasant pictures."
Jeremiah 7;13,29;19 the KJV has "rising up early" when the idiom actually means "do do something continually." (232)
McGrath says the New Testament was written in "the language of the workplace and the market [but] changed into the high cadences of the palaces of Westminster and the high tables of Oxford and Cambridge." He goes on to say that style and elegance is of the translators,not of the passages they translate.(239)
The KJV used "ways of speaking that wetre already becoming archaic in the standard English of the first decade of the 17th century"...ways of speaking "were dying out in everyday English speech." (265,266)
The KJV would actually have "been perceived to be slightly old-fashioned and dated even from the first day of its publication." (276)
'The 'new Bible' was initially regarded with polite disinterest. Nobody at the time really liked the new translation very much." (278)
He says,and it is well-known,that the KJV translators (I call them revisers) didn't have access to "additional ancient Near Eastern texts.' (p.234)
"The KJV translators used classical Greek instead of a much later form of Greek which had more fluid grammatical rules." (237)
He gives as an example of this Isaiah 2:12-16 in the KJV :"For the day of the Lord of hosts shall be upon...all the ships of Tarshish,and upon all pleasant pictures."
Jeremiah 7;13,29;19 the KJV has "rising up early" when the idiom actually means "do do something continually." (232)
McGrath says the New Testament was written in "the language of the workplace and the market [but] changed into the high cadences of the palaces of Westminster and the high tables of Oxford and Cambridge." He goes on to say that style and elegance is of the translators,not of the passages they translate.(239)
The KJV used "ways of speaking that wetre already becoming archaic in the standard English of the first decade of the 17th century"...ways of speaking "were dying out in everyday English speech." (265,266)
The KJV would actually have "been perceived to be slightly old-fashioned and dated even from the first day of its publication." (276)
'The 'new Bible' was initially regarded with polite disinterest. Nobody at the time really liked the new translation very much." (278)
is there a point in this thread?
Yes.......what IS rippon's obsession with bashing the KJV?
maybe upset about the niv?
"Bashing"? Seriously. I am documenting historical references regarding the KJV. It should be considered educational.I'm sure you were not familiar with much of what I have quoted.
saturneptune
New Member
Neither is the rest of the human race.
Are you saying that the Kjv is not a good translation? that it is inferior to your Niv?