The KJV is being updated

[1watchman]

One needs to be very sure! I urge seekers to read only sound KJV Bibles and not listen to religious souls,who like to modernize what God has given, and thus many seekers have gotten confused by it all. Put the Lord Jesus FIRST in your heart and ask Him to not let you be confused and led astray with modern religious ideas.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

One needs to be very sure! I urge seekers to read only sound KJV Bibles and not listen to religious souls,who like to modernize what God has given, and thus many seekers have gotten confused by it all. Put the Lord Jesus FIRST in your heart and ask Him to not let you be confused and led astray with modern religious ideas.

You're mistaking people who read anything other than a KJV as someone who is being led astray and under confusion. Very dangerous accusations to make against people who read a different translation than you do.

No translation is perfect as words tend to have varied meanings, this applies even to the KJV. I think the issue with most KJV only individuals is they don't read a different translation actually trying to see if it's viable or not. They read it to poke holes in it. Much like an atheist would read any bible to do the same.

 

[AV1611VET]

Scofield's Bible was originally published in 1909, and then he published a revised version in 1917. So which of his Bibles is without error? He was a scholar, but obviously not infallible, otherwise why did he correct his earlier effort?

Because science changed?

 

[pescador]

One needs to be very sure! I urge seekers to read only sound KJV Bibles and not listen to religious souls,who like to modernize what God has given, and thus many seekers have gotten confused by it all. Put the Lord Jesus FIRST in your heart and ask Him to not let you be confused and led astray with modern religious ideas.

God has not given us the King James translation! The Biblical manuscripts are written in ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek. No English translation, including the KJV, is "given by God". They are the works of humans, doing their best to translate the ancient writings into the language in use at the time of the translation. (Read that sentence carefully!)

There are quite a few translations available today and most of them are excellent. In fact the source documents and other writings of Biblical times have given modern translators a much better method of understanding what the authors meant than what the KJV translators understood. Additionally, since none of us live in the English culture of the early 17th Century, modern translators make every effort to transmit what the Scriptures actually meant in the Biblical cultures. That is the goal of true translation!

Put the Lord Jesus FIRST in your heart and ask Him to not let you be confused and led astray by early 17th Century religious ideas, created to satisfy a king's idea of what Christianity should be.

 

[AV1611VET]

There are quite a few translations available today and most of them are excellent.

Compared to what?

 

[pescador]

Compared to what?

Compared to those that are not excellent! Most modern translations are the results of very hard work by Biblical scholars who are very skilled in understanding the ancient languages and communicating the thoughts and ideas of the Biblical writers to our 21st Century minds.

 

[AV1611VET]

Compared to those that are not excellent! Most modern translations are the results of very hard work by Biblical scholars who are very skilled in understanding the ancient languages and communicating the thoughts and ideas of the Biblical writers to our 21st Century minds.

Why do these "very skilled scholars" contradict each other then?

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Why do these "very skilled scholars" contradict each other then?

I'm very curious what you mean by this.

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm very curious what you mean by this.

Did "very skilled scholars" write the NASB?

Did "very skilled scholars" write the NIV?

If so, why do they contradict each other?

 

[pescador]

Why do these "very skilled scholars" contradict each other then?

I wouldn't use the term "contradict", perhaps differ in their interpretations. There is no direct correspondence between the ancient Biblical languages and modern English. The vocabulary, word tenses, idioms, etc. are thousands of years old and were used by cultures extremely different than our own. Additionally, sometimes the source documents -- or what remains of them -- differ from each other because of scribal errors and (perhaps) additions.

A skilled translator tries to convey not just the words of the documents, but also what they meant to the original hearers. (Very, very few people in Biblical times were literate.)

Since translation of ancient documents will always remain as much of an art as a science, translations will always differ from each other. Even the Septuagint -- the Old Testament of Christ's time -- written in Koine Greek differs from the Hebrew version.

P.S. The above explains why I don't like the King James version, written more than four hundred years ago from a limited number of sources in a form of English that is no longer used, for a society that is very different than our own.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Did "very skilled scholars" write the NASB?

Did "very skilled scholars" write the NIV?

If so, why do they contradict each other?

This is basic bible translation stuff. Those versions you quote have different translation philosophies. The NASB is meant to be literal, while the NIV is meant to be more readable. Doesn't mean they contradict each other. In fact they compliment each other. You can't tell me your entire basis for claiming what you are is due to you not knowing basic translation processes

 

[1watchman]

Did "very skilled scholars" write the NASB?

Did "very skilled scholars" write the NIV?

If so, why do they contradict each other?

Good point, and it is apparent when one compares the modern writings and ideas and reasoning, against noted scholars of the past have shown. Men like to think they know more than the scholars. We need to keep to very indepth studies by known scholars. I will hold to the KJV as I have noted already as indisputable, and have found accurate in all the comparisons I do with what the modern versions are writing.
Well, "to each his own" as is often said; for religious people will seek after whatever they like to hear; and not being always true to the intent of God.
I will leave this subject to those who prefer to just argue over God's Word, and looking for a simple wording for their comfort.

 

[pescador]

Good point, and it is apparent when one compares the modern writings and ideas and reasoning, against noted scholars of the past have shown. Men like to think they know more than the scholars. We need to keep to very indepth studies by known scholars. I will hold to the KJV as I have noted already as indisputable, and have found accurate in all the comparisons I do with what the modern versions are writing.
Well, "to each his own" as is often said; for religious people will seek after whatever they like to hear; and not being always true to the intent of God.
I will leave this subject to those who prefer to just argue over God's Word, and looking for a simple wording for their comfort.

I assume that you're living in the 21st century and have modern ideas and reasoning, so denigrating modern scholarship is absurd. "Men like to think they know more than the scholars" is a nonsensical statement. Are the scholars to whom you refer all women? Do you think that modern scholars are dumber than those of 400 years ago?

You can "hold to the KJV" if that is your preference, but to claim that modern Biblical scholarship is lacking is very, very strange. BTW, what are your scholarship credentials?

We agree on one thing: religious people will seek after whatever they like to hear; and not being always true to the intent of God.

 

[pescador]

One needs to be very sure! I urge seekers to read only sound KJV Bibles and not listen to religious souls,who like to modernize what God has given, and thus many seekers have gotten confused by it all. Put the Lord Jesus FIRST in your heart and ask Him to not let you be confused and led astray with modern religious ideas.

Sorry but the KJV translators produced a "modern" version of earlier Englyshe translations, and he didn't stop enabling people to effectively translate the source texts in 1611. I urge seekers to read only sound modern Bibles and not listen to religious souls, who like to claim what God has given 411 years ago is the only true translation. Put the Lord Jesus FIRST in your heart and ask Him to not let you be confused and led astray with the religious ideas of a secular king from four centuries ago.

 

[Athanasius377]

Wasn't this already done years ago?

21st Century King James Version (KJ21) - Version Information - BibleGateway.com

 

[pescador]

One needs to be very sure! I urge seekers to read only sound KJV Bibles and not listen to religious souls,who like to modernize what God has given, and thus many seekers have gotten confused by it all. Put the Lord Jesus FIRST in your heart and ask Him to not let you be confused and led astray with modern religious ideas.

Modernize what God has given? Don't you realize that the KJV is a man-made creation, based on early scrolls written in ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek? Of necessity, they had to "modernize" what God gave the Biblical authors; they translated the ancient documents into the Englyshe of the early 17th Century. You do realize, don't you, that a) their work was based in part on earlier English translations, b) that they had a limited set of source documents compared to what is available today, and c) they stated in their preface that their translation was not the definitive word of God, and d) they expected it to be modified over time?

People in the early 1600s could have accurately written "Put the Lord Jesus FIRST in your heart and ask Him to not let you be confused and led astray with modern religious ideas." I realize that you're not aware that a) Bible translation is both an art and a science and b) that here is no direct correlation between ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek and English, regardless of when the translation was done.

If you actually think that the KJV is the Word of God, prove it!

 

[AV1611VET]

Don't you realize that the KJV is a man-made creation,

Negative.

 

[HARK!]

(perhaps) additions.

Perhaps?

List of major textual variants in the New Testament

 

[pescador]

Negative.

So who created the KJV? Aliens? The KJV was created by people. Obvious to anyone with a rational mind.

 

[pescador]

Perhaps?

List of major textual variants in the New Testament

Okay, I'll correct that. Additions were definitely added to the earliest sources and/or the translation.

You do realize, don't you, that the link you provided contains this...

This article possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (April 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
This is an (incomplete) list of major textual variants in the New Testament, with a focus on differences between categories of New Testament manuscript.