- Oct 4, 2010
- 13,243
- 6,313
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Hi @Albion,
Gosh, I think that the 'evidence' (remember that niggling little word?) said that it was 23%. You're still not willing to accept anything but 'your truth'. I get it. We've discussed a lot over the years.
I would agree with that statement. Just as I would agree that in the 1500's people around the world reading and being saved with the Tyndale translation of the Scriptures. It was the first translation that was put into print. In the 1500's Erasmus cobbled together a new translation of the Scriptures, from the available manuscript data that he had at hand, which is now called the Textus Receptus (Received Text). So yes, the KJ translation probably had the longest run as a translation of the Scriptures in English...so far. But that neither makes it perfect or the best. It is just the first of many more modern translations that are based on whatever material was available in that day. However today, we have more modern translations, of which many are based on newer archeological evidence of MSS, that just were not available to the translators of the KJ translation.
It was good for it's day and it certainly is correct enough to do the work for which God sent unto mankind His word. Any reliable translation of the best MSS concerning the work of Jesus and the apostles as they walked among us, is good for the open of heart to understand what God has done for us through His Son, Jesus. May God be forever and ever praised. Amen!
As to the old covenant writings, those have, long before the KJ translation, been approved and set in canon. The only issue of difference from the KJ translation and any of the more modern translations, is the accounting of the work of God since delivering His Son to us. The most important message of that group of writings being that God sent His Son to die in our place for the forgiveness of our sin. That anyone who would believe and trust God in this work, would gain eternal life with Him who lives forever. I have read many, many differing translations and have yet to find any of the reliable translations to fail at this purpose.
Please consider that God sent to us His words that we might be saved. Not that we could argue over who did the best job in translating His words into English. It is through the knowledge that one gains from reading the Scriptures with a soft and open heart, that salvation may come to that person. Whether he read those words as translated in the NIV, NASB, NKJ, KJ, ESV, etc. Let's be approving of people reading and understanding the Scriptures more than whether they are reading one's personal assessment of what the 'best' translation is. Believe it or not, there are people finding God's salvation through many of the reliable translations. It doesn't have to be the KJ.
God bless,
Ted
It was a generalization, one that is often by historians and others. But you can call it 40% if you prefer. Or 61.3% if you'd rather. (sigh)
Gosh, I think that the 'evidence' (remember that niggling little word?) said that it was 23%. You're still not willing to accept anything but 'your truth'. I get it. We've discussed a lot over the years.
The point remains that the Bible societies and evangelistic associations in the English speaking world were especially active throughout the globe in those days in spreading the Gospel, using the KJV as their version of Scripture.
I would agree with that statement. Just as I would agree that in the 1500's people around the world reading and being saved with the Tyndale translation of the Scriptures. It was the first translation that was put into print. In the 1500's Erasmus cobbled together a new translation of the Scriptures, from the available manuscript data that he had at hand, which is now called the Textus Receptus (Received Text). So yes, the KJ translation probably had the longest run as a translation of the Scriptures in English...so far. But that neither makes it perfect or the best. It is just the first of many more modern translations that are based on whatever material was available in that day. However today, we have more modern translations, of which many are based on newer archeological evidence of MSS, that just were not available to the translators of the KJ translation.
It was good for it's day and it certainly is correct enough to do the work for which God sent unto mankind His word. Any reliable translation of the best MSS concerning the work of Jesus and the apostles as they walked among us, is good for the open of heart to understand what God has done for us through His Son, Jesus. May God be forever and ever praised. Amen!
As to the old covenant writings, those have, long before the KJ translation, been approved and set in canon. The only issue of difference from the KJ translation and any of the more modern translations, is the accounting of the work of God since delivering His Son to us. The most important message of that group of writings being that God sent His Son to die in our place for the forgiveness of our sin. That anyone who would believe and trust God in this work, would gain eternal life with Him who lives forever. I have read many, many differing translations and have yet to find any of the reliable translations to fail at this purpose.
Please consider that God sent to us His words that we might be saved. Not that we could argue over who did the best job in translating His words into English. It is through the knowledge that one gains from reading the Scriptures with a soft and open heart, that salvation may come to that person. Whether he read those words as translated in the NIV, NASB, NKJ, KJ, ESV, etc. Let's be approving of people reading and understanding the Scriptures more than whether they are reading one's personal assessment of what the 'best' translation is. Believe it or not, there are people finding God's salvation through many of the reliable translations. It doesn't have to be the KJ.
God bless,
Ted
Upvote
0