KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE

[brinny]

The King James Version belongs in the trash. It has severely outdated language and is not based on the original manuscripts.

LOL! Not a fan?

By the way, you might want to watch the video posted in post #3.

He breaks down why the King James Bible is reliable.

 

[Ancient of Days]

Rubiks said:
"The King James Version belongs in the trash. It has severely outdated language and is not based on the original manuscripts."

You are right about one thing, Satan clearly hates the KJV. Thanks for proving the point.

 

[brinny]

Rubiks said:
"The King James Version belongs in the trash. It has severely outdated language and is not based on the original manuscripts."

You are right about one thing, Satan clearly hates the KJV. Thanks for proving the point.

Exactly.

 

[Devin P]

A KING JAMES VERSION SERMON:

- Hebrews 4:12 (KJV)
- Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)

Notice the word "preserve", meaning God's word is already present in our times.

- Galatians 1:6-7 (of 1:1-12) (KJV)

Notice "of Christ", meaning sadly there are trying Christians attracted by the overwhelming affection of Christ, only to be misled by a Gospel that is not "of Christ"

- 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 (KJV)

Scriptural changes differing in meaning broadly spread through the many so called, "modern English Bible Translations" published since the King James Version Bible (KJV) or its birth in 1611 as the Authorized Version (AV).

Here is our History:
The King James Version Bible: Translated from the Textus Receptus and finished in 1611; Through God's will a breakthrough for the Protestant Reformation, for Christian believers with beliefs protestant to the Roman Catholic Church.

The MOST respected Bible, standing out as a strong spiritual asset.
The one and only true word of God (in the English Language).
The Holy Bible.

- Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV)

Pre 1611 (Old Testament):
Was known to be in the Hebrew Language.

Pre 1611 (New Testament):
Before year 1611, The New Testament was present on earth in the Greek language; in texts known as the Textus Receptus, Yet, not yet translated into the English Language.

Pre 1611 English Bible translations (To solve confusion):
These books were not known to be as spiritually profitable, but are very evident that the puritan reformer group in their day were not happy with Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church, desperate and determined for liberty in faith. ​

The kjv wasn't the first English translated version of the Hebraic and Greek scriptures, the Geneva was older.

The Geneva was the choice of the people, but James outlawed the printing of the Geneva and eventually banned its existence, and despite people being against the kjv at first, it caught on decades later. But it was to the point that people died trying to preserve the Geneva.

The issue with the Geneva though, is that it was written before the English language was solidified, so there's some confusing spellings of certain words because they were still figuring the specifics out.

 

[Tom 1]

The King James Version belongs in the trash. It has severely outdated language and is not based on the original manuscripts.

The KJV had a huge impact on the English language as well as the spread of Christianity, so I wouldn’t knock it. Check out Melvyn Bragg’s ‘book of books’.
As for the main post I don’t really see a reason for insisting on using it over any modern translation though, I’ve always found comparing different translations or breakdowns of the Greek and Hebrew when necessary helps me to get an understanding of anything unclear. I’ve read some of the arguments but I don’t see anything in it beyond personal choice or the weight of tradition in some churches.
Btw Tyndale did most of the hard work, much of the KJV is taken directly from his translation.

 

[Dkh587]

I enjoy the KJV, but it's not perfect. For example, in Acts 12:4, the Greek word for Passover was incorrectly translated into "Easter" rather than Passover.

 

[GingerBeer]

Okay you like the KJV we get it and you think it is just the best bible ever (in English) - absolutely fabulous better than any other! Great. Now what?

 

[ViaCrucis]

The kjv wasn't the first English translated version of the Hebraic and Greek scriptures, the Geneva was older.

The Geneva was the choice of the people, but James outlawed the printing of the Geneva and eventually banned its existence, and despite people being against the kjv at first, it caught on decades later. But it was to the point that people died trying to preserve the Geneva.

The issue with the Geneva though, is that it was written before the English language was solidified, so there's some confusing spellings of certain words because they were still figuring the specifics out.

The same is true of the KJV (1611 original) which has words such as thinke instead of think; or had the reverse of modern use of u and v, diuide rather than divide, vnder instead of under. Standardization of English spelling and orthography happened largely in the 18th and 19th centuries. Another example would be the use of the long-s even in the late 18th century which can be seen e.g. the American Declaration of Independence,

"When in the Courſe of human Events, it becomes neceſſary for one People to diſſolve the Political..."

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Sanoy]

I don't think theology should ever seriously be derived from a translation. There are far too many words with no English parallel to do that safely without anachronism. If theology cannot seriously be derived from translation then it really doesn't leave much unique weight to the idea of KJVO.

 

[Deadworm]

KJV Only devotees think so little of the Word of God that they don't bother to investigate the modern science of Text Criticism. This science groups biblical manuscripts into families by date, geographical origin, and general reliability. Then it demonstrates when, how, and why many of the hundreds of thousands of errors crept into the text, so that the most accurate possible critical text of the Hebrew and Greek can be recovered. The results are often corroborated by the earliest church fathers and their quotations of specific texts. For example, Origin points out errors that have crept into texts that are missing in earlier manuscripts, errors that are sadly preserved in the texts used by the KJV. The most relevant of the earliest manuscripts and paypyri were of course t available to the KJV translators. This summary is almost universally accepted in both conservative and liberal seminaries.

The Hebrew and Greek texts used by the KJV translators contain many bogus verses that are missing from the earliest and most reliable manuscripts. No such bogus intrusion is more spiritually dangerous than the false ending of Mark 16:9-20. Manuscript evidence demonstrates the original Gospel ended at 16:8 and various false endings were then later added to provide stories of Resurrection appearances. One manuscript of Mark indicates that the text was invented by Aristo of Pella after 150 AD. The Greek style of 16:9-20 differs so strikingly from the rest of Mark's Gospel that its bogus nature is widely recognized by modern Bible scholars.

What makes the false ending of Mark so spiritually dangerous is its claim: "These signs shall follow them that believe...They shall pick up snakes in their hands and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them (16:18)." This cultic promise serves as the basis for the Applalachian Christian practice of putting God to the test by handing wild ratllesnakes and drinking strychnine rat poison. Many fatalities, including children, have resulted rom this cultic practice. Note that the deliberate act of picking up deadly snakes is based on Paul's accidental encounter with a viper that wraps around his hand in Acts 28:3). and the accidental treading on scorpions in Luke 10:17.

 

[Dale]

A KING JAMES VERSION SERMON:

- Hebrews 4:12 (KJV)
- Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)

Notice the word "preserve", meaning God's word is already present in our times.

- Galatians 1:6-7 (of 1:1-12) (KJV)

Notice "of Christ", meaning sadly there are trying Christians attracted by the overwhelming affection of Christ, only to be misled by a Gospel that is not "of Christ"

- 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 (KJV)

Scriptural changes differing in meaning broadly spread through the many so called, "modern English Bible Translations" published since the King James Version Bible (KJV) or its birth in 1611 as the Authorized Version (AV).

Here is our History:
The King James Version Bible: Translated from the Textus Receptus and finished in 1611; Through God's will a breakthrough for the Protestant Reformation, for Christian believers with beliefs protestant to the Roman Catholic Church.

The MOST respected Bible, standing out as a strong spiritual asset.
The one and only true word of God (in the English Language).
The Holy Bible.

- Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV)

Pre 1611 (Old Testament):
Was known to be in the Hebrew Language.

Pre 1611 (New Testament):
Before year 1611, The New Testament was present on earth in the Greek language; in texts known as the Textus Receptus, Yet, not yet translated into the English Language.

Pre 1611 English Bible translations (To solve confusion):
These books were not known to be as spiritually profitable, but are very evident that the puritan reformer group in their day were not happy with Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church, desperate and determined for liberty in faith. ​

You say:
<< Pre 1611 (New Testament):
Before year 1611, The New Testament was present on earth in the Greek language; in texts known as the Textus Receptus, Yet, not yet translated into the English Language. >>

You're ignoring the Latin Vulgate, but I'll leave that to the Catholics.

As a basic point of religious history, there were English translations before the KJV. Someone has already pointed out the Geneva Bible.

The KJV was actually the eighth (8th) English translation! The most widely used translation when King James commissioned the KJV was known as the Bishop's Bible.

I personally have found the KJV to be unreliable and misleading in a number of places.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

KJV Only devotees think so little of the Word of God that they don't bother to investigate the modern science of Text Criticism. This science groups biblical manuscripts into families by date, geographical origin, and general reliability. Then it demonstrates when, how, and why many of the hundreds of thousands of errors crept into the text, so that the most accurate possible critical text of the Hebrew and Greek can be recovered. The results are often corroborated by the earliest church fathers and their quotations of specific texts. For example, Origin points out errors that have crept into texts that are missing in earlier manuscripts, errors that are sadly preserved in the texts used by the KJV. The most relevant of the earliest manuscripts and paypyri were of course t available to the KJV translators. This summary is almost universally accepted in both conservative and liberal seminaries.

The Hebrew and Greek texts used by the KJV translators contain many bogus verses that are missing from the earliest and most reliable manuscripts. No such bogus intrusion is more spiritually dangerous than the false ending of Mark 16:9-20. Manuscript evidence demonstrates the original Gospel ended at 16:8 and various false endings were then later added to provide stories of Resurrection appearances. One manuscript of Mark indicates that the text was invented by Aristo of Pella after 150 AD. The Greek style of 16:9-20 differs so strikingly from the rest of Mark's Gospel that its bogus nature is widely recognized by modern Bible scholars.

What makes the false ending of Mark so spiritually dangerous is its claim: "These signs shall follow them that believe...They shall pick up snakes in their hands and if they drink any deadly thing, it will not hurt them (16:18)." This cultic promise serves as the basis for the Applalachian Christian practice of putting God to the test by handing wild ratllesnakes and drinking strychnine rat poison. Many fatalities, including children, have resulted rom this cultic practice. Note that the deliberate act of picking up deadly snakes is based on Paul's accidental encounter with a viper that wraps around his hand in Acts 28:3). and the accidental treading on scorpions in Luke 10:17.

Again with the snake thing. Come on now. Luke 10:19 mentions that we can tread on snakes. The idea here is that one can touch snakes without intentionally setting out to do so and not be harmed. Mark 16:18 is referring to Paul's encounter with a snake that wrapped around his hand and yet it did not bite him. The KJV says, "take up serpents" in Mark 16:18 and yet we see in Acts of the Apostles 28:3-4 a snake fasten onto Paul's hand and the barbarians had seen this snake then hanging on Paul's hand. In a way, Paul took up this serpent and yet he was not harmed. *Cough* Fulfillment.

I honestly do think there are two sides here sometimes; And I also believe there is a spiritual danger in regards to this topic. However, I believe the real danger is not having a sure word of authority.
But I am commanded in love to do good and to love and to pray for those in whom I strongly disagree with in regards to the things of GOD.

Anyways, may GOD bless you.

 

[dqhall]

A KING JAMES VERSION SERMON:

- Hebrews 4:12 (KJV)
- Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)

Notice the word "preserve", meaning God's word is already present in our times.

- Galatians 1:6-7 (of 1:1-12) (KJV)

Notice "of Christ", meaning sadly there are trying Christians attracted by the overwhelming affection of Christ, only to be misled by a Gospel that is not "of Christ"

- 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 (KJV)

Scriptural changes differing in meaning broadly spread through the many so called, "modern English Bible Translations" published since the King James Version Bible (KJV) or its birth in 1611 as the Authorized Version (AV).

Here is our History:
The King James Version Bible: Translated from the Textus Receptus and finished in 1611; Through God's will a breakthrough for the Protestant Reformation, for Christian believers with beliefs protestant to the Roman Catholic Church.

The MOST respected Bible, standing out as a strong spiritual asset.
The one and only true word of God (in the English Language).
The Holy Bible.

- Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV)

Pre 1611 (Old Testament):
Was known to be in the Hebrew Language.

Pre 1611 (New Testament):
Before year 1611, The New Testament was present on earth in the Greek language; in texts known as the Textus Receptus, Yet, not yet translated into the English Language.

Pre 1611 English Bible translations (To solve confusion):
These books were not known to be as spiritually profitable, but are very evident that the puritan reformer group in their day were not happy with Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church, desperate and determined for liberty in faith. ​

There were numerous ancient Greek Bible New Testament manuscripts containing some variances in wording. The translators of the New International Version looked at them and tried to pick the best translation. They also used modern vocabulary without thee, thou etc.

The Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered at Qumran above the Dead Sea shore in 1946-1947. These scrolled dated from the 3rd century BC to the 1st century AD. They contained Old Testament books and previously unknown writings. It took decades to piece together and translate them. There are some variances between the Dead Sea Scrolls and later Greek and Hebrew Old Testament texts used for Hebrew and Christian Bibles.

Some scholars found there were similarities between the Dead Sea Scrolls and more recent translations:
The Dead Sea Scrolls

Other scholars found there were differences between the Dead Sea Scrolls and more recent translations:
"Dead Sea Scrolls" yield "major" questions in Old Testament understanding // News // Notre Dame News // University of Notre Dame

 

[pescador]

I don't think theology should ever seriously be derived from a translation. There are far too many words with no English parallel to do that safely without anachronism. If theology cannot seriously be derived from translation then it really doesn't leave much unique weight to the idea of KJVO.

I use the NET Bible, second edition, with its 58,506 translators' notes. Since very few people are qualified to translate the ancient texts the translators' notes are extremely helpful to help the reader understand the nuances and difficulties of translation.

KJVO folks worship a book, in other words, an idol.

 

[The Times]

A KING JAMES VERSION SERMON:

- Hebrews 4:12 (KJV)
- Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)

Notice the word "preserve", meaning God's word is already present in our times.

- Galatians 1:6-7 (of 1:1-12) (KJV)

Notice "of Christ", meaning sadly there are trying Christians attracted by the overwhelming affection of Christ, only to be misled by a Gospel that is not "of Christ"

- 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 (KJV)

Scriptural changes differing in meaning broadly spread through the many so called, "modern English Bible Translations" published since the King James Version Bible (KJV) or its birth in 1611 as the Authorized Version (AV).

Here is our History:
The King James Version Bible: Translated from the Textus Receptus and finished in 1611; Through God's will a breakthrough for the Protestant Reformation, for Christian believers with beliefs protestant to the Roman Catholic Church.

The MOST respected Bible, standing out as a strong spiritual asset.
The one and only true word of God (in the English Language).
The Holy Bible.

- Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV)

Pre 1611 (Old Testament):
Was known to be in the Hebrew Language.

Pre 1611 (New Testament):
Before year 1611, The New Testament was present on earth in the Greek language; in texts known as the Textus Receptus, Yet, not yet translated into the English Language.

Pre 1611 English Bible translations (To solve confusion):
These books were not known to be as spiritually profitable, but are very evident that the puritan reformer group in their day were not happy with Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church, desperate and determined for liberty in faith. ​

There are points for or against.
KJV has words that are generalised as well that would have two entirely different meanings, if one did not check the word in the Greek. Some versions try to sharpen the word to nake distinction, that the words are different.

For example, in revelation it uses the word beast as follows.....

1And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see. 2And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.

These four beasts should be rendered four creatures that stand before the throne of God. By using the word beast it confuses tge reader to think that the rider on the white horse is antichrist, when in fact this is the revelation of Jesus Christ and this white horse the the Elijah forerunner.

It is important to distinguish tge dual meaning of words, otgerwise the lines of demarcation are blurred and the outcome can lead to two entirely eschatological views of who the rider of the whote horse is.

 

[NeedyFollower]

A KING JAMES VERSION SERMON:

- Hebrews 4:12 (KJV)
- Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)

Notice the word "preserve", meaning God's word is already present in our times.

- Galatians 1:6-7 (of 1:1-12) (KJV)

Notice "of Christ", meaning sadly there are trying Christians attracted by the overwhelming affection of Christ, only to be misled by a Gospel that is not "of Christ"

- 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 (KJV)

Scriptural changes differing in meaning broadly spread through the many so called, "modern English Bible Translations" published since the King James Version Bible (KJV) or its birth in 1611 as the Authorized Version (AV).

Here is our History:
The King James Version Bible: Translated from the Textus Receptus and finished in 1611; Through God's will a breakthrough for the Protestant Reformation, for Christian believers with beliefs protestant to the Roman Catholic Church.

The MOST respected Bible, standing out as a strong spiritual asset.
The one and only true word of God (in the English Language).
The Holy Bible.

- Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV)

Pre 1611 (Old Testament):
Was known to be in the Hebrew Language.

Pre 1611 (New Testament):
Before year 1611, The New Testament was present on earth in the Greek language; in texts known as the Textus Receptus, Yet, not yet translated into the English Language.

Pre 1611 English Bible translations (To solve confusion):
These books were not known to be as spiritually profitable, but are very evident that the puritan reformer group in their day were not happy with Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church, desperate and determined for liberty in faith. ​

I have a KJV and I prefer it . But I am also aware that KJV only people are primarily English and American though they were english . This implies that non english speaking people have never heard the word of God until they learned english . I am also aware that the KJV bible did not keep the puritans ( Calvinist )from hanging adultresses , and burning people they deemed to be heretics , joining the army and killing "the enemies of God " though they themselves would proclaim that they were partakers of mercy and Grace ...according to the KJV ...The KJV also says that we are to be harmless as doves and yet ...we do not believe that .

So my point is ...Yes ..only English speaking baptist are saved ...because of their deep humility and willingness to be wrong . May God forgive the spirit in which I write but I feel like Paul when he was adressing those who constrained the galatians to be circumcised ..he wished they would cut them selves . I use the KJV ...have no use for the NIV but it is quite arrogant and because of pride to say that it is God's Word ....God's Word is God's word . His name is Jesus .
Let us be careful that we do not compass land and sea making prosoytes , and when he is made , we make him twofold more the child of hell . For KJV only people ...compass means to travel and two fold means twice ...proselyte means convert ...in other words someone who you get saved and turn them into a KJV only person ...you know ...a proud american christian that speaks english ..the christian tongue.

 

[JoeP222w]

I didn't infer he was lost, I SAID he is WRONG.

You asserted but did not demonstrate how he was wrong.

 

[KingJamesVersionBibleOnly]

I enjoy the KJV, but it's not perfect. For example, in Acts 12:4, the Greek word for Passover was incorrectly translated into "Easter" rather than Passover.

If you believe the KJV is the pure word of God, which is supposed to be how you feel about the Holy Bible you have chosen for your life, then you should always accept that the Bible as a whole has nothing incorrect and every word came from God, and is perfect and correct.
(Proverbs 30:5-6) Please re-read the whole sermon and make sure you understand it)
&
It is often taught that Acts 12:4 is wrong from the various modern English translations & correct in the KJV.

 

[KingJamesVersionBibleOnly]

 

[KingJamesVersionBibleOnly]

The kjv wasn't the first English translated version of the Hebraic and Greek scriptures, the Geneva was older.

The Geneva was the choice of the people, but James outlawed the printing of the Geneva and eventually banned its existence, and despite people being against the kjv at first, it caught on decades later. But it was to the point that people died trying to preserve the Geneva.

The issue with the Geneva though, is that it was written before the English language was solidified, so there's some confusing spellings of certain words because they were still figuring the specifics out.

Its not completely about what came 1st, I would absolutely in your case consider; the KJV Bible was chosen & proved to have more of an impact. Is there truly a question if it was God's will or not?
&
There are currently no laws against using the Geneva Bible within my knowledge, Yet, Still the KJV is highly favored.

- 1 Corinthians 2:13 (KJV)