King James Version

[Didaskomenos]

I'm just trying to figure out why. I mean, of all the English translations in the world, what makes anyone think the KJV is the best? Why not Tyndale's? Why not the American Standard? Why the KJV of all translations? It didn't even try to be close to the "originals," using as sources translations of translations - it's just beyond me.

It's like saying, "Apples are the best fruit. No doubt. God wants us to eat apples. No other fruit. Why? Because he wants his people to eat the right fruit, and apples are the right fruit. They are good for you. Bananas have been known to get speckled. Pineapples can't be God's chosen fruit for you, because they're too hard to get into. I like apples. It's apples."

 

[Julie]

That"The AV is too hard to understand” is the same endless prattle we have been hearing from bible translators for at least fifty years.

Have you ever read 2 Peter 3:15&16?

“…our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things in which are some things hard to be understood…”

 

Have you ever read Isa 55:8&9?

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”

 

Have you ever read Proverbs 8:8&9?

“All the words of my mouth are in righteousness; there is nothing froward or perverse in them. They are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge.”


MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE and JUDE did not profess to be “inerrant” before or after writing what they wrote.  …There is not one verse in any translation of any edition of any Bible from any set of manuscripts on this earth where the original author of Esther, the Proverbs, Jonah, Mark, 1 Peter, Joshua, or 2 Samuel ever professed to be INSPIRED, INFALLIBLE OR INERRANT.

Because the translators never professed inerrancy does not mean the KJV is not inerrant any more than are the books of the Bible listed above.

 

[Didaskomenos]

Originally posted by Julie
Have you ever read Isa 55:8&9?

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.”

Presumably, the Lord did not here imply an exception clause for those who read the KJV. I guess the New Age Bible Versions leave out the next sentence, "But those who read AV1611 shall always know every one of my thoughts and ways concerning the presentation of my Word."

Have you ever read Proverbs 8:8&9?

“All the words of my mouth are in righteousness; there is nothing froward or perverse in them. They are all plain to him that understandeth, and right to them that find knowledge.”

Of course they're plain to "him that understandeth," but it doesn't say *who that is*, or that reading the KJV is *how* to "find knowledge." It's easy to see once you've seen it. But both of us think it's plain to us. Don't you think that verse is talking about God's truth in general, not the English language? This is nuts.

 

[filosofer]

This is nuts.

Well said, and worth saying again:

This is nuts.

 

[Thunderchild]

And whereas they vrge for their second defence of their vilifying and abusing of the English Bibles, or some pieces thereof, which they meete with, for that heretikes (forsooth) were the Authours of the translations...we marueile what diuinitie taught them so."

Does it say who is being accused here of villifying the prior English language versions and declaring them to have been produced by heretics? ... "We marvel what divinity taught them so." (must file that for future use)

 

[tericl2]

Wouldn't something like the Young's Literal translation or the Literal Translation Version (LITV) work in place of the KJV?? Or is the KJV THE ONLY Bible? Just curious.

 

[Divinus]

Originally posted by Thunderchild


Does it say who is being accused here of villifying the prior English language versions and declaring them to have been produced by heretics? ... "We marvel what divinity taught them so." (must file that for future use)

I can't really remember..I was reading a scanned copy of the edition (I haven't bought my own copy yet) and I was in a bit of a rush. I don't think they named names...the website I was reading is here, I think it was about page seven or so..

Has anyone else heard the claim KJVOs sometimes make that because modern versions are under copyright, therefore they are evil? That one's funny

 

[suzie]

Originally posted by Didaskomenos


Presumably, the Lord did not here imply an exception clause for those who read the KJV. I guess the New Age Bible Versions leave out the next sentence, "But those who read AV1611 shall always know every one of my thoughts and ways concerning the presentation of my Word."



Of course they're plain to "him that understandeth," but it doesn't say *who that is*, or that reading the KJV is *how* to "find knowledge." It's easy to see once you've seen it. But both of us think it's plain to us. Don't you think that verse is talking about God's truth in general, not the English language? This is nuts.

well  put didaskomenos