KJV Removed

[the particular baptist]

The Authorised Version (KJV) is covered by Crown Copyright which pre-dates modern copyright law. Outside the UK (and Commonwealth?), The AV is old enough to be out of copyright.

I think Wycliffe is being confused with Tyndale.

Yep, my bad. Thanks for the correction. Yes here in the states and most of the world besides Great Britain there is no copyright on the KJV.

 

[the particular baptist]

Wycliffe made the first complete English translation, working from the Latin Vulgate. The Established Church was unhappy (Wycliffe was a precursor to the Protestant Reformation and preached biblically centred reform), and banned Wycliffe's translation in 1409.

Tyndale came a century later. He was a very gifted linguist, who knew Greek, Hebrew, Latin, French, German, Italian etc (he would have been off the right hand side of MagusAlbertus' IQ graph!). He didn't need an English translation. However, he produced a new translation into English so that ordinary people could read and understand God's Word. He came at the right time to make use of the newly invented printing press and take advantage of the latest research into Greek and Hebrew manuscripts.

Tyndale's version was also banned in England, and he was executed in 1536 in Antwerp at the bidding of Henry VIII.

Later (1604), James I commissioned a new translation for political reasons - he wanted to displace the Geneva Bible which was popular with the Puritans and Separatist's, and also choose wording to support the episcopal structure of the Church of England. However, the Authorised Version did make extensive use to previous English translations, particularly Tyndale's.

The whole purpose of a translation is to enable someone to who doesn't know the original languages to have a version that they can understand. Obvious! However, if after 500 years, the destination language has changed so that people now find the translation difficult to follow, then it no longer meets that purpose. The AV/KJV is no longer suitable for ordinary people. If thou speakest not in 'thees and thous' in they own tongue, then thou shouldest not be using the AV/KJV (or at least, not requirest of others).

I'm familiar with both men and admire them greatly.

 

[EphesiaNZ]

It bugs me that NIV is copyrighted as I use the Xiphos Bible Study software and cannot study the NIV version with Xiphos although I'm happy enough with any of the non-copyrighted versions such as KJV, GodsWord or WEB.

Having said that, NIV is a what we use in church. I think God's Word should be free no matter what version it is.

 

[the particular baptist]

I think God's Word should be free no matter what version it is.

 

[98cwitr]

Genesis 22:1 (King James Version)

Genesis 22

1And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.

James 1:13
Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:


^^^The main reason I have rejected the KJV and support it being removed from any Christian institution. It's not the Words of Our God...because there is in a blatant and evident contradiction here.

 

[EphesiaNZ]

Genesis 22:1 (King James Version)

Genesis 22

1And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.

James 1:13
Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:


^^^The main reason I have rejected the KJV and support it being removed from any Christian institution. It's not the Words of Our God...because there is in a blatant and evident contradiction here.

Well NIV suffers too depending how you measure time;

Matthew 12:40 - For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Luke 24:7 - The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.

Was it after three whole days or on the third day?

 

[the particular baptist]

Genesis 22:1 (King James Version)

Genesis 22

1And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am.

James 1:13
Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:


^^^The main reason I have rejected the KJV and support it being removed from any Christian institution. It's not the Words of Our God...because there is in a blatant and evident contradiction here.

Hi bro, its just the AV language. The word means "test".

 

[98cwitr]

then it should say test and not tempt...yet alas....

Well NIV suffers too depending how you measure time;

Matthew 12:40 - For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Luke 24:7 - The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.

Was it after three whole days or on the third day?

That looks like a universal conundrum and not a NIV-only issue...do all the English translations suffer from this?

 

[EphesiaNZ]

then it should say test and not tempt...yet alas....

That looks like a universal conundrum and not a NIV-only issue...do all the English translations suffer from this?

Yes, it probably is but was just trying to highlight dropping one version for another - there will always be cross references which do not correspond 100%. Just wonder how many works that have had a multitude of authors over hundreds of years then translated into various languages and then hundreds of versions wouldn't have some slight anomalies?

 

[MagusAlbertus]

I said that they need an international version because they didn't grow up in an english-speaking home.

Many people grow up speaking english but don't grow up in an english speaking home. Crazy i KNOW but that's how the melting pot of the US works.

I don't care what is in the pew

As a Christian you don't get to not care because

the bibles they removed had nothing wrong with them.

This is wrong, there was something wrong with them, they where written in old-english gibberish; the kind of thing someone that needs a pew bible is more likely not to understand (what with not speaking church).

The whole purpose of a translation is to enable someone to who doesn't know the original languages to have a version that they can understand. Obvious! However, if after 500 years, the destination language has changed so that people now find the translation difficult to follow, then it no longer meets that purpose. The AV/KJV is no longer suitable for ordinary people.

unless you value tradition more than you do loving your fellow man.

I'd love an argument for the gibberish in the pews that didn't have to eventually fall back on this.

 

[GJonesDreams]

The NIV is not a translation! It is a revision. The Bible was translated 400 years ago into the English language. That's when it was translated. Since then people have tried to create "revisions" by revising original text which had a long history before being translated into our English language via the King James Bible. Was God almighty not big enough to know exactly how he wanted his Word translated into the English language? I think he knows what he is doing! Also be sure and research the NIV...you will discover that thousands of words were changed/removed and even entire verses were completely removed!

 

[EphesiaNZ]

The NIV is not a translation! It is a revision. The Bible was translated 400 years ago into the English language. That's when it was translated. Since then people have tried to create "revisions" by revising original text which had a long history before being translated into our English language via the King James Bible. Was God almighty not big enough to know exactly how he wanted his Word translated into the English language? I think he knows what he is doing! Also be sure and research the NIV...you will discover that thousands of words were changed/removed and even entire verses were completely removed!

Just a pity that the NIV isn't free to reach everyone - that's the sad part..

 

[Hammster]

The NIV is not a translation! It is a revision. The Bible was translated 400 years ago into the English language. That's when it was translated. Since then people have tried to create "revisions" by revising original text which had a long history before being translated into our English language via the King James Bible. Was God almighty not big enough to know exactly how he wanted his Word translated into the English language? I think he knows what he is doing! Also be sure and research the NIV...you will discover that thousands of words were changed/removed and even entire verses were completely removed!

They probably should have stuck with the Geneva bible instead of the AV revision.

 

[98cwitr]

Yes, it probably is but was just trying to highlight dropping one version for another - there will always be cross references which do not correspond 100%. Just wonder how many works that have had a multitude of authors over hundreds of years then translated into various languages and then hundreds of versions wouldn't have some slight anomalies?

yeah...only if those authors had been inspired in some way

 

[HantsUK]

They probably should have stuck with the Geneva bible instead of the AV revision.

You have a very good point.

However, the Geneva Bible was not acceptable to James I and the Church authorities, as it was too closely aligned with the Puritans, and contained marginal notes that were critical of the established church.

 

[dies-l]

The NIV is not a translation! It is a revision. The Bible was translated 400 years ago into the English language. That's when it was translated. Since then people have tried to create "revisions" by revising original text which had a long history before being translated into our English language via the King James Bible. Was God almighty not big enough to know exactly how he wanted his Word translated into the English language? I think he knows what he is doing! Also be sure and research the NIV...you will discover that thousands of words were changed/removed and even entire verses were completely removed!

Actually, the Bible was first translated into modern English over 600 years ago, then revised numerous times throughout the 15th and 16th century; these revisions culminated in the King James Version (aka the Authorized Version) in 1611. Prior to the Wycliffe translations of the late 14th century, the Bible was previously translated into Old English and Middle English.

 

[HumbleMan]

When I read the bible (my favorite version is the HCSB), I not only read the words on the page, but I also seek God's guidance in understanding what is written. I would do that with any translation.

But then again, I don't verse-mine. I read the bible in context of what is being addressed in each gospel/letter/prophecy/history.