Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
The King James Bible
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mark kennedy" data-source="post: 59268845" data-attributes="member: 29337"><p>We live in a time when we can access not only various excellent direct translations, but there are tools for exploring the originals. The KJV is a great translation but so was the Geneva Bible and the NIV. You should also take into consideration that the KJV has went through maybe 10 revisions since 1611. Have you ever tried to get an actual KJV 1611 in print? </p><p></p><p>It's considered '<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical" target="_blank">canonical</a>' in the original. I'm not crazy about the language of the KJV because the OT gets pretty cryptic even with a modern translation. I tend to prefer the NIV for OT history but NT doctrine just sounds better in the KJV. The 22 Psalm and Romans 6 are better done in the old King James, I mean I think so. Some other passages in places like Hebrews and Leveticus are more comprehensive in the NIV. </p><p></p><p>At any rate, that's my two cents worth</p><p></p><p>Grace and peace,</p><p>Mark</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mark kennedy, post: 59268845, member: 29337"] We live in a time when we can access not only various excellent direct translations, but there are tools for exploring the originals. The KJV is a great translation but so was the Geneva Bible and the NIV. You should also take into consideration that the KJV has went through maybe 10 revisions since 1611. Have you ever tried to get an actual KJV 1611 in print? It's considered '[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical"]canonical[/URL]' in the original. I'm not crazy about the language of the KJV because the OT gets pretty cryptic even with a modern translation. I tend to prefer the NIV for OT history but NT doctrine just sounds better in the KJV. The 22 Psalm and Romans 6 are better done in the old King James, I mean I think so. Some other passages in places like Hebrews and Leveticus are more comprehensive in the NIV. At any rate, that's my two cents worth Grace and peace, Mark [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
The King James Bible
Top
Bottom