The King James Version

gordonhooker

Franciscan tssf
Supporter
Feb 5, 2012
1,883
1,045
Wellington Point, QLD
Visit site
✟274,602.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Agree. I would call the GNT a paraphrase, not a translation.

Closer to paraphrase than dynamic equivalence but great for younger reader. I can still remember the 60’s when the first Good News NT hit the shelves and was great for Sunday school.
 
Upvote 0

1stcenturylady

Spirit-filled follower of Christ
Supporter
Feb 13, 2017
11,189
4,193
76
Tennessee
✟431,122.00
Country
United States
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Republican
Closer to paraphrase than dynamic equivalence but great for younger reader. I can still remember the 60’s when the first Good News NT hit the shelves and was great for Sunday school.

Gordon, I thought you would also like to know that William Tynsdale wrote an extensive introduction to each book, some more than 10 pages long. I hope you get it; I think it would be a worthwhile addition to your library. I have a pretty extensive library, where much of my money went to over the years.
 
Upvote 0

gordonhooker

Franciscan tssf
Supporter
Feb 5, 2012
1,883
1,045
Wellington Point, QLD
Visit site
✟274,602.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Gordon, I thought you would also like to know that William Tynsdale wrote an extensive introduction to each book, some more than 10 pages long. I hope you get it; I think it would be a worthwhile addition to your library. I have a pretty extensive library, where much of my money went to over the years.
Sounds great
 
Upvote 0

robycop3

Newbie
Sep 16, 2014
2,435
539
✟107,962.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Is the KJV only view a false view of preaching or studying the Bible? I am just wondering because I believe all translations are written about the same things? They are translations, not a promotion of false doctrine. When did the KJV only view take place? Why would it be considered more accurate than the NKJV and other translations?
Yes, it's a false view. The KJVO myth has no Scriptural support at all, even in the KJV itself, a fact which makes it automatically false.

And the KJV is not at all perfect. It has many goofs & booboos in it, such as "Easter" in Acts 12:4. (Easter didn't exist when Luke wrote "Acts".)

Yes, the KJVO myth is man-made & false !
 
Upvote 0