KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES
- Thread starter KingJamesVersionBibleOnly
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
So you agree that the ultimate goal is a preservation of Church and Bible is just one of tools God uses for it. The question is if the tool has to be physically perfect or if Church would die if one sentence was missing. I am saying - absolutely not.
I think that KJV has this Psalm wrong. Which is not as much a fault of the translation, rather a fault of wrong sources selection.
Psalm says "for all generation from now for ever".
Where was a perfect word in 500 BCE, 1 AD, 200 AD, 500 AD, 1400 AD, 1610 AD?
The history says that text was changing, canon was dynamic etc. But there has always been some remnant of His people.
I think that KJV has this Psalm wrong. Which is not as much a fault of the translation, rather a fault of wrong sources selection.
Psalm says "for all generation from now for ever".
Where was a perfect word in 500 BCE, 1 AD, 200 AD, 500 AD, 1400 AD, 1610 AD?
The history says that text was changing, canon was dynamic etc. But there has always been some remnant of His people.
Last edited:
Just as I thought, you are redefining "evil"! LOL!
If the very words of the 1611 KJV are inspired, then God would have chosen the very best word possible to describe what he meant in Jonah 3:10. But you are now telling me that the word "evil" there means "destruction"
By the way, that happens to be the very word the NIV uses:
Jonah 3:10 (NIV)
If the very words of the 1611 KJV are inspired, then God would have chosen the very best word possible to describe what he meant in Jonah 3:10. But you are now telling me that the word "evil" there means "destruction"
By the way, that happens to be the very word the NIV uses:
Jonah 3:10 (NIV)
When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.
See posts 230,231,240
See posts 230,231,240
The plurality in verse seven, when it says, Thou shalt keep them, and, thou shalt preserve them, corresponds to the plurality of, “the words of the Lord” in the previous verse six.
The godly and ungodly aren’t pluralized.
Both are defined as singular groups referred to by use of “him”, as the godly man, and as “him” the ungodly man.
Thus “them” refers to “the words of the Lord” which words the Lord preserves.
Thus “them” doesn’t refer to either the godly man, nor the ungodly man.
The godly and ungodly aren’t pluralized.
Both are defined as singular groups referred to by use of “him”, as the godly man, and as “him” the ungodly man.
Thus “them” refers to “the words of the Lord” which words the Lord preserves.
Thus “them” doesn’t refer to either the godly man, nor the ungodly man.
Last edited:
Verse 7 in the KJV says, "Thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."
Even if the KJV position is correct regarding the "them" referring to the words of the LORD, it is fatally flawed on the application, because the verse does not say that God will "preserve His words and make them available to a later generation".
Even if the KJV position is correct regarding the "them" referring to the words of the LORD, it is fatally flawed on the application, because the verse does not say that God will "preserve His words and make them available to a later generation".
KJV1611 knows that I was talking about Septuagint, we were discussing this before. So I did not consider it necessary to mention that.
"For the end, A Psalm of David, upon the eighth.
Save me, O Lord for the godly man has failed; for truth is diminished from among the children of men.
Every one has spoken vanity to his neighbour: their lips are deceitful, they have spoken with a double heart.
Let the Lord destroy all the deceitful lips, and the tongue that speaks great words:
who have said, We will magnify our tongue; our lips are our own: who is Lord of us?
Because of the misery of the poor, and because of the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the Lord, I will set them in safety; I will speak to them thereof openly.
The oracles of the Lord are pure oracles; as silver tried in the fire, proved in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou, O Lord, shalt keep us, and shalt preserve us, from this generation, and for ever.
The ungodly walk around: according to thy greatness thou has greatly exalted the sons of men. "
Psalm 11
"For the end, A Psalm of David, upon the eighth.
Save me, O Lord for the godly man has failed; for truth is diminished from among the children of men.
Every one has spoken vanity to his neighbour: their lips are deceitful, they have spoken with a double heart.
Let the Lord destroy all the deceitful lips, and the tongue that speaks great words:
who have said, We will magnify our tongue; our lips are our own: who is Lord of us?
Because of the misery of the poor, and because of the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the Lord, I will set them in safety; I will speak to them thereof openly.
The oracles of the Lord are pure oracles; as silver tried in the fire, proved in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Thou, O Lord, shalt keep us, and shalt preserve us, from this generation, and for ever.
The ungodly walk around: according to thy greatness thou has greatly exalted the sons of men. "
Psalm 11
I'm not very learned regarding this subject at all, and yes, I know we shouldn't go by feelings, but the KJV just feels right to me. It's something I can't explain.
I certainly use other translations as well during research, but that old KJV speaks to my soul in a way the others simply don't.
Just my opinion, and it doesn't count for much. Especially regarding the scholarly discussion going on in this thread. I certainly admire the knowledge displayed here.
You guys rock!
I certainly use other translations as well during research, but that old KJV speaks to my soul in a way the others simply don't.
Just my opinion, and it doesn't count for much. Especially regarding the scholarly discussion going on in this thread. I certainly admire the knowledge displayed here.
You guys rock!
He’s a Blue Jays fan?? Now we KNOW the English language is corrupted! (Western Canadian joke!) I also got the word “Jersey” out of this video. Perhaps because he grabbed his jersey when he said it? Or maybe because that is a very familar word, my kids having been in hockey for years and years. (One still coaching hockey, and a grandson with a complete Canadian NHL Jersey set to wear to daycare every day!)
And why on earth does my autocorrect keep capitalizing jersey!? Do they not know it is something players on a sports team wear, and not necessarily a place?
And why on earth does my autocorrect keep capitalizing jersey!? Do they not know it is something players on a sports team wear, and not necessarily a place?
Greek is so easy to learn, if you just take a course on it. Now, finding a grammar and vocabulary course on Early Modern English, that is the challenge.
Or, if you know French, German, Spanish, etc, you can read it in second person singular.
It always amazes me how people can just read the Bible in a language that is so far away from what we speak, and think they understand it, but yet, they can’t learn the languages the Bible was written in, nor any other common European language. (If you are Asian, or something like that, feel free to ignore this post!)
Which of course, the key is, ”thinking they understand it.” The Bible is important to me, so I want to read it in languages I understand, not in fome old, ftrange and no longer used language.
Forty, I am so far behind on thif thread. So bufy with life, I am behind on every thread!
Or, if you know French, German, Spanish, etc, you can read it in second person singular.
It always amazes me how people can just read the Bible in a language that is so far away from what we speak, and think they understand it, but yet, they can’t learn the languages the Bible was written in, nor any other common European language. (If you are Asian, or something like that, feel free to ignore this post!)
Which of course, the key is, ”thinking they understand it.” The Bible is important to me, so I want to read it in languages I understand, not in fome old, ftrange and no longer used language.
Forty, I am so far behind on thif thread. So bufy with life, I am behind on every thread!
I think you are on the wrong thread!
The “I spoke to God and he told me so” people are over on the Word of Faith threads.
The only inspired versions were the original autographs. God told you no such thing. In fact, you admit in the last half of your sentence, it “came out of your studies.” More or less.
I’ll take modern English, translated from the copies that are closest to the autographs. The KJV was translated from 7 much later, corrupted (because they were copies of copies of copies, and don’t even agree with the earliest Byzantine copies) manuscripts.
So much delusion in the BDF. Imagine trying to justify your “revelation” by saying God told you it was a “revelation.” The KJV never says it is the only inspired version, and neither should you.
Shame on you!
Lucy-P, I loved your treasure trove of bizarre KJV verses.
I always say, I don’t understand the archaic and obsolete language, and you certainly proved exactly the reason it is almost dangerous to read in a language that is no longer used.
I guess that is why so many heresies seem to come out of the KJV? Because people can’t tell what on earth the KJV is saying so why not make up stuff as you go along?
I always say, I don’t understand the archaic and obsolete language, and you certainly proved exactly the reason it is almost dangerous to read in a language that is no longer used.
I guess that is why so many heresies seem to come out of the KJV? Because people can’t tell what on earth the KJV is saying so why not make up stuff as you go along?
I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would have a problem reading KJV english.
I'm glad you chimed in because you're a very smart person and I would like to get your opinion on the context of Luke 1. What do you think Luke is trying to get across to the reader in the first three verses?
I'm glad you chimed in because you're a very smart person and I would like to get your opinion on the context of Luke 1. What do you think Luke is trying to get across to the reader in the first three verses?
Fast forward to 2018. We don’t speak that way anymore. The modern versions are written the way we speak today. Same concept the 1611 translators employed.