KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES

[KJV1611]

this has nothing to do with this thread, just wanted to say welcome back! ( I assume you have not been around much lately, I have not seen you ).

Thank you! I've missed the fellowship and conversation.

 

[KJV1611]

Seems that kjv1769 is a little disingenuous about God speaking to him directly. He claims it here then denies it later. Here it is; "I asked God...and he showed me." That is God being enquired of then giving divine revelation if I've ever seen it.

Later is a "lol" denial that the above happened in sequence and is just reduced to; "I said the Lord SHOWED me through studying SEVERAL translations that the KJV was inerrant. I never said God told me anything."

No, sorry. You claimed you asked then he showed you which implies divine revelation no matter how you attempt to deny it. If you're "bold" enough to claim it then stick to your Montanist story.

You know the more I think about this the more it bugs me. Why do you hate me or want to discredit me? What did I do to offend you?
What you wrote about me is slander and not true and I could care less what you think of me but my question is WHY do you fell the need to tear me down?

 

[Joseppi]

I would be willing to bet dollars to donuts He didn't speak 17th century Elizabethan English. In fact, English was not even a language ca. AD 30.

God often chooses the weak thing to confound the wise.
When I look at all the complaints the anti-kjvo list as reasons to avoid the Holy Bible, you’d think that people would shy away from it. But God uses it and it blesses the readers of it.

 

[KJV1611]

Please understand that I am not trying to tear down the KJV, which I both use and cherish.

I am arguing against the ideas of special inspiration and absence of error.

As with all translations, the KJV has errors; but they are not of such a nature as to in any way compromise God's message.

Having never had contact with the accounts Luke is citing, I have no basis on which to comment; except that I expect that they were not the other 3 Gospels included in the Canon.

It is refreshing to discuss this issue with someone like yourself, who appears to approach the subject reasonably and honestly. I look forward to further exchanges.

You are refreshing as well my friend. But I think you are wrong about the KJV being in error in Luke 1 and you're using that error (which does not exist) to cast doubt on the reliablity of the KJV... all of this is in good faith on your part, I believe you are going with what you believe.

I think that this one single issue is so important that I would like to reason with you on how the KJV is right in this instance. Are you willing to discuss it with me?

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

It seems we must go over this again.

[video=youtube;C5IFwHQhC3o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5IFwHQhC3o[/video]​

That it be.

 

[hornetguy]

God often chooses the weak thing to confound the wise.

How does that verse even apply in this discussion? Are you simply throwing out platitudes, hoping to sound pious?

When I look at all the complaints the anti-kjvo list as reasons to avoid the Holy Bible, you’d think that people would shy away from it. But God uses it and it blesses the readers of it.

So, persecution complex, much? You have been told, time and again... and I will tell you one final time (from me, at least) that we that disagree with your approach do not tell people to avoid the KJV.... that it is a good translation, for the most part, if they can read and understand the archaic language.

I have, and occasionally do read, a KJV, and a NKJV translation. They are occasionally useful tools in seeing another perspective on a particular passage. I can do that, because I do not believe that there is only ONE translation handed down "with God's name on it" as has been claimed about the KJV.

As you said in your message.... the complaints are coming from the anti-KJVO crowd... not the anti-KJV crowd. I'm not sure your persecution complex will allow you to understand that, but, there it is.

 

[KJV1611]

So, how do you explain that His perfect quotations differ from your perfect KJV OT? Can there be several perfect versions that differ from each other? But that is not "preservation" as said in Psalm.



But that makes your view of the masoretic Psalm contradicting what you say... Either God preserves Bibles in a perfect shape for all generations or not.

trof.... my very very good friend. The word of God is not bound by words, there are a myriad of words that can be used to carry the word of God. Yes there can be and have been several perfect versions over the years and over many different languages.

Just because the word of God is not bound by words doesn't mean all bibles that slap "Holy Bible" on the cover are the container for the word of God.

Look at the bible as an encrypted message from God to his children, the written words are not the message, they are the carrier of the message. Radio waves would be a good ananlogy - the radio wave is the carrier, the modulation of the radio wave is the message. The radio wave has to be de-modulated in order to get the message... if the receiving radio isn't set to the right frequency then the message can't be decoded.

 

[Joseppi]

But, this weird, concocted scenario which makes a translation inspired, pure, and the only translation one should read, is why I oppose those who claim it is the only translation. By poor slight of hand, they deny mistakes in their translation of choice, and compare ltbeir translation to others, proclaiming other versions as evil and corrupt, by setting the KJV as the standard, instead of the original languages, and by that, I do not mean the majority manuscripts (TR), most of which are copies of copies of copies, mistakes compounding until the very corrupted versions Erasmus used, and the KJV committee used his translation.

The Holy Bible is the standard the Holy Ghost uses to correct, reprove and rebuke.
I think that is why so many compromise with corruption by pretending to love the Holy Bible on one hand, but loving corruption and lies with the other bible in hand.
Do you think God compromises? I know he doesn’t.

The modern bibles can’t stand the light of day, so to speak, that is the problem they have. They really aren’t of God. And you can’t sell them to people seeking truth. They are a blight.
Are the churches better off? No. Look around, the churches have themselves been compromised. Fattened and dumbed. Popular yet empty like Oprah.

Anyway, please read the version that works for you. As for me, God showed me when I compared various versions to the Hebrew and Greek, that the KJV is a fair, but not perfect translation, just like all the other translations. Despite never having read the KJV, God still has managed to reach me, teach me, and feed me in my daily Bible readings for the last 37 years!

It all sounds reasonable until you compare the modern bibles with the truth. The problem is that corruption ruins modern bibles.
And the churches in America are sick because of it.

Try reading the Holy Bible prayerfully for 30 arduous days. No helps of any kind but only God leading you and see what happens.

 

[KJV1611]

trof.... my very very good friend. The word of God is not bound by words, there are a myriad of words that can be used to carry the word of God. Yes there can be and have been several perfect versions over the years and over many different languages.

Just because the word of God is not bound by words doesn't mean all bibles that slap "Holy Bible" on the cover are the container for the word of God.

Look at the bible as an encrypted message from God to his children, the written words are not the message, they are the carrier of the message. Radio waves would be a good ananlogy - the radio wave is the carrier, the modulation of the radio wave is the message. The radio wave has to be de-modulated in order to get the message... if the receiving radio isn't set to the right frequency then the message can't be decoded.

Most people are trying to get the message from the carrier wave instead of the modulated signal... that's what original language study is, the study of the carrier wave.

 

[Joseppi]

How does that verse even apply in this discussion?
Are you simply throwing out platitudes, hoping to sound pious?

Why does the scripture offend you?
The Holy Bible is attacked as being problematic according to the opposers of it.
God does choose weak things to confound the wise of this world that claim they know better.

So, persecution complex, much? You have been told, time and again... and I will tell you one final time (from me, at least) that we that disagree with your approach do not tell people to avoid the KJV.... that it is a good translation, for the most part, if they can read and understand the archaic language.

I am not interested in your compromise approach to bibles.

I have, and occasionally do read, a KJV, and a NKJV translation. They are occasionally useful tools in seeing another perspective on a particular passage. I can do that, because I do not believe that there is only ONE translation handed down "with God's name on it" as has been claimed about the KJV.

Why try and convince me you are fair minded about compromise.
I believe you present the “compromise equals godliness” thing precisely because the modern bibles are obviously corrupt.
And you’ve been reading them and never noticed? I’m supposed to believe that?

As you said in your message.... the complaints are coming from the anti-KJVO crowd... not the anti-KJV crowd. I'm not sure your persecution complex will allow you to understand that, but, there it is.

I get your point.
If only everyone accepts the corrupt modern bibles, then the world would be a nicer place to sleep in.
Isn’t going to happen.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

 

[Joseppi]

First, its David talking, not God. Let us be technical, when you want your Bible to be technically perfect

-------

To your question, some context: You are right, there were several lines of Scriptures. Two became dominant. The Septuagint line (from which Septuagint was translated) and masoretic line.

The Septuagint line was used by universal (Greek speaking) Jewish community, by apostles and by Church (its used by Greek speaking churches till today, without interruption).

Because the Septuagint were so much used by Christians and prophecies about Christ were so clear in it, Jews decided to go by the other, masoretic line, after they made some serious editations to it.

In a reformation era, people in Latin Europe were used to translate from Latin Vulgate. It was unacceptable for reformators, who wanted to get rid of RCC influence. So they decided to translate from original languages, instead.
No problem with the NT. But regarding the OT, there is just one Hebrew line - the masoretic text. Thats why they used it without much consideration - and that was a mistake, IMHO. Greek churches continue in using Septuagint, RCC is probably still using Vulgate? Not sure. So its mainly a protestant problem/issue.

---------

My response to "which line is correct" - from the historical context, I am very much for the Septuagint line.
1) There is too much Jewish antiChristian agenda behind the masoretic line.
2) The majority of NT places where the OT is quoted is from the Septuagint. So if I want to have a consistent Bible, I must use it.
3) Because it is so massively used in the NT, I think that the authority of apostles and the first Church indicates I should use it too.

Origen invented the Septuagint.
The story you tell is made up.

(The technical approach bit is your own notion.)

Origen was a pagan Bible corrupter that invented ecclesiastical texts no common man wanted.
And those are the texts used to invent the Latin Vulgate in the hope of replacing the Old Latin bible, and today’s phony modern bibles.

The result of the Origenic corrupt texts was that the ecclesiastical class used them to bring in the the dark ages of superstition, thinly veiled paganism, and enormous ignorance, as the Roman Empire fell, divided, and went underground.
And the modern corrupt bibles are as Alexandrian as Origen’s office, and are now leading the dumbfounded back into darkness.

Do you know why they invented the monastery system?
To remove seekers of the truth off the streets lest the common man wake up and forsake paganand heathen nonsense masquerading as Christianity.
Can’t have truth out in the streets when the ecclesiastical want to keep people in the dark.

The Holy Bible is on the loose, thank God.

 

[Joseppi]

A minor correction - I shall huffeth and puffeth and bloweth thine house down. Now it's in proper KJV english.

I think that a child can read and understand what God said about blowhards in Psalm 12.
While adults with a dull axe to grind on the wheel of truth pretend they can’t fathom the meaning of puffeth.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

trof.... my very very good friend. The word of God is not bound by words, there are a myriad of words that can be used to carry the word of God. Yes there can be and have been several perfect versions over the years and over many different languages.

Just because the word of God is not bound by words doesn't mean all bibles that slap "Holy Bible" on the cover are the container for the word of God.

Look at the bible as an encrypted message from God to his children, the written words are not the message, they are the carrier of the message. Radio waves would be a good ananlogy - the radio wave is the carrier, the modulation of the radio wave is the message. The radio wave has to be de-modulated in order to get the message... if the receiving radio isn't set to the right frequency then the message can't be decoded.

Pray tell us then from your lofty height which available translations merely "slapped Holy Bible on the front"?

Which Bible publishers would you like to accuse of:

1) Not translating
2) Not utilising language scholars
3) Not studying available manuscripts
4) Not praying for guidance

5) simply writing anything and having " Holy Bible" printed on the cover.

 

[Chester]

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)

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
​

HA! I need to make another post quickly or I may become a KJV only person too! I had 1611 posts and need to make another one to make sure no one mistakes my identity.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

HA! I need to make another post quickly or I may become a KJV only person too! I had 1611 posts and need to make another one to make sure no one mistakes my identity.

As long as your number isn't 666


I mean six-hundred three score and six

 

[Dino246]

The Holy Bible is the standard the Holy Ghost uses to correct, reprove and rebuke.

Wrong; it's the bible YOU use to attack and condemn others.

The modern bibles can’t stand the light of day, so to speak, that is the problem they have.

What utter closed-minded rubbish.

Origen invented the Septuagint.

That is a load of cow chips. The Septuagint was translated from the Hebrew by a team of scholars before Jesus was born! One can trace the readings quoted by Jesus to the Septuagint!

Origen was a pagan Bible corrupter that invented ecclesiastical texts no common man wanted.
And those are the texts used to invent the Latin Vulgate in the hope of replacing the Old Latin bible, and today’s phony modern bibles.

That's a ridiculous argument, considering that it is the "ecclesiastical texts" that many KJV-onlyists promote as being the "true lineage" of Scripture. Again, your understanding of history is sadly lacking.

 

[hornetguy]

Why does the scripture offend you?

Scripture does not offend me... your taking scriptures completely out of context to make yourself appear to be some type of philosopher does offend me.

The Holy Bible is attacked as being problematic according to the opposers of it.
God does choose weak things to confound the wise of this world that claim they know better.

And this still makes no sense in the context of this conversation, unless YOU are accusing the KJV as being "weak"....

I am not interested in your compromise approach to bibles.

I'm crushed.

Why try and convince me you are fair minded about compromise.
I believe you present the “compromise equals godliness” thing precisely because the modern bibles are obviously corrupt.
And you’ve been reading them and never noticed? I’m supposed to believe that?

I'm not trying to convince you of anything regarding my "fair-mindedness". I never said, or implied that compromise equals godliness.... please do not put your words in my mouth. I was simply refuting your asinine comment that we who do NOT agree that the KJV was personally handed down by God, somehow are "trashing" the KJV. I predicted you wouldn't understand that. Apparently I was correct.

I get your point.

No, you don't get my point. I'm talking apples, and you're talking cheeseburgers. You are definitely out where the buses don't run...

If only everyone accepts the corrupt modern bibles, then the world would be a nicer place to sleep in.
Isn’t going to happen.

My comments are imbedded in red.

 

[trofimus]

trof.... my very very good friend. The word of God is not bound by words, there are a myriad of words that can be used to carry the word of God. Yes there can be and have been several perfect versions over the years and over many different languages.

OK, if you just leave out the word "perfect", you would be in agreement with the rest of us. We also believe that the message can be carried with many different words.

But then some KJVO guy (I do not say its you) comes and says "one word is left out = its an evil corruption".

 

[trofimus]

Origen invented the Septuagint.
The story you tell is made up.

(The technical approach bit is your own notion.)

Origen was a pagan Bible corrupter that invented ecclesiastical texts no common man wanted.
And those are the texts used to invent the Latin Vulgate in the hope of replacing the Old Latin bible, and today’s phony modern bibles.

The result of the Origenic corrupt texts was that the ecclesiastical class used them to bring in the the dark ages of superstition, thinly veiled paganism, and enormous ignorance, as the Roman Empire fell, divided, and went underground.
And the modern corrupt bibles are as Alexandrian as Origen’s office, and are now leading the dumbfounded back into darkness.

Do you know why they invented the monastery system?
To remove seekers of the truth off the streets lest the common man wake up and forsake paganand heathen nonsense masquerading as Christianity.
Can’t have truth out in the streets when the ecclesiastical want to keep people in the dark.

The Holy Bible is on the loose, thank God.

Not historically true.

Manuscripts of Septuagint´s line of text are older than Origénes (For example DSS).
New Testament´s quotations of the Septuagint readings, too.


Tell me, if you are so paranoid that some Christian theologian (Origénes) corrupted something, why are you totally OK with Jewish antichristian texts? Its like being afraid of rain and but ending up in a river. Origénes could have some strange views of Christ, but Jews hated Christ.