KJV translators weren't KJV only!
- Thread starter ResidentAlien
- 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.
Which version of the KJV is the final and perfect one?
Based on what the KJV translators say in their Preface, it doesn't make any sense that they were KJV finally. For example they stated the necessity of translations (plural) into a language the common people could understand. The KJV may have served its purpose, but it's out of date.
I've actually heard people say that the form of English used in the KJV is the most perfect and pure form of English that ever was and will ever be; and for this reason the KJV is the most perfect translation that is and shall ever be. To that the KJV translators would roll over in their graves. Maybe the KJV language is a perfect and pure form of the English language, I don't know. But regardless, as far as the Bible is concerned, if people can't understand it it's useless.
The NKJV is an improvement, but is it the final one? Or the 1611, the 1629, the 1638, the 1762, or the 1769?
Based on what the KJV translators say in their Preface, it doesn't make any sense that they were KJV finally. For example they stated the necessity of translations (plural) into a language the common people could understand. The KJV may have served its purpose, but it's out of date.
I've actually heard people say that the form of English used in the KJV is the most perfect and pure form of English that ever was and will ever be; and for this reason the KJV is the most perfect translation that is and shall ever be. To that the KJV translators would roll over in their graves. Maybe the KJV language is a perfect and pure form of the English language, I don't know. But regardless, as far as the Bible is concerned, if people can't understand it it's useless.
The NKJV is an improvement, but is it the final one? Or the 1611, the 1629, the 1638, the 1762, or the 1769?
"But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknown tongue? as it is written, Except I know the power of the voice, I shall be to him that speaketh, a Barbarian, and he that speaketh, shall be a Barbarian to me. [1 Cor 14] The Apostle excepteth no tongue; not Hebrew the ancientest, not Greek the most copious, not Latin the finest. Nature taught a natural man to confess, that all of us in those tongues which we do not understand, are plainly deaf; we may turn the deaf ear unto them. The Scythian counted the Athenian, whom he did not understand, barbarous; so the Roman did the Syrian, and the Jew (even S. Jerome himself calleth the Hebrew tongue barbarous, belike because it was strange to so many) so the Emperor of Constantinople calleth the Latin tongue, barbarous, though Pope Nicolas do storm at it: so the Jews long before Christ called all other nations, Lognazim, which is little better than barbarous. Therefore as one complaineth, that always in the Senate of Rome, there was one or other that called for an interpreter: so lest the Church be driven to the like exigent, it is necessary to have translations in a readiness. Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtain, that we may look into the most Holy place; that removeth the cover of the well, that we may come by the water, even as Jacob rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, by which means the flocks of Laban were watered [Gen 29:10]. Indeed without translation into the vulgar tongue, the unlearned are but like children at Jacob's well (which was deep) [John 4:11] without a bucket or something to draw with; or as that person mentioned by Isaiah, to whom when a sealed book was delivered, with this motion, Read this, I pray thee, he was fain to make this answer, I cannot, for it is sealed. [Isa 29:11]"
I think that I have been ministered to by the exhortation in Corinthians to "quit you like men";
While a more modern translation would render it as "Be brave."
In context, there is a special connection to the first understanding (found in the kjv); in that it is said to us that the household of Stephanas addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints.
It applies, very aptly, in a teaching that when you quit doing some behaviour that you have an addiction to, that it is wise to replace that behaviour with something holy.
But the modern translations do not give that teaching; in them "quit you like men" is rendered "Be brave."
And, even if "Be brave" is more in line with today's English, I find that I prefer the kjv's rendering here because its application is more beneficial.
While a more modern translation would render it as "Be brave."
In context, there is a special connection to the first understanding (found in the kjv); in that it is said to us that the household of Stephanas addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints.
It applies, very aptly, in a teaching that when you quit doing some behaviour that you have an addiction to, that it is wise to replace that behaviour with something holy.
But the modern translations do not give that teaching; in them "quit you like men" is rendered "Be brave."
And, even if "Be brave" is more in line with today's English, I find that I prefer the kjv's rendering here because its application is more beneficial.
Perseverance of the Saints (the "P" of TULIP in Calvinism).
Of course, even if Peter did stand condemned, he was able to come back to the Lord and as soon as he would, he would be in right standing with God again and therefore if he died he would go to heaven.
But if he went on into the next life while he still "stood condemned" he would in fact be condemned to hell.
That's what "condemned" means.
Of course, even if Peter did stand condemned, he was able to come back to the Lord and as soon as he would, he would be in right standing with God again and therefore if he died he would go to heaven.
But if he went on into the next life while he still "stood condemned" he would in fact be condemned to hell.
That's what "condemned" means.
Here the KJV translators are taking note of the previous Protestant English Versions from Tyndale, Coverdale to Bishops Bible. that's why there was a need for a new translation for the common people and to be appointed to be read in the churches. The KJV translators do not deny they are the words of God but have some imperfections and blemishes that need to purify and KJV as the result of these purifications.
