King James Bible

[Dirtman]

God had the KJV translated for the purpose of bringing forth fruit, and it has been very obedient to the call. It was translated at the perfect time in human history. The greatest preachers of the past four centuries have been King James Bible believers. Billy Sunday is said to have led over one million people to Christ, and he was a KJV believer. Spurgeon, Moody, Whitfield, and Wesley were all KJV men, and the list goes on. God has richly blessed the ministries of such men as these because they stayed busy OBEYING His word rather than questioning its authority.

The KJV produces good fruit, because the Holy Spirit bears witness to it like no other book in the world. It's easier to memorize than any new version, and the beautiful old English language gives the reader the impression that he is reading a book very different and far superior to the rest. It reads different because it IS different, and it IS different because it has a different Author.

Questioning the veracity of the KJV onlyism is not questioning the Word of God.
We all know King James didnt write his Bible. He just commissioned it, set the rules for its translation. If you also note; no King ratified or commissioned or authorized the Scriptures of the Bible. Also God did not ever ordain a usurper of the throne. Even David waited until God dealt with Saul.
If all those famous preaxhers actually converted so many people why is our nation a nation of heathens and heretics., the numbers dont add up. The the fruit of western evangelicalism is questionable. We have more herecies and cults than ancient Israel.
Even Billy Graham gave a statement where he made the claim that there will be budists and muslims in heaven because they were God seekers even though they never confessed Christ.

 

[Wansvic]

From the little history of 16th and 17th century England which I've read and mostly on Wikipedia it seems that the KJV was the outcome of the desire for the English king to put himself in charge of church and state. So I've read somewhere the divine right of kings was of primary importance in the making of this translation?????? So if we use the KJV we need to know that it is biased that way???

A great resource for those interested in the history of the Bible is: "Gipps Understandable History of the Bible" by Samuel C. Gipp, Th.D.
Also the Rose Publishing pamphlet "How We Got the Bible" provides basic information as well.

I have a 22 page printout listing verses that have been modified/removed etc. from newer translations. Some changes seem benign whereas others, whether intentional or not, modify references to Jesus' deity, hell, etc. The file was too big to include in this post. However, I intend to try to upload into a different thread. It will be entitled Bible Version Scripture Changes, I will let you know if the upload works.

 

[Dirtman]

The problem with putting these men on a pedestal is not that they werent Christian or even good preaxhers, they were humans with serious flaws.
Saying they converted great numbers dont add up, never did. Even Jesus drew great numbers in the thousands but very few were actually converted. The ones converted were the ones discipled. The same with these great preaxhers. Some were converted but very few by comparison to the crowds they drew.
Some of them didnt disciple anyone or even baptize any one the coaxed some folks to repeat a "sinners prayer" and then left them flat. This is not conversion. These guys are overly romanticized and trod out by revivalists when they want to prove an errant point.

 

[John146]

set the rules for its translation.

Can you show proof of this statement?

 

[John146]

f all those famous preaxhers actually converted so many people why is our nation a nation of heathens and heretics.

See the new versions = Laodicean Church Age

 

[John146]

Even Billy Graham gave a statement where he made the claim that there will be budists and muslims in heaven because they were God seekers even though they never confessed Christ.

Billy Graham went crazy at the latter end of his life.

 

[Dirtman]

See the new versions = Laodicean Church Age

No such thing. Thats some serious inductive thinking. The left to the church at Laodicea was literally to that church and serves as a good warning to all churches through put the ages.

 

[Dirtman]

Billy Graham went crazy at the latter end of his life.

Thats a bit harsh.

 

[John146]

Thats a bit harsh.

He made compromises that he never would have made in his younger years.

 

[Dirtman]

Can you show proof of this statement?

From the King James bible web site.

https://www.kjvbibles.com/bible-translation-and-the-king-james-bible

When King James ascended the throne in 1603, he was not pleased with the selection of English translations available. He didn’t like the Geneva Bible because the study notes appeared to undermine ideas of monarchy. King James wanted a Bible more suited to the rule of kings. A literary scholar himself, he also wanted a comprehensive and accurate translation.

King James wrote to Bancroft with a list of suggested instructions of his own. The king's letter to Bancroft still exists in the library at Lambeth Palace.

1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops' Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the original will permit.
2. The names of the prophets and the holy writers, with the other names in the text, to be retained, as near as may be, accordingly as they are vulgarly used.
3. The old ecclesiastical words to be kept, as the word church, not to be translated congregation.
4. When any word hath divers significations, that to be kept which hath been most commonly used by the most eminent fathers, being agreeable to the propriety of the place and the analogies of faith.
5. The division of chapters to be altered either not at all, or as little as may be, if necessity so require.
6. No marginal notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek words, which cannot, without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed, in the text.
7. Such quotations of places to be marginally set down as shall serve for the fit reference of one Scripture to another.
8. Every particular man of each company to take the same chapter or chapters; and, having translated or amended them severally by himself where he thinks good, all to meet together to confirm what they have done, and agree for their part what shall stand.
9. As any one company hath dispatched any one book in this manner, they shall send it to the rest, to be considered of seriously and judiciously; for his Majesty is very careful on this point.
10. If any company, upon the review of the book so sent, shall doubt or differ upon any places, to send them word thereof, to note the places, and therewithal to send their reasons; to which if they consent not, the difference to be compounded at the general meeting, which is to be of the chief persons of each company, at the end of the work.
11. When any place of special obscurity is doubted of, letters to be directed by authority to send to any learned man in the land for his judgment of such a place.
12. Letters to be sent from every bishop to the rest of his clergy, admonishing them of this translation in hand, and to move and charge as many as, being skillful in the tongues, have taken pains in that kind, to send their particular observations to the company, either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford, according as it was directed before in the king's letter to the archbishop.
13. The directors in each company to be the Deans of Westminster and Chester, for Westminster, and the king's professors in Hebrew and Greek in the two universities.
14. These translations to be used, when they agree better with the text than the Bishops' Bible: Tyndale's, Coverdale's, Matthew's [Rogers'], Whitchurch's [Cranmer's], Geneva."
15. By a later rule, "three or four of the most ancient and grave divines, in either of the universities, not employed in translating, to be assigned to be overseers of the translation, for the better observation of the fourth rule."

 

[Pilgrimshope]

And King James did not write the authorized version.

yeah 54 language and textual experts did after more than seven years of exhaustive comparison and rechecking one another’s work revising and re checking again and again until these world renowned 54 experts all agreed it was correctly translated

It is by far the most foolproof translation method ever taken of scripture james wanted a correct translation into English , because the earlier translations to English James felt had many mistakes

what he did all he did was gather the best experts in all the world and commissioned them to make sure it’s correct. No Matter how long it took he wanted the most accurate translation to that date in the world and he got it

 

[Dirtman]

Rule #3 also included words like priest, bishop, baptize, etc.

 

[Dirtman]

As for error in the KJV. This is an example.
Isaiah 13:15 the KJV reads “joined” (“every one that is joined unto them shall
fall by the sword”). There is no support for this reading in any Hebrew
manuscript, text, ancient version, or rabbinic tradition. Instead, the cor-
rect reading is “captured” (“anyone who is captured will fall by the
sword,”)

 

[ResidentAlien]

Billy Graham was compromised almost from the start, but he wasn't the only one. He was a product of his time. Tent revivals and crusades were very popular in the '50s and '60s. This was the beginning of the ascendancy of the parachurch; that is, entities that exist alongside the church. They have now nearly eclipsed true churches.

I know people think Graham did a lot of good because he drew large crowds and apparently won a lot of people to Christ. But the parachurch was never God's intention for his body. Parachurch organizations are capable of raising enormous amounts of money and this is the lure for people.

The fact that Graham apparently lost his grounding later in life is a bit of a misrepresentation. He merely showed the true colors he had all along.

 

[fredoheaven]

As for error in the KJV. This is an example.
Isaiah 13:15 the KJV reads “joined” (“every one that is joined unto them shall
fall by the sword”). There is no support for this reading in any Hebrew
manuscript, text, ancient version, or rabbinic tradition. Instead, the cor-
rect reading is “captured” (“anyone who is captured will fall by the
sword,”)

Have you run through the context? Thanks

 

[Dirtman]

Have you run through the context? Thanks

Yep, the context is clear.

 

[HealthAndHappiness]

King James wanted Bibles available to the common people, ie. available in every church in the common language. The Church of Rome had Latin Masses and discouraged personal interpretation. The King sponsored the best translators available regardless of church. There were checks and balances to help prevent personal interpretations favoring one denominational view over another.

 

[HealthAndHappiness]

History of the King James Bible
The whole documentary is worth someone's time, but if you just want the scene on the primary history, go to the 28 minute mark and you'll run into the Bible History Museum.

 

[Dirtman]

How about them dancing satyrs in verse 21. Ya think some half man half goat Greek mythological creatures will be dancing where chaldees once was?

 

[Nehemiah6]

As for error in the KJV. This is an example.
Isaiah 13:15 the KJV reads “joined” (“every one that is joined unto them shall fall by the sword”).

Why is that an "error"? Those who were captured were "joined" to their captors.