Yet it was good enough for millions of Christians over hundreds of years until the false Bibles (the Pretenders) came along.
As to "outdated, archaic, and obsolete" you have not kept up with the developments in this direction because of your built-in Westcott-Hort bias. Please note as an example:
King James Bible
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began... (Rom 16:25)
King James 2000 Bible (almost identical to the NASB)
Now to him who is able to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began...
American King James Version
Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began...
New American Standard Bible
Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past...
Now let's see which is the most faithful according to the Received Text (the true text):
Τῷ δὲ δυναμένῳ* ὑμᾶς στηρίξαι κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου καὶ τὸ κήρυγμα Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίου χρόνοις αἰωνίοις** σεσιγημένου...
*Strong's Concordance
dunamai: to be able, to have power
Original Word: δύναμαι
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: dunamai
Phonetic Spelling: (doo'-nam-ahee)
Definition: to be able, to have power
Usage: (a) I am powerful, have (the) power, (b) I am able, I can.
1. So when the KJB says "that is of POWER" it is faithfully presenting δυναμένῳ. While humans "are able", God has the power, and all power belongs to Him.
2. "Stablish" is the older form of "establish" so this is of little consequence. Updated spelling.
3. Even though χρόνοις αἰωνίοις** (chronois aioniois) literally means "in times of the ages" it is more theologically accurate to say "since the world began" rather than "for long ages past". Why? Because according to Bible chronology (going strictly by the Bible) "since the world began" refer to approximately 6000 years (4000 at that time), while "long ages past" accommodates evolution with it millions and millions of years. We should keep in mind that many of the naturalistic textual scholars who altered the Bible believed in evolution (as well as many other false teachings).
SO ONCE AGAIN WE FIND THAT THE KING JAMES BIBLE IS THE MOST TRUSTWORTHY AND ACCURATE ENGLISH TRANSLATION EVEN TODAY.
As I stated in my first post, I have no interest in debating this issue. And if the OP is not interested in the KJB, I have no interest in pursuing this discussion. However, let's get rid of this false idea that the KJB is "outdated, archaic, and obsolete". That's what Satan would have Christians believe, since he hates this faithful translation.
As to "outdated, archaic, and obsolete" you have not kept up with the developments in this direction because of your built-in Westcott-Hort bias. Please note as an example:
King James Bible
Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began... (Rom 16:25)
King James 2000 Bible (almost identical to the NASB)
Now to him who is able to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began...
American King James Version
Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began...
New American Standard Bible
Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which has been kept secret for long ages past...
Now let's see which is the most faithful according to the Received Text (the true text):
Τῷ δὲ δυναμένῳ* ὑμᾶς στηρίξαι κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου καὶ τὸ κήρυγμα Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν μυστηρίου χρόνοις αἰωνίοις** σεσιγημένου...
*Strong's Concordance
dunamai: to be able, to have power
Original Word: δύναμαι
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: dunamai
Phonetic Spelling: (doo'-nam-ahee)
Definition: to be able, to have power
Usage: (a) I am powerful, have (the) power, (b) I am able, I can.
1. So when the KJB says "that is of POWER" it is faithfully presenting δυναμένῳ. While humans "are able", God has the power, and all power belongs to Him.
2. "Stablish" is the older form of "establish" so this is of little consequence. Updated spelling.
3. Even though χρόνοις αἰωνίοις** (chronois aioniois) literally means "in times of the ages" it is more theologically accurate to say "since the world began" rather than "for long ages past". Why? Because according to Bible chronology (going strictly by the Bible) "since the world began" refer to approximately 6000 years (4000 at that time), while "long ages past" accommodates evolution with it millions and millions of years. We should keep in mind that many of the naturalistic textual scholars who altered the Bible believed in evolution (as well as many other false teachings).
SO ONCE AGAIN WE FIND THAT THE KING JAMES BIBLE IS THE MOST TRUSTWORTHY AND ACCURATE ENGLISH TRANSLATION EVEN TODAY.
As I stated in my first post, I have no interest in debating this issue. And if the OP is not interested in the KJB, I have no interest in pursuing this discussion. However, let's get rid of this false idea that the KJB is "outdated, archaic, and obsolete". That's what Satan would have Christians believe, since he hates this faithful translation.
Nehemiah, Nehemiah! Westcott and Hort?? Really?? I have never used that version in my life. I use SBL on-line, or Nestle-Aland at home. I have strong reasons for doing so, as they are much more accurate than all the copyist mistakes in the Byzantine much later manuscripts. Seeing as there were none before the 4th century AD, and they just magically spring into existence then. Nope, give me good copies, cross compared against the 4 different manuscripts types, and I am good.
As for Strong's, you know what I think of concordances, especially the circular logic (thanks Dino!) of using KJV as the English language base to translate the Greek from. And I do agree, the KJV was excellent for many centuries, especially when people actually spoke like that. Time has passed, and we simply do not speak that way at all anymore. Your sad attempt to use Strong's and then teach me 1611 English aside, you aren't telling me anything I don't know.
I am a short earth creationist, since before I was saved. I believe God is totally sovereign and Lord. He has all power. That is what my Bibles tell me, especially the Greek version. I know there is truth in the KJV, I won't deny that. But, I also know that I speak a lot of languages, but KJ English is NOT one of them, and nothing you can say or do will ever make me want to read a version that has seen better times, in a language I don't understand.
And no, KJV is NOT the best and most trusted version, but we have done this dance before, and I am not going to bring out all my Greek and Hebrew tools, to show you why it is not, ok?
- 2
- 2
- 1
- Show all