Forgot to add, with red letter.I want it all.
The KJV, Translators to the reader with Apocrypha. Without animal skin if possible.
Why do you prefer Cambridge edition?
KJV Translators to the Readers
- Thread starter IsaiahA
- 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.
And are you also aware of the unbiblical teachings of the Apocrypha? ThanksI'm aware, thank you.
Ever since the Tanakh was translated Greek there were errors in the Bible.
We even now know that the KJV, which is mostly Textus Receptus, which only went as far back to the 10th Century Greek Texts, the revised version of the Vulgate and it's now convoluted RCC influences to create the Bible.
I use them as reference only.
My Bible today, from online standpoint, I like being able to look at a Verse and then compare to other versions of the Bible.
But when I want God's understanding and wisdom to really understand what am I really seeing through God's View here, I use the Tanakh [Old Testament] and the 3rd/4th Century Greek Text still in existence.
And you are able to verify the Greek because it matches Jerome's Vulgate, which when he wrote it he made no errors and it was the truest copy made.
Even today, on the correct site, you can read the Vulgate Jerome translated and when you see a different color ink, or a group writing thought in parentheses, that shows where the original true version of the Vulgate was added to and manipulated.
That is just my opinion and experience between using the Hebrew for the Old Testament and oldest Greek Text for the New Testament. It really shows the errors that the KJV, or Textus Receptus, has. And in a few Verses, the meaning is changed. And that should never happen.
We even now know that the KJV, which is mostly Textus Receptus, which only went as far back to the 10th Century Greek Texts, the revised version of the Vulgate and it's now convoluted RCC influences to create the Bible.
I use them as reference only.
My Bible today, from online standpoint, I like being able to look at a Verse and then compare to other versions of the Bible.
But when I want God's understanding and wisdom to really understand what am I really seeing through God's View here, I use the Tanakh [Old Testament] and the 3rd/4th Century Greek Text still in existence.
And you are able to verify the Greek because it matches Jerome's Vulgate, which when he wrote it he made no errors and it was the truest copy made.
Even today, on the correct site, you can read the Vulgate Jerome translated and when you see a different color ink, or a group writing thought in parentheses, that shows where the original true version of the Vulgate was added to and manipulated.
That is just my opinion and experience between using the Hebrew for the Old Testament and oldest Greek Text for the New Testament. It really shows the errors that the KJV, or Textus Receptus, has. And in a few Verses, the meaning is changed. And that should never happen.
That's your opinion. You're welcome.And are you also aware of the unbiblical teachings of the Apocrypha? Thanks
The Title Page reads as follows:
THE
HOLY BIBLE
Containing the OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS AND THE APOCRYPHA
Translated out of the original tongues
and with the former translations
diligently compared and revised
by his majesty's special command
Appointed to be read in Churches
The title pages of the Apocrypha and New Testament sections read with the same wording.
Several points I had in mind, one was to alert the "KJV Only" brethren that in the complete Translators to the Readers pages, you do not find the KJV translators that their translation was to be the only preserved word of God. Another point is, the KJV translators had been given guidelines on how they should translate, for example using the ecclesiastical word "church" instead of using a literal, word for word translation; which would more accurately rendered "congregation" or "assembly" through the entire Bible, OT & NT. The men of old using the KJV spoke of the church in the OT as well as the church in the NT.
You can read the 15 points in the instructions given to the KJV translators here:
https://www.thekingsbible.com/Library/InstructionsToTranslators
Do read them, it is enlightening about the KJV, which is my basic and foundational study translation because of Strong's numbering system.
I want it all.
The KJV, Translators to the reader with Apocrypha. Without animal skin if possible.
Why do you prefer Cambridge edition?
What I mainly had in mind was the quality of the construction of the Cambridge Bibles. Yet, for those very particular, it is the Cambridge that supposedly prints the most accurate KJV -
https://kjvpce.com/pce
That depends on how you understand the quote from the Apocrypha, which I gave in the context of modernist evolution theories. Four translations of the verse read as follows:
"I beseech thee, my son, look upon the heaven and the earth, and all that is therein, and consider that God made them of things that were not; and so was mankind made likewise." (2Ma 7:28 KJVA)
"I beseech you, my child, to look at the heaven and the earth and see everything that is in them, and recognize that God did not make them out of things that existed. Thus also mankind comes into being." (2Ma 7:28 RSVA)
"I beg you, my child, to look at the heaven and the earth and see everything that is in them, and recognize that God did not make them out of things that existed. And in the same way the human race came into being." (2Ma 7:28 NRSVA)
"I implore you, my child, to look at the heavens and the earth; consider all that is in them, and realize that God did not create them from what already existed and that a human being comes into existence in the same way. (2MA 7:28 REBA)
I find that a silly quibble that God created the dust first out of nothing before creating man from the dust that he had created out of nothing. Yet, it surely shows that the Jews at the time between the OT and NT record certainly could not see any idea of an evolutionary ladder, which I referred to in my statement.
You wrote - "I think there's no need for the Apocrypha as a way of helping to understand Genesis 1:1. Your example may come from the "liberal Oxford Study Bible..."
Do you see anywhere I said the apocrypha was a help to understand Gen. 1:1. The Apocrypha is a record of various things the Jews believed of the faith, so it is a historical record helping us understand how the Jews saw various things. As to my finding that reference to 2 Macc. 7:28 in the liberal Oxford Study Bible... it is not just the modern liberals who reference the Apocrypha. I have the 3-volume Matthew Poole's commentary from the 17th century and on some verses the Apocrypha is cross referenced, especially in the Book of Daniel. But it is in other passages as well, as in the following key passages -
Gen. 1:20 crossed to -
"Upon the fifth day thou saidst unto the seventh part, where the waters were gathered that it should bring forth living creatures, fowls and fishes: and so it came to pass." (2Es 6:47 KJVA)
Gen. 1:26 crossed to -
"For God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of his own eternity." (Wis 2:23 KJVA)
Gen. 1:30 crossed to -
"All the works of the Lord are exceeding good, and whatsoever he commandeth shall be accomplished in due season." (Sir 39:16 KJVA)
(Sirach is also known as Ecclesiasticus)
Well, the red letter is no help to me, I'm color blind with red my weakest color.
It is interesting though, to see John 3:16 is placed in red though some believe that is beginning John's comments instead of Jesus continuing to speak. But as you infer, all scripture is inspired of God.When it comes to the believer and reading non-canonical books that have a connection with the faith, there are examples in the Bible of other books that are not inspired by the Holy Spirit-
"And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in midheaven, and did not hurry to set for about a whole day." (Josh 10:13 NRSV)
"Wherefore it is said in the Book of the Wars of the LORD, 'Waheb in Suphah and the wadis. The Arnon and the slopes of the wadis that extend to the seat of Ar, and lie along the border of Moab.'” (Num 21:14-15 NRSV)
"It was also about these that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, 'See, the Lord is coming with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all, and to convict everyone of all the deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.'” (Jude 1:14-15 NRSV)
The Apostle Paul writes: "When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments." (2Tim 4:13 NRSV)
That sounds to me like Paul is referencing books other than inspired scripture.
"And the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stopped in midheaven, and did not hurry to set for about a whole day." (Josh 10:13 NRSV)
"Wherefore it is said in the Book of the Wars of the LORD, 'Waheb in Suphah and the wadis. The Arnon and the slopes of the wadis that extend to the seat of Ar, and lie along the border of Moab.'” (Num 21:14-15 NRSV)
"It was also about these that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, 'See, the Lord is coming with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all, and to convict everyone of all the deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.'” (Jude 1:14-15 NRSV)
The Apostle Paul writes: "When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments." (2Tim 4:13 NRSV)
That sounds to me like Paul is referencing books other than inspired scripture.
Thank you for the link. As for the Greek Ekklesia, the KJB is not alone in its translation of the word "church". You can used the bible hub to this point. It's not really an altogether error. See it for self. Thanks
There is a very good reason for that. God has preserved His Word, not Jim's preface.
It's unfortunate you comment without knowing of what you speak.
Reading the information in the Translators would preclude such.
In the list of the books of the Bible, the original KJV included the Apocrypha in the OT books. See the archived view:
https://archive.org/details/1611TheAuthorizedKingJamesBible/page/n37/mode/2up
The KJV contains the Word of God. Me know what me speak, but thanks for being concerned about my fortune. I eagerly await you new and improved translation, revelations, and preface.
There are only two resources that matter.
1.) The Bible
2.) The Understanding of the Holy Spirit