KJV Only?

[Daniel1611]

Besides me, how many people here are KJV Only?

 

[faroukfarouk]

I voted no, but I do love and use the King James.

 

[BornAgainBrian]

It was a great translation for its time and has a certain classical quality to it. But I see nothing to prove it is inherently superior for everyone.

 

[JM]

I voted no but use the AV as my main Bible believing the underlying manuscripts were "immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentic; so as in all controversies of religion, the church is finally to appeal to them." (1.8 London Baptist Confession of Faith, 1689)

Yours in the Lord,

jm

 

[twin1954]

I too voted no but I too use the KJV almost exclusively. I have and use several other translations but I preach and teach exclusively from the KJV. I find the KJV to be as good as any other and in many cases better in certain words. An example would be the word charity translated from the Greek agape. It conveys the actual meaning of the word much better than simply saying love. But other translation are legitimate and often help to see a passage from a slightly different perspective because of wording.

 

[98cwitr]

Gen 22:1 vs James 1:13...KJV fails.

 

[now faith]

Gen 22:1 vs James 1:13...KJV fails.

How many deletions and failure is in the Critical Text ?

 

[th1bill]

I voted no because I prefer a word for word translation, as closely as is possible and thus prefer the NASB. There can never be a, perfect, word for word for word but the KJV is a good bit to much idea for idea for me. I found my LORD through the KJV ai still compare to it and others to teach but the English used is a complete study in and of itself.

 

[faroukfarouk]

I too voted no but I too use the KJV almost exclusively. I have and use several other translations but I preach and teach exclusively from the KJV. I find the KJV to be as good as any other and in many cases better in certain words. An example would be the word charity translated from the Greek agape. It conveys the actual meaning of the word much better than simply saying love. But other translation are legitimate and often help to see a passage from a slightly different perspective because of wording.

Kind of similar to my thoughts and practice, I guess. Blessings.

 

[OzSpen]

Besides me, how many people here are KJV Only?

Which edition of the KJV? Are you a supporter of the Apocrypha in the KJV of 1611? Do you read a copy of the 1611 edition?

 

[abacabb3]

No, because its manuscripts are less than ideal by the admission of the translators and Erasmus who devised the printed Greek works which constituted the KJV translation. If even Erasmus did not give it a 100% stamp of approval, why do we commit that error today? It's irrational.

I recommend this for viewing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJrptikLjq8

 

[Daniel1611]

Which edition of the KJV? Are you a supporter of the Apocrypha in the KJV of 1611? Do you read a copy of the 1611 edition?

There are no differences between the 1611 and the KJV we have today except the font and some spelling changes. I don't consider the Apocrypha as inspired scripture because it wasn't consider inspired and we don't have it in the original Hebrew.

Also, I recommend the book Defending the King James Bible to everyone. I also saw good documentaries called "New World Order Bible Versions" and one called "A Lamp in the Dark." Both are on youtube.

 

[abacabb3]

There are no differences between the 1611 and the KJV we have today except the font and some spelling changes. I don't consider the Apocrypha as inspired scripture because it wasn't consider inspired and we don't have it in the original Hebrew.

Also, I recommend the book Defending the King James Bible to everyone. I also saw good documentaries called "New World Order Bible Versions" and one called "A Lamp in the Dark." Both are on youtube.

NWO Bible Versions is drivel. Watch the above Youtube video I posted.

 

[OzSpen]

There are no differences between the 1611 and the KJV we have today except the font and some spelling changes. I don't consider the Apocrypha as inspired scripture because it wasn't consider inspired and we don't have it in the original Hebrew.

Also, I recommend the book Defending the King James Bible to everyone. I also saw good documentaries called "New World Order Bible Versions" and one called "A Lamp in the Dark." Both are on youtube.

I am not the slightest bit interested in defending the KJV. You don't seem to understand that when Erasmus compiled his Greek MSS for the Textus Receptus there was only a handful of them from about the 10th century. Erasmus could not find one of them that had the last 6 verses of the Book of Revelation so what did he do. He had access to the Latin Vulgate so he translated from the Vulgate to the Greek.

As a result, since the time of Erasmus many Greek MSS have been found that are earlier those those in the Textus Receptus and not one of those MSS agrees with Erasmus's translation to Greek, word for word.

In addition, the language of the KJV of 1611 is quite different to the 1769 revision that I have, which is one of the common ones being sold today.

However, the Apocrypha was in the 1611 edition of the KJV. Since you support the KJV, it should be consistent to affirm the Apocrypha as it was included in the 1611 KJV.

There are many more MSS closer to the originals than those used by Erasmus for the Textus Receptus, and thus the KJV.

Regards,
Oz

 

[BornAgainBrian]

There are plenty of books on both sides of the matter. Few will sway anyone, methinks.

 

[bushinoki]

I voted no, I am not KJV only, because of some of the issues mentioned above. I prefer the NKJV myself, especially with footnotes marking the differences between the TR and other MSS, as well as the more modern language. I've read other translations, and I know exactly why people prefer certain translations such as the ESV over the KJV/NKJV, but I have my preference.

 

[faroukfarouk]

There are plenty of books on both sides of the matter. Few will sway anyone, methinks.

There is a lot of rhetoric, but this does not always mean accurate information, which is essential.

 

[faroukfarouk]

I am not the slightest bit interested in defending the KJV. You don't seem to understand that when Erasmus compiled his Greek MSS for the Textus Receptus there was only a handful of them from about the 10th century. Erasmus could not find one of them that had the last 6 verses of the Book of Revelation so what did he do. He had access to the Latin Vulgate so he translated from the Vulgate to the Greek.

As a result, since the time of Erasmus many Greek MSS have been found that are earlier those those in the Textus Receptus and not one of those MSS agrees with Erasmus's translation to Greek, word for word.

In addition, the language of the KJV of 1611 is quite different to the 1769 revision that I have, which is one of the common ones being sold today.

However, the Apocrypha was in the 1611 edition of the KJV. Since you support the KJV, it should be consistent to affirm the Apocrypha as it was included in the 1611 KJV.

There are many more MSS closer to the originals than those used by Erasmus for the Textus Receptus, and thus the KJV.

Regards,
Oz

..but those MSS Erasmus used were broadly representative of the majority.

 

[now faith]

There's power in the blood!
Colossians 1:14

In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

Satan hates the Atoning Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, so we shouldn't be surprised to find the blood missing in modern translations:

NIV....... redemption, the forgiveness of sins

NASB... redemption, the forgiveness of sins

NRSV... redemption, the forgiveness of sins

REB..... our release is secured and our sins are forgiven

NWT.... we have our release by ransom, the forgiveness of sins

NAB...... redemption, the forgiveness of our sins

It's not about Erasmus,he simply presented the error of translation in the Vulgate.

It's about if what you read is the inspired Word of God and does it support the Devine nature of Christ.

 

[Bluelion]

In school we are taught to use many translations and not rely on any one but to draw from many to understand. Biblical studies major.