have you changed on the KJV and why?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Dale-c, Oct 27, 2009.

  1. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    On another thread:

    Actually, I was raised a KJVO and I did change my mind after reading on forums on the internet.

    I will say that I did not do much arguing in favor of the KJV because I did realize it was not something that I had a lot of study in.

    The problem for me was that when I started on these forums and tried to come up with the reason for my belief I found no basis for it other than tradition.

    So, Bye bye tradition and hello truth.

    You may never change the mind of someone like Mr Garvey but you never know who is reading.
    This is a public forum and we should stand for the truth, even if our debate opponent is lot going to change.
     
  2. Harold Garvey

    Harold Garvey
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,036
    Likes Received:
    0
    I won't be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine.

    The more I discuss versions the more concrete I am on the KJV.:godisgood:

    I can agree that some words mean the very same thing, but I can also see why the KJV translators chose the words they did as to express the context more clearly than in other versions which sometimes cloud the sense.:flower:
     
  3. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was raised KJVO too.

    My mind was changed from reading the different translations themselves. I find that the comparison of passages between the different translations often sheds great light on the meaning of the passage. Yet, I haven't found a time when different translations were in direct contradiction of each other (though I tend to stay away from the so-called gender neutral version and the paraphrases).

    And since I've been around since before home computers existed, much less the internet, my mind was made up from my own research.
     
  4. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    And the use of English that hasn't been spoken in the last few hundred years doesn't cloud the sense? Really?
     
  5. Thermodynamics

    Thermodynamics
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, my position has changed somewhat over the years. When I was young I didn't see a difference between versions and I thought that any version was as good as any other. I just thought that one version worded things one way and a different version worded them in another way.

    As I have grown older and learned a few things (mostly learned how little I really know) I have discovered that different versions are based on different sets of manuscripts. I have come to believe that the Majority Text manuscripts are more faithful to the originals than the Minority Text manuscripts are. As a result I have a greater level of trust in Bible versions based on Majority Text manuscripts.

    Having said that I also understand that NO translation is going to be perfect. I also understand that we grasp God's Word not through our own wisdom, but only through the Holy Spirit. For that reason I believe it is better for someone to own a translation that I may think is not very good, but that they will read, than it is to own a translation that I think is great, but that they will not read.
     
  6. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    I was KJVP, but when I went to Mexico and learned Spanish and henceforth read the RV1960, I learned that translations could be, and all ARE, a compromise.
     
  7. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    I started out KJVO, but had already found it out for what it was and moved away from it before I found the BB. It's amazing what listening to learned men can do for someone instead of listening to "Brother Bubba" and his spit-spewin', snot-slangin', rip-roarin', heal-kickin', all-out bellerfest preaching on the evils of man's fake version of God's word where he seldom bothers to actually USE God's word and instead substitues his own opinions and traditions.

    At least, that's where I came from.
     
  8. Repent-or-Burn

    Repent-or-Burn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    179
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am TRO.

    All the other translations - to use them, you have to say that God did not preserve His word.
    We had to go out and find it in the 19th? century.
     
  9. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,972
    Likes Received:
    129
    Curious! You call yourself textus-receptus only

    Does that mean you ONLY consider the textual variants found within the Byzantine/Majority textform?

    Or

    Does it mean you ONLY consider the data coalesced by biblical scholars of the 17th century from the ancient manuscripts available at that time?

    Rob
     
  10. Repent-or-Burn

    Repent-or-Burn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    179
    Likes Received:
    0
    Deacon,

    I do believe I would fall into the latter category.
     
  11. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,407
    Likes Received:
    328
    Then you are relying on a scant paucity of manuscripts compared with what the Church has discovered since the early 17th century.
     
  12. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,407
    Likes Received:
    328
    There is no translation based on the Majority text alone.
     
  13. Repent-or-Burn

    Repent-or-Burn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    179
    Likes Received:
    0
    Source

    ~~~Apparently I can't post less than 10 characters, so here I am collecting them.~~~
     
  14. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yet you adhere to false doctrine, and insist that all others do the same. Interesting.
     
  15. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    well, take your pick Mr Garvey, be tossed to and fro or just settle one one false doctrine and stick with it.
    Doesn't seem to make much of a difference.

    Repent-or-Burn, are you not aware that the manuscripts that were found in the 19th century were older than those used by erasmus?
    And to be consistent are you saying that God's word was not prserved until the 16th century when Erasmus compiled his greek text?
     
  16. Jim1999

    Jim1999
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Jim1999.jpg>

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    All my theology came through use of the KJV. All my preaching was done through the KJV as my base version of scripture. All my theological texts used the KJV to support doctrine. This combined with use of Greek and Hebrew, and theological logic. I have always transliterated from the KJV, and read all available versions as helps.

    If my view of God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit, is so off-base, then my salvation would also be in jeopardy. I firmly believe that my personal experience with God has been confirmed with the KJV, and I shall continue to my dying day to rely on the KJV, and all my notations and corrections, where required. I shall enter the pulpit with my faithful KJV fully open to my text of the day, and preach God's word without doubt or wavering.

    I have nothing against any of the versions available. I think they all "contain" the word of God. If one's theology comes from one verse, it is a faulty theology. It is fair to discuss the varying versions, and get a better view of God and His purpose in our lives, but I can't get excited over the differences in each text over another. God remains sovereign whatever version we employ.

    This is the only sense that I am KJVO; my personal preference. I also love the Phillips New Testament, written by a man who was quite liberal in his theology, but expressed the Word clearly for the mind. He did not allow his liberalism to deprive Jesus of His divinity, nor His sacrifice on the cross in my behalf. If this copy of the New Testament influences even one to find the Saviour, it is the word of God to me.

    Cheers,

    Jim
     
  17. Repent-or-Burn

    Repent-or-Burn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    179
    Likes Received:
    0
    It doesn't matter if they're older. My POINT was that they were found in the 19th century, and disagree with the TR.

    The TR is, as per my understanding - a compilation of what has always existed. Thus, Erasmus didn't go creating the Bible in the 16th. (I thought it was 17-18?)
     
  18. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes it does. If a passage exists in a later document, but is missing from an earlier document, the logical conclusion is that it was added to the later document. KJVOists often claim that post-KJV translations "removed" passages from scripture, when in actuality, the logical conclusion must be that the KJV source texts "added" the passages.
     
  19. Repent-or-Burn

    Repent-or-Burn
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    179
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, for over a thousand years while that manuscript was Apocrypha, we did not have a complete Bible? I believe on Faith, that God has preserved His word for us, we have not been 1,000 years without it.
     
  20. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting question. The reason I say that is because the common KJVO position dictates that we did not have a complete bible until the KJV, or at least, until the TR.
     

Share This Page

Loading...