1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

KJV and apocrypha

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Phillip, Oct 15, 2004.

Top Posters
Page 2 of 3
  1. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    That is all I am going to say about this. Constructive input would include discussion of the historical aspects of the inclusion of the apocrypha
    --------------------------------------------------


    <off topic comments deleted>


    Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle

    [ October 15, 2004, 02:38 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]
     
    #21 michelle, Oct 15, 2004
  2. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Moderators, feel free to shut this down at any time. You have my blessings. No hard feelings, I am just sad that I cannot discuss historical facts without interruption.
     
    #22 Phillip, Oct 15, 2004
  3. manchester

    manchester New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think we would all do well to stop trying to justify extrabiblical beliefs that we KNOW are wrong.
     
    #23 manchester, Oct 15, 2004
  4. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since this has been garbaged up so, I repost an earlier post. Please find a pdf scan of the first page of each of the three major sections of the KJV 1611. (This is a scan of an ORIGINAL printing). There were NO other introductory pages to the apocrypha which was included right in the MIDDLE of the OT and NT without seperation. The facts speak for themselves. The 1611 KJV contains the apocrypha and there is nothing to indicate (in the book itself) that the translators felt otherwise:

    http://www.baptist-church.org/example.pdf
     
    #24 Phillip, Oct 15, 2004
  5. russell55

    russell55 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    Messages:
    2,424
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm hoping the thread doesn't have to be shut down, but can just be cleaned up a little. It promised to be an interesting one, and one about a subject I was hoping to learn something on.
     
    #25 russell55, Oct 15, 2004
  6. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    By the way, if someone wants to send me $5 bucks to cover my effort to make a disk, costs of the disk and mailing, I will send you the complete scanned and originally printed KJV1611 on a CD.

    PM me. PS, THis is not an offer to make money. I will not make anything at 5 bucks a pop.
     
    #26 Phillip, Oct 15, 2004
  7. williemakeit

    williemakeit New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    0
    Personally, I use the KJV exclusively, but have had questions regarding the Apocrypha. I had hoped to maybe learn more about it in this post. I deal with a demographic of 85% Catholic. The latest figures that I had access to indicated that only 1% in Maryland are Baptist. Reading other Baptists' take on the Apocrypha may prove to be very useful to me. I am unable to post anything of any significance on the subject, but I would like to see where it goes.
     
    #27 williemakeit, Oct 15, 2004
  8. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Since Philip has graciously given permission as author if the thread for an early shutdown, this thread will be shut down if it cannot be kep on topic.

    THIS IS NOT A KJVO THREAD. If that continues it will be shut with no further notice. The topic is historical justification for inclusion of the Apocrypha in the KJV1611.
     
    #28 NaasPreacher (C4K), Oct 15, 2004
  9. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Could someone provide HISTORICAL evidence that the translators did not believe the apocrypha to be scripture, beyond the statement of beliefs by their church?

    A statement by several of the translators perhaps, found in another 400 year old document?
     
    #29 Phillip, Oct 15, 2004
  10. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    Personally, I use the KJV exclusively, but have had questions regarding the Apocrypha.
    --------------------------------------------------


    So are you saying, you are wondering if it is Scripture and that it SHOULD BE INCLUDED? And you would base this upon the thoughts and feelings of the KJB translators? Just to let you know, the true churches do NOT BELIEVE IT IS.


    Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
    #30 michelle, Oct 15, 2004
  11. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you C4K. I am honestly trying to "learn" about the history here. The 1611 is a translation and did contain the apocrypha, the question is "why"? But, the answers have to come from historical sources. Do I believe the apocrypha is scripture? NO, but somebody made a decision to include it, again "why"?
     
    #31 Phillip, Oct 15, 2004
  12. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    Thank you C4K. I am honestly trying to "learn" about the history here. The 1611 is a translation and did contain the apocrypha, the question is "why"? But, the answers have to come from historical sources. Do I believe the apocrypha is scripture? NO, but somebody made a decision to include it, again "why"?
    ---------------------------------------------------


    &lt;off topic comment deleted&gt;


    Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle

    [ October 15, 2004, 02:47 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]
     
    #32 michelle, Oct 15, 2004
  13. williemakeit

    williemakeit New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    393
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, that is not what I am saying. I haven't said anything but to request to let this thread ride. My KJV does not include the Apocrypha, and for good reason. Take a few more moments, reread my post, and honor my humble request. I personally have not met a Baptist that believes the Apocrypha is scripture, but if this thread does go that way, or if it proves to be an attempt to ping the KJVO, then I will ignore it as I do all such threads.
     
    #33 williemakeit, Oct 15, 2004
  14. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    If this brings about confusion among Christians, then you have to point to the KJV1611 translators for including it, not a person who brings the fact up. There is NOTHING wrong with a study of historical evidence and facts and it is a FACT that the 1611 version of the King James did contain the apocrypha. . . my question is why?
     
    #34 Phillip, Oct 15, 2004
  15. natters

    natters New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    michelle said "Again, I ask you, what does this prove in this issue, and how is this beneficial, unless of course you are going against your stated INTENT of this thread?"

    Who cares? Let people talk about what they want to talke about. It is beneficial in that some people might learn something new and interesting about Bible history.
     
    #35 natters, Oct 15, 2004
  16. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Moderator note:

    I can't monitor this discussion constantly as we have a yout meeting going on at the moment. And future off topic comments will be deleted in their enitirety - this includes personal questioning of the benefit of this thread.
     
    #36 NaasPreacher (C4K), Oct 15, 2004
  17. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    No, that is not what I am saying. I haven't said anything but to request to let this thread ride. My KJV does not include the Apocrypha, and for good reason. Take a few more moments, reread my post, and honor my humble request. I personally have not met a Baptist that believes the Apocrypha is scripture, but if this thread does go that way, or if it proves to be an attempt to ping the KJVO, then I will ignore it as I do all such threads.
    --------------------------------------------------


    Thank you for explaining that, and I have to admit, I was deeply concerned for you in that it seemed as though that was what you were trying to determine.


    Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
    #37 michelle, Oct 15, 2004
  18. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    &lt;snipped per previous warning - posters will not question the purpose or intent of this thread&gt;

    [ October 15, 2004, 02:56 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]
     
    #38 michelle, Oct 15, 2004
  19. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let me clarify again, if I didn't make it plain, I do NOT believe the apocrypha is scriptural, nor am I trying to prove it is. I am simply wanting facts to determine the reason the KJV1611 translators saw fit to include it. Nothing more.

    If resulting facts are found, then this does not preclude their use in other debate threads, but not this one. That is my ONLY purpose for THIS thread. There is no secret agenda here. I have laid it on the table. Now, please, let us get to the facts. Thank you!
     
    #39 Phillip, Oct 15, 2004
  20. manchester

    manchester New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    There may be good reasons to reject the Apocrypha, but fear that &lt;personal attack deleted&gt; isn't one of them.

    [ October 15, 2004, 03:12 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]
     
    #40 manchester, Oct 15, 2004
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 2 of 3
Loading...