KJV Only Folks: What Bible translations should non-English speakers use?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by MichaelNZ, Aug 22, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MichaelNZ

    MichaelNZ
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2012
    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
    To those of you who believe that the KJV is the inspired Word of God - what versions should people who don't speak English use? It would be good if anyone could tell me what the best French and German versions are, but other languages are also appreciated.
     
  2. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am not KJVO, but I am TR only. So, I would recommend a Bible translated from the TR. In the person's own language of course.
     
  3. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    16,990
    Likes Received:
    46
    So the difference between you and a KJVO would be both of you see ONLY the TR as a valid greek text to translate from , but they would see the KJV as ONLY version God honors, while as long as using TR text, it could be in Spanish/French etc the version?
     
  4. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    0
    My Opinion....

    My opinion is that the whole issue has ALWAYS been about which underlying text (Greek/Hebrew) is being used. One of the reasons (as I understand it) that most true KJV Only advocates reject the NKJV is that when doing comparative readings between the two translations,the NKJV seems to, in many places, follow the readings rendered by versions that come from the Critical Text "family" of texts. I have read the evidence and been convinced but I can't even begin to demonstrate it here for several reasons.....#1 my memory of specifics is not that good...and #2 I type very slow...(I've been working on this short post almost 10 minutes...IT TAKES ME A LONNNNG TIME TO DO THIS STUFF!:laugh:) I can,however,highly recommend a very good book for source material. I did read this book and was greatly impressed by it! That is "One Book Stands Alone" by Dr.Douglas B.Stauffer and can be found at the the following website if you want to obtain a copy. He does extensive verse-by-verse comparisons in this book between the KJV,the NIV, and the NKJV to name a few as well as referencing the Greek and Hebrew.
    McCowen Mills | (the publishers website)

    Now...my short answer is...yes...valid translations of the Bible SHOULD be translated from the right text families. However...that is the extent of MY so-called "expertise". Somebody a whole lot smarter than me has to get it done. One of these days though I will "have the mind of Christ" Amen!

    Bro.Greg
     
  5. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    No. They NKJV was not translated from the Critical text. It may agree with it in some places, but that doesn't make it wrong. The only ones who claim the NKJV was translated in "some" places from the CT are from the KJVO camp.
     
  6. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    True Amy, just like the KJV agrees with the Critical Texts in some places.
     
  7. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    16,990
    Likes Received:
    46
    So a Christian has legitimate reasons for them to be a KJV preferred, NONE for KJVO?
     
  8. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    None. KJVO is ridiculous.
     
  9. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ahem....!


    I RESPECTFULLY disagree and shall continue to do so.
    As I recommended...obtain and read the book I referenced.:type:


    Bro.Greg
     
  10. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ahem again !

    I'm used to being called names....and 12,000plus posts on the BB are not intimidating me! I love my KJV, I love my KJV, I love my KJV..............!:laugh:

    Bro.Greg:smilewinkgrin:

    (sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me!:tongue3:)
     
  11. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Here we go - in what passages does the NKJV choose the CT over the Traditional Text where the KJV did not do the same?

    Not translational choices, but choosing the CT to translate?
     
  12. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    The TR (KJV) agrees with the Critical Text in about 95% of the entire New Testament!
     
  13. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let The Record Show......

    Bro.Roger...let the record show that even I agree that the KJV will in many instances agree with the Critical Text BECAUSE.....even I agree that the Critical Text CONTAINS the Word of God (at least in part). Thus...there are going to be places where they agree. I just follow the camp that believes that the TR and the Westcott-Hort/Critical text don't agree with one another entirely and that the TR/Masoretic Text family is the more accurate of the two. I can't prove that personally because I'M NOT SMART ENOUGH. But...the "camp" or crowd that holds to the TR position tells me I have a mistake and error-free Bible I can depend on....and the CT, W/H, MV crowd tells me I have nothing but an imperfect translation that contains errors which requires the use of the M/V's to straighten out. I don't think God would leave His Church at the mercy of erroneous Bibles. I think God holds upholds His standard of perfection in His Word. I think I'm gonna stay with that standard...but it is not a test of fellowship with me.


    God Bless You,
    Bro.Greg:thumbsup:
     
  14. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    No one really has a problem with that, but to claim that the NKJV is a Critical Text translation is simply an error.
     
  15. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    I didn't call you names. I said KJVO is ridiculous. By that I mean the doctrine of it, not you. :love2:
    And you should be intimidated. I'm tough! GRRRRRR....LOL
     
  16. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    And I love my KJV
     
  17. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    16,990
    Likes Received:
    46
    Thought they had declawed you?
     
  18. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    They tried but it didn't work. :laugh:
     
  19. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let Me Clarify...


    I'm sorry...I wasn't clear on that...after looking back into Dr.Stauffer's book, I think I am correct in my understanding that he believes that some of the readings in the NKJV were more consistent with the rendering of the (other) Modern versions (such as the NIV) that were faithful to the Critical/Alexandrian family of texts. He doesn't say that the NKJV was translated exclusively from them and he does acknowledge that the TR renderings are predominately present. He just contends that the NKJV is NOT (exclusively) a rendering of the TR/ Masoretic family. I hope that makes more sense.....gotta go...time for prayer meeeting! God Bless you Bro.Roger !

    Amy...I'll get back to ya later!:smilewinkgrin: Gotta go pray and shake off the fear!

    Bro.Greg
     
  20. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    :laugh:

    I wanted to post what the NKJV says in the Preface regarding the texts it was translated from.

    "The King James New Testament was based on the traditional text of the Greek speaking churches, first published in 1516, and later called the Textus Receptus or Received Text. Although based on the relatively few available manuscripts, these were representative of many more which existed at the time but only became known later. Because the New King James Version is the fifth revision of the historic document translated from specific Greek texts, the editors decided to retain the traditional text in the body of the New Testament."


    So unless the editors have told a bold faced lie, the NKJV is translated from the exact texts as the King James Bible.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...