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!

minimal update to the kjv?

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by timothy 1769, Aug 9, 2003.

Top Posters
  1. timothy 1769

    timothy 1769 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,323
    Likes Received:
    0
    were there ever any updates to the kjv that only tried to replace archaic words with modern equivalents, without otherwise 'improving' the translation?

    the kind of update i'm talking about could be done with the 1828 webster's dictionary and strong's concordance.

    what do you think of the idea? is there room for an extremely minimal update of the kjv?

    and no, the nkjv does not qualify [​IMG]

    i'll give my opinion later.
     
    #1 timothy 1769, Aug 9, 2003
  2. mesly

    mesly Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2002
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Since I don't own a copy I cannot speak for it directly, but didn't the KJV21 claim to do this?
     
    #2 mesly, Aug 9, 2003
  3. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    The updates to the KJV over the years have been much more than minimal. Unfortunately, they have not been enough.

    For such a task, an 1828 Webster's and a Strong's are not the tools for the job. You need the Greek texts, the lexicons, and a modern English dictionary if you are going to do this. People do not understand the limitations of strongs. For a word that gets 2-3 in Strong's, the basic Greek lexicon gives several paragraphs, sometimes several columns, on some occasions several pages. You simply cannot do this task with Strong's. It is not the right tool for the job. One of hte problems with Strong's is that it gives people the belief that they are equipped to critique the Greek from it.

    As an alternative to all that, you can use one of several faithful modern translations that are easily understood and even more accurate than the KJV. There is no need to reinvent the wheel on this one.
     
    #3 Pastor Larry, Aug 9, 2003
  4. Jesus is Lord

    Jesus is Lord New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is a translation called "King James 2000". The archaic are replaced and that´s it. You can find it here .
     
    #4 Jesus is Lord, Aug 9, 2003
  5. Bugman

    Bugman New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    0
    Isn't the KJV 200 the same as the Modern King James Version?

    Anyways the MJKV is aviable with E-Sword. I use it when I'm talking to someone who has problems with the old words in it. Personall I liek the old words.

    Bryan
    SDG
     
    #5 Bugman, Aug 10, 2003
  6. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wasn't this the goal of the ASV 1901? Not sure, myself.
     
    #6 Johnv, Aug 12, 2003
  7. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know if the KJV2k is the same as the Modern King James Version, but I believe the MKJV that you're referring to also replaces archaic phrases like "I do you to wit" with "I make known to you". Additionally, it repaces the "unicorn" with the correctly translated "wild ox".

    So it's not just an update of the "thee's and "thou's", nor should it be. I haven't read it, but I think it might be worth at least a glance. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
     
    #7 Johnv, Aug 12, 2003
  8. Jesus is Lord

    Jesus is Lord New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    The KJ2000 is NOT the MKJV! It is a version that updates some old words like thees and thous... nothing else!!!
     
    #8 Jesus is Lord, Aug 13, 2003
  9. timothy 1769

    timothy 1769 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    1,323
    Likes Received:
    0
    i find the thee's and thou's to be easy to understand and exetremely useful. i guess i'm more concerned with things like let, prevent, etc.

    but given man's tendency to gloriy his own worldly wisdom and that we are living in an age of apostasy, i think this is not the time to attempt any update, even such a minor update as replacing archaic, confusing words.

    i do think the "defined kjv" is a decent idea, though i haven't bought one yet. they put the definitions of archaic and uncommon words in the margin.
     
    #9 timothy 1769, Aug 13, 2003
  10. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Modern translations go one step better ... they put them in the text where they belong :D
     
    #10 Pastor Larry, Aug 13, 2003
  11. Bugman

    Bugman New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2002
    Messages:
    329
    Likes Received:
    0
    #11 Bugman, Aug 13, 2003
  12. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    In the 60's the Scofield Reference Bible was revised in the "New" Scofield . . In it, about 400 archaic words from the AV are replaced with modern English equivalents. The original AV words are in the margin.
     
    #12 Dr. Bob, Aug 13, 2003
  13. Forever settled in heaven

    Forever settled in heaven New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2000
    Messages:
    1,770
    Likes Received:
    0
    i always got tripped up in KJB memory verse quizzes in school cos i think the replacements weren't consistently flagged.

    i wonder how many places still have verbatim quizzes--either KJB or MV/NIV/?
     
    #13 Forever settled in heaven, Aug 13, 2003
  14. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    In 1965-66 I took Personal Evangelism class and was required to memorize 128 verses. Still know MOST of them to this day. Thank God for those "mean" professors.

    We had to write them word perfect, KJV(whatever revision you used, mine was 1769 version). I can hear a hue and cry if we tried to have that same standard for a 2-credit class in college today!
     
    #14 Dr. Bob, Aug 14, 2003
  15. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,122
    Likes Received:
    19
    What is wrong with the original Authorised Version of 1611? That is one of the Versions of the Word of God that I use.
     
    #15 Baptist in Richmond, Aug 16, 2003
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...