My Problems With MV's

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Baptist4life, Nov 29, 2008.

  1. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    The following short list is just a sampling of the divergent and confusing readings found among the contradictory modern bible versions. There are numerous other examples. Among these “details” are whether Jeremiah 27:1 reads Jehoiakim (Hebrew texts, RV,ASV, NKJV, KJB) or Zedekiah (NIV, NASB); whether 2 Samuel 21:8 reads Michal (Hebrew texts, KJB,NKJV, RV,ASV) or Merab (NIV,NASB), or 70 (NASB, NKJV, RV, ASV,KJB) being sent out by the Lord Jesus in Luke 10:1 or 72 (NIV), or the 7th day in Judges 14:15 (KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV) or the 4th day (NASB, NIV), or God smiting 50,070 men in 1 Samuel 6:19 (KJB, RV,ASV,NASB) or 70 men slain (NIV, RSV), or there being 30,000 chariots in 1 Samuel 13:5 (KJB, NKJV, RV, ASV, NASB, ESV) or only 3000 (NIV, & Holman), or 1 Samuel 13:1 reading - ONE/TWO years (NKJV, KJB, Geneva,Judaica Press Tanach), or 40/32 (NASB 1972-77) or 30/42 (NASB 1995, NIV), or _____years and.______and two years (RSV, ESV); 2 Samuel 15:7 “forty years” (Hebrew, Geneva, NKJV, NASB, RV) OR “four years” (NIV,RSV, ESV,NET), or the fine linen being the “righteousness” of saints or the fine linen being the “righteous acts” of the saints in Revelation 19:8, or where 2 Chronicles 36:9 reads that Jehoiachin was 8 years old when he began to reign (Hebrew texts, NASB, NKJV, RV,ASV,KJB, ESV) or he was 18 years old (NIV), or that when God raised the Lord Jesus from the dead it is stated in Acts 13:33 “this day have I begotten thee” (KJB, NASB, NKJV,RV, ESV) or “today I have become your Father” (NIV).






    There are so many differences in the MV's that I choose to stick with the KJV. MY personal choice..you are free to pick whatever version YOU like. Please, please, lay off the KJV. OK?
     
    #1 Baptist4life, Nov 29, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 29, 2008
  2. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are differences in the KJV as well. As you can tell from your own listing above, the KJV differs from the other Bibles in numerous places. That doesn't make the KJV right or wrong. It simply shows that the "problem" is elsewhere.
     
  3. TomVols

    TomVols
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Glad you've chosen the KJV, but be aware that there are differences even among the various renderings of the KJV. What you allege against other translations is something the KJV is guilty of. And remember that when you use one version to compare others by, by necessity you create what you allege.
     
  4. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know there are differences in the KJV. I'm not judging ANY version. I'm just saying that the KJV is no WORSE or BETTER than the MV's. I just don't see what everyone's got against the KJV.
     
    #4 Baptist4life, Nov 29, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 29, 2008
  5. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know anyone who has anything "against" the KJV. They simply point out that the obvious fact that the KJV is not perfect and that incurs the wrath of some.
     
  6. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tell that to Rippon


     
  7. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rippon is correct, but that's not something "against" the KJV. It is 400 years old, and uses 400 year old language. Today, the English speaking world needs something in its only language.

    It's a strange world we live in where stating that something is out-dated because of language is somehow "against" it.
     
    #7 Pastor Larry, Nov 29, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 29, 2008
  8. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    By definition, the KJV (or KJB) itself is a "Modern Version."

    Even in the sense in which you are actually mis-using that terminology, the KJV was an "MV" in the 17th Century.

    Not to mention, the KJV was done at the dual behests of the Church of England, and King James I, primarily in opposition to a version actually done by Protestants, namely the Geneva, under whatever pretexts.

    Do you oppose your so-called "MVs" because they completely remove more than a dozen books from the Holy Scriptures?

    Have I actually noticed you quoting from a 1611 KJV?

    So would it be reasonable to conclude that you really prefer such versions and editions of the Bible as Wycliffe, Tyndale and Coverdale?

    Somehow, I do not expect to get a "Yes!" answer to any of the above questions, thus I consider this to merely be another exercise of 'hyocrisy'.

    Granted, you specifically said nore of the above things, but the 'not-so-subtle' implication is certainly there for a 'single-version' advocacy.

    (Can anyone here besides my alter ego, Language Cop, spell and define "A-g-e-n-d-a"??)

    BTW and FTR, I use a KJV (or a NKJV) almost exclusively, and have mainly done so for more than 40 years, except for a few brief instances, when I did not actually have one in my hands, and used what was available, in that sense. My bride's NIV or HCSB, my own MLB or ASV off the bookshelf, or whatever my bride currently has up on her "electronic Bible" (She can access about six different versions.) have all seemed to work fairly well, in those few instances.

    Ed
     
  9. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you think that's not "against" the KJV, then sir, you're blind or prejudice yourself. You'll not find me posting anything like that about the MV's, but if I did, I would expect people to think I have something "against" MV's...I DON"T. Rippon, and apparently YOU, seem to think, the people who use the KJV, (NOT THE KJVO people, just the one's who prefer it), are imbeciles who really don't understand it, and need to abandon that "relic" and get with the MV's that YOU like ! THAT is the problem I have with that mentality.
     
    #9 Baptist4life, Nov 29, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 29, 2008
  10. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ed, I OWN and USE the following...................NIV, HCSB, NKJV, KJV, TNIV. I also OWN, but seldom if ever use, an NASB, Douy-Rheims, a New English Bible, and a "catholic" coffe table Bible that was a wedding present, though I'm not sure what version it is. So your post is clearly not true of me. Please do not lump me in with the KJVO crowd, because you have NO basis to do so. I post what I do because I think the "rightful attitude" against the KJVO crowd is being transferred to the KJV Bible. That's all.
     
    #10 Baptist4life, Nov 29, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 29, 2008
  11. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks for the personal attack, but the fact remains: Stating that something is old and linguistically out of date is not "against it."

    I can't speak for Rippon, but as for me, you could not be more wrong. I said nothing that would indicate I think that way about people who use the KJV. In fact, I don't. I don't care what version people use.

    I expect you to issue an immediate apology and never again say something so irresponsible.
     
    #11 Pastor Larry, Nov 29, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 29, 2008
  12. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since that was NOT a personal attack, but simply your opinion that it was, I see no need to apologize. Maybe I will as soon as you people "apologize" to me for insinuating that I'm KJVOnly!
     
  13. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    You don't like MV's but you like the KJV. So, how would you describe yourself?
     
  14. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Then WHY did you agree with this statement??


     
  15. Baptist4life

    Baptist4life
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Show me where I said I don't like MV's? I OWN and USE several.
     
  16. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    You said I was blind and prejudice (sic). That was not about the topic. That was about the person, and it wasn't a compliment. So yes, it was a personal attack, and you should apologize.

    Where did I insinuate that? I had no idea what your position was. I don't recall insinuating anything about your position. If you can point out where I insinuated that I will gladly take a look. I just went back and looked at my posts and see no such insinuation.
     
  17. mcdirector

    mcdirector
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    8,292
    Likes Received:
    10
    awww

    another versions thread.

    People are going to analyze all versions available. Even the KJV - Because it's been around a long time and in so many hands and so many households, it will most likely be analyzed the most.
     
  18. Jim1999

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

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Messages:
    15,460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Personally, I think we get carried away with what version is best, and we do tend to get personal about it.

    In my opinion, the best version is still the one that get's read and studied. We can always correct any mistakes that may crop up, make notes and get on with the purpose of scripture in daily living.

    I still use the same KJV I started out with in 1945. It, no doubt, has many errors, but I still use it. I am not KJV only, I just happen to be familiar with this book. I memorized text from it and guess what I will quote from the pulpit?

    I read many different versions including some very liberal versions. It has not changed my theology one iota, nor has it affected my spiritual affectation for my loving God or for my fellow believers.

    So, folks, let us try to stick to constructive criticisms and leave individuals out of the picture. Let us attempt to learn more about truth in the word, whichever version we happen to find attractive.

    Cheers, and bless,

    Jim
     
  19. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    I apologize since I apparently did 'misread' you, Baptist4life. It was certainly not intentional.

    (Incidentally, I composed my own initial post after 4 posts, thus did not read any additional posts from anyone else, as I went on back to bed after posting and entering, last evening.)

    BTW, do any of the rest of these KJV 'advocates' consider any of the KJII, KJ21, KJIII, NKJV, HCSB, LITV, TMB, AKJV, and/or MKJV just as acceptable as the KJV? (1769, you understand.) :rolleyes:

    (Why do I not expect to get any real "Yes!" here, either? To any of the above??

    Never mind that several of the above, by definition, are actually 'Baptist' Bibles. :confused:

    :rolleyes:

    Ed
     
    #19 EdSutton, Nov 29, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 29, 2008
  20. sag38

    sag38
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    4,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    The title of your thread implies that you have problems with MV's. What else are we to think?
     

Share This Page

Loading...