New version? The Seemless Bible

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by franklinmonroe, Sep 9, 2009.

  1. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    The Seemless Bible (2005), which has only the text of the entire New Testament, is described as --
    The Seamless Bible presents these chronicles of the original translation – for the first time ever – in a seamless chronological order as they happened.

    Adapted from the King James Version, the fabric of the Gospel has been rewoven into an easy-to-read narrative that presents the story of Christ and His Apostles in sequential order to provide new insights about His life and times. Words that may have obscured the simple power, beauty, and truth of Jesus’ life and teachings have also been updated to contemporary language.
    The text is set in paragraph form without intervening verse numbers or traditional chapters (although the beginning of each section indicates all the referrences of the passages included). It seems that none of the original KJV text is left out (complete index in back).

    Is this a genuine KJV or not?

    BTW, there is now a Seemless Gospels by the same publisher also. Similarly, there is a chronological Gospels in the TNIV text by Zondervan called The Story.
     
    #1 franklinmonroe, Sep 9, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 9, 2009
  2. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's simply an adaptation of the NT of the KJV text, sans chapter and verse divisions.

    Chapter and verse divisions are not required for a bible to be a bible, so, yes, it's a bible. That said, chapter and verse divisions are important man-made tools used for reference. I wouldn't recommend it for referential study, but for spiritual enrichment, it's probably fine.
     
  3. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,404
    Likes Received:
    328
    Since it has been updated to contemporary language I wouldn't consider it to be a genuine KJV.
     
  4. Dale-c

    Dale-c
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    4,145
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not that it matters what you or I think anyway Rippon :)
    I am sure that many would oppose a KJV that simply had the verse divisions removed.

    Afterall, if God inspired the translation of the KJV, then the chapters are inspired.
     
  5. Tater77

    Tater77
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2009
    Messages:
    461
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have a New King James archeological study bible in chronological order. Seems more like a molehill that doesn't need to become a mountain. They are good study helps.
     
  6. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,144
    Likes Received:
    321
    What about the Book of Maps?


    HankD
     
  7. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    I wouldn't recommend it to a newer Christian by itself. I would tell'em to have a copy of a "regular" version at hand. I believe the NT is in a reasonable chronological order anyway, but not the OT. However, the order of the OT boox has been what it is for a long time, & I am against making a version or edition that changes it.
     

Share This Page

Loading...