Using the KJV is ecclesiastical compromise

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Paul33, Feb 11, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Paul33

    Paul33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Fundamentalists talk about separation from apostates and those who fellowship with apostates (neo-evangelicals).

    Well, then, isn't using the KJV compromise? The pilgrims refused to use the KJV for this very reason. They were not about to compromise with the Church of England and use their translation of the Bible.

    Shouldn't fundamentalists recoil at its use in their churches?
     
  2. av1611jim

    av1611jim
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Messages:
    3,511
    Likes Received:
    0
    Answer: Only if you are a Calvinist since that is who produced the Geneva bible. That IS which bible you are referencing isn't it? And since Calvinism is unbiblical then one should seperate from them as well. One could take the logic of your OP to its natural conclusion but then one would end up with no bible at all since EVERY gruop which has produced a modern bible has problems of their own.
    So let's just seperate from EVERYBODY!!!
     
  3. Keith M

    Keith M
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, the good old KJV has withstood the test of time. Although the KJV was probably influenced by COE translators, why should we recoil from its use? The KJV, as well as many other Bible versions, has led many people to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, and that is what is important. Sure the KJV has some translational problems like the use of the word "Easter" in Acts 12:4, but that doesn't qualify it for the garbage dump.
     
  4. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with Paul33. If you venture onto KJVO websites they fault MV'ers for being ecumenical and ***gasp*** they had none Baptist on the translation team. But many do not realize the KJV was translated by the COE which they would disagree with on many doctrinal points.
     
  5. Paul33

    Paul33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    0
    Keith M,

    I'm going to change your statement just a little bit.

    "Well, good old Billy Graham has withstood the test of time. Although Billy Graham was probably influenced by his sponsors, why should we recoil from him? Billy Graham, as well as many other evangelists, has led many people to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, and that is what is important. Sure Billy Graham has some sponsorship problems like the use of Bishop Pike in LA, but that doesn't qualify him for the garbage dump."

    Interesting, eh?
     
  6. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,565
    Likes Received:
    4
    Actually, the KJV has but little Anglican influence, such as "bishoprick", which is among the proper English definitions of "eposkope".
     
  7. Eliyahu

    Eliyahu
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    I hope you had paid the attention to the previous threads about KJV and Easter.
    Acts 12:4 states Pasxa but it can be translated either as Passover or Ishtar (Festival).
    If you choosed Passover (Pesach) you would find the conflict with the previous verse 3. It was Days of ULB already. Ishtar festival took placed just a few days later than Passover. (Actually it started only one day later than Pesach as it celebrated Full Moon while Pesach was on the 14th. Then it lasted 8 days as well. The highlight of the Ishtar was Sunrise on Sunday and the Last Day for Orgy(actually sex party). Therefore it was rather a few days later than Pesach). In M.E. both Pesach and Ishtar ( Pascha) were translated into Pasxa in Greek. Ishtar was the name of Goddess in M.E and was called Ashtaroth in Lebanon, Ashera in Israel, Ostarte in Germany, Easter in England( transliterated from Ostarte).

    Therefore KJV is quite correct in this translation and it is one of the several spots where KJV is outstanding and prevailing any other versions, with an exception to Third Millenium Bible.

    If anyone wants to condemn KJV on this Acts 12:4, that person must explain in advance why Acts 12:3 says it was already Days of ULB while Passover is the first day of ULB which means Passover was already passed by.
     
  8. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    9,949
    Likes Received:
    78
    Eliyahu said:

    "Acts 12:4 states Pasxa but it can be translated either as Passover or Ishtar (Festival)."

    No, it can't. It could be translated as Passover or Easter (although the interchangeability of the words was fading by 1611). There is no documentation — that I know of — that Ishtar has anything to do with Easter.

    The use of Easter is not a big deal to me. It was, technically, acceptable at the time, though it is puzzling that the translators used it only once. That, in fact, is the root of the controversy: Instead of accepting that Passover and Easter were interchangeable, defenders twist history and pagan mythology into a pretzel to try to justify the use of Easter that one time.

    So far as I know, no one felt compelled to create an Ishtar-Easter mythology until the 19th century. John Gill blandly notes that Easter meant Passover, and he was not one to spare words when he thought there was additional amplification needed.
     
  9. partialrapture

    partialrapture
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0
    Paul33

    Show proof that the pilgrams did not use the the AV and dont just say it.
     
  10. partialrapture

    partialrapture
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Among the books in Pilgrim Hall are four Bibles of unusual interest. One belonged to Governor William Bradford, the Pilgrim Governor, and ONE TO JOHN ALDEN. These are among the very few objects existing today which we feel reasonably sure 'came over in the Mayflower.'...John Alden’s Bible, rather surprisingly, is the 'King James' version authorized by the Church of England....No. 90 in the Pilgrim hall catalogue designates the Bible which once belonged to John Alden. Some of the leaves are missing, but the colophon at the end of Revelation shows that the New Testament was printed in London by Robert Barker, 'Printer to the Kings most excellent Majestie,' in 1620. The Concordance was printed by Bonham Norton and John Bill in 1619. This is not a Geneva Bible, but the 'King James' or 'Authorized' version....the firm of Barker in London printed both King James and Geneva Bibles, sometimes using the same decorative material for both."
    (http://www.pilgrimhall.org)
     
  11. partialrapture

    partialrapture
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0
    "It (i.e. the AV) is rightly regarded as the most influential book in the history of English civilization."
    (Compton's Encyclopedia)


    "The King James Bible is the cornerstone of Anglo-Saxon civilization. Over a period of some three hundred and thirty years nearly twelve generations of English-speaking peoples have come to know the Bible in this incomparable translation. Our economic systems, our literary and cultural pursuits are rooted in this single fructifying source."
    ("The Dallas Morning News," 1941)
     
  12. Petrel

    Petrel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,408
    Likes Received:
    0
    They used primarily the Geneva Bible.
     
  13. Petrel

    Petrel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,408
    Likes Received:
    0
    partialrapture, I ran across that site too and notice you excerpted it rather oddly. . .

    It's wise to take care in excerpting so as not to give the impression the text says something that it does not.
     
  14. partialrapture

    partialrapture
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    87
    Likes Received:
    0
  15. Eliyahu

    Eliyahu
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    Would you please show me the origin of Easter ? What was the root of Easter ?
     
  16. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    9,949
    Likes Received:
    78
    You tell me; you made the assertion.

    What do we really know about Easter other than what Bede tells us? The rest ultimately springs from Alexander Hislop's etymological guesses and similar works.
     
  17. Askjo

    Askjo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let me ask you 2 questions:

    1. When did Passover occur?

    2. When did Easter occur?

    I agree with Eliyahu's excellent comment. I do not think that the KJV has translational problem on Acts 12:4.
     
  18. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    9,949
    Likes Received:
    78
    Passover=Easter.

    Why make it harder than that? There is no need to do so.
     
  19. Paul33

    Paul33
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,434
    Likes Received:
    0
    So why did you do it?

    Petrel has shown from your own source that the Geneva Bible was most commonly used by the pilgrims. Again, you already knew that, so why did you try to suggest that my statement was incorrect?

    Very odd indeed.
     
  20. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Luke 22:1
    Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.

    Ezekiel 45:21
    In the first month, in the fourteenth day of the month, ye shall have the passover, a feast of seven days; unleavened bread shall be eaten.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...