Wanna purchase the Hendrickson AV 1611 for $18?

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by robycop3, May 6, 2005.

  1. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    On the EZBoard "BVDB", a member called "dofchrist" posted this link:

    http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.gsp?product_id=2369154

    I said I'd post it on some other boards, giving him credit for first bringing it to our attention.

    I have made some online purchases from Wally & found it reliable so far.
     
  2. jshurley04

    jshurley04
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2004
    Messages:
    554
    Likes Received:
    0
    Unless I can see a page or two, I seriously doubt that it is an actual 1611. Those things are unreadable by today's society. That is why I laugh so hard at those who claim to use only the 1611.
     
  3. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    I used to have a Henderson KJV1611 Edition
    reprint. It has the Roman letters (not the
    difficult-to-read-Gothic letters).

    For an electronic copy e-Sword is good:
    http://www.e-sword.net/

    (I keep e-sword for when i can't get on-line:
    I have:
    Geneva Bible
    KJV1611 Edition
    KJV1769 edition with Strong's Numbers)

    This is free, unless you want to donate some
    money, then you can.
    You can put your curser over the
    Strong's number and it shows stuff like:

    1Th 5:22 Abstain567 from575 all3956 appearance1491 of evil.4190

    G1491
    εἶδος
    eidos
    i'-dos
    From G1492; a view, that is, form (literally or figuratively): - appearance, fashion, shape, sight.

    This is lot better than thumbing through
    1854 pages very thin pages
    of STRONGEST STRONG'S [​IMG]
     
  4. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are also lots of copies of Nelson's
    reprint of the King James Version,
    1611 Edition. I had both and compared them
    to each other. Never did find a variation.
    I gave the Henderson copy to a KJVOite.
     
  5. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,147
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    You are right, it isn't a 1611. It was reset in Roman type and the marginal notes are not from the 1611 edition.

    If you want an exact photo-reproduction of the real thing go to http://www.greatsite.com/facsimile-reproductions/kingjames-1611.html and scroll down to "Regular Edition" - but it will cost you $249. [​IMG]
     
  6. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    TCassidy: " ... the marginal notes are not from the 1611 edition."

    How did the Henderson Team and the Nelson team both end
    up with the same margin notes?
    Why are the translator notes, margin notes the same as
    in my 1873 Edition?

    BTW, the site you cite shows the same margine notes around
    Gen 1:1 and Proverbs 1 as in the Nelson
    KJV1611 Edition (with the Roman fount text).
     
  7. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,147
    Likes Received:
    1,309
    If you will read the Introduction to the Nelson editon (if your copy has the Introduction - it was left out of many of the printings) you will see that the decorative initials and border designs are from a 1911 edition KJV and the marginal notes are taken from a 1613 edition. Very, very close, but not an exact reproduction of the 1611 first edition, first printing. If you want the real thing you will have to fork over the $250.
     
  8. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Greetings:

    I use one, and the cost was substantial.
    I would disagree with your assertion that the early modern English of the Authorised Version is "unreadable by today's society." If you have a fascimile of an Authorised Version in Roman letters, it is not really that hard at all.

    TCassidy: great link - wish I had known about that sooner.......

    Best wishes to both of you,

    BiR
     
  9. FrankBetz

    FrankBetz
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    You attacked Brother Ed by placing him out of today's society, and the Hendrickson AV 1611 is as readable as any other form of English.

    I rather Like Ed, but his attempts to mock the Germanic type found in the AV 1611 is rather immature.

    I own one, it is very helpful, just as the updated type found in the Cambridge 1762 edition
     

Share This Page

Loading...