What does your KJV say?

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by try hard, Sep 19, 2002.

  1. try hard

    try hard
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think this should be interesting.
    (Use the 1769)

    [ September 19, 2002, 03:52 PM: Message edited by: Tri Hard ]
     
  2. DocCas

    DocCas
    Expand Collapse
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2000
    Messages:
    4,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Once again we see a poll with insufficient answers to choose from. I have KJVs which read in every way you listed, but there is no "All of the above" option. :(
     
  3. try hard

    try hard
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    0
    Once again, you look into it too much. Just pick up your 1769 bible and look up what it reads. No big deal, no tricks.
     
  4. kman

    kman
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2002
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    0
    For the poll I checked the KJV I use the most in my devotions. I know some of my other King James Bibles have the "other" poll readings.

    -kman

    [ September 19, 2002, 02:07 PM: Message edited by: kman ]
     
  5. Ernie Brazee

    Ernie Brazee
    Expand Collapse
    <img src ="/ernie.JPG">

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2001
    Messages:
    843
    Likes Received:
    0
    What is the point of the poll? :confused:
     
  6. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    DocCas said:

    I have KJVs

    The question doesn't ask what your KJVs say, it asks what your KJV says.

    </font>
    1. Take a KJV off the shelf.</font>
    2. Look up the answers to the poll.</font>
    Easy.
     
  7. Ransom

    Ransom
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ernie Brazee asked:

    What is the point of the poll?

    To make you doubt the Word of God. Is it working? [​IMG]
     
  8. MissAbbyIFBaptist

    MissAbbyIFBaptist
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/3374.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 3, 2002
    Messages:
    2,567
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ransom Said:
    Nope. Nothing could change my opinion of God's Word. It is as precious to me now, if not more so, that before.
    ~Abby [​IMG]
     
  9. eric_b

    eric_b
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://home.nc.rr.com/robotplot/tiny_eri

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    442
    Likes Received:
    0
    I assume different answers imply different revisions to the KJV...? Could you please provide a key so we know which answers mean what version?

    Eric
     
  10. try hard

    try hard
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nope. These differences are in the 1769 [​IMG] (Assuming most use that revision today, I presumed that would be the one that people looked to: obviously some make it more complicated than it really is)

    My apologies for not saying that before. :(

    [ September 19, 2002, 03:58 PM: Message edited by: Tri Hard ]
     
  11. eric_b

    eric_b
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://home.nc.rr.com/robotplot/tiny_eri

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    442
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nope. These differences are in the 1769 [​IMG] (Assuming most use that revision today, I presumed that would be the one that people looked to: obviously some make it more complicated than it really is)</font>[/QUOTE]I think I failed to communicate my question properly, let me try again: which answers in your poll belong to the 1769 revision and which answers belong to the original 1611 version?

    Eric
     
  12. try hard

    try hard
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    0
    They are all in the 1769.
     
  13. eric_b

    eric_b
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://home.nc.rr.com/robotplot/tiny_eri

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    442
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are you saying there are different versions of the 1769? I think at least one of us is having trouble communicating...

    Eric
     
  14. try hard

    try hard
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ransom said
    You crack me up. LOL
     
  15. try hard

    try hard
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    0
    nope. For some reason or another, different 1769 KJV's read different in some places. :confused:

    As to my knowledge, there are no different versions of the 1769 Bible KJV :D

    [ September 19, 2002, 04:04 PM: Message edited by: Tri Hard ]
     
  16. try hard

    try hard
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    0
    Still confused? :confused:
     
  17. kman

    kman
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2002
    Messages:
    299
    Likes Received:
    0
  18. eric_b

    eric_b
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://home.nc.rr.com/robotplot/tiny_eri

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    442
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, I did a little research, here is a good overview:

    http://www.theanswer.org/biblestudy/kjv_differences.htm

    And here is a short excerpt that speaks directly to this:


    Revisions were made in the years 1613, 1629, and 1638. The revisions made at Cambridge in 1762 and at Oxford in 1769 were significant in that they modernized the spelling. The version in use today is basically the Revision of 1769. However, even today there are differences between the KJV published by Oxford, Cambridge, and Nelson publishers. This would lead to the question, "Which one is the true version?"


    Also an interesting point:


    Finally, for those who feel the KJV is the only "true" translation, the original KJV of 1611 included the Apocrypha. This raises the question, are the Apocrypha inspired by God? If not, how can the KJV be the perfect translation since it included the Apocrypha?


    Eric
     
  19. try hard

    try hard
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2001
    Messages:
    178
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks K-man and Eric, Hence the point of this poll is to get people to think.

    Which one is corrupt? :D
     
  20. eric_b

    eric_b
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://home.nc.rr.com/robotplot/tiny_eri

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2002
    Messages:
    442
    Likes Received:
    0
    The word "corrupt" is a dramatic overstatement; judging from DocCas' comments in the other thread it looks like the Oxford edition contains at least one typo, the Cambridge and Nelson editions might contain small mistakes as well, but I don't know that to be the case.

    But it is the original autograph of Scripture in its original Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic that we know to be infallible. Translations have authority to the extent that their underlying text is an accurate copy of the autograph, and insofar as the translation correctly transmits the meaning into the new language.

    Eric

    [ September 19, 2002, 04:30 PM: Message edited by: eric_b ]
     

Share This Page

Loading...