What is the KJ"B"

Istherenotacause said:

Yep... Authorized by King James who first sought to catch and kill Tyndale because he didn't want the common people to have the Bible in a common language they could understand.

Wow...... Couldn't that be said about the KJVO crowd? In fact, sounds to me like the Tyndale Version Only crowd thinks God is too weak to use anyone other than William Tyndale to record HIS word. Well guys, My God is Powerful!

William Tyndale KJV Story

Diane Tavegia

 

Diane,

Tyndale was martyred in 1536. King James came to the throne of England in 1603. It was not he who persecuted Tyndale, it was Henry VIII.

 

You knew very well what the KJ"B" was before you wrote this post. Shame on you for casting for an argument.

Jason

 

Originally posted by Istherenotacause:
>>At least King James I had enough God about him to establish a
>>CORRECT rendering of the RIGHT texts!

You might want to research the true motivation for the Authorised Version.......

>>If I didn't have anything better than the niv I would go to a
>>Bible bookstore and buy me a King James Bible!

You make statements like this, and yet you contend that you are not a KJV-Onlyist?

 

I use the KJV. I love the KJV. In my opinion (and I understand that others more godly and wiser than I have differing opinions) it's the best English translation we have available. That being said, I think the attitude of many of its defenders stinks. MV advocates would be much more willing to dialogue if KJV'ers could do that in a civil manner. By the way, a few of you MV'ers have engaged i nsome mud slinging, name calling, etc. Folks, we're all on the same team here. Sure we can disagree, even very strongly, but we must do so lovingly.
Sorry for preaching - I know that's not what this is for.

 

That's okay Greg. When you're preaching what you're preaching, you have my permission to preach on Well said and worth saying.

 

Hey, no fair injecting reason and godliness into this debate.

Jason

 

The KJB is not a version
Technically, it's a translation. But it is by no means an exclusive translation.

A "revision" BTW is NOT another version or translation, just an updating of spelling for the most part
It depends on the amount of revision. Dr. Benjamin Blayney's 1769 revision of the KJV is significant enough to be called a version apart from the 1611 edition. The KJV's generally used today are revisions of the 1769 edition.

 

OOOoooooo! Now I'm feeling fuzzy all over. You think we can hop a flight to 'Frisco and hang out with some guys?

 

Huh?

God Bless,
Neal

 

Istherenotacause,
I think you need to look at a map. San Francisco is in Northern California. John lives in Southern California.

 

Wow! You mean I get to fly to southern California just so I can meet up with Greg so we can hop a flight to 'Frisco? But what if it rains, in S. Cal.? Will my KJ"B" get wet?

Funny, I can't even find California in the "maps" section of my Bible, does this mean that it doesn't really exist?