From 1916 Regarding The KJV

What was the name of his book that had those quotations? Do you have the page numbers for the quotations?

 

Yet people on this forum say that the KJV is never degraded.What, then, is the above? For what purpose was it posted? :BangHead:

 

What I'd like to know is your reason for posting it. If it's something someone wrote "way back almost 96 years ago", why did you feel the need to post it here?

 

You're the one who brought up the 96 years thing, not me. I'm beginning to think I must have superior intelligence because I've been using the KJV my whole life and understand it quite well. Seems everyone else thinks it's impossible to understand! :tongue3:

 

funny stuff there

 

Indeed he did:

John Gill, Exercitations on the epistle to the Hebrews, concerning the priesthood of Christ [1674]:

"Ours Quick; improperly; for that Word doth more ordinarily signify speedy than living; and I doubt not but many are deceived in this Place through the Ambiguity of that Word."


Of course in his own writings Owen uses the word quick in the exact same way as the KJB does.

Owen doesn't interrupt his own prose, however, to give a schoolmarm lecture to himself on how oh so "improper", tsk tsk, his own use of the word is.

 

Many are the critics of God's word. Wescott and Hort had the same objection and undertook not only to upgrade or modernize the wording, but they also took it upon themselves to go through the whole of the NT slashing and burning at will, adding words, taking phrases out, changing meanings, etc. The work they did became the 'acceptable' practice of modern textual critics of fashioning the word of God as they see fit, ancient records and other perspectives notwithstanding. They should have studied the last page of the Book before they began at the first page dismantling it at will, bringing on themselves the sure and certain curse of God.

 

My goodness. I wasn't bragging, it was a joke. I always seem to forget that you are never wrong. Sorry.

 

Why does everybody want to "dumb down" the Bible? Sure, there are archaic words, but if a person is serious about learning the scriptures they will study. There are many resources available today at the touch of a mouse.

I will relate it to a musical instrument. I have been playing guitar for nearly 40 years, and while I am not the greatest, I can play on a professional level and have many times. Over the years I have run into many "wannabees". I have had many folks ask me for lessons. Folks want it to be easy, they want to learn quick. There are companies that promise to teach you guitar or piano in one week. IT CAN'T BE DONE. If you want to play an instrument well, you must put in many thousands of hours of study and practice.

The scriptures are no different, we need to study. This takes hard work and persistence. If the scriptures were so simple a small child could read them, you would read the book through once and put it down. No one appreciates what is simple and easy.

If you really could learn to play an instrument in one week, it would not hold your interest, it would be no more thrilling or challenging than making a paper airplane. Nobody is going to pay to see that. People pay to see professional musicians because they know it is difficult and requires a lifetime of study.

I don't know about you, but I love to listen to preachers who really know the Word of God. My pastor is very knowledgeable and teaches Bible college. I am always learning from him and it is always exciting.

Nothing worthwhile comes easy. "Wannabees" want things easy, they practice guitar two weeks, then put it in the closet when they discover how difficult it is. That's OK, I have picked up some great bargains from these guys when they finally sell that guitar.

 

Was the KJV a dumb-down of the Wycliffe New Testament?

 

Wescott and Hort concerned themselves primarily with the collation of ancient Greek manuscripts, not the editing of an English translation.

 

When did you start studying the languages of the Scriptures?