Featured Does a Multitude of Modern English Bible Versions Promote a Violation of 1 Cor 1:10

Anyone who knows how to go on the Internet and look up information on the KJV. Ever heard of "Google"?

 

Does a multitude of varying editions of the KJV promote a violation of 1 Corinthians 1:10?

In my first-hand examination of over 500 editions of the KJV, I could probably identify over 100 editions and perhaps over 200 that have some differences or variations with other KJV editions. These editions would not be every word the same with each other.

KJV editions in the 1600's are not every word the same as typical KJV editions in the 1700's.

There were varying editions of the KJV in the 1600's with a good number of differences between the 1611 edition, the 1629 Cambridge edition, the 1638 Cambridge edition, the 1660 London edition, the 1675 Oxford edition, the 1679 Oxford edition. The 1660 London edition introduced some of the editing/revising changes that would later be reintroduced in the 1743 Cambridge.

There were also varying editions of the KJV in the 1700's. The 1743 Cambridge edition introduced many changes and revisions to the KJV, and its text was followed by some other printers. The 1769 Oxford edition introduced a different set of changes and revisions to the KJV. Surprising, Oxford University Press continued to print a KJV edition that was similar to that in the 1743/1762 Cambridge for several years after 1769. Oxford did not start following its own 1769 Oxford edition until around 1784.

There were also varying editions of the KJV in the 1800's. At some point likely in the early 1800‘s, Cambridge departed from that Oxford standard [especially in its 1816 and 1817 editions] before later returning to a revised edition of it. David Norton indicated that the text in this 1817 Cambridge edition “goes back at least as far as 1805” (Textual History, pp. 125-126). Norton noted: “It is an eclectic combination of old and new work that is most interesting for the number of 1611 readings it restores” (p. 126). Norton also pointed out that “in places some of Blayney’s readings appear” (p. 126). In another book, Norton wrote: “On occasions a great deal of work was done on the text with no fanfare at all. By 1805, for instance, Cambridge had revised its text, restoring a number of 1611 readings, but it is not clear what principles lay behind this work, nor who did it” (KJB: A Short History, pp. 173-174). A KJV that Cambridge published for the British and Foreign Bible Society and identified as being printed in 1812 has this same text. The text of a KJV edition printed in Albany, New York, in 1816 and of a KJV edition printed in New York by Collins and Company in 1816 provide additional evidence that this text goes back before 1817. Someone took some time and effort in the editing and making of the text that served as the basis for this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. Evidently, three or more earlier KJV editions were compared and consulted in its making. For the period that Cambridge printed this stereotype edition [likely from 1805 until 1818 or 1819], it served as a Cambridge standard. This KJV text served as a Cambridge standard for a longer period [14 years] than the earlier 1629 Cambridge edition had been [9 years]. This is a Cambridge standard edition and revision overlooked or ignored by KJV-only authors. Facts from a KJV edition in John Brown’s Self-Interpreting Bible printed in London in 1821 show that it followed much of the same KJV text as that in this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. Facts from some American editions of the KJV (such as Phinney’s Stereotype Edition, Holbrook’s Stereotype edition, and Harding’s Fine Edition) indicate that they have been influenced by the same KJV text that was the basis for this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. A KJV edition printed in 1827 in New York by Daniel Smith and stereotyped by J. Howe and a KJV edition printed in 1835 in Philadelphia by Alexander Toward also may have been influenced by it. These KJV editions in the early 1800’s would suggest that the 1769 Oxford edition was not firmly established as the standard or was not yet known or recognized as the standard by all printers of the KJV. In 1873, Scrivener would also introduce his Cambridge edition of the KJV that has many differences with typical other KJV editions.

 

Personally, my best KJV text is in an electronic MySword Android app module.

'Name: Authorised (King James) Version, Pure Cambridge Edition

Title: Authorised (King James) Version, Pure Cambridge Edition

Abbreviation: AKJV/PCE

Language: eng

Version: 2.11

Version date: October 16, 2018

Publish date: circa 1900

Creator: John S Martin with the guidance of Jon Graef for Costas Stergiou ([email protected]) - used work from Wm

Source: theWord KJV module, and www.bibleprotector.com and the Cambridge Cameo Edition Bible

Editorial Comments:

version 2.2 [Jon] Fixed Strong's numbers in Jer 25:20, 24; 50:37; Eze 30:5, from H6153 to H6154

version 2.2 [Jon] Removed spaces at start of some lines containing Strong's numbers that have no translation word. See below note for details.

version 2.2 [Jon] An x has been added to untranslated Strong's numbers. \cf10 will color the Strong's, Teal, so it looks different and a space can be added at the end to give a stand-off to the word following.

version 2.3 [Jon] Many hyphenation and footnote adjustments.

version 2.4 [Jon] More adjustments in formatting. Additional places where x has been added to untranslated Strong's.

version 2.5 [Jon] Many small corrections to footnotes

version 2.6 [Jon] Adjusted word attachment of some notes

version 2.7 [Jon] Couple of punctuation fixes

version 2.8 [Jon] Footnote fixes

version 2.9 [Jon] [Misplaced Strong Numbers in Acts 21:23-KJV module - theWord] Strong's numbers were attached to wrong word. Acts 21:23 "which have a vow" was tagged as "which have a vow"

version 2.10 [Jon] Duplicate Strong's (42 places of 46) that have no purpose in the module have been disabled by placing an X at the head of the tag, so they will be disregarded by theWord.

version 2.11 [Jon] Strong's number G4754 removed from the word "thou", at 1Tim 1:18

Filename:

/storage/emulated/0/mysword/bibles/akjvpce.bbl.mybible
Comments:

This module is a modification of theWord's KJV module, made with Costas Stergiou's permission. It's title is Authorised (King James) Version, Pure Cambridge Edition first published by Cambridge University circa 1900-1970s. It is the result of the textual purification process that has occurred since 1611 when the Holy Bible was completed and printed. Millions of copies conforming to this edition were issued by Bible and missionary societies in the twentieth century. This text stands in contrast to all other editions (especially those created since the mid to late 1800s).

7th major translation into English. According to Bible Protector, www.bibleprotector.com, the AV-1611 is the 7th major translation of the Bible into English.
1. Tyndale - 1525-1535
2. Matthew's - 1537
3. Coverdale - 1535
4. Great - 1539
5. Geneva - 1560
6. Bishops - 1538
7. 1611 KJV - 1611

7th major edition of the AV/KJV Bible. According to Bible Protector, the AV produced by Cambridge, circa 1900, is the 7th major edition of the 1611 with each edition purifying the previous through correcting printing errors, standardization of spelling, italics, but no changes in wording. These editions are:
1. 1st 1611 edition
2. 2nd 1611 edition
3. 1613 edition
4. 1629 edition
5. 1638 edition
6. 1769 edition
7. circa 1900 - Pure Cambridge Edition

Pure Cambridge Edition checklist:
1. "or Sheba" not "and Sheba" in Joshua 19:2
2. "sin" not "sins" in 2 Chronicles 33:19
3. "Spirit of God" not "spirit of God" in Job 33:4
4. "whom ye" not "whom he" in Jeremiah 34:16
5. "Spirit of God" not "spirit of God" in Ezekiel 11:24
6. "flieth" not "fleeth" in Nahum 3:16
7. "Spirit" not "spirit" in Matthew 4:1
8. "further" not "farther" in Matthew 26:39
9. "bewrayeth" not "betrayeth" in Matthew 26:73
10. "Spirit" not "spirit" in Mark 1:12
11. "spirit" not "Spirit" in Acts 11:28
12. "spirit" not "Spirit" in 1 John 5:8

The KJV text is in the public domain, except in the United Kingdom, because the rights are vested in the Crown (English royalty).

Modification Schema: theWord's KJV module was used as the basis for modification because it already has the translators notes in it, Strong's numbers, red lettering, and paragraphing. It has been modified to match the Pure Cambridge Edition (PCE) which was printed by Cambridge University Press circa 1900-1970s. Modifications include:
1. Spelling - The spelling has been modified to match the older spelling of the PCE. Modifications include: enquire/enquired to inquire/inquired; razor to rasor; counsellor/counsellors to counseller/counsellers; ankle/ankles to ancle/ancles; LORD'S to LORD's; expenses to expences; Gaba to Geba in Ezra 2:26, Sarah to Sara in Rom 4:19; 9:9; 1Pe 3:6.
2. Paragraphing - The modern paragraphing scheme has been replaced with that of the PCE. There are no paragraph breaks after Acts 20 other than at the end of each chapter.
3. Red Lettering - The red lettering, an American innovation, has been modified to match the PCE by removing all red lettering from Acts 1:9 on. The Cambridge Cameo Edition Bible states, "With the words of our Lord while upon earth printed in red." These are the words he spoke, but not the words others spoke in quoting him, from Mat 1:1-Act 1:9. More recent red letter editions have begun making red the words Jesus spoke after his resurrection as well as his words quoted by others.
4. Psalm Headers - These have been reduced to a smaller font size than the verse text to match the PCE.
5. Psalm 119 Section Headings - These are the names of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. They have been enlarged to a larger font size than the verse text to match the PCE.
6. End notes to Paul's Epistles - These have been removed from the translator notes since they are not part of the translator notes and placed at the end of each epistle as they are in the 1611 and PCE and in a smaller font size than the verse text to match the PCE.
7. End notes to the Testaments - These have been added to the last verse of each testament since they are a part of the PCE in the same size as the verse text to match the PCE and made bold to make them distinguishable from the verse text.
8. Hyphenation of Compound Proper Names - The hyphens in compound proper names have been removed, with certain exceptions, in the digital format found in bible programs. They have been reinstated to match the PCE in accordance with the KJB-PCE-RTF.rtf file available from www.bibleprotector.com and clicking on the link: King James Bible: Pure Cambridge Edition: Rich Text Format: Compressed Zip (1.37 MB).
9. Miscellaneous Corrections - Italic word corrections; change "the Hivites" to "and the Hivites," Exo 23:23; punctuation change in Jer 32:5 (. to ?); capitalization of both letters (AE) from the converted ash character; correction of capitalization of spirit in Act 11:12.
10. Translator Notes - The translator notes have been modified to match those found in the Cambridge Cameo Edition Bible.'

 

This list omits some major editions of the KJV such as the 1616 London edition, the 1660 London edition, the 1743 Cambridge edition, the 1762 Cambridge edition, the 1829 or 1835 Oxford edition that changed over 90 uses of "LORD" to "Lord," the 1873 Cambridge edition by Scrivener. The 1920's Cambridge edition is not the seventh major edition of the KJV.

Most post-1900 or present Cambridge KJV editions follow the 1873 Cambridge correction at 1 Samuel 2:13 [“priests’ custom”] since the Hebrew noun translated priests here was plural in number, and they may also be following the 1873 edition in departing from around twenty spellings of proper names in the 1769 Oxford to return to 1611 spellings reintroduced in the 1873. Those spellings of proper names likely include the following: “Sabtecha” (Gen. 10:7), “Abida” (Gen. 25:4), “Zerah” (Gen. 46:12), “Jahazah” (Josh. 13:18), “Hapharaim” (Josh. 19:19), “Malchi-shua” (1 Sam. 31:2), “Shammua” (2 Sam. 5:14), “Shimea” (2 Sam. 21:21), “Naharai” (2 Sam. 23:37), “Ezer” (1 Chron. 1:38), “Geshan” (1 Chron. 2:47), “Achsah” (1 Chron. 2:49), “Shimron” (1 Chron. 7:2), “Jehoshua” (1 Chron. 7:27), “Michah” (1 Chron. 23:20), “Jeshua” (1 Chron. 24:11), “Ephraim” (2 Chron. 13:19), “Ezion-geber” (2 Chron. 20:36), “Carchemish” (2 Chron. 35:20), “Mispar” (Ezra 2:2), “Asnappar” (Ezra 4:10), and “Nicolaitans” (Rev. 2:6, 15). It is likely from the 1873 Cambridge or from Scrivener’s book with information from a collation of several KJV editions that post-1900 Cambridge editions adopted most of the following renderings: “all his sin” (2 Chronicles 33:19), “whom ye” (Jeremiah 34:16), “flieth away” (Nahum 3:16), “Beer-sheba, or Sheba” (Joshua 19:2), “vapour” (Psalm 148:8), “wits’ end” (Psalm 107:27), “travail” (Numbers 20:14), “travail” (Lamentations 3:5), “Spirit” (Matthew 4:1), “Spirit” (Mark 1:12), “further” (Matthew 26:39), “further” (Mark 1:19), “further” (Ecclesiastes 8:17), “wondrously” (Jud. 13:19), “floats” (2 Chron. 2:16), “clifts” (Job 30:6), and “chrysolite” (Rev. 21:20). Instead of only three renderings, there could be over thirty renderings/spellings that may be regarded to be characteristic of post-1900 Cambridge editions. It was the 1873 Cambridge edition that introduced or re-introduced these post-1900 Cambridge spellings/renderings.

There were changes in wording in the editions listed so the claim of Bible Protector is not true. Over 170 whole words were added to later KJV editions, that were not found in the 1611 edition.

 

No doubt google would refer us to this thread. Look at all the personal, valuable research 1560 Logos has done. You can't just "google" that.

Also, in case you do not know, google now restricts information. Those of us who used it in the old days notice the difference when we use it now. Google now limits information.

 

What are you? His mom? [snip]

And.......YES.....you CAN find ALL that info he posts ONLINE. I'm done. You go continue your "Logos infatuation". That's a little weird, too.

 

Bible Protector does not define nor explain what constitutes a "major edition" of the KJV. What makes him the determiner of what constitutes major editions?

What could soundly be regarded as another major edition of the KJV is what is sometimes called the 1817 Cambridge edition although it may have been first printed several years earlier. Several publishers in America seem to have followed that edition in their editions so it was widely used.

At some point likely in the early 1800‘s, Cambridge departed from that Oxford standard [especially in its 1816 and 1817 editions] before later returning to a revised edition of it. David Norton indicated that the text in this 1817 Cambridge edition “goes back at least as far as 1805” (Textual History, pp. 125-126). Norton noted: “It is an eclectic combination of old and new work that is most interesting for the number of 1611 readings it restores” (p. 126). Norton also pointed out that “in places some of Blayney’s readings appear” (p. 126). In another book, Norton wrote: “On occasions a great deal of work was done on the text with no fanfare at all. By 1805, for instance, Cambridge had revised its text, restoring a number of 1611 readings, but it is not clear what principles lay behind this work, nor who did it” (KJB: A Short History, pp. 173-174). A KJV that Cambridge published for the British and Foreign Bible Society and identified as being printed in 1812 has this same text.

The text of a KJV edition printed in Albany, New York, in 1816 and of a KJV edition printed in New York by Collins and Company in 1816 provide additional evidence that this text goes back before 1817. Someone took some time and effort in the editing and making of the text that served as the basis for this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. Evidently, three or more earlier KJV editions were compared and consulted in its making. For the period that Cambridge printed this stereotype edition [likely from 1805 until 1818 or 1819], it served as a Cambridge standard. This KJV text may have served as a Cambridge standard for a longer period [14 years] than the earlier 1629 Cambridge edition had been [9 years]. This is a Cambridge standard edition and revision overlooked or ignored by KJV-only authors. Facts from a KJV edition in John Brown’s Self-Interpreting Bible printed in London in 1821 show that it followed much of the same KJV text as that in this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. Facts from some American editions of the KJV (such as Phinney’s Stereotype Edition, Holbrook’s Stereotype edition, and Harding’s Fine Edition) indicate that they have been influenced by the same KJV text that was the basis for this 1805/1817 Cambridge edition. A KJV edition printed in 1827 in New York by Daniel Smith and stereotyped by J. Howe and a KJV edition printed in 1835 in Philadelphia by Alexander Toward also may have been influenced by it.

These KJV editions in the early 1800’s would also suggest that the 1769 Oxford edition was not firmly established as the standard or was not yet known or recognized as the standard by all printers of the KJV.

 

I agree.

And so now we have the more purified NASB95 in updated English and God our Teacher living inside us. The important thing is if we have the words God NOW chooses to make Himself and His ways known to us.

 

@Baptist4life,
The KJV editions are various. And even maybe different between current American editions.

 

I have and I am and it's not because I read God's Word in the NASB95. Hopefully, you don't attribute what you hope to be your salvation on the premise you use the KJV.

 

The guy has been posting DAILY, all day, every day, for years on every Christian forum around about this topic. He must spend his every waking minute on the internet posting 2000 word copy and paste posts. He brags about reading HUNDREDS of books on the topic. It's a 24/7 addiction with him. He's obsessed to the point where it's become, well, creepy. I truly feel that if the KJVO issue went away, he'd have no life at all. That's why I consider him a nut.

 

Regardless of another poster's incorrect accusation, I did write the information that I copy and post. It is not someone's material besides where I directly and accurately quote the writings of others. Sometimes I directly write my responses since I attempt to interact with what other posters post. My information concerning editions of the KJV is from my own firsthand research and comparison of those editions.

That poster seems to complain that I post the truth since they have not demonstrated that any of my statements are false.

 

No, I posted that you have a very strange obsession with this topic, that it absorbs your entire waking hours, 24/7, and you continue to prove my point with your constant posts. I find you a very strange bird indeed. I'll leave off my comments now, and just ask others to watch you, and see if I'm being untruthful.

 

Do you possibly have a strange obsession or weird infatuation with trying to attack me personally?

You make a false accusation since this very important subject does not absorb my entire waking hours 24/7. Your statement is simply not true. It seems that you do not consider the Scriptures to be a very important subject to study and discuss.

 

Disagreeing with human, non-scriptural, non-true, exclusive only claims for the KJV does not downplay the word of God.