1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Is the KJV the true "word of the Pope" in English?

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by manchester, Oct 19, 2004.

Top Posters
Page 1 of 2
  1. manchester

    manchester New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    The translators of the 1881 ERV NT were frank about the KJV’s use of the Rheims NT. They said in their “Preface” to the New Testament that the text of the KJV “shows evident traces of the influence of a Version not specified in the rules, the Rhemish, made from the Latin Vulgate, but by scholars conversant with the Greek original.” (p. VI). And indeed this influence is pervasive. Dr. J. G. Carleton in his work The Part of Rheims in the Making of the English Bible (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1902. 259 pp.) has shown that the KJV has taken some 2,803 readings, besides 140 marginal readings--nearly 3,000 in all--from the Roman Catholic (Rheims) translation of 1582. After a brief but helpful survey of English Bible versions before 1611, Carleton explains his methodology, and then presents his findings in extended lists, meticulously prepared, showing precisely where and how the KJV was influenced in its vocabulary, phraseology and grammar by the Roman Catholic Rheims NT, an influence that literally affects every page of the KJV NT.

    Consider two summary statements by Carleton: “The Tables annexed give the sum total of the issue of my inquiry. They speak for themselves as to the intimate relationship, hitherto insufficiently acknowledged, which exists between the Authorized and Rhemish Versions. If one were to assess the degree of obligation due from the former to the latter, it might, I think, fairly be said, that while the Translation of 1611 in its general framework and language is essentially the daughter of the Bishops’ Bible, which in its turn had inherited the nature and lineaments of the noble line of English versions issuing from the parent stock of Tyndale’s, yet with respect to the distinctive touches which the Authorized New Testament has derived from the earlier translations, her debt to Roman Catholic Rheims is hardly inferior to her debt to puritan Geneva,” (p. 31). And again, “As a set-off against these improvements, in which A[uthorized] has followed R[heims], we observe instances, not a few, in which A[uthorized] has been led by R[heims] into translations distinctly inferior to the earlier renderings, to which the Revised Version has frequently returned,” (p. 53). Let the reader who doubts the pervasive impact of the Catholic Rheims NT on the KJV NT--who doubts because he cannot bring himself to face these facts--secure Carleton’s volume for himself, and see with his own eyes.

    The 1611 King James Version had a Table or "glossary" of Latin words it took from the Catholic Rheims. To see a scan of the complete leaf CLICK HERE:

    ===================

    Is the KJV the true "word of the Pope" in the English language?
     
    #1 manchester, Oct 19, 2004
  2. manchester

    manchester New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the KJVo 5's are right, that where the KJV differs from the originals the KJV is correct, and the KJV additions/differences were copied directly from the Roman Catholic Douay-Rheims, does that mean that the Douay-Rheims was the REAL "new inspiration" and not the KJV?
     
    #2 manchester, Oct 19, 2004
  3. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I would love a working link or site of the source. If only we had not added in Latin words like "Lucifer" there would be far less confusion.

    My pastor (who preached from the KJV1769 Scofield but used the ASV1901 as the most accurate translation in classes) in the 50's and 60's warned of an uneducated generation that would elevate a version to bibliolatry. Though they will deny it vehemently, every kjvo 4-5 level truly fit that warning.
     
    #3 Dr. Bob, Oct 19, 2004
  4. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    Is the KJV the true "word of the Pope" in the English language?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    You have just encouraged blasphemy of the word of God in the English language by your proposed question and implication.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
    #4 michelle, Oct 19, 2004
  5. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    I would love a working link or site of the source. If only we had not added in Latin words like "Lucifer" there would be far less confusion
    --------------------------------------------------


    You are very incorrect. In fact, there is more confusion claiming Satan is the morning star, to which is blasphemy, than what centuries of christians in the past up until this day, and even non-believers KNOW who Lucifer is. Lucifer IS the correct word in our language and to change this, has caused confusion. Not the other way around.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
    #5 michelle, Oct 19, 2004
  6. manchester

    manchester New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    The blasphemy is claiming that the Pope's word is God's Word. I do not claim that about the KJV.
     
    #6 manchester, Oct 19, 2004
  7. manchester

    manchester New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    I didn't post it because the site it came from is Roman Catholic.

    http://tinyurl.com/6stzy
     
    #7 manchester, Oct 19, 2004
  8. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    My pastor (who preached from the KJV1769 Scofield but used the ASV1901 as the most accurate translation in classes) in the 50's and 60's warned of an uneducated generation that would elevate a version to bibliolatry. Though they will deny it vehemently, every kjvo 4-5 level truly fit that warning.
    --------------------------------------------------

    God tells us to, and expects us to revere HIS WORDS, as He has said:


    John 14

    19. Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
    20. At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
    21. He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
    22. Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?
    23. Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.
    24. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.


    Psalms 138

    1. I Will praise thee with my whole heart: before the gods will I sing praise unto thee.
    2. I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.
    3. In the day when I cried thou answeredst me, and strengthenedst me with strength in my soul.
    4. All the kings of the earth shall praise thee, O Lord, when they hear the words of thy mouth.
    5. Yea, they shall sing in the ways of the Lord: for great is the glory of the Lord.
    6. Though the Lord be high, yet hath he respect unto the lowly: but the proud he knoweth afar off.
    7. Though I walk in the midst of trouble, thou wilt revive me: thou shalt stretch forth thine hand against the wrath of mine enemies, and thy right hand shall save me.
    8. The Lord will perfect that which concerneth me: thy mercy, O Lord, endureth for ever: forsake not the works of thine own hands.


    The words "King James Bible", is ONLY THE NAME that has been attached to the words of the Lord within it. Once you understand this, and the scriptures I have given you, which there are many more I could give, INDEED shows forth your false accusation of us.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
    #8 michelle, Oct 19, 2004
  9. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    The blasphemy is claiming that the Pope's word is God's Word. I do not claim that about the KJV.
    --------------------------------------------------


    You INDEED have with the following:


    --------------------------------------------------
    Is the KJV the true "word of the Pope" in the English language?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    and.....

    --------------------------------------------------
    If the KJVo 5's are right, that where the KJV differs from the originals the KJV is correct, and the KJV additions/differences were copied directly from the Roman Catholic Douay-Rheims, does that mean that the Douay-Rheims was the REAL "new inspiration" and not the KJV?
    --------------------------------------------------


    Love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
    #9 michelle, Oct 19, 2004
  10. manchester

    manchester New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    Then you misread me, Michelle. It is YOU who claim that the POPE'S Douay Bible, as incorporated into the KJV, is God's PURE Word.

    When the Scriptures say one thing, and the Pope says another, you choose to believe the Pope and the KJV. The KJV adds the Roman Catholic teachings onto the Word. It includes Roman Catholic verses that are not found in the Greek text, borrowed straight from the Douay Bible.
     
    #10 manchester, Oct 19, 2004
  11. manchester

    manchester New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    The words "King James Bible" are not in the Word. The King James Version is a VERSION of the Bible. The "King James Bible" does not exist. All the scriptures you have given tell people to embrace the HCSB, as it is the Word of God in English.

    BTW, the KJV was not "authorized" by King James. Any version can be called "authorized" if you want to.
     
    #11 manchester, Oct 19, 2004
  12. manchester

    manchester New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    401
    Likes Received:
    0
    The record is clear. The KJV repeatedly rejects the Word of God in favor of the Roman Catholic Bible. The MVs reject the Roman Catholic Bible in favor of the original and inerrant Word of God.
     
    #12 manchester, Oct 19, 2004
  13. gb93433

    gb93433 Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,549
    Likes Received:
    15
    Many scholars and others have known that for years. We have known that the KJV made use of the Vulgate for part of the translation becuase the available manuscripts did not have all the text. Certainly the Vulgate was around long before the KJV.
     
    #13 gb93433, Oct 19, 2004
  14. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I do NOT want this thread to go 'round this subject again, but you are saying that the LITERAL HEBREW WORDS which mean LITERAL "MORNING STAR" is somehow "confusing"? God blew that one.

    And the catholic vulgate "Lucifer" clears up God's boo-boo?

    If God's Word (inspired Hebrew/Greek) gives us a word and our English language has an EXACT WORD for it, is it not academic/spiritual dishonesty to sub in our own word(s)??

    God forbid.
     
    #14 Dr. Bob, Oct 19, 2004
  15. bryan1276

    bryan1276 New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2003
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen Michelle. You're right.
     
    #15 bryan1276, Oct 19, 2004
  16. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    The words "King James Bible" are not in the Word.
    --------------------------------------------------


    I have never said they were, nor anyone else, but this is something you have tried to bind us to. In fact, I have continually said that the name "King James Bible", is ONLY the name that has been attached to the scriptures.


    --------------------------------------------------
    The King James Version is a VERSION of the Bible.
    --------------------------------------------------


    The KJB is the translation of the words of the Lord - the scriptures, into our English language.


    --------------------------------------------------
    The "King James Bible" does not exist.
    --------------------------------------------------


    The scriptures do not exist?


    --------------------------------------------------
    All the scriptures you have given tell people to embrace the HCSB, as it is the Word of God in English.

    --------------------------------------------------


    This only shows the contradiction of your stated beleifs.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
    #16 michelle, Oct 19, 2004
  17. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    BTW, the KJV was not "authorized" by King James. Any version can be called "authorized" if you want to.
    --------------------------------------------------


    I never said anything about this word. It is irrelevant to this issue.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
    #17 michelle, Oct 19, 2004
  18. natters

    natters New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    michelle said "In fact, I have continually said that the name "King James Bible", is ONLY the name that has been attached to the scriptures."

    Really? Even in 1600?

    michelle said "The KJB is the translation of the words of the Lord - the scriptures, into our English language."

    I agree. [​IMG] So is the Geneva, and others.
     
    #18 natters, Oct 19, 2004
  19. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    Then you misread me, Michelle. It is YOU who claim that the POPE'S Douay Bible, as incorporated into the KJV, is God's PURE Word.

    --------------------------------------------------


    I have never claimed any such thing. I claim and know that the scriptures in the KJB are the words of the Lord 100% accurately in our language. In other words, the KJB is the infallible, inerrant words of God in our language. This is what I believe and claim.


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
    #19 michelle, Oct 19, 2004
  20. michelle

    michelle New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    0
    --------------------------------------------------
    I do NOT want this thread to go 'round this subject again, but you are saying that the LITERAL HEBREW WORDS which mean LITERAL "MORNING STAR" is somehow "confusing"? God blew that one.
    --------------------------------------------------

    This is false and you should know this. The Hebrew words do not mean "morning star" literally. I guess generations of chrisitan English Scholars up until this day, didn't know and all the modern scholars of today do huh?


    love in Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour,
    michelle
     
    #20 michelle, Oct 19, 2004
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 1 of 2
Loading...