KJV1611 and Apocrypha

KJV 1611.
personally, I ask why you favor the 1611.
The early English, has MANY spelling mistakes.
Secondly, it should not be treated like a idol.
Alot of sloppy copy mistakes.Not saying that it isnt inspired,but isnt it apparent,if it was perfect,there wouldnt be mistakes? The 1769,corrects the spelling,and can touch peoples hearts,ALONG with other bibles! Again ONLY,the orginal Greek, and Hebrew, is the true " Gods Words" I also use the K.J.V.as well as others.I take a scripture from a translation,and if it is off,either K.J.V. or N.I.V. or N.L.T and chose which one better represents the text.
Sorry to tell you!the K.J.V. has flaws.
Some bad translation,here and there.

 

KJV 1611.
personally, I ask why you favor the 1611.
The early English, has MANY spelling mistakes.
Secondly, it should not be treated like a idol.
Alot of sloppy copy mistakes.Not saying that it isnt inspired,but isnt it apparent,if it was perfect,there wouldnt be mistakes? The 1769,corrects the spelling,and can touch peoples hearts,ALONG with other bibles! Again ONLY,the orginal Greek, and Hebrew, is the true " Gods Words" I also use the K.J.V.as well as others.I take a scripture from a translation,and if it is off,either K.J.V. or N.I.V. or N.L.T and chose which one better represents the text.
Sorry to tell you!the K.J.V. has flaws.
Some bad translation,here and there.

 

about double posting: it seems like alot of people are having that problem, it seems like alot of people are having that problem, it seems like alot of

 

about double posting: it seems like alot of people are having that problem, it seems like alot of people are having that problem, it seems like alot of

 

about double posting: it seems like alot of people are having that problem, it seems like alot of people are having that problem, it seems like alot of

 

I haven't said the KJV was invalid (I use it) because of the apocrapha. However, I get tired of having KJVO's attack MV's for doing the same things the KJV translators did - including printing the apocrapha with the rest of it.

 

I am not sure if this is addressed to me, but I would love to take a stab at answering it. I am a Purist with respect to this language of ours, and the REAL Authorised Version is a priceless work of art, in addition to being one of the English translations of God's Holy Word. The "early English" is a misconception, as the REAL Authorised Version is written in early modern English. As for you contention that the REAL Authorised Version has "MANY mistakes," I would be curious as to how you have arrived at this conclusion. Bear in mind that the REAL Authorised Version is written in early modern English, which is different from the modern English of 1769. I live near Jamestowne and Williamsburg, and the spelling in the REAL Authorised Version is consistent with that of the writing during this time period. It is also consistent with my copy of the 1599 Geneva Bible.

I have a facsimile copy of the Wiclif translation which is in Middle English: check this Version of God's Holy Word for the spelling and you will find a vast difference.

Cannot speak for everyone else, but I made it quite clear that I am anti-KJVO. I utilize several different translations of God's Holy Word. The phrase "idol worship" is best directed at those who hold up their particular copy of God's Holy Word as the ONLY source of God's Word, to the point of excluding all other Versions of God's Holy Word.

Again, I have made it quite clear that I am not a KJV-Onlyist. Ask anyone who has been on this list for any period of time.

Disagree with you here. If this is true, then we should all be studying ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek, neither of which are in use today. That would even disqualify the MT's, as the translators added vowels to the original Hebrew.

In order to do this, you must:
1. be well versed in ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek.
2. have copies of the original texts readily available.

If you can do this, then you a far-more-advanced authority than I am. I am impressed to see that you use multiple Versions, though. It is good to see someone who utilizes all the resources available to them.

I never proclaimed it to be perfect, just "more perfect" than the 1769 Revision. I simply have a personal preference for the REAL Authorised Version. I have several Versions of God's Holy Word, and love each and every one of them, as I believe that they contain the Words of my Lord and Savior.

I hope that this post finds you well.

 

I didn't say you did.

But don't you see the hypocrisy of turning around and doing the same thing? You are tired of KJVOs attacking other English versions containing the Apocrypha so you, in turn stoop to their level? I am sorry, but I fail to see the difference between you and them.