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!

Why are Proponents of Modern Versions so Anti KJV?

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by Ulsterman, Nov 26, 2003.

  1. Kelly Todd

    Kelly Todd <img src=/6234.gif>

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2003
    Messages:
    145
    Likes Received:
    0
    The problem is not with the KJV. It is with the "theology" the KJVO use to support their view.

    Example: Authorized? By who? The Committee James the 1st Authorized.
    It's about poking holes in the view, not the version.

    We could easly find problems with all the translations. Hey it was men who translated them. Translations are not inspired. But we can preserve God's word by studying it. We should not be poking holes in translations, but we should study the Word, and be thankful we have so many tools to understand what the Bible says.
     
  2. RaptureReady

    RaptureReady New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2002
    Messages:
    1,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Correct! However the KJV is most accurate translation. </font>[/QUOTE]Askjo, do you just prefer the King James Bible over the modern versions or do you believe that the King James Bible is infallible, inerrant, THE pure word of God?
     
  3. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I am strongly ANTI KJVonly. I view them as a schismatic sect that is truly hurting fundamentalism.

    I love the KJV (1769 revision I use).

    The premise of this thread is seriously flawed as it is based on a falsehood.
     
  4. Keith M

    Keith M New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi, eschatologist!

    I would have to say that I agree with the spirit of your post, but there are several non-Greek English Bible versions prior to the KJV. Take a look at History of the English Bible for information on the various versions.
     
  5. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Correct! However the KJV is most accurate translation. </font>[/QUOTE]Depends on the criteria for accuracy.
     
  6. Ransom

    Ransom Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2000
    Messages:
    4,132
    Likes Received:
    1
    Homebound asked Askjo:

    Askjo, do you just prefer the King James Bible over the modern versions or do you believe that the King James Bible is infallible, inerrant, THE pure word of God?

    Uh-oh! Someone just said the wrong thing.

    Looks like the KJV sharks of orthodoxy have smelled blood, and they're starting to circle . . .
     
  7. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Which edition?

    The Original 1611 edition in Gothic type, with marginal notes and Church of Rome Apocrypha or the 1769 with hundreds of word corrections set in Roman type without the RCC Apocrypha or marginal notes.

    HankD
     
  8. Kiffin

    Kiffin New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    2,191
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am a proponent of modern versions. I use the NKJV as my primary translation but I also read and use the Amplified, NIV, NRSV, New Jerusalem, NASB, The Message and the KJV as well as other versions and hope to get the ESV soon.

    I am not anti KJV. Most of my memory work is from the KJV. KJV ONLY's are usually the ones who are anti Modern Versions but most of us who use modern versions revere and respect the Classic KJV.
     
  9. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes.
     
  10. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    What about 1611 KJV?
     
  11. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Homebound and I know the KJV is the most accurate translation and the best translation for English-speaking people available today. We are aware of the history of Bible and manuscript evidences supporting the KJV than modern versions.
     
  12. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    You don't know. :(
     
  13. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    30,285
    Likes Received:
    507
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I use it, but only to show people with heads in the sand that it is VASTLY DIFFERENT than what is called the KJV today.

    Some actually equate the two!! What is different is not the same.
     
  14. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry <b>Moderator</b>
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    You don't know. :( [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]Yes I do. And you have shown that you do not. The KJV is an accurate translation, but it is a stretch to call it the most accurate, as we have shown on different occasions.
     
  15. Ulsterman

    Ulsterman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    1
    Kenneth L. Barker, Secretary of the NIV Committee on Bible Translation said it was and presented an overhead illustrating his opinion in a seminar I attended in Dublin some 12 years or so ago. In fact, this was a key moment in his presentation for me, because it persuaded me to hold on to my KJV and not sacrifice it in favour of NIV.

    Larry, which version do you consider to be the most accurate translation of the Received Text?
     
  16. LarryN

    LarryN New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    958
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not the Larry you were addressing this question to, but I can't pass on a loaded question.

    The most accurate translation of the Received Text (aka the "TR")?: I'd have to say the NKJV.
     
  17. LarryN

    LarryN New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    958
    Likes Received:
    0
    BTW, please define "accurate". If one equates accuracy with "formal equivalence", then we should all be using, say, Young's Literal Translation, and not the relative "dynamic equivalence" of the KJV.
     
  18. Ulsterman

    Ulsterman New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Messages:
    1,048
    Likes Received:
    1
    According to one source I read "While passing off as being true to the Textus Receptus, the NKJV IGNORES the Receptus over 1,200 times."
     
  19. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not the Larry you were addressing this question to, but I can't pass on a loaded question.

    The most accurate translation of the Received Text (aka the "TR")?: I'd have to say the NKJV.
    </font>[/QUOTE]
     
  20. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not the Larry you were addressing this question to, but I can't pass on a loaded question.

    The most accurate translation of the Received Text (aka the "TR")?: I'd have to say the NKJV.
    </font>[/QUOTE]The New KJV included 40% non-TR because this version adulterated its words.
     
Loading...