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!

Word counts! 1611 vs 1769 KJV

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by David J, Feb 10, 2005.

Top Posters
  1. David J

    David J New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    The book of Matthew:

    Chapter 1: 1769 deletes one word.

    1611- 524 words
    1769- 523 words

    Chapter 2: 1769 adds one word.

    1611- 664 words
    1769- 665 words

    Chapter 3: 100%

    1611- 421 words
    1769- 421 words

    Chapter 4: 1769 deletes two words.

    1611- 609 words
    1769- 607 words

    Chapter 5: 1769 adds one word.

    1611- 1176 words
    1769- 1177 words

    Chapter 6: 100%

    1611- 862 words
    1769- 862 words

    Chapter 7: 1769 adds three words.

    1611- 681 words
    1769- 684 words

    Chapter 8: 100%

    1611- 841 words
    1769 -841 words

    Chapter 9: 1769 deletes two words.

    1611- 915 words
    1769- 913 words

    Chapter 10: 100%

    1611- 1003 words
    1769- 1003 words

    This comparison was done using e-Sword by simply copying the 1611 chapter to Word and doing a word count and comparing it to the 1769 KJV using the same methods.

    Example:

    1611-

    Mat 1:1 The booke of the generation of Iesus Christ, the sonne of Dauid, the sonne of Abraham.
    Mat 1:2 Abraham begate Isaac, and Isaac begate Iacob, and Iacob begate Iudas and his brethren.

    1769-

    Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
    Mat 1:2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;


    I posted this just to prove a point to our KJVO friends. I’m curious to see how many excuses are given to pardon the 1769 KJV for changing the AV1611.

    Things that are different are not the same. How many additions and deletions must be made before a translation is considered suspect using KJVO test methods?

    Does the KJVO interpretation of Psalm 12:6-7 apply to the 1611 vs. 1769 controversy?

    Does this verse apply?

    Mat 5:18 For verily I say vnto you, Till heauen and earth passe, one iote or one title, shall in no wise passe from the law, till all be fulfilled. -1611KJV

    Now keep in mind that I am using KJVO definitions and methods used to make MV’s suspect of KJVO conspiracy theories and guess work. Please note that I am simply applying KJVOism to the AV1611 vs. 1769KJV.

    Some may find this a bitter pill to swallow in that it exposes a double standard that exist in KJVOism.
     
    #1 David J, Feb 10, 2005
  2. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    What we need is an 'e' counters.
    I'm suree there are lots of missing 'e's
    going from KJV1611 to KJV1679. Where have
    all those silent 'e's gone.

    Sing to the to tune of "where have
    all the flowers gone?"

    Where have all the silent 'e's gone?
    Long time passing.
     
    #2 Ed Edwards, Feb 10, 2005
  3. Ben W

    Ben W Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,883
    Likes Received:
    6
    Last time I mentioned this to my KJVO neighbour, he said it was because "The Holy Sprit needed to sift the word" because of the translation errors. He still wont answer my question about why it needed to be sifted several times!
     
    #3 Ben W, Feb 11, 2005
  4. Slambo

    Slambo New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    197
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh wow!!!!!

    Just like the multitude of omissions found in todays Bibles???

    Way to go! [​IMG]
     
    #4 Slambo, Feb 11, 2005
  5. robycop3

    robycop3 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    14,362
    Likes Received:
    668
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Slambo: Oh wow!!!!!

    Just like the multitude of omissions found in todays Bibles??

    Or the multitudes of ADDITIONS found in some of yesterday's Bibles?

    There's an equal case for BOTH.
     
    #5 robycop3, Feb 11, 2005
  6. PASTOR MHG

    PASTOR MHG New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    297
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello Friends!

    New to posting on the board. I have been a reader of the forums for a long time and have recently decided to get involved. I must say I have been truly blessed by the spirited debate and will be looking forward to participating myself.

    I must say that with regard to the issue at hand, it seems as though you are beating a dead horse. I have watched your posts in other topics about this issue and I think you are not getting your desired response because men with such beliefs as "paidagogos" have answered your question, however you will never accept such an answer because of your premise.

    The gentleman clearly made the case that the differences in the A.V. are of no consequence to the text whatsoever. For even those who would fall into your side of the issue have conceded this long ago. (see the "Committee on versions to the Board of Managers," American Bible Society, 1852)

    The real issue in this debate is the text source...more to come...

    Thanks for reading,
    MHG
     
    #6 PASTOR MHG, Feb 11, 2005
  7. David J

    David J New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    I must say that with regard to the issue at hand, it seems as though you are beating a dead horse. I have watched your posts in other topics about this issue and I think you are not getting your desired response because men with such beliefs as "paidagogos" have answered your question, however you will never accept such an answer because of your premise.

    I have yet to get a real answer that does not involve a double standard.

    Why is it ok for Blaney to add/subtract and/or change the AV1611 but it’s not ok to update the KJV today?

    Things that are different are not the same and two different things can not be perfect according to KJVO law.

    The real issue in this debate is the text source...more to come...

    If that is truly the case then they should support correcting the KJV by changing Easter to Passover and applying the Granville Shape rule to 2 Peter 1:1.

    KJVOism is not about the text source. That is a smoke screen. If this was the case then the NKJV would be embraced with open arms by KJVOist who apply a mystic feel to the TR.


    Thanks for your reply.
     
    #7 David J, Feb 12, 2005
  8. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    #8 Ed Edwards, Feb 12, 2005
  9. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi pastor, nice to meet you. It might be helpful for those other posters if you wouldn't mind telling us exactly where you stand in the KJV debate. Do you believe the KJV to be without any error whatsoever? Do you believe other translations are as good? Just where do you stack up on the KJV chart.

    You will find a good thread (somewhere, I'll see if I can find it and point you to it) where you can pick a number defining your level of belief all the way from the KJV is divinely transcribed and is better than its Greek or Hebrew sources, to its a good translation, but not my favorite.

    You don't have to do this, but its just a thought.
     
    #9 Phillip, Feb 12, 2005
  10. Phillip

    Phillip <b>Moderator</b>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    I must be going blind. Let me put on my reading glasses. Ed already posted the link. Sorry Ed.
     
    #10 Phillip, Feb 12, 2005
  11. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    #11 Ed Edwards, Feb 12, 2005
  12. David J

    David J New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    Messages:
    796
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yet another set of questions that will go unanswered by the KJVO Camp.
     
    #12 David J, Feb 13, 2005
  13. Keith M

    Keith M New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    For those who are truly interested, there is now a 1611 KJV available at StudyLight. And since those of the KJVO camp are not able to answer questions about the differences you can do a parallel comparison between the 1611 KJV and a MV KJV to see for yourself how they differ.
     
    #13 Keith M, Feb 19, 2005
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...