Wrong Renderings In The A.V.

Oh? How about the use of "prevent" in 1 Thess 4:!5 in the KJVs? To modern readers the word means something different than what it meant in the early 17th century. Many modern readers don't know that "prevent" once meant "precede" because that meaning sure isn't used today. The word "prevent" was apparently used first in the Bishops' Bible and continued to appear in the Geneva Bible, the Douay-Rheims Bible, the King James Version and Wesley's New Testament. The more modern word "precede" may have first appeared in the Webster Bible (1833). For modern translations to use "prevent" would certainly be a "lack of comprehensible use of words." That's why we have modern translations - to keep God's word as fresh and meaningful for modern readers as it was for readers centuries ago.

BTW, Salamander, It's KJV, not KJB as you errantly put it. Check the title page of any KJV. I have never seen a single title page that uses the word "Bible" instead of "Version." All the title pages I have ever seen say "King James Version." If you wish to continue to use the errant term "KJB" the decision is yours, but as long as you continue to use "KJB" when referring to the KJV you'll always be wrong.

 

It isn't a high-minded boast to be able to understand the modern English of modern translations more easily than the archaic English of the KJVs. The high-mindedness comes when certain people think everyone should be trained in archaic English usage to get the word of God as He intended it. God meant for His word to be understandable to everyone, not just a few. The modern translations continue to insure the word of God is kept alive and just as understandable for modern readers as it was for readers of the first century New Testament writings. Your argument that the KJVs are easier to understand just isn't valid, Salamander.

 

Yes, what a dolt leading scholar David Norton [Textual History of the King James Bible] is for using KJB!

 

I'm so sorry this is so hard for some one of your intellect.

Study is still work today, just as it always will be work.

Timothy wasn't instructed to work in the brickmaking process under pharoah, he was instructed by Paul to study the Scriptures as to be more equiped to relate the mind of God in all matters as a pastor should do.

Or would you still disagree?:laugh:

Studying to be quiet requires diligence in keeping ones tongue from wrapping around one's throat to strangle himself. I see you're still working on it.:laugh:

 

Rippon needs to quit opening himself up to be duped into starting these sort of topics by some one who hates the KJB and learn to do his own studies.

 

Now A.F. you shouldn't be so hard on roby!:laugh:

 

re-read A.F.'s remark to roby, the same would apply.

To "prevent" means to go before and keep one from succeeding in an effort. The word is PERFECT in context.

Paul was expressing that those who are alive and remain would not get a better resurrection as described in Hebrews.

Actually, "prevent" still means precede, it hasn't changed, but men have tried to change the word of God.

Yep, the serpent told Eve the same sort of thing about the fruit too.

One Proto-type, many versions.:wavey: :godisgood: :wavey:

 

Then apparently Mr. Norton ignores title pages too. That's his problem. It still doesn't make KJB right.

 

Not quite, Sal. Youi need to brush up on your "facts" a little better or you''ll continue to display your ignorance. A growing and evolving language has changed the meaning of "prevent" and several other English words over the course of nearly 500 years. No one has tried to change the word of God - just to interpret it in the same light it was meant when originally written. That's what legitimate modern translations do - they keep the original meaning while changing words when necessary to keep up with changing language usage.

Actually, Sal, you're wrong again. The "did God really say" position is the KJVO position that casts doubt on God's ability to accurately preserve His word (His message to us) in as many translations as He deems fit. See, God isn't limited to a presecribed set of words. If He were, then the message would be changed as I demonstrated before with the word "prevent." God doesn't want His message changed because that's what causes the watered-down beliefs of some non-fundamental groups. The KJVO group is just one such non-funmdamental group. There are others - the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Mormons and the Seventh Day Adventists easily come to mind. They also teach non-scriptural ideas, just as the KJVOs do.

 

How silly. Do ya ever hear anyone say, "I'm STUDYING at plowing my garden"?

 

I like this wording:

1 Thessalonians 4:11 (Geneva Bible, 1599 Edition):

And that ye studie to be quiet, and to meddle with your owne busines, and to worke with your owne handes, as we commanded you

:laugh: "meddle with your own business";
don't meddle with mine!

 

"Many farmers study to break the roots of their corn. We have heard them boast of ripping them up with a big plow" ---Henry Ward Beecher

 

KJVOs choose to ignore the fact that word meanings change in a growing and evolving language. They think every word should mean the same today as it meant 500 years ago in pre-KJV days. They think evryone today should learn all archaic meanings of every word in the KJVs in order to get the message as God intended it. KJVOs think it's better to confuse modern readers with archaic word meanings than to change words to keep the message alive, fresh and unchanged.

This just goes to show how confused KJVOs really are.

 

Your 'attack' on the Bible (not to mention the 'crack' directed at another poster) is what is actually deplorable, here.

One does not have to prefer any particular rendering in a version, and can disagree with another rendering of a passage, in a different version, without resorting to this level, IMO.

Ed

 

Aren't wrong renderings the reason we have revisions to Bible translations, to keep the Word as understandable as possible to the present generation?

 

Better renderings

Welcome to the Baptist Board. :wavey:

And why don't we reword this to phrase this as a "better, or 'more up-to-date' renderings" now, as opposed to "wrong renderings" which, in fact, are merely 'dated.'

Guys and girls, the term "wrong renderings" is simply too misleading and too pejorative, for what we are talking about.

Perhaps the best example found is that of the Jacobean and/or Elizabethan English wording of "the Holy Ghost" [or as you might hear it spoken in some churches, "the HOLYGhost" (That's one three syllable word, in case you happened to miss it. )] and a more up-to-date wording of "the Holy Spirit."

That does not mean that 1600 English was incorrect, here. It merely means the language has changed over 400 years.

Ed

 

Actually, i have heard something like that. However, I must apologize. I failed to follow your convoluted line of reasoning correctly.


A.F.

 

So you do believe in evolution! No wonder so many see the dangers of evolution being linked to apostacy and avoid it!

The root meaning of prevent is to go before and hinder another from acomplishment, just as the Scripture shows that those who had already died would still be in the Resurrection.

Foul! They changed the word into "precede" which to prevent some one from accomplishment , going before them must be done to prevent them.

The Thessalonians were concerned if they died before the Resurrection those who were alive at that time might somehow deny them entrance due to the corrupting of the body in the grave.

The thiong is you haven't considered this or the depth of the body in the grave and the implications of the decay concerning it.

Paul expressed we will all have new bodies.

This is a doctrinal issue which is altered in the modern versions use of "precede".

This modern usage tends to deaden the word of God where the KJB keeps it fully intact and alive!

What a laugh!

I won't get into exposing the ideals you just posted which are contrary to where you say we are to derive the word of God from all the MSS available that have produced modern versions.:laugh:

The issue isn't language changes, the issue is that the modernversions change the meaning to something less than what the KJB maintains as much more indepth and ALIVE!

Your remarks goes directly against Scripture.

 

Welcome to the bottom of the barrel, Ed.:laugh:

The word of God isn't political or "adjustable' TUR INTERPRETATIONS.

I didn't attack any Bible, i did point out that modern versions actually cause the believer to not have the whole picture as we find in detail when we consider and compare Scripture with Scripture.

There's more to the word of God than the printed page, friend.