is the King James Version the real true Bible?

Answer 1

One of the best

Answer 2

The King James is the true Bible, but that doesn't mean there aren't other true bibles. For example the New Jersalem Bible is a true bible. It was translate from the Greek and Hebrew into French and then into English. There are literal translations like the New Jersalem and paraphrase translation which use more modern English so the Bible can be easier understand by today's English speaking people. A literal translation is translated from Greek and Hebrew in to a modern language be it French or Swaheli or a direct translation from a modern literal translation. A paraphrase bible takes a translated version and puts it into a more modern understandable way of speaking. This does not change the meaning of the written Word. Understand?

Answer 3

NOPE, sad to say, but, as I once visited a protestant Bible bookstore, looking for a "New King James Bible", the Bible expert there said that if any protestant ever saw the original version of the newest "New King James Bible", they wouldn't recognize it, and since the protestant Bibles, whichever version they put upon you, are nothing more than watered-down and abbreviated versions of the original Bible which the Roman Catholic Church was founded on, why would I care what King James wrote? And now, sad to say, the media-contrived monster that has come to be known as the "American Catholic" Church, which, by definition couldn't exist within the Roman Catholic Church, has it's own watered-down "protestantized" versions of the Bible, so you have to look thoroughly for the truest Roman Catholic Bibles now available. You might want to look at the one with the Douay-Rheims Old Testament in it, and the Revised Standard Version (RSV) (as opposed to the protestantized NEW Revised Standard Version - NRSV) for a beginning of what is still avaiable from the American publishing companies. God Bless you in your search.

Answer 4

Read:

God's Secretaries: The Making of the King James Bible by Adam Nicolson

Fantastic history of the King James...

Um, and no, not the real true Bible - but if you are looking for "real" and "true" you might want to read lots of Bibles and glean what makes sense to you. Also, check out the Hebrew Bible - The Five Books of Moses: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy (The Schocken Bible, Volume 1) - as translated by Everett Fox.

Answer 5

Skalite, superb question. I truly have studied this very situation for an exceedingly long term. the way I comprehend it and have self assurance is that, certainly the KJV is the greater advantageous be attentive to God. this is the God promised seventh point of purification, tried interior the furnace of earth. II Kings 12:6 The words of the LORD [are] organic words: [as] silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven cases. right that's a catalogue of variations best as much as the A.V. 1611 textual content textile German Luther Bible Tyandale Coverdal Matthews large Geneva Bishop's No, the subject, from what I see is that no longer that the Christians of the previous getting it incorrect. greater to the actuality of why absolutely everyone could mess with the be conscious after that element, is the question, truly. do you comprehend of each and all of the deletions that have occured because that element? Why do you think of absolutely everyone could make the complication to rewrite the bible and make it greater complicated? Is God the author of misunderstanding? right that's a catalogue of merely the hot testomony deletions, i do no longer comprehend approximately you, yet while human beings pass approximately deleting comprehensive verses, it truly makes me think of why. Matthew 17:21, Matthew 18:11, Matthew 23:14, Mark 7:sixteen, Mark 9:40 4, Mark 9:40 six, Mark 11:26, Mark 15:28, Mark sixteen:9-20, Luke 17:36, Luke 23:17, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, Acts 15:34, Acts 24:7, Acts 28:29, Romans sixteen:24, I John 5:7.

Answer 6

NO, it's NOT the real true Bible as you put it. I hope by now you realize that. Do your research. There are many errors in the KJ Bible. For the best English version, read Douay-Rheims version. The Greek is of course the best. But the DR-V was translated from the Latin Vulgate which was translated from the Greek version. So put the King James version down and pick up & read the DR-V (Douay-Rheims Version).

Answer 7

It is ok. There are a number of mistranslations in it that you have to study and look out for. It was a compromised bible to be the authorized version in England. There were two rival ones before it. The bishop's bible from the Catholics and the geneva bible from the pilgrims. King James made his authorized version to end the bickering.

Answer 8

It is a good translation of the Bible, but it is not the only one. None of the translations are perfect. The original manuscript were perfect and infallible. Learn Hebrew and Greek and then buy a Bible in the original languages. That would give you the most accurate version available today.

Answer 9

Because they think it's God Sent, it has hundreds of errors, and it was not the first Bible printed in English, it just happen to have King James backing.
.
People in the English-speaking world use and accept the King James or Authorized Version more than any other single Bible translation. In fact, so highly esteemed is this translation that many persons venerate it as the only true Bible. This raises some questions.

Do these countless persons who use the King James Version know why, despite objections from churchmen, modern translations keep rolling off the presses? Do they know why the King James Version itself was once opposed by the people? Do they know why, despite vigorous protest and opposition, the King James Version entered into the very blood and marrow of English thought and speech? Do they know what illuminating document is probably missing from their own copies? In short, do they really know the King James Version?

The purpose of Bible translation, then, is to take these thoughts of God, originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, and put them into the common languages of today. Bible translation makes God’s Book a living Book. So true Christians read the Bible, not to be entertained by clever turns of expression, unusual words, excellency of style, striking rhetorical devices or felicities of rhythm, but to learn the will of God. It was for this reason that the King James Version came into existence. That was in 1611.
From almost every quarter the King James Bible met opposition. Criticism was often severe. Broughton, a Hebrew scholar of the day, wrote to King James that he “should rather be torn asunder by wild horses than allow such a version to be imposed on the church.”

The translators, not unaware that people preferred to keep what had grown familiar, knew that their work had unleashed a storm. They tried to calm the people down. They wrote a “Preface of the Translators” to explain why the King James Version was made. This preface is called by the Encyclopedia Americana “a most illuminating preface describing the aims of the translators which unhappily is omitted from the usual printings of the Bible.” Thus most Authorized Versions today, though they contain a lengthy dedication to King James, omit the preface. Its presence would clear up many misunderstandings about the purpose of the revision. The reader would learn that strong opposition was expected.

The reader would learn that the King James Version was a revision of earlier works made with a modest hope of improvement and no thought of finality, In time the clamor died down, and the King James Version prevailed over the Geneva Bible. For more than two and a half centuries no other so-called authorized translation of the Bible into English was made. Little wonder that many people began to feel that the King James Bible was the only true Bible. Like many people who once objected to any change in the Geneva Bible, many persons today object to any change in the King James Bible. They oppose modern translations perhaps as vigorously as the King James Version itself was once opposed.

King James Bible has been changed; today no one reads the King James Version in its original form. Explaining why this is so the book The Bible in Its Ancient and English Versions says: “Almost every edition, from the very beginning, introduced corrections and unauthorized changes and additions, often adding new errors in the process. The edition of 1613 shows over three hundred differences from 1611. . . . It was in the eighteenth century, however, that the main changes were made. . . . The marginal references were checked and verified, over 30,000 new marginal references were added, the chapter summaries and running headnotes were thoroughly revised, the punctuation was altered and made uniform in accordance with modern practice, textual errors were removed, the use of capitals was considerably modified and reduced, and a thorough revision made in the form of certain kinds of words.”

So many changes have been made, many of them in the readings of passages, that the Committee on Versions (1851-56) of the American Bible Society found 24,000 variations in six different editions of the King James Version!

What, then, of the objections raised by persons who say they do not want the King James Bible changed? Since the King James Version has already been changed, they lie on a crumbled foundation. If these persons do not want it changed, then why do they use, instead of a copy of an edition of 1611, an edition that has been changed?

They appreciate, perhaps unknowingly, the improvements the later editions have made. They do not like the odd spelling and punctuation of the 1611 edition; they do not want to read “fet” for “fetched,” “sith” for “since” or “moe” for “more,” as the edition of 1611 had it. Thus improvement, when needed, is appreciated, even by those who say they object to any changing of the King James translation.

One of the major reasons the Authorized Version is so widely accepted is its kingly authority. There seems little doubt that, had not a king authorized this version, it would not today be venerated as though it had come direct from God

Answer 10

i cannot say that it is entirely accurate. but i do believe in the bible as a whole. where there can always be a difference in how the particular author and translator can view the same particular instant in the bible, the correctness of the bible as a whole will show through.

dont be confused when you see someone spout off about the falseness of the bible. it may be that they just do not agree with the translation, or they feel threatened because they know that they are not "right" with the Word of God.

-eagle

Answer 11

There is no real true bible. The bible as we know it today is a conglomeration of texts that were passed down as oral tradition long before they were even committed to writing. Some of these were then voted into cannon over 1000 years ago. Since then there have been many translations and reconfigurations. Many of the texts (mostly epistles) have even been found to have been fraudulent.