This idea just blows me away. How can you possilby think that?
2007-10-16 16:58:41 · 12 answers · asked by Pal 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I just couldn't help myself. I had to respond to these answers!
Answer #1: "the KJV is the only english bible that comes from the right text."
Actually, the New King James Version (NKJV) was translated from the same source as the original King James Version (KJV), so this statement is false. Unfortunately, the NKJV does not include all the books, or the alternate verse translations in the margins (which translators of the KJV considered *necessary*).
Answer #2: "How could anyone think the Bible is in anyway divine, KJV or otherwise?"
Admittedly, it is a matter of faith. However, I wonder how anyone who has read the entire text could find it *not* divine. :)
Answer #3: "Compare Genesis 22:8 and you will see connotations within the text that are missing in all BUT The King James."
The (obvious) question here is: if it is missing from all but the KJV, what makes you think that this connotation is part of the original texts?
Answer #4: "The true Bible is original translations of the books they were derived from. The Guttenburg Bible."
This, of course, is *not* the original translation from the original languages. The Greek codices may (controversially) get that credit, but the Latin Vulgate certainly can claim original translation from all those texts available at the time - a mere several centuries before Gutenberg.
Answer #5: "Because I've done my homework.Research the texts from Alexandria [used for all the perversions out there] and you'll find they are corrupt to the core.The King James translators used the pure texts from Antioch.Ask yourself how God's Word can be copyrighted.The King James has no copyright."
Many versions are not copyrighted. Nearly all of those older than 100 years are no longer under copyright. The age of the KJV is hardly a argument in favor of its accuracy.
Answer #6: "If you study the modern versions compared to the KJV you will see. So many verses changed for no logical reason."
This answerer assumes that new versions are alterations of the KJV. They are not. Rather, more accurate translations have been produced from more authoritative (less altered) original texts using modern (i.e. advanced by 400 years of study) knowledge of ancient languages. Interestingly, very few today have a copy of the original KJV translation, and instead almost always use the (very!) abridged Oxford Revision of 1769.
"Also, Look on the inside of your NIV Or whatever version you have. IT IS copyrighted. TO me that seems like it is controlled by man."
This is correct. I assure you, in 400 years time all the versions available today will no longer be copyrighted.
Answer #7: "The original texts were written in Greek"
This is false.
"the KJV has strong basis from the Latin Vulgate bible which is a faulty translation from Greek to latin."
This, too, is false. The Latin Vulgate is translated from the original languages, just as the KJV. Jerome translated the entire Hebrew Bible from Hebrew for the Vulgate Old Testament. The KJV may have made use of the Vulgate (among other versions) as a *reference*, but not as a source for translation.
Answer #9: "the KJV is closer to what is in the heart, most of the others have been worked on by at least a few homosexuals."
This is news to me. Which of the translators of the New Jerusalem Bible are homosexuals? Just wondering...
"the KJV says that homosexuality is a sin but the newer versions lead one to believe it is ok."
I have yet to read a version which suggests such a thing. Homosexuality is roundly condemned in both New and Old Testaments in *all* of the several versions that I have read, including the modern New American Standard Bible and New Jerusalem Bible.
"there are other discrepancy's as well check out Genesis,3;22 if they read the same to you then I don't know what to say because when I have read it in the different versions it reads very different to me."
Of course, Different translations are *bound* to produce different text ("discrepencies")! Even with knowledge of ancient languages 400 years advanced from what the translators of the KJV had, translation is still not a perfect (read: unambiguous) science.
Answer #10: "All Bibles were written centuries after the time of Jesus (may peace be upon him) and all of them are man written and obviously wrong."
It is true that all bibles were *assembled* centuries after the time of Jesus. However, all the books appear to have been written within 100 years of his death.
It is also true that all of them are man written. Likewise, the Qur'an. To the best of my knowledge, the stone tablets containing the "10 commandments" is the only thing actually written by any hand other than man's.
Of course, "obviously wrong" is quite a statement to make, when no such thing is obvious, or even discernible with study, as far as I can determine.
Answer #11: "Comparing Scripture verses side by side and seeing the changes that change doctrine in the myriad versions from the KJV."
Again, modern versions, in general, make no attempt whatsoever to change the KJV. They succeed admirably in making no changes to the KJV whatsoever. This answerer seems to assume that only doctrine that is supported by the KJV is sound - which is putting the cart before the horse.
Jim, http://www.jimpettis.com/wheel/
2007-10-16 18:46:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Skalite, Excellent question. I have studied this very issue for a very long time. The way I understand it and believe is that, indeed the KJV is the more sure Word of God. It is the God promised 7th level of purification, tried in the furnace of earth. II Kings 12:6 The words of the LORD [are] pure words: [as] silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Here is a list of versions leading up to the A.V. 1611 text German Luther Bible Tyandale Coverdal Matthews Great Geneva Bishop's No, the problem, from what I see is that not that the Christians of the past getting it wrong. More to the fact of why anyone would mess with the Word after that point, is the question, really. Do you know of all of the deletions that have occured since that point? Why do you think anyone would take the time to rewrite the bible and make it more complicated? Is God the author of confusion? Here is a list of just the New Testament deletions, I do not know about you, but when people go about deleting entire verses, it really makes me think why. Matthew 17:21, Matthew 18:11, Matthew 23:14, Mark 7:16, Mark 9:44, Mark 9:46, Mark 11:26, Mark 15:28, Mark 16:9-20, Luke 17:36, Luke 23:17, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, Acts 15:34, Acts 24:7, Acts 28:29, Romans 16:24, I John 5:7.
2016-05-23 02:20:10 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People who think that the KJV is the best translation are claiming this with a Bias mind. Then when they research their claims they are referencing faulty sources. It's been a horrible cycle of delusion from the start. The most literal and readable translation is the RSV, revised standard version. The original texts were written in Greek, the KJV has strong basis from the Latin Vulgate bible which is a faulty translation from Greek to latin. If anyone hear actually could read Greek they would know how wrong they are.
2007-10-16 17:12:32 · answer #3 · answered by Pathofreason.com 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Jesus is the true Word of God. I study the KJV because God wrote his word on our hearts and the KJV is closer to what is in the heart, most of the others have been worked on by at least a few homosexuals. the KJV says that homosexuality is a sin but the newer versions lead one to believe it is ok.
there are other discrepancy's as well check out Genesis,3;22
if they read the same to you then I don't know what to say because when I have read it in the different versions it reads very different to me. when reading them try to keep in mind that Jesus is the tree of life. there is no evil in the Father or the Son, there is only one that has knowledge of good and evil and that would be?????? any how read it and see
*Toadaly odiously has no idea how the KJV was translated
2007-10-16 17:30:33 · answer #4 · answered by hmm 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
If you study the modern versions compared to the KJV you will see. So many verses changed for no logical reason.
Also, Look on the inside of your NIV Or whatever version you have. IT IS copyrighted. TO me that seems like it is controlled by man. KJV are not copyrighted. I think God's word can come through no matter how bad man messes it up, but I prefer to leave out some of the unjustified "improvements"
2007-10-16 17:11:43 · answer #5 · answered by wrench'n away 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
We think that because it is the most accurate English translation to the original Herbrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts.
Compare Genesis 22:8 and you will see connotations within the text that are missing in all BUT The King James.
2007-10-16 17:06:57 · answer #6 · answered by Bobby Jim 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
How could anyone think the Bible is in anyway divine, KJV or otherwise?
The KJV came from 'the right text'? That's one of the funniest things I've heard all day. In terms of source quality, the KJV is a stinker that depended on multiple copies of a single source. That's why there are newer translations that attempt to rectify that error.
2007-10-16 17:05:42 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Comparing Scripture verses side by side and seeing the changes that change doctrine in the myriad versions from the KJV.
2007-10-16 18:17:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Because I've done my homework.Research the texts from Alexandria [used for all the perversions out there] and you'll find they are corrupt to the core.The King James translators used the pure texts from Antioch.Ask yourself how God's Word can be copyrighted.The King James has no copyright.
2007-10-16 17:08:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
All Bibles were written centuries after the time of Jesus (may peace be upon him) and all of them are man written and obviously wrong.
2007-10-16 17:55:46 · answer #10 · answered by Sultan Cartman 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋