KJV vs. other translations

[Pierac]

I stopped reading this l-e-n-g-t-h-y post after a few sentences, as I have better things to do with my time.

However, these things caught my eye: Act 26:14 "And when we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew dialect, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.'

The footnote in the NRSVue for this verse is "That is, Aramaic".
NET "When we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic"
NIV, "We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic"
NLY, "We all fell down, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic"

Aramaic IS a Hebrew dialect!

Claiming that some Bible translators, have translated “Aramaic” when the original text specifically states "Hebrew" is nonsense.

It's interesting that in your post you ignore the fact that the great majority of the NT was written in Koine Greek!!!

Act 22:2 And when they heard that he was addressing them in the Hebrew dialect, they became even more quiet; and he *said,

Act 26:14 "And when we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew dialect, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.'

Act 21:1 Paul's Journey to Jerusalem.... 40 When he had given him permission, Paul, standing on the stairs, motioned to the people with his hand; and when there was a great hush, he spoke to them in the Hebrew dialect, saying,


Then just call Aramaic... Hebrew.... Problem solved or you could actually read the l-e-n-g-t-h-y post...

 

[Jim B]

Act 22:2 And when they heard that he was addressing them in the Hebrew dialect, they became even more quiet; and he *said,

Act 26:14 "And when we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew dialect, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.'

Act 21:1 Paul's Journey to Jerusalem.... 40 When he had given him permission, Paul, standing on the stairs, motioned to the people with his hand; and when there was a great hush, he spoke to them in the Hebrew dialect, saying,


Then just call Aramaic... Hebrew.... Problem solved

The problem was on your end, not mine.

Again, you ignore that the NT was largely written in Koine Greek.

 

[Pierac]

The problem was on your end, not mine.

Again, you ignore that the NT was largely written in Koine Greek.

Yes... But the Koine Greek reads Hebrew every time as our translations show... Man you need to look at History out side our Bible... It matches. The bible...

Act 22:2 And when they heard that he was addressing them in the Hebrew dialect, they became even more quiet; and he *said,

Act 26:14 "And when we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew dialect, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.'

Act 21:1 Paul's Journey to Jerusalem.... 40 When he had given him permission, Paul, standing on the stairs, motioned to the people with his hand; and when there was a great hush, he spoke to them in the Hebrew dialect, saying,

For example 90 % of all coins found at Masada were written in Hebrew and that was 70AD... History matchs our scriptures... not your opinion... Think about where did you even get the ideas

 

[Jim B]

Yes... But the Koine Greek reads Hebrew every time as our translations show... Man you need to look at History out side our Bible... It matches. The bible...

Act 22:2 And when they heard that he was addressing them in the Hebrew dialect, they became even more quiet; and he *said,

Act 26:14 "And when we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew dialect, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.'

Act 21:1 Paul's Journey to Jerusalem.... 40 When he had given him permission, Paul, standing on the stairs, motioned to the people with his hand; and when there was a great hush, he spoke to them in the Hebrew dialect, saying,

For example 90 % of all coins found at Masada were written in Hebrew and that was 70AD... History matchs our scriptures... not your opinion... Think about where did you even get the ideas

I don't even understand "what the Koine Greek reads Hebrew every time as our translations show" means. Koine Greek is a language; it cannot read.

Acts 22:2 (NET), "(When they heard[c] that he was addressing them in Aramaic, they became even quieter.)
Acts 26:14 (NET) -- Jesus speaking -- " When we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? You are hurting yourself by kicking against the goads.’ "
John 20:16 -- "Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned and said to him in Aramaic, “Rabboni” (which means Teacher).".

And Acts 21:1 says "After we tore ourselves away from them, we put out to sea, and sailing a straight course, we came to Cos, on the next day to Rhodes, and from there to Patara." Acts 21:40 says "When the commanding officer had given him permission, Paul stood on the steps and gestured to the people with his hand. When they had become silent, he addressed them in Aramaic,"

Aramaic is mentioned five times in John's gospel and three times in Acts. The "Hebrew dialect" was Aramaic. Those words are translated for people who don't know what Aramaic is.

Your citing Masada is silly. The Romans ruled the region and the coin of the realm was the denarius. Luke 20:23-25, "But he [Jesus] perceived their craftiness and said to them, “Show me a denarius. Whose head and whose title does it bear?” They said, “Caesar’s.” He said to them, “Then give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.” " It is mentioned in other places as well. There is no mention of the shekel in the New Testament. Because the Jewish rebels had Jewish coins means nothing.

History does indeed match the scriptures... not your opinion.

 

[Davy]

Yea, Its people like you that put horns on Moses....

That's a stupid and sottish statement, totally irrelevant to the modern corrupt English Bible translations.

 

[Davy]

Yea... I was pointing out how one single person can mis lead people like you for over 1000 years... Now let's look at your KJV.... Erasmus put together his English translation of the Greek manuscripts in the 1500's in less than a year. He had only 5 manuscripts and was forced to use the latin Vulgate to fill in the gaps.... Not exactly historical in context... Westcott and Hort spent 25 years using hundreds of newly found manuscripts along with the 5 Erasmus used... Manuscripts much closer to the time of Jesus... Thus WHY YOUR MODERN KJV READS THE SAME AS OTHER MODERN BIBLES TODAY... So either your wrong or the KJV you think you know so well... sold out.... YOU be the judge... Stop following others and seek the truth for yourself... I don't need to humiliate you any further...

You sure love telling LIES.

I was asked to join a Bible study with some friends, and I read from the KJV and they were using either the NKJV or the NIV. They kept complaining because of HOW DIFFERENT THE KJV READ THAN THEIR 'NEW AND IMPROVED' CORRUPT VERSIONS!

Thus your statement that the later KJV editions read the SAME AS OTHER MODERN BIBLES TODAY" IS CERTAINLY A HUGE... JOKE! You obviously will tell any LIE to try and deceive true Christians here on this forum.

 

[Jim B]

You sure love telling LIES.

I was asked to join a Bible study with some friends, and I read from the KJV and they were using either the NKJV or the NIV. They kept complaining because of HOW DIFFERENT THE KJV READ THAN THEIR 'NEW AND IMPROVED' CORRUPT VERSIONS!

Thus your statement that the later KJV editions read the SAME AS OTHER MODERN BIBLES TODAY" IS CERTAINLY A HUGE... JOKE! You obviously will tell any LIE to try and deceive true Christians here on this forum.

The "joke" is that you think that the KJV, created over 400 years ago by a group of pepole who were commanded by their secular king to codify his personal view of Protestantism and eliminate any challenges to his rule is THE perfect word of God. That is really, really tragic!

The KJV was created using a limited set of source documents and was based on earlier translations (with accompanying notes removed that cast doubt on his "divine" authority. Many fled with thei preferred translations in order to avoid persecution by the secular king!

The 1611 KJV has been modified over time, so which revision is the perfect one?

Modern translations are far superior to the KJV. They are based on better sources and batter scholarship and thier purpose is to glorify God, not a secular king.

Additionally, the KJV uses language that is unclear to modern minds, so it is very often re-interpreted by people to prove their personal doctrine. Your example above is a perfect example of this rigid ideology.

Finally, before accusing someone of lying, why do you write "They kept complaining because of HOW DIFFERENT THE KJV READ THAN THEIR 'NEW AND IMPROVED' CORRUPT VERSIONS!" Do you really think that people claimed their preferred Bibles were "corrupt" or are YOU lying?

 

[Charlie24]

The "joke" is that you think that the KJV, created over 400 years ago by a group of pepole who were commanded by their secular king to codify his personal view of Protestantism and eliminate any challenges to his rule is THE perfect word of God. That is really, really tragic!

The KJV was created using a limited set of source documents and was based on earlier translations (with accompanying notes removed that cast doubt on his "divine" authority. Many fled with thei preferred translations in order to avoid persecution by the secular king!

The 1611 KJV has been modified over time, so which revision is the perfect one?

Modern translations are far superior to the KJV. They are based on better sources and batter scholarship and thier purpose is to glorify God, not a secular king.

Additionally, the KJV uses language that is unclear to modern minds, so it is very often re-interpreted by people to prove their personal doctrine. Your example above is a perfect example of this rigid ideology.

Finally, before accusing someone of lying, why do you write "They kept complaining because of HOW DIFFERENT THE KJV READ THAN THEIR 'NEW AND IMPROVED' CORRUPT VERSIONS!" Do you really think that people claimed their preferred Bibles were "corrupt" or are YOU lying?

I believe there are some translations that are good and helpful to the reader, but you have to be careful.

I'm a KJV only person because I was taught from a child using that translation. It's my opinion there are key words in the KJV, not found in other translations, that when you go to the Greek definitions, you will find the true meaning of that Scripture.

I have tries other translations and felt lost, unsure, and just agitated because of the many years of studying from the KJV, I just felt out of place studying them and not finding those key words that I have researched in the past for a better understanding.

 

[Jim B]

I believe there are some translations that are good and helpful to the reader, but you have to be careful.

I'm a KJV only person because I was taught from a child using that translation. It's my opinion there are key words in the KJV, not found in other translations, that when you go to the Greek definitions, you will find the true meaning of that Scripture.

I have tries other translations and felt lost, unsure, and just agitated because of the many years of studying from the KJV, I just felt out of place studying them and not finding those key words that I have researched in the past for a better understanding.

Fine. Thanks for the explanation. However, there are others who believe that the KJV is the only true and accurate translation and claim that other, more modern, translations are corrupt.

There are always going to be differences among translations because there is no single source of the Scriptures. The source documents differ and the art/science of textual criticism is determining which sources are the most reliable. There will always be differences among translations. Not only do the various sources differ, but the languages differ in vocabulary, verb usage and tenses, idioms, etc. In my opinion, the best Bibles are those that communicate most successfully to our 21st century minds.

If you feel that the KJV is the best for your understanding then by all means continue to use it. Realize, however, that others (inlcuding myself) prefer more modern translations. Presently I use four: the 1978 NIV, the NLT, the NET, and the NRSVue (my favorite). I also like reading "A New, New Testament", which is quite radical and includes several non-Canonical "books".

 

[Behold]

The 1611 KJV has been modified over time, so which revision is the perfect one?

Some of spelling was modified. , but never the verses or the context of the original.

The NIV is probably the worst translation ever created, other than the RSV.

What is interesting about the KJV.......one of the things, is that the chance that it is the bible version that was used that led you to Christ, is about 99%.
Its the bible that led most Pastors found today, originally to Jesus.
All the great past revivals, are KJV .

Moody, Sturgeon, Graham, Wesley.........name all the great spiritual figures like those, and all of them were originally converted under the preaching of the KJV.

The KJV is the only "bible" that is free to print.
You can print it.......no charge.
Why?
Because KJames wanted the word of God to be free.

So, its an interesting situation with the KJV.

Its the only Bible, for example that has a "cult of KJV haters" worldwide.

 

[Jim B]

Some of spelling was modified. , but never the verses or the context of the original.

The NIV is probably the worst translation ever created, other than the RSV.

What is interesting about the KJV.......one of the things, is that the chance that it is the bible version that was used that led you to Christ, is about 99%.
Its the bible that led most Pastors found today, originally to Jesus.
All the great past revivals, are KJV .

Moody, Sturgeon, Graham, Wesley.........name all the great spiritual figures like those, and all of them were originally converted under the preaching of the KJV.

The KJV is the only "bible" that is free to print.
You can print it.......no charge.
Why?
Because King James wanted the word of God to be free.

So, its an interesting situation with the KJV.

Its the only Bible, for example that has a "cult of KJV haters" worldwide.

The first two major revisions of the King James Bible came in 1629 and then again in 1638.

Into the early 19th century, because of changing literary styles, diction, and language usage, several attempts had been made periodically to revise the King James Version to make its language more current. None of these had any lasting significance. However, since the translation in the early 17th century, earlier and more accurate biblical manuscripts had been discovered, a greater understanding of the intricacies of Greek and Hebrew grammar construction had developed, and archeological research had provided new perspectives on life in biblical times. As well, in several centuries, the English language itself had undergone significant changes. In the 1870s, serious work began on a major revision of the King James Version to reflect all of these new realities. A committee of over 50 English and American scholars was established and began meeting in 1871. The result was the publication in 1881 of the English Revised Version, or Revised Version, which was the first and remains the only officially authorized revision of the King James Bible.

Now, regarding your biased opinions...

Claiming that "the NIV is probably the worst translation ever created" just shows your closed-mindedness. It is just youR opinion; it lacks any substance. It is one of the best-selling Bibles because it is both accurate and readable.

The KJV is published in many versions, each of which is copyrighted and sold for profit. Try republishing any of them and you will be in court quickly.

And finally, you, who hate modern versions, write "Its the only Bible, for example that has a "cult of KJV haters" worldwide", which is, of course, nonsense.

STOP WORSHIPING AN ENGLYSHE TRANSLATION, CREATED TO SATISFY A SECULAR KING, THAT IS INFERIOR TO JUST ABOUT EVERY MODERN TRANSLATION.

 

[Behold]

The first two major revisions of the King James Bible came in 1629 and then again in 1638.

Into the early 19th century, because of changing literary styles, diction, and language usage, several attempts had been made periodically to revise the King James Version to make its language more current. None of these had any lasting significance.

You said "major" then posted a contradiction.

What you posted said...>" to revise the King James Version = to make its language more current. """


That is to revise the spelling and nomenclature.......not change the verses or the doctrine, as i told you.

ITS A SPELL CHECK.....

So, you are a KJV Hater, from that cult.
You are so obsessed that you post what contradicts the lie you are trying to prove.

You should think about that, for a bit. Jim B

 

[Jim B]

You said "major" then posted a contradiction.

What you posted said...>" to revise the King James Version = to make its language more current. """


That is to revise the spelling and nomenclature.......not change the verses or the doctrine, as i told you.

ITS A SPELL CHECK.....

So, you are a KJV Hater, from that cult.
You are so obsessed that you post what contradicts the lie you are trying to prove.

You should think about that, for a bit. Jim B

Since you can't understand the truth that I have written, I will not discuss this with you any longer. What Jesus said is true about you, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin, but now because you claim that you can see, your guilt remains."

Unlike yourself, I am not a member of any cult. I worship God, you worship a book (a flawed translation no less!)

Until you can accept the truth I will not put up with your lies and hatred any longer.

 

[amigo de christo]

Since you can't understand the truth that I have written, I will not discuss this with you any longer. What Jesus said is true about you, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin, but now because you claim that you can see, your guilt remains."

Unlike yourself, I am not a member of any cult. I worship God, you worship a book (a flawed translation no less!)

Until you can accept the truth I will not put up with your lies and hatred any longer.

a short but friendly reminder of how the DRAGON has been at work to transform the churches from within . BUYER BEWARE
that we aint sitting under leaders such as these .

 

[Jim B]

a short but friendly reminder of how the DRAGON has been at work to transform the churches from within . BUYER BEWARE
that we aint sitting under leaders such as these .

Is this supposed to mean something relevant to the discussion?

 

[Jim B]

a short but friendly reminder of how the DRAGON has been at work to transform the churches from within . BUYER BEWARE
that we aint sitting under leaders such as these .

Isn't this off-topic? The OP is about the KJV vs other translations. Your post doesn't have anything to do with that subject.

 

[Behold]

Until you can accept the truth I will not put up with your lies and hatred any longer.

I showed you that you said "major" revision had been made, and then what you posted said the words were updated.

That's not hatred im showing you, that is just, reality.

You should try it and get past your KJV hatred.
This bible version, probably led the person to Christ who led you.

 

[Jim B]

I showed you that you said "major" revision had been made, and then what you posted said the words were updated.

That's not hatred im showing you, that is just, reality.

You should try it and get past your KJV hatred.
This bible version, probably led the person to Christ who led you.

I don't hate the KJV. That is an outright lie, typical of your attitude toward those of us who regard the KJV as one among many translations. Show me where, even once, that I said that I hate it. Here is what I did write in answer to someone's post: If you feel that the KJV is the best for your understanding then by all means continue to use it. Realize, however, that others (including myself) prefer more modern translations.

You are the one who is intolerant of those of us who use translations other than the KJV. Your attitude is identical to that of the Pharisees, who were unable to accept Christ because their legalism blinded them.

Even the KJV translators didn't claim that their work would be the final, definitive translation. So why do you???

 

[Behold]

I don't hate the KJV. That is an outright lie, typical of your attitude toward those of us who regard the KJV as one among many translations.

JimB,

Why would you be on a christian forum, trying to castigate this one bible version.

Where are your other posts and Threads that try to dishonor and criticize another Bible Version, using such venom??

Also, how is it that if someone uses the NIV, you are not ranting and raving about them "worshipping it", Jim B?

Its because you are not in a NIV HATER CULT, are you.

Game over.
Now, Find something better to do with your time that actually honors God.


And FYI, i have used a few Bibles., including Messianic scriptures, and the KJV.

 

[amigo de christo]

Is this supposed to mean something relevant to the discussion?

It can sting a bit to see and know when one has been sitting under this deception . We both know its all over the churches .
Only some cannot see it for what it truly is . I brought it to help others and to remind us to stay well planted in the scriptures
by which we shall test all men . They are everywhere Jim . From the old grandma and grandpa who sit in churches
to the young , to the leaders.