King James Version Only...?

[JohnDB]

If you think so. You really worry me. There is no gospel in the book if Mormon. It is a perverted made up book using king janes language where they are not even doing what God commanded

Not all Mormons use a "retranslated" KJV... some actually do use the regular KJV but still really don't focus on it as much as they do on other books keystone to their religion. (Which isn't Christian)

 

[YeshuaFan1]

Hort was a liar:

"Hort clearly had a bias against the Textus Receptus, calling it "villainous" and "vile". Hort aggressively taught that the School at Antioch (associated with Lucian) had loosely translated the true text of Scripture in the second century A. D. This supposedly created an unreliable text of Scripture which became the Textus Receptus. This was called the Lucian Recension Theory.

Hort did not have a single historical reference to support the idea that such a recension took place. He simply theorized that it must have taken place. In spite of the fact that there is not a single historical reference to the Lucian Recension, many Bible colleges teach it as a historical fact."
(The Westcott and Hort Only Controversy)

what about those men who assembled together to translate the Nas/esv and Niv, were they are corrupt and untrained?

 

[YeshuaFan1]

Modern NT translations from Wescott and Hort's texts omit many Greek NT passages in the Majority Texts used for the KJV Bible.

One must prove by the textual evidence that those variants and readings they "took away" were actually part of the originals texts themselves!

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Not all Mormons use a "retranslated" KJV... some actually do use the regular KJV but still really don't focus on it as much as they do on other books keystone to their religion. (Which isn't Christian)

If you read the Book of Mormon it uses what I call king James english.

I am not sure what bible they use, I had a bible study with one about 20 years ago, out of respect I ready the Book of Mormon, I got about three quarters of the way through when it was so far out in left field it I could no longer go forward

 

[YeshuaFan1]

From Wikipedia:
F. J. A. Hort, was an Irish-born theologian[
He was born on 23 April 1828 in Dublin, the great-grandson of Josiah Hort, Archbishop of Tuam in the eighteenth century. In 1846 he passed from Rugby School to Trinity College, Cambridge,[3] where he was the contemporary of E. W. Benson, B. F. Westcott and J. B. Lightfoot.[2] The four men became lifelong friends and fellow-workers.

Brooke Foss Westcott (12 January 1825 – 27 July 1901) was a British bishop, biblical scholar and theologian, serving as Bishop of Durham from 1890 until his death.

Westcot was more interested in all the other writings from the Jews than actually doing the Bible itself. He was a scholar in all the Sifre, Talmud, Midrash and etc of the Ancient Near East.

Hort was more of the financier of publishing and producing his works and encouraged Westcott to do all the things that were done.

Westcott's commemtary on the book of Hebrews and Jude is beyond compare as he is knowledgeable on the many other writings that were referenced in the two letters and gives us the unique and fuller insights as to what was written and why.

Neither of these men including Lightfoot or Eadie are anything but good men intending the best for the knowledge of the scriptures.

They were slandered by many who did not like the theological positions the men held because they offered proofs that shattered many of these twisted theological positions.

They had no axe to grind as they were affiliated with the Anglican Church but mostly just in name only...they really didn't like the guerilla warfare existing between the various denominations. They were avowed almost pacifists.

Seen where some Kjvo have gone so far to say they were into seances and the occult!

 

[YeshuaFan1]

No.

They were biased and determined to attempt to debunk the ancient KJV. A major modern proofreader for the NIV was a lesbian for example.

They had NO desire to debunk or put down the Kjv, as ALL of them respected its way of speaking and phrasing, but they also all thought could make a better translation closer to what the originals were!
And the general editor of the Niv had repeatably shot down that Lesbian rumor, as she had NOTHING to do with finished product!

 

[JohnDB]

Seen where some Kjvo have gone so far to say they were into seances and the occult!

Yeah...it's not a good idea to listen to slander.
When someone starts out by impugning character of people....chances are they are not actually studied in what they are talking about except for the conspiracy theories.

 

[YeshuaFan1]

From Wikipedia:
Academic debate through that century, however, increasingly reflected concerns about the Authorized Version shared by some scholars: (a) that subsequent study in oriental languages suggested a need to revise the translation of the Hebrew Bible—both in terms of specific vocabulary, and also in distinguishing descriptive terms from proper names; (b) that the Authorized Version was unsatisfactory in translating the same Greek words and phrases into different English, especially where parallel passages are found in the synoptic gospels; and (c) in the light of subsequent ancient manuscript discoveries, the New Testament translation base of the Greek Textus Receptus could no longer be considered to be the best representation of the original text.[110]

Responding to these concerns, the Convocation of Canterbury resolved in 1870 to undertake a revision of the text of the Authorized Version, intending to retain the original text "except where in the judgement of competent scholars such a change is necessary". The resulting revision was issued as the Revised Version in 1881 (New Testament), 1885 (Old Testament) and 1894 (Apocrypha); but, although it sold widely, the revision did not find popular favour, and it was only reluctantly in 1899 that Convocation approved it for reading in churches.[111]

By the early 20th century, editing had been completed in Cambridge's text, with at least 6 new changes since 1769, and the reversing of at least 30 of the standard Oxford readings. The distinct Cambridge text was printed in the millions, and after the Second World War

The Cambridge Kjv of 1873 was considered the best edition, and had many revisions, so much for Kjvo!

 

[YeshuaFan1]

I read the book or Mormon. The gospel is not found there. Only a perverted gospel

well, starts out with the council of the gods, and Lucifier upset that daddy choose his brother Jesus over him to be messiah!

 

[YeshuaFan1]

You do remember some of the KJV was translated from a Latin based Greek text so you not?

Eramus brought over into his work certain Latin Vulgate readings, and had some wording that we still do not know where he gotr them from!

 

[YeshuaFan1]

Davy wrote:


It should be noted that W&H used ancient manuscripts to establish their text. Since their time there have been other respected texts such as the Nestle texts, the United Bible Societies' texts, etc. All of which are superior to the flawed Received Text used by the KJV.

One important thing found in the KJV is the use of God's name. The KJV translators removed that name and replaced it with the mistranslated "LORD" in nearly all of the many thousands of places it was found in the text they used, but miraculously used it at Ps. 83:18.

Psalm 83:16-18, KJV: "Fill their faces with shame; that they may seek thy name, O LORD [sic]. Let them be confounded and troubled for ever; yea, let them be put to shame, and perish: That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH art the most high over all the earth."

So why has the KJV actually removed that very name from its translation in the thousands of places it appears in the manuscripts and texts?

And why do KJV-only advocates not seek that name and use it as Ps. 83:16-18 demands? Do we ever find them consistently using "Jehovah" as their KJV insists in that scripture.

That is a reason why Dr Macarthus is redoing the Nas next year, as will be putting in Yahweh for the name Lord!

 

[JohnDB]

The Cambridge Kjv of 1873 was considered the best edition, and had many revisions, so much for Kjvo!

And they immediately made the RSV after completing it because the Textus Receptus was trashed and unreliable.

 

[YeshuaFan1]

Not all Mormons use a "retranslated" KJV... some actually do use the regular KJV but still really don't focus on it as much as they do on other books keystone to their religion. (Which isn't Christian)

Joseph Smith made a "better" Kjv, but most of them just stuck to old kjv!

 

[JohnDB]

I believe that currently United Bible Society is on their 5th or 6th revision now...I'm kinda hooked on the 4th myself because that was the one that created the NIV in the 60's.

Also for the Old Testament I use the Biblica Hebraica Stuttengartsia (if I spelled all that correctly I'll be amazed) otherwise known as the BHS.
Both are collaborations of the oldest and most reliable texts/manuscripts available...both noting where copyist errors were made.

 

[YeshuaFan1]

I believe that currently United Bible Society is on their 5th or 6th revision now...I'm kinda hooked on the 4th myself because that was the one that created the NIV in the 60's.

Also for the Old Testament I use the Biblica Hebraica Stuttengartsia (if I spelled all that correctly I'll be amazed) otherwise known as the BHS.
Both are collaborations of the oldest and most reliable texts/manuscripts available...both noting where copyist errors were made.

Nestle Aland 28/Usb 5 currently!

 

[Jane_Doe22]

If you read the Book of Mormon it uses what I call king James english.

I am not sure what bible they use, I had a bible study with one about 20 years ago, out of respect I ready the Book of Mormon, I got about three quarters of the way through when it was so far out in left field it I could no longer go forward

The "Mormon" Bible is the KJV, which is used for all English congregations. Obviously Spanish speakers use a Spanish Bible version, etc.

 

[Truther]

If you think so. You really worry me. There is no gospel in the book if Mormon. It is a perverted made up book using king janes language where they are not even doing what God commanded

It talks about Jesus and God, kinda like the modern versions that directly followed it.

 

[Truther]

The perfect bible was given

since then all we have are what the scribes have rewritten and interpretations of men

it is perfect in that it can lead me to Christ and help make me
Mature

but the English bible is Missing some deep stuff.

Which Bible is perfect?

Is it still in existence?

Can you point me to it?

The word of God endureth forever, correct?

 

[Truther]

They had NO desire to debunk or put down the Kjv, as ALL of them respected its way of speaking and phrasing, but they also all thought could make a better translation closer to what the originals were!
And the general editor of the Niv had repeatably shot down that Lesbian rumor, as she had NOTHING to do with finished product!

To the contrary, I saw her interview as a proofreader. Notice the NIV is leaning towards gay progressives as friendly.

Transgender Virginia Mollenkott and the NIV Bible Translation

 

[YeshuaFan1]

Which Bible is perfect?

Is it still in existence?

Can you point me to it?

The word of God endureth forever, correct?

Only perfect one were the originals!