KJV versus Modern Translations

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Laish

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2019
208
251
63
57
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Okay but it's not part of the primary - genuine - canon.
True but the Catholic Church are the ones that came up with term deuterocanonical for their additional books . Protestants call it the Apocryphal. The term apocryphal is more fitting meaning secret or non canonical.
Blessings
Bill
 

farouk

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2009
30,790
19,231
113
North America
True but the Catholic Church are the ones that came up with term deuterocanonical for their additional books . Protestants call it the Apocryphal. The term apocryphal is more fitting meaning secret or non canonical.
Blessings
Bill
Sometimes clerics will project obscurity in order to advance clerisy while obscuring the authority of Scripture.
 

farouk

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2009
30,790
19,231
113
North America
True but the Catholic Church are the ones that came up with term deuterocanonical for their additional books . Protestants call it the Apocryphal. The term apocryphal is more fitting meaning secret or non canonical.
Blessings
Bill
Good to call it simply the Apocrypha...
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Good to call it simply the Apocrypha...
Correct. Deuterocanonical means that a second canon was established, and is on the same level as the first. But the fact is that there is no second-canon, regardless of the Catholic and Orthodox positions. The Mormons also have a second canon, different from that of the Apocrypha. And then we have the writings of E. G. White being regarded as practically canonical.
 

farouk

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2009
30,790
19,231
113
North America
You may also note that the Septuagint often differed depending where it was used . None of the fragments found in or around Jerusalem have the apocrypha.except those discovered along with the Dead Sea scrolls .
This also reflects why the orthodox and catholic Bibles differ .
Blessings
Bill
It has been said also that the Septuagint proves that God uses translations...
 

tzcho2

Well-Known Member
Feb 15, 2019
1,646
846
113
Boston
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I'll bet a bazillion dollars those videos you post are hit jobs that do nothing to acquaint the viewer with an accurate representation of the facts or history.

As I stated earlier, only someone with ROMAN CATHOLIC SYMPATHIES could ever be pleased with the notion that God kept from His people what the Holy Spirit originally inspired only to hand it over to the Roman Catholic church 15 centuries later in the form of the Latin Vulgate - WHICH THE CRITICAL TEXT MSS AND ALL THE NEW VERSIONS AGREE WITH STUPENDOUSLY.
;) Don't be so quick or you risk loosing a bazillion dollars!!!
I began watching the videos and they are an intelligent discussion by different presenters who are from all sides of this issue. I personally prefer KJ and I'm not scared or threatened to watch people discuss these different versions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CoreIssue

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
It has been said also that the Septuagint proves that God uses translations...
Possibly. But those who have made a careful study of the Septuagint have concluded that it was a Greek corruption of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) and also added a whole raft of apocryphal non-canonical books. It was used by Hellenistic Jews outside Palestine, who had already adopted some pagan and Greek philosophical ideas. See The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah by Alfred Edersheim for starters.
 

farouk

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2009
30,790
19,231
113
North America
Possibly. But those who have made a careful study of the Septuagint have concluded that it was a Greek corruption of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) and also added a whole raft of apocryphal non-canonical books. It was used by Hellenistic Jews outside Palestine, who had already adopted some pagan and Greek philosophical ideas. See The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah by Alfred Edersheim for starters.
The fact that in the New Testament the Lord Jesus is recorded as having quoted from the Septuagint is part of the equation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CoreIssue

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The fact that in the New Testament the Lord Jesus is recorded as having quoted from the Septuagint is part of the equation.
1611 KJV had the apocryphal.

So I'm trying to argue it was separated from books Bible, but you can't tell that just by looking at it.
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The fact that in the New Testament the Lord Jesus is recorded as having quoted from the Septuagint is part of the equation.
There is doubt whatsoever that (a)Christ quoted exclusively from the Hebrew Tanakh, since He Himself limited the Hebrews Scriptures to the 24 books in the Tanakh (Luke 24) whereas the Septuagint has about 56 books and (b) many translated verses into the Greek directly from the Hebrew would resemble those in the Septuagint (since it was not a wholesale replacement of the Tanakh).

So what you see is an ILLUSION. Dig deeper.
 

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
There is doubt whatsoever that (a)Christ quoted exclusively from the Hebrew Tanakh, since He Himself limited the Hebrews Scriptures to the 24 books in the Tanakh (Luke 24) whereas the Septuagint has about 56 books and (b) many translated verses into the Greek directly from the Hebrew would resemble those in the Septuagint (since it was not a wholesale replacement of the Tanakh).

So what you see is an ILLUSION. Dig deeper.
You mean like your KJV illusion it is the only proper Bible?
 

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
7,184
2,534
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
;) Don't be so quick or you risk loosing a bazillion dollars!!!
I began watching the videos and they are an intelligent discussion by different presenters who are from all sides of this issue. I personally prefer KJ and I'm not scared or threatened to watch people discuss these different versions.
I've heard the arguments before. Proponents of the Critical text refuse to acknowledge certain facts of history which are crucial in condemning these false MSS. The same way those two leftist backpackers in Morocco who refused to acknowledge the imminent threat that is Islam - and only realized it when their empty heads were being sawn off by those of "the religion of peace".
 

Lady Crosstalk

Well-Known Member
Feb 16, 2019
2,069
1,114
113
49
Ontario
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
When will you stop characterizing the debate as "KJV VS. All Others" when it is actually the Textus Receptus VS. the Critical Text, the Byzantian VS. the Western/Alexandrian?

As you've been shown, the Critical Text is based on an extreme minority of all ancient MSS and has been proven to be steeped in questionable circumstances -
  • totally reckless compilation and deviation from strict methods and best practices of genuine ancient scribes
  • dated to be around the time of Constantine's commission to Eusebius (who was a disciple of that deceived occultist Origen) for the compilation of an "ecumenical Bible" intended to unite pagans with the church by, through removal of key texts which point to the exclusivity of Him as Savior and God, a Total Onslaught on the sole divinity of Christ
  • the widely known then but almost entirely unknown today fact that those false Bibles were rejected and discarded by the early church (only to be "discovered" as the oldest MSS which many like you have erroneously concluded that "oldest" means "what God originally intended)
  • suspicion as to the genuineness of the Protestantism of Westcott, Hort, Tichendorf, and their band of "Merry Mary Men" and papal intrigue surrounding their events of the 19th century
  • coupled with the fact that older letters from ECFs contain that which is present in the Byzantian MSS (from which the Textus Receptus is compiled) but which is absent in the MSS that you defend so fiercely
  • the fact that the Alexandrian MSS, upon which the Critical Text is based, is called "Alexandrian" for a good reason: most of it was found in Alexandria - THE CAPITAL OF OCCULTISM - where God picked the mightiest Pharaoh to ever live to demonstrate His omnipotent power at the time of the Exodus - the same world renown, mighty Pharaoh of Pharaohs who was called "the Napoleon of Egypt" - the same Pharaoh who was directly responsible for the compilation of the Book of the Dead, the "bible" of the occult world - the same Pharaoh who got his butt handed to him by my Lord in the spring of 1450 B.C. - and you along with Westcott and company expect such ancient MSS to be "what God originally intended" while dismissing the Byzantian MSS from Palestine - WHERE CHRISTIANITY WAS BORN - as full of errors?

But, Phoneman, the Sadducees and Pharisees had nothing but the pure word: They had extremely strict rules that led to the preservation of the Scriptures. Jesus Himself testifies to the accuracy of the Scriptures in John 10:35--->"...the Scriptures cannot be broken." And they STILL blew it when it came to recognizing who the Messiah was and is.

We don't want to be "straining at gnats and swallowing camels" which is what the religious authorities in Jesus' day appeared to be doing. Do you not think that the Holy Spirit can guard the word that He inspired and deliver it to the believer's heart in a pure way?
 

Enoch111

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2018
17,688
15,996
113
Alberta
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Do you not think that the Holy Spirit can guard the word that He inspired and deliver it to the believer's heart in a pure way?
The Holy Spirit has indeed guarded and preserved the written Word of God in the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts which are faithfully translated in the King James Bible and the Geneva Bible (among other Reformation Bibles).

But ever since the 19th century this pure text of the Bible has been under attack by unbelieving scholars and critics, who chose to promote a handful of CORRUPTED MANUSCRIPTS (the Minority or Critical Text) and that is what you will find in all modern Bible versions.

Christians have been informed about this attack on the Bible, but many continue to promote the corrupted Bibles instead of staying with the King James Bible. And for those who need updated versions of the KJV, there are a few out there (barring the NKJV which has also been corrupted).
 

Lady Crosstalk

Well-Known Member
Feb 16, 2019
2,069
1,114
113
49
Ontario
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
A different look at Bible version disagreements.

John Ankerberg Show (KJV vs New Translations) - YouTube

Very interesting is the KJVO do not argue anything but they have faith in the KJV.

Start at the beginning of these videos, most are Good to listen closely. Discussions are broken up into multiple videos videos.

What argument I find obscene is that there was no Bible before 1611. But they also admit 1611 is not the KJV of today. The 1769 is, which got rid of the books of the apocrypha.

Moving beyond that it deals with the broader questions concerning the Bible, all versions.

Also notable is the claim that the KJV's is word for word, which is bogus. You cannot translate from one language to another word for word. It is impossible.

Yes--what are called "word-for-word" really aren't. The translators must account for idiomatic expressions and sometimes, there aren't even equivalent words in another language so they must supply a group of words to try to say the same thing as the original text.
 

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I've heard the arguments before. Proponents of the Critical text refuse to acknowledge certain facts of history which are crucial in condemning these false MSS. The same way those two leftist backpackers in Morocco who refused to acknowledge the imminent threat that is Islam - and only realized it when their empty heads were being sawn off by those of "the religion of peace".
You who refuse to listen to a single video on the thread.
 

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Holy Spirit has indeed guarded and preserved the written Word of God in the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts which are faithfully translated in the King James Bible and the Geneva Bible (among other Reformation Bibles).

But ever since the 19th century this pure text of the Bible has been under attack by unbelieving scholars and critics, who chose to promote a handful of CORRUPTED MANUSCRIPTS (the Minority or Critical Text) and that is what you will find in all modern Bible versions.

Christians have been informed about this attack on the Bible, but many continue to promote the corrupted Bibles instead of staying with the King James Bible. And for those who need updated versions of the KJV, there are a few out there (barring the NKJV which has also been corrupted).
Your problem is Christ said he would preserve the teachings, not a translation.

That has been done.

You cannot prove he chose a certain translation as superior.

You who refuse to listen to a single video because you are close minded.

So where was the Bible before either of your allowed translation?

And reformers who have been proven to be nonbiblical in many ways.

Calvinism as an example.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Lady Crosstalk

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Yes--what are called "word-for-word" really aren't. The translators must account for idiomatic expressions and sometimes, there aren't even equivalent words in another language so they must supply a group of words to try to say the same thing as the original text.
Exactly.

Every translation contains dynamic translation.

A great example is the hand. In English it does not include the wrist. In Greek it does.

Mailing someone through the hand on across results in the nail ripping out. Through the rest and ankle bone will hold the weight.

Nor was it a cross like most envision. It was an X
bible %.png
 

Lady Crosstalk

Well-Known Member
Feb 16, 2019
2,069
1,114
113
49
Ontario
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
But ever since the 19th century this pure text of the Bible has been under attack by unbelieving scholars and critics, who chose to promote a handful of CORRUPTED MANUSCRIPTS (the Minority or Critical Text) and that is what you will find in all modern Bible versions.
But God has "outsmarted" those unbelievers and has made sure that those who belong to Him are able to understand the pure word from the context and through duplication--under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I was raised with the KJV but was clueless to put it together until I became a Christian, by the convicting power of the Holy Spirit. The early 20th century's, C.H. Spurgeon (arguably, one of the greatest preachers ever of God's word) once said:"The need of the hour for today's ministry is believing scholarship joined with earnest spirituality, the one springing from the other as fruit from the root. The need is Biblical doctrine so understood and felt that it sets men's hearts on fire." C.H Spurgeon had NO formal academic training in theology but he did have 10,000 volumes in his own personal library.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Phoneman777