King James Version Only...?

[Wrangler]

Older manuscripts have been found since 1611 KJV translation was published. The older the manuscripts the more reliable they are. The verses that are "missing" from modern translations were not found in the oldest manuscripts. So, in reality, nothing is missing at all.

Great point! The accusation that modern Bibles have verses 'missing' is from the POV of KJV, which falsely added verses that were never there to begin with.

What's missing from your Bible?

Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus - Textual Criticism 101 - Berean Patriot Note: The following is from a study I did and not taken from the above link. The linked article is very long but very informative. So how did we end up with changes and verses being deleted out of the...

www.christianforums.com

Still relying on copy and pasting? Unable to digest the volume of words to a concise thesis? It's silly to expect your Superman fallacy, appealing to these 46 paragraphs make a cogent point related to the topic.

You don't even reference an authoritative reference on the subject but you own work in a different forum! What's up with that? LOL

 

[rockytopva]

I have used the KJV Open Bible for as long as I can remember. I can remember the Free Will Baptist church awarding me my first KJV Open Bible at the age of 18 for teaching a year of Sunday School there and have delighted in it ever since.

But... There are sometimes I quote out of the KJV and must go back and make sure that the point was well understood and that I did not speak alien to newcomers .

 

[rockytopva]

The First Freewill Baptist Church. Good bunch of people! They would treat me out to dinner on Sundays after church. They also had wonderful foot washing services and would lay their hands and pray for me as they went through the ritual. Use to leave with a wonderful clean feeling as well. Hoping they are still open!

 

[RLT63]

Great point! The accusation that modern Bibles have verses 'missing' is from the POV of KJV, which falsely added verses that were never there to begin with.

Still relying on copy and pasting? Unable to digest the volume of words to a concise thesis? It's silly to expect your Superman fallacy, appealing to these 46 paragraphs make a cogent point related to the topic.

You don't even reference an authoritative reference on the subject but you own work in a different forum! What's up with that? LOL

It’s not a copy and paste

 

[Wrangler]

It’s not a copy and paste

46 paragraphs! It reminds me of that episode in Friends, where Rachel wrote Ross a 14-page letter, both sides.

Can you give us the 1-paragraph cliff notes version?

 

[RLT63]

46 paragraphs! It reminds me of that episode in Friends, where Rachel wrote Ross a 14-page letter, both sides.

Can you give us the 1-paragraph cliff notes version?

The Alexandrian texts are not superior to the Byzantine. There’s nothing wrong with having a modern version but I like to know what was omitted and why. That’s why I like the NET full notes edition. Bottom line, the best Bible is the one that you read

 

[Wrangler]

The Alexandrian texts are not superior to the Byzantine.

First I heard anyone make this claim. What Makes the Alexandrian Manuscripts that Make Up All Modern Bibles Superior to the Byzantine Manuscripts of the KJV and NKJV? - Christian Publishing House Blog

 

[Wrangler]

I like to know what was omitted and why.

This was already explained. The link I provided once again explains it was the Byzantine manuscripts which falsely added text.

 

[RLT63]

This was already explained. The link I provided once again explains it was the Byzantine manuscripts which falsely added text.

The notes in the NET make it clear what was omitted and why but I don’t always agree with the decisions that were made and I don’t necessarily agree with your link. Just because something is older doesn’t make it better. Kind of ironic you want me to read a link you posted but you can’t read my post, and didn’t you give me grief for posting links?

 

[Aunty Jane]

Ah...welcome to the wonderful world of "Christianity" where disagreements about so many things, so often outweigh the agreements.

Can I find God and his Christ in that rabble......NO! That is why I got out of it and studied the Bible for myself from scratch.
I had teachers who did that, and they showed me how to do thorough research.

I have a variety of Bibles, and the Jewish Tanakh, Strongs Concordance and Biblegateway have helped me to make sense of what is otherwise, nonsensical.

I don't believe that people can be raised to spiritual life with a dead language. Archaic English is a dead language. (1 Cor 14:8-9)
Hebrews 4:12...
"For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints from the marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart."

That's why a variety of translations along with a concordance separates the facts from the myths.
Archaic language might be poetic and all.....but for new students of the Bible it is not only confusing but so often downright misleading.

 

[Mr E]

The First Freewill Baptist Church. Good bunch of people! They would treat me out to dinner on Sundays after church. They also had wonderful foot washing services and would lay their hands and pray for me as they went through the ritual. Use to leave with a wonderful clean feeling as well. Hoping they are still open!

Sorry.....but that's kind of weird.

 

[RLT63]

The notes in the NET make it clear what was omitted and why but I don’t always agree with the decisions that were made and I don’t necessarily agree with your link. Just because something is older doesn’t make it better. Kind of ironic you want me to read a link you posted but you can’t read my post, and didn’t you give me grief for posting links?

Let me give you an example, John 5:4. Modern versions omit verse 4- But the story makes no sense without verse 4: Read verse 7:

Jhn 5:2 - Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.
Tools

Jhn 5:3 - In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered,waiting for the moving of the water.

Jhn 5:4 - For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubledthe water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was madewhole of whatsoever disease he had.

Jhn 5:5 - And a certain man was there, which had an infirmity thirty and eightyears.

Jhn 5:6 - When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole?

Jhn 5:7 - The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth downbefore me. / What was troubling the water? Why did the impotent man want to get in the water while it was troubled? Without verse 4 we don’t know. This.is just one example, There are many more.

 

[RLT63]

This was already explained. The link I provided once again explains it was the Byzantine manuscripts which falsely added text.

Here is another example. The Johannine Comma of 1 John 5:7-8: Added or Removed? - Berean Patriot

 

[RLT63]

Let me give you an example, John 5:4. Modern versions omit verse 4- But the story makes no sense without verse 4: Read verse 7:

Jhn 5:2 - Now there is at Jerusalem by the sheep market a pool, which is called in the Hebrew tongue Bethesda, having five porches.
Tools

Jhn 5:3 - In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered,waiting for the moving of the water.

Jhn 5:4 - For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubledthe water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was madewhole of whatsoever disease he had.

Jhn 5:5 - And a certain man was there, which had an infirmity thirty and eightyears.

Jhn 5:6 - When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole?

Jhn 5:7 - The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth downbefore me. / What was troubling the water? Why did the impotent man want to get in the water while it was troubled? Without verse 4 we don’t know. This.is just one example, There are many more.

What's the Best Bible Translation? And More Importantly, Why? - Berean Patriot

This article won't be a quick read because it's an in-depth treatment of the topic, not a gloss. Deciding on the best Bible translation is...

www.bereanpatriot.com

 

[RLT63]

First I heard anyone make this claim. What Makes the Alexandrian Manuscripts that Make Up All Modern Bibles Superior to the Byzantine Manuscripts of the KJV and NKJV? - Christian Publishing House Blog

Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus - Textual Criticism 101 - Berean Patriot

There are three major competing Greek sources to use for translating the New Testament: the Critical Text, the Majority Text, and the Textus Receptus. The science of assembling these manuscripts is called “Textual Criticism”, and you can consider this a complete Textual Criticism 101 article...

www.bereanpatriot.com

 

[RLT63]

The notes in the NET make it clear what was omitted and why but I don’t always agree with the decisions that were made and I don’t necessarily agree with your link. Just because something is older doesn’t make it better. Kind of ironic you want me to read a link you posted but you can’t read my post, and didn’t you give me grief for posting links?

Here is another example

Mar 1:2 - as it is written in Isaiah the prophet: “I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare your way”. / What’s wrong with that? That’s not Isaiah, that’s Malachi. The KJV and NKJV say as it is written in the Prophets

 

[RLT63]

46 paragraphs! It reminds me of that episode in Friends, where Rachel wrote Ross a 14-page letter, both sides.

Can you give us the 1-paragraph cliff notes version?

Try reading it. Then you would understand why some of us don’t believe the Alexandrian texts are the superior ones.

 

[RLT63]

Great point! The accusation that modern Bibles have verses 'missing' is from the POV of KJV, which falsely added verses that were never there to begin with.

Still relying on copy and pasting? Unable to digest the volume of words to a concise thesis? It's silly to expect your Superman fallacy, appealing to these 46 paragraphs make a cogent point related to the topic.

You don't even reference an authoritative reference on the subject but you own work in a different forum! What's up with that? LOL

There’s no reference because it’s my material . If you would have read the first few lines I stated this is from a study I did

 

[RLT63]

I have used the KJV Open Bible for as long as I can remember. I can remember the Free Will Baptist church awarding me my first KJV Open Bible at the age of 18 for teaching a year of Sunday School there and have delighted in it ever since.

But... There are sometimes I quote out of the KJV and must go back and make sure that the point was well understood and that I did not speak alien to newcomers .

That’s why I like the NKJV. The language is easier to understand

 

[Wrangler]

Try reading it. Then you would understand why some of us don’t believe the Alexandrian texts are the superior ones.

No thanks. The premise that earlier manuscripts, undergoing fewer revisions-rewrites-copying is somehow less accurate is not logical.

My BS meter is finely tuned these days and I am leery of anyone who requires such volume, 46-paragraphs, such quantity to obviously compensate for quality. This is why I asked for the Cliff Notes version. It caused you to condense the volume to the basic premises, which are fatally flawed. They are fatally flawed for two reasons: the FROM and the TO of the KJV translation.

I don't need to become an expert in linguistics. I don't need to substitute KJV for Byzantine and non-KJV with Alexandrian text references to make myself appear more erudite. The TO of the KJV translation is archaic, obsolete. Claiming it is the best translation is false on its face given the fact that no one speaks Middle English anymore.

So, you retreat to the FROM part of the translation. I thank God that the majority of people, the majority of Christians, the majority of academics recognize the newer translations are from more reliable manuscripts.