- Dec 31, 2010
- 5,190
- 2,392
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
KJV 1611 Version
- Thread starter rockytopva
- Start date
-
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!
No book does that (slap around a fantasy, unscriptural depiction of a devil). Only the Holy Spirit can do that, but I suppose that pic is an apt metaphore of the run of the mill kjonlyist 
Yeah, Satan has his scribes and translators too, and has been very successful at watering down the Scriptures with new versions. He can't get rid of the KJV so he invents new ones.
I'm being the total bad guy here with my following sarcastic comment - but does that mean most KJVOer's who use the 1769 revision are out of luck? Maybe it's just a demon-slapper?
- Dec 31, 2010
- 5,190
- 2,392
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
I would like to read the 1611 version totally through one day. The tougheset part would be the spelling differences from today.
U = V (Example: loued = loved; gauve = gave)
y (Used as 'the')
nn (Sonne = Son [an example of phoenetic spelling])
V = U (Example: vnto = unto | See John 1:11)
VV = W (Example: svvord = sword) [The V was called a 'U', this is why we still call a W a 'double U']
I = J (Example: Iesus = Jesus | See John 1:17)
Lowercase "s" letters look similar to "f" letters (Notice the 'Old Testament' type example on the right)
From Matthew 16
13 ¶ When Iesus came into the coasts of Cesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom doe men say, that I, the sonne of man, am?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art Iohn the Baptist, some Elias, and others Ieremias, or one of þe Prophets.
15 He saith vnto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered, and said, Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God.
17 And Iesus answered, and said vnto him, Blessed art thou Simon Bar Iona: for flesh and blood hath not reueiled it vnto thee, but my Father which is in heauen.
U = V (Example: loued = loved; gauve = gave)
y (Used as 'the')
nn (Sonne = Son [an example of phoenetic spelling])
V = U (Example: vnto = unto | See John 1:11)
VV = W (Example: svvord = sword) [The V was called a 'U', this is why we still call a W a 'double U']
I = J (Example: Iesus = Jesus | See John 1:17)
Lowercase "s" letters look similar to "f" letters (Notice the 'Old Testament' type example on the right)
From Matthew 16
13 ¶ When Iesus came into the coasts of Cesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom doe men say, that I, the sonne of man, am?
14 And they said, Some say that thou art Iohn the Baptist, some Elias, and others Ieremias, or one of þe Prophets.
15 He saith vnto them, But whom say ye that I am?
16 And Simon Peter answered, and said, Thou art Christ the sonne of the liuing God.
17 And Iesus answered, and said vnto him, Blessed art thou Simon Bar Iona: for flesh and blood hath not reueiled it vnto thee, but my Father which is in heauen.
Whenever I encounter a KJV purist I ask him what this means ......
Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem. (KJV)
It usually takes them about 10 minutes to explain it as follows .......
On the first day of every week, each of you should take some of your money and put it in a special place. Save up as much as you can from what you are blessed with. Then you will not have to gather it all after I come. When I arrive, I will send some men to take your gift to Jerusalem. (NLT)
The KJV reader always ends up paraphrasing everything in order to make sense of it.
Why not just read the paraphrased NLT version in the first place
Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem. (KJV)
It usually takes them about 10 minutes to explain it as follows .......
On the first day of every week, each of you should take some of your money and put it in a special place. Save up as much as you can from what you are blessed with. Then you will not have to gather it all after I come. When I arrive, I will send some men to take your gift to Jerusalem. (NLT)
The KJV reader always ends up paraphrasing everything in order to make sense of it.
Why not just read the paraphrased NLT version in the first place
This topic is like being concerned with a paper cut when the house is burning down around you. Same with Calvinism. Worthless
I wish I weren't an admin so I could tell you to drop dead, but I am, so I can't.
This is a thread in the entertainment forum, so be entertained or be elsewhere
This is a thread in the entertainment forum, so be entertained or be elsewhere
I have a copy and do consult it periodically.
The most difficult thing when I sit with it for a short period is the u, v and vv differences. It's really a matter of training your mind, and I am sure would become easier with repetition, especially reading it through. However, in College (and even some in high school), we did read Chaucer, Beowulf and other works in middle or archaic English, so I have a bit of a professional background in the subject. My experience is that it's just a matter of doing it.
I also have a 1611 KJV version and have used it in the past to help me get through a KJV Christian bible study course. It was quite difficult task because I had to use a number of bible versions ie: NIV, Amplified and NASB to give me an understanding of the meaning and then to reply back using the KJV. :huh:
It was a great exercise though and a blessing!
It was a great exercise though and a blessing!
I grew up on the KJV 1611 and have no problem explaining in simple terms for those who are illiterate :huh: what the meaning of a word or scripture verse(s) itself, are about. Go figure.Arnie Manitoba said:
A very good historical account of the KJV and the surrounding times is "In The Beginning" by Alister McGrath. It is very enlightening and an easy read.
The KJV even uses letters that aren't in our modern alphabet. The word "the" is spelled with the letter thorn representing TH and a superscript representing E. Out of context, the vast majority of KJV-onlyists wouldn't even begin to recognize the word.rockytopva said:
But, actually, the toughest part isn't overcoming the spelling, it's overcoming the meaning of words. Most words have changed significantly in meaning since 1611. At least and old spelling is glaring but a changed meaning might be undetectable.
The 1611 KJV is unreadable to modern people, including KJV-onlyists.
I dont think anyone has an issue with the accuracy of the KJV
The big issue is readability .... and the KJV fails terribly .... and it's simply because of the language difference from 1600's England to today.
I think the modern translations have opened the door wide for everybody to read and enjoy their bibles.
Versions like the NLT are very readable , no thinking required to figure out the meaning ..... then for more accurate study of specific passages NIV KJV NASB etc. are all excellent.
The big issue is readability .... and the KJV fails terribly .... and it's simply because of the language difference from 1600's England to today.
I think the modern translations have opened the door wide for everybody to read and enjoy their bibles.
Versions like the NLT are very readable , no thinking required to figure out the meaning ..... then for more accurate study of specific passages NIV KJV NASB etc. are all excellent.
It certainly makes for interesting discussion. The KJV only group swear by their version based upon it's translation process and the greek and hebrew manuscript(s) used. The ESV I think is a faithful & excellent modern translation and is equal in popularity to the 1611 version.Arnie Manitoba said:
One of the remarkable things about it is it primarily is based upon 'formal equivalence' and uses 'dynamic equivalence' where formal equivalence is not appropriate or fails to render the scripture as accurately as possible to the greek manuscripts, etc.
Personally I think they have struck a harmonious balance between the two where the KJV is "FE" throughout and the NIV is "DE" throughout.
Anyway that's my two cents worth.
You should move the NIV to the same class as the NLT. And, for accurate study, KJV NASB etc.Arnie Manitoba said:
The shame is that many of the study tools such as Storng's and Vines are keyed to KJV because of it's popularity. I find that there are some much better translations available but are not directly keyed to lexicons and Hebrew/ Greek dictionaries and word studies so it takes a more disciplined study.Arnie Manitoba said:
KJV's history is full of less than spiritual motivations and is responsible for many false teachings.
IMO, Rotherham's emphasized, Concordant literal, and Young's literal are far more accurate than the KJV with all of it's revisions. Remember just because something is more popular doesn't make it the best and in some cases when it comes to the spiritual it is usually the other way around, what is best is not popular.
Since 1984 the NIV has always been my "go to bible" (I have 14 different bibles)Polt said:
I find the NIV the most accurate for conveying what the scriptures actually mean
Similar threads
