New King James Version ALERT!

[TheUnworthyServant]

Here's a very good example.

John5:39-40 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

How do you "search" the Scriptures? You "read" them.

 

[jiggyfly]

How do you "search" the Scriptures? You "read" them.

Your misunderstanding my post, there were two points.

One, the text you quoted from Romans states that faith comes by hearing, not reading.

Two, the point being made in the text I quoted is the pharisees knew the scriptures well and thought that eternal life could be obtained through the scriptures.

 

[Samuel Pickens]

H. L. Mencken (1880-1956), of all people, the agnostic Baltimore Sun reporter and literary critic who covered the Scopes trial gave eloquent testimony to the superiority of the KJV. Mencken's quote I give in full from the preface to Gustavus Paine's The Learned Men (the KJV translators):


It is the most beautiful of all the translations of the Bible; indeed, it is probably the most beautiful piece of writing in all the literature of the world. Many attempts have been made to purge it of its errors and obscurities. An English Revised Version was published in 1885 and an American Revised Version in 1901, and since then many learned but misguided men have sought to produce translations that should be mathematically accurate, and in the plain speech of everyday. But the Authorized Version has never yielded to any of them, for it is palpably and overwhelmingly better than they are, just as it is better than the Greek New Testament, or the Vulgate, or the Septuagint. Its English is extraordinarily simple, pure, eloquent, lovely. It is a mine of lordly and incomparable poetry, at once the most stirring and the most touching ever heard of.”


Of course the KJB has no errors or true obscurities, but overall such a statement from H. L. Mencken is astounding. For us today the KJV is better than the Greek New Testament and is the most beautiful writing in all literature. The greatest Greek scholars among us do not think in Koine Greek, and the priesthood of the believer requires that those in the pews have faithful vernacular translations.


Since Gustavus Paine did not give the location of this quote of Mencken's I called Mr. Fitzpatrick, curator of the Mencken Collection at the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore, and asked him whether he had seen the Paine quote. He had not, but he said it certainly sounded like Mencken. He sent me some other newspaper and magazine articles written by Mencken. They are just as strong as the Paine quote. If any man thinks KJV only people are rough on liberal theologians and text critics that man should look at the last sentence of an article entitled “The Book.” There Mencken said, obviously in jest, but a jest that was made as a commentary on modern translations, that the 300th anniversary of the KJV in 1911 should be celebrated by the “wholesale hanging of so-called biblical scholars.”


In an article from the American Mercury of December, 1931 Mencken defends J. Gresham Machen against the modernists at Princeton who had just tried and fired him and even seems to take Machen's side. Machen graduated as valedictorian from Johns Hopkins University. Mencken and Machen were both in Baltimore at the same time, but Mencken never met Machen. Nevertheless, he wrote several stories about Machen's trial by the Presbyterian General Assembly which showed quite a bit of respect for him and took his side. Machen was the first man tried by a liberal university for being orthodox. But though he was a believer he favored the critical text. Soon after he was fired from Princeton he founded Westminster Theological Seminary, and in turn it became the birthplace of the NIV..


Mencken did meet many times with Howard A. Kelly, M.D., the great and famous fundamentalist physician who founded and headed the Department of Ob-Gyn at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore from its beginning in 1889 until 1933. Kelly was one of the great “four doctors” who were present from the beginning of the Hospital. Their famous group portrait hangs today in the rotunda of the Hopkins Hospital. They were Sir William Osler, medicine, William Halstead, surgery, William Welch, pathology, and Howard Kelly, obstetrics and gynecology. Kelly was the only fundamentalist of the four. But Mencken, as one would expect, showed considerably less respect for Kelly than for Machen, because Kelly was a soul winner who believed in the any moment second coming and a literal 6 day creation. Kelly was also a prohibitionist and very dry while Machen, according to Mencken's newspaper articles was “a wet” and “may have voted for Al Smith in the 1928 election.” Mencken called Kelly's views simian. So the differences, in Mencken's mind, between Machen and Kelly were creationism, prohibition, and eschatology. But it is striking that Menken preferred the English Bible, the KJV, to Machen's critical Greek text. Mencken was courageous enough to defend Machen aganinst the liberal Princeton academics and also courageous enough to admit the superiority of the KJV. At least in these instances Mencken was right.

 

[jiggyfly]

H. L. Mencken (1880-1956), of all people, the agnostic Baltimore Sun reporter and literary critic who covered the Scopes trial gave eloquent testimony to the superiority of the KJV. Mencken's quote I give in full from the preface to Gustavus Paine's The Learned Men (the KJV translators):


It is the most beautiful of all the translations of the Bible; indeed, it is probably the most beautiful piece of writing in all the literature of the world. Many attempts have been made to purge it of its errors and obscurities. An English Revised Version was published in 1885 and an American Revised Version in 1901, and since then many learned but misguided men have sought to produce translations that should be mathematically accurate, and in the plain speech of everyday. But the Authorized Version has never yielded to any of them, for it is palpably and overwhelmingly better than they are, just as it is better than the Greek New Testament, or the Vulgate, or the Septuagint. Its English is extraordinarily simple, pure, eloquent, lovely. It is a mine of lordly and incomparable poetry, at once the most stirring and the most touching ever heard of.”


Of course the KJB has no errors or true obscurities, but overall such a statement from H. L. Mencken is astounding. For us today the KJV is better than the Greek New Testament and is the most beautiful writing in all literature. The greatest Greek scholars among us do not think in Koine Greek, and the priesthood of the believer requires that those in the pews have faithful vernacular translations.


Since Gustavus Paine did not give the location of this quote of Mencken's I called Mr. Fitzpatrick, curator of the Mencken Collection at the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore, and asked him whether he had seen the Paine quote. He had not, but he said it certainly sounded like Mencken. He sent me some other newspaper and magazine articles written by Mencken. They are just as strong as the Paine quote. If any man thinks KJV only people are rough on liberal theologians and text critics that man should look at the last sentence of an article entitled “The Book.” There Mencken said, obviously in jest, but a jest that was made as a commentary on modern translations, that the 300th anniversary of the KJV in 1911 should be celebrated by the “wholesale hanging of so-called biblical scholars.”


In an article from the American Mercury of December, 1931 Mencken defends J. Gresham Machen against the modernists at Princeton who had just tried and fired him and even seems to take Machen's side. Machen graduated as valedictorian from Johns Hopkins University. Mencken and Machen were both in Baltimore at the same time, but Mencken never met Machen. Nevertheless, he wrote several stories about Machen's trial by the Presbyterian General Assembly which showed quite a bit of respect for him and took his side. Machen was the first man tried by a liberal university for being orthodox. But though he was a believer he favored the critical text. Soon after he was fired from Princeton he founded Westminster Theological Seminary, and in turn it became the birthplace of the NIV..


Mencken did meet many times with Howard A. Kelly, M.D., the great and famous fundamentalist physician who founded and headed the Department of Ob-Gyn at Johns Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore from its beginning in 1889 until 1933. Kelly was one of the great “four doctors” who were present from the beginning of the Hospital. Their famous group portrait hangs today in the rotunda of the Hopkins Hospital. They were Sir William Osler, medicine, William Halstead, surgery, William Welch, pathology, and Howard Kelly, obstetrics and gynecology. Kelly was the only fundamentalist of the four. But Mencken, as one would expect, showed considerably less respect for Kelly than for Machen, because Kelly was a soul winner who believed in the any moment second coming and a literal 6 day creation. Kelly was also a prohibitionist and very dry while Machen, according to Mencken's newspaper articles was “a wet” and “may have voted for Al Smith in the 1928 election.” Mencken called Kelly's views simian. So the differences, in Mencken's mind, between Machen and Kelly were creationism, prohibition, and eschatology. But it is striking that Menken preferred the English Bible, the KJV, to Machen's critical Greek text. Mencken was courageous enough to defend Machen aganinst the liberal Princeton academics and also courageous enough to admit the superiority of the KJV. At least in these instances Mencken was right.

looks like more biased propaganda for the KJVO

 

[Samuel Pickens]

looks like more biased propaganda for the KJVO

You obviously didn't read it ------- it is comments from an agnostic................. Not a Christian.

Many people do not believe the Bible to be the Word of God. But, read what even an agnostic said about the Bible. If a jiggyfly doesn't want to read it; OK. But let others have their own opinion.

 

[jiggyfly]

You obviously didn't read it ------- it is comments from an agnostic................. Not a Christian.

Many people do not believe the Bible to be the Word of God. But, read what even an agnostic said about the Bible. If a jiggyfly doesn't want to read it; OK. But let others have their own opinion.

I read it and posted my opinion just as you have posted your opinion in other threads.

So do you give a non-believer's opinion weight to the credibility towards KJV?

 

[Samuel Pickens]

So do you give a non-believer's opinion weight to the credibility towards KJV?

Now you know. Jesus Christ is Lord. Prepare ye the way of the Lord. He is soon coming. Maybe those Origen, Eusebius, Alexander, Valantinous, Plationus, Pamphilus and their Greek text from the secular view to incorporate Plato and Arianism whom through their attempt to write in thier interputations and thought and philosophies is more to your taste. Those that pervert the Word of God. Nor in your vain attempt to expound what you don't know. I started studing manuscript evidenance and textual critism in 1978.

 

[jiggyfly]

So do you give a non-believer's opinion weight to the credibility towards KJV?

Now you know. Jesus Christ is Lord. Prepare ye the way of the Lord. He is soon coming. Maybe those Origen, Eusebius, Alexander, Valantinous, Plationus, Pamphilus and their Greek text from the secular view to incorporate Plato and Arianism whom through their attempt to write in thier interputations and thought and philosophies is more to your taste. Those that pervert the Word of God. Nor in your vain attempt to expound what you don't know. I started studing manuscript evidenance and textual critism in 1978.

Why then are you dodging the question?

 

[Samuel Pickens]

Why then are you dodging the question?

You really are uninitiated and do not have a clue or know any of the above, their text or basic for their writings or thier philosophies and their standing on Plato; do you? Not even a foggy idea.

I've dodged nothing. But I did think you may have had some basic knowledge. I started manuscript evidence and textual critism in 1978.
If you don't believe the Bible; try not to pervert it or take some silly treatie and exhault it. Stop and think: what if you were standing directly in front of Jesus Christ.

 

[jiggyfly]

You really are uninitiated and do not have a clue or know any of the above, their text or basic for their writings or thier philosophies and their standing on Plato; do you? Not even a foggy idea.

I've dodged nothing. But I did think you may have had some basic knowledge. I started manuscript evidence and textual critism in 1978.
If you don't believe the Bible; try not to pervert it or take some silly treatie and exhault it. Stop and think: what if you were standing directly in front of Jesus Christ.

If your not dodging it then simply answer it.

 

[Samuel Pickens]

If only you could read and understand what you read:

There are millions in Martyr's Mirror the book is ~1572 pages. It is $86 USD but can be read in the Internet. Next, there's Foxe's Book of Martyrs. Again; it is available mostly on the Internet. Again, "The Trail of Blood"; can be read on the Internet mostly.

This is the Internet. You are looking at it now. It list 17 centuries.............. but keep reading:

Martyrs Mirror: A Christian Book of Martyr Stories
Similar to John Foxe's book of martyr stories, this classic book of 16th century martyrs includes firsthand accounts of trials and letters from prison, ...
www.homecomers.org/mirror/contents.htm

The Martyrs Mirror or The Bloody Theater, first published in 1660 in DutchDutch languageDutch is a West Germanic language spoken by over 22 million people as a native language, and over 5 million people as a second language.
"1% of the EU population claims to speak Dutch well enough in order to have a conversation." Outside the European Union the number of second language...
by Thieleman J. van BraghtThieleman J. van BraghtThieleman J. van Braght was the Anabaptist author of the Martyrs Mirror or The Bloody Theater, first published in 1660 in Dutch. This work claimed to document the stories and testimonies of various early Protestants and opponents of the Roman Catholic Church who died as martyrs...
, documents the stories and testimonies of Christian martyrMartyrA martyr is somebody who suffers persecution and death for refusing to renounce a belief, usually religious.-Meaning:...
s, especially Anabaptists. The full title of the book is The Bloody Theater or Martyrs Mirror of the Defenseless ChristianChristianA Christian is a person who adheres to Christianity, an Abrahamic, monotheistic, religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, who Christians believe was the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, and the Son of God.The term "Christian" is also used adjectivally to...
s who baptized only upon confession of faith, and who suffered and died for the testimony of JesusJesusJesus of Nazareth —also known as Jesus Christ or occasionally Jesus the Christ—is the central figure of Christianity. Within most Christian denominations...
, their Saviour, from the time of Christ to the year A.D. 1660. The use of the word defenseless in this case refers to the Anabaptist belief in non-resistance. The book includes accounts of the martyrdom of the apostlesTwelve ApostlesIn Christianity, apostles were missionaries among the leaders in the Early Church and, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, Jesus Christ himself. The term was also used, especially by the Gospel of Luke, for "the Twelve," Jesus' inner circle of disciples...
and the stories of martyrs from previous centuries with beliefs similar to the Anabaptists.


If you care to do simple searches; you will easily find the millions of Christians martyred by countries and catholics.

 

[jiggyfly]

If only you could read and understand what you read:

There are millions in Martyr's Mirror the book is ~1572 pages. It is $86 USD but can be read in the Internet. Next, there's Foxe's Book of Martyrs. Again; it is available mostly on the Internet. Again, "The Trail of Blood"; can be read on the Internet mostly.

This is the Internet. You are looking at it now. It list 17 centuries.............. but keep reading:

Martyrs Mirror: A Christian Book of Martyr Stories
Similar to John Foxe's book of martyr stories, this classic book of 16th century martyrs includes firsthand accounts of trials and letters from prison, ...
www.homecomers.org/mirror/contents.htm

The Martyrs Mirror or The Bloody Theater, first published in 1660 in DutchDutch languageDutch is a West Germanic language spoken by over 22 million people as a native language, and over 5 million people as a second language.
"1% of the EU population claims to speak Dutch well enough in order to have a conversation." Outside the European Union the number of second language...
by Thieleman J. van BraghtThieleman J. van BraghtThieleman J. van Braght was the Anabaptist author of the Martyrs Mirror or The Bloody Theater, first published in 1660 in Dutch. This work claimed to document the stories and testimonies of various early Protestants and opponents of the Roman Catholic Church who died as martyrs...
, documents the stories and testimonies of Christian martyrMartyrA martyr is somebody who suffers persecution and death for refusing to renounce a belief, usually religious.-Meaning:...
s, especially Anabaptists. The full title of the book is The Bloody Theater or Martyrs Mirror of the Defenseless ChristianChristianA Christian is a person who adheres to Christianity, an Abrahamic, monotheistic, religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, who Christians believe was the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible, and the Son of God.The term "Christian" is also used adjectivally to...
s who baptized only upon confession of faith, and who suffered and died for the testimony of JesusJesusJesus of Nazareth —also known as Jesus Christ or occasionally Jesus the Christ—is the central figure of Christianity. Within most Christian denominations...
, their Saviour, from the time of Christ to the year A.D. 1660. The use of the word defenseless in this case refers to the Anabaptist belief in non-resistance. The book includes accounts of the martyrdom of the apostlesTwelve ApostlesIn Christianity, apostles were missionaries among the leaders in the Early Church and, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, Jesus Christ himself. The term was also used, especially by the Gospel of Luke, for "the Twelve," Jesus' inner circle of disciples...
and the stories of martyrs from previous centuries with beliefs similar to the Anabaptists.


If you care to do simple searches; you will easily find the millions of Christians martyred by countries and catholics.

What in the world does this have to do with KJV bible???

 

[kiwimac]

The KJV was an Ok version FOR IT'S TIME. That time has passed. We have access to older and better MSS than the KJV translator's did and the text of the more modern translations reflect that fact.

 

[jerryjohnson]

The KJV was an Ok version FOR IT'S TIME. That time has passed. We have access to older and better MSS than the KJV translator's did and the text of the more modern translations reflect that fact.

If you want to use those texts go right ahead, it's still a free country. I will read the text I prefer, the KJV Companion Bible edited by EW Bullinger.

 

[revdw76]

It's my understanding that the original KJV is closest to the original transcripts of the Bible. From my (limited) research, I have concluded and found that the KJV is the most accurate. I also find that this version is more in line with the Strongs Concordance. However, I do realize that the Strongs is based on the KJV.

However, I do find the "Kings English" insufferable. So, I use the New King James, same thing without the Thee, Thou, and the Wilst etc. It also makes it easier to do a little more linguistics type study and understand certain things a little more.

There are other translations in the Bible mostly written by certain scholarlisticly type people such as Ryrie. I don't care for the notes and for study bibles. I've found most to be denominationaly biased, or doctrinaly biased. Either falling heavy towards Calvinsim, or Arminianism. Some are just completely ate smooth up.

As with any translation, converting to a more modern form of language it's easy to loose some of the essence in translation, which can make study a little harder, although not impossible.

It is interesting the King James version was written by atheist scribes. (supposedly) In which the intent was that one who didn't believe would have no desire to change scripture or to be biased doctrinaly as to manipulate the words to suit their needs. It was under very close scruitiny, and constantly compared to the original scripts.

The reasons for the translations were solely so the layman would be able to read the Word of God without the aid of a Bishop or a Pope. At the time that was the only way the Layman could read or hear the word of God,and thus was subject to the manipulation of the Clergy as the Clergy saw fit. Interesting enough there were more people who couldn't read back then than those who could. However the intent was to bring the Word of God into the hands of the People.

As with all versions of the Bible, prayer should be done prior to reading the words. The Lord will lead you into all truths, and the Gospel will be explained to you as you can handle it and as the Lord has prepared your heart. Those who truly seek Him will find Him and will not be turned away.

If the only translation you can find are in Chinese, yet you only read English, the Lord will provide a way for you to read and understand one way or another.

I ask for God to show me His Word's true meaning. I read the scipture in several versions and find the true meaning of the scripture verses. I read out of the KJV when I preach just because I like the way it sounds rolling off the tongue,(OK so I'm a shakespeare nut) but I always try to preach the true meaning of God's Word.

 

[epistemaniac]

I ask for God to show me His Word's true meaning. I read the scipture in several versions and find the true meaning of the scripture verses. I read out of the KJV when I preach just because I like the way it sounds rolling off the tongue,(OK so I'm a shakespeare nut) but I always try to preach the true meaning of God's Word.

actually Shakespeare apparently predominately used the Geneva translation http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/, but I get your meaning and hey... if someone wants to use the KJV, well thats fine... the problem is when some try and force others to use it as if, if one should fail to use it, one has somehow compromised the faith.... the reasons for insisting that everyone MUST use the KJV are fallacious and even unbiblical since the KJV bible itself does not claim to be the only approved bible...

someone said "Use the accepted text of the first century Christians......................... The KJV will stand up."... really... you can't be serious... use the accepted text of the 1st century Christians!!??? well since this statement comes from a KJVO advocate it seems this is defending the thesis that the 1st century Christians used the KJV!!! Since the KJV could not have been read by the early Christians what text are we supposed to use? the LXX? the Hebrew text? the Greek NT letters in circulation? but however one answers these questions, no argument can be constructed on the basis of which text the early Christians used that we must therefore use the KJV!!! it was also said "When you look at new bibles like the NIV and find from where they came you will rapidly reject them. Would anyone use catholic text (killers of the saints)? That line seems to like the LXX, hexapla, statue worship and Mary worship and the like plus Plato and a nuber of others subscribing to philosophy. I don't think they have their place in Holy Scripture."

what a great example...... of logical fallacies!!!!! lol, consider the following:

Prejudicial Language

Definition:

Loaded or emotive terms are used to attach value or moral goodness to believing the proposition.

Examples:

1. Right thinking Canadians will agree with me that we should have another free vote on capital punishment.
2. A reasonable person would agree that our income statement is too low.
3. Senator Turner claims that the new tax rate will reduce the deficit. (Here, the use of "claims" implies that what Turner says is false.)
4. The proposal is likely to be resisted by the bureaucrats on Parliament Hill. (Compare this to: The proposal is likely to be rejected by officials on Parliament Hill.)

and

Complex Question

Definition:

Two otherwise unrelated points are conjoined and treated as a single proposition. The reader is expected to accept or reject both together, when in reality one is acceptable while the other is not. A complex question is an illegitimate use of the "and" operator.

Examples:

1. You should support home education and the God-given right of parents to raise their children according to their own beliefs.
2. Do you support freedom and the right to bear arms?
3. Have you stopped using illegal sales practises? (This asks two questions: did you use illegal practises, and did you stop?)

and

Ad hominem abusive

Ad hominem abusive usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.

Examples:

* "You can't believe Jack when he says God exists. He doesn't even have a job."
* "Candidate Jane's proposal about zoning is ridiculous. She was caught cheating on her taxes in 2003."

and

Description of Genetic Fallacy

A Genetic Fallacy is a line of "reasoning" in which a perceived defect in the origin of a claim or thing is taken to be evidence that discredits the claim or thing itself. It is also a line of reasoning in which the origin of a claim or thing is taken to be evidence for the claim or thing. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

1. The origin of a claim or thing is presented.
2. The claim is true(or false) or the thing is supported (or discredited).

 

[Brother Mike]

Jiggyfly:

I see hearing but sure don't see reading in that text. How do think Abraham, Israel, Jacob and Joseph trusted God? What of the many who couldn't not read?

Religious paradigm is hard to change indeed. The scriptures encourage us to be led by HolySpirit.

Here's a very good example.

John5:39&40 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. KJV

I have to agree with Jiggfly...... I use the KJV, but I use other translations. Sure, not every scripture in every Translation is good, but the Spirit of God will help lead into truth. You folks make things way to complicated.

and the funny thing is, Nobody is going to change their mind after how many pages of forum?? Pretty amazing huh?

You all be blessed..

Jesus Is Lord.