Thoughts about using a KJV update?

[Bible Highlighter]

Where do we start?

Let’s take tenses.

How many more tenses does the english have compair Ed to the greek.

Let’s take the word love. 1 english word to translate 4 different greek words. All with different meanings.

Let’s take the word baptise. For one, baptize is not a native english word. Instead of translating it. They transliterated it. Made a new word. With no true meaning. And cause the baptism debate to rage on and on. When it all could have been settled if they just translated the word.

How about passages like acts 2: 38, While the origional KJV was close (repent YE and let every one of YOU) it is still lacking, because a normative reading makes it appear water baptism is required for remission of sin. Which is false..

I can go on and on and on

You are under the false impression that clarity of information is a flaw from GOD. Well, this is a false line of thinking because Jesus spoke in parables. Also, the disciples did not understand about Christ’s death, and resurrection even when He spoke about it. Jesus could have sat down the disciples and used hand puppets to illustrate what was about to happen, but He didn’t do that.

But you will only see what you want to see. And instead of attacking, I think it would be better just to let people use whatever word they use , because every word can tech us Gods truth if we are looking as far as the essentials go. THE KJV served me well for 15 years. The NKJV has served me well for almost 40 years.. I am not going to judge someone because they like the NASB or another version. But I am not going to make a particular version and IDOL as some people do.

Believing that we have the perfect Words of God is not an idol anymore than a woman who cherishes a letter from her future to be spouse (working in another country) would be an idol. But if the woman started to talk to the letter, and kiss it, and take it out on dinner dates, then there would be a problem. Most KJB Only believers hold to the view that GOD is a spirit being and that He is to be worshiped. The Bible is simply the expressed mind of GOD and we cherish that like a woman would cherish a letter from her loved one. That does not make an idol. So this is merely a false accusation (i.e. an attack).

As for my attack: Well, it’s not a personal attack (upon certain set individuals only). It’s an attack upon a false belief that teaches that all Bibles say the same thing when they simply don’t. Modern Bibles do teach false doctrines and they have the devil’s name in them where they do not belong, too. There are all tons of problems with Modern Bibles. They also come from Rome, too. The list goes on and on. It’s not that one cannot use a Modern Bible, but a person needs to have a final Word of authority. There can only be one Word of God and not many. That is what you don’t understand.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

You are under the false impression that clarity of information is a flaw from GOD. Well, this is a false line of thinking because Jesus spoke in parables. Also, the disciples did not understand about Christ’s death, and resurrection even when He spoke about it. Jesus could have sat down the disciples and used hand puppets to illustrate what was about to happen, but He didn’t do that.
.

Jesus asked peter. Do you LOVE (AGAPE) me?

Peter responded. Yeah Lord I Love (Phileo) you

This is not a parable. It is not a symbolic representation of what is being said.

it is a fallacy in the english language.

Until I first saw this, I had a basic understanding of what it meant

When I first saw it. My eyes were opened to the truth.

Even though Peter could not say He loved Jesus with agape love as of yet. Jesus still told him to do his work.

Jesus repeated the same words again, The thirst Time, Jesus came down to Peters level

Peter do you phileo me, Which caused peter to do what we all would do in pride. And get upset..

Jesus restored peter with this conversation. Peter denied there times, Here Jesus asked peter three times,,And he told peter with no small effect. Even though you can not say you love me with the agape Tupperware of love. I still love you and will empower you to do my work.

Like I said, You will only see what you want to see.

 

[reformed1689]

here are important doctrines that are changed in Modern Bibles.

except that is false

 

[Davy]

Oh brother. What a waste of money that was.

So says the likes of Hort fans.

 

[Michiah-Imla]

Do you LOVE (AGAPE) me?

Peter responded. Yeah Lord I Love (Phileo) you

This is a good example of what happens when you start meddling with the Greek. You come up with faulty ideas like thinking there’s a difference between “agape” and “phileo” love.

Why do people like you fall for these false Greek language “secret and deep revelations”? Look at all the places where “agape” and “phileo” appear and you will see that putting a difference between these two words is vanity.

 

[Davy]

Means nothing to me.so it's a bit pointless.

Most events of history are pointless to those who keep repeating it.

 

[Jim B]

Most events of history are pointless to those who keep repeating it.

Why are you changing the subject and giving a secular quotation that has nothing to do with any thoughts about using a KJV update?

 

[Davy]

I agree with everything you said here, with the exception that you believe the KJV is perfect with no flaws.

The KJV is a translation, By flawed people. Into a flawed language. That in itself has inherent flaws built in.

While it is stupid trying to argue about all the issues with any bible. And takes away from what we should be doing. It is just as stupid as saying ne version is perfect and all others are flawed.

But of course what you're saying is NOT... really the issue. The issue is that modern New Testament translations REMOVE and MODIFY important Scriptures which have been a basis of Christian Doctrine for centuries, i.e., the higher critic's revisions using DIFFERENT Greek manuscripts based on Wescott and Hort's new Greek text. They sought to completely EXCLUDE the Majority Texts (majority of existing Greek New Testament manuscripts), with their new Greek translation secretly presented to the committee of 1881, on which all later versions are based upon (even the NKJV). Hort's early belief was hatred towards the Textus Receptus Greek texts which were used for the 1611 KJV New Testament. If their translation had used... the Majority Texts also, those revision errors which @Bible Highlighter showed likely would not have happened. But Wescott and Hort completely LEAVING the Textus Receptus showed a direct ATTACK upon the Textus Receptus. Why? Because the Textus Receptus or Majority Texts, prevent the REMOVAL of those doctrines which @Bible Highlighter pointed out (and the list is actually longer than what he showed here).

 

[Davy]

Why are you changing the subject and giving a secular quotation that has nothing to do with any thoughts about using a KJV update?

Do you OWN this Forum? Are you the head Administrator here? Did you begin this Thread? If not, then you need to step back and pay attention to the evidence against the Wescott and Hort movement which myself and @Bible Highlighter have revealed instead of making snide remarks about a post which was NOT EVEN WRITTEN TO YOU!

 

[Jim B]

But of course what you're saying is NOT... really the issue. The issue is that modern New Testament translations REMOVE and MODIFY important Scriptures which have been a basis of Christian Doctrine for centuries, i.e., the higher critic's revisions using DIFFERENT Greek manuscripts based on Wescott and Hort's new Greek text. They sought to completely EXCLUDE the Majority Texts (majority of existing Greek New Testament manuscripts), with their new Greek translation secretly presented to the committee of 1881, on which all later versions are based upon (even the NKJV). Hort's early belief was hatred towards the Textus Receptus Greek texts which were used for the 1611 KJV New Testament. If their translation had used... the Majority Texts also, those revision errors which @Bible Highlighter showed likely would not have happened. But Wescott and Hort completely LEAVING the Textus Receptus showed a direct ATTACK upon the Textus Receptus. Why? Because the Textus Receptus or Majority Texts, prevent the REMOVAL of those doctrines which @Bible Highlighter pointed out (and the list is actually longer than what he showed here).

I am a believer in the skills and integrity of modern translators. They are excellent in what they do and have produced some wonderful work. Your accusations are meaningless and say more about you than about them.

 

[Jim B]

Do you OWN this Forum? Are you the head Administrator here? Did you begin this Thread? If not, then you need to step back and pay attention to the evidence against the Wescott and Hort movement which myself and @Bible Highlighter have revealed instead of making snide remarks about a post which was NOT EVEN WRITTEN TO YOU!

You start by discussing this forum, then end with "NOT EVEN WRITTEN TO YOU!" in all caps. I will indeed step back, and pay no attention to your vicious remarks.

 

[BarneyFife]

Hi, I would love to hear the community’s feedback about using an update to the King James Version. I love the KJV. But the translation is in the main about 400 years old (spelling changes were made in 1769). So if there were an update that simply and accurately updated the KJV, making no changes except updating the archaic language, would you want to use it? What would be your thoughts generally about such an update? It would be great to hear what you all think. May God be glorified.

*Update April 17, 2022: There is a project going on to update the KJV. www.kjvupdate.com

I don't mind referring to other versions, updates, etc., but I have so much committed to memory from the King James that I could never memorize from another, I don't believe.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

This is a good example of what happens when you start meddling with the Greek. You come up with faulty ideas like thinking there’s a difference between “agape” and “phileo” love.

Why do people like you fall for these false Greek language “secret and deep revelations”? Look at all the places where “agape” and “phileo” appear and you will see that putting a difference between these two words is vanity.

This is what happens when you start trying only see what you want to see.

There is a HUGE difference between Agape and Phileo love. If there was no difference at all. They would be the same word.

There is a reason peter could only say phileo when Jesus asked him agape.

We either search the meaning to understand why, or ignore it.

 

[Michiah-Imla]

I am a believer in the skills and integrity of modern translators

LOL!!

 

[BarneyFife]

I am a believer in the skills and integrity of modern translators. They are excellent in what they do and have produced some wonderful work. Your accusations are meaningless and say more about you than about them.

You just can't resist insulting people with whom you disagree, can you?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

But of course what you're saying is NOT... really the issue. The issue is that modern New Testament translations REMOVE and MODIFY important Scriptures which have been a basis of Christian Doctrine for centuries, i.e., the higher critic's revisions using DIFFERENT Greek manuscripts based on Wescott and Hort's new Greek text. They sought to completely EXCLUDE the Majority Texts (majority of existing Greek New Testament manuscripts), with their new Greek translation secretly presented to the committee of 1881, on which all later versions are based upon (even the NKJV). Hort's early belief was hatred towards the Textus Receptus Greek texts which were used for the 1611 KJV New Testament. If their translation had used... the Majority Texts also, those revision errors which @Bible Highlighter showed likely would not have happened. But Wescott and Hort completely LEAVING the Textus Receptus showed a direct ATTACK upon the Textus Receptus. Why? Because the Textus Receptus or Majority Texts, prevent the REMOVAL of those doctrines which @Bible Highlighter pointed out (and the list is actually longer than what he showed here).

Lol

So since these newer texts are damaging to the word. We totally ignore the errors in the said text we love

Thats faulty reasoning my friend.

 

[BarneyFife]

Why do people like you

Why do people like you have to use phrases such as "people like you?" - lol

 

[Michiah-Imla]

This is what happens when you start trying only see what you want to see.

There is a HUGE difference between Agape and Phileo love. If there was no difference at all. They would be the same word.

There is a reason peter could only say phileo when Jesus asked him agape.

We either search the meaning to understand why, or ignore it.

Ah EG my friend.

I don’t know why but I like you anyway; even if I disagree with you on a couple biblical issues.

 

[Davy]

I am a believer in the skills and integrity of modern translators. They are excellent in what they do and have produced some wonderful work. Your accusations are meaningless and say more about you than about them.

Well I am not a believer in the skills of the HIGHER CRITICS. They show an AGENDA against the KJV Bible and the TEXTUS RECEPTUS Greek texts. The documented evidence, even in the personal correspondence between Wescott and Hort, reveals an INTENTIONAL ATTACK upon the Greek Textus Receptus with replacing it with the corrupt Codex Vaticanus and Alexandrinus. And their proposal that those manuscripts are the "oldest and best" is nothing more than just an affirmation without ANY HISTORICAL PROOF. Thus only the FOOLISH would believe supposed scholars like them who want us to just believe what they say, just because they said it.

 

[Michiah-Imla]

Why do people like you have to use phrases such as "people like you?" - lol

LOL!!!

Yeah, I should have used better words.

Hey, at least I didn’t use “viper” or “serpent”…