Thoughts about using a KJV update?

[Jim B]

You ain't kiddin Jay. But because of verses like Gen 25:29 you see the need for updating, as languages evolve. Being 68 yrs old I know a cult is a religious organization, most picture it as a church of satan. I believe being gay is happy go lucky feeling, whereas many associate it with homosexuality. A faggot is a bundle of sticks, etc.

In my favorite translation -- the NET -- Genesis 25:29 is "Now Jacob cooked some stew, and when Esau came in from the open fields, he was famished" with this accompanying translator's note: Jacob cooked some stew. There are some significant words and wordplays in this story that help clarify the points of the story. The verb “cook” is זִיד (zid), which sounds like the word for “hunter” (צַיִד, tsayid). This is deliberate, for the hunter becomes the hunted in this story. The word זִיד means “to cook, to boil,” but by the sound play with צַיִד it comes to mean “set a trap by cooking.” The usage of the word shows that it can also have the connotation of acting presumptuously (as in boiling over). This too may be a comment on the scene. For further discussion of the rhetorical devices in the Jacob narratives, see J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis (SSN)."

The KJV has this: "And Jacob sod pottage: and Esau came from the field, and he was faint" Sod? pottage? faint? Really!

 

[Truther]

Translations must keep pace with the changes in language. That is the main area where the KJV fails. Nobody on the planet speaks/reads/writes in early 17th century Englyshe.

See my post below...

I trow not agree with thou, sire.

No, we are already okay with the KJV as it stands.

The kooky redefinitions of the left don't require me to redo my Bible.

They don't even like God at all.

 

[Jim B]

I trow not agree with thou, sire.

No, we are already okay with the KJV as it stands.

The kooky redefinitions of the left don't require me to redo my Bible.

They don't even like God at all.

I have read many irrational posts but this is one that stands out as very strange.

a) What do you use the word "trow", while the rest of your post is in conventional English? Two sentences later you use the word "kooky"!

b) When you say "we" in "we are already okay with the KJV as it stands", to whom are you referring? Do you have multiple personalities?

c) "The kooky redefinitions of the left don't require me to redo my Bible" is meaningless. To what are you referring? It seems you're mixing secular politics with your concept of religion.

d) To whom are you referring when you write "They don't even like God at all."

Even though you call yourself "Truther" (whatever that is supposed to mean), you are clearly irrational so I won't read or respond to any more of your strange posts.

 

[Truther]

I have read many irrational posts but this is one that stands out as very strange.

a) What do you use the word "trow", while the rest of your post is in conventional English? Two sentences later you use the word "kooky"!

b) When you say "we" in "we are already okay with the KJV as it stands", to whom are you referring? Do you have multiple personalities?

c) "The kooky redefinitions of the left don't require me to redo my Bible" is meaningless. To what are you referring? It seems you're mixing secular politics with your concept of religion.

d) To whom are you referring when you write "They don't even like God at all."

Even though you call yourself "Truther" (whatever that is supposed to mean), you are clearly irrational so I won't read or respond to any more of your strange posts.

I was having a good time with KJVish English and giving you my opinion about the KJV "update".

Just having a bit of Easter fun my friend.

 

[farouk]

I would...what do you think an updated version would contain that might be offensive?

There is the KJ21....

 

[Heart2Soul]

There is the KJ21....

I have recently been given a NASB Bible (used...well used..lol) and I did research on it and what I found was most scholars agree it is the best literal interpretation to English available and it was translated from the original manuscripts.

 

[farouk]

I have recently been given a NASB Bible (used...well used..lol) and I did research on it and what I found was most scholars agree it is the best literal interpretation to English available and it was translated from the original manuscripts.

@Heart2Soul The NASB is accurate in many ways; I do find the resonance of the King James and its readability to be superior, though. The NASB also misses parts of verses included in the King James.

 

[Heart2Soul]

@Heart2Soul The NASB is accurate in many ways; I do find the resonance of the King James and its readability to be superior, though. The NASB also misses parts of verses included in the King James.

This one is a special edition called the Charles F. Stanley Life Principles Bible that has a lot of comments putting real life situations with the Word...bringing clarity to its application.

 

[farouk]

This one is a special edition called the Charles F. Stanley Life Principles Bible that has a lot of comments putting real life situations with the Word...bringing clarity to its application.

@Heart2Soul Study Bibles can be helpful; I have used the Thompson Chain Reference to profit (although I increasingly find that the print size is challenging to the eyes...)

 

[farouk]

Three issues (among others) which might affect my use of a KJV update:

1) Print size

2) Print size

3) Print size

 

[Heart2Soul]

Three issues (among others) which might affect my use of a KJV update:

1) Print size

2) Print size

3) Print size

Lol yes...me too

 

[farouk]

What concerns me about different translations of the Bible is if they are using the KJV as their source....meaning if there is an error in translation then the next translation includes that error and more than likely adds additional errors.
Example if the NIV was published to make reading the KJV easier to understand in our modern tongue and they didn't use the original source to translate then all they did was created an easy read Bible full of errors.
Jm2c

@Heart2Soul There's another way of looking at it as well; maybe sometimes the efforts of conservative, Godly scholars in translation in the past have ultimately been more accurate than the efforts of more modern ones....

 

[farouk]

Lol yes...me too

@Heart2Soul Well, it can creep up on us, the eyesight issue; this has been my experience, anyway...

 

[Heart2Soul]

@Heart2Soul There's another way of looking at it as well; maybe sometimes the efforts of conservative, Godly scholars in translation in the past have ultimately been more accurate than the efforts of more modern ones....

And we are just skimming the surface...the Bible is written in every language of the world and every language has problems translating Hebrew and Greek to their language.

 

[farouk]

And we are just skimming the surface...the Bible is written in every language of the world and every language has problems translating Hebrew and Greek to their language.

@Heart2Soul

I do love Anne Steele's hymn from the 18th century:

"O may these hallowed pages be
My ever dear delight!
And still new beauties may I see,
And still increasing light!

Divine instructor, gracious Lord,
Be Thou for ever near:
Teach me to love Thy sacred Word,
And view my Saviour there."

 

[Deborah_]

We have so many good modern translations. I see no need (personally) for an update of the KJV.

 

[Robert Gwin]

The word of God must evolve?

Yes sir Truth, although the Bible was finished by the year 100, understanding is released progressively Pro 4:18. As you know Daniel was a very favored friend of God who was privileged to pen prophecy in the Bible, yet he didn't understand what he had written Dan 12:4. After the period of apostasy, in those end times Daniel referred to, God began to gather the sheep back together in His house to be instructed in His ways and to walk in His paths, being spiritually fed not new passages of Bible, but understanding of what is written through a faithful slave that Jesus assigned to feed the sheep in the last days before his coming Mat 24:45-47. They are made up of born again Christians Truth.

 

[Robert Gwin]

No more than what you do, with your no kidding statements. I did not introduce Gen 25:29 into the conversation, you did Robert.

As for being 68 years old, and having a good handle on the "slang" that has and is being used is not the question I was answering. The question I was hinting at was why was Esau so willing to sell his birthright to Jacob in this short account provided. The author of Genesis did not attempt to provide an answer to this question, he only pointed out that Esau was willing to sell his birthright and then some twenty or so years later claim that Jacob had stolen his birthright from him years earlier.

I would humbly suggest to you that all of our English translations have contextual errors written into them, but, be as that may be, our present fallible translations are still our best means of getting an understanding about God at this present time.

As for referring to other translations to try and get a better understanding of what has been written into our favourite translations, this "checking of other translations" for a clearer understanding of the context of the passage in questions falls short when the same error has been written into all of the translations. Just because a number of translation provides the same contextual information does not make that contextual information true with respect to the source document's contextual understanding.

The problems that we have are the various interpretations that the teachers of Christianity religion vary so much that only confusion can prevail.

Shalom

The Bible of course said enough on it Jay Jn 21:25. It was prophesied that the older would serve the younger Gen 25:23. That is not to say God caused it, however He knew it Isa 46:10. That wasn't the topic anyway sir, the thread is about thoughts on a KJV update.

I fully agree with you that all, yes all versions have mistakes, like you said many the same mistakes, a great example being Jn 1:1 which was no mistakein reality, rather it was a deliberate manipulation. By examining multiple versions, and prayer, and honest research, one can definitely get accurate understanding today. Isa 2:2-4; Dan 12:4

 

[Robert Gwin]

In my favorite translation -- the NET -- Genesis 25:29 is "Now Jacob cooked some stew, and when Esau came in from the open fields, he was famished" with this accompanying translator's note: Jacob cooked some stew. There are some significant words and wordplays in this story that help clarify the points of the story. The verb “cook” is זִיד (zid), which sounds like the word for “hunter” (צַיִד, tsayid). This is deliberate, for the hunter becomes the hunted in this story. The word זִיד means “to cook, to boil,” but by the sound play with צַיִד it comes to mean “set a trap by cooking.” The usage of the word shows that it can also have the connotation of acting presumptuously (as in boiling over). This too may be a comment on the scene. For further discussion of the rhetorical devices in the Jacob narratives, see J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis (SSN)."

The KJV has this: "And Jacob sod pottage: and Esau came from the field, and he was faint" Sod? pottage? faint? Really!

Yes sir Jim, your version make it easy to understand, keep in mind however in the year 1620 the KJV was very well understood, and people might have been scratching their heads reading the NET

 

[reformed1689]

The biggest con that this generation has fallen for…

Only to those who are ignorant on the subject. It's not a con.