Author Topic: KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE  (Read 297 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KingJamesVersionBibleOnly

KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE
« on: February 16, 2018, 05:05:02 PM »

Welcome to the Biblical and Theology Section of 1Faith

[Raise a Debate] @ 1faith

Your post will be answered shortly

Raise a Debate - by posting bait !
A KING JAMES VERSION SERMON:

- Hebrews 4:12 (KJV)
- Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)

Notice the word "preserve", meaning God's word is already present in our times.

- Galatians 1:6-7 (of 1:1-12) (KJV)

Notice "of Christ", meaning sadly there are trying Christians attracted by the overwhelming affection of Christ, only to be misled by a Gospel that is not "of Christ"

- 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 (KJV)

Scriptural changes differing in meaning broadly spread through the many so called, "modern English Bible Translations" published since the King James Version Bible (KJV) or its birth in 1611 as the Authorized Version (AV).

Here is our History:
The Authorized Version: Translated from the Textus Receptus and finished in 1611; Protestant Reformation for Christian believers with beliefs protestant to the Roman Catholic Church; Later revised as the King James Version Bible.

The MOST respected Bible, standing out as a strong spiritual asset.
The one and only true word of God (in the English Language).
The Holy Bible.

- Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV)

Pre 1611 (Old Testament):
Was known to be in the Hebrew Language.

Pre 1611 (New Testament):
Before year 1611, The New Testament was present on earth in the Greek language; in texts known as the Textus Receptus, Yet, not yet translated into the English Language.

...............................................................

Pre 1611 English Bible translations (To solve confusion):
These books were not known to be as spiritually profitable, but are very evident that the puritan reformer group in their day were not happy with Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church, desperate and determined for liberty in faith.



Welcome to the Biblical and Theology Section of 1Faith

[Raise a Debate] @ 1faith

Your post will be answered shortly

Raise a Debate - by posting bait !

Offline John

Re: KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE
« Reply #1 on: February 16, 2018, 09:05:45 PM »
Sorry not only are you historically wrong but you are also spiritually wrong.

Make some inquiries into the work of Witclife and find out how many languages they have translated the bible and more importantly from your warped view, what translation they use.

They aren't messing around with old 16t centuary english, and even where they did they are following Tyndale and revising the language so that plough boys, tailors, travellers and ordinary men and women can study the word of God and learn about him.

Jesus taught us to worship him in spirit and in truth. He isn't bothered whether we use thees and thous so long as we are coming to him earnestly and humbly.


Offline Mountain Goat

Re: KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE
« Reply #2 on: February 16, 2018, 10:24:29 PM »
I know that the KJV one can't go wrong with. While in general, modern translations are much clearer to our language today, they do seem a bit watered down or "Tamed" compared to reading a King James version.
I think it is an idea to use a KJV but also have a more modern version, so when one reads something and needs something clarified, one is more likely to understand.
In today's lifestyle where city and town life is very different from the past, we can easily lose the comprehension of what the Bible is saying. Yet those of us who have a smallholding or farming background are far more likely to understand Biblical concepts, especially if one has a background of old fashioned style farming (Why I mentioned smallholding) techniques.
One of the most well known parables... The parable of the sower.  This takes on a whole different and more thorough meaning if read by someone who has regularly worked the land using older methods, but still, a modern farmer will also understand it as it has a deep spiritual meaning. I've heard it preached about the seeds, but never about the other spiritual aspects associated with the seeds to get a good harvest. (Why in the past I've written posts on it in here). And this is just one small example which can be missed by a city or town  lifestyle. In the past even a city lifestyle involved tending crops even if it was to assist others at the time of harvest.
I can easily go deeper about just this one parable and how it relates spiritually and the need for ground preparation well before the sowing stage commences, or one is only going to see a rare plant succeed. Plough and weed and water the ground and you are just about guaranteed a harvest! Also tares... Tares look like wheat but are poisionus. It is only at harvest time when they are separated, as there is no way of telling which is which before the crops come into fruit.


Offline Tes Johnson

Re: KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE
« Reply #4 on: February 17, 2018, 02:51:09 AM »
O well let use the message which is neither really a translation or paraphrase - but an attempt to communicate to us today, through a way we understand...


 Galatians 1:6-9 The Message (MSG)  6-9 I can?t believe your fickleness?how easily you have turned traitor to him who called you by the grace of Christ by embracing a variant message! It is not a minor variation, you know; it is completely other, an alien message, a no-message, a lie about God. Those who are provoking this agitation among you are turning the Message of Christ on its head. Let me be blunt: If one of us?even if an angel from heaven!?were to preach something other than what we preached originally, let him be cursed. I said it once; I?ll say it again: If anyone, regardless of reputation or credentials, preaches something other than what you received originally, let him be cursed.

It seems to me whatever tranlsation we use or paraphrase - the message is the same to the people at that time...


EG: you cannot turn back time... and if you do the same thing today - you cannot turn back time...


You only turn back time [if you are His and are not put in this posiition - therefore you are a simple beleiver in Christ [as you were never made a leader "by Christ"..






Offline Cariad

  • Awarded Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 319
  • Total likes: 18
  • Thanked: 25 times
  • Welcome our New Member
Re: KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2018, 10:09:09 AM »
A KING JAMES VERSION SERMON:

- Hebrews 4:12 (KJV)
- Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)

Notice the word "preserve", meaning God's word is already present in our times.

- Galatians 1:6-7 (of 1:1-12) (KJV)

Notice "of Christ", meaning sadly there are trying Christians attracted by the overwhelming affection of Christ, only to be misled by a Gospel that is not "of Christ"

- 2 Corinthians 11:3-4 (KJV)

Scriptural changes differing in meaning broadly spread through the many so called, "modern English Bible Translations" published since the King James Version Bible (KJV) or its birth in 1611 as the Authorized Version (AV).

Here is our History:
The Authorized Version: Translated from the Textus Receptus and finished in 1611; Protestant Reformation for Christian believers with beliefs protestant to the Roman Catholic Church; Later revised as the King James Version Bible.

The MOST respected Bible, standing out as a strong spiritual asset.
The one and only true word of God (in the English Language).
The Holy Bible.

- Proverbs 30:5-6 (KJV)

Pre 1611 (Old Testament):
Was known to be in the Hebrew Language.

Pre 1611 (New Testament):
Before year 1611, The New Testament was present on earth in the Greek language; in texts known as the Textus Receptus, Yet, not yet translated into the English Language.

...............................................................

Pre 1611 English Bible translations (To solve confusion):
These books were not known to be as spiritually profitable, but are very evident that the puritan reformer group in their day were not happy with Catholicism and the Roman Catholic Church, desperate and determined for liberty in faith.
@KingJamesVersionBibleOnly

Hello there,

I do not believe your opinion is warped or without value, and I thank you for expressing it.

I am just thankful that God has enabled us to believe and receive the truth contained in His Word, that we may be recipients of His grace, and share His delight in and through Christ Jesus - the Living Word - our beloved Saviour, Lord and Head - To Whom be glory!

In His Holy Name
Chris
The following users thanked this post: Rose Anna

Offline Rose Anna

Re: KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE
« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2018, 01:05:03 PM »
In looking at all the bible versions and translations there does seem to be in places some different wordings, that give different interpretations from the Kings James version.
However, I wouldn't say they are a different gospel because the essential things about the redeeming work of Christ central to the gospel and other important things like the prophetic word and deity of Christ are generally in the translations.
Yes God's Word is preserved.
I try to read as many translations as possible, sometimes. Yet the new king james version is my favourite because its as near to the old king james version as possible and in modern English.


Offline Deborah

  • Bible Buddies - together
  • ******
  • Posts: 550
  • Total likes: 84
  • Thanked: 31 times
  • Gender: Female
  • New :
    • Discovering the Bible
Re: KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE
« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2018, 08:37:59 PM »
Quote
The Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew (apart from a few sections written in Aramaic); the New Testament was written in Greek. Relatively few ordinary people today can understand even one of these languages, let alone all three! Most of us depend on translations; and Bible translation has a very long history. It began in the third century before Christ, when the Old Testament was translated into Greek. It is this version, called the Septuagint, which is the one used by the writers of the New Testament when they quote from the Old Testament; and thus the Bible itself both endorses the principle of translation and implies that a translation has the same authority as the original.
Jesus and His disciples would have spoken Aramaic as their first language, and so much of the material in the gospels must have been translated from Aramaic into Greek before being written down. Why then was the New Testament written in Greek? The apostles had a commission to take the good news "to all nations." (Luke 24:47) Greek was the lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean region at that time, and so it became the main language of the early Church.

But before too long, further translations needed to be made, into other Middle Eastern languages and into Latin. The Latin version (the Vulgate) was adopted as the official version for use by the Catholic Church. Time went by, and the gospel continued to spread throughout Europe. But translation of the Bible into the new languages did not keep pace; instead, it ground to a halt. Such was the status of the Latin version (despite it not being the original) that it seemed sacrilegious to translate the Holy Scriptures into any 'ordinary' language. So knowledge of the Bible became the exclusive preserve of those who could understand Latin ? the educated, and the religious professionals. Only with the Reformation was this hurdle eventually overcome - against stiff resistance from the church establishment.

Surprisingly, this history has had a tendency to repeat itself. People get very attached to traditional versions of the Bible, and some individuals have a very negative attitude towards modern translations, simply because they differ slightly from the older ones. For many people in the UK and USA, the only 'real' Bible is the King James Version. It's true that the translation commissioned by James I of England 400 years ago has been enormously influential over British culture. And any book that is still being read 400 years after its first publication must have something going for it. The problem is that it is, well, 400 years old. And although it still has a vociferous fan club, most churches have moved on - and for good reason.
 
For one thing, although the translation was the best that could be done at the time, many more (and older) New Testament manuscripts have been discovered since - so the modern Bible versions are made from a text that is much closer to what was originally written. (Admittedly, there haven't been very many changes; and the vast majority are trivial.)
More importantly, the English language has changed enormously over the last four centuries - enough to make the language of the King James Bible incomprehensible in some places and unexpectedly deceptive in others. When it was made, the translators deliberately adopted a somewhat archaic, formal style, in order to evoke a sense of awe and respect. Unfortunately that decision has caused it to 'date' rather rapidly. To most of the younger generation, its forms of expression are sufficiently obscure for it to be off-putting rather than enlightening. To unbelievers, it is likely to convey the subliminal message that Christianity also is old-fashioned and out-of-date. But it is the favourite version of the militant atheists, simply because it gives them many opportunities to poke fun at the Bible and reject its message.

The King James Version could therefore be described as 'an acquired taste' - but for those who are very familiar with the Bible and with its quirks, these things are not likely to be a problem. Nobody likes change for the sake of it, and we all tend to find a version that suits us and stick to it. But there is nothing sacred about any one particular translation. 21st-century English speakers now have a bewildering array to choose from, varying from the good old 'King James' (the KJV) and its modernised equivalent (the 'new KJV') through the 'middle-of-the-road' versions that aim to strike a balance between 'literalness' and readability (such as the New International Version or NIV) to the idiomatic paraphrases (such as The Message). All of them are God's word. The 'right' version for you is the one that you will read.

https://deborahsbiblestudies.wordpress.com/the-bible/4-which-translation/
https://deborahsbiblestudies.wordpress.com/the-bible/4-which-translation/
"Christ died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for Him who died for them and was raised again." (II Corinthians 5:15)
The following users thanked this post: John

Welcome to the Biblical and Theology Section of 1Faith

[Raise a Debate] @ 1faith

Your post will be answered shortly

Raise a Debate - by posting bait !