KJV-onlyism?

[farouk]

I agree with your post farouk, they denouce and denounce and most of them seem unable to grasp that the very version they are defending has been changed many times? They rage against the catholics and how they would not allow the truth of the Greek text to be known, yet they themselves restain any attempt to bring the fullness of the Greek to light. The reformation did not come from the KJV, but I believe one could argue that the KJV was a satanic attempt by free-masons to hinder the truth of the Greek Text from being futher understood. The fact that the first KJV was covered in hidden masonic signs seems to be ignored outright by these people! The fact that King James himself and the major organizers of the translation were ungodly men, seems to also be ignored?

m: I think this is overstating whatever it is you are referring to.

Some of your other points are doubtless true.

 

[evenifigoalone]

So far what I'm finding says that there is at worst a 5% different between the majority and consensus texts: http://www.compassdistributors.ca/topics/textchoi.htm
Quotes from this link:

The Alexandrian text is about 5% smaller than the Byzantine text, and there are some differences in words between the two texts. No Christian doctrine is omitted from the Alexandrian text, but some appear strengthened in the Byzantine text.

The difference in size between the two texts can only be explained one of two ways: Either text was dropped out of the Alexandrian text type, or text was added to the Byzantine type. If we can determine which we believe happened, we can be sure of our textual choice.

The author, after presenting facts from both sides, states that the majority text is probably the most trustworthy, and why he thinks so based on the facts represented.

There are very few Bibles available today that reflect the Majority Text. Actually, none presently published are based on the Byzantine Majority Text, but two major versions are based on the Received Text, which reflects 98% of the Majority Text already. These two versions are the King James Version and the New King James Version. I find both versions useful. I consider the New King James Version much easier to read, and it is my recommendation for most people. The New King James Version also benefits from footnotes that show where the consensus text and the majority text differ from the Received Text.

However, the author seems to be of the attitude that he could be wrong, that others may come to a different conclusion. In which case, he recommends the New American Standard Bible, noting that it includes the omitted verses in footnotes.

I wrestled with the question of Bible texts for years, giving great consideration to the pros and cons of both text types. Perhaps the evidence I presented leads you to a different conclusion than mine, and if so, so be it! The difference between the two texts is very small compared to some variances in history. The Septuagint in some places differed greatly from the Hebrew, and yet, when the translations were accurate, the apostles quoted the Septuagint, in a sense placing a stamp of approval on the version. For example, Jeremiah in the Septuagint omitted approximately 2700 words. That's close to the amount of difference between the Majority Text and the Consensus Text in all 27 books in the New Testament! Nevertheless, Jeremiah is quoted from the Septuagint in the New Testament.

The Bible text is remarkably pure text with an unparalleled number of ancient witnesses. Let's not ignore the witness of 95% of those manuscripts when the reasons to do so cannot be satisfactorily proven.

Here's another article:
http://bible.org/article/majority-text-and-original-text-are-they-identical





Gah, this is so confusing. :gah

But it does appear to me that the differences are not nearly as major as made out to be. If both majority and consensus texts agree in the vast majority of things, then Bibles based on either would still be able to bring people to salvation and teaching of the Holy Spirit.
It would seem that either way, no matter which one is more correct than the other, God did indeed preserve His Word.

 

[farouk]

So far what I'm finding says that there is at worst a 5% different between the majority and consensus texts: http://www.compassdistributors.ca/topics/textchoi.htm
Quotes from this link:
The author, after presenting facts from both sides, states that the majority text is probably the most trustworthy, and why he thinks so based on the facts represented.
However, the author seems to be of the attitude that he could be wrong, that others may come to a different conclusion. In which case, he recommends the New American Standard Bible, noting that it includes the omitted verses in footnotes.
Here's another article:
http://bible.org/article/majority-text-and-original-text-are-they-identical





Gah, this is so confusing. :gah

But it does appear to me that the differences are not nearly as major as made out to be. If both majority and consensus texts agree in the vast majority of things, then Bibles based on either would still be able to bring people to salvation and teaching of the Holy Spirit.
It would seem that either way, no matter which one is more correct than the other, God did indeed preserve His Word.

questdriven:

Indeed, one can see Divine wisdom in the Lord preserving the Word in a multiplicity of manuscript copies.

If one copy had been set in stone, so to speak, doubtless some people would have wanted to bow down and revere the copy, like an icon.

Blessings.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Y'know, there was this guy a few years back who would come to our church and when he'd teach, he'd always refer to the Greek manuscript. The church eventually dropped him because he would point out errors in the KJV. (Yeah, we can't have that, can we? Even if it's true. :gah) I think he had a degree in theology or something.
I might ask how I might contact him, and see what his position is on the KJV-only matter.

 

[farouk]

Y'know, there was this guy a few years back who would come to our church and he'd compare the KJV to the Greek manuscript. The church eventually dropped him because he would point out errors in the KJV. I think he had a degree in theology or something.
I might ask how I might contact him, and see what his position is on the KJV-only matter.

questdriven:

Well, he might have sensible things to say, but be careful because not every person that puts the King James into historical perspective does so sympathetically. Blessings.

 

[farouk]

PS: questdriven:

I'm sure you would be careful, mind. Just remember that more broadly if someone is 'out of favor' with a congregation and a person sees fit to associate closely with the person, it might be taken as a hostile act rather than simply an educational exercise. So what I meant was, Be discreet.

Re. the King James, I'm sure even your preacher/pastor would agree that words such as 'bishop' would have been better rendered 'overseer'.

Blessings.

 

[evenifigoalone]

Yeah, I guess so.
My mom is actually pretty happy that I want to contact this guy.


This is an incredibly frustrating and irritating subject to me right now, but I feel like it'd be good to learn more about it. I think if my mom understands my position and where I'm coming from here, it'll make things easier for both of us.

 

[farouk]

Yeah, I guess so.
My mom is actually pretty happy that I want to contact this guy.


This is an incredibly frustrating and irritating subject to me right now, but I feel like it'd be good to learn more about it. I think if my mom understands my position and where I'm coming from here, it'll make things easier for both of us.

questdriven:

You know, it should be very encouraging for you that your mom sympathizes with you in your questions and your wish for accurate information about the King James.

Blessings.

 

[evenifigoalone]

questdriven:

You know, it should be very encouraging for you that your mom sympathizes with you in your questions and your wish for accurate information about the King James.

Blessings.

It wold be nice if she stopped saying that the information I'm reading that she disagrees with is the devil trying to confuse me. :gah
If you ask me, the devil uses the KJV-only mindset to cause division between believers.

 

[farouk]

It wold be nice if she stopped saying that the information I'm reading that she disagrees with is the devil trying to confuse me. :gah
If you ask me, the devil uses the KJV-only mindset to cause division between believers.

questdriven:

I see what you mean. But it's nice she thinks it's a good idea for you to contact the guy you mentioned.

There is man called David Daniell who has written books on William Tyndale, on whose English Bible translation work the King James is substantially based. Some of his books were issued by Yale University Press, anyway.

Blessings.

 

[Stone-yarder]

[MENTION=89910]questdriven[/MENTION],Did you get a chance to watch the mini-series I posted? By Sam Gipp

 

[evenifigoalone]

I put off my homework to spend the day researching this. So, I'm off to do math and history now.

 

[evenifigoalone]

[MENTION=89910]questdriven[/MENTION],Did you get a chance to watch the mini-series I posted? By Sam Gipp

Not yet.

 

[farouk]

Stone y: I love and use the King James, but it's important to recognize that it's a translation, and that there can be more than one viable way of translating things, even if the King James is a good translation.

 

[Stone-yarder]

Its good to see you guys and gals researching this topic for your selves. When I share my faith with unbelivers or whomever, all I can do is present the truth to the best of my ability. All to often people get caught up in agenda driven or a "being right" self induced scenario. We cant convince people of anything nor is it our job to do so. More often than not we end up driving people away from our causes than bringing them in. I think there is a sense of "I will feel guilty or God is going to judge me" If I dont convince someone to see the light. I have learned to step aside after I share my expeirience,strength and hope and allow people to come to their own conclusions. I am not responsible for the decisions other people make in life. This is not directed at anybody here just a realization I have come to. Well I suppose thats not entirely true, your post about your mom QD is what sparked this. It sounds like she is not respecting your boundrys and in her quest to "convince" you, she is seriously stepping on your toes. But at this point it is up to you as to where you draw the line.

 

[Mitspa]

It wold be nice if she stopped saying that the information I'm reading that she disagrees with is the devil trying to confuse me. :gah
If you ask me, the devil uses the KJV-only mindset to cause division between believers.

I agree, and I say that anyone who claims the KJV is the best translation has no understanding of the Greek at all. The many mistakes I found in the KJV convinced me that to learn the Greek was the only way of getting past religion and doctrines of men that they ALL put into their translations. One day I taught a 12 year old in about an hour, the Greek letters and to write her name etc... Greek is not as "greek" as religion has made us think! With a concordance and Greek dictionary most can get past the mistakes in the KJV. The truth of the scriptures are worth seaching out, and the battle has always been to hide away the epistles of Paul. When Luther got a hold of them, he changed the world! Then religion cloaked the scriptures again, with translations such as KJV.

 

[farouk]

I agree, and I say that anyone who claims the KJV is the best translation has no understanding of the Greek at all. The many mistakes I found in the KJV convinced me that to learn the Greek was the only way of getting past religion and doctrines of men that they ALL put into their translations. One day I taught a 12 year old in about an hour, the Greek letters and to write her name etc... Greek is not as "greek" as religion has made us think! With a concordance and Greek dictionary most can get past the mistakes in the KJV. The truth of the scriptures are worth seaching out, and the battle has always been to hide away the epistles of Paul. When Luther got a hold of them, we changed the world. Then religion cloaked the scriptures again, with translations such as KJV.
Edited
.

M:

You are using very strong language about a basically sound and God-honoring translation of the Bible that has without doubt been much blessed.

I am not KJV Only, but please respect this version of God's Word. Whether it could be improved in places is a matter than can be discussed, but the terms introduced in your post don't help such a discussion, I would submit respectfully to you for your consideration.

 

[Mitspa]

M:

You are using very strong language about a basically sound and God-honoring translation of the Bible that has without doubt been much blessed.

I am not KJV Only, but please respect this version of God's Word. Whether it could be improved in places is a matter than can be discussed, but the terms introduced in your post don't help such a discussion, I would submit respectfully to you for your consideration.

Well I respect the Word of God, I do not respect those who change it. I speak the truth as it has been shown to me, I do not intend to offend those who honor Gods word but if I offend those who do not, I can not help that.
I was not aware that you decided what I must respect?

"respect this version" does not mean much to one who has taking the time and effort to study the Greek. I suggest you take that time also before you attempt to defend and demand that others respect that which is clearly in error.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I firmly believe the videos answered all of your questions so for me to reiterate it would only be redundant.

There are no questions in my post. They are statements in conflict with the video. I do not believe there is anything special about the KJV.

You might want to consider a different source than Hoviind, too. While he is an ardent creationist, he doesn't bother with any proof for his views. Then there's his tax fraud conviction. Not exactly the flag bearer for Christianity.

 

[reba]

Our members are welcome to disagree with each other. We are welcome to disagree with this translation or that translation of the Word of God.... I will not tolerate such disrespect to a imperfect yet wonderful translation of the Scriptures. Pointing out errors is acceptable such disrespect is not. reba