|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/17/2006 4:55:40 PM
|
|
|
ttleib01
Posts: 5
Joined: 4/14/2006
Status: offline
|
Hey guys,
These are all, for the most part, pretty good arguments. I'm not going to say anything against anyone because what you do is up to you.
I just wanted to tell you what I find to be the best translation. I prefer to read the ancient greek. But I realize it's not possible for everyone to learn greek. When comparing the different translations to the greek I find that the ESV and NASB are the most literal translations. KJV is not always a literal translation but it still conveys the meaning well. Some parts of the NIV are quite a bit different from the original greek simply because they converted phrases of greek into phrases that try to convey the meaning, but it definately loses a little here and there. Like it's been stated before no one translation is perfect because you don't understand the value and different connotations associated with different words in greek. But as I said before. I find the ESV and NASB to be the most literal translations.
Personally, I don't really care for the KJV because of the eloquent speach. Jesus was a humble man of meager means. He was raised by a carpenter and so spoke the common language. When He spoke it was simple and plain, easy for normal people to understand. His disciples likewise, with a few exceptions, were men of meager means. They spoke to normal people so they used simple terms so all could understand.
But these are all just my opinions. I hope it's helped.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/17/2006 5:05:22 PM
|
|
|
RJR_fan
Posts: 715
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: RTP, in sunny NC USA
Status: online
|
quote:
He was raised by a carpenter and so spoke the common language. When He spoke it was simple and plain, easy for normal people to understand. His disciples likewise, with a few exceptions, were men of meager means. They spoke to normal people so they used simple terms so all could understand.
Peter is hard to read in the original because his Greek is so lousy.
Luke is hard to read in the original because his Greek is so good, refined, and rich!
John and Paul seem to be the easiest to read. Whenever I'm learning a new language, I usually like to read the NT in it a time or two, starting with John 1:1.
_____________________________
The future has never been shaped by majorities but rather by dedicated minorities. And free men do not wait for the future; they create it. RJR
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/17/2006 8:12:56 PM
|
|
|
Kath
Posts: 17136
Joined: 2/28/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Sunny,
I hate to split hairs here, but to be fair, that is not what was implied in your post...
We need to end the discussion on Sunny's statement here and now.
It was removed and nothing more needs to be said.
Please do not reply to this message within the Community.
Please do not send me PMs regarding this message as I am unable to discuss it further.
Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns. Please allow time for a response.
Sincerely
Kath
Forums Assistant Administrator
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/17/2006 9:05:41 PM
|
|
|
manwe
Posts: 191
Status: offline
|
I think we need to tone it down or the thread'll be locked.
_____________________________
Zephaniah 3:17 reads, "The LORD your God is with you, he is mighty to save. He will take great delight in you, he will quiet you with his love, he will rejoice over you with singing."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/17/2006 10:17:42 PM
|
|
|
died4meNu
Posts: 18
Joined: 10/5/2005
Status: offline
|
I agree...this topic always gets so heated....I think seeing this makes  happy.....
_____________________________
Sometimes it is hard to remember that there is a plank in my eye, do you have that problem too?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/18/2006 11:30:00 AM
|
|
|
DaveW
Posts: 4106
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: offline
|
quote:
ttleib01:
Personally, I don't really care for the KJV because of the eloquent speach. That is interesting because it took almost a century for the KJV to catch on (circa 1700) because the speech used had too much street slang. It was not sophistocated enough for the upper classes who ran the church of England.
< Message edited by DaveW -- 4/18/2006 11:32:44 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/18/2006 1:28:19 PM
|
|
|
phyl2
Posts: 245
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
That is interesting because it took almost a century for the KJV to catch on (circa 1700) because the speech used had too much street slang. It was not sophistocated enough for the upper classes who ran the church of England.
I'm not so sure that is accurate.
William Tyndale's aim was to make a translation that the "common ploughboy" would understand. According to a man who studied the changes from the Tyndale to the KJV (don't recall his name), the changes made were to a higher style of language and a high church interpretation. The Anglican officials were pleased with the translation - it was mostly Anglicans who made it. The working class and non-Anglicans did not like it at all, preferring the Geneva translation.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/18/2006 2:06:23 PM
|
|
|
ttleib01
Posts: 5
Joined: 4/14/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DaveW
quote:
ttleib01:
Personally, I don't really care for the KJV because of the eloquent speach. That is interesting because it took almost a century for the KJV to catch on (circa 1700) because the speech used had too much street slang. It was not sophistocated enough for the upper classes who ran the church of England.
Do you commonly use old English today when conversing with normal people? I wasn't saying the KJV was eloquent when it was written. I was speaking of todays standards.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/18/2006 4:37:03 PM
|
|
|
died4meNu
Posts: 18
Joined: 10/5/2005
Status: offline
|
For all those who are KJV Onlyist, which version of the KJV is the ONLY one? And on top of that, which form of the Textus Receptus to you hold to as well? Just curious......
In Christ,
Adam
_____________________________
Sometimes it is hard to remember that there is a plank in my eye, do you have that problem too?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/18/2006 8:50:06 PM
|
|
|
manwe
Posts: 191
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: died4meNu
For all those who are KJV Onlyist, which version of the KJV is the ONLY one? And on top of that, which form of the Textus Receptus to you hold to as well? Just curious......
In Christ,
Adam
They would say that is irrevelevant. The only changes made have been either spelling or other typo related changes, nothing doctrinal or theological - as they claim all others do.
_____________________________
Zephaniah 3:17 reads, "The LORD your God is with you, he is mighty to save. He will take great delight in you, he will quiet you with his love, he will rejoice over you with singing."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 9:15:58 AM
|
|
|
ninjaaron
Posts: 8
Joined: 5/2/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: phyl2
quote:
That is interesting because it took almost a century for the KJV to catch on (circa 1700) because the speech used had too much street slang. It was not sophistocated enough for the upper classes who ran the church of England.
The Anglican officials were pleased with the translation - it was mostly Anglicans who made it.
I thought it was a catholic translation...
Maybe not... hmm...
_____________________________
I'm an overly critical person.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 9:48:07 AM
|
|
|
DaveW
Posts: 4106
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: MD suburbs of Washington DC
Status: offline
|
Nope. Jolly old Church of England.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 11:27:06 AM
|
|
|
cjwpastor
Posts: 502
Joined: 4/27/2005
Status: offline
|
In another discussion I had to do some digging on this passage and found this interesting:
Luke 22:31-32 in the KJV reads:
quote:
And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:
But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.
The NRSV reads:
Simon, Simon, listen! Satan has demanded to sift all of you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your own faith may not fail...
The KJV is wrong here. The greek in vs. 31 is the plural "you" and yet the translation is muddy - it sounds as if only Peter is the one Satan will sift. The NRSV is more accurate in translating "all of you" (meaning disciples) and then it is even more critical because it is Peter (singular "you") that Jesus prays for to strenthen the other you(s).
Any thoughts?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 11:52:44 AM
|
|
|
chalkstc
Posts: 540
Joined: 5/13/2005
Status: offline
|
CJW,
quote:
ORIGINAL: cjwpastor
In another discussion I had to do some digging on this passage and found this interesting:
Luke 22:31-32 in the KJV reads:
quote:
And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:
But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.
The NRSV reads:
Simon, Simon, listen! Satan has demanded to sift all of you like wheat, but I have prayed for you that your own faith may not fail...
The KJV is wrong here. The greek in vs. 31 is the plural "you" and yet the translation is muddy - it sounds as if only Peter is the one Satan will sift. The NRSV is more accurate in translating "all of you" (meaning disciples) and then it is even more critical because it is Peter (singular "you") that Jesus prays for to strenthen the other you(s).
Any thoughts?
The following is from the Geneva Bible and notes and agrees with the KJV..............
Luke 22:31; Luke 22:32
Luke 22:31
And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired [to have] you, that he may l sift [you] as wheat:
We must always think about the ambush that Satan lays for us.
To toss you and scatter you, and also to cast you out.
Luke 22:32
But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.
It is through the prayers of Christ that the elect never utterly fall away from the faith: and because of this they should encourage one another on.
(from Geneva Notes, PC Study Bible formatted electronic database Copyright © 2003 Biblesoft, Inc. All rights reserved.)
As much as we can use this text for ourselves, it should be certain that the Lord was warning Peter alone that he was about to fall in his future three time denial of Christ. Who brought the fear upon Peter, or who did he succomb to when he denied Christ?
Isn't it he that proudly said.........................
Luke 22:33 And he said unto him, Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death.
Peter's boast.
But the Lord said............
34 And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.
This was certainly only to Peter, and not ALL the disciples. And this was not Peter's only rash or "foot in the mouth" statement............
Matt 16:22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan : thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
Did ALL the disciples make this comment? NOT!
If you do not like the KJV, fine, but at least read the context before putting it down and thus not being rash with statements as Peter was.
And as far as we are concerned in our walk,..............sometimes we're a "Peter", and sometimes we're a Paul.
YBIC,
Frankie
_____________________________
Prov 27:17 iron sharpeneth iron as a man the countenance of his friend.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 12:36:09 PM
|
|
|
phyl2
Posts: 245
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
cjwpastor
quote:
The KJV is wrong here. The greek in vs. 31 is the plural "you" and yet the translation is muddy - it sounds as if only Peter is the one Satan will sift. The NRSV is more accurate in translating "all of you" (meaning disciples) and then it is even more critical because it is Peter (singular "you") that Jesus prays for to strenthen the other you(s).
You are forgetting something very important - in the KJV "you" and "ye" are plural you, and "thee" and "thou" are singular you.
chalkstc:
The Geneva notes don't include any discussion on "you/ye" being plural and "thee/thou" being singular because they aready understood this fact. So, it is clear that the warning about being sifted like wheat applies to all of us and then Jesus narrowed in on Peter, because Peter would essentially be the first to experience the sifting during his upcoming denial of Christ.
John 17 contains the prayer that Jesus prayed/prays for all of us.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 12:40:24 PM
|
|
|
phyl2
Posts: 245
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
chalkstc,
Just an additional note here. I think your software has the KJV text with the Geneva notes, not the Geneva translation. But, if you'd like to read the Geneva translation, it can be found online here: Studylight
You can also read other early English translations such as Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale and Bishop's.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 3:37:00 PM
|
|
|
37818
Posts: 371
Joined: 4/24/2005
From: Mira Loma, California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cjwpastor
quote:
You are forgetting something very important - in the KJV "you" and "ye" are plural you, and "thee" and "thou" are singular you.
HA! I wish I could say I "forgot." Truth is I don't remember ever knowing that to begin with.  To be safe though, I think I will stick with my "modern and corrupt" versions which better bring these distinctions out - this way I don't look so foolish in the future 
And chalkstc, I don't hate the KJV - I just think people who are KJVO are missing the boat.
Thanks phyl for pointing out my error.
Chad
With most of the modern translations the singular and plural is lost in modern English. Unless one has a commentary where it is brought out, or can read Greek, this can and often does lead to some misinterpretations. Unfortunatly the KJVO crowd misinterpret the texts anyway. If they didn't, they wouldn't still be KJVO. I use the KJV as my primary Bible. But you are correct that the KJVO crowd has "missed the boat."
_____________________________
Jesus Christ God's only-begotten Son. Incarnate, both fully God and fully man and one and the same God with His Father. God is neither begotten nor made. Father, Son and Holy Spirit, three Persons who are one God. This is not negotiable - no discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 3:50:36 PM
|
|
|
gadomody
Posts: 10
Joined: 3/28/2006
Status: offline
|
Coming out of a semi-cultic denomination, I saw this controversy from an ugly point of view. King James onlyism can be used as a tool. The Pastors of this particular church used the somewhat difficult language to twist scripture and get the Bible to say things that just weren't there. In this particular church, they set up shop outside of military bases and preyed on lonely people that had little scriptural training. This church is very controlling and oppressive. I never read the King James before I went in, and I always have a nagging unsettled feeling when I read from it since. I learned one thing from that year with the "cult", The Bible is not a god, but GOD can be found in the Bible.
_____________________________
Beloved,let us love one another, for love is from GOD, and whoever loves has been born of GOD and knows GOD. 1 John 4:7
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 3:54:59 PM
|
|
|
cjwpastor
Posts: 502
Joined: 4/27/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
I learned one thing from that year with the "cult", The Bible is not a god, but GOD can be found in the Bible.
Amen!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 5:26:06 PM
|
|
|
chalkstc
Posts: 540
Joined: 5/13/2005
Status: offline
|
Phy,
quote:
ORIGINAL: phyl2
chalkstc,
Just an additional note here. I think your software has the KJV text with the Geneva notes, not the Geneva translation. But, if you'd like to read the Geneva translation, it can be found online here: Studylight
You can also read other early English translations such as Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale and Bishop's.
Thx for the link. And I will check it out. But either way, Jesus was speaking to Peter though the far reach of scripture can also apply to us. The context does prove it to be to Peter singularly and not as CJW alledged imo simply to knock the KJV.
Frankie
_____________________________
Prov 27:17 iron sharpeneth iron as a man the countenance of his friend.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 5:31:06 PM
|
|
|
chalkstc
Posts: 540
Joined: 5/13/2005
Status: offline
|
CJW,
quote:
And chalkstc, I don't hate the KJV - I just think people who are KJVO are missing the boat.
I am not KVO, and still think you quoted without context of the whole theme in the passage. As I stated previously, who did Jesus rebuke when He said "get thee behind me satan"?
I have found out to my own chagrin, is that it not just what I quote, but what I may have left out as you did.
Frankie
_____________________________
Prov 27:17 iron sharpeneth iron as a man the countenance of his friend.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 5:42:01 PM
|
|
|
chalkstc
Posts: 540
Joined: 5/13/2005
Status: offline
|
Phy,
This is what the Geneva says.................
22:31 - And the Lorde saide, Simon, Simon, beholde, Satan hath desired you, to winowe you as wheate.
It seems the verse is still to Peter singular to me. And note that the KJV has different phraseology, but does not change the meaning of what or to who it is said.
Thx again for the link. And you were right, my software only has the notes. Good to know I can get the Geneva online. Esword is also supposed to have it, but I have not gone there yet.
Frankie
_____________________________
Prov 27:17 iron sharpeneth iron as a man the countenance of his friend.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 6:20:45 PM
|
|
|
manwe
Posts: 191
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: phyl2
cjwpastor
quote:
The KJV is wrong here. The greek in vs. 31 is the plural "you" and yet the translation is muddy - it sounds as if only Peter is the one Satan will sift. The NRSV is more accurate in translating "all of you" (meaning disciples) and then it is even more critical because it is Peter (singular "you") that Jesus prays for to strenthen the other you(s).
You are forgetting something very important - in the KJV "you" and "ye" are plural you, and "thee" and "thou" are singular you.
chalkstc:
The Geneva notes don't include any discussion on "you/ye" being plural and "thee/thou" being singular because they aready understood this fact. So, it is clear that the warning about being sifted like wheat applies to all of us and then Jesus narrowed in on Peter, because Peter would essentially be the first to experience the sifting during his upcoming denial of Christ.
John 17 contains the prayer that Jesus prayed/prays for all of us.
Interestingly, the KJV doesn't utilize the thee ye sayings in this particular case, instead it is just "you" with no indication of the plural.
KJV Luke 22:31 [And the Lord said,] Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, [that he may] sift [you] as wheat:
[ ] not in the Greek text.
Extreme literal would be
"Simon, Simon, behold Satan has demanded to sift y'all (humas) like wheat."
So, yes, any English tranlsation that says "you all" or "all of you" is the correct rendering.
For some bizarre reason the KJV dudes skipped this one, probably it is a scribal insertion on the part of the KJV dudes cuz they though it was referrin to Peter only. There are no textual variants for that verse so it is not in despute.
_____________________________
Zephaniah 3:17 reads, "The LORD your God is with you, he is mighty to save. He will take great delight in you, he will quiet you with his love, he will rejoice over you with singing."
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The KJV Only Debate - One Stop Thread - 4/19/2006 6:25:46 PM
|
|
|
manwe
Posts: 191
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: chalkstc
CJW,
quote:
And chalkstc, I don't hate the KJV - I just think people who are KJVO are missing the boat.
I am not KVO, and still think you quoted without context of the whole theme in the passage. As I stated previously, who did Jesus rebuke when He said "get thee behind me satan"?
I have found out to my own chagrin, is that it not just what I quote, but what I may have left out as you did.
Frankie
which do you prefer, the KJV or the Greek?
If the Greek you'll have to change you position on this. The Greek has the plural "you" when Jesus says "...statan has demanded to sift "humas" you all like wheat.
_____________________________
Zephaniah 3:17 reads, "The LORD your God is with you, he is mighty to save. He will take great delight in you, he will quiet you with his love, he will rejoice over you with singing."
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
