• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why Old King James?

stribb

New Member
well actually using the old king james is a poor choice. The old king james has been retranslated from the 1611 version, but that's not my problem; I'm including dates to support my point. I don't have names for the specific archaeologists but I do know that in the late 1800's archaeological studies were done in many towns from the time of the new testament. The new testament is written in Greek, but remember that there are two types of Greek. There is classical Greek: Which was used in literature. Then there was an everyday language. Much like we have today. For example I'm using everyday English and not Proper English (You can tell from all of the grammar mistakes :p)
When scholars first started looking at the texts (bare in mind this was some time before the textus receptus was formed) they noticed that there were a few words that they did not know the meaning. They called these words "Holy Spirit" words. Words ordained by God. However when archaeologists began digging they found things much like letters or modern day shopping lists. Each of the "Holy spirit" words could be accounted for. So these words were not ordained by God rather they were words used by the common people. This is not surprising because the authors of the new testament were common people. The king james was translated before this archaeological study was done so when it was made the Church was still under the impression that these words were "holy spirit" words. Let me rephrase from the beginning. Old king james is not a poor choice. It is a poor choice for the every man. I have even heard that english scholars find the old kjv easier to read. My main point is that it doesn't matter which translation you read they all have their flaws.
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
Reading I Corinthians 13 between the KJV and the NIV makes a HUGE difference.

I Corinthians 13:1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing. 4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. NIV

I Corinthians 13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. KJV

Quite often I break out my Russian Bible just to practice my Russian. I don't do it to gain a greater insight into the scriptures.
 

McBell

Unbound
I have yet to find that definition of concupiscence. I'll keep looking though.
Websters 1828 dictionary:
Concupiscence
CONCUPISCENCE, n. [L., to covet or lust after, to desire or covet.] Lust; unlawful or irregular desire of sexual pleasure. In a more general sense, the coveting of carnal things, or an irregular appetite for worldly good; inclination for unlawful enjoyments.

We know even secret concupiscence to be sin.

Sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. Rom 7.
 

Francine

Well-Known Member
I fail to see the "HUGE" difference...

1 John 5:7-8 is a more stark contrast:

[KJV] For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

[NIV] For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.
 

McBell

Unbound
1 John 5:7-8 is a more stark contrast:

[KJV] For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

[NIV] For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

A History of the Comma Johanneum

For more reading on this addition to the Bible:

Comma Johanneum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First Epistle of John - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Top