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 )
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.
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.