Good comparison......

[Bob Wright]

First of all, let me say our church is an Fundamental Independent Baptist Church. As such, we hold, and use, the King James Version of the Bible as out text in church and Sunday School. Don't want to stir up any argument, just a statement of fact to introduce the following story.

We had a guest preacher this morning from up in East Tennessee (Greenville) one of a series of speakers for our missions observance month. During his preaching this morning he referred to our Bible as "our M1911."

Think about it!

Bob Wright

 

[Paul B]

I just started a new church not too long ago and the pastor insists people use the King James version. In fact, if you bible is not a King James version he will give you one to keep. Interesting place. The church used to be a bar and of the very many churches I tried out, this is the first one I've not fallen asleep in the first 5 minutes of the sermon. I may stick around for a while. For anyone here in Tucson, it's that little church across the street from the cemetery called Agape. You're all welcome.
Paul B.

 

[Jim Puke]

Having grown up in Sothern Baptist churches, I have always leaned towards the King James version and used to be of the opinion that it was the ONLY version. Well, as I have gotten older and spent a little time reading some of the other versions...I have come to the conclusion that there is very little difference in them.

At any rate, I agree with your opinion of the analogy he used...cool.

 

[Paul B]

"Well, as I have gotten older and spent a little time reading some of the other versions...I have come to the conclusion that there is very little difference in them."

My wife who studies that stuff big time feels a lot of stuff has been removed from the more modern versions. I've never really gotten into it so won't argue one way or the other. Point is there have been discussions on this at church and there seems to be a lot of agreement in what she says witin the congregation. I just asked her about it and she says it's certain verses have been removed.
Paul B.

 

[Rancher Will]

Here is a little item about the King James Version.

I have a King James Version Bible that my mother owned before my parents died in 1939. It was printed by Berwick & Smith, Norwood Press, Norwood, Mass., USA in 1888, as noted on the flyleaf.

Now here is the interesting part:

Inside of the flyleaf, starting and continuing for three pages, beginning,

"TO THE MOST HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE
JAMES
BY THE GRACE OF GOD
KING OF GREAT BRITAIN, FRANCE, AND IRELAND, DEFENDER OF THE FAITH.etc.

Translated out of the original tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and revised, BY HIS MAJESTY'S SPECIAL COMMAND.

APPOINTED TO BE READ IN CHURCHES"

Then below this is, "The Translators of the Bible with Grace, Mercy, and Peace through JESUS CHRIST our LORD." followed by the names of the translators appointed by King James.

Then continuing for the next pages is a detailed description of the process that the Translators used, listing their sources, each paragraph addressing King James as "Your Majesty" explaining that they were complying with the King's order.

Reading the total pages, it is clear that the Translators worked to the best of their ability, in every paragraph, to make sure that King James was given the credit for the version written and it was written from translations satisfactory to King James.

I believe this clearly explains how and why it is called the "King James Version".

 

[Bob Wright]

Here is a little item about the King James Version.

I have a King James Version Bible that my mother owned before my parents died in 1939. It was printed by Berwick & Smith, Norwood Press, Norwood, Mass., USA in 1888, as noted on the flyleaf.

Now here is the interesting part:

Inside of the flyleaf, starting and continuing for three pages, beginning,

"TO THE MOST HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE
JAMES
BY THE GRACE OF GOD
KING OF GREAT BRITAIN, FRANCE, AND IRELAND, DEFENDER OF THE FAITH.etc.

Translated out of the original tongues, and with the former translations diligently compared and revised, BY HIS MAJESTY'S SPECIAL COMMAND.

APPOINTED TO BE READ IN CHURCHES"

Then below this is, "The Translators of the Bible with Grace, Mercy, and Peace through JESUS CHRIST our LORD." followed by the names of the translators appointed by King James.

Then continuing for the next pages is a detailed description of the process that the Translators used, listing their sources, each paragraph addressing King James as "Your Majesty" explaining that they were complying with the King's order.

Reading the total pages, it is clear that the Translators worked to the best of their ability, in every paragraph, to make sure that King James was given the credit for the version written and it was written from translations satisfactory to King James.

I believe this clearly explains how and why it is called the "King James Version".

Well, uh, yeah. Scholars have told me that they have studied the original texts, or reproductions of them, and they believe it is the most accurate translation of the old texts.

Bob Wright

 

[Cape Cod Terry]

In the Mayflower Compact he was referred to by the Pilgrims as "Our dread Sovereign, King James" I think they used another version.

Cape Cod Terry

 

[cadillo]

But it is written in a language that is no longer used. I doubt that anyone here can read the King James version and understand as much as they would if reading a version written in today's United States English.

It is my understanding that my New International Version of the Bible is not only written in the everyday language of today's United States of America, but was translated from viable texts written in their original languages. In fact the Preface of my Bible begins as:

"THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION (emphasis in Preface) is a completely new translation of the Holy Bible made by over a hundred scholars working directly from the best available Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts."

Why then would anyone instead read and hope to properly understand a Bible written in a language that they have never themselves used? Try walking down the street today speaking in that language with its thee's, thou's, wilt's, verily's, and diverse's, and watch your credibility spin down the drain. Why? Because no one would understand your meaning, nor care to even try to do so.

 

[SAJohn]

I have read that the first written versions of the new Bible were in Greek, not Latin or Aramaic.

 

[Phoenix too]

http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Story-James-Version-1611-2011/dp/0199557594/ref=pd_sim_sbs_b_3?ie=UTF8&refRID=1A96VAV3V3V5JPWFQ4NM

I highly recommend it.

 

[mohavesam]

Ahhh... At last something we can agree on! A discussion on what constitutes REAL religion. :roll: :roll: :roll:
But - if God is alive, wouldn't he have sent a revised edition down by now? :shock:

 

[certified angus]

The 1611 King James Version had two editions. 5he first is referred to as the "not" Bilble, as the printer forgot the word "not" in the commandment forbidding adultery.