This is a question mostly for those who prefer the King James Version: Now that the 1599 Geneva Bible is back in print, what is preventing you from using it as your version of choice instead of the KJV?

I understand the preference of KJV over, say, the NIV or ESV. But what makes the KJV a better translation than the 1599 Geneva Bible?

I'm curious to hear your answers. Thanks!

Actually, I DO prefer the 1599 Geneva to the KJV and use it instead of the KJV.

I use my 1599 everywhere and everyday...

Another Book I need to buy...

ya'll must've missed the G1599Only thread.

Originally Posted by LadyFlynt

ya'll must've missed the G1599Only thread.

Originally Posted by thunaer

I use my 1599 everywhere and everyday...

Same here, I was just curious if anyone uses the KJV instead of the 1599GB and if so, what are their reasons.

Originally Posted by sastark

This is a question mostly for those who prefer the King James Version: Now that the 1599 Geneva Bible is back in print, what is preventing you from using it as your version of choice instead of the KJV?

I understand the preference of KJV over, say, the NIV or ESV. But what makes the KJV a better translation than the 1599 Geneva Bible?

I'm curious to hear your answers. Thanks!

You are asking two different questions: Why do I use the KJV instead of the Geneva? and What makes the KJV a better translation.

As to the latter question I do not have the expertise to answer. (Although I think it is generally accepted that the KJV was an improvement on the Geneva)

I use the KJV more than the Geneva for reasons other than translation. Mainly because it was the 'Standard' English version for many years while the Geneva drifted into obscurity. I believe the will continue to be the standard English version years from now. (We will have to wait and see).

The KJV was a Reaction to the Geneva. If you think it was an Improvement, how?

I love the 1599 Geneva Bible and I refer to it as needed. I prefer the KJV for a variety of reasons. It is the Bible used in the pulpit at my church. I think it is an improvement over the Geneva in many places. Its language flows better, imo, and for memorization purposes, the KJV is superior and also, for memorization purposes, incorporated into the Westminster Standards. The Geneva Notes are very good (especially Junius on Revelation), but I do differ from them in a few places. My 1599 Geneva by Tolle Lege doesn't have the Geneva Psalter in the back (although it's on the CD); my 1599 Geneva facsimile does, but it's not that useful practically for singing, for me, anyway; whereas, my KJV does have the 1650 Psalter in the back. So my reasons generally are, I think the KJV translation work is generally superior (though I love the Geneva Bible), and there are practical reasons why it's better for me to make the KJV my primary version. I don't have time to elaborate for now, but will come back to this thread later if need be. Meanwhile, Matthew Poole notes:

10. The French Version: which is called “Genevan” by Louis de Dieu and others, having been made by the Genevan pastors around (if I am not misled) 1560. This version possesses no small amount of erudition and a reputation for judgment and fidelity. 11. The English Version: this one I have most accurate knowledge of and follow most naturally, which, by order of the most serene and most learned King James, but by the counsel and labors of bishops and other learned men appointed unto this work, was brought together in 1611, in which there are many examples of great erudition and skill in the original languages, of acumen, and of extraordinary judgment. This version frequently provided for me the greatest help and use in the most difficult texts.

Originally Posted by sastark

Same here, I was just curious if anyone uses the KJV instead of the 1599GB and if so, what are their reasons.

I use the KJV because I have used the KJV since I was converted, love it and see no need to switch from the best version available.

Originally Posted by LadyFlynt

The KJV was a Reaction to the Geneva. If you think it was an Improvement, how?

Not entirely, the dislike of the GB was really to do with its notes as is fairly clear historically. Not least because one of the rules from King James I was

14. These translations to be used, when they agree better with the text than the Bishops’ Bible. TYNDAL’S, COVERDALE’S, MATTHEWS’S, WHITCHURCH’S, GENEVA.

http://www.trinitarianbiblesociety.o...cles/kings.pdf

Okay, someone found a KJV WITH a Psalter?! Given Andrew, I shouldn't be shocked. And I agree, the facsimile is so much better...but how many people have $200-$300 to spend LOL!

Originally Posted by LadyFlynt

Okay, someone found a KJV WITH a Psalter?! Given Andrew, I shouldn't be shocked. And I agree, the facsimile is so much better...but how many people have $200-$300 to spend LOL!

Colleen, re the KJV w/Psalter, all the PRC pew Bibles are KJV w/Psalters. They are published by the Trinitarian Bible Society. See also this thread:

AV with Metrical Psalms

I'm currently reading a 1560 Geneva facsimile -- started in Revelation, with an interest in reading the notes. Is the 1599 Geneva just more widely available? Or do many find it preferable to the 1560?

Originally Posted by David_A_Reed

I'm currently reading a 1560 Geneva facsimile -- started in Revelation, with an interest in reading the notes. Is the 1599 Geneva just more widely available? Or do many find it preferable to the 1560?

Both are available at Amazon and such places. I can't speak for all, but my thoughts on the two versions may be found here:

1560 vs 1599 Geneva Bibles

I just ordered my Geneva Bible from Monergism Books. The price is much better than Tolle Lege ($55) and the shipping is VERY reasonable - $3.99 for the Bible as well as another book I ordered. It will become my at home study Bible since I prefer a smaller volume for use at church.

For those of you who have said the KJV is a better translation in some places, could you please provide examples? or point me to a web site that lists differences in the translations? Thank you!

Originally Posted by sastark

For those of you who have said the KJV is a better translation in some places, could you please provide examples? or point me to a web site that lists differences in the translations? Thank you!

I don't think that anyone is saying that the KJV is better with regards to its translation as such (correct me if I am wrong). The difference is not between Beer and Malt Whisky but rather between a Balvenie and Laphroaig, one of taste. Which reminds me.....

If you want to parrallel them then you can download them from e-sword!

One example on Romans 6:1

KJV: "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?"

GB: "What shall we say then? Shall we continue still in sinne, that grace may abounde? God forbid."

Hi Sastark! And everyone!

I am torn between two lovers! The 1599 Geneva and KJV! Wife got me the Geneva for X-mas. I really like it. It seems just about the same as the King Jimmy in translation quality and the sources. I love how the NT face plate says "Translated out of Greek by Theodore Beza"! That is unbeatable!!

However, I teach Sunday School in Church. I use the KJV there. When I took my Geneva to show it off, nobody ever heard of it. Of course, the NIV is the pew bible. If you use the KJV at church, it's almost a silent sign to us real Reformed folk of who we are. (Kind of like a secret Mason handshake ). My class is used to me using the KJV, and I don't want to confuse the poor souls anymore than they already are. I believe also that one translation should be used and read by one person in a classroom. (ME!!)

So there you have it. I hope this helps. I could go on, but I think I've hit the highlights. (I'm beginning to sound like a modern praise band though. I. I. I.)

Oh yea, I almost forgot. I'm thinking of nicknaming my Geneva - The Heap Bible

II Tim 4:3 - "For the time will come when they will not suffer wholesome doctrine: but having their ears itching, shall after their own lusts get them an heap of teachers."



Ya gotta love this stuff. It appears elsewhere to!

Originally Posted by Grymir

If you use the KJV at church, it's almost a silent sign to us real Reformed folk of who we are. (Kind of like a secret Mason handshake ).

Oh my! The KJV as shibboleth??? What if someone is carrying a Scofield KJV?

That they were Left Behind by the PCUSA!!

Try using a Geneva Bible in the PCUSA and you'll see who gets "left behind."

(BTW--my sweat pants have the logo for "Left Behind" printed on, well, er, ah . . . you know . . . the Left . . . Behind. My 16 year old daughter will not let me wear them in public. Oh well!)

(BTW--my sweat pants have the logo for "Left Behind" printed on, well, er, ah . . . you know . . . the Left . . . Behind. My 16 year old daughter will not let me wear them in public. Oh well!)

That's great. I wanna pair to wear to Church!!!!

Yea, I take enough heat at my church for using KJV (Oh come on Tim, you wanna be relevent, or understood, or whatever don't you? They say, But I don't budge nor buy those lines either. If you can't stand the heat, don't use the KJV! ). At least mine is conservative. But there 'reform' efforts are wayyyy to liberal for me. I couldn't imagine doing it at a mainstream PCUSA church.

Originally Posted by sastark

This is a question mostly for those who prefer the King James Version: Now that the 1599 Geneva Bible is back in print, what is preventing you from using it as your version of choice instead of the KJV?

I understand the preference of KJV over, say, the NIV or ESV. But what makes the KJV a better translation than the 1599 Geneva Bible?

I'm curious to hear your answers. Thanks!

Seth,

I don't have a lot of time tonight, so I'll give you three main reasons, but without a lot of explanation.

1. Sola Scriptura - The doctrine of Scripture Alone as final authority has always included the Regula Fidei (Rule of Faith) of the Church, so while the Scripture alone is authoritative, it is never actually alone because the doctrines it teaches are part of it, which leads me to 2;

2. Confessionalism - For surety of my faith, I need to maintain both theological and epistemological continuity between Scripture and the Confession in my adherence to Sola Scripture. The Authorized Version was the final form of the Reformation Bibles, likewise the Westminster Confession was the final form of the Reformation Confessions. They are a unity.

3. Juridical Authority - The Authorized Version provides historical and legal continuity between law and gospel whereby I can better obey my Lord and serve Him in both body and spirit which were purchased by His blood. (e.g., 1 Cor 6:20) "For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's." Personally, I cherish this part because while I am grateful for the faith God has given me and the assurance of salvation that goes with that, I long to live for Him in a comprehensive sense, not just believe and trust in Him in a compartment that is segregated away into my private life, but publicly proclaim His name as being above every other without having my voice molested whereby I can lead a quite and peaceable life. So, if needs be I want to be able to defend that, which the Authorized Version provides me as an American - so it's more important to me than the Bill of Rights because they too have a continuity in terms of the Public Confession of Faith that is imputed unto me as a citizen.

It is, then, this comprehensive genuine catholicity that binds me to the Authorized Version.

Answering your question could be developed into a small treatise on the subject, so thanks for asking it, but these are the big three for me.

Cordially,

Thomas

Originally Posted by DMcFadden

What if someone is carrying a Scofield KJV?

I still take mine to church with me...

"Scofield KJV" - them's fightin' words in some parts, ain't they?

Seriously, though, I bought my 1599 Geneva early last summer after already having acquired the 1560 version a couple of years ago. For awhile, I've been pretty stuck on the 1599GB except for the fact that its print is very small for someone with my eye problems to read. So I bought a nice magnifying glass to go along with it. Then I started comparing verses & didn't quite know what to think. To wit (just a couple of examples here for brevity's sake): 2 Corinthians 2:17 and Isaiah 26:3. I understand the subtleties of the different wording in the verse in 2 Corinthians and am cool with it, but the Isaiah 26:3 difference, I don't understand.

I've been studying the "critical text/Textus Receptus" issue for about 9 years now and have come down finally, firmly and for all time (after 4 years of resistance) on the side of the KJV/Textus Receptus.

Been going back and forth between my giant print KJV and the 1599GB lately; I do very much like the latter and would like it better if it came out in a giant print edition. If I'm wrong in preferring the KJV rendering of the two verses I mentioned above, I would like to hear about it... I'm still learning and have never been in a graduate theology course (except at the University of Detroit - and obviously, that doesn't count! - or not! - to that "education").

Originally Posted by Grymir

(BTW--my sweat pants have the logo for "Left Behind" printed on, well, er, ah . . . you know . . . the Left . . . Behind. My 16 year old daughter will not let me wear them in public. Oh well!)

That's great. I wanna pair to wear to Church!!!!

Yea, I take enough heat at my church for using KJV (Oh come on Tim, you wanna be relevent, or understood, or whatever don't you? They say, But I don't budge nor buy those lines either. If you can't stand the heat, don't use the KJV! ). At least mine is conservative. But there 'reform' efforts are wayyyy to liberal for me. I couldn't imagine doing it at a mainstream PCUSA church.

Nice!

Originally Posted by Grymir

I am torn between two lovers! The 1599 Geneva and KJV! Wife got me the Geneva for X-mas.

So your wife is left out?

Originally Posted by sastark

. . . what makes the KJV a better translation than the 1599 Geneva Bible?

I'm curious to hear your answers. Thanks!

. . . what makes the KJV a better translation than the 1599 Geneva Bible?


"italics"


Psalm 16:8 ¶ I have set the LORD always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved. KJV

Psalm 16:8 I have set the Lord always before me: for he is at my right hand, therefore I shall not be moved. GENEVA

Peter quoted the italics Acts 2:25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: KJV



Isaiah 65:1 ¶ I am sought of them that asked not for me; I am found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name. KJV

Isaiah 65:1 I have been sought of them that asked not; I was found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my Name. GENEVA

Paul quoted the italics Romans 10:20 But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me. KJV



Deuteronomy 25:4 Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn KJV

Deuteronomy 25:4 ¶ Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn GENEVA

Paul quoted the italics again 1Corinthians 9:9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? KJV


Peter and Pauls quoting of the italics is just a side note.



Thank you


.

JohnOwen, I've become Mormon so I get to have all three!!!

My Wife is my first love. It a metaphor. I knew it would get somebodys attention. I had thought to start a thread on this same subject (using that as a tag line to get people to read it), because I am betwixt a rock and a hard place concerning the KJV or Geneva.

Y'all, my wife just told me she'll share me with two bibles, but she draws the line with the virgin mary!!

"italics removed"

2 Samuel 21:19 And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam. KJV


2 Samuel 21:19 And there was yet another battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaare-Oregim, a Bethlehemite, slew Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam. GENEVA

Geneva note* 21:19 That is, Lahmi the brother of Goliath, whom David slew,
1 Chron. 20:5


Some would say the italics "the brother of" in the KJV do not need to be removed even though they are not in the originals.

Originally Posted by Gesetveemet

. . . what makes the KJV a better translation than the 1599 Geneva Bible?


"italics"


Psalm 16:8 ¶ I have set the LORD always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved. KJV

Psalm 16:8 I have set the Lord always before me: for he is at my right hand, therefore I shall not be moved. GENEVA

Peter quoted the italics Acts 2:25 For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: KJV



Isaiah 65:1 ¶ I am sought of them that asked not for me; I am found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name. KJV

Isaiah 65:1 I have been sought of them that asked not; I was found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my Name. GENEVA

Paul quoted the italics Romans 10:20 But Esaias is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me. KJV



Deuteronomy 25:4 Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn KJV

Deuteronomy 25:4 ¶ Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn GENEVA

Paul quoted the italics again 1Corinthians 9:9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? KJV


Peter and Pauls quoting of the italics is just a side note.



Thank you


.