This is for those who are King James Prefer-ist. Those who do not think the King James Bible is the God-given translation but for those who prefer it. My questions is why do you prefer it? Accurate translation? Like the poetry of the translation? I see the appeal of using a translation that multiple generations have used but shouldn't we use the most accurate translation none the less?
Not KJVO, KJVP.
- Thread starter Wynteriii
- Start date
- Status
Wynter,
I am not KJVO or KJVP but I don't think you understand the KJVP position. They use the AV because they feel that it IS the most accurate translation.
I knew if I would get KJVO position wrong or at least present it wrong.
I was describing the fundamentalist KJVO but that is a small part of the King James Only Movement. I believe if you listen to an early debate on this issue featuring James White and someone I don't know on the Ankenberg show. This person claimed that the KJV was the God given translation and any others were human perversions of Scripture. This is probably this view isn't held by all and could be called radical KJVO.
Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk 4
I was describing the fundamentalist KJVO but that is a small part of the King James Only Movement. I believe if you listen to an early debate on this issue featuring James White and someone I don't know on the Ankenberg show. This person claimed that the KJV was the God given translation and any others were human perversions of Scripture. This is probably this view isn't held by all and could be called radical KJVO.
Sent from my GT-P3113 using Tapatalk 4
Logan
Puritan Board Graduate
You're probably talking about Jack Moorman's debate.
I find there are a number of people that would say they are KJV-preferist (as you put it) but practically speaking, are KJVO, whether they would defend that position or not. Some feel it is the only option at the moment, some feel it is the best option, others feel it should be the only option. There is a wide spectrum of reasons: translational excellency, accuracy, pronoun distinction, majesty, tradition, textual history, confessional history, ecclesiastical authorization, and some, like Moorman (and I think Steve, from this board), that believed it was providentially preserved.
Have you followed the recent threads where this was delved into in some detail? Perhaps more detail than you'd be looking for!
I find there are a number of people that would say they are KJV-preferist (as you put it) but practically speaking, are KJVO, whether they would defend that position or not. Some feel it is the only option at the moment, some feel it is the best option, others feel it should be the only option. There is a wide spectrum of reasons: translational excellency, accuracy, pronoun distinction, majesty, tradition, textual history, confessional history, ecclesiastical authorization, and some, like Moorman (and I think Steve, from this board), that believed it was providentially preserved.
Have you followed the recent threads where this was delved into in some detail? Perhaps more detail than you'd be looking for!
Bill The Baptist
Puritan Board Graduate
I appreciate your desire for understanding, but frankly I think we have been
when it comes to this subject as of late.
when it comes to this subject as of late.The Bible is the very word of God. It is God given. The translation of the Bible is a blessing of Providence. The Bible as translated is to be received and read as the very word of God. The problem with multiple translations, sometimes contradictory in meaning one from another, is that they force the Bible reader to choose between them. The Bible reader seeks God for wisdom, and makes his choice based on the evidence attainable at the time. The choice being made, he reads the preferred translation with the conviction that it is God-given. In the absence of any solid evidence to the contrary, he has no reason to alter his preference. Add to this the blessing of God upon the reading of the Bible, the important place of church authority and ministry, confessional subscription, religious vows and engagements, and other things of a like nature, and it becomes impossible to view the translation as a matter of indifference.
One Little Nail
Puritan Board Sophomore
with the ankerberg debate there were 8 persons debating & i think it was Sam Gipp who held that God
had preserved his word into the English Language,that in Old Testament times if you wanted to know
God's Word you had to learn Hebrew,Chaldean Likewise today you would need to learn English
http://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5641953C984053E0
also some of Sams teaching can be found here
http://samgipp.com/av/
http://samgipp.com/answerbook/
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dVSkxBaNGSw
had preserved his word into the English Language,that in Old Testament times if you wanted to know
God's Word you had to learn Hebrew,Chaldean Likewise today you would need to learn English
http://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL5641953C984053E0
also some of Sams teaching can be found here
http://samgipp.com/av/
http://samgipp.com/answerbook/
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dVSkxBaNGSw
Last edited:
irresistible_grace
Puritan Board Junior
After listening to Accurate Translation
And especially to Authentic Text
I am officially an Exclusive AV-ist! Or what this thread calls KJVP
And especially to Authentic Text
I am officially an Exclusive AV-ist! Or what this thread calls KJVP
JimmyH
Puritan Board Senior
A view from a 'babe in Christ' who is chronologically advanced ...... I think the impression I get from the KJVP/KJVO folks, at least the more learned of them, is that it isn't only that the KJV was translated by firm in the faith believers, or that they had superior scholarship, but that the texts from which the KJV came were reliable, while the texts from which the modern translations came are not.
There are some who say that Westcott & Hort were demon incarnate and that since the CT text is a derivative of their scholarship, all of the modern translations are suspect, if not downright heresy.
I read the KJV first but follow all that I read within it with either the NASB, ESV, or NKJV among others that I consult less frequently. I'm liking the ESV more and more as I become more familiar with it. Reading the various translations, at my current level of scholarship, which is admittedly on a low level, has convinced me that the debate is a tempest in a teapot. your mileage may vary.
OTOH, maybe the modern translation folks, ESV, NASB, have fooled R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, among others who rely on those texts for preaching and for their published study Bibles. I look forward to the upcoming Joel Beeke AV Study Bible coming, they say, in late 2014.
There are some who say that Westcott & Hort were demon incarnate and that since the CT text is a derivative of their scholarship, all of the modern translations are suspect, if not downright heresy.
I read the KJV first but follow all that I read within it with either the NASB, ESV, or NKJV among others that I consult less frequently. I'm liking the ESV more and more as I become more familiar with it. Reading the various translations, at my current level of scholarship, which is admittedly on a low level, has convinced me that the debate is a tempest in a teapot. your mileage may vary.
OTOH, maybe the modern translation folks, ESV, NASB, have fooled R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, among others who rely on those texts for preaching and for their published study Bibles. I look forward to the upcoming Joel Beeke AV Study Bible coming, they say, in late 2014.
Puritan Scot
Puritan Board Freshman
Jimmy,
I had the privilege this morning of listening to a recent address given by Dr. David Allen, Deputation Speaker for the Trinitarian Bible Society at the TBS. (USA) AGM. He also gave several other addresses for the Society whilst on a tour of the USA/Canada.
I can truly recommend this excellent Sermon Audio address found on the link below, in which he clearly answers your concern raised above.
Trinitarian Bible Society - Recent News
joejohnston3
Puritan Board Sophomore
Here is a link to Joel Beeke's explanation that really explains it well for me and lays out why we prefer it.
Dr Joel Beeke on Bible Versions: Practical Reasons for Retaining the KJV | The Young Puritan
Dr Joel Beeke on Bible Versions: Practical Reasons for Retaining the KJV | The Young Puritan
Tyrese
Puritan Board Sophomore
How can it be the most accurate translation when scholars are saying the NASB and the ESV are the most accurate translations?
Tyrese
Puritan Board Sophomore
So would you say the ESV or the NKJV are good translations? Translations given by God? After reading your comment you would think the KJV was the original (literal) Hebrew and Greek.
Not saying it is. Just sharing the arguments I have heard KJVP use. I am neither KJVP nor KJVO.
Ask Mr. Religion
Flatly Unflappable
I take this to imply accordance with WLC #157: "The holy scriptures are to be read with an high and reverent esteem of them; with a firm persuasion that they are the very word of God." If so, I am in complete agreement as we either confess we have the word of God or we must sit in judgment of translations tacitly admitting the church does not have the word of God.
AMR
But the confessions defer to the original languages and I am convinced this is the most solidly reformed position rather than somehow believing that God gave us a certain English translation -- a position that would have been baffling to our Dutch, French, and other brethren. The English translations are just that, translations for those of us who are at the Dick and Jane level of reading the Greek and are terrified of the original Hebrew.
No, I do not think the AV is the original Hebrew and Greek. I specifically stated the issues in terms of "translation." Are you deliberately trying to twist what I said?
When did the failure to accurately render the original as literally as possible become a virtue in translation?
As for your question, there are good aspects to the ESV and NKJV translations, but there are also deficiencies and obscurities which are needlessly introduced. These have been sufficiently discussed elsewhere.
Please refer to the answer of the previous question of the Catechism (156), which says "the word of God" is to be read by all, and it is to this end "the the holy scriptures are to be translated out of the original into vulgar languages." Then answer 157 states "The holy scriptures are to be read with an high and reverent esteem of them," etc. That is, the Scriptures translated are to be read as such.
Captain Picard
Puritan Board Freshman
I find it interesting that there are no "Geneva Bible Only"ers, or at least no well-known organized movement for them...especially considering that the translation of the AV was primarily presided over by a collection of Synergists medieval-catholic priests.
Dearly Bought
Puritan Board Junior
One Little Nail
Puritan Board Sophomore
How can the NASB possibly be the most accurate Bible when it has a need of an update
Double Jeopardy: The NASB Update
One Little Nail
Puritan Board Sophomore
Tyrese there is no need to twist Matthews view of The Faithful Providential Preservation of God's Word
as it is in the English Language, he doesn't equate The KJB as the original Greek & Hebrew though he
would say it is a faithful reproduction & translation of it in the english language & I would agree with him
One Little Nail
Puritan Board Sophomore
Translations can be regarded as The Very Words of God if they they are an accurate & faithful Translation of
the Faithfully Preserved & Transmitted Hebrew & Greek Languages of the Old & New Testaments as such the
Foreign Language Bibles are The Word of God for those races & tongues as good as these Continental Reformed
Language Translations are The King James Bible is a Superior Bible & Translation to all these other versions.
it had better Scholarship, better Translators, it is the High Water Mark of Reformation Era Translations, and
it can be seen in the Good Providence of God as He planned English to become the Future World Language
that He gave a Brilliant Bible Translation in The KJB in preparation for this outcome,
The Translators Revived by Alexander McClure
http://www.wilderness-cry.net/bible_study/translators/
the words flow & the meaning is True to the Greek, what more could you ask of a Translation?
The making of The KJB-When God spoke in English http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YfrvcWEHroA
Last edited:
Jake
Puritan Board Senior
I recommend taking a look at the chapter entitled "The learned men" by Terence H. Brown from Which Bible? edited by David Otis Fuller to get some information about the men who translated the Authorized Version. Many very able and theologically solid men were involved in its translation.
Logan
Puritan Board Graduate
Since there was a push by several respected members of the Westminster Assembly to revise the KJV, perhaps that's an indication that even great translations could stand to be updated.
One Little Nail
Puritan Board Sophomore
Greetings Logan , there may have been a push from members of the WA to revise but a desire to revise is
different from a need to update,this probably stems from the NASV having a changing underlying text base,
sort of like Quicksand it is, whereas The KJB is built upon the Rock of The Received Text,not sinking sand ie CT.
cant speak for the members of the West Assembly as there were different theological camps, was it the Independents
who wanted the changes? it would have no doubt been on theological issues the USBaptists in the 19th century did
a baptist version, immersion substituted for baptism but that one never got off the ground or should i say out of the
water.
Captain Picard
Puritan Board Freshman
Thank you Jake for the recommendation, I will look into that. Dearly Bought, I meant no offense nor do I profess to be a textual scholar or even seminarty Trained, but the TR from which the KJV was translated was heavily influenced by the input of Desiderius Erasmus and similar "humanist" thinkers from a perspective that would now be taken to be Romanist, was it not? EDITED: to add: "priests" was an inaccurate term to use, Erasmus for example was not to my knowledge a priest.
Nor did he in any way preside over the AV translation, seeing as he had died long before it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
