Getting discouraged with KJ publishers

[Jerry]

Peter, I would think someone who made such a big deal over the spelling of Bible words would use the right name for Bible books. P.S. It is the book of Revelation - no "s" in that word.

[trc123]

Peter, I would think someone who made such a big deal over the spelling of Bible words would use the right name for Bible books. P.S. It is the book of Revelation - no "s" in that word.

Good OBservation.

[Jerry]

I'm curious: which Bearing Precious Seed publisher is the Authorized IFB publisher for the KJV? I have a NT by BPS that has these same "prOBlems" in them - not different words, but different capitalization. Is there a Baptist Pope that can give the official imprimatur stamp to a particular organization? And no, BPS is not a single organization, but a banner name that independant printers use. Which ones are approved and "safe", and which ones are not?

[Jerry]

I'm curious: which Bearing Precious Seed publisher is the Authorized IFB publisher for the KJV? I have a NT by BPS that has these same "prOBlems" in them - not different words, but different capitalization. Is there a Baptist Pope that can give the official imprimatur stamp to a particular organization? And no, BPS is not a single organization, but a banner name that independant printers use. Which ones are approved and "safe", and which ones are not?

[PeterAV]

Hi Seth-Dotty,
you wrote:

you say Matt 26:39 should read further but this oxford edition reads farther not further. I fail to see an issue with that though since it is just a different spelling of the same word.

They are not the same word. They are very similar, but not the same with all definitions the same.
One does not say "farther more".. an example only.
According to Matthew 5:18 Jesus make every letter an issue in the Bible.
Then, so do I.
Also, there is usage of both terms today that are intermixed, for sure.
*******
BUT

*******

The word "farther" can only be between a choice of nearer or farther, but when you are moving, you are always going further.
Matthew V.

*******
Also the Oxford is wrong in those places with the spelling of the letter "s" or "S" that you mentioned. I will tackle that after this post.
*******
Thanx 4 the question.
*******
PeterAV
Every word of God is pure:

[PeterAV]

Acts 11:28 spirit is correct and effects doctrine
It looks like Oxford and London both used Spirit instead of spirit like all the other King James Bibles of history. Oxford also used to have spirit in 1817 edition, but they changed it in the fifties.
*******
Did you know, that the Oxford of 1817 was only three verses away from Presentational purity?
Then they digressed and compromised.
*******
Isaiah 11:2 shows that even from God,... spirit means more than just Holy Ghost.
This is why little s.
spirit has many usages.
But Spirit can only be that of the Holy Ghost or the Godhead.
*******
I hope this helps answer your questions a little.
*******
PeterAV
Every word of God is pure:

[PeterAV]

Peter, I would think someone who made such a big deal over the spelling of Bible words would use the right name for Bible books. P.S. It is the book of Revelation - no "s" in that word.

You are correct, and I knew that when I typed it.

[PeterAV]

I'm curious: which Bearing Precious Seed publisher is the Authorized IFB publisher for the KJV? I have a NT by BPS that has these same "prOBlems" in them - not different words, but different capitalization. Is there a Baptist Pope that can give the official imprimatur stamp to a particular organization? And no, BPS is not a single organization, but a banner name that independant[sp] printers use. Which ones are approved and "safe", and which ones are not?

BPS as you said, Jerry, is not up to snuff with the capitalizations, etc.
There are a few Publishers that do publish the pure word of God without any admixture of error.
One is at Bible Protector dot com
You can also get the same pure text from Trinitarian Bible Society, but only one Text of theirs is correct of all the King James Bibles they sell.
The correct one is a Family Bible
8 1/2 by 5 1/2 for size
10 point text size
Product code 9CFR
ISBN 0 907861 59 8
Calf skin luxury leather
*******
Only these ones are safe.
Even Riplinger now sells that same Trinitarian Family Bible.
*******
It is time to grow in this issue, and publish the pure word of God and make disciples of all nations.
*******
PeterAV
Every word of God is pure:

[PeterAV]

My Cambridge, wide margin, concordance Bible purchased about 1981 is correct according to the test.

A site I use for online searches is correct...except, they have the "spirit" as "Spirit" (S in caps) for the last 2 passages you mention.

I like the Cambridge and intended to get another like it but with large print. Are you saying all their new ones are not "presentationally pure?"

Hi Tim,
Yes, the modern King James Bibles are going away from the truth.
Especially Cambridge with Norton's guesswork.
Oxford refuses to correct any OBvious ones as well.
All other publishers borrow from these two Publishers.
*******
But there are a few now that do publish the Pure Cambridge Edition.
*******
PeterAV
Every word of God is pure:

[PeterAV]

..... Also, a typo does not discredit the KJB.

Very true, but it can affect doctrine. And the correction should be made in the next publishing.
In the 1600's if one word was OBviously wrong, the publishers were fined huge sums. Plus they would reclaim the Bibles.
PeterAV
Every word of God is pure:

[trc123]

I marvel at the terminology that is employed and how creative people can get.

[PeterAV]

If a person has bean gifted with an ability to be creative to verify progress and truth, this is wonderful, and brings glory to God.

[trc123]

Wow, I just read that Bible Protector's narrative concerning the Pure Cambridge Edition and was struck by the subtle doctrinal teaching that God's word was purified over time. So, when God gave his Word it was evidently not pure?

This just seems to be some very dangerous slippery slope to me.

"There was also a proper purification that took place circa 1900, which has resulted in the final text of the King James Bible, which is in all ways the definitive presentation of the King James Bible, and should not be altered."

[Seth Doty]

Acts 11:28 spirit is correct and effects doctrine
It looks like Oxford and London both used Spirit instead of spirit like all the other King James Bibles of history. Oxford also used to have spirit in 1817 edition, but they changed it in the fifties.
*******
Did you know, that the Oxford of 1817 was only three verses away from Presentational purity?
Then they digressed and compromised.
*******
Isaiah 11:2 shows that even from God,... spirit means more than just Holy Ghost.
This is why little s.
spirit has many usages.
But Spirit can only be that of the Holy Ghost or the Godhead.
*******
I hope this helps answer your questions a little.
*******

Not really. You still haven't said why you think the Cambridge edition is correct. You merely state that in acts 11:28 "spirit" is correct not "Spirit" but you give no reason why you think this is so. Are you saying that "Spirit" in that verse is not speaking of the Holy Ghost in your opinion? If so why would you think that?


Another issue I find with your opinion that capitalization is of great importance is that even the Cambridge edition you are endorsing does not seem to be consistent. For example you said that sword searcher used the "pure" Cambridge edition so I went and downloaded that so I could compare it. One of the first things I checked for is consistency in capitalization of "Spirit" when an OT verse containing "Spirit" is quoted in the NT.

Right off I found this example:

"Joe

[Kayla]