Getting discouraged with KJ publishers

[4everHis]

I am hijacking this thread. This is exactly the exhausting, divisive type of conversation that prevents me from sending my teens over to OB. God's Word is forever settled in Heaven. I don't recall punctuation and capitalization being a word, but whatever. It sounds like someone has an axe to grind and the rest of you are giving grist to his/her mill.

By the way, KJV is the best thing going in the English language. How carefully have you looked for the punctuation in the other "versions"? I sense that you have not exhausted that subject. Shall we examine punctuation and capitalization in other versions or is KJV the best in the English language? I'm just curious, because this discussion seems to be nonedifying IMHO, capitalization intended.


By the way, just as a point of reference, did you know that today's scholars differ on the capitalization of the word Internet? Both are deemed correct, since no true consensus can be declared. It depends upon with whom you check, but the words Internet and internet have an identical meaning. Interesting, isn't it? English is a unique language, certainly. Additionally, I am not comparing the Holy Spirit to the Internet, just to be clear.

[Jerry]

I don't see how those who are resisting Peter are aiding his cause. Is it better to let error go unchallenged?

[JerryNumbers]

Jerry.

If you refuse to let your children to come here because of such a topic as this, them you need to keep them out of every church in this world. For no matter where you go that the Bible is taught there is going to be doctrinal disagreement and there is a good opportunity for someone to teach your children wrong.

As for this topic, I completely disagree with PeterAV, but so far the disagreement has been civil, which would set a good example for you children on how to disagree.

Standing against wrong is important, allowing it to go unchallenged is wrong, acting like it does not exist is wrong, ignoring it is wrong, going along with it is wrong.

[4everHis]

Point taken:icon_smile:.


I always think you should stand for truth. Always. I have a different tolerance for discussions that major on the minors and that cut others down when their points are invalid.

It appears that the folks around here are slow to want to grow in this area of the Pure Holy Bible.
Very stand offish for sure.

Perhaps if I had quoted to what I was responding, that might have been helpful.

Keep up the good work in contending without being contentious. Sorry for the miscommunication.

[JerryNumbers]

Sometimes I speak up in such topics as this, sometimes I don't. Seems others do the same. So I assume that they to feel like there is a time for them to speak up, a time for them to be quite.

Hopefully we will all have the wisdom to do this, and understand when others speak up when we do not, that they feel its the proper time for them to do so even though it may not be the proper time for us to.

Them in the mean time we all could do take these verses to heart praying for one another that in such times we can manifest it as we should.

Col

[PeterAV]

One can see the checking I did with Bible Protector at his Forum, as we go through the Bible comparing all the variations. This also should bode well to give you folk an arena to see what it is all about.
http://www.bibleprotector.com/forum/
Thank you kindly!
And may God continue to bless you folk.
*******
PeterAV
Every word of God is pure:

[Seth Doty]

*******
All King James Bible read Spirit in Acts 10:19.
It is the Oxford that is inconsistent, for there is no early witness for a capital in the word "spirit" in Acts 11:12
So Oxford fails the "age" test.

Wait a minute, isn't it your whole premise that the earlier KJV editions have spelling errors that make them "impure"? Isn't that a double standard on your part?

Edited to add: Actually it doesn't even look like it is true that the capitalization of Spirit in Acts 11:12 has no early witness in the English language. I checked out various historic English translations online and it seems that both the Geneva bible (1560) and the Wesley NT (1755) capitalize Spirit in Acts 11:12. While I don't think there is a need for a "early witness" and I wouldn't necessarily recommend either of those bibles it does show the claimed need for a "early witness" to be a moot point since the Geneva bible pre-dates the KJV.

Link to the page from the 1560 Geneva: Acts 11 geneva

Also no legitimate revision introduced the Oxford reading.
Oxford fails the Revision test.

Okay.... I suppose you need to define "legitimate revision". When I look through my various KJV bibles that I have but don't use daily it looks like Spirit is capitalized in Acts 11:12 in all but two of my copies(out of eight different bibles of various ages from various publishers) one being a thomas nelson pocket bible and the other being a exact textual replica of the original 1611 KJV. Even my Reina Valera Gomez capitalized "Spirit" in Acts 11:12(only non-english bible I have to check). Based on my small sample apparently the majority of KJV publishers capitalize "Spirit" in Acts 11:12. I guess most KJV publishers are following an "illegitimate" revision in your eyes...

And since the Greek word pneuma is always spelled in uniform letters making no distinction for capitals, we don't go to the Greek for help.

See, that right there is what I was trying to get you to admit when you were saying that the reason Spirit wasn't capitalized in Joel 2:28-29 and then was capitalized in Acts 2:17-18(in the Cambridge edition you are pushing) was because of additional NT revelation. OBviously since the NT was first given in Greek and as you now admit Greek does not capitalize letters as we do that was and is impossible.

The English translation itself was the point of origin for the capitalization of various words. In the languages the KJV was translated from the words were not capitalized at all. The Cambridge edition you are endorsing is therefore inconsistent itself about capitalization as I pointed out in the first place. That inconsistency alone shows that your argument for this Cambridge edition being the only pure KJV is fatally flawed.

[JerryNumbers]

I've got a Bible published by John A. Dickson Publishing Company of Chicago copyrighted 1946.

Joel 2:28-29 spirit with a small s

Acts 2:17,18 spirit with a large S

This is a large family Study Bible which I think was bought by mother when I was very small, 1946 was the year of my birth. It has several beautiful pictures in it, and along about the middle has the 23rd Psalm printed in a beautiful type on colored pages.

I did not check all the verses, it might upset me to find out that during those days they did not have a proper accurate Bible to study.

[Seth Doty]

I've got a Bible published by John A. Dickson Publishing Company of Chicago copyrighted 1946.

Joel 2:28-29 spirit with a small s

Acts 2:17,18 spirit with a large S

This is a large family Study Bible which I think was bought by mother when I was very small, 1946 was the year of my birth. It has several beautiful pictures in it, and along about the middle has the 23rd Psalm printed in a beautiful type on colored pages.

I did not check all the verses, it might upset me to find out that during those days they did not have a proper accurate Bible to study.

So I am clear here, I don't personally believe that it is a serious prOBlem for Spirit to be capitalized in Acts 2:17,18 and not in Joel 2:28-29. It is only a spelling inconsistency and thus no big deal in my eyes. It only becomes a prOBlem when someone claims even the spelling and capitalization must be perfect in order to have a "pure" bible. I was just pointing out that the Cambridge edition that PeterAV is saying is the one pure KJV due to spelling issues has minor spelling issues as well. It isn't as if there is a serious prOBlem with the Cambridge edition, after all it is almost exactly the same, but there doesn't seem to be anything that makes it any better than other KJV editions either.

[JerryNumbers]

So I am clear here, I don't personally believe that it is a serious prOBlem for Spirit to be capitalized in Acts 2:17,18 and not in Joel 2:28-29. It is only a spelling inconsistency and thus no big deal in my eyes. It only becomes a prOBlem when someone claims even the spelling and capitalization must be perfect in order to have a "pure" bible. I was just pointing out that the Cambridge edition that PeterAV is saying is the one pure KJV due to spelling issues has minor spelling issues as well. It isn't as if there is a serious prOBlem with the Cambridge edition, after all it is almost exactly the same, but there doesn't seem to be anything that makes it any better than other KJV editions either.

I'm with you!

[PeterAV]

So I am clear here, I don't personally believe that it is a serious prOBlem for Spirit to be capitalized in Acts 2:17,18 and not in Joel 2:28-29. It is only a spelling inconsistency and thus no big deal in my eyes.

Several King James Bible committees have decided against your belief here including Oxford, Cambridge, and London.
Capitalization affects doctrine.
In English, spellings and capitals are there for a specific reason, along with the italics.
This is no spelling inconsistency as you claim.
You are then being the final arbiture, instead of the word of God.
Rather I see a spelling "consistency" here in all of the Bibles for the last couple hundred years.
For hundreds of Years all King James Bibles read little s in Joel and Capital S in Acts.
Don't know about the new ones being printed up, however.
*******
PeterAV
Every word of God is pure:

[Wretched Jon]

Thanks yall. I think I just finally had it with publishers, and went on a rant. There are certain publishers I strictly avoid from the get go, and then there are those I have dealt with.
I dont have a prOBlem with understanding the KJB, but just cant find myself to trust a publisher, if I have found an error in their publishing. Is that being OCD?
I am not going to another per-version.
I am checking out LCBP's website now.
Has anyone had any experience with the Rock of Ages Study Bible by Oxford?

[Seth Doty]

Has anyone had any experience with the Rock of Ages Study Bible by Oxford?

Yes, I have it and I like it, it has pretty solid notes, but if you insist on complete freedom from publishing errors it prOBably won't be any better than another publisher. For example I found one place(if I recall it was in Isaiah) where they printed half of a verse on one page and then printed the whole verse again on the next page. It doesn't have a lot of mistakes like that but there are some. It isn't worth worrying about though in my opinion.

but just cant find myself to trust a publisher, if I have found an error in their publishing. Is that being OCD?

Could be.

[JerryNumbers]

You will not find a perfect publisher this side of heaven, perfection only lies on the other side of heaven, but once many years ago perfection lived with man, but they hated Him and murdered Him on the Cross.

[trc123]

You will not find a perfect publisher this side of heaven, perfection only lies on the other side of heaven, but once many years ago perfection lived with man, but they hated Him and murdered Him on the Cross.

Isn't that the truth.......