That old black Book

[irishman]

The KJB

If we continue to change and “update” the King James Bible, we will have accomplished a mighty feat for the dark forces of evil, and watered down the truth; in a day where we daily are encouraged to “update” and to go higher and faster in electronic gadgets, computers and phones, we program ourselves to “update” every portion of our lives, along with all things that enter into our realm of persuasion. In simple terms, “LEAVE THE BIBLE ALONE!” It has served well for hundreds of years, and is still capable of refreshing and restoring life to those who are hanging on the edge of destruction; it is still capable, and, indeed, necessary to reclaim lost souls and restore them to Heavenly realms. The Bible hasn’t changed; it need not change; it is a Book of holiness, which in itself never changes; it is given from a God that “changeth not”.

History has verified the practical abilities and the potential of the Bible, and we would be wise to OBserve the facts it gives us. All through the ages great nations have stood on the foundation of the King James Bible, (America especially) and have enjoyed revival from its sweet pages. Yes, our country was founded on these same principles; there is no denying it for any that have studied history in depth. Look at the great men of our heritage and see that they were men of faith, specifically faith in the written Word, the King James Bible.

The destroyers have come
The Word to destroy;
The evil they’ve done
With the devil’s employ;

Is unfathomed today
In our foolish world;
They have taken away,
Truth they have hurled.

They’ve sought to change
The truth to a lie;
They’ll rearrange,
The Word awry.

“Change it naught, change it naught”,
Rings the chant of Truth;
“Change it not, change it not”
Sings the voice of couth.

They’ve sought to change
God’s Holy Word;
The most ridiculous thing
I’ve ever heard.

Edited May 9, 2010 by irishman

[Live4Him]

Would you have said the same thing in 1611 when the Authorized Version was just coming out? Weren't there already several good translations out there such as the Geneva, Tyndale, etc? Why did there need to be another one? Wasn't the good ol' Geneva good enough?

[irishman]

Would you have said the same thing in 1611 when the Authorized Version was just coming out? Weren't there already several good translations out there such as the Geneva, Tyndale, etc? Why did there need to be another one? Wasn't the good ol' Geneva good enough?

Nope!

[Pastor Matt]

I would not have a prOBlem with the archaic words being replaced. I'm not talking about changing anything in the Bible, but just updating English words that have changed over the years. Pretty much the same thing that has been done on the current version that we have in our hands.

[JerryNumbers]

The KJB

If we continue to change and “update” the King James Bible, we will have accomplished a mighty feat for the dark forces of evil, and watered down the truth; in a day where we daily are encouraged to “update” and to go higher and faster in electronic gadgets, computers and phones, we program ourselves to “update” every portion of our lives, along with all things that enter into our realm of persuasion. In simple terms, “LEAVE THE BIBLE ALONE!” It has served well for hundreds of years, and is still capable of refreshing and restoring life to those who are hanging on the edge of destruction; it is still capable, and, indeed, necessary to reclaim lost souls and restore them to Heavenly realms. The Bible hasn’t changed; it need not change; it is a Book of holiness, which in itself never changes; it is given from a God that “changeth not”.

History has verified the practical abilities and the potential of the Bible, and we would be wise to OBserve the facts it gives us. All through the ages great nations have stood on the foundation of the King James Bible, (America especially) and have enjoyed revival from its sweet pages. Yes, our country was founded on these same principles; there is no denying it for any that have studied history in depth. Look at the great men of our heritage and see that they were men of faith, specifically faith in the written Word, the King James Bible.

The destroyers have come
The Word to destroy;
The evil they’ve done
With the devil’s employ;

Is unfathomed today
In our foolish world;
They have taken away,
Truth they have hurled.

They’ve sought to change
The truth to a lie;
They’ll rearrange,
The Word awry.

“Change it naught, change it naught”,
Rings the chant of Truth;
“Change it not, change it not”
Sings the voice of couth.

They’ve sought to change
God’s Holy Word;
The most ridiculous thing
I’ve ever heard.

I agree, leave it as it is. modem man need not change a thing within its pages.

[gary.lehman]

Would you have said the same thing in 1611 when the Authorized Version was just coming out? Weren't there already several good translations out there such as the Geneva, Tyndale, etc? Why did there need to be another one? Wasn't the good ol' Geneva good enough?

Let's change this question up a bit to....if I were my great great great great great (how ever many) grandparents would I say the same thing of the 1611?

My paternal grandmother's side? No...they spoke German, and from what we can tell, are not sure if they were Lutheran or Catholic. Either way, there is no proof that they could even read. If they could, they prOBably weren't affluent enough to own a personal copy of God's word. If they could, and they were Lutheran, it would have been the Luther Bible. I can tell you, however, that my grandmother was a Baptist. She carried a King James Bible to the church around the corner.

My paternal grandfather's side? PrOBably the same as my paternal grandmother except for the small Irish branch. I'm sure they didn't carry a King James :-).

My maternal grandmother's side? Well, the semi-royalty side would have owned a King James Bible because they were Church of England. The less affluent grandparents prOBably owned a Geneva and came to the United States to escape persecution. The other grandparents prOBably agreed with Menno and carried a German Luther Bible until they left that community in the early 1800s.

My maternal grandfather's side? They prOBably started with a Geneva Bible, but like most, within 50 years, converted to the King James. Thing is, however, I know my great-grandfather, a circuit preacher, was carrying a 1901 American Standard Version on his routes in Central and South Missouri at the early part of the 1900th century. As for the Irish side of this grandparent, I'm sure he wouldn't have been caught dead with a King James Bible.

More importantly is my wife's family, who can be traced to the Mayflower. Can you guess what Bible they carried? It wasn't the King James. See: http://www.greatsite.com/facsimile-reproductions/geneva-1560.html

As for her other side, they were Tories (and actually had to come back from Canada years later) so they most likely embraced the King James because they sided with the more than just King James...they embraced all the kings, even during the Revolutionary War. Ironically, her two sides might have shot at each other. One, a Puritanical, Geneva Bible side, and the other, a pro-English, Church of England, King James Bible side. By the way, the later is (was) religious, but possibly lost. My FIL got saved in 1969 from a Billy Graham crusade and became an IFB in the mid-1970s. Of course he is King James Only.

My point is this, I think we have started to re-write history and there is no way of knowing what we would have done until we truly consider history and our heritage. Thank God for the King James...but thank God just as much, if not more, for the Bible of the Puritans / Pilgrims that was the first English Bible to land on our shores! Edited May 11, 2010 by gary.lehman

[Live4Him]

Nope!

No, the Geneva wasn't good enough?

I would not have a prOBlem with the archaic words being replaced. I'm not talking about changing anything in the Bible, but just updating English words that have changed over the years. Pretty much the same thing that has been done on the current version that we have in our hands.

I agree.

My point is this, I think we have started to re-write history and there is no way of knowing what we would have done until we truly consider history and our heritage. Thank God for the King James...but thank God just as much, if not more, for the Bible of the Puritans / Pilgrims that was the first English Bible to land on our shores!

I agree.

[irishman]

"No, the Geneva wasn't good enough?"

If it was, there would have been no KJB, and no further need for it. Do you think all that happened by accident?

Maybe the "authorized" version was also authorized by God, did you ever think of that?

Please check out the "articles" tab, and the KJB posts.

Edited May 14, 2010 by irishman

[Live4Him]

"No, the Geneva wasn't good enough?"

If it was, there would have been no KJB, and no further need for it. Do you think all that happened by accident?

Maybe the "authorized" version was also authorized by God, did you ever think of that?

Please check out the "articles" tab, and the KJB posts.

God left the world without a sufficiant English translation of His Word for hundreds of years?

[JerryNumbers]

God left the world without a sufficiant English translation of His Word for hundreds of years?

Yes, yet He provided one when the time was proper.

[brother_mike]

I agree, leave it as it is. modem man need not change a thing within its pages.

I agree. It is as God wants it to be.

[brother_mike]

I would not have a prOBlem with the archaic words being replaced. I'm not talking about changing anything in the Bible, but just updating English words that have changed over the years. Pretty much the same thing that has been done on the current version that we have in our hands.

With all due respect Bro. Matt, if you change the "archaic" words, then you ARE changing something IN the Bible. Edited May 15, 2010 by brother_mike

[JerryNumbers]

Exactly, they've tried that several times, them the final product left a lot to be desires, for they changed the meaning of many things within the pages of the bible to further support their own agenda.

All that is needed, if for people to open and study the very good Bible, KJV, that God has provided us with.

My humble opinion only, most of those who come along and want to come up with a new version do so for 2 main reason, dollar marks in their eyes and or to make changes to support their beliefs.

[Pastor Matt]

With all due respect Bro. Matt, if you change the "archaic" words, then you ARE changing something IN the Bible.

Then why is it acceptable with the Bible we have in our hands? If that is the case, the Bible we have in our hands has already been changed. The changes I am talking about, it the same "updating" that was already done in our current KJV Bible.

[John81]

God left the world without a sufficiant English translation of His Word for hundreds of years?

Actually there was no English translation at all for over a thousand years. The same is true for many other peoples and there are still some people groups who still don't have a translation of the Bible in their own language.