RAY COMFORTS EVIDENCE BIBLE

[John81]

Yes, and there are those who think their KJB "is" God/Jesus!

I tend to ignore those on the radical edge and try to deal with those still in the realm of reality.

[kevinmiller]

Yes those crazy printers and printer errors!

I know of a guy that believes the KJV is God, and I know plenty of people that believe you can only grow with a KJV as well, funny thing is there is a group of people in French Canada that believe the same things about their version as well :loco

-Alen

Guess they're everywhere.

Though in reality, I guess it's not really all that funny because satan has so deceived them. Think of how many people they turn away from the gospel by either their arrogance, condemnation, or inability to recognize other, or foreign, versions. I think a person's witnessing ability is near crippled when you have that kind of KJVO attitude.

[John81]

It's sad, but there are many who harm the cause of Christ by such actions.

[lettheredeemedsayso]

The people that Satan has really decieved are those that believe that modern translations are just as much God's Word as the KJV.

[BroJesse]

I own a copy of the Evidence Bible and while it would seem on the surface that the language of the KJV has been edited to make it more "accessible" to the common man on the street, the problem is that not all the changes are helpful.

Example: Joh 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

By changing all the "thees" and "ye" to "you", it has actually made things less clear because it no longer distinguished between the first person singular and the plural. What Jesus was saying to Nicodemus was this:

Marvel not that I say unto you {Nicodemus}, Ye {everybody: all men} must be born again.

I keep the Evidence Bible around as a useful reference.

[lettheredeemedsayso]

Bro Alen, what source language would you be referring to?

[anime4christ]

Question: How is it perverting the Word of God if one updates words like betwixt to between?

If the KJB is the preserved Word of God for English speaking peoples why wouldn't it be better to update the language in the KJB rather than to make a whole new translation?

Myself, I love the KJB as is. However, I know many people who greatly struggle with the old English of the KJB.

If the Evidence Bible is truly the KJB with updated wording, which would make it easier for many folks to read, then I have no problem with that.


However, in the case of the NKJV, which proclaimed to be an updating of the language of the KJB but actually went beyond that and changed verses and is in reality a different translation, I'm against that.

Amen. Not everybody can read the old English, an update is welcome IMO even though I still like the original KJV a lot.

[John81]

An important point to note is that to the average reader "ye" means "you" and the two are interchangable to them. So, for them, whether they read a Bible with ye or you, they are thinking you.

[BroJesse]

An important point to note is that to the average reader "ye" means "you" and the two are interchangable to them. So, for them, whether they read a Bible with ye or you, they are thinking you.

Thee also means you, but it means you (singular). Ye refers to all of you or "you" as in a group.

This is not perculiar to the KJV, they were formal rules of written English that were in common use until the 20th century. This was covered in Strunk and White's book called "The Elements of Style".

The Online Bible documentation has more about this subject.

[John81]

Yes, that's true, and "we" may understand this linguistic bit but for most readers it's not a part of their knowledge or understanding.

[kevinmiller]

Bro Alen, what source language would you be referring to?

The Greek and Hebrew. What God's Word was originally written in. And those that accept versions that are in error as being God's Word are just as much in the wrong as those that make the KJV more than it is. There is a balance and neither end of the extremes are right.

[brother_mike]

WOW!!

Well. All I can say is that is is pretty sad to see the character assasinations that come out for making a simple opinion on a Bible. It is really sad commentary on some folk against the deeply held beliefs of a certain group of people.

Sad. Very Sad

God bless
Bro. Mike

[kevinmiller]

What versions are in error? And how are they in error? And please don't use the argument they attack the deity of Christ, because I can pull out at least several verses where they are more blunt about the deity of Christ, than ANY verse in the KJV.

The Deity of Christ??? Hmm...not really sure what you are talking about.

Many of the modern versions(NIV, ESV, ASV) use corrupt source texts which makes them unreliable. Many modern versions leave verses out altogether. Many of the versions also had, on top of the source texts, an unreliable and unqualified translating team.

[Alen]

Many KJO people say MVs attack the deity of Christ, in other words they say MVs distort scripture to make it look like Christ isn't God.

Corrupt text? I couldn't be bothered getting into that one. The leaving out verses bit is a misrepresentation, most of them still include those verses, though have a note saying they don't have a strong manuscript evidence for them. As for the translating teams for them, the NIV for example had more people working on it than the KJV. As for their qualifications, I highly doubt that they would use unqualified people for that. A search of the names of the translators, and their qualifications should remove any doubts about that (unless you are talking about the NWT, which only one person actually knew any of the original languages).

-Alen

[kevinmiller]

Many KJO people say MVs attack the deity of Christ, in other words they say MVs distort scripture to make it look like Christ isn't God.

I thought we had just established that I wasn't a "KJO" person. :frog

Corrupt text? I couldn't be bothered getting into that one. The leaving out verses bit is a misrepresentation, most of them still include those verses, though have a note saying they don't have a strong manuscript evidence for them. As for the translating teams for them, the NIV for example had more people working on it than the KJV. As for their qualifications, I highly doubt that they would use unqualified people for that. A search of the names of the translators, and their qualifications should remove any doubts about that (unless you are talking about the NWT, which only one person actually knew any of the original languages).

-Alen

Well, since the text was what our Bible is translated from, that is what is of the utmost importance I should think. Might be a good idea for you to study it a bit.
I have a copy of the NIV in a Korean-English translation and not only does it leave out verses but it just goes from verse 37 to verse 39, for example, so that unless you were looking for it, you would never notice it. One of the verses is where the Ethiopian eunuch asks Phillip what hinders him from being baptized and Phillip gave him the prerequisites for baptism. That is the most clear doctrine of baptism in the Bible and shouldn't be left out.
As far as being unqualified, one of the people on staff was a professing lesbian which explains why "sodomite" was changed to "prostitute"(a vast difference in words there) in many occasions.