Geneva Bible

[kevinmiller]

It's a crock full of rubbish, in my opinion. God blesses the KJB.

Yes He does. Because it is perfectly translated, not for the simple fact that it is the KJV.

[Guest Guest]

Not everyone agrees with your interpretation of the Bible. You need to get off your high horse Vince. Just because you think you've found a "truth" doesn't mean that you have arrived and everyone else is disregarding God's Word. Sheesh.

Kevin, I clearly and repeatedly showed where "Passover" is a one day event, actually a single meal. Everyone that wants to argue against the Authority of the King James Bible refused to consider my statement. I interpreted nothing. I simply stated what the Bible SAYS. If you disagree with that, then you disagree with the Bible. Is that "logical" enough?

You take issue with it's name? I would think that the content is more important than the name. The KJV is named after a most-likely unsaved tyrant. It's still a great version is it not? And the Geneva Bible is what many people used in founding our country and in starting revivals. The KJV doesn't necessarily have the market on that.

No, I take issue with it being "Geneva BIBLE" and "King James VERSION." The KJB is not a version: It is God's written Word.

Do you think Jesus is going to be a nice King in the Millennium?? "Rod of Iron" doesn't sound too appealing. God's first government choice is a Theocracy, then a Monarchy. The only place you'll find a "Democracy" of any sort in the Bible is the church, and that only vaguely.

And that "unsaved tyrant" wrote a Study guide on the Song of Solomon and a commentary on Revelation. Watch the mud you sling around.

[Guest Guest]

Was auch immer. I never stated that I don't believe the KJV, or that I believe the KJV was wrong to translate the passage as it did. Stop reading into my words.

You say that the Geneva translated it correctly, but the KJB translated it differently. So, either you're wrong or the KJB is wrong: your statements are mutually exclusive. i.e. They cannot both be true.

[John81]

Prior to all this Geneva Bible being everywhere I noticed a great deal of Reformed Theology. In fact, I believe I posted here last year asking about Reformed Theology.

It would stand to reason that if Reformed Theology is growing that they would promote the Geneva Bible as "their" Bible.

Do the notes in the Geneva Bible promote the idea that "the church" is now Israel and Israel has been disinherited?

Do the notes in the Geneva Bible promote some aspects of Calvinism?

I ask because I've noticed both of these is some sermons and books I've read by those who hold to Reformed Theology.

[Randy]

The point of this Geneva Bible thread is to find out what it is and why it's becoming so popular again at this time.

I think that there are two reasons for it becoming popular again. The first is that there is a growing trend away toward Calvinism and covenant theology - and the marginal notes in the Geneva Bible support them.

That, and people want to be different for difference sake.

I have some friends who are Calvinist Covenant Theologians, and they have recently switched to the Geneva Bible. They had been using several different versions until we talked about the KJV & why. They used KJV for a while, and now have 'found' the Geneva. I know that at least in part, the reason is that they feel the need to be different (read superior).

It is hard to say, but I think that satan is behind this new interest in the Geneva. 400 years of fruit from the KJV is hard to argue with.

[Will]

Prior to all this Geneva Bible being everywhere I noticed a great deal of Reformed Theology. In fact, I believe I posted here last year asking about Reformed Theology.

It would stand to reason that if Reformed Theology is growing that they would promote the Geneva Bible as "their" Bible.

Do the notes in the Geneva Bible promote the idea that "the church" is now Israel and Israel has been disinherited?

Do the notes in the Geneva Bible promote some aspects of Calvinism?

I ask because I've noticed both of these is some sermons and books I've read by those who hold to Reformed Theology.

I have a copy of it myself. The notes contained inside are the original notes put there by Calvin and other Reformed theologians of that time. I forget who all the theologians were who contributed to the Geneva. But yes, it promotes Calvinism I suppose, let me check real quick...Yep. I don't have any idea concerning notes about Israel.

[Will]

You say that the Geneva translated it correctly, but the KJB translated it differently. So, either you're wrong or the KJB is wrong: your statements are mutually exclusive. i.e. They cannot both be true.

Yes, they can both be true.

As I stated before, in the 17th century and prior, it was common to call the Passover "Easter."

[John81]

Thank you Randy!

I've been sitting here trying to remember what some of these people call themselves and it's the Covenant Theology folks I was thinking of.

I've noticed many of these folks books and sermons are becoming ever more popular. They preach the church has inherited the covenants from Israel, which they say God has rejected. They tend to teach some or all of Calvinism.

I can see how many "conservative" Christians might turn to them. Much of what they teach is "conservative" but then they toss in these other aspects and I don't believe folks think enough about it all before joining in with them.

I do believe the devil constantly tries one thing after another to diminish the King James Bible while uplifting "other Bibles" for professing Christians and seeking souls to look to.

[Will]

I think that there are two reasons for it becoming popular again. The first is that there is a growing trend away toward Calvinism and covenant theology - and the marginal notes in the Geneva Bible support them.

That, and people want to be different for difference sake.

I have some friends who are Calvinist Covenant Theologians, and they have recently switched to the Geneva Bible. They had been using several different versions until we talked about the KJV & why. They used KJV for a while, and now have 'found' the Geneva. I know that at least in part, the reason is that they feel the need to be different (read superior).

It is hard to say, but I think that satan is behind this new interest in the Geneva. 400 years of fruit from the KJV is hard to argue with.

Wow...Satan is behind this interest in the Geneva? Those are bold words, please back them up.

And the KJV didn't become popular until the Geneva stopped being printed. And that was in the 18th century. Prior the the Geneva being put out of print, the Geneva was the Bible of the common man.

[Guest Guest]

Yes, they can both be true.

As I stated before, in the 17th century and prior, it was common to call the Passover "Easter."

But that would mean that the Geneva's expression here is superior to the KJB. If what you say is true, of course.

[John81]

MC,

One thing I do agree with you on is the Bible/Version thing. While I catch myself using the "version" title, I don't like it and never have.

Caling the King James Bible the King James Version seems to me to put it in the same category with all the other "versions" and thus diminishes it to the level of simply being one of many "versions" and not something that stands out or above the others.

I much prefer KJB to KJV and I prefer King James Bible to King James Version.

Alas, most King James Bibles have "King James Version" printed in large letters on them.

I've had Muslims, Catholics and Orthodox all attack the King James Bible, and all those "versions" because they use one "holy book/Bible" while all us "Protestants" have a variety of "versions" we choose from to suit our needs.

It's sad, but that's how they see it and that little wedge becomes a big issue for them and helps to block out the truth. :(

[Will]

MC,

One thing I do agree with you on is the Bible/Version thing. While I catch myself using the "version" title, I don't like it and never have.

Caling the King James Bible the King James Version seems to me to put it in the same category with all the other "versions" and thus diminishes it to the level of simply being one of many "versions" and not something that stands out or above the others.

I much prefer KJB to KJV and I prefer King James Bible to King James Version.

Alas, most King James Bibles have "King James Version" printed in large letters on them.

I've had Muslims, Catholics and Orthodox all attack the King James Bible, and all those "versions" because they use one "holy book/Bible" while all us "Protestants" have a variety of "versions" we choose from to suit our needs.

It's sad, but that's how they see it and that little wedge becomes a big issue for them and helps to block out the truth.

Catholics have multiple versions too, don't let them lie to you.

Muslims have multiple translations of the Koran as well.

'Tis all hypocrisy.

[John81]

I do believe Satan "could be" behind, or at least partly behind, the resurgence of the Geneva Bible.

If the Bible contains all the error filled notes folks have posted about, then it would stand to reason Satan would prefer folks to read/use that Bible than the King James Bible.

[kevinmiller]

Kevin, I clearly and repeatedly showed where "Passover" is a one day event, actually a single meal. Everyone that wants to argue against the Authority of the King James Bible refused to consider my statement. I interpreted nothing. I simply stated what the Bible SAYS. If you disagree with that, then you disagree with the Bible. Is that "logical" enough?

Yes, and people don't agree with that interpretation. Just because you see it that way doesn't make you right and everyone else wrong. I might add that people have so-called proof in the Bible for other absurd doctrines like geocentricism.

No, I take issue with it being "Geneva BIBLE" and "King James VERSION." The KJB is not a version: It is God's written Word.

Vince, you are extremely unbalanced. Why do you make a mountain out of a molehill?

Do you think Jesus is going to be a nice King in the Millennium?? "Rod of Iron" doesn't sound too appealing. God's first government choice is a Theocracy, then a Monarchy. The only place you'll find a "Democracy" of any sort in the Bible is the church, and that only vaguely.

And that "unsaved tyrant" wrote a Study guide on the Song of Solomon and a commentary on Revelation. Watch the mud you sling around.

That's good Vince. You go start a country where you use the KJV, or excuse me KJ"B," as your constitution and make sure you outlaw the Geneva Bible. :shootme:

[John81]

Yes Will, but we all know when these false religionists are attacking Christianity the truth doesn't matter.

It's easy for them to point to a dozen different Bible versions of ours and much more difficult for us to do the same back at them. For this reason, they love to use this tactic.