New Cambridge Paragraph Bible

[Guest Guest]

Dwayne, after they ironed out the typos and spelling from the 1611 without changing the 1611 edition in whatever year it was, I am opposed to changing the spelling after that point. God's Word, the KJV was translated into the Queens English instead of American English so it needs to stay that way.

Katy-Anne

[Anon]

Dwayne, after they ironed out the typos and spelling from the 1611 without changing the 1611 edition in whatever year it was, I am opposed to changing the spelling after that point. God's Word, the KJV was translated into the Queens English instead of American English so it needs to stay that way.

Katy-Anne

I have to agree that anyone who is "1611 only" should be reading the 1611 text... I see what you are saying but there's really nothing to say that the spelling changes were inspired while more modern spelling changes are not... :?

[kevinmiller]

But we're Americans so we need an American version.
The verse style was first used in the Geneva Bible so the KJV actually copied that from an earlier ENGLISH version. lol

[Guest Guest]

If the 1611 is the 'Perfect' Bible, then is my Scofield KJV incomplete? After all, it does not include the Apocrypha like the 1611 did. Was the Apocrypha also divinely inspired?

[BroJesse]

It's not a modernization of spelling. Besides that, if it was spelled that way then when they translated a perfect Bible, it needs to stay that way.

Here is an article that can explain it better than I can.

http://www.biblebelievers.com/believers-org/counterfeit-KJV.html

Katy-Anne

Katy,

I'm aware of that article and also another one by Dennis Deneau. These articles talk about changes that were made to the 1769 KJV which is what nearly all of us are using.

The posts by some of the others in response to you are about the fact that there are changes in spelling between the 1611 through to the 1769 editions and they are not dealt with in the article about Counterfeit KJVs.

I had earlier on either in this thread or some other alluded to the fact that there have been word changes and there are also spelling changes in the KJV brought in by other publishers in editions of the KJV that we are using today.

Spelling changes are one thing, but word changes are dangerous.

[BroJesse]

But we're Americans so we need an American version.
The verse style was first used in the Geneva Bible so the KJV actually copied that from an earlier ENGLISH version. lol

Hmm... this is an irony. You use a language that you call English but you refuse to use the same words and spellings that the English do!

I had a friend who was once stopped by a tourist while on the streets of Singapore and was asked "Do you speak English?" and he smiled and said "No, I speak American" and then he walked off.

[Tim]

If the 1611 is the 'Perfect' Bible, then is my Scofield KJV incomplete? After all, it does not include the Apocrypha like the 1611 did. Was the Apocrypha also divinely inspired?quote]

Hey ncuthman you had better go :hide :lol:

[dwayner79]

Dwayne, after they ironed out the typos and spelling from the 1611 without changing the 1611 edition in whatever year it was, I am opposed to changing the spelling after that point. God's Word, the KJV was translated into the Queens English instead of American English so it needs to stay that way.

Katy-Anne

You are picking and choosing here. Either they got it perfect in 1611 or they didn't. The 1769 edition (and the various others leading up to that) all made minor changes and made spelling changes. In the last 230+ years words continue to change. Why was it ok to ammmend teh spelling for the first 158 years, but not any more?

[Guest Guest]

Hey ncuthman you had better go :hide

I shall fear no Ruckmanite.

But then, what does fear really mean? Which fear is it? Is it the strongest fear I have toward someone who would kill me or is it the fear of stubbing my toe on the couch? Is it the fear of the Lord or the fear of The Look from my wife?

[kevinmiller]

When did we start talking about fear? :?

[Alen]

Let's go beyond that, since when was the topic about Katy-Anne's view of the KJV?

In case you all need a hint, the topic (at least originally ) was about the Cambridge Paragraph Bible.

-Alen

[BroJesse]

But then, what does fear really mean? Which fear is it? Is it the strongest fear I have toward someone who would kill me or is it the fear of stubbing my toe on the couch? Is it the fear of the Lord or the fear of The Look from my wife?

Definitely the look from the wife... :D

[Doc H]

In 1611 the rules of English spelling had NOT been standardized.

eg Sin could be spelt sin, sinn, sine or sinne even on the same page.

Shakespeare used different spellings for the same words in his works.

Why is it that someone who is KJBO is called a 'Ruckmanite'?

Alen, forget the paragraph bible and stick with the KJV.

I would recommend you read Sam Gipp's 'Understandable History of the Bible'.

[Guest Guest]

Amen Doc H!

Katy-Anne

[Will]

[quote="Doc H"]
In 1611 the rules of English spelling had NOT been standardized.

eg Sin could be spelt sin, sinn, sine or sinne even on the same page.

Shakespeare used different spellings for the same words in his works.

[b]Why is it that someone who is KJBO is called a 'Ruckmanite'?[/b]

[color=#ff001b]Alen, forget the paragraph bible and stick with the KJV.[/color]

[color=#0009ff]I would recommend you read Sam Gipp's 'Understandable History of the Bible'.[/color]
[/quote]

[b]Let's leave that argument alone please.[/b]

[color=#ff0000]It is the KJV.[/color]
[color=#0000ff]
Currently reading that book. It's interesting. Some stuff I agree with, some stuff I don't.[/color]