Members 1Timothy115 Posted December 29, 2008 Members Share Posted December 29, 2008 I was just wondering why so many folks put (KJV) and others (KJV 1611) after Bible quotes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bzmomo7 Posted December 29, 2008 Members Share Posted December 29, 2008 I think it is because there is a difference between the 1611 version and other years versions. I really hope we don't open a can of worms on this issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John81 Posted December 29, 2008 Members Share Posted December 29, 2008 Myself, I prefer KJB because I think it's more accurate. :smile Some want it to be clear what they are quoting is from the KJB. Some use the 1611 because they actually quote from that edition of the KJB while some do it for other reasons I'm not clear on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted December 29, 2008 Share Posted December 29, 2008 I will pm you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 1Timothy115 Posted December 29, 2008 Author Members Share Posted December 29, 2008 Thanks everyone. I got it and no other replies required. The KJV has always been my preference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 1Timothy115 Posted December 30, 2008 Author Members Share Posted December 30, 2008 Here is my statement on versions: I believe the original texts are the divinely inspired Word of God in its entirety, written by men as they were moved by the Holy Spirit, and that it is the sole authority for the Christian's faith and conduct. I believe the King James Version of the Bible is the preserved Word of God for teaching and preaching to English speaking people. This is what I will use when I post scripture. I believe other English translations contain the Word of God including the latest Catholic authorized version, The New American Bible, Saint Joseph Edition. (2 Timothy 3.16-17; 2 Peter 1.20-21) I have had a Cambridge Bible since the 1980s with the King James dedication and Epistle Dedicatory in the front. I love reading the Middle English words and phrases. I seem to be able to remember the scriptures better in my Bible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members trc123 Posted December 30, 2008 Members Share Posted December 30, 2008 I was just wondering why so many folks put (KJV) and others (KJV 1611) after Bible quotes? Because there are several renditions of the King James Bible and 1611 let's the reader know the poster sticks to the 1611 version Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (KJV Revised) Joh 3:16 For God so loued ye world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life. (KJV 1611) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 1Timothy115 Posted December 30, 2008 Author Members Share Posted December 30, 2008 Because there are several renditions of the King James Bible and 1611 let's the reader know the poster sticks to the 1611 version Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (KJV Revised) Joh 3:16 For God so loued ye world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life. (KJV 1611) I think mine is a 1769 KJV Edition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kevinmiller Posted December 30, 2008 Members Share Posted December 30, 2008 I think mine is a 1769 KJV Edition. Most people's KJV's are the revised version and the idea that a person has or uses a 1611 version is typically erroneous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members trc123 Posted December 30, 2008 Members Share Posted December 30, 2008 Most people's KJV's are the revised version and the idea that a person has or uses a 1611 version is typically erroneous. Exactly correct. This is true in 99.9% of the time where the person claims KJV1611. It is also true that having several renditions somewhat undermines the KJV only argument as then you naturally have to answer the question, "Which rendition/revision?" Along with the what about other languages. I remember when I first got saved (almost 30 years ago now) that the KJV only stance was KJV only for all languages. Then as it got harder to defend, as the years have passed because our missionaries where having a hard time teaching English to the natives before they could hear the "Word" of God; we now add KJV only "for the English speaking people" in order to compensate. Things certainly do change, even though God and his Word never change (unless it is a revision)! {yes that was sarcasm at the end} Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 1Timothy115 Posted December 30, 2008 Author Members Share Posted December 30, 2008 Exactly correct. This is true in 99.9% of the time where the person claims KJV1611. It is also true that having several renditions somewhat undermines the KJV only argument as then you naturally have to answer the question, "Which rendition/revision?" Along with the what about other languages. I remember when I first got saved (almost 30 years ago now) that the KJV only stance was KJV only for all languages. Then as it got harder to defend, as the years have passed because our missionaries where having a hard time teaching English to the natives before they could hear the "Word" of God; we now add KJV only "for the English speaking people" in order to compensate. Things certainly do change, even though God and his Word never change (unless it is a revision)! {yes that was sarcasm at the end} OK. I'm satified with what I have and defend your right to the KJV of choice. That said, I think I recall a quick ref. for which revision is which. Similar to...if your Bible has "this" then it is a 16XX or 17XX. Does anyone know where I could find that without an author's 3 page essay on why they use one or the other? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Pastor Matt Posted December 30, 2008 Administrators Share Posted December 30, 2008 Just because I say I use the KJV1611 Bible does not mean that was the last date the Bible went through an edition. It was the founding date (or building date) for that Bible. My house was built in 1974, but I have done many renditions and remodeling, but the house is still a 1974 house. Here is another example that I used a long time ago. I went to a car show and saw a 1951 Crosley in mint condition. Through the life of this car it has had some revisions done. It has had a new paint job, the interior has had some work done, the engine oil has been replaced quite a few times, the exhaust pipes were changed to nice looking chrome, and many other revisions were done to the car. And yet it was still being advertised as a 1951 car. Some will say my logic does not fit, but of course people will say that. We all say that when we do not agree with something. That is why I say I use a KJV1611 Bible. It is the foundation for what I hold in my hands today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members trc123 Posted December 30, 2008 Members Share Posted December 30, 2008 An interesting thought/question. If I am multi-lingual (English, French and Spanish) which Bible must I read and study to be most right with God? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Pastor Matt Posted December 30, 2008 Administrators Share Posted December 30, 2008 Good question. I always say that the KJV is preserved perfectly in English, but also can be preserved in other languages. I only speak English, so it is KJV for me. To answer your question, if the other language has a Bible that was translated from the correct texts and is accurate, then I have no problem with them using that Bible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members 1Timothy115 Posted December 30, 2008 Author Members Share Posted December 30, 2008 Just because I say I use the KJV1611 Bible does not mean that was the last date the Bible went through an edition. It was the founding date (or building date) for that Bible. My house was built in 1974, but I have done many renditions and remodeling, but the house is still a 1974 house. Here is another example that I used a long time ago. I went to a car show and saw a 1951 Crosley in mint condition. Through the life of this car it has had some revisions done. It has had a new paint job, the interior has had some work done, the engine oil has been replaced quite a few times, the exhaust pipes were changed to nice looking chrome, and many other revisions were done to the car. And yet it was still being advertised as a 1951 car. Some will say my logic does not fit, but of course people will say that. We all say that when we do not agree with something. That is why I say I use a KJV1611 Bible. It is the foundation for what I hold in my hands today. Me too. But, I don't fault any who use some other KJV revision, I have reservations about the "New." I would never recommend anything besides the one I use...personal preference. Also, it's read from the pulpit in my Church. I would still like to see that quick reference to revision item/date. I want to know the date of the one I use since it's not specified. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.