Textual/version stance
Which best describes your position on the KJV/KJVO/TR issue?
3 members have voted
-
1. Which best describes your position on the KJV/KJVO/TR issue?
-
1. I believe the King James Version is a faithful translation while also believing that there are other translations out there, including foreign language translations and Critical Text translations that are equally faithful. For instance, the NASB is a faithful translation to the texts it was translated from. The textual issue is as a non-issue. I use the KJV because I believe it to be the best translation although I don't have a problem studying from other versions to gain differing or a deeper perspective.6
-
2. I believe that the Received Text is the accurate text and any Bible faithfully translated from it is God's preserved Word. I am not opposed to a new English (or any other language) translation from the TR as long as it is faithful and accurate.16
-
3. I believe that the KJV is the only pure translation for English speakers and that nothing will ever replace the KJV in English no matter how archaic the 1611 English becomes.12
-
4. I believe that the KJV is the only pure translation for English speakers. While accepting translations in other languages, I would still believe that the KJV is superior to all the rest.8
-
5. I believe that the King James Version is the only true Bible in the world, that it - itself - was given by verbal inspiration of God in 1611, and that all nations should learn 1611 English in order to have the one, pure Bible.2
-
6. I am not KJVO at all.9
-
-
Topics
-
- 3 replies
- 22 views
-
- 1 reply
- 30 views
-
- 42 replies
- 768 views
-
- 27 replies
- 827 views
-
- 82 replies
- 3,280 views
-
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. 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.