It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Excellent, that's the most powerful way to study the Word IMO,
Strongs Concordance + Greek/Hebrew Translit + KJV = perfection
Originally posted by KJV1611
reply to post by Lazarus Short
See what it says in Acts 7:45 and Heb 4:8. I want to know if it says Jesus or Joshua. It should say Jesus if they translated it from the majority Greek texts. Also look up 1 John 5:7 and Col 1:14 and see what they say as well compared to the KJV in order to determine their stance on a few subjects I am interested in. See also if there is any margin notes in Mark 16, the last 12 verses, do they say they are not in the "originals"?
I am curious to see, and I would love to read the preface to their their bible as well. I will buy on for my collection if I can find a cheap one as well I keep my eyes peeled at thrift stores and goodwills.
Acts 7:45 "Joshua"
Hebrews 4:8 "Joshua"
They are interchangeable.....but not sure why they would change it from the Authorized version? Still looking for a copy of a KJV 2 online..nothing yet. Please provide a link if you can find one.
I John 5:7 "the Father" "the Word" "the Holy Ghost" KJV II has "Holy Spirit"
Excellent. ALL new bible perversions change that verse. As you well know apparently....or you wouldn't have quoted just the last of the verse.
Colossians 1:14 both have "through His blood"
That's a first.
the KJV II has Mark, chapter 16, complete, with no notes
...then why change it? If it ain't broke.......don't "fix" it. I have a bone or two to pick with their comments here Laz.
Here's the end of the preface, written by Jay Green:
"HERE ARE THE GAINS OF THE KING JAMES II VERSION:
1. A strong effort has been made to keep all the majesty, beauty and glory that is inherent in God's word, and which even its enemies admit were brilliantly incorporated in the original King James Version.
Then why make a new version with a COPYRIGHT attached to it then fellows? And if the Bible is "completely inerrant" what did you think you needed to fix it children?
2. This Bible has been handled reverently, since we believe without any reservation that the Bible is completely inerrant, that it has a pure beginning and that it also had a special providential preservation by the divine Author through all these centuries. As we worked, we feared God, not man.
The "best" text my foot. It is the MAJORITY TEXT!!! 5000 manuscripts from Byzantine Antioch, compared to 4 from Alexander Egypt. 4!!! The choice isn't that hard children. 5,000 to 4. It isn't "best"...its MAJORITY! Unless you live in America where the minority clearly rule....hints all new bibles use the minority text as their foundation. Typical.
3. A pre-study of textual criticism encompassing more than 1000 hours convinced us the best text was that used by Tyndale and the KJV scholars.
No it is not either. Refer to Acts 7:45 and Heb 4:8 to prove this lie. They did no such thing as translating word for word. Its impossible.
4. This Bible is translated word-for-word in an attempt to give a literal rendition of each and every one of God's words.
Lately, the 'translators' and paraphrasers have claimed this was impossible without destroying readability. In this Bible, you will see it is not only possible, but it is desirable.
5. All true scholarship has been used, including any late archeological finds which have thrown light on the translation problems of the Bible.
This is the same argument ALL modern versions try to make. And ALL of them turn out to be at a HIGHER reading level than a KJV. The KJV is the Standard of BASIC English. It is in fact the very foundation of BASIC English. Modern English is NOT BASIC English....modern English is slang trash not worthy to be placed in ANY Bible.
6. This Bible has easy-to-understand language. It can be read by elementary school children with relative ease. It is not, however, in basic English.
Wouldn't that make it harder to understand?? I happen to hold to the belief that the very italic words the KJV translators inserted into the text is just as inspired as the TEXT itself! And I have scripture proof for that as well if you want to journey down that road Laz, it is interesting.
7. This Bible has far fewer words added for sense, and they are in italics.
BAD idea.......thus leaving the editors the final authority as to what they think God was "meaning" in His words. I can think of two places right now where they probably screwed up and put a capital S in the place of a lower case s in "spirit" thinking it was the spirit of God causing this person to do something.....when in fact it was the person's spirit.
8. The three Persons of the Trinity, and pronouns for them, are capitalized in order to help the reader distinguish them from men in the Bible.
Another dumb idea. ALMOST every time in the New Testament when someone quotes a Old Testament passage.....it is NOT a word for word quote. Thus putting these occurrences in quotation marks are misleading as it is not a QUOTE. A simple reference where the event took place would work fine.
9. Old Testament quotations in the New Testament are in quotation marks. These are the only quotation marks in this entire Bible.
I would be curious to test this statement out...I can show you where multiple places in the Textus Receptus there are variations on the text.......how you going to put ALL the manuscript evidence in when there are sometimes 4-10 different accounts giving...? Guess you would just go off the already proven Authorized version, huh guys?
10. None of God's words were left out. If Hebrew or Greek manuscripts were behind them, the evidence was considered and a translation given.
11. Only proper English is used. There is no slang in this Bible.
12. Though many improvements have been made, most well-known verses of the Bible are changed only by removing the Elizabethan English.
You will not need to rememorize. In fact, this Bible can be used in either the pew or the pulpit interchangeably with the King James Version.
Jesus is the english incarnation of the greek Iesous.
Originally posted by Lazarus Short
off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift