KJVOs and Other versions from the TR

[spock]

The differences between the 1611 KJV and the 1769 KJV are more than just spelling changes:

Leviticus 26:23, 1611: "And if ye will not be reformed by these things." 1769: "And if ye will not be reformed by me by these things."
Numbers 7:31, 1611: "Of an 130 shekels." 1769: "Of the weight of an 130 shekels."
Ruth 3:15, 1611: "And he went into the citie." 1769, "And she went into the city." [Who went into the city?]
Esther 3:4, 1611: "Whether Mordecai his matters would stand." 1769, "Whether Mordecai's matters would stand."
Psalm 69:32, 1611: "And your heart shall live that seek good." 1769, "And your heart shall live that seek God."
Psalm 105:30, 1611: "The land brought forth frogs." 1769, "Their land brought forth frogs."
Isaiah 51:16, 1611: "And have covered thee." 1769, "And I have covered thee."
Jeremiah 40:5: "Over all the cities of Judah." 1769, "Over the cities of Judah."
Daniel 3:15, 1611: "A fiery furnace." 1769, "A burning fiery furnace."
Zechariah 11:2, 1611: "Because all the mighty are spoiled" 1769, "Because the mighty are spoiled."
Matthew 3:11, 1611: "But will burne up the chaffe." 1769, "But he will burn up the chaff."
Matthew 12:23, 1611, "Is this the sonne of David?" 1769, "Is not this the son of David?"
Mark 10:18, 1611, "There is no man good, but one." 1769, "There is none good, but one."
Luke 1:3, 1611, "Having had perfect understanding of things." 1769, "Having had perfect understanding of all things."
1 Corinthians 4:9, 1611, "As it were approved to death." 1769, "As it were appointed to death."
1 Corinthians 15:6, 1611, "And that hee was seene." 1769, "After that he was seen."
1 Corinthians 15:41, 1611, "Another of the moone." 1769, "Another glory of the moon."
1 Timothy 1:4, 1611, "Rather than edifying which is in faith." 1769, "Rather than godly edifying which is in faith."
2 Timothy 4:13, 1611, "Bring with thee, but especially the parchments." 1769, "Bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments."
1 John 5:12, 1611, "hee that hath not the Sonne hath not life." 1769, "He that hath not the Son of God hath not life."
Jude 25, 1611, "Power, now and ever." 1769, "Power, both now and ever."

We're still waiting for the King James Only folks to explain to us why they use the 1769 version instead of the 1611 version which they say was inspired by the Holy Ghost.

I'm checking you list and only got to the first one so far. It is incorrect! Le 26:23 And if ye will not be reformed by me by these things, but will walk contrary unto me; (KJB). Just a little dishonest on that one. I'll check others after church.

 

[illinoisguy]

Just a little dishonest on that one.

Leviticus 26:23, AV 1611: "And if ye will not be reformed by these things, but will walke contrary unto me:"
Leviticus 26:23, 1769 Version: "And if ye will not be reformed by me by these things, but will walk contrary unto me;"

Please explain why it is "dishonest" and "incorrect" to cite this difference in wording between the AV 1611 and the 1769 version of the KJV. Show your work.

 

[FSSL]

There are 27 different editions of various TRs. So, which one? The KJVO is DISHONEST when they attempt to discuss the TR.

They will always foist the KJV meaning and usage on the Greek.

 

[Agent P]

Le 26:23 And if ye will not be reformed

Danged Calvinists always trying to get the last word in...

 

[spock]

Leviticus 26:23, AV 1611: "And if ye will not be reformed by these things, but will walke contrary unto me:"
Leviticus 26:23, 1769 Version: "And if ye will not be reformed by me by these things, but will walk contrary unto me;"

Please explain why it is "dishonest" and "incorrect" to cite this difference in wording between the AV 1611 and the 1769 version of the KJV. Show your work.

I have a 1611 KJB it reads as our 1769 version. So your were not truthful or the reading has been changed from what you said was 1611.

 

[abcaines]

I have a 1611 KJB it reads as our 1769 version. So your were not truthful or the reading has been changed from what you said was 1611.

Is your research as sound as your grammar?

 

[spock]

Is your research as sound as your grammar?

Naw both my grammars died years ago...

seriously, the 1769 is just another edition, not a revision.

 

[Ransom]

Leviticus 26:23, AV 1611: "And if ye will not be reformed by these things, but will walke contrary unto me:"

I have a 1611 KJB it reads as our 1769 version. So your were not truthful or the reading has been changed from what you said was 1611.

And now, reality. Leviticus26:23 from the 1611 Bible:



"And if ye will not be reformed by these things, but will walke contrary unto me."

Illinoisguy is correct. Whatever you have wasn't published in 1611.

 

[Ransom]

seriously, the 1769 is just another edition, not a revision.

If there are substantial changes, and clearly there have been, then it is both.

 

[illinoisguy]

Waiting to see how Spock talks his way out of this one:

 

[spock]

You guys obviously cannot grasp the difference between revision and new translation.

 

[spock]

The OO crowd seem to not make an issue of there being NO original around today (I thought God said that they would nere pass away???), and that the so-called copies of Wescott, Hort, Aland, amd Nestle come from a completely different line of MSS than those of the TR (yes we know about Beza, Stevens, Erasmus, ...). The end result is that we believe that we have an inspired, preserved, infallible, inerrant, perfectly preserved Word of God (yes we believe that God can actually speak English). Whereas the OO's Bible is subject to the user's choice of text from which it was translated and what version they choose to use. And the version is full of errors (I'm still waiting for one of them to give me a complete list and location of all the errors in the KJB, ... been waiting for that for years.).

 

[Ransom]

Oh, I see. You're a parody account. Good one!

 

[AverageJoe]

The OO crowd seem to not make an issue of there being NO original around today (I thought God said that they would nere pass away???), and that the so-called copies of Wescott, Hort, Aland, amd Nestle come from a completely different line of MSS than those of the TR (yes we know about Beza, Stevens, Erasmus, ...). The end result is that we believe that we have an inspired, preserved, infallible, inerrant, perfectly preserved Word of God (yes we believe that God can actually speak English). Whereas the OO's Bible is subject to the user's choice of text from which it was translated and what version they choose to use. And the version is full of errors (I'm still waiting for one of them to give me a complete list and location of all the errors in the KJB, ... been waiting for that for years.).

Oh wow! Whatta ya know...another poster who is akin to a sock puppet...or should I just go ahead and call them one???? Only's have a bulb out and are in a really dark place....LOL

 

[FSSL]

The OO crowd seem to not make an issue of there being NO original around today (I thought God said that they would nere pass away???), and that the so-called copies of Wescott, Hort, Aland, amd Nestle come from a completely different line of MSS than those of the TR (yes we know about Beza, Stevens, Erasmus, ...). The end result is that we believe that we have an inspired, preserved, infallible, inerrant, perfectly preserved Word of God (yes we believe that God can actually speak English). Whereas the OO's Bible is subject to the user's choice of text from which it was translated and what version they choose to use. And the version is full of errors (I'm still waiting for one of them to give me a complete list and location of all the errors in the KJB, ... been waiting for that for years.).

So... which KJV has no errors.

 

[spock]

So... which KJV has no errors.

I'll counter: Which Bible is the "error free" one?

 

[Ekklesian]

I'll counter: Which Bible is the "error free" one?

There is none.

 

[The Parson]

The differences between the 1611 KJV and the 1769 KJV are more than just spelling changes:

We're still waiting for the King James Only folks to explain to us why they use the 1769 version instead of the 1611 version which they say was inspired by the Holy Ghost.

Spelling changes and nothing else. I promise you. It gets irritating to see those who try to push the Westcott/Hort/Origen perversions on us because they want us to reject the pure word of God in the English language. I just don't get it.
My Bible tells me that I am saved. This stands in the face of those that say salvation is a process. It is not. The King James plainly says: 1 Corinthians 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. (KJV) But every one of the perversions (new versions) say: 1 Corinthians 1:18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. (NIV)
And that's just one of the perpetual errors you'll find in these newer versions. It's enough to make a preacher fuss...

 

[ALAYMAN]

…
My Bible tells me that I am saved. This stands in the face of those that say salvation is a process. It is not.

Welcome to the forum preacher. As somebody who was formerly ardently KJVO, I am not your enemy, so keep that in mind as we proceed.

The statement you made above is probably not what you actually believe theologically. Do you believe in justification, sanctification, and glorification? Do you believe that, soteriologically speaking, salvation in total is comprised of these three salvific aspects?

 

[The Parson]

No, let's not strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. Salvation indeed makes us a purchased item: "Ye are not your own; you're bought with a price." In terms of soteriology, I believe in the process involving justification, sanctification, and glorification.

Justification is the immediate act where we are declared righteous through the blood of the Lamb when we confess our sins and accept Jesus as our Savior. This is a done deal, securing our position in God's treasury and ensuring we are safe from the wiles of the wicked one.

Sanctification is the ongoing process where we are gradually transformed into the image of Christ through the work of the Holy Spirit. It’s a journey that takes place over the course of a believer's life, refining our character and making us more like Christ.

Glorification comes into play when we receive our glorified bodies at Christ's return. It marks the completion of our salvation, where we are fully conformed to the image of Christ and made perfect in Him.

Together, these three aspects, justification, sanctification, and glorification, encompass the entirety around our salvation, but in no ways complete our salvation, it was a done deal when I asked for it.