1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured 1611 King James Bible

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by Riders, Jul 3, 2017.

  1. Riders

    Riders Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Messages:
    5,615
    Ratings:
    +1,327
    Religion:
    Unitarian Universalism,Pagan,Zen
    It's in a Museum in England.From what I was told in the YouTube videos is the name of Jesus is Iesus in it .

    A bunch of the words and verses are translated wrong so our bible isn't even the same bible.

    28 of the books have been left out including the Apocrypha.


    There are Masonic Free Masonry pictures on the old bible with secret symbols.

    All that being said why do Christians believe they are reading the right bible?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Jainarayan

    Jainarayan ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2011
    Messages:
    19,567
    Ratings:
    +7,688
    Religion:
    Hinduism, Vaishnava
    There was no J in Latin or Greek (there still isn't in Greek, Jacob is Iakovos, Jerome is Hieronomos). Later on the Latin I became stylized into a J. Names like Julius or Jesus were rendered as Iulius and Iesus. However, the KJV followed the Latin convention. Italian still has no J except in words of non-Italian origin.

    Not all Christians do. The KJV is not the de-facto bible of all Christendom, just as Prabhupada's Bhagavad Gita is not the de-facto version of all Hinduism. The RCC has its own sanctioned version of the bible, as does the EOC.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. Riders

    Riders Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Messages:
    5,615
    Ratings:
    +1,327
    Religion:
    Unitarian Universalism,Pagan,Zen
    Thankful for the reply.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. David1967

    David1967 Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2015
    Messages:
    8,544
    Ratings:
    +6,580
    Religion:
    Christian
    I actually have a 1611 KJV bible. Very hard to read due to the English of that time.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake ️️️️️️️️️️

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,620
    Ratings:
    +1,684
    Good News Translation

    seems good.


    Thing is, the kjv was written in a time where the methodology of reading, the religious aspect, was probably assumed.

    Nowadays, there are people who have never read the bible, etc, just picking up a bible
     
    #5 Desert Snake, Jul 3, 2017
    Last edited: Jul 3, 2017
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    7,960
    Ratings:
    +2,124
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    I'm not sure just what your question is.
     
  7. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    15,271
    Ratings:
    +2,985
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    Nothing strange there. At the time I was both a vowel and a consonant.
    To save confusion the I consnant was later changed into a J. This had not yet happened at the time the KJV was written. The long and short S were still both in use then, so many S's were written more like an f.
    The KJV had nothing what so ever to do with masonry. It was written by scholars selected by the Church of England bishops, on behalf of the King

    Apart for correcting a few minor errors it is the same now as it was then.
    A vast majority of modern bibles are a reworking of the KJV, taking into account modern scholorship, and lanuage. But few have the KJV's beauty of language. As it was writter to be read out loud in church.

    There are a number of the first editions of the KJV in libraries cathederals and museums through out the world. There are known to be around 200 still in existance.
     
  8. Mindmaster

    Mindmaster Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2010
    Messages:
    5,111
    Ratings:
    +2,641
    Religion:
    Theistic Satanist
    I'm not sure about the state of this actual Bible, but my father was still learning Latin in school to read the Bible/understand mass. They didn't change this until 1962 at the Second Vatican Council. and I am quite glad I was born much later. :D

    You are correct in the fact that Latin doesn't always directly translate into English, and in many ways it is a more expressive language. However, I would say why stop at Latin? The old testament Bible was certainly a mixture of Hebrew or Aramaic, and the new testament was surely mostly Greek (which was then the lingua franca of learning...). Latin was basically the common tongue at the time that the NT comes around, but Greek was the language of scholars and kings. The Bible was mostly privy to the upper echelon of society at the time (whether clergy, king, or nobleman of other sorts), and the commoners never used or heard Latin outside of mass. For the most part, and this was even true in my fathers time, lay person affiliated with the church had no idea what the priest was saying. :D There were, however, English language Bibles for the normal folks to read going back since forever. It is more likely your Bible there was used in some official capacity...

    Though Christians themselves do it, it is probably an error to look for the original documents as a basis of a faith that exists in the modern age because all living religions periodically revise themselves over time. What they were doing two-thousand years in the past isn't particularly important these days. If we used that logic and applied it to all fields science, religion, and anything else would be "garbage" because they were all drastically incorrect (in respect to a modern understanding of the world) and we would reject everything. Mostly, this sort of thinking is revisionist in that it is looking to use the past to destroy the present - it is either dishonest, or malicious in intent with no productive purpose.
     
  9. Riders

    Riders Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Messages:
    5,615
    Ratings:
    +1,327
    Religion:
    Unitarian Universalism,Pagan,Zen
    I actually disagree with those of you who say there's only a few mistakes.

    The videos I saw and there wouldn't be videos about this if it wasn't a big is that there are so many mistakes and differences it's not the same bible.

    So the question is what is the true bible.Sense there were 28 books including the Apocrypha left out :
    It was frankly a huge big deal to me.why don't Christians read those books ?
     
  10. Rival

    Rival Unicorn Noahide
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2012
    Messages:
    12,676
    Ratings:
    +13,997
    Religion:
    בת נח
    Because the Protestant Church left them out. The Protestant Church used the Jewish Biblical canon, which did not include those books. The Roman and Orthodox Churches used a different canon to the Jews, and this canon included those books. The KJB sandwiched them in the middle but prefaced them with a disclaimer saying that they are not fit to make doctrine from.
     
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
  11. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    7,960
    Ratings:
    +2,124
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    It isn't that one can't read them. Many KJV have those books but we see them as historical in nature but lacks the qualities to be included as scripture.
     
  12. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake ️️️️️️️️️️

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,620
    Ratings:
    +1,684
    Anyone know which 28 books are missing?
     
  13. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake ️️️️️️️️️️

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,620
    Ratings:
    +1,684
    Anyone know which books were left out?

    This statement implies that it isnt just apocrypha
     
  14. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    7,960
    Ratings:
    +2,124
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    Any book that violates the principles laid forth by the Torah, the words of the prophets and the words of the Apostles. There are other reasons such as when then were written. So, contrary to some beliefs, the Book of Enoch was not the Enoch of Genesis and thus, along with what was written that violates other scriptures... it wasn't included.

    Likewise for many others.
     
  15. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake ️️️️️️️️️️

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,620
    Ratings:
    +1,684
    It seems that we call all of that "apocrypha"
     
  16. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake ️️️️️️️️️️

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,620
    Ratings:
    +1,684
    Ie no non apocrypha was left out
     
  17. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    7,960
    Ratings:
    +2,124
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    it applied to all books left out.
     
  18. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake ️️️️️️️️️️

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,620
    Ratings:
    +1,684
    The op doesnt indicate which books those were, and states 28 books including the apocrypha. So which books, Genesis? Get what I 'm asking?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake ️️️️️️️️️️

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,620
    Ratings:
    +1,684
    I'm going to assume its the standard canon, and is missing the apocrypha, and pseudo apocrypha
     
  20. Riders

    Riders Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2015
    Messages:
    5,615
    Ratings:
    +1,327
    Religion:
    Unitarian Universalism,Pagan,Zen
    If your all reading different bibles why do you think you are all in same religion of Christianity?
     
Loading...