|
Post by ptrost on Oct 12, 2007 13:18:23 GMT -5
I know it's been a year since the last post, but after reading some of everyone else's experiences finding a good bible I thought someone might be blessed by mine.
I found biblefortoday.org (defender of the Masoretic and Textus Receptus) who publishes the Defined KJB which footnotes uncommon words at the bottom of each page and it has really opened up the King James Bible to me. As the previous brother pointed out, there's no notes to possibly lead you astray. They use the 1769 Cambridge text.
Unfortunately there's a lot of publishers that are using texts other than the 1769 like Zondervan who uses the 1873 Scrivener text and Scrivener made a few changes such as replacing faith with hope in Heb. 10:23 (even though the diary of a 1611 translator said that they put in faith instead of the literal 'hope' because it better conveyed the sense). Other publishers are changing the language and you just never know what the ramification is..
Pastor DA Waite of Biblefortoday.org recommended the Old Scofield if you just have to have a study bible, but said he doesn't believe in Scofield's millennial views. If any of you are unfamiliar with the 'archaic' language, check out the Defined KJB, it truly helped me to better understand it not having grown up with it.
|
|
|
Post by George on Oct 12, 2007 14:48:39 GMT -5
If anyone is interested in a "pure" Bible you can check at Bearing Precious Seed. One of those ministries went out of business a couple of months ago but the one in Milford, Ohio is still printing.
When I say a "pure" Bible what I mean is one that I have purchased three copies of that is true to the spellings and everything else of the King James Bible and contains no references or footnotes. I call the one I carry with me my Church Bible. I very much enjoy taking it to Church so that I can follow along in the sermon without the distraction of footnotes, references and the like.
As to the Old Scofield while it is a good Bible one must remember to compare what Scofield had to say in his notes sometimes differs from the Scriptures themselves. Not only do I not agree with his millennial stance there are other places I have seen where he appears to contradict the Scriptures. If one goes into it knowing that the notes and things in that Bible (or any reference Bible for that matter) are the words of men and not the Word of God they should be okay.
In Christ, George
|
|
|
Post by ptrost on Oct 16, 2007 7:20:59 GMT -5
It is certainly a shame that not only has Satan corrupted the word of God in these modern versions of scripture but is also going after the KJB. In the New Cambridge Paragraph Bible for instance, the editor has removed the italicization of the inserted words so now it's just like the modern versions where you don't know what was inserted for sense and what wasn't. Then you have all the other new KJB bibles coming out that update the language unnecessarily. I think this underscores the need for all of us to pray that God will continue to raise up men to defend his pure words. I would agree, you can't trust the notes in a lot of study bibles, you have to research for yourself. The most objective balanced noted I've seen are in the Spirit of the Reformation study bible. It's too bad it's NIV We could really use a KJV study bible with notes that gives you several ways a passage could be interpreted instead of just the 1 that the editor sees.
|
|
kscarle
Member
Philippians 4:4, Romans 12:1, John 14:15
Posts: 97
|
Post by kscarle on Dec 1, 2007 11:41:17 GMT -5
I do know this is an old post but thought I would add this... The differences in the KJV is shew to show and the word throughly to thoroughly, I do not know of others. My husband was in Bible college last year and a friend of his had gotten his verse test wrong. The Dean of the school (who is also pastor of the church) is very strict on the King James, and because of this slight variation the Bro. got his test wrong that he had studied for.
We are also very strict about using only the king James and during family Bible study my husband read from his and mine did not match..I was told that one was just the archaic word for the other.
|
|
|
Post by Brother Ben on Dec 2, 2007 18:50:55 GMT -5
Here is a link to an excellent article answering questions regarding the KJV, it's preservation, translation, inspiration, original autographs, etc.
[ftp]http://www.biblefortoday.org/Articles/answers.htm[/ftp]
|
|