art
New Member
Posts: 46
|
Post by art on Nov 8, 2010 21:53:15 GMT -5
I often hear reference to the 1611 version of the King James Bible. Since the 1611 was written in the old English, like my 1560 Geneva Bible that I sometimes use for cross-reference, isn't my King James Bible actually a later version than 1611? It's not written in the old English yet it is indeed a King James Version and not a NKJV or anything like that. Do you literally use the 1611 old English version (with the s's that look like f's and all that) for your study and preaching?
|
|
|
Post by Brother Ben on Nov 9, 2010 16:19:29 GMT -5
Bro. Art commented: Yes. The KJV that we use in fundamental circles is actually either the 1769 (Oxford Edition,) or the (Cambridge Edition.) The difference between the two is an ages old debate, but I prefer the Cambridge. Most fundamentally conservative KJV preachers use the Cambriadge edition. The difference from 1611 to 1769 is not in the change of ANY of the manuscript, but in font face, printers errors, and word spellings, i.e., travel to travail, brakedst to brakest, ax to axe, etc. Nay. ;D Bro. David Cloud has a very good article about the changes: Changes To The KJV Since 1611
|
|