# "Head-count" for AV users on the PB. The "REDO"



## etexas (Mar 29, 2009)

I know many of the PB users of the King James. Never have tried a "show of hands". There will be a poll, in respect to the Lord's Day I request that there be no Textual debates today. Just wondering who uses the AV and why! As for me. It is the rock solid Theology and the view that Providence preserved the undergirding Text Types used in the AV translation. Hill's was a big influence for me!


----------



## TaylorOtwell (Mar 29, 2009)

I use the Geneva Bible, so I guess I am pretty close?


----------



## etexas (Mar 29, 2009)

TaylorOtwell said:


> I use the Geneva Bible, so I guess I am pretty close?



Pretty close! To me the AV is a little more elegant and superior in literary style.


----------



## TaylorOtwell (Mar 29, 2009)

etexas said:


> TaylorOtwell said:
> 
> 
> > I use the Geneva Bible, so I guess I am pretty close?
> ...



Perhaps that is why I prefer the Geneva. Remember, I'm from Arkansas.


----------



## etexas (Mar 29, 2009)

TaylorOtwell said:


> etexas said:
> 
> 
> > TaylorOtwell said:
> ...


LOL! Actually the Geneva has MANY merits, and it was actually "on the table" during the Translation work for the AV, the AV translators wanted a Bible both for private reading AND oral reading in the Churches, so the parts they used from the Geneva were "ironed out" a little bit!


----------



## etexas (Mar 29, 2009)

Jonathan, delighted you are exploring the textual issues will PM you. You might want to Google Edward Hill's on the issue he was a BRILLIANT Presbyterian Scholar, Phi Beta Kappa from two or three "Ivy's" his book is free to read on a number of sites. (BE CAREFUL, there are some "cultic" AV sites that have it SO, if you use those, please, just read Dr. Hill's stuff!


----------



## PastorTim (Mar 30, 2009)

TaylorOtwell said:


> I use the Geneva Bible, so I guess I am pretty close?



Same here


----------



## etexas (Mar 30, 2009)

PastorTim said:


> TaylorOtwell said:
> 
> 
> > I use the Geneva Bible, so I guess I am pretty close?
> ...


OK, Geneva users. Stop derailing my thread here! Don't make the Uncle cyber-smack ya!


----------



## jaybird0827 (Mar 30, 2009)

OK. I'm an AV user. Thread is back on track now.


----------



## Knoxienne (Mar 30, 2009)

I prefer the AV.


----------



## etexas (Mar 30, 2009)

jaybird0827 said:


> OK. I'm an AV user. Thread is back on track now.


Thanks J-Man!


----------



## Claudiu (Mar 30, 2009)

etexas said:


> TaylorOtwell said:
> 
> 
> > I use the Geneva Bible, so I guess I am pretty close?
> ...



AV user here too...for the same reason, the elegant style. However, I might start looking into the ESV (for a more modern translation)


----------



## LawrenceU (Mar 30, 2009)

I use the AV for my personal study most of the time. I do preach from the ESV / NASB most of the time.


----------



## doulos (Apr 1, 2009)

I use exclusively the AV and am dumbfounded that anyone that holds to the Reformed Tradition would consider using a Bible based upon a text that was widely rejected by the Reformers.


----------



## Rich Koster (Apr 1, 2009)

I do not exclusively use the KJV. However, I do use it when printing large portions of text because it is not under copyright.


----------



## Grymir (Apr 1, 2009)

Schiver's KJV for me. No finer english translation.

Converted from my liberal ways by reading it cover to cover like a book.

Can't read any others. To much like Dick and Jane. 

I just like it. The language, the history, the King of translations.

And genuine leather! None of the paperback/hardback stuff either.

Plus I hear that Barth never read it.


----------

