Authorized (Mark Ward)

[Polanus1561]

28 posts in under 3 hours, proof of modern prophecy?

Its interesting, seeing that it is a topic discussed so many times that attracts the same people. The cycle of baptism-TR/KJV-EP threads will never be broken

 

[NaphtaliPress]

I don't understand how this is a serious objection to not using the KJV. At most a downside that needs addressing. Preacher/teacher has to explain. Reader has to get a dictionary or use a companion version like the NKJ. TBS and publishers add a glossary, or better, marginal notes. Issue solved?

 

[Polanus1561]

I don't understand how this is a serious objection to not using the KJV. At most a downside that needs addressing. Preacher/teacher has to explain. Reader has to get a dictionary or use a companion version like the NKJ. TBS and publishers add a glossary, or better, marginal notes. Issue solved?

It is not an objection, just a question.

Preacher/teacher has to explain - do children/teens then read only places the preacher has covered? Sunday schools do not usually go verse by verse.

Dictionary? - do we give teenagers that?

NKJV - do we give NKJVs to KJV using teens and have them use it side by side? I have not come across that.

Glossaries / marginal notes - most KJVs do not have that. And yes I see that as the only solution. I prefaced my post by referring to KJVs that are plain with no helps.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

It is not an objection, just a question.

Preacher/teacher has to explain - do children/teens then read only places the preacher has covered? Sunday schools do not usually go verse by verse.

Dictionary? - do we give teenagers that?

NKJV - do we give NKJVs to KJV using teens and have them use it side by side? I have not come across that.

Glossaries / marginal notes - most KJVs do not have that. And yes I see that as the only solution. I prefaced my post by referring to KJVs that are plain with no helps.

Thanks but I was simply addressing the view of the OP and wasn't directing anything at you personally.

 

[Polanus1561]

Thanks but I was simply addressing the view of the OP and wasn't directing anything at you personally.

Got it. My oversight. I now see you were not replying directly to me.

 

[alexandermsmith]

I use the KJV. I use the TBS Westminster Ref Bible. I use other versions too.

But I wonder how people can just give children a KJV bible with no helps and expect them to read independently for themselves especially with the false friends words. Yes, you go through the bible with them as a family and correct some words... but I am speaking about independent reading (what a great means of grace). Do you give them a list of places where they must be careful? A list to memorize that 'wont' means 'accustomed' actually?

I mean, if you give a child any translation of the Bible isn't he going to struggle at places if left on his own to read it? Putting aside the issue of words with obsolete meanings, the meaning of whole passages (even understanding what the passage is describing before we even get to the meaning) is going to cause a child difficulty (adults too!). There seems to be the assumption that if we just update some vocabulary problem solved. The reason we have preachers and commentators is to aid in our understanding of Scripture. This whole issue of obsolete words really seems to be missing the point.

 

[Jake]

I don't understand how this is a serious objection to not using the KJV. At most a downside that needs addressing. Preacher/teacher has to explain. Reader has to get a dictionary or use a companion version like the NKJ. TBS and publishers add a glossary, or better, marginal notes. Issue solved?

Mark Ward also has a YouTube channel where he comments on false friends, many of which he and listeners have continued to find after the book is published. One interesting thing is that he often compares to some of the resources available (including the TBS word list John mentioned) and finds some of these false friends are missed. I think the best choice is often to use a companion version if you are committed to an older version as it will help show some of the difficulties.

I also learned through his channel more about is Noah Webster's revision of the KJV. I think it may be agreeable to many of the TR folks here as it doesn't change the grammar (leaves in the thees/thous) but updates many archaic words, and even fixes the age old problem of "Easter" in Acts 12:4 (changing it to "Passover"): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster's_Revision

 

[Jake]

I mean, if you give a child any translation of the Bible isn't he going to struggle at places if left on his own to read it?

Sure, there will always be difficulties. I would rather a child struggle with the concepts and ideas rather than Jacobean English.

 

[Stephen L Smith]

I use the NKJV which I believe has a helpful balance between the rich heritage of the KJV and modern scholarship.

I also highly recommend the KJV Reformation Heritage study Bible. It is a spiritual feast for the soul with helpful study notes, and discussions on serious topics of theology too.

 

[Polanus1561]

Sure, there will always be difficulties. I would rather a child struggle with the concepts and ideas rather than Jacobean English.

Not only that but a teenager may just pass by the false friends - 1 Thess 4:15. Those are the ones hardest to prevent

 

[alexandermsmith]

Mark Ward also has a YouTube channel where he comments on false friends, many of which he and listeners have continued to find after the book is published. One interesting thing is that he often compares to some of the resources available (including the TBS word list John mentioned) and finds some of these false friends are missed. I think the best choice is often to use a companion version if you are committed to an older version as it will help show some of the difficulties.

I also learned through his channel more about is Noah Webster's revision of the KJV. I think it may be agreeable to many of the TR folks here as it doesn't change the grammar (leaves in the thees/thous) but updates many archaic words, and even fixes the age old problem of "Easter" in Acts 12:4 (changing it to "Passover"): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster's_Revision

As someone who has only been using the KJV for around eleven years I can count on one hand the number of times I actually had to look a word up because it's obscurity caused difficulty in reading and understanding the text. Who are these people who can't get through five verses of the KJV without recourse to a dictionary? I don't know any. This seems like a problem manufactured by those who don't actually use the KJV and who reject it on theological and textual grounds, not those who actually make use of it.

 

[Jake]

As someone who has only been using the KJV for around eleven years I can count on one hand the number of times I actually had to look a word up because it's obscurity caused difficulty in reading and understanding the text. Who are these people who can't get through five verses of the KJV without recourse to a dictionary? I don't know any. This seems like a problem manufactured by those who don't actually use the KJV and who reject it on theological and textual grounds, not those who actually make use of it.

Switching to the KJV and SMV was a big jump for me that I really struggled with and greatly slowed down the amount of Bible I was able to read and understand well compared to the ESV and BPW I used before. Mark Ward's videos have led to many aha moments for me in reading the KJV and other Jacobean/Elizabethan literature. He has focused mostly on the linguistic side of things in this book and his early videos, but now he has also delved into the textual issues as well.

 

[hammondjones]

When I think of the puritanboard, I often think, a peculiar people indeed.

 

[Sam Jer]

The textual issue is really the heart of the matter. Whichever side's right we need to admit this is mostly a diversion, since all it can prove is that TR people need a new translation / need to use the NKJV

 

[retroGRAD3]

We aren't in the reforming times necessary to produce a new and faithful version of the received text. That will require a church unity and attainment in her officers such as we saw in the Reformation years. Meanwhile, the KJV works excellently for those who hold to the doctrine of a received text; it is useful (and preferred) for evangelism, for preaching, and for teaching.

And I believe we have covered before that it is impossible for this situation to ever come about as the conditions continue to shift to always make it impossible. So, this does not appear to be a legitimate or realistic requirement.

 

[retroGRAD3]

The reality is with this issue is there will always be two sides (or more) and there will always be an impasse. We just gotta learn to live with one another.

 

[Polanus1561]

And I believe we have covered before that it is impossible for this situation to ever come about as the conditions continue to shift to always make it impossible. So, this does not appear to be a legitimate or realistic requirement.

We use the 1769 Blayney KJV revision right? I think it was a small group led by the man of the same name.

Does a light language revision necessarily entail an ecclesiastical effort?

 

[Jake]

We use the 1769 Blayney KJV revision right? I think it was a small group led by the man of the same name.

Does a light language revision necessarily entail an ecclesiastical effort?

KJV 1769 was a more intense revision than Webster in my opinion. The 1769 made many textual changes including minor ones related to manuscript differences as Scrivener identified in addition to updating language and spelling. The 1769 was not ecclesiastically sanctioned like the 1881 Revised Version was.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

And I believe we have covered before that it is impossible for this situation to ever come about as the conditions continue to shift to always make it impossible. So, this does not appear to be a legitimate or realistic requirement.

Reformation and revival not possible?
I’m sure that it has seemed to be so many times throughout history, and yet God brought it about.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Jeri or someone make sense for me the argument we have to wait for some wider reformed state of the church to do any bible revision. The Authorized Version itself was created in a pretty corrupt church, by some talented prelates. Presbyterianism had been nigh eradicated and run underground by the same prelates (one is a famous antagonist in Presbyterian literature of the century), and puritanism was a down trodden minority. What is more important to determine a good time to do a new bible translation or revision of the KJV, a national established though a corrupt church persecuting reformers (but with the talent), or a confessionally reformed denomination with the talent but not a national church? And is there some scriptural rule to determine this?

Reformation and revival not possible?
I’m sure that it has seemed to be so many times throughout history, and yet God brought it about.

 

[Polanus1561]

How does that also relate to multiple translations in other languages today? Different organizations (TBS, Crossway?) churning out translations in other languages. Are they doing something churches should be doing?

 

[Logan]

Jeri or someone make sense for me the argument we have to wait for some wider reformed state of the church to do any bible revision. The Authorized Version itself was created in a pretty corrupt church, by some talented prelates. Presbyterianism had been nigh eradicated and run underground by the same prelates (one is a famous antagonist in Presbyterian literature of the century), and puritanism was a down trodden minority. What is more important to determine a good time to do a new bible translation or revision of the KJV, a national established though a corrupt church persecuting reformers (but with the talent), or a confessionally reformed denomination with the talent but not a national church? And is there some scriptural rule to determine this?

Exactly.
"John Wycliffe, can you translate the Bible into English for us?"
"No, it's not a time of reformation or revival."
"William Tyndale, can you translate the Bible into English for us?"
"No, it's not a time of reformation or revival."
"Miles Coverdale, can you translate the Bible into English for us?"
"No, it's not a time of reformation or revival."
"John Knox and other refugees in Geneva, can you translate the Bible into English for us?"
"No, it's not a time of reformation or revival."

I've never understood where one would gather these criteria from Scripture.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Exactly.
"John Wycliffe, can you translate the Bible into English for us?"
"No, it's not a time of reformation or revival."
"William Tyndale, can you translate the Bible into English for us?"
"No, it's not a time of reformation or revival."
"Miles Coverdale, can you translate the Bible into English for us?"
"No, it's not a time of reformation or revival."
"John Foxe and other refugees in Geneva, can you translate the Bible into English for us?"
"No, it's not a time of reformation or revival."

I've never understood where one would gather these criteria from Scripture.

And I'm really just thinking, what is wrong with updating the KJV on these words that are fallen off normal usage per the OP; so not even really going back to manuscripts and thus skirting the whole issue of manuscripts.

 

[retroGRAD3]

And I'm really just thinking, what is wrong with updating the KJV on these words that are fallen off normal usage per the OP; so not even really going back to manuscripts and thus skirting the whole issue of manuscripts.

Isn't this the purpose of the modern English version (MEV)? Also though, the NKJV is this too. Saying the NKJV has been corrupted by Westcott and Hort (which was suggested elsewhere) is beyond ridiculous. If there is proof of W&H tampering that can be presented, I will retract.

 

[NaphtaliPress]

Isn't this the purpose of the modern English version (MEV)? Also though, the NKJV is this too. Saying the NKJV has been corrupted by Westcott and Hort (which was suggested elsewhere) is beyond ridiculous. If there is proof of W&H tampering that can be presented, I will retract.

I don't know what the MEV is. The NKJV I use I'm often not thrilled with the changes; but it is an old Nelson from 1980s. The majority text readings are given in the margin I think is the issue. But at least my NKJV has Passover at Acts 12:4. So, where does one draw the line?

 

[Polanus1561]

If TBS does it then I think many TBS supporting Reformed churches maaaay be open to the idea. But I dont think TBS will

 

[Jake]

I don't know what the MEV is. The NKJV I use I'm often not thrilled with the changes; but it is an old Nelson from 1980s. The majority text readings are given in the margin I think is the issue. But at least my NKJV has Passover at Acts 12:4. So, where does one draw the line?

The MEV is probably the most well known modern TR-based English translation after the NKJV. It even included a scholar from RPTS. I have seen copies at multiple local bookstores. But to your point it's still not very well known. Much less than ESV, NASB, NIV, CSB, etc.

 

[Polanus1561]

The MEV is probably the most well known modern TR-based English translation after the NKJV. It even included a scholar from RPTS. I have seen copies at multiple local bookstores. But to your point it's still not very well known. Much less than ESV, NASB, NIV, CSB, etc.

I cannot imagine KJV using churches, from IFBs to the Free Church of Scotland, using a translation published by “Charisma House”.

Like I said, if it was TBS, things might change

 

[Northern Crofter]

The real difficulty with the KJV is not the obsolete words. You can pick up a book and figure it out. The true danger is in “false friends,” words that we use today but have changed in meaning.

What exactly is the danger? Have you, for example, observed the use of the KJV preventing someone from coming to Christ? The spiritual content of the ESV will be just as foreign to the darkened mind as the KJV. It is the preaching of the word and not merely reading of the Word that is primary means of evangelization - or else the Ethiopian eunuch (or is there a more modern word?) reading Isaiah would not have needed Philip to preach to him in Acts 8.35. Appealing to the WCF, it is not the reading of the Scriptures with Godly fear alone, but also the sound preaching and conscionable hearing of the Word, in obedience unto God, with understanding, faith and reverence that is part of the ordinary religious worship of God. The ordinances in which the covenant of grace is currently dispensed are with good reason identified as the preaching of the Word and administration of the sacraments, not merely reading and observing.

Exactly

So you are proposing this same thinking to all documents with so-called "false friends"? The 18th century sections of the US Constitution should constantly be rewritten? For example, in the 2nd Amendment, the words "well regulated" in 18th century had nothing to do with what we term "regulation" today - in today's terms it would read "well-equipped." Shouldn't we instead turn to the "preaching" of the judges and lawyers "ordained" to exposit the words of law?

(eventually archaic personal pronouns will be brought in as a requirement).

If "thee" and "thou" are archaic but more accurate in reflecting the original tongues, the latter is more important. Or would you rather risk the (further) infiltration of gender-neutral language (since that is how modern Western society is now communicating) into Bible translation? I prefer "thee" and "thou" to "them" and "their."

When I find old words that I think communicate better than anything we have today - like "brainpan" in my Geneva - I reintroduce them in my conversations with great aplomb. Sometimes old is new.

 

[Taylor]

The ordinances in which the covenant of grace is currently dispensed are with good reason identified as the preaching of the Word and administration of the sacraments, not merely reading and observing.

With regard to Scripture, this is simply not true. The Spirit of God especially, but not exclusively, makes the preaching of the Word an effectual means of convincing and converting sinners (WSC 89). He also makes the reading such.