Featured The KJV Update Project

KJV-only advocates likely will not accept it.

There have already been editions/revisions of the KJV that simply updated archaic words in the KJV, and KJV-only advocates reject them. They reject Nick Sayer's updating of the KJV's NT.

Sayers, Nick (ed.). The King James Version 2023 New Testament. Australia, 2023.

 

The NKJV does not use Critical Text Readings. That's a false myth by king james only.

 

KJV-only advocates have not proven that the makers of the NKJV followed any Critical Text readings. Likely all the very few differences could be in the possible range of translation differences instead of being proven to be textual.

KJV-only advocates do not assert that the KJV used Latin Vulgate readings when the makers of the KJV borrowed many renderings from the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament so they do not apply the same measures/standards to the KJV that they inconsistently and unjustly apply to the NKJV.

 

The NKJV only places Critical Text (NU) and the then differing Majority Text readings (M) in the margins.

 

Well this is a new one on me but that being said, go on and do, what you need to do... Me... Tried and true KJV, before I joined and btw, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it either

Oh and btw... I have ten KJV's in house, not to forget those that are here with just one click, you accept it... I don't need it!... Brother Glen

 

Which one of the twenty to thirty present post-1900 KJV editions do you claim to be the "tried and true" one?

Perhaps you use one of the post-1984 KJV editions that used computer-based texts that introduced some new variations and new errors into KJV editions.

Those varying post-1900 KJV editions differ in places from the 1611 edition, the 1629 Cambridge edition, the 1638 Cambridge edition, the 1679 Oxford edition, the 1743 Cambridge edition, the 1762 Cambridge edition, the 1769 Oxford edition, the 1835 Oxford edition, the 1873 Cambridge edition, etc. When some renderings needed to be changed, revised, or corrected, how are those renderings "tired and true"?

 

The KJV and NKJV use the same Greek text there.

What is being done, the words "them" and "sheep" are deliberately switched in translation to read first "sheep" and then "them."

Several translations are doing this swap.

John 10:12 (KJV) - But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.

John 10:12 (NKJV) - But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them.

 

Wrong. "Probata"=Sheep is used 3 times in both the Textus Receptus and Byzantine Text. But only 2 times in the Critical Text. Please note the NKJV uses "sheep" 3 times. The NKJV was translated from the Textus Receptus, and not the Critical Text. That is a lie cooked up by non-truth telling, insecure Onlyist.

English Majority Text Version 2009
But a hired hand, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them.

Interlinear Bible: John 10:12 - Textus Receptus Bibles

 

Please see posts #9 & #12 where the real reason is given.

 

So you want to call God The Father a farmer?... I'll use the KJV definition... Brother Glen

John 15:1 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman.

 

Of course it is not acceptable. 1611 is the only Bible for them. Let's not even mention they don't use a 1611.

 

there will be Bible translators that will twist in hell. Not because they translated the scriptures from one language to another but because they have no fear of God and their handling of the words of God proves it. Continual Bible translations is a symptom of a greater problem, unbelief. Many of the reasons given for the practice are lies.
…
1 Corinthians 1:10
Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

How many among us thinks it would be hypocritical to instruct us to speak the same thing while at the same time sanctioning 150 different translations in the same language?

professing themselves to be wise they became fools!

 

So what does husbandman mean?

 

John 6 is about the manna of the OT, which is the same and equal in it's properties as the bread of life in the NT. The manna is a visual in the physical arena to teach and confirm a spiritual truth that is also a prophecy. The two must be matched together because there is a miraculous element to both. The Jews had been teaching about the manna for about 1500 years when the bread of life came on the scene that effectively brought the teaching of the manna to fruition. However, as demonstrated by John in his gospel, very few Jews had any knowledge of the spiritual aspect of the manna in the OT and so the whole exercise of the feeding of the five thousand with the single meal of a young child was completely lost on the participants.

The point of the miracle of the manna being sent from heaven by the Father to the children of Israel in the desert was to give them life and to maintain it. It supplied all they needed to live, but only if they ingested it. It would do no good for anyone in the little boys lunch pail. This was the spiritual message. Jesus Christ was sent by the Father in heaven to a dry and thirsty land. He was the bread of life he said in V 35. He could not give life to anyone unless he was ingested. This is what he said in this chapter. "except you drink my blood and eat my flesh you have no life in you.

47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
48 I am that bread of life.
49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

Why do I bring this up in the context of a single Bible that comes from God. It is to illustrate that the Jews during the days of Jesus had one version of the Hebrew Bible and had the WORD of God in their presence explaining it after the nation had studied it for 1500 years and they still did not get it. Today, and on this forum, there might be one person posting here that understands the ways of God enough to know that the entire OT, every word and every story is a physical visual of a spiritual New Testament truth. Change the words and damage the visual and how it reveals the spiritual. Change it 150 times and you have what you have today, total confusion and division about the most simple fundamental truths and men believing complete and total lies to the point they go out and tell the same things themselves.

Here is what Jesus said to these unbelievers who just a few minutes after he said it departed because they did not have a heart for God and did not understand his words.

44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

Look at the tenses of the verbs I have underlined. Two past tense and one present tense. One must be taught of God through his word to be saved by ingesting Jesus Christ.

1Jo 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.
12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

What if in those translations you obscured that visual and diminished Jesus Christ? What then?

Col 1:27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:
13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.