HomeGroupsTalkMoreZeitgeist
Search Site
This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

Answers to Your Bible Version Questions by…
Loading...

Answers to Your Bible Version Questions (edition 2003)

by David W. Daniels

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingConversations
1311,514,599 (2.17)None
This book is typical of the KJV Only line--there is only one Perfect Bible and it is a KJV 1611. As with Riplinger, Ruckman, Waite and others, it would take a full book to challenge everything but let me give just one reason why you should not trust this author (to answer his question on p. 193).

On page 128 Daniels writes, "The simple fact is that the King James Bible you can purchase in almost any bookstore, allowing for changes in spelling (and possibly the two printing errors) [he alludes to 2 Chron 33:19 and Jere 34:16] is the same Book of God's preserved words that was printed in 1611." Anyone who wants to check the veracity of that statement should consult F. H. A. Scrivener's The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611), Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representations. Beginning with the Appendix on page 147 Scrivener lists all the changes down through the ages. (If you have Logos Bible Software, look for this in front of the Cambridge Paragraph Bible).

But, for those who might not have this book but do have a copy of the original KJV 1611 try comparing these passages. In Numbers 6:14 the 1611 has "lambe" where all versions now have "ram." Is that not a textual change? Or, see Mark 5:6 where the 1611 has "came" while we now have "ran" in our versions. Or, Romans 3:24 where the 1611 has "Jesus Christ" but our versions have "Christ Jesus." Or, maybe we should throw in some examples where words are added, like 2 Cor 11:31. Our present editions read "kept the city of the Damascenes with a garrison..." while the 1611 has "kept the citie with a garrison." Or check out 1 Tim 1:4 where the 1611 has "...rather then edifying which is in faith" while our versions have "rather than godly edifying which is in faith." (Please note that all versions from Tyndale to the Bishops Bible has the word "godly" included).

By now the reader may be thinking that these are but a few examples which slipped by the good Mr. Daniels. But, alas, Scrivener's lists run on for 90 pages! That's right, 90 pages. On page 194 Daniels asks the question: "Why should you believe in me?" He then proceeds to answer it with "Surely you shouldn't." (His implication is that you should do the research yourself to see if he is correct.) So I did the research and now I agree with him--I don't trust him! ( )
1 vote Notnarb6779 | Sep 11, 2009 |
This book is typical of the KJV Only line--there is only one Perfect Bible and it is a KJV 1611. As with Riplinger, Ruckman, Waite and others, it would take a full book to challenge everything but let me give just one reason why you should not trust this author (to answer his question on p. 193).

On page 128 Daniels writes, "The simple fact is that the King James Bible you can purchase in almost any bookstore, allowing for changes in spelling (and possibly the two printing errors) [he alludes to 2 Chron 33:19 and Jere 34:16] is the same Book of God's preserved words that was printed in 1611." Anyone who wants to check the veracity of that statement should consult F. H. A. Scrivener's The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611), Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representations. Beginning with the Appendix on page 147 Scrivener lists all the changes down through the ages. (If you have Logos Bible Software, look for this in front of the Cambridge Paragraph Bible).

But, for those who might not have this book but do have a copy of the original KJV 1611 try comparing these passages. In Numbers 6:14 the 1611 has "lambe" where all versions now have "ram." Is that not a textual change? Or, see Mark 5:6 where the 1611 has "came" while we now have "ran" in our versions. Or, Romans 3:24 where the 1611 has "Jesus Christ" but our versions have "Christ Jesus." Or, maybe we should throw in some examples where words are added, like 2 Cor 11:31. Our present editions read "kept the city of the Damascenes with a garrison..." while the 1611 has "kept the citie with a garrison." Or check out 1 Tim 1:4 where the 1611 has "...rather then edifying which is in faith" while our versions have "rather than godly edifying which is in faith." (Please note that all versions from Tyndale to the Bishops Bible has the word "godly" included).

By now the reader may be thinking that these are but a few examples which slipped by the good Mr. Daniels. But, alas, Scrivener's lists run on for 90 pages! That's right, 90 pages. On page 194 Daniels asks the question: "Why should you believe in me?" He then proceeds to answer it with "Surely you shouldn't." (His implication is that you should do the research yourself to see if he is correct.) So I did the research and now I agree with him--I don't trust him! ( )
1 vote Notnarb6779 | Sep 11, 2009 |

Current Discussions

None

Popular covers

Quick Links

Rating

Average: (2.17)
0.5 1
1 1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5 1

Is this you?

Become a LibraryThing Author.

 

About | Contact | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 203,187,668 books! | Top bar: Always visible