• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Apostasy That Wasn't

it's just me said:
Actually, I think it's very poetic, which is why it is written the way it is, to be read aloud to the congregation. But, no serious Christian these days only has one translation, there are dozens to choose from.
Click to expand...

I have 3, and I'm an agnostic. lol...

KJV is "olde English" to me, which requires double and triple takes. I can understand that it might be fine from the pulpit.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
I have 3, and I'm an agnostic. lol...

KJV is "olde English" to me, which requires double and triple takes. I can understand that it might be fine from the pulpit.
Click to expand...

It's actually middle English to early modern English, you can't even read old English. One of my favorite surprises I like to pull on people who think they know the KJV Bible are the passages where it has men "pissing against the wall".
 
it's just me said:
It's actually middle English to early modern English, you can't even read old English. One of my favorite surprises I like to pull on people who think they know the KJV Bible are the passages where it has men "pissing against the wall".
Click to expand...

I will find a copy and check - it's been awhile.

That was the first version I tried to read (without help, mind you) as a kid, cover to cover. It was a slog. Someone gave me an NIV and a lot more of it clicked. I was in 8th grade then, so I'm sure that was a factor. Now I mainly encounter it on line when I do searches for passages and get references to multiple versions side by side.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
I will find a copy and check - it's been awhile.

That was the first version I tried to read (without help, mind you) as a kid, cover to cover. It was a slog. Someone gave me an NIV and a lot more of it clicked. I was in 8th grade then, so I'm sure that was a factor. Now I mainly encounter it on line when I do searches for passages and get references to multiple versions side by side.
Click to expand...

I don't know how old you are but when I was a kid that was about all there was - various printings of the "Authorized" version.
 
it's just me said:
I don't know how old you are but when I was a kid that was about all there was - various printings of the "Authorized" version.
Click to expand...

FWIW, the KJV experience was in the late-60's, the NIV came in the latter part of the 1970's.
 
it's just me said:
It's actually middle English to early modern English, you can't even read old English....
Click to expand...

<alt>doxygen said:
I will find a copy and check - it's been awhile...
Click to expand...

This chart shows samples of the changes in English. #1 is Old English or Anglo-Saxon (circa 450-1066 CE). #2 is Middle English (circa 1066-1450 AD). #3 is Modern English from about the time of Shakespeare. #4 is another sample of Modern English, but it is more recent than #3.
KAuypmU.gif

https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/diagram_4English.html
 
it's just me said:
Everybody's a critic...
Click to expand...
I didn't intend it in that spirit, though I can see how it might be taken in that way. In fact I thought you were right, and don't see anything in the chart that changes my opinion. These are not hard-and-fast demarcations after all.

Peace.
 
Angel said:
This chart shows samples of the changes in English. #1 is Old English or Anglo-Saxon (circa 450-1066 CE). #2 is Middle English (circa 1066-1450 AD). #3 is Modern English from about the time of Shakespeare. #4 is another sample of Modern English, but it is more recent than #3.
KAuypmU.gif

https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/diagram_4English.html
Click to expand...

KJV 1611:
“Ye haue not chosen me, but I haue chosen you, and ordeined you, that you should goe and bring foorth fruit, and that your fruite should remaine: that whatsoeuer ye shall aske of the Father in my Name, he may giue it you.”
John 15:16 (KJV)
Click to expand...

KJV Standard:
“Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you.”
Click to expand...

There may be others, for all I know. I really have no idea which one I was attempting in 8th grade study hall. I don't see how the Standard version would have caused any grief in and of itself, but you should remember that I came into the OT only knowing the sort of OT bible stories that get told in Sunday school. The fact that the creation story gets told twice, each with a different focus threw me.

No offense was intended.
 
<alt>doxygen said:
KJV 1611:


KJV Standard:


There may be others, for all I know. I really have no idea which one I was attempting in 8th grade study hall. I don't see how the Standard version would have caused any grief in and of itself, but you should remember that I came into the OT only knowing the sort of OT bible stories that get told in Sunday school. The fact that the creation story gets told twice, each with a different focus threw me.

No offense was intended.
Click to expand...

I was cracking a joke. As a matter of fact, my chosen KJV version and my reference point is the 1611, which makes for some interesting moments in public reading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom