New Conservative Bible will eliminate 'liberal' text

Knoxville News Sentinel ^ | October 18, 2009 | Bob Smietana

[dangus]

I believe (hope) Graybeard58 is humorously referencing a former Texas governor who famously declared, “if the King’s English was good enough for my Lord and Savior, it’s good enough for me.”

[A.Hun]

I'm not enough of a scholar to debate it with you!

I use the KJV as a base and research around as needed. As far as I'm concerned, someone reading any Bible is a good thing, but the newer the translation, the more skeptical of it I am.

[A.Hun]

NKJV is the cats meow.

I have a version and it seems to be close to the original..it certainly is easier to understand. KJV does make it difficult.

[editor-surveyor]

We already have a Bible that tells it like God says it is, in fact we have two: The Geneva, and the King James.

The rest are Biblical novels, not translations.

They were created to make money and political statements.

[editor-surveyor]

“must be divine intervention. LOL”

Nope, God never has to repeat himself, so it must be the other guy... :o)

[eclecticEel]

there will be no socialists or snake handlers in the Bible. No woman caught in adultery. And, definitely, no Stephen Colbert

Colbert? If your translation of the Bible contains references to Stephen Colbert I do believe that it needs to be scrapped.

[refreshed]

Same here. KJV user.

[editor-surveyor]

"In Christ there is no East or West, in him no South or North, but one great fellowship of love throughout the whole wide earth."

He blew it in the first stanza:

Mat 10:34-36
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.

[editor-surveyor]

“Don’t you mean the REVISED King James Version?”

All the ‘revisions’ of the KJV consisted of updating the spellings of a few words.

[ColdWater]

Nope, I learned on the Authorized version. It works for me.

1611 or 1759 version?

[antiRepublicrat]

No, Truth is Truth and does not change with tranlation.

How do you know what the truth is?

[ColdWater]

All the ‘revisions’ of the KJV consisted of updating the spellings of a few words.

Though I speake with the tongues of men & of Angels, and haue not charity, I am become as sounding brasse or a tinkling cymbal. 2 And though I haue the gift of prophesie, and vnderstand all mysteries and all knowledge: and though I haue all faith, so that I could remooue mountaines, and haue no charitie, I am nothing. 3 And though I bestowe all my goods to feede the poore, and though I giue my body to bee burned, and haue not charitie, it profiteth me nothing.

[editor-surveyor]

Exactly!

Spelling changes fairly rapidly, but pronounciation is much slower.

[Unam Sanctam]

This is just dumb.

[fire4effect]

Who “authorized” it? King James?

[A.Hun]

1611.

[A.Hun]

Who “authorized” it? King James?

According to Wiki, nobody. It was commissioned by King James but never "authorized" for anything. It did become the standard for the Church of England, replacing two earlier translations.

Like I said earlier, I'm no scholar. I just go with the millions of earlier worshippers that found God through the KJV.

[count-your-change]

God's Word has survived despite attacks since it was written dowm, it will survive a Shuffly.

[Politicalmom]

Well, removing the adulterous woman part is just wrong.

Maybe in this version she’s caught not recycling....

[count-your-change]

In the 1611 edition dedication King James is praised for his support and encouragement of the work so it had his authorization, his approval, to that degree at least.