View Single Post
Old 05-02-2008, 08:04 AM
bibleprotector's Avatar
bibleprotector bibleprotector is offline
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 587

The Version and Translation made in 1611 is the right one. There is no dispute between the 1611 and 1769 Editions on text or translation, since they both agree. Therefore it is entirely proper to stand for the "1611" Version.

Things like changing the 1611 "he" at Ruth 3:15 to the 1611 "she", or the 1611 "seek good" at Psalm 69:32 to the 1629 "seek God", or having the 1629 "Amen" at the end of Ephesians all never constitute either an underlying text or translation change. There are no actual changes to Scripture, or actual changes in the version-text and/or the translation of the King James Bible from 1611 to the Pure Cambridge Edition. All we can witness is the purification in correcting typographical errors, standardisation of the language and other regularisation. There are unauthorised editions which do corrupt the King James Bible, but they do not form part of the traditional lineage, such as, Webster, 1850s American Revision, Scrivener and Norton. These editions are not commonly used, and are generally considered abnormal.

Scrivener's relatively recent flawed Greek text is of no consequence.