[Just_A_Thought]

Question about different KJV's...

If the KJV was standardized 1769 to make all KJVs uniform then where did all the different ones come from today? I was not aware that there were that many different KJV versions. It seems on this forum that I was mistaken. I was aware that one or two had a word or two difference but not tht much of a difference. Can you please let me know these things?

1) How many different KJV versions are there? (If known)

2) Who makes them?

3) Can you give me a list of differences? (example the NIV states this but the KJV states this...)

Thanks!

[bibleprotector]

There is only one true King James Version, and that is the one which appeared in 1611 and continued through the years to this very day, printed and published by a great cloud of witnesses.

However, there are many editions. Each edition may differ because of printing mistakes. Moreover, there are consistent types of editions, because a publishing house might spell a certain word a particular way.

There are two broad kinds of groups of editions, being, the various editions which came from 1611 to 1769; and the editions which follow the 1769 Edition. (Though they might have started following it in 1835, not in 1770!)

More importantly, none of the differences between historical traditional editions (as opposed to deliberately modernised ones) can count as a different in the underlying text or the translation of the King James Bible, and are therefore not "different versions".

Joh 3:16 For God so loued ye world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life.
- KJV 1611

As you can see from this quote, this is the King James Bible, despite differences that have occurred in punctuation, spelling and correction of printers' errors.

The 1769 Oxford Edition was an attempt to standardise. It was not 100% "standard", because it accidentally missed out on half a verse in Revelation. That was quickly corrected, but its rendering of Joshua 19:2 was not corrected until 1817. Moreover, as other publishing houses adopted the 1769 Edition as a basis, they might have retained their own peculiarities, or done further particular editing (as is the case of both Cambridge and Eyre & Spottiswoode).

So it is a deception to say “KJV v. KJV”. Really, it is the inquiry into: “What is the standard edition?”

Some people say it doesn’t matter which edition you use. As far as the KJB is concerned that is okay, but why have an edition which has known objectionable variations, when there is one without impurity in its presentation.

To see more information on this, look at my website, www.bibleprotector.com

[Traditional Anglican]

The "short answer" is the 1769. Grace and Peace.

[bibleprotector]

The "short answer" is the 1769.

The point is that no edition today exactly matches the 1769 Edition, and that the 1769 Edition was not the final edition. See www.bibleprotector.com/purecambridgeedition.htm

[Traditional Anglican]

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

The point is that no edition today exactly matches the 1769 Edition, and that the 1769 Edition was not the final edition. See www.bibleprotector.com/purecambridgeedition.htm

I am aware of this, however the 1769 is the standard and even those with some variants make little or no difference, I use an Oxford Clarendon AV, there are a FEW minor places it which may not line up with the Cambridge, however both are at the core streams from the 1769 there ARE some King James Bibles that are mucked up but in general most are in agreement. Blessings.

Originally Posted by Traditional Anglican

I am aware of this, however the 1769 is the standard and even those with some variants make little or no difference, I use an Oxford Clarendon AV, there are a FEW minor places it which may not line up with the Cambridge, however both are at the core streams from the 1769 there ARE some King James Bibles that are mucked up but in general most are in agreement. Blessings.

Well, smarty-pants, if you knew the answer, why did you ask the question?



As for the differences between the AV and the NIV, they are ghastly and ubiquitous. But here's a chart of some of the most egregious:

http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/various.html

[bibleprotector]

variants make ... no difference

As far as the KJB is concerned as a text and translation, true. As far as God's perfect works, purification, exactness of jots and tittles, no.

some variants make little ... difference

Perhaps "rasor" versus "razor" is a little thing, I agree. But the issue comes down to greater differences, such as whether it is "and" or "or" in Joshua 19:2. If presentation doesn't matter, we may in fact be allowing error when we should have inerrancy being shown (see postscript). If we use an Oxford but acknowledge the true reading, that is perhaps justifiable. But I think the conscience of a believer would indicate that to allow something which we know is not presented correctly is wrong. In Joshua 19:2, if Beer-sheba and Sheba are two different places, the count of cities in verse 6 is in error.

the 1769 is the standard

Only broadly, because it read "Beer-sheba, Sheba", and that went on until 1817. Whereas now the Oxford reads "Beer-sheba, and Sheba", whereas the Cambridge has the correct "Beer-sheba, or Sheba".

there are a FEW minor places it may not line up with the Cambridge

What is the name of God in Isaiah 9:6? "Counsellor" or "Counseller"?
Did the blind man at Jericho call Jesus the "son of David" or the "Son of David"?
Is the first witness in earth in 1 John 5:8 "Spirit" or "spirit"?

These are not minor things, especially the last, where doctrine and consistancy is at stake.

While I agree that the text and translation are not an issue, and that we do not want to get into straining at gnats at expence (NB!) of truth, we do want to have the best what God has provided us with, and be able to have full certainty in the very presentation of Scripture: "And the LORD answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it." (Hab. 2:2).

"For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (Matthew 5:18).

"Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him." (Prov. 30:5).

"He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he." (Deut. 32:4).

P.S. The KJB is inerrant, and the Oxford Edition of the KJB, being Scripture, is inerrant. It just isn't presenting it exactly right. The issue is the presentation, not the Scripture itself. If the presentation is wrong, that could serve to hinder people, whereas they would be both certain and unhindered when the presentation is correct.

[Just_A_Thought]

Originally Posted by Vendetta Ride

Well, smarty-pants, if you knew the answer, why did you ask the question?



As for the differences between the AV and the NIV, they are ghastly and ubiquitous. But here's a chart of some of the most egregious:

http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/various.html

If you were asking this due to my question, I was asking the KJV be compared to the NIV. I was asking for verses that differ from one KJV to another KJV like most people compare the KJV to the NIV.

[stephanos]

Originally Posted by Just_A_Thought

If you were asking this due to my question, I was asking the KJV be compared to the NIV. I was asking for verses that differ from one KJV to another KJV like most people compare the KJV to the NIV.

bibleprotector is the leading expert on this subject. If you truly are interested to know the differences, you'll explore the link he gave.

Peace and Love,
Stephen