[bibleprotector]

Zondervan did not always publish the Scrivener edition, and may only be reproducing it in some of its KJBs.

As for the one mentioned by textusreceptusonly, it is probably following one of these two editions: The two edition-types from recent years with lowercase "spirit" in Genesis 1:2 are the Cambridge Standard Text Edition (appeared in circa 1993), and the Eyre and Spottiswoode Edition from about the 1950s.

The American editions traditionally (but not always) followed the Oxford or a mixture of the Cambridge Edition(s). These type of KJBs (as were printed by Thomas Nelson and others) were considered "normal".

Two things have happened in recent years:
(1.) a lot of editing/modernising has been going on in KJBs.
(2.) there is now a rising degree of understanding concerning the editions issue, including a push to promote one particular Cambridge Edition as the standard edition.
See http://www.bibleprotector.com/purecambridgeedition.htm

[Jordan]

So, with the one that I ordered, is it the "true" Word of God then?

[bibleprotector]

Like Pilate, you must resolve the question of "What is truth?" to begin with.

If you received the Word of God from the Holy Ghost's provision, then you got the true Word of God.

[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

Zondervan did not always publish the Scrivener edition, and may only be reproducing it in some of its KJBs.

Last night, in Johannine Comma research, I ran into this interesting note on the net.

http://members.aol.com/kjvisbest/sources.htm
An Essay on Sources How to Find Materials for Comparative Study of the KJV and Earlier Versions by T.L. Hubeart Jr.

in at least one significant passage the 1873 version has been altered (see 1 John 5:7, where Weigle's Octapla shows Scrivener throwing the "Johannine Comma" into italics, while the Zondervan volumes put it back into regular type!).

We do have on the net the 1884 re-printing of the 1873 work:

The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611): Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representatives - F. H. A. Scrivener

However, the actual Cambridge Paragraph Bible, with Scrivener as editor, is not on the Net, nor the Octapla, so I cannot easily check if this mangling by italics was done, and if so was it Scrivener and Weigle, or only Weigle. Anybody who can check, much appreciated.

I do have a Scrivener-based Zondervan edition 'KJV Study Bible' where the Johannine Comma text size and font is fine.

Shalom,
Steven

[bibleprotector]

Scrivener's 1873 Paragraph Edition had "strain out a gnat", "profession of our hope" and 1 John 5:7 in italics. These things have probably been changed in the recent Zondervan reprintings. Just when a few people thought that Scrivener's edition was the best, then Norton's edition came along, which several think is better. Of course, these editions are way off the track.

Here is a quote from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Cam...aragraph_Bible

The original Cambridge Paragraph Bible
A previous edition of the KJV called the Cambridge Paragraph Bible was published in 1873. That volume was edited by F.H.A. Scrivener, one of the translators of the English Revised Version and a noted scholar of the text of the Bible. For a long time it was perhaps best known as the KJV text in the standard reference work The New Testament Octapla edited by Luther Weigle, chairman of the translation committee that produced the Revised Standard Version. But more recently, the publisher Zondervan has attempted a revival of Scrivener's text by conforming all its newer editions of the KJV to it, such as its Zondervan KJV Study Bible. And the popular Logos Bible Software includes an electronic text of the Cambridge Paragraph Bible as of certain editions of version 3 of its Bible program.

Considerable honour is due to Scrivener for his work on the 1873 Cambridge Paragraph Bible. Nevertheless, there are some instances of misrepresentation of the original KJV text in Scrivener's work, since, as Norton suggests, he felt himself entitled to "correct" what the translators wrote. For example,

in Matthew 23:24, Scrivener changes KJV's "strain at a gnat" to "strain out a gnat" (emphasis added) on the basis of the belief that it was a printer's error or a mistranslation, as it is commonly known that hulizō means "to filter".[3]
he changes Hebrews 10:23's "Let us hold fast the profession of our faith" to "Let us hold fast the profession of our hope" (emphasis added); this change was allegedly to fix a translator error;
there are instances of spelling that are intentionally left unmodernized, such as "ebeny" for "ebony" and "mo" for "more";
Additionally, the passage in 1 John 5:7–8 often referred to as the Johannine Comma is thrown into italics by Scrivener because of its disputed authenticity, although the original translators left no indication that they doubted its genuineness. (This italicization has been removed from Zondervan's reprints of the Cambridge Paragraph Bible text but can be seen in the New Testament Octapla's reprinting.)
Although Scrivener's text has been highly regarded since its appearance, it has not had a major influence on current editions of the KJV, which are essentially reprints of the 1769 Oxford edition by Benjamin Blayney. Therefore, current KJV printings feature certain post-1611-edition editorial changes, 18th century spelling, an enhanced system of "supplied words" (the words printed in italics as having no equivalent in the original Biblical texts but added for clarity), and emended punctuation.

[Jordan]

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

Like Pilate, you must resolve the question of "What is truth?" to begin with.

If you received the Word of God from the Holy Ghost's provision, then you got the true Word of God.

I don't understand...?

[bibleprotector]

Psalm 68:11 says, "The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it."

John 17:14a says, "I have given them thy word".

1 Thess. 2:13 says, "For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe."

From these verses and many others we can conclude that the Word is single (one), not plural (many), and we can see that God has promised to get one Word to us today.

"For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God" (2 Cor. 2:17a). There are corrupters around, so we could not just accept anything as "the Word of God", but must see that there is the true, and that there are those which are of the error and corruption.

[Jordan]

OK I know that, but how do I know if I'm using the right translation of the KJV?

[bibleprotector]

There is only one translation or version called the King James Bible.

[Jordan]

No there isn't. There has been many revisions to the KJV Bible. What exact Bible are you using? Can you find it on a website and show it to me?