The King James Version of the Bible: Difference between revisions

The King James Version of the Bible (view source)

Revision as of 23:33, 18 July 2014

136 bytes removed , 10 years ago

→‎Did William Branham believe the KJV was the only inspired English Bible?

Believethesign

Bureaucrats, Administrators

3,880

edits

Revision as of 23:30, 18 July 2014 (view source) Believethesign (talk \| contribs) (→‎The Textus Receptus) ← Older edit		Revision as of 23:33, 18 July 2014 (view source) Believethesign (talk \| contribs) (→‎Did William Branham believe the KJV was the only inspired English Bible?) Newer edit →
Line 53:		Line 53:
	Though William Branham did preach and quote primarily from the King James Version, '''he never claimed the King James Version was the only real Bible''', and in fact, used several different versions, including the Darby Translation, and the Amplified Bible. His quote above simply states that he was satisfied to keep the KJV, because it had stood the test of time. That is a personal preference, and, especially in 1953 when he said it, an understandable position. Regardless, the Bible itself did not need vindicating, by William Branham or anyone else. Christians have always, and will always, believe the original manuscripts to be the divinely inspired and authoritative Word of God. Therefore, any faithful translation into English is, by definition, also the Word of God. So what constitutes a faithful translation?		Though William Branham did preach and quote primarily from the King James Version, '''he never claimed the King James Version was the only real Bible''', and in fact, used several different versions, including the Darby Translation, and the Amplified Bible. His quote above simply states that he was satisfied to keep the KJV, because it had stood the test of time. That is a personal preference, and, especially in 1953 when he said it, an understandable position. Regardless, the Bible itself did not need vindicating, by William Branham or anyone else. Christians have always, and will always, believe the original manuscripts to be the divinely inspired and authoritative Word of God. Therefore, any faithful translation into English is, by definition, also the Word of God. So what constitutes a faithful translation?

	There are a number of translations available today, that are not only much clearer to read, but also more faithful to the original texts than the King James Version~~. In Part II, we will further explore the idea of a faithful translation, why we have so many, and what it means for today’s Christian~~.		There are a number of translations available today, that are not only much clearer to read, but also more faithful to the original texts than the King James Version.