11,158
edits
The King James Version of the Bible: Difference between revisions
→Did William Branham believe the KJV was the only inspired English Bible?
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
:''In the studying of the Scripture, I have been accused, and do a great deal of typology. Which typology is typing the Old with the New. I'll tell you why I do that. It's because of this. Maybe sometimes the--the great words that scholars and so forth try to give the Bible Its--Its terms or pronouncing... I'm satisfied to take the King James for mine. It's waved the storms longer than any translation yet, and I just believe it that way.''<ref>53-0325 ISRAEL.AND.THE.CHURCH.1_ JEFFERSONVILLE.IN</ref> | :''In the studying of the Scripture, I have been accused, and do a great deal of typology. Which typology is typing the Old with the New. I'll tell you why I do that. It's because of this. Maybe sometimes the--the great words that scholars and so forth try to give the Bible Its--Its terms or pronouncing... I'm satisfied to take the King James for mine. It's waved the storms longer than any translation yet, and I just believe it that way.''<ref>53-0325 ISRAEL.AND.THE.CHURCH.1_ JEFFERSONVILLE.IN</ref> | ||
He also believed there were errors in the KJV: | |||
:''“And we noticed what that woman said. She turned with startled eyes, and she said, ‘Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet.’” Now, that… Really, in the King James is mistranslated.<ref>William Branham, 62-0726 - A Testimony Upon The Sea, para. 46</ref> | |||
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. | 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. | ||
=What is the best Bible translation?= | =What is the best Bible translation?= | ||