KJ2000

[MPaul]

I downloaded the KJ2000 in BA, which was my introduction to this version. Basically, I like the Bible, though I do not think it is as good as the KJVER. At times it is more than an updating of language but a change in wording, although I have not found anything particularly significant so far.

However, I have now noted by visiting the KJ2000 website, that they have a study bible with comments by E. G. White. Thus, it does appear that his translation is a work of the Seventh Day Adventist church. I have no prejudice against Adventists whatsoever, and I do not judge them; however, I do not agree with their theology.

However, I do now wonder, do the changes in this version reflect and support Adventist positions? Does anyone know?

My preference for a bible in English is always the KJV, but there are times when I simply cannot use it -- such as in doing services in a prison, or with various groups of young people, who simply cannot or will not comprehend or accept the old language. In the past, I have used the NKJV for these situations, but I do not really like this bible very much; so I'm going over to the KJVER. However, I am considering the KJ2000 for another alternative.

Also, does anyone know -- does the paperback or hardback copy of the KJ2000 have a decent font for reading. I know most bibles that are very inexpensive usually have a font that will drive a person blind. I do not think the Lord wants me to go blind reading the bible.

[Tim]

This is just to clarify our position on Bible Translations.

We at Bible Analyzer only endorse and believe the Authorized King James Version of 1611 as the pure word of God. It is our final authority in all matters. However, this does not mean other translations cannot be consulted and used. Personally, we treat all the modern translations more as commentaries than Bibles. This is one reason why we distribute Bible Analyzer Bible modules of these versions; to allow others to do the same.

Another reason is for comparative purposes; so one can easily compare another translation to the AV and see for themselves just how poor some are. The Bible Compare feature was created for this.

Concerning the KJ2000, we have not examined it in much detail, but it appears in many places it just updates older words to the modern counterpart without changing meaning. This is no different than consulting a dictionary. But in the places it actually changes the meaning, then it is rejected, like all te others

[MPaul]

Tim,

Actually, your response is interesting.

Do you at BA hold that the Greek or Hebrew text is the pure word of God? Just curious.

I only hold that the KJV is anointed, not inspired, staying with the traditional Protestant position on translations. However, I think the KJV is the most anointed bible in history – so it is not just anointed, but it is highly anointed. I hold that the modern versions are a combination of paraphrase and non-anointed translation. I find comparative bible study interesting and fascinating, not just to enable me to more effectively defend the KJV, but at times I find the Greek or Hebrew difficult to understand due to archaic language, and I might consult many bible versions to see how other people think on the meaning of a passage. The KJV can seem difficult at times also, but I do not think this arises due to archaic language, which is actually routine to deal with, but due to the literary theory of translation used and an effort to stay with the language equivalent of the Greek or Hebrew, rather than a meaning equivalent. In these situations consulting many versions can seem helpful, although at times the dynamic equivalence of a modern version might have such a tenuous basis, I do wonder what value it has at all. And then, I also have to have access to other versions to answer questions people raise based on them.

So why did I tell you all this in my last paragraph? – uh??? just to be one more example of the kind of person using your software.

Paul

[Tim]

Yes, the Greek and Hebrew that underlies the AV is as pure as it is. If we spoke Greek and Hebrew that would be our Bible, but since we speak English, the AV is our Bible. To us it is the definitive translation of the original.

Yes, the AV is definitely anointed, and that begs the question, why is that so?

Yes, questions do arise about other versions and having them available to consult and compare is an asset, we believe, and not a hindrance. If we could get licenses to distribute them we would provide several more.

[MPaul]

Yes, the AV is definitely anointed, and that begs the question, why is that so?

Before answering this question, perhaps, another should be considered – in what manner are words anointed? But that poses another question – how do words have power? I know what people from the Word of Faith Movement would say, but I have another understanding of how words have power.

Answering these questions does bring up differing doctrinal views. And my discussing doctrine with you might quickly or ultimately lead to contention, when actually, my focus in posting should be on BA software.

I believe BA software is anointed – very much so. But I do not believe everything about it is infallible. Nevertheless, it accomplishes its work for the kingdom.

[Atlas]

MPaul,


Here is an interesting question for you my friend. What is your final authority? Is the Bible or Bibles in you hand your final authority? Is any translation your final authority? Is the Greek and Hebrew your final authority? This is the only question that matters for a Christian when you think about it.


Atlas

[MPaul]

MPaul,


Here is an interesting question for you my friend. What is your final authority? Is the Bible or Bibles in you hand your final authority? Is any translation your final authority? Is the Greek and Hebrew your final authority? This is the only question that matters for a Christian when you think about it.


Atlas

You go first. What is your final authority?

[Tim]

Tim,

I have several articles on these questions at our other website, http://www.preservedwords.com.

In short, my final authority is the AV of 1611 (in any edition, apart from typographical errors) and the Hebrew and Greek texts behind it (essentially the Textus Receptus).

Since I only understand English, the AV is my tangible final authority which I can hold in my hands.

I have read most if not all of your articles on this topic. I do tend to agree with you my friend. You made some very good points in some of your articles, and I did learn a thing or two that I did not know.

[MPaul]

Tim,

Yes, I've read things by you on the Bible. Actually, I think it was articles in the software.

However, I have a confession to make -- hmm... for the book of Revelation, I actually think the version from the Helen Barrett Montgomery New Testament is better. It is very similar to the KJV, but I think the Montgomery version reflects the true literary style. I believe this is in the Public domain now, and I would like to set it out on my website according to its literary structure. It is so beautiful. (My grandmother's name was Helen Montgomery, but not a relation).

eSword puts out the Montgomery NT. I would like to have it in BA, if you have lots of spare time to add another version.

PS -- yes, my preferred Greek text is Scrivener, and Hebrew, Chayyim

[Tim]

Sure, we will make a mod out of nearly any public domain text for comparison purposes.