Warning: session_start(): open(/var/lib/lsphp/session/lsphp80/sess_0jairjga4f17olf2o22p81hduk, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/kjv.site/public_html/Discussion-Thread/index.php on line 2
Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/lib/lsphp/session/lsphp80) in /home/kjv.site/public_html/Discussion-Thread/index.php on line 2 BIBLE DISCUSSION THREAD 227350
I have a replica of the 1611 KJV. The Apocrypha is in there. It is tucked in between the Old and New Testaments -- as it should be.
From what I understand, the Apocrypha covers the time between Malachi and the New Testament.
Interestingly enough, the commission that translated the Textus Receptus (where the KJV almost exclusively entails), they did NOT remove the Apocrypha. It stayed in the KJV until the late 1800 (around 1880). So, if it were truly "unGodly," they would have NEVER left it in.
I wish I had a more direct answer, but I am not a Pastor. I read a book supporting the King James ONLY as God's true bible. (As opposed to the "modern translations.")
In the book, "The Preeminence of Christ," the Authors, John A. Ricci and Louis E. DeBoer point out that most of the early "translations" were done by Gnostics, who carried (what we would call today) significant baggage. For instance, they did NOT believe in the Resurrection of Christ.
They also frequently changed parts of the New Testament that they personally did not agree with.
Most of the "modern translations," are translations of Gnostic translations (unlike the King James which principally comes from the Textus Receptus).
The "modern translations" started around the time the Apocrypha was removed from the KJV. While I have no way of knowing, and I will not be dogmatic about it, I think a bunch of "modern translators" formed a group of "Bible scholars" and had it removed.
From what I understand, the Apocrypha covers the time between Malachi and the New Testament.
Interestingly enough, the commission that translated the Textus Receptus (where the KJV almost exclusively entails), they did NOT remove the Apocrypha. It stayed in the KJV until the late 1800 (around 1880). So, if it were truly "unGodly," they would have NEVER left it in.
In the book, "The Preeminence of Christ," the Authors, John A. Ricci and Louis E. DeBoer point out that most of the early "translations" were done by Gnostics, who carried (what we would call today) significant baggage. For instance, they did NOT believe in the Resurrection of Christ.
They also frequently changed parts of the New Testament that they personally did not agree with.
Most of the "modern translations," are translations of Gnostic translations (unlike the King James which principally comes from the Textus Receptus).
The "modern translations" started around the time the Apocrypha was removed from the KJV. While I have no way of knowing, and I will not be dogmatic about it, I think a bunch of "modern translators" formed a group of "Bible scholars" and had it removed.
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment below to start a new comment thread.
Note: Comment threads older than 2 months are automatically locked.
Do you have a Bible comment or question?
Posting comments is currently unavailable due to high demand on the server.
Please check back in an hour or more. Thank you for your patience!
Report Comment
Which best represents the problem with the comment?