Question/insight #37: "I believe the Cambridge KJV is more accurate than any modern versions because many modern versions omit any doctrines of the bible as such the Son of God or the salvation. They followed 2 famous ancient manuscripts. These MSS did not agree each others thrice thousand times in the gospel alone. Do you trust them? Not me! The fact is that modern versions contain the Word of God; the KJV is the Word of God."
Response #37:
I am assuming that you did not mean to imply that the KJV itself is THE "Word of God" of which the canonical scriptures speak, because that virtually would be professing idolatry. The KJV is certainly an instrument to articulate the Word of God, but so are the ancient Greek texts (all of which vary in some instances) and the many translations over the centuries into Latin, German, English, Spanish, Chinese, Navajo, etc.
As you know, Jesus consistently and persistently preached against self-righteous legalism. Eduard Schweizer makes a good point when he writes in his commentary on Matthew (The Good News According to Matthew, Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1975, page 147), under the topic of the Lord's Prayer, Matthew 6:7-13:
The Lord's Prayer is found in a rather different form in Luke 11:2-4. It is astounding how little legalism the early Christians showed in transmitting the words of Jesus. Even so central a text as this is reshaped with relative freedom, adapted to local usage, and elaborated. The community had no sacred texts in the sense of ones that had to be repeated without the slightest change. The Lord's Prayer is therefore not the letter of the law; it is an aid to prayer, a guide to be followed without being bound to this or that precise wording.
As to the history of the Greek texts upon which the KJV's New Testament is based, I recommend that you read the webpage article at
You also can read an answer to a previous question I received, which asked, "Is it the KJV the only translation that should be used?" My answer is at:
|
Copyright
1996-2002 Robert Nguyen Cramer
|
||