Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | what about the K J V | Rev 3:10 | Reformer Joe | 25007 | ||
Coming as I do from the theological tradition of the Puritans (call me puritannical -- I don't mind!), I will be happy to contend that the KJV is okay, just not as accessible to people speaking and English that is almost 400 years newer than what we see in its pages. Incidentally, the Geneva Bible (1560) came out before the KJV (1611), and the KJV was a response to that version, not vice-versa. King James just didn't like those Puritans and their study Bible! :) --Joe! |
||||||
2 | what about the K J V | Rev 3:10 | Hank | 25012 | ||
And to think, Joe, that for all these years I've been laboring under the delusion that R.C.Sproul and King Jimmy were buddies! Just shows how simple it is to be wrong, I guess. --Hank | ||||||
3 | what about the K J V | Rev 3:10 | Reformer Joe | 25045 | ||
Hank: R.C. Sproul isn't THAT old! :) Sproul's Reformation Study Bible is New King Jimmy, though... Speaking of Bible translations, I am test-driving the new English Standard Version, published by Crossway Bibles. I like it a lot! --Joe! |
||||||
4 | what about the K J V | Rev 3:10 | Makarios | 25047 | ||
Greetings Joe! Did you see my "write up" on the new English Standard Version that I posted to the Forum? I like it a lot also! Blessings to you, Nolan |
||||||