WRIGHT WAY: A New King James Bible?

[inge]

I do not understand why anyone of us can give so much attention to this matter. We have the New World Translation. It is not a revised Bible. The WTS started from scratch. It is the best Bible available. What else do we need? When Kings James comes back in the resurrection and we still use the NWT, he will use it instead of the one that carries his name.

I do not believe that this Bible will ever appear in print. If our literature starts quoting the Divine Name Kings James Version, then I will be convinced, but not until then.

BTW, I do use the KJ version. I like to compare many translations. It gives a deeper understanding of a Bible text.

This is the last comment I make on this subject. I will stick to what the FDS says, if it ever will say anything about this Bible.

Inge

[Musky]

I think the point is that MANY people of the world use and trust the King James Version of God's word, so if we are to reach their hearts, having that version use Jehovah's name can only be a good thing.

[Willow]

I do not understand why anyone of us can give so much attention to this matter.Inge

I didn't realize that you misunderstood what this thread was about, dear sister No wonder you were defending our far superior NWT so vehemently! This thread is about being happy to see that our great God's name has been restored to it's rightful place in a version of the Bible that so many misled and blinded potential sheep belonging to Jehovah are used to reading. You hit the nail on the head when you stated that "some well-meaning people just replaced God and Lord with Jehovah in that Bible". That is precisely what happened. It doesn't make the KJ bible better than our NWT or anything else. The article that Bro. Wright wrote about it and our posts have all been about our excitement at seeing Jehovah's name being made known in yet another way. But you are absolutely right - we belonging to Jehovah's organization have no need to replace our Bible with this version of the KJ.

May Jehovah bless you and all of us in your/our fine efforts to make his name known to all!

[sianrose]

I think the point is that MANY people of the world use and trust the King James Version of God's word, so if we are to reach their hearts, having that version use Jehovah's name can only be a good thing.

It would be good if it is printed....being able to say to people...if you would like to look in your copy of the Bible ...you will find "Jehovah's" name restored to where it should be...

[rbrown1205]

Frankly I have a feeling that those who believe in the King James Bible will stick to the one that they have had over the years. There is a sizable following of people especially in the South who think that the King James version of the Bible has a special inspiration. I am thankful that that version has Jehovah's name in the places where it is, such as Exodus 6:3, and Psalm 83:18. It is possible to learn the truth through the King James version and a little reasoning, like this:

"you see, Jesus said Hallowed be thy Name, not, Hallowed be thy Names, so there is only one name for the true God"

and

"you see, Jonah 2:2 said he was in the belly of hell, so you can see that he came out, so he saw hell as a place of death, and hell is not a place of eternal torment where you don't come out"

and

" 'yes, John 1:1 says there and the word was God', but vs 18 says 'no man has seen God at any time' and yet people did see Jesus face to face"

Until 1950, the brothers used the King James Bible extensively, and hearing how they reasoned with people using that version is remarkable. In fact, the WTBTS had printed several thousand copies of the King James version of the Bible, all the way up to 1972.

I am glad that this version was printed, mostly the preface makes some very sound points in favor of including God's name not only in the Bible, but in worship, and this during a time when the Catholic church is trying to blot any mention of the name from their church buildings and liturgy.

[Daniel Metz]

I have read about this Divine Name King James Version for some time now, both on the website http://www.dnkjb.net/ and on the Facebook page. I think it is extremely likely, from what I have read, that this project was started by some brothers who wanted to glorify Jehovah. They say that the have spent a lot of money making the online version and are now asking for donations to produce a printed version.

I think though that only Witnesses will buy it. Christendom's members, especially Evangelicals, will not buy a King James Version that has been modified by Witnesses of Jehovah who started this project. They are not interested in having Jehovah's name restored, since they believe the Trinity and want to believe that "Jehovah in the Old Testament is Jesus in the New Testament."

If we try to use it in the service to show Jehovah's name in places where the householder's King James Version doesn't have it, the householder will suspect that Witnesses edited it, and I can't blame them.

I don't plan to get a copy for myself because I will never use it in the service.

The intention is good but it seems to me it is a lot of effort for very little results.

[Daniel Metz]

I think it will be much more practical to convince users of the King James that every time that that version has LORD in small capitals, the original has the Tetragrammaton. The easiest way is to show them a Hebrew Bible, which can be found online, such as on the site http://biblos.com/genesis/2-4.htm, where one can click on the "Hebrew" tab and see the Hebrew text. There the Hebrew translated by "the LORD" is clearly indicated as "Yahweh" in the "Transliteration" column.

Then we can show them that the New World Translation has restored Jehovah everywhere that it is found.

[rbrown1205]

Brother Metz, I am not disputing you, but please show me where the evidence is located that some of our brothers played a role in the production of this version..?

[Brother_Bliss]

We have the New World Translation. It is not a revised Bible. The WTS started from scratch. It is the best Bible available. What else do we need?

I wholeheartedly agree. Best translation available by far. But even the NWT has been revised over the years, with 2006 being the most recent changes.

I do not believe that this Bible will ever appear in print.

I have my doubts also. However, being published on the web is a form of being "in print" and it can be legitimately quoted even in our literature. I would prefer it circulate as a PDF document however.

BTW, I do use the KJ version. I like to compare many translations. It gives a deeper understanding of a Bible text.

Me too. If this makes it to the presses, I will purchase a paper copy to add to my massive library. If it makes it as a PDF or e-sword extension I will download it and keep it as part of my electronic library.

This is the last comment I make on this subject. I will stick to what the FDS says, if it ever will say anything about this Bible.

It does add just one more reference of Bible's / translation committees / etc that recognized the value of the Divine Name and see the need to have it restored. We certainly don't need the FDS to specifically tell us we can or cannot reference it.

My brother was a fundamental KJV only Baptist. He is finally coming around to a number of things, and the Divine Name is something he has embraced. He will be delighted to see the DNKJB restore the name to where it had been previously ripped away. Another ace in our pockets, it is (okay, maybe not an ace - maybe just a jack or queen )

[Aelon]

{{ Merged with previously existing topic }}

http://www.clevelandbanner.com/bookmark/16962037/article-WRIGHT+WAY%3a+

A new King James Bible has broken a centuries-old tradition and is following in the footsteps of several Bible translations that restored the Divine Name to its original place in the Old Testament.

The Divine Name King James Bible is raising eyebrows in the world of Bible translators for replacing the capitalized GOD and LORD with the English translation “Jehovah” in 6,972 places.

In Hebrew the four letters representing the Divine name, also called the Tetragrammaton, is YHWH. To this day no one is certain of its exact pronunciation.

Translators of the Divine Name King James Version are following the pattern of other Bible translations, including Young’s Literal Translation, Darby Translation, The New World Translation, The American Standard Version and The Bible in Living English, in restoring the Divine Name where it was originally written.

Publishers of this latest King James Version wrote, “We specifically left the Authorized Version as it is except to restore the Divine Name. We hope then to make people pause and ask themselves if they want ANY modern English Bible that does not display God’s Divine Name as it is found in the original writings no matter how well translated it is.”

The group also stated it is not affiliated with or sponsored by any religious organization and the new edition was not produced by the direction, assistance or approval of any religious organization or religious community.

Explaining their reason for restoring the Divine Name where it originally appeared, the publishers stated online, “Does it not seem clearer than ever why Jesus instructed us at Matthew 6:9 to pray ‘Hallowed be thy name’ not ‘hidden be thy name.’ Jesus faithfully showed why the name of Jehovah must be known to us, for only by that way would we know who Jesus is and how actually Jesus set the pattern for pure worship.

“This is directly tied to our having eternal life, for Jesus himself said in prayer to Jehovah, ‘And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.’” — John 17:3.”

While some scholars prefer the transliterated pronunciation “Yahweh,” others say the name Jehovah has already been established over centuries and preserves the four consonants of the original Divine Name in English (JHVH).

Publishers of this latest effort to restore the Divine Name said, “The base text of the Authorized King James is in the public domain but the exclusive feature of restoring the name Jehovah or Yahweh to the otherwise unmodified content of the base text constitutes an important new literary expression.”

One example given of this “new literary expression” is at Isaiah 42:8 where the Divine Name KJV reads, “I am Jehovah: that is my name.” Numerous translations continue to insert “LORD” or “Lord” where the Divine Name originally appeared, a practice that is being challenged by adherents to more literal translations.

There is also the “21st Century King James Version”(KJ21), completed in 1994, which updated obsolete words from the 1611 edition by using Webster’s New International Dictionary, second edition. Spelling, punctuation and capitalization were also updated.

While the more popular Authorized King James Version uses the Divine Name “Jehovah” in Exodus 6:3, Psalm 83:18, Isaiah 12:2 and Isaiah 26:4, The New King James Version replaced the name with LORD or YAH in those verses.

The 21st Century King James Version, however, restores the Divine Name in the four places where the Authorized King James Version used it for centuries. The Divine Name King James Version, however, restores the name Jehovah in nearly 7,000 places where YHWH or JHVH (Latin) originally was.

Personally, I am in favor of the most literal translation of the Holy Bible in its entirety regardless of who translates it. Any translation that is going to be closer to what was originally written is bound to bring its readers closer to God.

Besides, in Deuteronomy 4:2, the very verse that tells humans not to add or take away from God’s Word — many translators removed the Divine Name. I wonder how does that make God feel? Do you find that offensive? I simply want the truth as God intended us to have it. You don’t have to be a scholar to know that removing someone’s personal name and replacing it with a title is not accurate translating.

Some people are adamant about sticking with the Bible they were raised on. Others see the benefit in modern translations. To each his own. I was raised on the King James Bible. I will always love it. But I also enjoy modern translations which give me the benefit of more advanced research into the original Hebrew and Greek language.

Whichever translation you personally prefer, most people will agree there should always be room for the author’s personal name in His own book.

[Brother_Bliss]

I do not believe that this Bible will ever appear in print.

I have my doubts also.

Looks like we were wrong...

http://dnkjb.net/com/

[rocket]

This aught to cause quite the fire storm in the King James only community. I for one will be happy to see it in print as yet one more revision of the KJV.

Does anyone have the Webster Bible? It is a 1833 revision of the KJV by Noah Webster. It updates some of the more difficult language of the KJV while holding to most of the original text. I have the online version bookmarked but I was looking for one in print. It retains God's name where it was in the KJV.

[Brother_Bliss]

Does anyone have the Webster Bible?

I have it in my electronic Bible library on my laptop, but not in printed form.

[pinkypie]

Did anyone buy the King James Bibles with Jehovah's name on them off of http://dnkjb.net/com/ . I bought 4 bibles in February and they keep telling me they will ship them but don't. It's been past 45 days so it looks like they've stolen my money.

Gina

[Brenda]

Did anyone buy the King James Bibles with Jehovah's name on them off of http://dnkjb.net/com/ . I bought 4 bibles in February and they keep telling me they will ship them but don't. It's been past 45 days so it looks like they've stolen my money.

Gina

Gina, I received the one that I ordered in March.

They had sent an email to say that they had found a verse missing...and therefore required a complete review to make sure there were no other errors. Also, since they were self-publishing, and were only printing a small quantity, they had to change the format of what they had originally planned.

But I did receive mine about 3 weeks ago...so yours may be shipping soon.

Brenda :readbible:

[Mei]

Did anyone buy the King James Bibles with Jehovah's name on them off of http://dnkjb.net/com/ . I bought 4 bibles in February and they keep telling me they will ship them but don't. It's been past 45 days so it looks like they've stolen my money.

Gina

Gina, I received the one that I ordered in March.

They had sent an email to say that they had found a verse missing...and therefore required a complete review to make sure there were no other errors. Also, since they were self-publishing, and were only printing a small quantity, they had to change the format of what they had originally planned.

But I did receive mine about 3 weeks ago...so yours may be shipping soon.

Brenda :readbible:

Ditto! I received the two I ordered in February.

[pinkypie]

Thanks for letting me know.

Gina

[Daniel Metz]

Brother Metz, I am not disputing you, but please show me where the evidence is located that some of our brothers played a role in the production of this version..?

Sorry, Sister Brown, for not answering you sooner.

For me the evidence that brothers are behind this version is the information on the website about it. The way they speak is like Witnesses, but they don't want to reveal that they are Witnesses.

Notice this paragraph from the website:

"The most powerful force in human intellect is the truth. It is the most observable and most perpetual state of a sound mind. What group or individual alive today can claim to be perpetually in or of the truth? We think no one can sustain such a premise for themselves. In the context of these statements we answer the question "Who are the Divine Name Publishers" by saying simply that we are a group of avid truth seekers who have determined for themselves that it is an undeniable truth that the Divine Name has been purposely withheld from those to whom it is owed. Equal to lying about the Creator and His Will is the hiding or obscuring of His Divine Name. And it is a great shame for Bible translators to conspire with ignorance and evil to accomplish such a heinous thing."

A bit further is the following:

"To be sure, we have had to take responsibility for accuracy but while many bible translators extol their devotion to accuracy supported by their academic credentials and they emphasize readability of their bibles, very few concern themselves with the Divine Name and it is by the very means of their credentials that they and others excuse themselves for removing the Divine Name from the Scriptures. We specifically left the Authorized Version as it is except to restore the Divine Name. We hope then to make people pause and ask themselves if they want ANY modern English bible that does not display God's Divine Name as it is found in the original writings no matter how well translated it is and no matter if it was translated by the best and the brightest. The merit of this new literary work and whether or not it can rightly claim to have substantially and correctly restored the Divine Name should be based strictly upon the abundant archeological evidence that is freely available on the Internet. It is our intention that it should not be based on the academic credentials of its producers. It is for these simple reasons that the production members of the Divine Name King James Bible wish to remain anonymous."

The last two sentences are straight from the Reasoning book's description of the New World Translation Committee.

I can't imagine any non-Witness doing this amount of work to restore Jehovah's name in the King James Version.

I have no other proof than this, but I think I am right about this.

[Willow]

That was my reasoning also. But since they apparently did not want it made known, I didn't mention it on this forum - due to the possibility of apostates and other non-witnesses getting on here...