[Diligent]

Originally Posted by Beth

I currently have this Bible. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0521164389 hopefully this is a good one? I'm not sure how I would know? This is all quite confusing to me.

and would like to add the Interleaved Bible HAND BOUND NOTE BIBLE on the bottom of this site. http://www.pilkingtonandsons.com/interleavedbibles.htm it's out of stock right now. I would like to use this Bible for note taking, (if anyone else has any other suggestions that would be great)

Any way the Interleaved Bible Hand Bound says this: "Cambridge King James Version Text" and that's it. How do we know which Cambridge text it would be. Do you think it would be the same as the one I currently have?

The Concord is a "newer" edition that Cambridge started printing some time in the 80s I think. It is still a King James and I won't tell anyone to not use it. However, it does appear to incorporate some of the non-pristine Oxford readings. But an Oxford is a KJV too.

What is odd about the Concord is that it has selectively americanized spellings of some words (like rasor to razor) but most of them have not been americanized.

I wouldn't know about the interleaf Bible. You would have to compare it I guess.

I would not worry about your Concord. I have one that I used from around 2001 until this year when I replaced it with a Cambridge "large text edition" without references or margin notes which also lines up more closely with the "pristine" c.1900-1980 Cambridge text, though it still isn't an exact match.

It is necessary that we be intellectually honest and acknowledge that different KJV printings do have slight variations. However, none of the differences that I have seen actually cast doubt on what God actually said. While I agree that the c.1900-1980 text is the most pristine edition, I can't find cause to tell people not to buy new Bibles just because they don't match exactly.

I would really like to see the c.1900 text used as the standard for new printings of the KJV, and I am going to use it as the standard for my Bible software in future updates.

[bibleprotector]

It is necessary that we be intellectually honest and acknowledge that different KJV printings do have slight variations. However, none of the differences that I have seen actually cast doubt on what God actually said.

Yes, we know that many good Christians have used KJBs with these very slight variations between them since 1611. Obviously, the best thing to do is to receive God's providentially supplied proper presentation of the KJB, and allow that through the process of time it to be the common standard.

Originally Posted by Diligent

The Concord is a "newer" edition that Cambridge started printing some time in the 80s I think. It is still a King James and I won't tell anyone to not use it. However, it does appear to incorporate some of the non-pristine Oxford readings. But an Oxford is a KJV too.

What is odd about the Concord is that it has selectively americanized spellings of some words (like rasor to razor) but most of them have not been americanized.

I wouldn't know about the interleaf Bible. You would have to compare it I guess.

I would not worry about your Concord. I have one that I used from around 2001 until this year when I replaced it with a Cambridge "large text edition" without references or margin notes which also lines up more closely with the "pristine" c.1900-1980 Cambridge text, though it still isn't an exact match.

It is necessary that we be intellectually honest and acknowledge that different KJV printings do have slight variations. However, none of the differences that I have seen actually cast doubt on what God actually said. While I agree that the c.1900-1980 text is the most pristine edition, I can't find cause to tell people not to buy new Bibles just because they don't match exactly.

I would really like to see the c.1900 text used as the standard for new printings of the KJV, and I am going to use it as the standard for my Bible software in future updates.

Thanks, I feel a better about this now. You think you are safe in getting a KJV?? I certainly thought I was safe in purchasing a Cambridge edition?

I'm already called a KJVO nut, and wasn't looking forward to being called a KJV "pristine" c.1900-1980 Cambridge text only nut.....or...... KJVPc.1900-1980CTO nut.

I have many KJB's that I have received from grandparents, etc, I'll have to look around and see if I have the "pristine" text.

Does anyone know if the Defined King James Bible from The Bible for Today is the "pristine" text? Just curious, I also have that Bible.

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by sting of truth

now i'm thinking about approaching a publishing company and asking them to print up some of the bibles with the text available from bible protector's website, or maybe putting it on a disk and having kinko's or someone print some up for me, maybe i can get them to do it in gen u ine leather too.. it'll be costly, but maybe, just maybe i can find a place that'll do it for me.. but i really am prolly just going to keep on with my thompson chain, i love the references in that bible, i already took a pen and put some of the corrections in the margin.. thats why i wanted a list of every variant, so i could go through and fix the whole dad gum thing..

I have a beautiful Moroccan leather wide-margin Bible from Bearing Precious Seed http://www.bpsmilford.org/. There are no study helps at all, but it's still the best Bible I have. The only thing is that from what I checked it seems to be half-Oxford/half-Cambridge.

I was wondering that given their philosophy (as I remember reading it in their newsletter or somewhere) that scripture publishing should be entrusted to the church and not commercial interests, and commercial interests may be a reason for the proliferation of different versions, if they might be one to approach about this?

This is from their Statement of Faith:

The Bible - We believe the Bible consists of only sixty-six books (Genesis through Revelation). We believe God breathed the very words of Scripture (all of them) and superintended the men (whom He chose) in the process each had in writing the Scripture. We believe God has preserved His Word in New Testament form in the manuscript text known as the Textus Receptus. We further believe God has preserved His Word in Old Testament form in the manuscript text known as the Masoretic Text. Finally, we believe we have His preserved Word in the English language in the Bible known as the King James Version or Authorized Version. The King James Version is our sole authority for all purposes of reading and studying in English. The Bible is our sole rule of faith and practice.

[bibleprotector]

Those Church or ministry organisations printing King James Bibles in recent years have been printing the Concord Cambridge Edition, which is a hybrid with the Oxford, and therefore has some issues.

While King James Bible printing has been in the hands of the Anglican-National Universities, that is, Oxford and Cambridge, as well as under the Anglican-Royal power, the King James Bible was largely maintained while these bodies (and England herself) were Christian. Also, the common faith of the priesthood of believers was consenting to this. But there has been a complete reversal in national and religious culture in the reign of Queen Elizabeth II. Therefore, it is now up to Christians to "gather" and "maintain" and "preserve" and "protect" the Word of God.

Clearly, God would not allow his national vessel of Britain to go toward the beast-system and yet not care for His Word that was being kept by His providential use of the British Crown and the two learned institutions. Therefore, we must see that God has transferred the guardianship into the hands of others now, who are going to stand for the truth. This is of central importance at my Church. And there are others around the world who are also called to this type of ministry, as they see the witness through the Bible Protector website.

If the King James Bible had the backing of the greatest monarchy in recent centuries, then the continued backing of the King James Bible has to be greater. If the King James Bible was at the foundation of the Christian nations as they were, we must yet see a restoration somewhere, so that the pure and true King James Bible be upheld as an ensign, and be the basis of a godly culture somewhere in the world. See Psalm 110:3.

Originally Posted by Beth

Does anyone know if the Defined King James Bible from The Bible for Today is the "pristine" text? Just curious, I also have that Bible.

I just looked in my Defined King James Bible and it's Cambridge 1769 text.

hey jeff, do you know which of their bibles are red letter text? is the hand size, and wide margin red letter? and finally, do they have any others in genuine leather other than the hand size and wide margin?

[Jeff]

Originally Posted by sting of truth

hey jeff, do you know which of their bibles are red letter text? is the hand size, and wide margin red letter? and finally, do they have any others in genuine leather other than the hand size and wide margin?

The wide margin is not red letter, so I suspect that none of them are. I think what you're seeing on their website are all they have (http://www.bpsmilford.org/store.html).

You might try searching for Bearing Precious Seed of Lansing, MI (I'm not sure of their relation to BPS of Milford and El Paso). I know when I checked they had some Old Scofield study Bibles with (I think) a concordance and maps. But I don't know about red letter, as I remember they also didn't have very good descriptions of the Bibles, so you might have to call or write to find out. I remember I thought their wide margin Bibles looked funny with the margins all around the perimeter but no center margin, so I didn't know how I'd write notes on the center verses.

[bibleprotector]

I just looked in my Defined King James Bible and it's Cambridge 1769 text.

That doesn't mean what it appears to mean. Firstly, because probably no one is using a Cambridge Bible literally printed in 1769, and secondly, because while all normal KJBs are based on the 1769 Edition, there are differences.

The "Cambridge Editions" as printed by Bearing Precious Seed or the one printed by Bible For Today called "The Defined King James Bible" are using the Concord Cambridge Edition as their text.

It wasn't until 1835 that Cambridge changed from following the 1762 Edition to following the Oxford Edition that was directly based upon the 1769 Edition (with corrections), but Cambridge did not follow it exactly, because Oxford always has had some peculiar spellings. The Cambridge was then edited noticeably around 1900, making the Pure Cambridge Edition. And then somewhere around the 1980 Cambridge changed the pure edition slightly back to the Oxford, so creating the Concord Cambridge Edition.

Bearing Precious Seeds is an umbrella name that many independant printing companies take. And there are differences between the texts that they use (referring to capitalization or spelling of certain words).