Updated American Standard Version
Giving Bible readers what God said not what translators think God meant
The 1611 KJV translators said in the 1611 Preface that they revised the 16th century English Bible trying to make advancements on the English Bible and that when new manuscripts were discovered, and a better understanding of the Hebrew and Greek happened, they expected that there would be an improved English Bible.
In the earliest days of the Christian church, after an apostolic letter was sent to a congregation or an individual, or after a gospel was written to meet the needs of a particular reading public, copies would be made in order to extend its influence and to enable others to profit from it as well. It was inevitable that such handwritten copies would contain a greater or lesser number of differences in wording from the original. NOTE: This is an introductory article, but filled with links to more in-depth articles if one desires a deeper look.
The King James Version has reached the milestone of the 400th anniversary of its first publication. Academic and religious conferences, museum displays, books and articles, and commemorative editions of the KJV have exploded in such quantity that 2011 can confidently be declared the year of the King James Bible.
The Hebrew text was like the Greek NT; it had accumulated copyist errors, a few intentional, a good number accidental, between the Malachi days of 440 BCE and Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi (135 to 217 CE). The same thing happened to the Greek New Testament from about 400 CE to 1550 CE, a period of copyist errors.
The King James Only movement asserts that the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible is superior to all other translations of the Bible.
THE PREFACE to the 1611 KJV by the translators says the KJV was a revision of the 16th-century translations of Coverdale, Tyndale, the Great Bibles, and others. The translators said they expect new revisions of their KJV translation when more manuscripts come to light, and if there was an improved understanding of Hebrew and Greek, there should be revisions. Were those translators wrong?
THERE are three great Book-religions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Other religions have their sacred writings, but they do not hold them in the same regard as do these three. Buddhism and Confucianism count their books rather records of their faith than rules for it, history rather than authoritative sources of belief. The three great Book-religions yield a measure of authority to their sacred books which would be utterly foreign to the thought of other faiths.
Are you a member of the King James Version Onlyist (KJVO) Cult or affiliated with it? What are the signs that the KJVOists are a cult? What is the true transmission of the Greek New Testament and the Textus Receptus? Let’s begin by saying the King James Version Onlyist (KJVO) is no different from the Jehovah’s Witnesses or the Mormons. They blindly accept information that is blatantly wrong that it leaves the rational mind bewildered. Some warning signs that the KJVO is a cult-minded group. If you are not willing to objectively read a book or article that counters your narrative, not even able to acknowledge basic truths, then you are in the KJVOist Cult.
The King James Only movement asserts that the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible is superior to all other translations of the Bible. Adherents of the King James Only movement believe that the KJV is the greatest English translation ever produced, needing no further improvements, and they also believe that all other English translations which were produced after the KJV are corrupt. Is this true?
The Majority Text is nearly synonymous with the Byzantine Text because it was in Byzantium (and surrounds) that the Lucian text was copied again and again until it was standardized in thousands of manuscripts. (Phillip Comfort)