Someone pointed this out to me about 6 months ago. Can't find anything explaining all the changes between these two versions. Beware.
YouVersion App Changes the KJV
Logan Ortiz
Other urls found in this thread:
Tyler Bell
There's nothing specific to meat or grain in the original hebrew. The grain translation comes from inference from the ingredients listed later, meat originally meant any form of food, not just flesh.
Kevin Ramirez
Every Bible source I've seen says contrary to the "KJV" in this app. The technicality isn't as important as whether or not there are other "inconsequential" changes in this app's "KJV".
Daniel Collins
To avoid your Bible shifting like and under your feet at the whims of a developer who may not even be a Christian, or, God forbids, Satan, through his minions at Google and Apple, do not use a dedicated "Bible app". Instead read the Bible with a regular EPUB reader app so you can be sure the data of your Bible won't change.
Dylan Bell
That is actually pretty interesting. I wonder if it was a mix up between the original KJV and the AV? Either way, YouVersion promotes some really sketchy people (Bethel/Jesus Culture for example)
Robert Smith
I know you are right, though it's a shame because of how much of a little powerhouse this app is. So much lost potential.
I've noticed wicked red flags all over this app as well. Every reading plan contains blurbs about dispensationalism or man-made teachings, and every "motivational poster" is always an NIV quote.
Charles Sanchez
Wow, that’s really interesting user. Do you have a source for me to follow up on that…or where I can go to learn more?
Brody Nguyen
Install And Bible. As far as I'm aware it's the only Bible app that respects your software freedoms.
Jacob Jones
See the usage of minhah in Num 15:9 to see grain is appropriate
Mason Cooper
I mean you can also get a physical copy. The jews aren't going to sneak into your house and change the pages.
Caleb Mitchell
You wanna bet?
Asher Brooks
You're quite the optimist.
Also just use the DRC which is on the Bible app. I have it in EPUB too. Good thing is there is no copyright on it.
Landon Cruz
Hasn't the KJ undergone some minor revisions since the original print, especially with all the unauthorized publishers?
On a similar note, has anyone tried any of the mobile programs available on crosswire.org?
crosswire.org
Ayden Ross
Posting the verse from scans of some of the ancestral editions, 1611, 1637, 1769 and 1817. Also checked the legacy Cambridge text (aka the 1900, mainly used today) and legacy Oxford. I also checked the oldest sub-variants like the ABS version post-1856, Scrivener's paragraph version 1873, and Biblegateway's odd AKJV version. They all say meat offering. I can safely say that changing it to grain is a recent variant. There might be a lot of other changes here. Maybe I'll post back here later.
Josiah Wright
Levi Brown
Nice. Here's another change:
Sebastian Gomez
Memphis and Noph were two names for the same city, though I don't know why one version says Noph and the others say Memphis.
Asher Martinez
Noph is used in Hebrew, Memphis in the Septuagint and Vulgate. Different English translations chose to go with one rendering or the other.
Robert Ramirez
You mean that one version of Genesis that has Methuselah outliving the flood by 14 years? I thought we were being serious here and not these clown translations.
Charles Mitchell
As opposed to the Masoretic with its version of Isaiah that removes the prophecy of the virgin birth?
Christian Ramirez
Huh? No, the original Hebrew of the Old Testament doesn't remove that.
Jaxon Jackson
Yeah, it absolutely doesn't. You'd have to be pretty trusting of judaizers to translate your words for you if you thought that.
Austin Perez
You realize that doesn't magically make the methuselah contradiction go away, and that no one takes the modern jewish translation of Isaiah 7:14 seriously? The original Hebrew does say virgin there.
Also realize that in addition to this, only the original Hebrew has the prophecy of the Son in Psalm 2:12. Sorry but this is just too much of a strawgrasp here to try to detract from something you can't find a flaw in.
Wyatt Murphy
Doesn't have anything to do with Noph being rendered as Memphis and controversy over Isaiah doesn't have to do with the text just the translators.
Landon Nguyen
There have been offshoots of the Authorized KJB for a long time. One of the first ones was Webster's 1833 Bible, which took the base text and changed maybe 1% of the words. He didn't like the word ghost and he changed things like "male child" instead of "manchild" and "healed" instead of "made whole." He also changed "sons" to "descendants" in Genesis 10, one of the first "gender-inclusive" translations.
There were also a few curious changes in Webster's version that seem to affect passage meaning in other ways, like where he changed 1 Corinthians 4:4 from "For I know nothing by myself" to "I know nothing against myself"
and in 1 Thessalonians 1:4 "Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God" is changed to "Knowing, brethren beloved by God, your election."
Later you had the American Bible Society which made systematic changes in their 1852 version to Americanize it.
Then Scrivener made a "Paragraph King James Bible" in 1873, which some people mistakenly think is the same translation. It does weird things like adding parentheses in new places, changing "faith" to "hope" in Hebrews 10:23, going back to 1611 spellings some places, and moving punctuation around all over the place. For example in Psalm 105:6 Scrivener adds an extra comma after "Jacob." You can easily change the meaning this way just by altering the sentence structure from what it was supposed to be.
The changes of other versions is even more extensive. The YLT came out in 1862 and then moderns versions started in 1881 with the ERV. An interesting fact is that in 1881 when just the New Testament for it was completed, the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Times were so pleased with the modern version that they published it for free. Modern versions and Scofield's (dispensational) footnoted version of the KJB also have gotten much positive press in the mainstream ever since.
Chase Russell
They don't remove it. They just raped their own language to convince people that "almah" means young woman rather than virgin. Even St. Jerome encountered this in his day (300s AD), but the Church was smart enough to not listen to Rabbis. After WW2, they guilted their way into people's minds. The RSV was the first Bible to come out in 1952, with a Rabbi on their translation committee. It was due to him and him alone that Isaiah 7:14 be changed. And soon other translations followed. And the Christian world has spiraled into depravity ever since.
Christian Myers
It's like Nippon/Japan, Beijing/Peking or Germany/Deutchsland
Andrew Perry
RSVCE has virgin still.