I have long known that many christians regard the KJV as the best version of the collection of texts known as the bible. However, it wasn't until recently that I was confronted with those who believe that the KJV is superior than the texts of the bible written in the original languages. So, I started this thread to better understand this view. Are there members who believe that the KJV is better than examining the bible texts written in their original languages?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The KJV: A question for defenders
- Thread starter Oberon
- Start date
Adso
Member
Individuals who I encounter who hold the view that the KJV is the supreme translation have more often than not done so do to their particular viewpoint. I find it more common among Calvinists in personal experience, but a few other sects seem to have a similar attachment to it as well. I see it as a post-facto rationalization of individual beliefs. The Bible may be the word of God in some sense, but it has passed through the imperfect filter that is man and thus is imperfect whichever way we lay it out. I feel it's best to read/study as many versions as possible and sort things out as appropriate.
Derry's Wall's
Member
I am not a big fan of King James V Scotland,1st of England.Stewart means Steward,they were not very good as king's or people,the whole line sucked & completely lost the plot once the Scot's Court moved down to England.
That aside,the standard of Inglis(pre-streamlined modern English) was brilliant,way ahead of anything we use today given the dumbing down of our culture.
Scotland has alway's had one of if not THE highest standard of Latin for the purposes of trade & commerce abroad.Latin was only very briefly the royal language of the Scot's for a period in the 12th century,when Roman Catholic's paid the best prices because they had stolen all the power & the money then.
The Royal Language of the Scot's has always been Inglis,then modern English although Inglis is still alive in the Argylle,Strathclyde & the Border's(west).Rabbie Burns of Ayrshire was no fluke.
I have never read the manuscript's so could not tell you if the KJV is superior or not,if it was it would not surprise me.
It is good enough for me,however,and could hold it's own with most/all versions.The main thing for everyone was that it was not in Latin,but in Inglis.
No-one put's the fear of God into you like a Wee Free or Presbytarian reading from the Bible in his mither tongue.
From memory I respect the entire 10 commandment's from a Jewish script,yet find the KJV 10 commandemnts impossible & unworkable,even bearing in mind that Rules are for the obedience of fool's & act as guidelines for the wise.
Great Love,
DW.
That aside,the standard of Inglis(pre-streamlined modern English) was brilliant,way ahead of anything we use today given the dumbing down of our culture.
Scotland has alway's had one of if not THE highest standard of Latin for the purposes of trade & commerce abroad.Latin was only very briefly the royal language of the Scot's for a period in the 12th century,when Roman Catholic's paid the best prices because they had stolen all the power & the money then.
The Royal Language of the Scot's has always been Inglis,then modern English although Inglis is still alive in the Argylle,Strathclyde & the Border's(west).Rabbie Burns of Ayrshire was no fluke.
I have never read the manuscript's so could not tell you if the KJV is superior or not,if it was it would not surprise me.
It is good enough for me,however,and could hold it's own with most/all versions.The main thing for everyone was that it was not in Latin,but in Inglis.
No-one put's the fear of God into you like a Wee Free or Presbytarian reading from the Bible in his mither tongue.
From memory I respect the entire 10 commandment's from a Jewish script,yet find the KJV 10 commandemnts impossible & unworkable,even bearing in mind that Rules are for the obedience of fool's & act as guidelines for the wise.
Great Love,
DW.
Derry's Wall's
Member
Verily.
Charity
Let's go racing boys !
jtartar
Well-Known Member
Oberon,
No serious Bible student believes that the KJV of the Holy Scriptures is a good translation. There are known to be around 20,000 errors in the KJV. Also many words used in the KJV have changed in meaning, some even meaning the opposite of what they meant in 1611, when the KJV was written. Take a couple for instance, at Gen 25:29, the Bible says that Jacob sod pottage and Esau came from the field and was faint. In the American English this means that Jacob was boiling up some stew, and Esau came from the field and was tired. Another is at 1Cor 10:25, where the KJV says that whatever is sold in a shambles, eat, asking no questions for yor conscience sake. In newer translations it is shown that a shambles means a meat market.
While it is true that almost all the errors in the KJV are insignificant, mostly having to do with numbers and names, still the wording is not easy to understand and almost ANY of the Newer translations are much better than the KJV. The truth of God's word can be found in the KJV, but to arrive at it you must be constantly using references, while most newer versions, the truth is in the text.
Another thing to consider; it is not much help at all to be able to read in Hebrew or Greek. Just like English the languages have changed. It would take a lifetime to learn what was meant by the original text. Many men have studied the languages over many years, and we can rely on what they say about the meaning of the text.
One thing to remember; God, Himself has promised to protect His word from adulteration, Ps 12:6,7, Prov 30:5,6, Isa 40:8, 1Pet 1:25. Jesus, God's only begotten son also stated about the Hebrew Scriptures; Your word is truth!! John 17:17.
No true Christian needs to worry about the text in the Bible. What every person on earth needs to do is study God's word, so we can be acceptable to Him, that is, if we want to survive the Great Tribulation that is soon to break out on the entire world, Luke 21:34-36.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
That depends on what you mean by "serious Bible student" and "good translation."
And how you count those supposed "20,000 errors."
I can say this for my study -- when I was first learning Hebrew and Greek, I hated the KJV and the NIV, and many other translations, for their lack of clarity and focus, and for their lack of solid translation and textual theory.
But now, after practicing translation for several years, I appreciate the majesty of both the KJV and the NIV. Both are excellent translations and have their own values, but none of them are sophisticated enough for a Christian to follow in their "literal sense" because intepretation is more than translation.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Um, no.
I read both. I find it very helpful in understanding the texts.
Derry's Wall's,
The truth from God can be found in almost any Bible, you just need to do more research when reading many Bibles, so as to understand exactly what is being said.
There are many Scriptures in the KJV that are not understood by ordinary English readers, but if you compare the KJV with other translations, you will find that both are accurate, it is just that the KJV was written in 1611, and our languages have changed since then.
Scholars know that there are thousands of, what are called errors, in the KJV, but the errors do not keep God's message from being understood, because almost all of the errors are in people's names, or numbers, or places. The reason for this is; there were many people who lived in areas where several languages were spoken, and names, places head different names to the different people. An in depth study of any Bible will prove the message from God is the same.
Different Bible translations are not the cause of arguments about Bible doctrine, but the reason is, people are looking for a reason not to obey, so, in their mind they can not be held responsible for their actions.
The problem is, God has promised that He would protect His word from all generations, Psalms 12:6,7, so it is up to us to search for truth, John 4:23,24, and the people who do not love the truth cannot survive, 2Thessalonians 2:9-13.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
No. The old English used is far out dated. I prefer either the New Catholic edition or the NIV, which are much easier to understand.
Many like the KJV because it was the first version in English and somehow they think that makes it more valid than other translations. I have no problem with it but more modern versions are easier to understand.
It wasn't the first version in English. Not by a long way.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
Well, it was the first one sanctioneed by the king and "mass produced."
No, that was the Geneva Bible.
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
:FACEPALM:
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
Your Ignorance of the King James Bible is most comical.Cheer right up, bro! The NIV will work for you!
anyone who knows anything about Bibles, knows the KJ is not the best translation. Knowledge of the language has greatly improved since it was written. The NKJV is very good.
How would you know? While I greatly appreciate the fact that you're no longer hawking the NIV, it's unclear why you would judge the NKJV - a translation that fails the Isaiah 7:14 test - as "very good."
Oh, well, one step at a time.