Former KJVO whose eyes are now open!

Thanks for the post Deborah. I too have purchased the HCSB and it is indeed a very good translation. I also read from the NIV but my new favorite is the NKJV. That symbol that pertains to the NKJV was discussed in detail here, and it has been dismissed as being more KJVO nonsense. At any rate, I don't find that emblem on either of the two NKJV Bibles I own.

 

Many times the KJV has run on sentences. But they don't always adhere to the Greek sentence structure either. For example in Phil. 2:2-4 in the Greek text it is one sentence. But the KJV makes it two sentences with two verbs. They even added some additional words just in that short passage alone.

 

When I first became a Christian I also was given a KJV and staretd reading it. I was hungry and understood very little. I told the man who gave it to me that I could not undertaand that language. So we went down to the Christian bookstore and bought one I could understand. I read that Bible for about one hour every day. I literally wore it out in just a few years. The book was falling apart. So I bought another soon thereafter.

Which is better to have a KJV that isn't read or an NAS that is. Since that time I have read and worn out many Bibles. Yes and even a few Greek NT's.

 

I am glad that you have found a translation that you enjoy Deborah. I don't own a copy, but have examined it online myself and frankly, I don't see what all of the fuss is about.

Nice translation I am sure, but just don't see what others see it as being revolutionary or that much different that any number of other newer versions.

I disagree that it is good enough to have the "message of God." God inspired His Word and every Word He chose is important.

 

We often see what we are looking for. If we want to see Jesus we focus on Him. If we want to see symbols then we focus on them.

When we focus on Christ there are a lot of things we don't see because we are so intent on Him.

 

Something often forgotten is the fact that God has different work for different believers, and that work may require the use of several BVs.

Congrats, Deborah! But I hope you continue to use the KJV along with whatever other versions you've chosen.

There are several other former KJVOs here, and I'd like to see'em check in.(I was NEVER KJVO.)

 

Deborah B.,

I too am a former KJVO.

I left the KJVO Camp when I read the first KJV which is the AV1611. The Message to the Reader in the 1611 KJV was enough to bump me from the ranks of KJVOism. The AV translators said the following:

“Yet for all that it cannot be dissembled...[that] it hath pleased God in his diuine prouidence, heere and there, to scatter wordes and sentences of that difficultie and doubtfulnesse, not in doctrinal points that concerne saluation (for in such it hath beene vouched that the Scriptures are plaine) but in matters of lesse moment, that fearfulnesse would better beseeme vs than confidence. . .and to resolue upon modestie....There be many words in Scripture, which be neuer found there but once. ..there be many rare names of certaine birds, beastes and precious stones, &c. concerning which the Hebrews themselves are so divided among themselves...so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (euen in thejudgement of the iudicious) questionable, can be no lesse than presumption. Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that varietie of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures; so diuersitie of signification and sense in the margine, where the text is not so cleare, must needes doe good, yea, is necessary, as we are perswaded....They that are wise, had rather haue their judgements at libertie in differences of readings, then to be captiuated to one, when it may be the other.”

My first bible outside of the Oxford 1769 KJV was the KJ21. The KJ21 is nice but it still leaves some things not corrected like Acts 5:30 and 2 Peter 1:1.

A friend of mine recommended the NIV and NASB(1995). From looking at these two translations I did not care for the NIV. I just prefer a more literal translation like the KJV, NKJV, NASB, etc...

When I read the NASB(1995) the clarity was there for me. It flows easier than the KJV and I found it to be a very helpful translation for study.

There is nothing wrong with the KJV if you can understand it and do your homework researching some of the words that have changed meanings etc... I just feel that I should not be forced to by a 1828 dictionary and other tools in order to understand the KJV fully. The bible should be in the common tongue so that everybody can understand the Word of the Most High.

I find myself reading the bible more since I switched to the NASB. I still reference the KJV simple because I like the was the KJV and NKJV renders some verses better, but then again the NASB renders some verses better than the KJV and NKJV. Basically I am following the advice of the AV1611 translators in that I study from different translations.

I'm glad that you found a translation that you enjoy reading. We are commanded to study the Word and put His Word in our hearts.

I have never looked back since I left KJVOism. The KJV is a fine translation but I see it becoming less and less used simply because the language of the KJV is not used today. For those who are KJV preferred then that is 100% fine with me. I have never told anyone to stop using the KJV. I use the Geneva Bible(1599) in my studies so for me to tell someone not to use the KJV would be a double standard

In Christ,
David J

 

Deborah, I am glad that God has used your HCSB to show you the truth of Christian accountability. All throughout the Pauline epistles, we are told that we must work to obtain the reward. I can see how you might miss it in the KJV, but if you have a better word of God now, I don't see how you can go wrong. God Bless!

I think what you have seen is the truth that the KJV does not teach what modern bible teachers teach, but the new versions do. It is no wonder that people have trouble understanding the KJV when their pastor tells them that the words mean the opposite of what they say. Faith = works. See how that faith?

 

James, my pastor is about as conservative as you can get. He will sometimes read from the KJV and then explain the older language with a newer version during a Bible study. By doing this, the KJV wording actually becomes clearer. It does NOT change.

BTW, show me where faith=works in any mainstream accepted MV. My pastor has NEVER preached that concept, in fact, that is one of his favorite subjects--that works is not required for salvation. He uses an MV to prove it, every time.

 

Are gehenna and hades the same place?

 

By the way, in my opinion, James' response to Deborah clearly shows why the KJVO groups can only cause confusion among Christians. This is caused by making them doubt what they read in the Word of God. . . this is where the theory actually can cause damage.

It is funny how a KJVO would rather pull a Christian down by telling them they are reading the wrong Bible, rather than holding them up and giving them Christian support to what both the KJV and the NASB teach.

I feel this may also be the reason that every KJVO church that I have been around seems to have no out-reach. They dwell on their non-Biblical theory more than they dwell on the Bible (whatever translation).

We are behind you Deborah; buy your mother that Bible. We all need a Bible in the language that we actually speak. God has provided and kept His Word alive as He promised He would!

 

Are gehenna and hades the same place?

Hey James . . . you do any other tricks?

 

Compare between the KJV and modern versions:

1. The KJV is superior over modern versions: 4-fold "T": Texts, Translators, Technique and Theology

2. 99% MSS (5210 of 5255 MSS) supported the KJV; 1% MSS (45 of 5255 MSS) supported modern versions.

3. The KJV - #1 - Most people among churches and ministries used for many years.

4. The KJV is still used since 400 years.

5. Modern versions omitted important names of our Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament alone 200 times!

 

1. The KJV is superior over modern versions: 4-fold "T": Texts, Translators, Technique and Theology

Opinion! Show us the scripture that says the KJV is the only English bible and which KJV!

2. 99% MSS (5210 of 5255 MSS) supported the KJV; 1% MSS (45 of 5255 MSS) supported modern versions.

Another lie designed to scare people.

3. The KJV - #1 - Most people among churches and ministries used for many years.

Thats not true today. By using your logic we should all be using the NIV since it is the most popular translation today.

Next....

4. The KJV is still used since 400 years.

But not the first AV1611 that contained the Apocrypha and marginal notes referring to alternate readings etc...

Your point is? I still use a 1599 Geneva.

More KJVO spin...

5. Modern versions omitted important names of our Lord Jesus Christ in the New Testament alone 200 times!

And the KJV weakens Jude 1:25 when compared to the NASB.

The KJV weakens 2 Peter 1:1 when compared to the NIV.

etc...

Another KJVO deception. Notice that our flamming kJVO friend Askjo always excludes the KJV from his own style of judging bibles. If he were honest in his beliefs and held the KJV to his own standards then he would admit the ONLY THE AV1611 is right and the current KJV's are distortions of the AV1611.

Just review the post by our KJVOist and you will see a big problem with the KJVOism.

Don't let them scare you with lies and emotional reasoning. They have no scripture to support the KJVO myths. They could end the bible translation debate if only they could provide the scripture that says KJV and which KJV.

Everything that they throw at you, you can apply it to the the KJV. They will run for the hills usually using silence as a defense. It's like a cross to a vampire when the KJVO theories are applied to the KJV family(1611-1873, NKJV, KJ21 & TMB).