Is the KJV clear?

Usually, the KJV is fairly clear, as C4K [who apparently happens to be one who prefers the KJV, BTW (C4K, how do you managed to get 'labeled' as the "bad guy" in the minds of some, in this forum??)] has previously stated. However, there are some times that it, like any other, is not as clear as one might like, simply because of the differences in the varied nuances of the English (or any other) language, vs. the varied nuances of the Biblical languages. That is why there is, as one posted somewhere else, no such thing as any "literal translation", and I would add, in any language.

Ed

 

KJV needs as much translation as Greek or Latin texts, imo. And modern connotations to words like "ghost," "replenish," "devils," and many more require one to very carefully translate these words into their original meanings every single time one reads them. Those connotations alone, and the mental effort they require to discard, are enough to make me prefer a newer translation, to say nothing of the words' denotations. Just one of many reasons for me.

Yes, I believe the KJV is unclear, as much or moreso than most modern translations.

The link provided shows some remarkably uneven reasoning in defense of KJVo. I wonder whether the author's historical claims are as inaccurate as his arguments based on Scriptural comparisons are weak and purposefully misleading. I saw no mention in his history section of the obvious agenda the writers of the KJV had, which is partially portrayed in their letter to the King. King James had specific historical reasons to commission a Bible that met his political and theological needs, and I see no reason not to suspect that he chose "scholars" that met his agenda or were likely to give him the translation he wanted.

Edit: After looking up verses given by the linked essay writer in various translations, I see that he doesn't even quote translations he disagrees with accurately.

 

The KJB is superior due to its clarity for all Englis speaking peoples and the congruency of other langauges in similarity.

 

That's just it, Salamander. The KJV isn't always clear on some things. Sometimes a modern version gives a clearer and more easily understood reading. One such word in the KJV that is no longer clear in its meaning is "prevent" (1 Thess 4:15). When the KJV was translated the word meant to precede. That is not the case today. MVs give a clearer word choice when "precede" is used in the text. The newer reading leaves no doubt as to what the writer meant.

Making a blanket statement that the KJV is always clearer than the MVs is no truer than saying the MVs are always clearer than the KJV. Sometimes one is clearer, sometimes another is clearer.

 

Well that is certainly another discussion.

Try understanding the doctrinal difference of those coming home verses those going home.

The Coming of our Lord precedes our coming home, we will not prevent them which are asleep from coming home either.

 

That's not what was meant, Salamander. You're confused by the wording of the KJVs and your interpretation of it.

Thanks for providing a great example of my point.

 

Amen! I second that. :thumbs:

 

If so, the KJV would no longer be here many long years ago. The KJV is still ALIVE since almost 400 years because of the KJV superiority.

 

The only 'Englis' speaking people I know all speak Spanish.

 

The Vulgate which was penned by Jerome was alive for more than 1,300 years ( even hundreds more years in some major quarters ) . Was it ALIVE because of its superiority ? Is the NIV superior to all other English versions since it has outsold them for the last 30 years ?

 

Do you have it with your hands and preach in latin, not English?

Sales only! However the fact does not agree with you. The KJV is still number one because of sales AND ministry printing for free.

 

Guesswork.

 

'Superiority' is in the mind of the beholder.

 

......oops

 

The 1611 KJV is based upon a different text that the modern translations. The more translations I see and read and use (presently the NASB), the more I long to return to the KJV. I think I have owned about 15 or so. I mark all over them, some I have worn out. My NASB is starting to suffer as a result.

 

Translational Issues

Look, if you are having trouble with understanding, get two or three others such as the NKJV, HCSB, ESV, or even the NIV. The whole language is different from the 18th century to the 21st century. That includes sentence structure and style. The KJV has its problems in that it is written from a negative point of sentence structure. This causes problems in understanding if you have not spent a lifetime learning the backwards sentence structure of 18th century English.

This does not mean that the KJV is useless or should be thrown out. It means allow God to direct your heart and your convictions based on HIS leading and not the teaching of man's preferences. If you feel led to keep useing the KJV with some help from other translations, keep doing it. If you feel led to change your translation of choice and use the KJV as a study tool, then do it. But allow God to direct you and not a man or multitudes of men to sway your opinion based on their preferences.

 

Translational Issues

Correction, there are some current translations that use the same family of texts as the KJV family of translations. The best one that I can think of is the NKJV.

 

First off, I'd say to stick with translations that come from the same family of texts. That would rule out the NASB, and I think the ESV(?). The NKJV is an excellent translation, and provides clarity for the modern reader. The KJV is also an excellent translation, but unless you've grown up using the KJV AND have an understanding of the English language at that time period, you'll have trouble reading some passages.