Is the KJV inferior to you?

I'll Stand Up

It depends, of course, on what you mean by inferior.

It is a SUPERIOR translation of a demonstrably INFERIOR text. However, it is also undeniable that God has used it and Christians have lived godly lives both with it and without it.

 

What are you calling a "demonstrably INFERIOR text" exactly?

 

Not to me. It was the version I was "borned" on and have used ever since. I don't have anything against other accepted versions. I like the fact that I'm using the version that my uneducated (as far as schooling) ancestors used- including many Preachers. It was good enough for them- it's good enough for me. I'm real old-fashioned- prefer the KJV with 1917 Scofield.

 

Not to me, either.

It is my preferred version, and I can't imagine having Bibles around the house (mine) with no King James Version.

However, I have no problems with MOST other versions.

I have several Bibles at home, and most of the time, the one with the most rifled pages would be a King James Version.

 

It is written at a reading level of our modern 8th grade.....remember.

I have never used any other version of the Bible. I grew up in a Southern Baptist Church, was saved with a KJV, and still use a KJV. I see no need for any other version - it is God's Word, and I don't question God's Word.
When one is saved, the Holy Spirit dwells within, and the scripture comes alive. My son is 29, he was saved last year, and he says that he had read the Bible many times without it making any sense, but after being saved, it now is a marvelous revelation of knowledge and guidance.

He has no trouble at all with the KJV. He is a child of this century too.

Debbie Mc

 

DC , I am glad your son was saved last year. I'm happy that he understands the KJV .

However , you said :"It's God's Word , and I don't question God's Word ." Does that mean that all other versions are not God's Word ? Or is that simply a misunderstanding on my part ?

Since you have never used any other version but the KJ version -- perhaps you might be surprised to find some renderings more accurate in other versions .

Do you honestly believe the KJV is written at an 8th grade level ?Can you document that from a non-KJVO source ?

 

The same thing here, Debbie Mc., when I was first converted, my first New Testament was a King James, my conversion happened in a King James Only church, thru a King James Only pastor, and I was formerly also a King James Only person (I'm not saying you are, mind you), but only because that was the first version I used.

I agree with you that King James English is not all that hard.

Would you believe that we had a member in church whose education was only up to the second grade, yet spoke fluent King James English ?

No kidding.

But then I chanced on the NASB, and then other versions, and I had no problems with them.

Still, I love KJV and much prefer it, but when I don't understand something or a word, I also refer to other versions.

Helpful, really.

 

Why would I need another version if this Bible has everything I need? I don't NEED another version.

The Language of the King James Bible demonstrates the following and more:
The recent discovery of the world's oldest New Testament fragment (Magdalen Papyrus A.D. 60) proves the KJV correct and the NIV, CEV, NRSV, NASB, and most new versions wrong.

• Jesuit Cardinal Carlo Marie Martini, editor of the Greek text which is used by NIV, NASB, and most new version translators, writes in his recent book that man can be "divine."
• The Dead Sea Scroll scandal leaves new versions on shaky ground.
• Forensic stylonomy would conclude that the new versions were written by an effeminate man or a woman. This corroborates the recent comment by the former Monitor of the Christian Reformed Church that NIV Old Testament Chairman, Martin Woudstra, was believed to be a homosexual.
• The inclusive language translations are exposed.
• The translation of Lucifer (helel) in Isa. 14:12 is proven correct.

 

Hi Deb, ( if I may call you that ) "forensic stylonomy" is a new one on me -- but maybe it's an archaic KJV expression:laugh:

What's an "effeminate woman" ?

Your info was fascinating , but most likely absurd when it wasn't slanderous .

 

First, if you're going quote other people's material verbatim, please give some proper credit (this list is copied word-for-word from the chick website).
Second, rather take up space with a large citation, why not just give the URL?
Third, why not contribute something new? This info is outdated Riplinger propaganda.
Fourth, if you're going to post it, be sure you understand it and can defend it. "Stylonomy" - no such word exists (outside Riplinger).

 

Which KJV are we talking about? I would say the 1611 with apocrypha is inferior to many translations.

 

Forensic stylonomy would also conclude that the above was written by an effeminate woman with a doctorate in home economics who cooked this balderdash up in her classroom kitchen while under the influence of a room full of 8th graders reading aloud from the Dead Sea scrolls while rock music is being played backwards to reveal the satanic chant 'Westcotthort, westcotthort, westcotthort,...."

 

I am not here to argue. I am here to fellowship. I am a born again Bible believing saved by grace Christian.

I choose to use the KJV because it has everything I need. It is the Bible that my Father used since he was saved in 1928, and I have used it all my life. I don't need or want another version.

Christian love to you all and I hope you understand what I am saying.

Debbie MC

 

Amen, everyone posting here would agree that it is the Word of God. And praise the Lord for other's choice of version that they can cherish and love them regardless of other people's views about them.

Ain't God good?

 

If are not "here to argue" Debbie than might I suggest you not quote from unsubstantiated sources. When you do that people are certain to discredit your sources.

Praise God that you have a translation that you are happy with. Indeed, you don't need any other version.

 

Give Gail Riplinger some credit when it is due. She just coined a word.

BTW, I did a search on the internet for this word ("stylonomy"), and that is the only reference to it, I found.

Ed

 

That's your right, & it's good you're happy having thus limited yourself. By that same right, I use several versions in order to have a broader understanding of the Scriptures beyond what I'd have if I were limited to just one version. I know the HOLY SPIRIT teaches, but he teaches more if he has more to work with. God is not limited to just one version & neither am I.

 

The TR

The TR collated by Erasmus and modified by Stephanus and Bezae.

 

"Forensic stylometry" was probably intended.

A.F.