King James Version

Could you be a little more specific? What exactly has the King James Version been successful at, and what edition of the King James Version are you referring to?

 

I would say because it became the official, per se, English translation endorsed and used by the church over which the king it is named for was the "head," which most English-speaking people also belonged to. And those who left that church for another usually still read this particular translation because it was there, and any conflict with the Anglican church was not about that translation. Then as the language changed further, the KJV style of language came to be regarded the type of English that 'God talks,' and a biased viewpoint associates this style of language to the 'success' of English becoming such a widespread language and the KJV used in so many evangelistic campaigns.

 

The bible is the best selling book ever, The KJV is one of the oldest publically available versions, So more people have bought it. It for that reason an old family bible is likely to be a KJV.

However this doesent apply in countries where English is not the main language of course.

 

Ya'll know my opinion on why. It's God's preserved word, that's why. Man can'tcompete with what God has written, {Or in other words, He used men to pen His words, It was inspired.}
Now ya'll know I'm not intending to start a debate, but ya'll also know by now where I stand when it comes to the Bible.
In Christ,Abby

 

I read the following on a a King James Version Only resources site (opposed to KJVOnlyism). You might wish to confirm it by another source before using it.

---After the KJV was made, the Church of England hierarchy became dissatisfied by the continued use of older versions, in particular the Geneva which was popular with dissenters from the state church such as Baptists and Separatists. The Church of England used the authority of the king through the High Commission Court to make it a crime to print, bind, or distribute any other version within the British Empire- which included just about everyone who spoke English.---

Eventually, the AV was accepted for us by virtually all groups... what choice did they have? Notably, the last revisions to the KJV took place right before the American Revolution and also some very significant political changes in Britain itself. As the state church and monarchy declined, revisions to the KJV ceased for an abnormally long period.

The next wave of revision and new translations was and is more indicative of scientific methods of analysis rather than political or reformation conflict.

 

With all due respect to your beliefs, I think he was looking for something based in fact, not fantasy.

 

(This is my first post to this board.) I couldn't agree more. I would like to add a couple of other reasons. One, is the accuracy of the KJV. The translators were trying to be as accurate as they could as to telling us what God actually SAID while many of the newer translations think they can help by telling us what God MEANT. There is a huge difference between those two things. Two, with centuries of use and great preachers and scholars studying the same version we have been able to "teach" through the few difficult portions so that there is a general consensus and the "comfort level" is high.

 

Hi Carl;
I believe that the KJV has been so successful because of all the good the KJV has done.I believe it is responsible for the leading of
more to Christ than any other book ever published.I believe that it's fruits speak for it. No other book in history has ever had such an impact on the masses than the KJV.

Romanbear
Peace

 

It is the gospel that is God's means of salvation.

Personally, I always love to hear a preacher harp on using the KJV exclusively. Then, he has to explain what each word means. That is great. Um, I will just read my NKJV and skip the needless explanations.

 

I like the King James because it is familiar, and poetical. I don't always understand it. I use other translations for that. When I quote a bible though, or memorize one, I always use the KJ. It's had such a huge effect on English Literature. Reading it is like Reading Shakespeare. It adds to our understanding of western culture. When I read stories out loud to my kids, I prefer to use the KJ. It sounds beautiful, elegant and authoritative. The doctrinal differences are for folks wiser than I to discuss. I just like the KJ, it's an unchanging classic, in a world where things aren't always certain.

Hope this helps.
Maggie

 

As several of the other folks have already posted, the KJV reigned as the only English Bible for 300 years due mostly to the politics of the Crown of England. This is very well stated above by ChristianCynic and Scott J. I don’t believe they mentioned one other fact. That the KJV was one of the most heavily copyrighted Bibles in history. The title pages state “Cum Privilegio” which means “with privilege”. This meant that not only were other versions outlawed but the KJV was also copyrighted by the Crown, and this would certainly discourage revision of any type. In 1777 Aikens (sp?) printed the first NT in the United States. Something must have happened in 1776 that allowed him to do so (LOL). Shortly thereafter other versions and revisions began to appear.

You might consider the fact that the KJV is no longer the best selling Bible version and has consistently declined in readership since the advent of the newer versions. It appears that most KJV readers are now either elderly folks whom have always read the KJV since their youth or folks who attend “Fundamental” type churches who do not allow the use of any other version of the Bible. If you personally attend this type of church then your view of the KJV’s popularity can easily be askew by your personal experience. All of the numbers I have seen thus far have shown that the KJV use is limited to mostly Baptist churches and even in these only the Fundamental Baptists or Pentecostals have a majority use of the KJV.

These are from Ellison Research of Phoenix Arizona (www.ellisonresearch.com). These people canvassed 500 Protestant churches and asked what version of the Bible they used. The results were:

Type of church KJV use NIV,etc Other
Mainline 8% 79% 13%
Evangelical 22 74 4
Pente-Charismatic 45 49 6

It appears Mainline refers to Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, etc.
Please be aware that statistics vary greatly with the intent of the persons who are compiling them. Therefore be skeptical of statistics gathered by any organization promoting a certain Bible type.

Also I am a member of a Community Bible Study which is open to people of all faiths. There are members from many different churches who carry various Bible versions. Of these about 2% use the KJV (I actually carry a KJV to this study). I understand that my personal experience is limited and only antidotal.

I believe the only reason for the decline of the KJV is the archaic words and difficult sentence structure. If you compare a Matthews or a Great Bible with a Geneva or Bishops Bible you will quickly see the latter are much more easily read which I feel explains why the earlier versions were replaced. It seems to me the same thing is happening to the KJV.

 

SORRY I'm not real good with charts on message
boards

Type of church ---KJV -- NIV,etc --Other
Mainline ----------8%------ 79% ----13%
Evangelical --------22------ 74------ 4
Pente-Charismatic -45------ 49------ 6

 

Ditto! 8oD !

 

Old Bibles you forgot one... Old School Primitive Baptist... KJV 100%... Unless the Old School Primitive Baptist brethren know something I don't know?... Brother Glen 35 years with the Old School Primitive Baptist! The only church body I know that is 100% KJV!... Brother Glen

 

I belong to a church where the pastor and most of the members are strictly KJV. Some even go so far as to say no one can be saved if they aren't using the KJV. Frankly, I believe that God's Word is God's Word no matter what version we read.

That said, I tend to use the NKJV as it retains much of the poetic flow of the KJV but uses more modern language. I also do a lot of comparative reading of other versions, too. I sometimes use the NIV, but have yet to form an opinion of the TNIV. I have been impressed with the English Standard Version (ESV) and the Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB), the latter of which is available only in the New Testament, with the whole Bible due for publication in 2004. I sometimes refer back to the Geneva Bible, too.

Why have different versions? I believe that as language changes there must be modifications made. When we update the words used, we're not changing what God said - after all, He didn't hand down the scriptures in 17th century English. If we are to stick with the original words, we all need to start learning Hebrew and Greek. I believe that God blesses His Word, and that He has kept it for us down through the years. But if we put one particular version on a pedastal to the utter exclusion of other versions, then I feel that we are becoming a slave to the version itself. It's almost as if we are placing the Bible before God, and thus the version itself becomes a god for us. I don't feel this is what God intended. It's a good thing we don't have the original copies written by the writers themselves, for we would begin to worship the manuscripts themselves, rather than following the teachings of the Word.