Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Robert Snow, Jul 17, 2013.
How many people here are KJV preferred, as opposed to KJVO?
I am KJT - King James (by) Tradition
KJVP here! :jesus: Been using the KJV for over 55 years!
And so why do you feel compelled to announce it as an accomplishment. HELP ME to understand the significance...I don't get it.
The OP asked who was KJVP. I simply stated I was, and had been using it my whole life. Never claimed it as an " accomplishment". I don't know how you got that from my post.
I am a NASB95 preferred, but I also like and use the KJV, the NKJV, the HCSB, the NET, and the WEB.
None of them consistently translate the same Greek word meaning using the same English word or phrase, and many translate genitives as "of + genitive" which more often than not gives an ambiguous meaning.
Ambiguity opens the door for false doctrines, such as work of God means work God does, or faith of Christ means faith Christ instills.
Unless a person identifies other versions they would use and recommend, the KJVP folks are really KJVO. Kind of like TULIP advocates who say they are not Calvinist, but cannot quite say which of the TULIP doctrines they reject as mistaken and false.
Try asking them which verse or verses they prefer in another version over and against the KJV. I expect not very many will be provided.
I am a KJVP, though at one time I was KJVO. I'd never go so far as to call other versions bad. I am of the mind that whatever version you can glean the most from, by all means do it. If it helps you in your walk with your Creator, then stick your nose in that version and read, study, and learn.
KJVP here, though I use the NASB and occasionally NKJV as well.
Why should they? Take logos for example. Why should it always be translated with the English gloss of word? The word word is a primary meaning,but not a so-called literal meaning. It also would not make sense in a number of places. Even Young's doesn't "translate" it as word each and every time.
Hear! Hear! What he said.
I grew up with the KJV and have used it for decades. When I got married my KJVO Dad read 1 Corinthians 13 at the ceremony using the NKJV! I guess to avoid confusion in the minds of the audience he opted to read "love" in the text instead of "charity". He then quickly donated the Bible to me, guess he didn't want it in his house!
So I started reading the NKJV. Verses flowed better. Archaic words were gone. It was easier to read. I didn't need a dictionary nearby.
Then my wife got a 1984 NIV Study Bible. I found this even easier to understand and easier to read.
Now with a Bible app on my phone and BibleGateway.com on my PC I can read almost any version and side-by-side as well. With these sorts of resources available I do not understand why someone would cling to the KJV and not even explore the options. IMO, you are denying yourself education in God's word. Example:
18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, [KJV]
18 I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in his holy people, [NIV]
Look at the KJV: "the eyes of your understanding.." ?? Since when is the word "understanding" a noun? The "hope of his calling" ? Makes no sense to me. NIV is much more clearer and concise.
Even though all of my memorized verses are in KJV, I'm slowly getting away from it. It's just too restrictive to the learning process for me.
It's listed as a noun in four different dictionaries I just checked! :thumbs:
Seems an overly broad application of KJVO. In my thinking, there's a big difference between "I like the KJV" and "You should (or "you must") use no other version than the KJB." (Note: I'm KJVP, but also like the NASB and NKJV, and have used the Amplified Bible as a reference.)
To another post: Though it can also be used as other parts of speech, "understanding" is most commonly a noun, and that's how most dictionaries begin their definition of the word.
Oops! B4L beat me to it!
Agreed, but in this verse? Don't think so. In any event, the "eyes of your understanding" is a clumsy phrase, and fails as a metaphor. The "eyes of your heart" is much more easily understood.
I could be considered "KJV preferred."
I still read and use mainly the KJV although I will consult other translations.
Along with the KJV, the other translations that I have recommended are some of the pre-1611 English Bibles of which the KJV is a revision such as the 1560 Geneva Bible, the 1842 revision of the KJV by Bible-believing Baptists and other believers, the Modern KJV by Jay Green, and the NKJV.
Are you one of the Anything but calvinism group, Van?
is there any difference between 1560 and 1599 geneva versions?
And you cannot recommend ANY versions based upon CT then?
Logos, my church uses a variety of versions (each person may use whatever he likes). We have people who use the KJV, NIV, ESV, NASB, ASB, etc. but the pastor preaches from, and the AWANA kids use, the NKJV, which I guess would be the dominant version used in our church. Anyway, I'd like to hear your opinion of the NKJV. Personally, I like it, but the KJV has been my "version of choice" for so many years I'm hesitant to change. I can open my KJV and find anything I'm looking for in a second, because I've used this particular copy for almost 20 years. I'm reluctant to switch, but I would like to buy a NKJV Study Bible. So, give me your likes/dislikes of the NKJV. Although we don't always agree, I DO value your opinion.
At least with a good edition of the NKJV you would see both the Majority and Critical Text footnotes. (the largely Alexandrian and Byzantine).
You'd do yourself a huge service by employing other versions than the KJV/NKJV.
Well, right in front of me on my computer desk are an NIV, HCSB, ESV, and a NASB. I think I have you covered. :thumbsup: