MV description -- Let's make it clear.......

As a person often called an "MVer" or "MV lover" or whatever by the KJVO group. Let me clear up a few misconceptions that have been spread about our beliefs. If you use an MV and you agree, please say so, and if I make a point you disagree with, feel free to straighten me out.

As a person called an MV person:

1. I do NOT hate the KJV. Far from it. I think it is a great translation and was even greater when it was printed because the language has changed over the years. Words are different, many aren't even used today and it is a difficult translation to read.

2. I love the beautiful language of the King James, especially in the poetic and prophecy chapters.

3. I read the King James and compare other Bibles to it (though not using it as the standard -- as I would compare any other translation with another)

4. I am NOT a "Word of God" hater. I simply believe the Word of God is not JUST found in a translation that has had many revisions since 1611.

5. I do NOT think that EVERY translation is accurate. There have been bad translations and there WILL be bad translations.

6. I do believe; however, that the mainstream translations of today, specifically the NASB, NIV, ESV, Holman, NKJV contain the Word of God and to be clear, so does the King James version (all revisions). I like them in varying degrees. My likes are based on "why I am reading the Bible at a particular time". If I am reading the KJV in Psalms or Genesis to enjoy the language I grew up with in church, that is one thing. If I am reading an entire book and do not have a lot of time to spend on each chapter, then I will usually use my ESV or Holman. I sometimes read the NIV for easier understanding.

7. I also believe that by reading and comparing translations, it is possible that the Holy Spirit can utilize this to provide you with insight not seen by a single translation. The Holy Spirit can also do this with one translation, but often I have been reading my parallel Bible and read four versions and the concept the writer was trying to get across suddenly became clearer.

8. I also believe that it is defaming the Word of God to call a translation "evil, or demonic" or other names simply because if it tells the story of the Jesus in a way a person can become saved, you just may be treading on very thin ice.

9. But, I do not have a problem with being critical (as in textual criticism) of particular passages of any translation for the purpose of comparing to the originals.

10. Finally, I do NOT believe that there is enough doctrinal difference between the manuscripts that the KJV was derived from and the "so called" Alexandrian (even though they make up only a portion), to have an effect.

Summary: Be careful as you read to pray and ask the Holy Spirit for guidance. I do not believe that I can say that I use the Holy Spirit as a guidance to sit down and rewrite the KJV in new english or make my own translation that will be inspired---I am human and what I think may be Holy Spirit guidance may be faulty. Otherwise, I could write the "Phillip 2004 version" and it would become the new standard.

There is no Biblical evidence whatsoever, that the KJV is a perfectly inspired book, nor is there any evidence it is of higher level than most modern translations. But, this is not to say that it is a bad translation. Far from it. It IS the Word of God, but so is my ESV.

Now, KJVO's that is my stance on the Bible, so if you accuse me of saying something or believing something I did not say, I will point to this post.

 

TC, I am the same way. Although I have studied both (some) they are very difficult languages and in fact Greek has ways of expressing things that seem almost impossible in English. It is way over my head to translate an old manuscript accurately without guidance.

THAT is the reason I like to compare translations. My only point here was that I do not think it is wrong for scholars or anybody who can to look at individual verses in all translations and make comments on their accuracy.

The bottom line is We Still Have the Same Doctrine. Regardless of what the KJVO's say. I just wanted to straighten out a few of the innuendos made in some of the threads. Such as "we are Bible Haters","we do not believe in the Word of God" or the big one "We hate the KJV". These are not true.

 

That means a LOT coming from a pastor. Thank you, Brother!

 

Dr. Griffin,

Maybe you have something there. I would buy a 2004 GET. I would feel a lot more comfortable with it than another "new, but unknown" translation.

I only wish that I had enough knowledge to read the Greek/Hebrew by sight. I think that would be as close to "being there" as you could get.

What little I have studied--I have studied Greek more than Hebrew, but it is such a complex language that I often feel that it is nearly impossible to convey certain "impressions" the writer wishes to portray. At least this is the feeling I get after studying all of the different possible combinations. Being very knowledgeable at Greek, would you say that is might a true statement?

 

Sure, we all know Paul and Peter read from the King James Old Testament!

 

Hmmmm! I can see it on the shelf. The Tiny Bible in Extra Large Print. I like it.

You could even have sales slogans like "The Tiny Bible with a Big Story."

Oh my, its getting late, my brain shut down hours ago. I'm outta here. You folks have fun.