Why Do I Read The KJV?

Believe whatcha wanna believe. You are right, God does not change, nor His Word. The KJV was a "new" translation in 1611, and some of the same reasonings you use against the MV's, they used in 1611, and the years following against the new fangled AV1611. Respectfully, the reason why your argument is flawed because God doesn't change, His Word has been and always will be in the Original. Where was God's Word before the KJV? And we can find His Word in the very same place...The Original MSS, and former translations diligently compared and revised (KJV1611, KJV1769, RV, ASV, NASB, NIV, NKJV, NIV, NLT, etc)

 

"Children should be seen and not heard."

Until now I thought this old saying was rather foolish, but someone in this thread has shown me the wisdom of it. Children that mouth-off as proud, arrogant know-it-alls usually need a good hard slap on the face!

 

I think what Kidz is saying is half right!
I use the K.J.V. and other bibles. You must agree the K.J.V has converted many to the Lord!
and should be respected!

 

Thank you, Dr. Griffin,

That’s the first time I saw Ephesians 1:3-14 translated into one sentence, just like it is in the Greek New Testament, since I last read it in the American Standard Version. The King James Version wrongly breaks it up into three separate sentences, changing subordinate clauses to main clause and thus distorting the meaning of the sentence and depreciating the exaltation of the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. But, now that I am thinking of it, I don’t recall ever seeing a period anywhere in the entire Latin Vulgate—the whole Bible is translated as one sentence, an interesting concept.

Anyway, for those who may not have it handy, the American Standard Version reads here as follows:

3. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ:
4. even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blemish before him in love:
5. having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6. to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved:
7. in whom we have our redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trepasses, according to the riches of his grace,
8. which he made to abound toward us in all wisdom and prudence,
9. making known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he purposed in him
10. unto a dispensation of the fulness of the times, to sum up all things in Christ, the things in the heavens, and the things upon the earth; in him, I say,
11. in whom also we were made a heritage, having been foreordained according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his will;
12. to the end that we should be unto the praise of his glory, we who had before hoped in Christ:
13. in whom ye also, having heard the word of the truth, the gospel of your salvation,-- in whom, having also believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,
14. which is an earnest of our inheritance, unto the redemption of God's own possession, unto the praise of his glory.

 

But which Latin Vulgate? The original "vulgata" which predated Jerome by about 250 years? Or the Vulgate of 382? Or maybe the early 6th century emendated Vulgate of Cassidorius? Or the 8th century revision of Alcuin, who was commissioned for the task by none other than Charlemagne himself! (Does that make it "Authorized by the King?") Or maybe the other 8th century revision done by Theodulf, bishop of Orleans? Or was it the 11th century Vulgate done by Lanfranc, bishop of Canterbury? Or maybe the mid 12th century revision of Stephen Harding of Citeaux? Or maybe the other 12th century revision by Cardinal Nicolaus? Or maybe the Exemplar Parisiense done in Paris in the 13th century? Or could it be one of the competitors to the Parisiense, the Senonense, or Correctorium Vaticanum, or maybe Correctorium Sorbonicum, or even the Correctorium Dominicanum? And, of course, try as you might, you cannot ignore the Sixtine Edition or 1590, nor the Clementine Edition of 1592. Or what about the Tischendorf Vulgate? Or perhaps the Oxford Vulgate, by Bishop J. Wordsworth and H.J. White? And, of course, we can't forget the modern (20th century) New Vulgate now, can we?

Uh, well, actually NOT! As you can see, your "LV ONLY" position is badly flawed! The Vulgate underwent even more revisions than the KJV!

 

Wow K4H You really write well for a seventeen year old. I will be looking forward to the obvious future that you have in writing! Nice website, but I noticed that you use other versions of the Bible on your website for foreign languages. How can you be sure that they are getting the KJV when they are hearing it in Spanish?

I assume that your OP was all your work or you would have credited it to it's source.

 

Some just repeat what they have heard and others apply 2 Timothy 2:15, "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth."

And some even apply Acts 17:11, "Now these were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so."

It is not about SYI. You know Share Your Ignorance.

 

gb,

Now you've gone and done it - you've quoted a non-KJV verse. Our learned 17 year old scholar will surely have words of wisdom for you!

 

Amen!!

vivus est enim Dei sermo et efficax et penetrabilior omni gladio ancipiti et pertingens usque ad divisionem animae ac spiritus conpagum quoque et medullarum et discretor cogitationum et intentionum cordis

HankD

 

WRONG!! The Vulgate only gets more perfect with each revision!

HankD

 

Uh, that was my point. That is why so many of the revisions were called "Corrections." What was your point?

 

Just what you said, the same as yours but mine.

HankD

 

Did this topic start with a hit and run?

 

"But which Latin Vulgate? The original "vulgata" which predated Jerome by about 250 years?"
On this side of the Atlantic, the term Vulgata is reserved for the translation (for the largest part) made by St. Hiëronymus (that's Jerome for you englishspeakers), in the late 4th century at the request of pope Damasus I .
Naturally there followed a long line of revisions in the centuries afterwards. Mostly they were needed because many of the copyists on the churches payroll were less than stellar.

While I'm lecturing I'd like to point out that Latin sounds much cooler than English and ought to be adopted as the liturgical language in all Englishspeaking churches.


What?

 

Originally posted by Kidz-4-HIM:
"I am the LORD, I change not."
Malachi 3:6
God is unchangeable. God's word is unchangeable too. In Matthew 24:35, the Lord Jesus said, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."

God is unchangeable, but language is NOT. And WHO oversees all languages? And we gotta use some common sense about Jesus' words. He said MILLIONS of words that weren't preserved, in mundane conversation, such as ordering a meal, purchasing a pair of sandals, etc. However, I have 100% faith that we have every word of His that he chose to preserve.-/i]

Why then are we so ready to accept changes to God's word in the form of different Bible versions?

The language has changed, and more manuscripts of Scripture have been found.


The Authorized King James text has faithfully served the body of Christ for almost 400 years. During this time, and during its translation, Satan has viciously and relentlessly attacked it.

The Latin Vulgate served Christians in many nations for over 1000 years. Longevity isn't the issue.


"I now hear Christians attacking it too! I've heard preachers and lay people say things like, "it's too hard to read" or "it doesn't properly reflect the true meaning of the original Greek". The issue about the original Greek sets my teeth on edge--which Greek? There are Greek manuscripts galore, including the corrupted manuscripts that the Roman Catholic religion uses. The snide remarks and attacks against this utterly reliable text are unfounded."

Not really. Take a little deeper look.

We must remember that the Bible is a spiritual book and is understandable to those who are led by God's Spirit. It is not possible for the natural man to understand it [I Corinthians 2:14], hence paraphrasing or simplifying it will do no good.

Read a little farther on in 1 Corinthians in your KJV: 1 Corinthians 14:10 There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification.
11 Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian, and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me.

This alone should tell you something. The Elizabethan English of the KJV is no longer in general use. And remember, at one time the AV 1611 was in the most modern English available.


"The Bible is not supposed to read like a fairy tale--Peter said, "for we have not followed cunningly devised fables" [II Peter 1:16]. The words of the Authorized King James are not laborious to me, they are beautiful and full of God's power. Even the world knows it--the Authorized King James has been listed on Norton Anthology's list of "the world's best literature" for decades."

But if you had only the Greek and Hebrew editions, could you read them with the clarity that you can read an English version?

"The new versions have come up with some dangerous changes to the scriptures. The Lord God gives us stern warnings about changing His Word--

Revelation 22:18-19, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Proverbs 30:5-6, Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."



Look at this change in the NIV:

John 3:16, For God so loved the world that He gave his one and only Son...
The authorized King James says,

John 3:16, For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son.
In this instance, the NIV changes the scriptures by saying that Jesus is God's "one and only" Son instead of His only begotten Son. This change causes a contradiction in the word of God because God has more than one son according to both the King James (Genesis 6:2, Job 1:6, John 1:12) and NIV (Genesis 6:2)."

Notice the capitalization of "Son".

I do not buy the line that the inerrant word of God is found only in the originals-- which nobody has. I know that God has the power to preserve His word and that he wouldn't leave us out in the dark with an "imperfect" translation. In the authorized King James Version God assembled, and moved with His Spirit, a team of some of the world's best scholars to translate His word into the world's most popular language, English."

God did the same with several versions in English BEFORE the AV 1611, and since then also. Contrary to KJVO belief, He did NOT retire to a park bench in 1611 & leave off overseeing His word. He still occupies a THRONE, the highest one in all existence, and He still presents His word to us AS HE CHOOSES.

"The complete translator's notes of the Authorized King James scholars are not included in today's publishings. This is unfortunate because these notes say a lot about these men-- they were humble, loved the word of God, loved the King, were berated by the Catholic religion, and they desired a translation for the common man who was kept in darkness. Some of the translators where killed for their faith. This book was forged in blood, sweat, and tears."

I recommend you read a good encyclopedia about the lives of these men, as many as whose names you can find. I'm not gonna bore us all with the details, except to say you're quite incorrect about them.

"Let's fall in love with the Authorized KJV again and stand on it. Let's get down to business and read the Word and stop spending so much time reading what others have to say about the Word in commentaries, Greek lexicons, study bibles, etc. We want the Holy Ghost to talk to us."

And while we're at it, let's all live like the Amish.

"How many classes have you been in where every student has a different textbook? None. It just doesn't make good sense on a very practical level. We all need to be on the same sheet of music so that we are in harmony. Let's not confuse our kids by teaching/preaching from the NKJV, NIV, NASV, LB, the Message, Phillips, GN, etc."

Do you have a replica of the AV 1611? If so, please read the words of the AV translators in their preface, "To The Reader: ""Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is no so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded."

"Let's not accept the premise that the tried and true Authorized King James is somehow outdated and is to be replaced by dozens of new translations. A standard test determined the Authorized KJV reading level to be 5th grade because it contains mostly one and two-syllablic words making it one of the easiest to read. People have been getting saved by reading it for a long, long time. We know that it contains the Word of life whereby we live and grow."

Let's get real. How many 5th graders could read

2 Corinthians 6
11 O ye Corinthians, our mouth is open unto you, our heart is enlarged.
12 Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels.
13 Now for a recompence in the same, (I speak as unto my children,) be ye also enlarged. with correct understanding. Almost all of 'em would believe both Paul and those to whom he wrote had dire need of a physician's services.

Now, here's what the AV translators had to say about new Bible versions:

"It is welcomed with suspicion instead of love, and with emulation instead of thanks: and if there be any hole left for cavil to enter, (and cavil, if it does not find a hole, will make one) it is sure to be miscontrued, and in danger to be condemned."

"Satan knows that in a generation we won't uniformly quote the scriptures. Imagine ten people with ten different translations trying to recite a psalm together. Confusion."

Imagine ten people stuck in a false doctrine.


"Satan knows that many newborn babes in Christ will not have the real milk that they need in order to grow because they'll have a watered down version of the truth. He figures that if he can't kill the babes, he'll do the next best thing-stunt their growth."

Yes, such as pushing a false, man-made, unScriptural doctrine, KJVOism.


"At the same time the world will point to Christianity and say, "They don't even have a definitive word of God. Anybody can write a Bible." They already say that the Bible was "just written by men".

What an imagination.

Being able to talk to a child of God and have our spirits commune on the parts of God's word that we've memorized is great. I now find people who are quoting scriptures that I know, but they are worded so differently that I have to ask the reference. This is confusion, and we know who authors confusion, the enemy of our souls, the Devil. I believe that the emergence of these many different "Bible" versions is Satan's most successful attempt to attack God's word."

You believe absolutely WRONG. Please read the words of the very AV translators above, CLOSELY. If THEY didn't believe it, why should YOU?

"The Bible says that in the last days there's going to be a falling away of the church and I believe that these other versions are helping to usher it along."

Proof, please? Not of the falling away, but of other versions ushering it.

Please don't debate this it is just what I believe!!!!!!!

Cline

There's no debate to it, Cline. It's just plain incorrect. If you prefer the KJV above all other BVs, fine, but when you begin to heap garbage upon the other person's Bibles, then expect to have your garbage returned with interest.

 

Kidz = "We must remember that the Bible is a spiritual book and is understandable to those who are led by God's Spirit. It is not possible for the natural man to understand it [I Corinthians 2:14],"

Pride, Pride, Sinful Pride. To think that if we are spiritual enough we will completely understand another language. Sounds Charismatic to me.

Sorry, Clint, but no place in God's word does it say that the more spiritual you are the more you understand 17th century language.

Open your eyes and ears to the truth. Don't let the blind (or purposely ignorant) guide you.

How many times have you heard of seminary called cemetary?

They are simply jealous of anyone with an education. Afterall, Aren't we instructed to study?

I was once young too. I have also learned to question what I am being taught. That changed my beliefs on a few things. It will yours too, unless you are full of arogance and think that you know it all. No one can know all there is to know about the Bible. Learning is Growing. As long as you grow spiritually you will learn.

Things you learned today replaces things learned before.