1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Why do so many Americans use the KJV?

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by The Undiscovered Country, Dec 27, 2004.

  1. The Undiscovered Country

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    72
    Likes Received:
    0
    I absolutely agree. The whole issue of the level of profits made from Bibles-or indeed maintaining copyright on them-makes me so mad

    Odd that tradition has been cited in so many replies when I suspect that many on the Board would be from churches that would claim to be non-traditional.
     
  2. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    Some (mostly) dispensationalists think that the KJV is more accurate that the Hebrew, Aramiac, and Greek autographs.
     
  3. MIZ83

    MIZ83 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2004
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    0
    Most of the congregation where I preach has switched from the KJV to the NASB, since that is what I use in class and in the pulpit. I think most of them were using the KJV because of familiarity. It is what they had grown up with. I don't prefer it because I think it is a shame to have to translate the translation. Also, modern translations utilize older Greek manuscripts. I like the NASB because it makes fewer interpretive decisions for the reader than many of the modern "dynamic equivilent" translations.

    Blessings,

    Bob
     
  4. Joeman

    Joeman New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tradition. People will use whatever version that is used by their home church. It's hard to listen to a sermon in KJV when you have NIV. Conservative evangelicals prefer literal translations, and KJV is one of the most literal translations there is. Also evangelical churches don't like to change.
     
  5. GrannyGumbo

    GrannyGumbo <img src ="/Granny.gif">

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well... there's just no substitute for the REAL thing! :D
     
  6. liafailrock

    liafailrock Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2001
    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    12
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I'll give my opinion why I like the KJV--- LEGAL reasons. Legal? you may ask. Yes. The KJV is public domain. I quote a lot of Scripture on my web site. Why must I have persmission from another to quote (supposedly) GOD's Word? Something is terribly amiss here if that's the case. Either other tranlations are not Gods Word, but man's paraphrase, OR some kind of blaspheme is talking place. How would you like to dictate something, have another copy it down, and then a third party translates it and claim "copyright" to it? Think about it. That's the most harebrained idea on the face of this Earth.
     
  7. steaver

    steaver Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    10,443
    Likes Received:
    182
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Amen liafailrock!

    God Bless!
     
  8. Keith M

    Keith M New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    2,024
    Likes Received:
    0
    Tradition, comfort level, familiarity, cadence...many who were raised in Christian homes prefer the KJV while many who became Christians after being raised in non-Christian homes prefer some of the more modern translations.
     
  9. music4Him

    music4Him New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,333
    Likes Received:
    0
    I prefer the KJV myself but as I was reading this thread it struck me that back when the KJV was written at that time it was their "modern" version.....as we are now in the year 2005 even our ways of speaking are different......if I told my hubby to look in his purse for change he'd give me what for....cause men don't carry no purse...(unless I make him hold mine while I try on shoes. [​IMG] ) [​IMG] But back when the KJV was first translated it was probley common knowledge as to what Jesus was talking about when he said take no purse or script.

    I read the KJV, but when I do I understand it in the modern language. I have even followed preachers reading out of the Amplified and it pretty much says in my understanding what I have in the KJV as I read along with them.

    Music4Him
     
  10. LarryN

    LarryN New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2003
    Messages:
    958
    Likes Received:
    0
    Uh, we've been over this countless times before- but there are numerous english versions of the Bible that are in the public domain, for example the ASV1901. The KJV is by no means unique in this regard.
     
  11. Johnv

    Johnv New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yet another KJVO potshot at any translation that's not KJV. Sad. The only "real thing" is the source texts. What we have is translations of the source texts. The KJV is no exception.

    The reason the KJV is so popular is the same reason that the NIV is so popular. They are generally good and faithful translations.
     
  12. Eladar

    Eladar New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2001
    Messages:
    3,012
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why do so many Americans use the KJV?

    Because if old English was good enough for Jesus, it is good enough for them!
     
  13. DietofWorms

    DietofWorms Guest

    You are, of course, joking here... I hope! :eek:
     
  14. music4Him

    music4Him New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,333
    Likes Received:
    0
    ~ [​IMG] GrannyGumbo ~
    ____________________________________________________________
    Well... there's just no substitute for the REAL thing!
    ____________________________________________________________

    BTW, before I knew there was the Baptist board I didn't study my Hebrew and Greek as much. But thanks to a few people that I met who are sticklers for the Hebrew and greek interpretations....maybe we all should read the very first oringinals? [​IMG]


    Although it might say the same as the KJV in our language? ;)

    Big Smile :D
    Music4Him
     
  15. liafailrock

    liafailrock Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2001
    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    12
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Grant it. I will not debate that. I know there are others, but do you hear anyone quoting from them? Let's face it. The tranlations many people have in mind are the mainline "McDonald's" of translations such as NIV, RSV, New Living, NKJV, etc. (I like Wendy's :D )
     
  16. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Strange sounding statements, considering
    the history of the KJV.

    Ed's short history of the "KJV".

    In 1762 and 1769 new versions of the KJV were authorized
    for distibution (distribution by Cambridge and Oxford),
    authorization by the British Crown.
    In 1776 the USA rebelled against the British Crown.
    There was no interest in accuracy of printing copies
    of the KJV nor of any crown rights. (Not to mention that
    setting press was a highly error prone process)

    I collectively call these editions the KJV1769
    (I have several copies of it). I also have a paper copy
    of the KJV1611 and the KJV1873.
    Anyway, it was highly arrogent to call an unauthorized
    copy "authorized" -- but such were the colonists [​IMG]

    Fast forward to 1950. Somebody noticed that the various
    versions of the KJV were NOT the same (and these new verions
    were diffaerent still). So by 1980 there was a logic
    and theory called the "King James Only" movement which said
    (in several forms i might add) that the King James
    Version (without specifying which KJV) was the only right
    translation in English.

    I consider it an arrogant matter to call oneself by a
    moniker containing "AV" and/or "1611"
    IF one does NOT use an "authorized Version" nor the
    KJV1611 edition. No King James Version Onlyist that i
    know uses exclusively either an actual AV nor an
    actual KJV1611 Edition.

    So then, why is the KJV still very popular in the USofA?
    I'd say because
    the colonist did their work well,
    making many prints of the unauthorized American KJV.
    While great lip service was given by the colonists to
    the pilgrims, the pilgrims brought the Geneva Bible with them,
    not the KJV.
     
  17. Gwyneth

    Gwyneth <img src=/gwyneth.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2002
    Messages:
    4,137
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Well... there's just no substitute for the REAL thing!"
    You got it Granny !
    [​IMG]
     
  18. billwald

    billwald New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    2
    "Because if old English was good enough for Jesus, it is good enough for them!"

    On the other hand, have always wondered why the angel told Joseph to give the child a Greek name. &lt;G&gt;
     
  19. Rookiepastor

    Rookiepastor New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2004
    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    0
    IMHO...

    I am moving towards the HCSB... in fact I use it 90 percent of the time from the pulpit...

    But I catch myself... when quoting Scripture... I tend to revert back to what I had memorized years ago.

    It is familiar to all of people out there.
     
  20. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yep, after 30 years using the KJV
    exclusively, most of the scriptures in my
    head are KJV1769.

    I still find it strange that the KJV1769
    editions in the US on which no stamp tax
    was paid to the British Crown are still
    called in error: "the Authorized Version (AV)" :confused:
     
Loading...