Why is it so important to use the KJV only?

Gotta be the strangest excuse I've heard for awhile, Jim...You win an "Attaboy" for originality.

However, I understand both metric and SAE. And I understand both archaic and modern English. Therefore, I'm not bound to one system of measures nor one English version of the Bible. Aint no Scripture saying I gotta be thus bound.

 

HankD, I gotta ask...

If I don't love my KJV more than my NKJV or NIV or NAS, does that mean I'm not a Believer?

 

Problems with "the standard rule" argument:

1. What about non-English? What rule works then?
2. "Standard rule" is a stretched analogy. It works superbly when one talks of the fundamentals of the faith. But if we don't agree on what a Leviathan is...does that completely negate our ability to fellowship? Does God desire that kind of division on such trivial matters?

Jim's analogy, by his own admission, does break down. I think it's a quite good one for reminding us that there must be an objective standard of truth. God knows we need that proclaimed in this day and age. But he defines the "standard rule" more strictly than the "standard rule" defines itself.

Standard disclaimer: I grew up with the KJV, love it, and my "memory banks" still function often times that route.

 

Not logically if as some have stated that the KJV is the standard rather than the original Hebrew & Greek it orginated from.

Bro Tony

 

And now from the great Southwest--

Well Pilgrim I reckon you don't need to be afeared, y'all gots to be born over.

Bro Tony

 

Colossians 2:9

NJB -- In him , in bodily form , lives divinity in all its fullness .

Weymouth -- For it is Christ that the fulness of God's nature dwells embodied .

JB Phillips -- Yet it is is in him that God gives a full and complete expression of himself in bodily form .

NLT2 -- For in Christ lives all the fullness of God in a human body .
( footnote : In him dwells all the completeness of the Godhead bodily . )

NIrV -- God's whole nature is living in Christ in human form .

NIV/TNIV -- For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form .

Norlie's New Testament -- Know this , that in Christ all the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily .

HCS -- For in Him the entire fullness of God's nature dwells bodily .

REB -- For it is in Christ that the Godhead in all its fullness dwells embodied .

MLB -- For in Him all the fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily .

ESV/NRSV -- For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily .

NKJ -- For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily .

 

Ok, consider this analogy (which actually isn't far from reality)... when you learn a second language, how do you listen to other people or read in that language? You absorb the words, then you attempt to translate it in normal modern day American English, then ponder the meaning in English. But if you know much about languages, you would know that there's not an "exact" translation. So, unless you were extremely fluent in that second language, to the point where you could actually THINK in that language without any English going through your head, which is extremely rare unless you can actually live somewhere for years where they exclusively speak that language all the time... do you not think that your thoughts would be more accurate if you simply paid several other scholars who WERE very fluent in that language to come up with the best translation and present it to you? Not only that, but what if that language was only truly spoken several hundred years ago, so not only is there a language barrier, but there's a historical barrier? In that scenario, no way that a normal person, even if they could somewhat blunder through and read that old and different language, could fully come up with an accurate, everyday-language English translation that they could fully understand.

Therefore, I don't see why it is sooooo important to cling on to the King James Version of the Bible, since if people can't fully understand it, it really doesn't do much good.

 

Should not the common and standard rule be the same both before and after 1611 or after 1769? Should not the standard rule be the same for all believers regardless of which language they speak and read?

Which of the many varying editions of the KJV is your claimed standard rule and by what greater standard did you determine that it should be your standard rule?

 

How is it then that a revision of a previous translation becomes the standard rule? This standard rule would have to be the original language manuscripts instead of the revision of a previous translation.

Then if that is what you expect you shouldn't post your comments in the open forum. When you post your comments in the open forum you invite comment from anyone and everyone. If you want privacy then you shouldn't post your comments for all to see, Jim. Posting your comments publicly and asking everyone to "keep their mouths shut" (not your own words but this is basically what you are asking) is not at all a realistic expectation.

 

True. But many try to force their choice of "measuring stick" on everyone as standard by which all is to be measured... that any other unit of measure isn't really measuring, but variagating the length and giving false results.

The only standard by which any translation should be measured is by what God said, period. His words were penned by the authors of Scripture, and then passed down in meticulous copies. Thus, and measure of a translation is how close it reassembles these words in the receptor language... not how much it varies from a previous work. Using another translation to measure isn't called measuring; it's called comparing, and means diddly as far as whether one or the other are accurate.

 

Amy, our salvation does not depend on it. It is self-evident and sufficient that nature displays a Creator that we must seek (Paul wrote of this in Romans). Abraham came to God without benefit of written scripture. Yes, I think that they are concerned with the spiritual welfare of others.

The primary truth is that some folks think that if genuine Christianity does not put forward a singularly unquestionable 'Bible' then the world will reject our belief system on the excuse of it being founded upon suspect information. So by faith they assume that God has miraculously preserved the 'Bible' through the ages, and in each and every language (or a universal dominate one). For centuries it was presumed to be the Latin Vulgate for the entire literate world. In English it is usually identified as the AV1611 (for some Catholics it still is the Rheims). They believe God could supernaturally use 17th century scholars in Europe to produce a perfect text superior to the ancient manuscripts (essentially a wholly new revelation) in a manner which He has yet seen fit to repeat. Catholics bolster their lack of confidence in the 'Bible' with apostolic 'tradition'.

The reason is that they can feel secure with these paradigms.

 

There is a lot of interesting information available on the www regarding this issue. Type in: "God Wrote Only One Bible" in a good search engine.

Search with an open mind.
Choose wisely.

Bro. James

 

God wrote only one Bible but He has graciously provided many translations of the same .

 

Another good thing to take to a search engine is simply KJVO. This also yields a lot of info - some pro and some con.

And He has even graciously provided various versions for those of us who read only English! Some folks just refuse to accept what God has graciously provided. They would rather find fault with the various English Bible versions God has so graciously provided than to accept them as gifts from God.

:godisgood:

As for the question heading the OP, "Why is it so important to use the KJV only?" the answer is "It isn't!" God has provided us with various English translations for our better understanding as the language has changed over the centuries. We should be thanking God for what He has provided and accept the various legitimate versions with open arms and minds rather than ridicule!

 

That is a J. J. Ray book published in 1955, which copied very heavily from Dr. Benjamin Wilkinson's book, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated.

As for J. J. Ray, try googling THAT name & see whatcha get. Same for Eye-Opener Publications. Why all the secrecy? Why would a CHRISTIAN author use a pseudonym? I still believe that whoever wrote that book was trying to place a barrier of paperwork between him/herself and Wilkinson because of possible plagiarism charges. Is that any way for a CHRISTIAN to act?

 

I think the question you should all ask, is this bible translation I am using (not version) true to the original texts? The original texts are inspired and without error. but since most of the world does not read greek and hebrew then we need it to be translated into our language.

Here's another question. Are spanish speaking countries all condemned to hell because they can't read and understand the KJV? Is thier Reina Valera translation good enough? Should we be so naieve (sp) to think that only english speaking people are saved?

Do they speak English in Heaven?