Let's try this again. I am not confused.
My reading comprehension is just fine. Look again at what you posted:
"I don't use the KJV myself, except for reference,
since I read Greek and Hebrew."
You clearly say "I don't use the KJV...except for reference."
You also said that you are not able to make a suitable reference.
That leaves you with what?--the KJV!!
Your 'logic' may appear impeccable to you,
but its wrong.
You edit my statements to make them more universal
and say more than I originally said.
"
I don't use the KJV myself, except for reference."
...is straightforward.
But I'm happy to elaborate and fill it out more.
I prefer reading the Greek NT, which I read alot,
regularly, and I also tend to write in Greek.
My skills in Greek are good enough for my own purposes.
I don't presume to be able to translate the NT for others,
nor do I expect them to accept my translations on their own.
If I were to defend a particular interpretation or rendering,
I would do so using independent evidences, like usage in other documents,
or the opinions of other scholars.
Not that I have any respect for them, but the assumption would be,
that others whom I would be trying to convince would.
When arguing and debating with others, in English,
I would naturally use the KJV (which they would recognise and respect),
not my own translations, although I have no hesitation in
making slight modifications to any quotation to better express
in modern language the meaning and intent of the original,
and also the intent of the KJV translators.
My own personal preference in English translations available
to the public is Young's Literal version. Not because its great,
but because relatively speaking, its better than most modern
versions, particularly with regard to the text used (TR).
I don't need the KJV or YLT or any other version.
I'm quite comfortable reading the NT in Greek for myself.
Since this is just a personal story of my personal preferences,
I don't see how it is even relevant to the discussion.
You state above that you don't rely upon your own translations.
You again state that you use the KJV when dealing with others.
No. You are making blanket statements about my statements.
But who cares?
I very much DO rely upon my own translations, for myself.
Its just that I don't care to share them with others,
or expect others to rely upon my translations.
What part of that is unintelligible to you?
You have no fluency in the ancient languages; you can only use them for reference.
Isn't that the truth?? So you have misrepresented yourself.
Your quote above is actually a lie.
This extreme language is false and also very wrong.
Resorting to name-calling, especially accusations such as this,
is totally inappropriate and uncalled for.
You are the one distorting my statements.
You are the one then who would be 'lying',
that is knowingly and actively changing truths to suit your purpose.
You use the KJV, and then you use the Greek and Hebrew for reference.
That is a more accurate statement, isn't it?
Why not be honest with yourself and with others.
This isn't a question of 'honesty',
its a question of meaning of language,
which we all know is not easy to solve.
What do you mean by "for reference"?
I know what I mean.
I use the KJV for reference,
meaning I check my understanding of Greek passages,
when I am in doubt or curious, by looking at what others have done.
I almost never correct my own translations or understandings
to conform to the KJV, or any other translation.
I use them 'for reference', meaning to assist my own thoughts,
for clarity of expression in English, and a variety of other purposes,
like examining textual variants.
But
I work most in Greek when dealing with the NT.
On the other hand, I appreciate Dictionaries, Grammars,
and Lexicons, as well as commentaries, and other publications.
I use them for reference.
None of my statements is "more accurate" or "more honest"
than any other statement.
They are all accurate and honest representations
in my own words of what I do.
