Converting thy to your is really the only requirement to modernizing the entire KJV Bible

[IFB_123]

Converting thy to your is really the only requirement to modernizing the entire KJV Bible.

The only reason i say that is when you read the KJV Bible to yourself, we should be able to do the conversion in our head.

When reading the KJV Bible out loud to others "thy" sometimes in our own heads sounds like "my".

Thou isn't really an issue with most People who've have a middle school education.

I'm not going to go into why the KJV Bible is sufficient other than for a society that embraces Science (Solomon was a scientist "speak to the earth and it will teach you") our society should have the brain power to be able to read the KJV. Most Churches treat their congregation like they are idiots and in many ways many churches are very condescending to their congregation.

So if we want to update the KJV Bible the only requirement for reading it out-loud is to convert "thy" to your. When reading the KJV Bible to ourselves the normal KJV is sufficient.

The KJV should not seem like some white supremacist phenonmenon. I'm not about to tell a Swahili speaker or a Spanish speaker what Bible to read. English originated in a European state so its only natural that the historical source of the optimal (as opposed to sufficient) English Bible would have been translated by Europeans.

Just as the Roman Catholic church promoted latin, many modern preachers tell us to go to seminary and learn greek and hebrew to read the Bible correctly.

Much of what is said about theology in this modern age is driven by banal and narcissistic thinking.

I understand much or all of what i'm saying right now has been stated on this forum 10,000 times. My main point is converting "thy" to "your" is the only requirement for updating the KJV Bible and that is due to that "thy" rhymes with "my" when reading aloud.

I hope you all have a great day.

 

[Conan]

There are many more words to convert "in a persons head, than just thy and thine. How about "of"? How about other archaic uses and meaning of words we don't use anymore. Why not convert them "in your head as well?

Mark 1:5.
And there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptised of(by) him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.

1:12,13
And immediately the Spirit driveth(drives) him into the wilderness.
And he was there in the wilderness 40 days tempted of(by) Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him.

1:19
And when he had gone a little further thence(from there), he saw James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the ship mending their nets.

1:29
And forthwith (immediately), when they were come out of the synagogue, they intered into the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John.

1:30
But Simon's wife's mother lay sick of(with) a fever; and anon(immediately or right away) they tell him of(about) her.

 

[rlvaughn]

The use of thou, thee, thine, ye, you, and yours salvages and keeps the singular/plural distinction we have lost in modern English. It is one of the great features of the King James Bible.
Why the Ye's and Thou's

 

[IFB_123]

There are many more words to convert "in a persons head, than just thy and thine. How about "of"? How about other archaic uses and meaning of words we don't use anymore. Why not convert them "in your head as well?

Mark 1:5.
And there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptised of(by) him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.

1:12,13
And immediately the Spirit driveth(drives) him into the wilderness.
And he was there in the wilderness 40 days tempted of(by) Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him.

1:19
And when he had gone a little further thence(from there), he saw James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the ship mending their nets.

1:29
And forthwith (immediately), when they were come out of the synagogue, they intered into the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John.

1:30
But Simon's wife's mother lay sick of(with) a fever; and anon(immediately or right away) they tell him of(about) her.

I stated this in the OP. Its only an issue when reading aloud. When reading to yourself none these things are issues. I stated that in the OP. Most middle schoolers are taught foriegn languages and learning the KJV Bible is tremendously easier than learning Spanish or German. Like i said in the OP many churches treat their congregation like they are dumb. "Thy" rhymes with "My" and it is only an issue when reading aloud. Complexity is a neccesary evil (Proverbs chapter 1 KJV)

 

[IFB_123]

The use of thou, thee, thine, ye, you, and yours salvages and keeps the singular/plural distinction we have lost in modern English. It is one of the great features of the King James Bible.
Why the Ye's and Thou's

I agree for the most part. "Thy" is only a problem when reading aloud because it rhymes with "my". I suppose what i may do is get a giant print KJV and when i'm going to read the Bible aloud i'll cross out just the "thy", and put in "your". People write in their Bibles all the time. I have a middle school education so i can translate the rest. Its far easier than learning German or Spanish.

 

[IFB_123]

There are many more words to convert "in a persons head, than just thy and thine. How about "of"? How about other archaic uses and meaning of words we don't use anymore. Why not convert them "in your head as well?

Mark 1:5.
And there went out unto him all the land of Judea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptised of(by) him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.

1:12,13
And immediately the Spirit driveth(drives) him into the wilderness.
And he was there in the wilderness 40 days tempted of(by) Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him.

1:19
And when he had gone a little further thence(from there), he saw James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, who also were in the ship mending their nets.

1:29
And forthwith (immediately), when they were come out of the synagogue, they intered into the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John.

1:30
But Simon's wife's mother lay sick of(with) a fever; and anon(immediately or right away) they tell him of(about) her.

Another problem is if you aren't careful these things can change the meaning. There is a one to one (not linear and certainly not loose) relationship between "thy" and "your". If i was going to change the version of the Bible i would just use the NLT. Once you change the KJV a little as an english speaker there really is no rational reason not to jump to the NLT.

 

[Logos1560]

Converting thy to your is really the only requirement to modernizing the entire KJV Bible.

That may be your opinion, but you do not prove your assertion to be the truth.

 

[Scarlett O.]

Converting thy to your is really the only requirement to modernizing the entire KJV Bible.

I read the King James, but it's not my primary Bible to read or use. I was raised on it - so I still like it from time to time and can appreciate it.

However, there are many words that need changed for a true "modernizing".

The first I always think of is the word, conversation, as found in Ephesians 4:22 - "That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;"

For the King James translators, this word did not mean talking or verbal communication. It means "manner of life, conduct". It's your behavior. This word is in the King James New Testament 13 times and if interpreting as speaking, then makes those 13+ verses awkward.

This word has changed in meaning since 1611. There are more.

 

[Logos1560]

Most Churches treat their congregation like they are idiots and in many ways many churches are very condescending to their congregation..

Would you say that is true of KJV-only churches or is that your opinion of non-KJV-only churches?

Do some KJV-only advocates seem to be condescending to other Bible believers who do not blindly accept human, non-scriptural KJV-only reasoning?

 

[IFB_123]

That may be your opinion, but you do not prove your assertion to be the truth.

Uncertainty is apart of everyones life. God said about himself "I'm a great God", so apparently even God himself has self-doubt.

 

[IFB_123]

I read the King James, but it's not my primary Bible to read or use. I was raised on it - so I still like it from time to time and can appreciate it.

However, there are many words that need changed for a true "modernizing".

The first I always think of is the word, conversation, as found in Ephesians 4:22 - "That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;"

For the King James translators, this word did not mean talking or verbal communication. It means "manner of life, conduct". It's your behavior. This word is in the King James New Testament 13 times and if interpreting as speaking, then makes those 13+ verses awkward.

This word has changed in meaning since 1611. There are more.

People back then liked learning complex stuff. Are you familiar with Haim Shore? The KJV and the New Arabic Version support a 12 to 18 (more like 15 to 18) billion year old universe. Both Hebrew and Chinese and to some extent greek are Polymorphic languages. In many ways our society has raised its youth to be country bumpkins and they will accuse us of being country bumpkins. One of the beauties of the KJV is it forces the reader to read between the lines due to its slightly archaic (not significantly archaic) word usage. Are you familiar with Proverbs chapter 1 KJV? It is not wrong to try to understand dark sayings. Attempting to understand polymorphism and even a moderately simple text like the KJV falls inline with Proverbs chapter KJV. I would argue Proverbs chapter 1 KJV is the main reason English speakers should stick to the KJV. Not many English versions of the Bible are laid out like Proverbs chapter 1 as they are in the KJV. As to my knowledge it is the only one laid out like that.

 

[IFB_123]

Would you say that is true of KJV-only churches or is that your opinion of non-KJV-only churches?

Do some KJV-only advocates seem to be condescending to other Bible believers who do not blindly accept human, non-scriptural KJV-only reasoning?

If you've ever been on a forum before it is very hard to state in words something without appearing or being condescending. This is not a hard and fast rule but many KJV churches tend to promote Bible reading more than non-KJV churches. Optimal is not perfection in every case. Should we not assume one version of the English Bible is perfect or atleast better than the others. Some People discriminate against the KJV because it was produced by semi-ancient old men.

I'm not opposed to the NLT but wouldn't you agree that these non-KJV churches tend to redirect us to someone who went to Seminary. That sounds alot like some Popish non-sense, wouldn't you agree?

This is not a hard an fast rule but KJV churches tend to be less top heavy due the fact that everyone has the same resources. We should be moving away from the 1st Beast not towards it. However the 2nd Beast will give honor to the 1st Beast.

 

[Logos1560]

Some People discriminate against the KJV because it was produced by semi-ancient old men.

Would a consistent application of your assertion suggest that KJV-only advocates discriminate for the KJV as they show partiality to an exclusive group of biased Church of England critics in 1611?

How would it supposedly be discrimination against the KJV to maintain that the same exact measures/standards should be applied to all Bible translators and to the process for the making of all Bible translations?

 

[Logos1560]

Should we not assume one version of the English Bible is perfect or atleast better than the others. .

Where do the Scriptures teach that the word of God should be assumed to be bound to the textual criticism decisions, Bible-revision decisions, and translation decisions of one exclusive group of Church of England critics in 1611?

 

[Salty]

This is not a hard an fast rule but KJV churches tend to be less top heavy due the fact that everyone has the same resources. We should be moving away from the 1st Beast not towards it. However the 2nd Beast will give honor to the 1st Beast.

Can you explain "less top heavy ..."

 

[IFB_123]

Would a consistent application of your assertion suggest that KJV-only advocates discriminate for the KJV as they show partiality to an exclusive group of biased Church of England critics in 1611?

How would it supposedly be discrimination against the KJV to maintain that the same exact measures/standards should be applied to all Bible translators and to the process for the making of all Bible translations?

What do you mean by same exact measures? Most measurements are approximate. Even NASA in every case approximates everything. NASA does not do perfect engineering but instead they approach the threshold of perfect engineering.

Who should make these decisions? Whether i go to someone who went to Seminary or whether i rely on the KJV as an English speaker, the latter is the lesser of the two evils. These things i speak of are why People rejected the Roman Papacy. In your defence Martin Luther said the steps he took were a step towards Atheism. I reject materialism/physicalism due to things such as Hempel's dilemna and issues raised by Pan-psychism. I subscribe to panentheism (not pantheism) and constitutive micro-psychism.

 

[IFB_123]

Where do the Scriptures teach that the word of God should be assumed to be bound to the textual criticism decisions, Bible-revision decisions, and translation decisions of one exclusive group of Church of England critics in 1611?

The alternative is typically to be redirected to someone who went to Seminary. Where does the Bible teach that? As someone has told me many times "If you don't read the Bible for yourself, you will drink the koolaid".

 

[IFB_123]

Can you explain "less top heavy ..."

Many non-KJV churches tend to be focused on the Pastor rather than the Bible. Do you need more details or can you figure it out from there?

 

[Salty]

Many non-KJV churches tend to be focused on the Pastor rather than the Bible. Do you need more details or can you figure it out from there?

Yea, a few more details - for example - where do you get that theory that non KJ focus on the pastor???

I know for a fact - that is NOT the case in our "non KJV" church!

 

[IFB_123]

Yea, a few more details - for example - where do you get that theory that non KJ focus on the pastor???

I know for a fact - that is NOT the case in our "non KJV" church!

thats great. I've been to alot of Churches, read alot of Sermons, and seen alot of online Sermons. Alot of Scientific studies on churches are catered towards non-Baptist churches so i think me and you should shy away from what Science says about Church practices.