Featured For those of you who use the King James Version (KJV) as your primary translation ...

Psalm 12
[6] The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
[7] Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

He promised to preserve His Word to all generations. To assume He is unable to translate His Word makes no sense at all. He must be able to translate it in order to preserve it.

I don't want to be the one trying to decide what He meant by each word of the book. I much prefer to assume that each word is preserved and that He said what He meant, and meant what He said.

King James only for me.

 

Good grief, your own post negated the KJV only position. The KJV translators even stated translation and updating should continue.

 

Pardon me, but God doesn't translate the Scriptures. He uses us for that. I am a Bible translator, and know that God helped me many times finding the right meaning and words in Japanese, but He used me to do the work.

Yes, God preserves His Word, but he gives it to believers, who are priests (the "priesthood of the believer") and thus responsible to preserve the Word on earth, just as the Jewish priests were responsible before God to preserve the Torah.

Now, admittedly, God translated a few passages and words to show us how it is done. (Eli, Eli, lama sabacthani, Immanuel, etc.) But that is part of Scripture, not a translation of Scripture, per se.

 

I read from the KJV and use it as my main version. Love it! Grew up with it, have compared much of it to the original languages and verified its accuracy. You just have to remember that it's a 17th century British translation.

 

Do you seriously think about the logical implications of what you assert?

The issue is not what God is able to do, but what God choose to do and what God said that He would do. Preservation concerns the exact, specific words that God gave by inspiration to the prophets and apostles.

Do you consider how inconsistent your claims are? If you must assume that God did translate His word into English, why would you accept the first English Bible translation?

Do you consider that you are in effect suggesting that God failed to translate His words perfectly in 1611 since over 2,000 changes, revisions, and corrections were gradually made to them between 1611 until around 1900? If God actually translated the 1611, all the later changes, revisions, and corrections to the 1611 edition in your post-1900 KJV edition would have to be wrong.

You in effect decide what God meant by each English word in the KJV so how is that really different than Bible translators deciding what the original-language words of Scripture mean?

 

You have nailed the real issue I think. Bible believers do not merely use the scriptures, they believe the scriptures. If different words in a given language did not have different meanings there would not be so many different words. The true God of heaven is not as conflicted as new age English speaking Christians makes him out to be with scores of attempts to decide for themselves what words they will assign as the words of God in their various translations and paraphrases.
One thing is sure, the practice of this philosophy is evidence that the creators and users and promoters of said philosophy are not taking the words of God, which are vehicles for his thoughts, nearly as important as he is. Because God’s thoughts are so much higher than our thoughts and his ways above our ways, it requires special revelation for our understanding and the two common things of all Christians that assures us of the ability to, “be of the same mind,” is to think in the same words in which he thinks. Those two things are, 1) his exact words, and 2) His own Spirit who indwells both God and his children at the same time and who searches the mind of God and reveals his thoughts to us in Spirit chosen words.

I am not guessing about this. It is what is told us plainly in a KJV translation of the inspired words that were given to the prophets who originally wrote them. I will quote two passages that tells me what I have told you. You may deny them and choose various words in new translations that do not say the same things if you wish. You have free will and can do as you please while you are in the body.

Isaiah 55:6-11
6 Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near:
7 Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:
11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

The people to whom this command was originally given, Judah and Jerusalem, [Isa 1:1-4] did not believe it.

1 Corinthians 2:9-14
9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

You men who promote and teach that God had something to do with all these translations and paraphrases in the same language are teaching that the message is what is important, not the words that conveys the message. This is arrogance and it is not what God has said in the KJV. God has not revealed the message in the worldly wisdom of men in their own words as you can see in the passages I quoted..

 

Another person who makes the KJV an idol. I have news for you, the Bible was not written in English.

 

I used to read and post on several "Christian" forums. It had been quite some time and with everything going on in the world, I decided to give it another shot. I got nothing from your response except to be reminded why I left.

So long again.

 

So in other words, you don't want actual conversation and debate but rather a sounding board.

 

Well, it didn't take long to get the negative comments going. Sorry, Alexander. And they say the it's the KJVO people causing contention!

In answer to your OP....I use the KJV because I've used, and memorized, it since I was six years old and first learned to read. And that's a l-o-n-g time ago! I have no problem with people using whatever verison they want. I sometimes use the NKJV, but always find myself going back to my old, marked up, duct taped, 30 year old, KJV. Just my personal preference. In my church I'm among the very, very few who still use the KJV. Most of those few are older, like me, and it's just what they grew up with. However, unlike the accusations presented on here, there are no disputes, arguments, or church splitting in our congregation over the issue of Bible versions. I don't believe that is nearly as serious an issue as those on here try to make it. JMHO.

 

There is a difference between KJV preferred, I have no problem with that whatsoever. What I have a problem with is people who are KJV Only and try to say that is the only English Bible that is valid.

 

But that isn't why Alexander started this thread. No reason to derail it.

 

Then your beef is with the KJVO nonsense that derailed it.

 

I wasn't referring to you. Sorry, if you mistook that.

 

What in the world was negative about my response??? Are you against missionary Bible translators or something???

 

Other reasons. It has both singular and plural pronouns. It's underlying Greek text more often than not, agrees with the common readings of the Greek text. It typically uses italics to show translator interpretation.