Are most Fundamental Baptists Churches KJVO then?

[OLD SARGE]

John 7:8 Go up to the feast yourselves; I am not going up to this feast, because My time has not yet fully arrived.” NASB

John 7:8 Go to the feast yourselves; I am not[a] going up to this feast, for my time has not yet fully come.” 9 So saying, he remained in Galilee. RSV

John 7::8 Go you up to this festival day: but I go not up to this festival day, because my time is not accomplished. DRB

John 7:8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come. KJV

I was led to Christ using a KJV. The friend who I went to church to get off my back, gave me an NASB thinking it would be easier to read. When I got to this verse I thought Christ just lied because two verse later he went up secretly. The RSV I got for perfect attendance in VBS that had never been used and smelled like new many years later said the same thing. I do not know where I got the KJV, but before I knew anything about manuscripts and higher criticism or literal word for word translation I switched because it did not make Jesus look like a liar. I figured if the other two got that wrong what else did they mess up? Even the DRB got it wrong and they like to say we got our Bible from them. Latest versions, maybe, but it would appear not the TR/KJV.

A couple of years later I went to Bible college and confirmed my stance. I will not argue over old English, but manuscripts and translation ideologies still keep the KJV as the best version. There are a few other versions that I have heard of use the TR and a literal translation. I could probably use one of those. Yet, despite all the sales pitches the KJV is still used by people where English is not their first language. If they can deal with a few archaic words, more in the NIV, than such a highly educated country as the US should be able to use a dictionary when they find a word they do not know. I read where the KJV is actually a ninth grade reading level whereas the NIV is first year college. Honestly, I do not even think many of our college grads can read at a first year college level. One girl graduate high school with honors, but cannot read or write.

So, I will just remain a stupid old man and stick to the version that has great success and still works. Shalom! Maranatha!

 

[Salty]

... I read where the KJV is actually a ninth grade reading level whereas the NIV is first year college. ...

This link states KJV = 11.5 --- NIV = 7.0

Bible Selector - Reading Level

Guide to selecting the right bible version for your needs. Bible reading level.

www.bibleselector.com

This link states KJV = 12 --- NIV = 7.0

Bible Translation Reading Levels - Bible Gateway Blog

[Read the Bible Gateway Blog post, The Bible Table of Contents] [Browse the Bibles section in the Bible Gateway Store, where you’ll enjoy low prices every day] [Read the Bible Gateway Blog post, When Was Each Book of the Bible Written?] Remove banner ads and expand your Bible reading experience...

www.biblegateway.com

This link states KJV = 12 --- NIV = 7.8

https://www.prisonfellowship.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Bible-Translations-by-Grade-Level_2__jul29_v2.pdf

Interesting chart here:

http://kukis.org/Eng_trans/biblechart.pdf

 

[OLD SARGE]

I was a good friend of someone in IFB church, who invited me to attend their dedication day for the new church building, and he just asked me to please wear a suite and take a Kjv. The Police Chief of town gave dedication prayer, and he read the OT passage of Solomon dedicating the Temple out of NIV, and the pastors and elders facial expression looked like they just smelt limburger cheese

Hey! I love Limburger! Make it Blue Cheese and that works!

 

[Salty]

I remember the day I return from Europe (with the US Army). Sunday morning at church the pastor asked me to speak for a minute about my time in Germany. (My home church = GARBC) I stated how the Lord has blessed Zweibruecken Baptist church when I was there. I also mentioned it was a Southern Baptist church! AS I turned - the Pastors face was just about as red as it could get! (yep, even in our SBC we did use our KJV!)

 

[OLD SARGE]

This link states KJV = 11.5 --- NIV = 7.0

Bible Selector - Reading Level

Guide to selecting the right bible version for your needs. Bible reading level.

www.bibleselector.com

This link states KJV = 12 --- NIV = 7.0

Bible Translation Reading Levels - Bible Gateway Blog

[Read the Bible Gateway Blog post, The Bible Table of Contents] [Browse the Bibles section in the Bible Gateway Store, where you’ll enjoy low prices every day] [Read the Bible Gateway Blog post, When Was Each Book of the Bible Written?] Remove banner ads and expand your Bible reading experience...

www.biblegateway.com

This link states KJV = 12 --- NIV = 7.8

https://www.prisonfellowship.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Bible-Translations-by-Grade-Level_2__jul29_v2.pdf

Interesting chart here:

http://kukis.org/Eng_trans/biblechart.pdf

Like anything else, you can find opposing concepts. Turns out there are five different readability checkers.

Readability Checker - Reading Level Calculator

Estimate the readability score and readability level of your text with this readability checker.

charactercalculator.com

I ran a passage from Leviticus and the SMOG said 7th grade and the others were college level, very difficult, etc. Maybe. the 7th grade checker is from a nation of better literacy than us.

 

[Logos1560]

Mark Ward observed that reading-level “tools measure a word’s complexity by syllable count, but that’s not a reliable way of judging whether a word can be understood” (Authorized, p. 54). Mark Ward also noted: “Reading-level analyses run by computers do not yield reliable or useful results when applied to archaic English” (p. 59). Mark Ward asserted: “Archaic vocabulary is a significant problem for readability” (p. 55).

The NKJV is clearly not as archaic in its language as the KJV is. Having a few more multi-syllable, harder words than the KJV is not proof that the NKJV is actually harder to read and understand. Gail Riplinger claimed that the KJV’s average was 1.310 syllables per word and that the NKJV’s average was 1.313 syllables per word (Language, p. 160). A three one-thousandths [.003] difference in average syllable count is not a significant enough difference to affect understanding. The archaic language in the KJV would likely be a greater problem for the understanding of present-day readers than this insignificant difference in average syllable count would be.

In a good number of places, the NKJV may have the exact same words as the KJV, but it may present as one word what the KJV divides and presents as two or three words, explaining why the NKJV would have fewer words. For example, in most editions of the KJV there are several commonly used words that are divided into two or more words where the exact same word united as one word in another English translation may count as a longer, multi-syllable word. Some examples include “to day,” “to morrow,” “for ever,” “for evermore,” “son in law,” “father in law,” “mother in law,” “daughter in law,” “strong holds,“ “way side,” “high way,” “high ways,” “good will,” “any more,“ “any thing,“ “mean while,” “mean time,“ “some time,” “sea side,“ “sea shore,“ “house tops,” “mad man,” “free man,” “any one,” and “cart wheel.” There may also be other such words. While later KJV editors changed or corrected a few of the uses of “lift” in the 1611 edition for the past tense “lifted,” there are other times where a present KJV has “lift” while the NKJV may have “lifted.” The NKJV has “forever” 393 times, “anyone” 192 times, “today” 161 times, “anything” 139 times, “anymore” 70 times, “tomorrow” 58 times, “father-in-law” 26 times, “highway” 23 times, “forevermore” 18 times, and “son-in-law” 13 times so that just these ten of the words divided in the KJV could give it over 1,000 more words than the NKJV. These divided words in the KJV lower its average syllable count, but they do not make it easier to understand.

 

[OLD SARGE]

I was a good friend of someone in IFB church, who invited me to attend their dedication day for the new church building, and he just asked me to please wear a suite and take a Kjv. The Police Chief of town gave dedication prayer, and he read the OT passage of Solomon dedicating the Temple out of NIV, and the pastors and elders facial expression looked like they just smelt limburger cheese

Non Inspired Version or as one lad put it, "I am thankful that I am NIV negative." In my early years, I was with the Hyles-Anderson types although I was saved in a GARB church while in the USAF. I went to an independent Baptist college, but they were not like the Hyles group. I ran into to those lads after college in PA where solid churches were hard to find. I eventually pulled away from that group. I have served in BGCT and SBTC churches since then as well as some IFBs. I pastored a church started by a BBC pastor, but the people were not of that stripe. I am a man without a group. I am too Conservative for many SBC churches and too liberal for many IFBs. I am currently a member of an SBTC church. In my time, I have ticked off the Left and the Right and occassionally scaring the snot out of the Moderates so I may well be not far off track as Jesus and the Apostles did the same. I never intentionally set people off and I have been surprised at what does set people off and what they find normal. If I survive my surgery I may have to write a third book about my pastoral observations.

 

[Logos1560]

Non Inspired Version

All post-NT Bible translations including the KJV would be non-inspired since they are not made by a miracle of direct inspiration of God. The process of the giving of all Scripture by inspiration of God to the prophets and apostles ended with the completion of the New Testament.

 

[JesusFan]

Mark Ward observed that reading-level “tools measure a word’s complexity by syllable count, but that’s not a reliable way of judging whether a word can be understood” (Authorized, p. 54). Mark Ward also noted: “Reading-level analyses run by computers do not yield reliable or useful results when applied to archaic English” (p. 59). Mark Ward asserted: “Archaic vocabulary is a significant problem for readability” (p. 55).

The NKJV is clearly not as archaic in its language as the KJV is. Having a few more multi-syllable, harder words than the KJV is not proof that the NKJV is actually harder to read and understand. Gail Riplinger claimed that the KJV’s average was 1.310 syllables per word and that the NKJV’s average was 1.313 syllables per word (Language, p. 160). A three one-thousandths [.003] difference in average syllable count is not a significant enough difference to affect understanding. The archaic language in the KJV would likely be a greater problem for the understanding of present-day readers than this insignificant difference in average syllable count would be.

In a good number of places, the NKJV may have the exact same words as the KJV, but it may present as one word what the KJV divides and presents as two or three words, explaining why the NKJV would have fewer words. For example, in most editions of the KJV there are several commonly used words that are divided into two or more words where the exact same word united as one word in another English translation may count as a longer, multi-syllable word. Some examples include “to day,” “to morrow,” “for ever,” “for evermore,” “son in law,” “father in law,” “mother in law,” “daughter in law,” “strong holds,“ “way side,” “high way,” “high ways,” “good will,” “any more,“ “any thing,“ “mean while,” “mean time,“ “some time,” “sea side,“ “sea shore,“ “house tops,” “mad man,” “free man,” “any one,” and “cart wheel.” There may also be other such words. While later KJV editors changed or corrected a few of the uses of “lift” in the 1611 edition for the past tense “lifted,” there are other times where a present KJV has “lift” while the NKJV may have “lifted.” The NKJV has “forever” 393 times, “anyone” 192 times, “today” 161 times, “anything” 139 times, “anymore” 70 times, “tomorrow” 58 times, “father-in-law” 26 times, “highway” 23 times, “forevermore” 18 times, and “son-in-law” 13 times so that just these ten of the words divided in the KJV could give it over 1,000 more words than the NKJV. These divided words in the KJV lower its average syllable count, but they do not make it easier to understand.

Very Important info on this by same Mark ward

Do KJV-Only Pastors Understand the KJV? (National Survey, Parts 1 and 2) | SHARPER IRON

sharperiron.org

Gist of his interaction with Kjv only pastors was that only a minority of even them could correct understand the Kjv and what it was really teaching and saying, and if they were having big issues, what about the Laity?

 

[JesusFan]

Non Inspired Version or as one lad put it, "I am thankful that I am NIV negative." In my early years, I was with the Hyles-Anderson types although I was saved in a GARB church while in the USAF. I went to an independent Baptist college, but they were not like the Hyles group. I ran into to those lads after college in PA where solid churches were hard to find. I eventually pulled away from that group. I have served in BGCT and SBTC churches since then as well as some IFBs. I pastored a church started by a BBC pastor, but the people were not of that stripe. I am a man without a group. I am too Conservative for many SBC churches and too liberal for many IFBs. I am currently a member of an SBTC church. In my time, I have ticked off the Left and the Right and occassionally scaring the snot out of the Moderates so I may well be not far off track as Jesus and the Apostles did the same. I never intentionally set people off and I have been surprised at what does set people off and what they find normal. If I survive my surgery I may have to write a third book about my pastoral observations.

The Niv /nas/Esv/Nlkv were all just as "inspired" as the 1611 Kjv was

 

[JesusFan]

All post-NT Bible translations including the KJV would be non-inspired since they are not made by a miracle of direct inspiration of God. The process of the giving of all Scripture by inspiration of God to the prophets and apostles ended with the completion of the New Testament.

Which supports the notion that KJVO folks must have either direct inspiration from the Holy Spirit unto the 1611 translators, or else derive d inspiration from their textual sources used by them

 

[37818]

Good Old KJV

The KJV has known errors.

Errors In The NIV

The NIV has more.

 

[OLD SARGE]

The KJV has known errors.

The NIV has more.

The "error" in the KJV is that Easter should have been Passover and we should dump Easter. Baptize should have been immersed. Those were early attempts at dynamic equivalence and you see why we should avoid that. The NIV has far worse issues.