Is it just my imagination, or are many folks here hostile to people who read the KJV?

[Thermodynamics]

OK, I am new here and not wanting to stir anything up or get anyone mad, but I have to ask this question:

Are many of the people here hostile to people who prefer the King James Version of the Bible? I feel like I should know what I am getting myself into by joining this board.

For the record here is my position:

I like the language of the King James better than that used in the more modern translations. I believe that English at that time was more expressive and better able to convey the detail of a thought than modern English. I also believe the manuscripts used (Majority Text) are more accurate to the originals than the manuscripts (Critical Text) used in most 20th Century translations.

I DO NOT believe that the King James Version of the Bible (or any translation) is perfect. The art of translation by its very nature does not allow for a perfect translation. I DO believe that almost any competent translation can be used to gain a greater knowledge of and closer relationship to God. I believe that some translations will be better than others at conveying the intent of the original, and that one translation may be better than another even where the same manuscript was used as the basis. I believe that a translation using a superior manuscript will tend to be more accurate that another using a faulty manuscript.

I know people who use versions other than the KJV, I like and respect those people and really don'r care a whole lot what version they read, but I prefer the King James and ask for the same respect.

 

[Marcia]

It's not people who prefer the KJV that are the problem. It's the King James Only people who tell those of us using other versions that we are not reading God's word. Yes, that does tend to rile one up a bit.

 

[tinytim]

From your OP, you will fit right in.. welcome..

What bothers most on the board is people slandering other people because they don't use the KJV..

 

[preachinjesus]

Are many of the people here hostile to people who prefer the King James Version of the Bible? I feel like I should know what I am getting myself into by joining this board.

I don't know if anyone is hostile to those who read the KJV, but in questioning the KJVO position many of us get maligned into positions that we don't accept and we get castigated by the proponents of KJVOism in order to create a red herring to distract the actual argument.

I enjoy the company of people who read the KJV. I appreciate the KJV. In reading the KJV I find it to be a bit dated and in a language that is deeply difficult for new believers to understand.

Many of us grew up using the KJV and grew under ministers and leaders who used it. It is a good translation. I just suggest that in our contemporary time there are other translations which suit us better.

No hostility here. :thumbsup:

 

[TomVols]

I have never seen anyone hostile to another because they use the KJV. The vitriol out of the KJVO camp, however, could sink a battleship.

Most who prefer more modern versions or who argue for the earliest mss go out of their way to be complimentary of those who hold the position you do.

 

[annsni]

There is no hostility at all against the KJV (well, except maybe by one poster). Many of us utilize the KJV and have memorized many verses in that version. Each of us has a favorite version that we use and the KJV is a great one.

Welcome to BB!!

 

[StefanM]

My pastor preaches out of the KJV. I carry an NIV/NASB parallel Bible to church every Sunday. I'm fine with that mixture. I would not attend a KJVO church, however.

 

[franklinmonroe]

Welcome to the BB!

... Are many of the people here hostile to people who prefer the King James Version of the Bible? ...

No. Moreover, members here characteristically are not even hostile towards the persons that endorse KJV-Onlyism. However, you will find that the destructive false doctrine of KJV-Onlyism is met with strong resistance. In addition, you will find that false assertions of all sorts will often be challenged, particullarly those that perpetuate the extremely unscriptural KJV-Onlyistic postion.

 

[TCGreek]

What bothers most on the board is people slandering other people because they don't use the KJV..

So true, my brother!

 

[Salty]

My pastor preaches out of the KJV. I carry an NIV/NASB parallel Bible to church every Sunday. I'm fine with that mixture. I would not attend a KJVO church, however.

I could attend a KJO - the problem is would they want me! - especially if I was to teach a class!

Therm: I agree with Marcia (wow -won't miracles ever cease!:laugh: ) using the KJV is fine - in fact I am KJP - its the KJO that seem to get upset at those of us who use other versions; and I use several versions as I prepare my messages




IF THE KING JAMES VERSION WAS GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE APOSTLE PAUL, THEN ITS GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME:smilewinkgrin:

 

[EdSutton]

OK, I am new here and not wanting to stir anything up or get anyone mad, but I have to ask this question:

Are many of the people here hostile to people who prefer the King James Version of the Bible? I feel like I should know what I am getting myself into by joining this board.

For the record here is my position:

I like the language of the King James better than that used in the more modern translations. I believe that English at that time was more expressive and better able to convey the detail of a thought than modern English. I also believe the manuscripts used (Majority Text) are more accurate to the originals than the manuscripts (Critical Text) used in most 20th Century translations.

I DO NOT believe that the King James Version of the Bible (or any translation) is perfect. The art of translation by its very nature does not allow for a perfect translation. I DO believe that almost any competent translation can be used to gain a greater knowledge of and closer relationship to God. I believe that some translations will be better than others at conveying the intent of the original, and that one translation may be better than another even where the same manuscript was used as the basis. I believe that a translation using a superior manuscript will tend to be more accurate that another using a faulty manuscript.

I know people who use versions other than the KJV, I like and respect those people and really don'r (sic) care a whole lot what version they read, but I prefer the King James and ask for the same respect.

Welcome to the Baptist Board. :wavey:

I won't necessarily agree with all you have stated above, but FTR, for most of my Christian life of more than 45 years, my regular Bibles have usually said "King James" on the flyleaf, as well. Some even used to say that on the spine, but no longer, as I literally have worn that writing away, worn out one copy till the cover literally came off, and had another actually rebound that was coming apart at the seams.

Ed

 

[Keith M]

OK, I am new here and not wanting to stir anything up or get anyone mad, but I have to ask this question:

Are many of the people here hostile to people who prefer the King James Version of the Bible? I feel like I should know what I am getting myself into by joining this board.

For the record here is my position:

I like the language of the King James better than that used in the more modern translations. I believe that English at that time was more expressive and better able to convey the detail of a thought than modern English. I also believe the manuscripts used (Majority Text) are more accurate to the originals than the manuscripts (Critical Text) used in most 20th Century translations.

I DO NOT believe that the King James Version of the Bible (or any translation) is perfect. The art of translation by its very nature does not allow for a perfect translation. I DO believe that almost any competent translation can be used to gain a greater knowledge of and closer relationship to God. I believe that some translations will be better than others at conveying the intent of the original, and that one translation may be better than another even where the same manuscript was used as the basis. I believe that a translation using a superior manuscript will tend to be more accurate that another using a faulty manuscript.

I know people who use versions other than the KJV, I like and respect those people and really don'r care a whole lot what version they read, but I prefer the King James and ask for the same respect.

There's nothing wrong with being KJVP or with the KJVs themselves, although the KJVs, like all other translations, have some human errors in them. As the others before me have said, the problem arises when KJVOs declare one of the KJVs is the ONLY true word of God in English. These people become their own final authority for there's certainly no scriptural authority for the denigration of God's word in all but one translation. The KJVO position is a man-made myth that originated with a Seventh-Day Adventist.

One of the KJVs is among the Bible translations I use most frequently - the others being the NKJV and the NASBs. I am convicted that God graciously preserved His word for various generations in various Bible translations. I believe those who deny this are backslidden and believe God is weak and a liar. I believe those who denigrate the word of God in its various translations are absolutely WRONG.

I also believe there are certain "translations" that are not legitimate efforts to bring the word of God to mankind. I believe the Cotton Patch Version, the Klingon Version, the New World Translation of the Jehovah's Wtinesses, the Joseph Smith Tranlation (also known as the Inspired Version) of the Mormons and the Clear Word Translation of the Seventh-Day Adventists are not legitimate attempts to translate the word of God. I believe such "translations" should be avoided.

 

[Jim1999]

quote: I believe those who deny this are backslidden and believe God is weak and a liar..

Chapter and verse please. I don't mind being called a backslider, but calling God weak and a liar is a bit much.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Baptist4life]

OK, I am new here and not wanting to stir anything up or get anyone mad, but I have to ask this question:

Are many of the people here hostile to people who prefer the King James Version of the Bible? I feel like I should know what I am getting myself into by joining this board.

For the record here is my position:

I like the language of the King James better than that used in the more modern translations. I believe that English at that time was more expressive and better able to convey the detail of a thought than modern English. I also believe the manuscripts used (Majority Text) are more accurate to the originals than the manuscripts (Critical Text) used in most 20th Century translations.

I DO NOT believe that the King James Version of the Bible (or any translation) is perfect. The art of translation by its very nature does not allow for a perfect translation. I DO believe that almost any competent translation can be used to gain a greater knowledge of and closer relationship to God. I believe that some translations will be better than others at conveying the intent of the original, and that one translation may be better than another even where the same manuscript was used as the basis. I believe that a translation using a superior manuscript will tend to be more accurate that another using a faulty manuscript.

I know people who use versions other than the KJV, I like and respect those people and really don'r care a whole lot what version they read, but I prefer the King James and ask for the same respect.

Well, I, for one, think that people who prefer the KJV are treated very badly in these forums, and if you scan through the threads you will see that. I even posted a thread about it.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=55954




You'll find that this forum is very much a "good ole boy" forum, and that's why I don't post much here. I'm amazed at the bias, and insults by some members, all of which seems to go unchecked by the moderators, even though I've received several warnings. Good luck to you.

 

[Samuel Owen]

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Baptist4life on this one. You don't have to say you are KJVO, if that's the version you choose and say you don't like the MV's. You are automatically branded as such.

 

[Askjo]

Well, I, for one, think that people who prefer the KJV are treated very badly in these forums, and if you scan through the threads you will see that. I even posted a thread about it.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=55954




You'll find that this forum is very much a "good ole boy" forum, and that's why I don't post much here. I'm amazed at the bias, and insults by some members, all of which seems to go unchecked by the moderators, even though I've received several warnings. Good luck to you.

Baptist4life, I agree with you on this one.

Thermodynamics, I suggest you to read past threads from the beginning to now concerning the KJV and Mvs. You will find out what happened here. I know many defenders of the KJV left this BB forum because of that.

 

[annsni]

OK - let's talk reality here. The KJV is a wonderful, solid version. However, there are those who say that any of the other version are "perversions", "grossly in error", "full of lies" and "Satan's Bibles". When that happens, then we will not stand for it because they are lies. We vehemently oppose the stance that the KJV is the only preserved Word of God or the most accurate version for today's people. But it is an absolutely solid, honored version that has withstood the test of time.

You will find, with one exception, no one on this entire bulletin board who will attack the KJV. I love the KJV. I quote the KJV. I use the KJV. It is not, however, the only Bible version we have for today.

Yeah, these last 3 posters are those who have spoken against the modern versions and have participated in threads speaking of such. But show me where the KJV is attacked. It doesn't exist.

 

[Baptist4life]

Yeah, these last 3 posters are those who have spoken against the modern versions and have participated in threads speaking of such. But show me where the KJV is attacked. It doesn't exist.

I have not spoken against MV's other than to say I don't care for them!



As for an attack on the KJV, what is this, if not an attack?

Originally Posted by Rippon
I'm just giving added weight to the fact that the Anglican Version is woefully out-of-date. A contemporary English reader of Scripture needs to study a more modern version so that understanding will result.The KJV family has had its day.

 

[Baptist4life]

Listen, I'll only post this once. If you can read these threads, and say that the people on here that prefer the KJV, and defend it, are not looked down upon, ridiculed, and made to feel un-welcome, then you had better quit lying to yourselves, and open your eyes. There are several members here who've made me feel like I'm some redneck, illiterate hillbilly because I defend the KJV. I've stated many times, and I will again, Read whatever version you like. Some I think are OK, some I don't. But quit telling us that those who prefer the KJV are not treated differently. It seems to be pretty obvious to the newer members here, and was the FIRST thing I noticed upon joining.

 

[tinytim]

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Baptist4life on this one. You don't have to say you are KJVO, if that's the version you choose and say you don't like the MV's. You are automatically branded as such.

Hence the problem.. .

Why do you not like the MVs?..

From our experience MV dislikers say that they dislike the MVs and they are not the true Bible...

I like MVs.. I like the KJV...

Although there is no version that is perfectly translated.

I have problems with the way somethings are translated in MVs.. as well as I have problems with the way things are translated in the KJV.

Again, why don't you like God's word (translated as a MV)?