King James Bible Companion

[Baptist4life]

When I witness to them I don't use their 'language' .............

But, isn't that the excuse for all the MV's? "We need a Bible in "our" language? 21st century people don't use the "language" of the KJV, they can't possibly understand it".

Then, how do you expect to communicate with those you're witnessing to if you aren't using "their" language? They're not going to understand you, according to your own reasoning. :tonofbricks:

 

[Rippon]

But, isn't that the excuse for all the MV's? "We need a Bible in "our" language?" 21st century people don't use the "language" of the KJV, they can't possibly understand it, so how do you expect to communicate with those you're witnessing to if you aren't using "their" language? They're not going to understand you, according to your own reasoning. :tonofbricks:

Well,my dear B4L, do you use KJV-speak when witnessing? Do you think that is the way to go? The unsaved,especially those from unchurched backgrounds would think you are mad(to use KJV-speak.) Standard 21st century speech is perfectly acceptable --the Lord will use it. In short,the language of the 2011 NIV,HCSB,NET Bible and NLTse is what they will understand. Then those bricks won't fall on your head because of your frustration.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

But, isn't that the excuse for all the MV's? "We need a Bible in "our" language? 21st century people don't use the "language" of the KJV, they can't possibly understand it".

Then, how do you expect to communicate with those you're witnessing to if you aren't using "their" language? They're not going to understand you, according to your own reasoning. :tonofbricks:

You have mistaken me. I don't defend all of the MVs.

Ebonics and Dublin street talk are not languages. They are coarse crude dialects often including vulgar (in the modern sense of the word) phrases and words. The Ebonics 'bible' is not even an attempt at a literal translation.

There is a big difference between that and English of the 21st century.

 

[Baptist4life]

Well,my dear B4L, do you use KJV-speak when witnessing?Sometimes. Do you think that is the way to go? Sometimes.The unsaved,especially those from unchurched backgrounds would think you are mad(to use KJV-speak.)No, most are more familiar with passages from the KJV than any of your MVs. Standard 21st century speech is perfectly acceptable --the Lord will use it.Of course He will, just as He will use KJV "speak", as you put it. In short,the language of the 2011 NIV,HCSB,NET Bible and NLTse is what they will understand. Not necessarily true at all.Then those bricks won't fall on your head because of your frustration.Why would you assume I'm frustrated? I suppose you love seeing bricks fall on my head. Seems you follow me around to post something negative every chance you get! I use the bricks gif because I knew that you would be here soon, piling bricks on me. You never dissapoint.:tongue3:

Btw, I think more unsaved people are familiar with Scripture from the KJV than any other.

 

[annsni]

Okay, how about these verses, written in your own modern language?

And da earth wuz widdout form, an' void; an' darkness wuz upon da face o' da deep. And da Spirit o' Big Daddy groved upon da face o' da waters.

So Big Daddy created peeps in his own image, in da image o' Big Daddy created he him; [foul language removed] created he dem.

Or this:
Yo, Big Daddy upstairs,
You be chillin
So be yo hood
You be sayin' it, I be doin' it
In this ere hood and yo's
Gimme some eats
And cut me some slack, Blood
So's I be doin' it to dem dat diss me
Don' be pushin' me into no jive
And keep dem crips away
'Cause you always be da man,
Straight up


Still think you might not need a dictionary or some other translation device for this modern everyday used language?????

I know I live in NY but that is not the language I speak.

 

[Baptist4life]

You have mistaken me.

Then I apologize. :godisgood:

 

[annsni]

Ebonics may be the "rough" language that some speak but it is not the only language they speak. I live on Long Island near some rough areas. Of course I'm less than an hour away from Harlem and other areas of New York City where rougher language is spoken. I promise you, you speak English, they do as well. It may not be perfect English but it's certainly not that sort of thing that was written here. There's an "act" - a "front" that these people use to be tough but it's not the primary language of anyone in NY, I can assure you.

 

[Baptist4life]

......... I live in NY ...........

I'll pray for you! :tongue3:

 

[Logos1560]

But, isn't that the excuse for all the MV's? "We need a Bible in "our" language? 21st century people don't use the "language" of the KJV, they can't possibly understand it".

Are you suggesting that the KJV translators were wrong in offering a similar reason for their making of another English translation when several were already available?

In their 1611 preface, the KJV translators wrote: "We desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar [common]."

Are you suggesting that the KJV translators were wrong to update a great deal of the archaic language in the Bishops' Bible of which the KJV was offically a revision?

 

[franklinmonroe]

Actually, unless you use a text-only Bible without notes, cross-references, and chapter and verse designations--you are using a Bible that is partially man-made. ...

Unless you use some sort of supernatural Bible that is not actually printed on paper with ink or not electronically delivered to your eyes or ears then you are using a Bible that wholly man-made.

 

[Fred's Wife]

Unless you use some sort of supernatural Bible that is not actually printed on paper with ink or not electronically delivered to your eyes or ears then you are using a Bible that wholly man-made.

Then what you are saying is that not one single Bible in the entire world is inspired by the Holy Spirit...correct?

 

[annsni]

I'll pray for you! :tongue3:

I know you posted as kind of a joke but not really, I hope. We DO need prayer here in NY. It's a very unchurched place (less than 1% attend a Bible teaching church) and it's very hard ground because religion is "cultural" here if it exists. God has us in the trenches and it's an exciting place to be and often discouraging. But God is stronger than the hard ground.

 

[SBCPreacher]

Okay, how about these verses, written in your own modern language?

And da earth wuz widdout form, an' void; an' darkness wuz upon da face o' da deep. And da Spirit o' Big Daddy groved upon da face o' da waters.

So Big Daddy created peeps in his own image, in da image o' Big Daddy created he him; [foul language removed] created he dem.

Or this:
Yo, Big Daddy upstairs,
You be chillin
So be yo hood
You be sayin' it, I be doin' it
In this ere hood and yo's
Gimme some eats
And cut me some slack, Blood
So's I be doin' it to dem dat diss me
Don' be pushin' me into no jive
And keep dem crips away
'Cause you always be da man,
Straight up


Still think you might not need a dictionary or some other translation device for this modern everyday used language?????

This is just about the most ridiculous response to a post I've ever read.

 

[Trotter]

Then what you are saying is that not one single Bible in the entire world is inspired by the Holy Spirit...correct?

No translation is inspired in and of itself. That which it is translated from IS inspired. All translations are the works of men's hands, attempts to deliver to us in our own language what God gave in languages other than our own. There is no second inspiration, else the canon would not be complete and we would be spewing out new revelations left and right (like the Mormons do).

 

[Jim1999]

I personally believe the only truly inspired word is in the original manuscripts. I believe the word has been preserved in essence through the various copies passed down through the ages. Hence, we do have the word of God in our hands.

In addition, this is also what makes systematic theology so important. It does not affirm a doctrine based on an isolated verse, but an accumulated meaning derived from the whole of scripture.

Thus I can hold my KJV and say I am holding the word of God. You may hold your version and truly say you are holding the word of God. The essence of what God gave to us IS contained in those versions, though there may be various differences in some verses, they do not affect the whole.

That is my understanding for what it is worth.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[franklinmonroe]

Then what you are saying is that not one single Bible in the entire world is inspired by the Holy Spirit...correct?

No, I'm saying that Bibles don't grow on trees. Somebody has to physically make them, print them, record them.

But on the hand, the Bible states that holy men spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. The KJV translators did not 'speak' new content when translating; the 'speaking' had already been done by prophets and apostles. What competent translators do is praiseworthy, but I wouldn't say that it has the attributes of divine inspiration.

 

[David Lamb]

Those are written in a commonly used, modern language...YES. Perhaps not used by Ann herself but my point was, there are many modern languages where a dictionary would greatly come in handy for translation.

Yes, I agree, for tranlation. I would need a dictionary if the only bible I had was in what to me is a foreign language, and Ebonics is a foreign language to me. (Even some words in standard American English either aren't used in British English, or have a completely different meaning - like gas, hood, drapes, sidewalk). But would a person who regularly uses Ebonics need to consult a dictionary to find out what "You be chillin, So be yo hood" means? No more than a Cockney would need a dictionary to understand, "Me trouble and strife took a butchers at me plates of meat."

Saying that someone prefers to use a Bible written in their modern language can be erroneous because every modern language isn't everyone else's modern language. Yes, the example I gave is the language of the modern black community, or if you will, Ebonics. Go into any black neighborhood in any town in America and that is what you will hear.

Yes, it is of course true that not everyone speaks the same modern language. But not everyone spoke the same language in 1611 either. Nowadays, very few people actually use the English of the KJV as their main language. I would suggest that not even the most zealous KJV supporter would say to their family doctor, "Go, I pray thee, to my house,
for my wife hath a sore sickness of long continuance."

Look, I understand, and even accept, there are those here on this MB who are not fans of, or readers of the KJV. That is your cup of tea.

I hope that you can also understand and accept that there are many of us who use a translation other than the KJV, who at the same time are not against the KJV.

But I truly dislike that when someone who DOES prefer the KJV posts something which is helpful, meaningful or even related to the KJV, those folks are rapid to jump and do everything they can to make them look wrong, stupid...you fill in your favorite thought here.

I apologise sincerely if you thought anything I have posted was meant to make make you look stupid. I assure you that wasn't my intention.

Yes, on the other side I realize there are those who think the only correct Bible is the KJV. And they're equally adamant in their arguments. However, THIS wasn't one of those discussions. I don't know why I let you people suck me in. Maybe I need to go find a nice, quiet Message Board where people actually have good things to say and share what God is doing for them instead of arguing all the time about idiotic, insipid things that in the end mean nothing at all for the Kingdom of God.

Yes, I praise God indeed for His great blessings, both those everyday things like food and clothing, and those amazing things He has done to enable a sinner such as me to go to His glorious heaven.

 

[David Lamb]

Rippon: "Well,my dear B4L, do you use KJV-speak when witnessing?" Baptist4life: Sometimes.

But Rippon didn't ask whether you used the KJV when witnessing, but whether you use what he called "KJV-speak". In other words, when you are witnessing using your own words, for example, giving your testimony, would you say to your hearer something such as this:
"Suffer me to tell thee how the Lord hath dealt with me. Aforetime I walked in ways of iniquity. Mine eye was blind to the good tidings of the gospel. But lo! the Lord hath now verily removed my blindness."

 

[Jaocb77]

Then what you are saying is that not one single Bible in the entire world is inspired by the Holy Spirit...correct?

Amen! This is the problem. We have many christians believing there is no 100% inspired bible anywhere on the face of the earth. That God failed to keep His promise to preserve His word when he said: My words shall endure forever.

 

[Jaocb77]

No, I'm saying that Bibles don't grow on trees. Somebody has to physically make them, print them, record them.

But on the hand, the Bible states that holy men spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. The KJV translators did not 'speak' new content when translating; the 'speaking' had already been done by prophets and apostles. What competent translators do is praiseworthy, but I wouldn't say that it has the attributes of divine inspiration.

So you believe that God does not get involved when it comes to His holy Word? Or let me put it another way, God was not involved at all when the KJV translators set out to translate? That God just went away and allowed His word to be tampered with beyond restraint?

God can and does use all types of men to get His will done.