• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

King James Version only or its ok to use other versions?

T

TaliOrlando

New Member
I am wondering what you think on this?

I have had brothers and sisters tell me they only use KJV and will not even read or touch any other..

I am new to this, but why is this happening?
 
T

tinytim

<img src =/tim2.jpg>
My thoughts are whatever version a person will USE is good.. barring the wack jobs like JEhovahs Witness... NWT
 
Thinkingstuff

Thinkingstuff

Active Member
For several reasons that I can think of. There are a group of people who believe that the KJV is the only properly translated bible in the English language. They will try to wow you with their views that it came from an uncomprimised textus recepticus and that the translators were faithful to the truest english translation. You will hear that there is a group saying that the only real viable translation that is faithful to the inspired word of God is the Authorized version of 1611. You might also find that these people pray in the kings english as well. Basically, they are not trustful of anything that doesn't seem like the "ole time religion".

The fact is I suggest you actually study how the bible was put together and have a critical view. Sometimes these people seem almost cult like with their KJ onlyism. The facts are that the original Authographs no longer exist. The scriptures were copied many times in many languages. The authographs were written in Hebrew and Aramaic. the NT was written in Greek. All english versions of the bible are translations and though the bible faithfully puts forth the word of God to man today I doubt that KJO people are correct in their views of the AV 1611. Though the translation is a good one it may not be the best one and the Textus Recepticus is not a pure copy inerrant. The real question when studying the bible and how it was put together is this:

Does infallibility = inerrancy?

There will be more honest people who say they just like it better. Nothing wrong with that. Its honest and the KJV of the bible is an orthodox (not as in orthodox church) translation but so are several other translations.
 
J

Jim1999

<img src =/Jim1999.jpg>
I don't think the manner of translation employed has anything to dowith for many people of age. We started with a KJV and we will end life with one. I still use my 1945 KJV for study, memorization and in the pulpit. I know better about the translations, Hebrew and Greek version, but I prefer my old KJV with all its marginal notes and corrections.

It is as simple as that. We like to make more of it than it is. Like the previous entry, I really don't care what version people read and study from; they are reading it! I can always correct wrong thoughts from the pulpit.

Cheers,

Jim
 
A

Askjo

New Member
Two words: Superior ans Accuracy.

The KJV is the most accurate translation available today.

The KJV is superior over modern versions because of 4-fold superiority: Theology, Translation, Technique and Texts.
 
Thinkingstuff

Thinkingstuff

Active Member
Askjo said:
Two words: Superior ans Accuracy.

The KJV is the most accurate translation available today.

The KJV is superior over modern versions because of 4-fold superiority: Theology, Translation, Technique and Texts.
Click to expand...

And here is a perfect example of what I mean when I say
Sometimes these people seem almost cult like with their KJ onlyism.
Click to expand...
Now let the wowing begin with reference to the TR. (not unlike Mary for the Catholics it was immaculately concieved and is the only faithful text brought forward to the KJ translators)
 
D

Darron Steele

New Member
Askjo said:
Two words: Superior ans Accuracy.

The KJV is the most accurate translation available today.

The KJV is superior over modern versions because of 4-fold superiority: Theology, Translation, Technique and Texts.
Click to expand...
The "4-fold superiority" is regurgitated from D. A. Waite.

Askjo: you ought to credit your source. It is plagiarism to attribute someone else's words to yourself -- unless you are D. A. Waite, but he is in New Jersey and you report being in the Midwest.
 
R

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Askjo said:
The KJV is superior over modern versions because of 4-fold superiority: Theology, Translation, Technique and Texts.
Click to expand...

These are just bald assertions -- no proof for any of the claims.
 
W

Walguy

Member
The KJV is a wonderful translation and a great work of literature. It is worth reading and studying. But the simple truth is that no translation can ever be perfect. Things are always lost going from one language to another. So claims of KJV being so perfect that nothing else is needed don't stand up to logical analysis.
In addition, the English language has changed so much since the KJV was published that you often need to have words and phrases translated into modern English just to properly understand what the KJV translators meant. This makes it less than ideal for those who didn't grow up learning the verses from it and what they mean. For adult converts it can be confusing to the point of being counterproductive.
I think the best method is to use a translation that you are comfortable with as your prime reading translation, but for studying to use multiple versions, including the KJV. For serious students, an interlinear Greek-English NT with a lexicon and dictionary brings the NT more alive than any number of English translations are capable of.
The KJV is worth having and using to the extent that it is helpful to each individual, but to state that it is the only Bible a Christian should ever read is to worship the translation rather than the Author. Not a good idea.
 
A

Askjo

New Member
My research on Bible issue for 20+ years showed me the fact. That is why I only use the KJV.

When I used the NASB for 10 years, I decided to start my research on Bible issues including the textual criticism, different Bible translations and Hebrew/Greek texts. When the fact showed me, I realized that the KJV is most accurate translation over modern versions.

[Sorry I hit the Moderator's edit button instead of the quote button.]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
B

Bible-boy

Active Member
Askjo said:
My research on Bible issue for 20+ years showed me the fact. That is why I only use the KJV.

When I used the NASB for 10 years, I decided to start my research on Bible issues including the textual criticism, different Bible translations and Hebrew/Greek texts. When the fact showed me, I realized that the KJV is most accurate translation over modern versions.
Click to expand...

Just curious, how many semesters of Greek and Hebrew did you study at an accredited Bible College or Seminary?
 
H

Havensdad

New Member
Askjo said:
My research on Bible issue for 20+ years showed me the fact. That is why I only use the KJV.

When I used the NASB for 10 years, I decided to start my research on Bible issues including the textual criticism, different Bible translations and Hebrew/Greek texts. When the fact showed me, I realized that the KJV is most accurate translation over modern versions.

[Sorry I hit the Moderator's edit button instead of the quote button.]
Click to expand...

Bro, the KJV doesn't even agree with it's own underlying text, in places. We can look and see the translation errors for ourselves (I do not read Hebrew, but I do read Greek). In order for you to make these assertions, you would have to say that God intentionally caused these errors> i.e. that the errors themselves were inspired...

Brother, might I suggest the ESV? A most EXCELLENT translation.
 
B

Bible-boy

Active Member
Havensdad said:
Bro, the KJV doesn't even agree with it's own underlying text, in places. We can look and see the translation errors for ourselves (I do not read Hebrew, but I do read Greek). In order for you to make these assertions, you would have to say that God intentionally caused these errors> i.e. that the errors themselves were inspired...

Brother, might I suggest the ESV? A most EXCELLENT translation.
Click to expand...

Yep,

Even in the Great Commission the KJV gets it wrong. The KJV says, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations..." (Matt. 28:19). This makes the text look like an imperative command. However, the Greek text is better understood as saying, "As you are going," or "As you go" meaning it should be a natural part of your daily life to be making disciples, teaching them, and baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Every Christian ought to be doing this as part of their daily lives. This is not some command for pastors and missionaries alone to be going out to the nations.
 
A

Amy.G

New Member
Bible-boy said:
Yep,

Even in the Great Commission the KJV gets it wrong. The KJV says, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations..." (Matt. 28:19). This makes the text look like an imperative command. However, the Greek text is better understood as saying, "As you are going," or "As you go" meaning it should be a natural part of your daily life to be making disciples, teaching them, and baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Every Christian ought to be doing this as part of their daily lives. This is not some command for pastors and missionaries alone to be going out to the nations.
Click to expand...
It appears all versions get it wrong then. I couldn't find one that says "as you go".
 
B

Bible-boy

Active Member
Amy.G said:
It appears all versions get it wrong then. I couldn't find one that says "as you go".
Click to expand...

Yep, because all their translation teams followed the lead of the KJV. However, the Greek is not in the imperative so it should not be translated as if it is a command...
 
A

Amy.G

New Member
Bible-boy said:
Yep, because all their translation teams followed the lead of the KJV. However, the Greek is not in the imperative so it should not be translated as if it is a command...
Click to expand...
Huh? The NIV, NLT, NASB translators followed the lead of the KJV? They didn't even use the same underlying manuscripts.

[OOOOPS. I did it again. I hit my Moderator's edit button instead of the quote button. Sorry.]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
B

Bible-boy

Active Member
Amy.G said:
Huh? The NIV, NLT, NASB translators followed the lead of the KJV? They didn't even use the same underlying manuscripts.

[OOOOPS. I did it again. I hit my Moderator's edit button instead of the quote button. Sorry.]
Click to expand...

They followed the same translation style in how they worded their translations. I'm not talking about which Greek texts they used.
 
E

Ed Edwards

<img src=/Ed.gif>
Mat 28:19 (Geneva Bible, e-sword.com )
Go therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the Name of the Father,
and the Sonne, and the holy Ghost,

Mat 28:19 (KJV1611 Edition, e-sword.com )
Goe ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the Name of the Father,
and of the Sonne, and of the holy Ghost:

Mat 28:19 (KJV1769 type Edition, crosswalk.com )
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Mat 28:19 (ESV = English Standard Version)
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations,
baptizing them inthe name of the Father
and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

Note that the KJV1611 is more like a 1599 Bible;
whereas the Modern Version (MV) KJV is like the Modern Version (MV) ESV.

Note the run-together-words 'in' and 'the' in the ESV. hard to get perfect, maybe in a later edition?
 
H

Havensdad

New Member
Ed Edwards said:
Note the run-together-words 'in' and 'the' in the ESV. hard to get perfect, maybe in a later edition?
Click to expand...

None of my ESV's have those run together words, Ed. You really need to stop buying your Bibles from rummage sales :laugh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top