Men Who Are KJV Preferred ...

[alexander284]

Men Who Are KJV Preferred ...

If you happen to be a man who falls into this category, I would appreciate knowing why you prefer the KJV over "modern" Bible translations.

(And thank you in advance for your valued feedback.)

 

[Crimson12]

It is the most predominant Translation that I know from the Textus Receptus. While I love my KJV along with NKJ; Jubilee and Webster these are just a few that I deeply like especially since unlike many modern Translation it does not question Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11. Don’t agree with the Modern Translation but that is my preference and why I would never recommend reading from the NIV I would rather someone read from it than ignore Bible reading all together.

 

[37818]

I would like it to be just simple. In the New Testament, more often than not, the KJV follows the Majority Text readings. But the Issues are really various. The old English has the plural and singular pronouns. There just happens to be some special cases. So the bottom line being, we can only take the translation we use to be in agreement with God's inerrant word as God gave it in the originals. When we have a difference or a difficulty we need to study the issue carefully.

 

[Marooncat79]

I typically used KJ and NASB

 

[Salty]

I dont call myself "Preferred"
but rather - more so "JKV-T" ie - by tradition.
I have used the KJV only for my first 20 years - then
about that time several more versions came out.

I do like the KJV - because that is the only version
I have memorized. I do you use my KJV in my sermon prep,
as well as my HSCB. Normally, I preach out out my NJKV

But IF I do preach in a KJO church - I have no problem using
my KJV. (But I wonder if I am supposed to say - "but this word means....."

 

[Reformed1689]

While I love my KJV along with NKJ; Jubilee and Webster these are just a few that I deeply like especially since unlike many modern Translation it does not question Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11.

Just curious, and this might be for another thread, do you know why those are not considered to be original?

 

[Reformed1689]

But IF I do preach in a KJO church - I have no problem using
my KJV.

Exactly, I agree with this wholeheartedly.

 

[Reynolds]

I dont call myself "Preferred"
but rather - more so "JKV-T" ie - by tradition.
I have used the KJV only for my first 20 years - then
about that time several more versions came out.

I do like the KJV - because that is the only version
I have memorized. I do you use my KJV in my sermon prep,
as well as my HSCB. Normally, I preach out out my NJKV

But IF I do preach in a KJO church - I have no problem using
my KJV. (But I wonder if I am supposed to say - "but this word means....."

Even when you preach at a KJVO church, you need to have fun with them a bit and unpack so e old the verses they so commonly misunderstand due to lack of Old English Knowledge.

 

[Reformed1689]

Even when you preach at a KJVO church, you need to have fun with them a bit and unpack so e old the verses they so commonly misunderstand due to lack of Old English Knowledge.

Or buy them a copy of this: King James Bible Word Book | Logos Bible Software lol

 

[JesusFan]

Even when you preach at a KJVO church, you need to have fun with them a bit and unpack so e old the verses they so commonly misunderstand due to lack of Old English Knowledge.

Doesn't the 1611 kjv use word "piss" in one of the prophets? Si that would be accepting preaching in Kjvo?

 

[Salty]

Doesn't the 1611 kjv use word "piss" in one of the prophets? Si that would be accepting preaching in Kjvo?

The day I preached at that KJO church (actually several preached that day) some of those pastors were joking how that is one time they can say "piss".
I found that totally unacceptable

That verse is II Kings 18:27. The NKJV states " who will eat and drink their own waste with you?"

 

[JesusFan]

The day I preached at that KJO church (actually several preached that day) some of those pastors were joking how that is one time they can say "piss".
I found that totally unacceptable

But per their own theology regarding the Kjv, would be "acceptable"

 

[Salty]

But per their own theology regarding the Kjv, would be "acceptable"

Yes, you are correct -
But if one one the teenage were to say in a mixed group - I have to go ......
I'm sure that someone would be pulling off a belt....

 

[Dr. Bob]

My pun-filled word plays are flooding my brain, but will refrain. I am not, nor ever was KJVonly/preferred, et al, so not eligible to comment on this thread.

 

[Salty]

My pun-filled word plays are flooding my brain, but will refrain. I am not, nor ever was KJVonly/preferred, et al, so not eligible to comment on this thread.

How about KJV-T --- KJV by Tradition??

 

[alexander284]

The day I preached at that KJO church (actually several preached that day) some of those pastors were joking how that is one time they can say "piss".
I found that totally unacceptable

That verse is II Kings 18:27. The NKJV states " who will eat and drink their own waste with you?"

The ESV still uses the word "dung." That may be something to address in the next update, eh?

 

[Dr. Bob]

How about KJV-T --- KJV by Tradition??

I grew up with KJV1769 Oxford edition and memorized hundreds (thousands?) of verses in the beautiful lilt of the AV. In the 1950's that was typical of Baptist churches, while the liturgical churches were using the RSV or Douay/Confraternity. Many of the leaders in the church were studying from the 1901ASV for its more accurate modern translation of tenses (I still have my hard-bound on the shelf beside me today)

So "tradition" would be both. As soon as I pastored I begin "revising" the verses as I preached - removing many of the archaism's and "smoothing" the grammar, pronouns, etc, just for the sake of making clear the verse to anyone of any educational level. This drove me into the inspired text to be sure I wasn't getting the message wrong. I saw many translated words and phrases that were either inaccurate or the language evolved and replaced them.

This led to not calling ANY translation as "preferred" and certainly not as "only". English is an ever-evolving language and so must be how the inspired Word is translated today into our receptor language.

 

[JesusFan]

The ESV still uses the word "dung." That may be something to address in the next update, eh?

What else could it be called though?

 

[Salty]

This led to not calling ANY translation as "preferred" and certainly not as "only". English is an ever-evolving language and so must be how the inspired Word is translated today into our receptor language.

I condend those of us in the USA do NOT speak English - we speak American - with many sub dialects

 

[RipponRedeaux]

I condend those of us in the USA do NOT speak English - we speak American - with many sub dialects

Is condend an example of the American language? I'm an American but I use the word contend.