Real Reasons to use the KJV.

[37818]

I am not a KJVonlyist.

https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.tbsbibles...ons-for-Keeping-to-the-Authorised-Version.pdf

https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.tbsbibles...EAE1CF/A-Textual-Key-to-the-New-Testament.pdf

So, I've looked at the two articles you linked too and skimmed through most of the thread and just want to ask you the following questions...

Is there any reason given in support of the KJV that would not also support the NKJV?

Yes, but is not in either articles. Of the modern translations the NKJV is a translation I would recomend. Bur the NKJV has no apperatus to distinguise singular pronouns from plural pronouns that the Old English offers. Otherwise the NKJV can be considered better the than our currently used KJV. The distinction between singular and plural pronouns is largely why I use the KJV.

 

[CJP69]

Yes, but is not in either articles. Of the modern translations the NKJV is a translation I would recomend. Bur the NKJV has no apperatus to distinguise singular pronouns from plural pronouns that the Old English offers. Otherwise the NKJV can be considered better the than our currently used KJV. The distinction between singular and plural pronouns is largely why I use the KJV.

One the contrary! There is no need to distinguish between singular pronouns from plural pronouns in the manner that the KJV does it. That's precisely the reason that English speaking people don't use "Thee", "Thou", "Thine", etc. any longer. There are other, both grammatical and contextual, ways the information is communicated.

 

[MrW]

Thee, thou, thine, singular.

Ye, you, plural.

I suspect we don’t use the old words now because we are lazy. It’s easier to just say you or y’all. We have degenerated from women wearing nice dresses and men wearing nice suits in the 40s and the early 50s until now today we wear rags. Behavior and speech have degenerated commensurately. Reading what the Founding Fathers of this nation wrote you can tell they were highly educated in language.

 

[CJP69]

Thee, thou, thine, singular.

Ye, you, plural.

I suspect we don’t use the old words now because we are lazy.

It's because they aren't needed.

It’s easier to just say you or y’all. We have degenerated from women wearing nice dresses and men wearing nice suits in the 40s and the early 50s until now today we wear rags. Behavior and speech have degenerated commensurately. Reading what the Founding Fathers of this nation wrote you can tell they were highly educated in language.

There are lots of thing about society that has degenerated both morally and practically but the use of thee and thou isn't one of them.

 

[37818]

e

One the contrary! There is no need to distinguish between singular pronouns from plural pronouns in the manner that the KJV does it.

You are mistaken.
The ten words/commandments. The seven letters of the book of Revelation. John 3:7. Romans 11. Etc.

 

[37818]

There is no NEED to distinguish between singular pronouns from plural pronouns in the manner that the KJV does it. As in, it isn't required or essential.

You fail to understand you are effectively denying Deuteronomy 8:3, ". . . might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live. . . ." You see God uses plural and singular pronouns in His word.

 

[MrW]

I didn't say that there wasn't any situation where the technique cannot be used!

I everyone on this entire site this dense?

I feel like I'm talking to 3rd grade public school students!

Let me be more explicit....

There is no NEED to distinguish between singular pronouns from plural pronouns in the manner that the KJV does it. As in, it isn't required or essential.

One is not obligated to use 17th century English to communicate clearly! It might be a personal preference, one might even count it as a luxury but it is not NECESSARY.

Get it?

I don’t know what your problems are, but there is no need to be so RUDE.

Get it?

 

[MrW]

When you showed up, I thought it refreshing you were here. You managed in only two posts to change my mind. Do you alienate everyone so easily?

 

[Scarlett O.]

I didn't say that there wasn't any situation where the technique cannot be used!

I everyone on this entire site this dense?

I feel like I'm talking to 3rd grade public school students!

Let me be more explicit....

There is no NEED to distinguish between singular pronouns from plural pronouns in the manner that the KJV does it. As in, it isn't required or essential.

One is not obligated to use 17th century English to communicate clearly! It might be a personal preference, one might even count it as a luxury but it is not NECESSARY.

Get it?

Mod note: Whether you are right or whether you are wrong is very, very irrelevant, your speech is horribly rude. Your anger has gotten the best of you and you insult groups of people that have nothing to do with this issue: ALL members here, third graders, public school members.

Your anger has overwhelmed you. Get off of this thread for a while until you can speak in a Christ-like manner.

This is not a suggestion.

Scarlett O.

 

[MrW]

Ye and you are plural.

Thee, thou, thy, and thine are singular.

Some see no need. Personally, I find it informative and useful.

 

[Silverhair]

You fail to understand you are effectively denying Deuteronomy 8:3, ". . . might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live. . . ." You see God uses plural and singular pronouns in His word.

When you read Deu 8:1-3 who was being spoken to, a single person or a group? A group. But you can still use the singular to represent that group or you could use a plural to represent those in the group. So you could use "you " in the English and it would not make any difference. The person would still understand what the text was trying to convey. So based on those verses to say the KJV's use of thee, thou etc adds to understanding the text fails.

 

[37818]

When you read Deu 8:1-3 who was being spoken to, a single person or a group? A group. But you can still use the singular to represent that group or you could use a plural to represent those in the group. So you could use "you " in the English and it would not make any difference. The person would still understand what the text was trying to convey. So based on those verses to say the KJV's use of thee, thou etc adds to understanding the text fails.

God addresses the individual with His commands. Deuteronomy 5:21 a case in point.

 

[Silverhair]

God addresses the individual with His commands. Deuteronomy 5:21 a case in point.

And you can't figure that out by reading a modern translation? You make it sound as if we should all be speaking in 16 or 17 hundreds English.

If five people got the wrong answer on a math test and I, as their teacher, say you missed a step and got it wrong. Am I speaking to the group or each student?

 

[MrW]

When you read Deu 8:1-3 who was being spoken to, a single person or a group? A group. But you can still use the singular to represent that group or you could use a plural to represent those in the group. So you could use "you " in the English and it would not make any difference. The person would still understand what the text was trying to convey. So based on those verses to say the KJV's use of thee, thou etc adds to understanding the text fails.

I can’t agree. Context shows a group is being spoken to, but the use of “thee” makes it personal to every last individual of the group.

It’s like the Ten Commandments. When God says “Thou shalt not…“ and “Thou shalt…”, it is singular though He refers to all Israel. It reinforces the fact that though He speaks to all Israel, He is at the same time emphasizing, “I’m talking to YOU, boy!”

 

[MrW]

And I am not telling you what you have to read. I am telling you it adds meaning to the text for me. If it doesn’t work for you, that’s between you and God. It does work for me, and I suspect for many others also.

 

[Silverhair]

I can’t agree. Context shows a group is being spoken to, but the use of “thee” makes it personal to every last individual of the group.

It’s like the Ten Commandments. When God says “Thou shalt not…“ and “Thou shalt…”, it is singular though He refers to all Israel. It reinforces the fact that though He speaks to all Israel, He is at the same time emphasizing, “I’m talking to YOU, boy!”

And someone hearing or reading those texts in a modern translation would understand just that. The same as those Jews in the desert that heard them understood that they had a personal application.

Exo 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. KJV
Exo 20:3 "You shall have no other gods before Me. NASB
Exo 20:3 You shall have no other gods before Me BSB
Exo 20:3 you shall have no other gods before me. NRSV
Exo 20:3 "You shall have no other gods before Me. NKJV
Exo 20:3 "You must not have any other god but Me. NLT

Do you think anyone would not understand this command as being personal? Or what about this one? Exo 20:7 "You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain. Or this one: Exo 20:17 "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's."

In the KJV we find "thou" 4617 times in 3262 verses. I read a number of those verses and there was no confusion in the modern translations. When we read the bible we do not read just one verse. We study the context and doing so removes any confusion one may have had.

I did the same with "thee" 3344 times in 2349 verses and got the same results. Context clears confusion.

 

[MrW]

And someone hearing or reading those texts in a modern translation would understand just that. The same as those Jews in the desert that heard them understood that they had a personal application.

Exo 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. KJV
Exo 20:3 "You shall have no other gods before Me. NASB
Exo 20:3 You shall have no other gods before Me BSB
Exo 20:3 you shall have no other gods before me. NRSV
Exo 20:3 "You shall have no other gods before Me. NKJV
Exo 20:3 "You must not have any other god but Me. NLT

Do you think anyone would not understand this command as being personal? Or what about this one? Exo 20:7 "You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain. Or this one: Exo 20:17 "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's."

In the KJV we find "thou" 4617 times in 3262 verses. I read a number of those verses and there was no confusion in the modern translations. When we read the bible we do not read just one verse. We study the context and doing so removes any confusion one may have had.

I did the same with "thee" 3344 times in 2349 verses and got the same results. Context clears confusion.

Yes they are instances where it works fine in modern English. My point was that we can see that in the Old English too, because of context.

My further point is there are times where it doesn't work in the modern English. At those times, where context doesn't make it clear, the singular or plural does make it clear.

I repeat, if it doesn't work for you, that's fine. I'm telling you it is beneficial to me. For those reasons, I disagree with you.

 

[kyredneck]

Real Reasons to use the KJV.

For me the reasons are simple, I learned from the KJV and all the Bible tools I've acquired over the years are synched with the KJV. Although the ASV has become my primary Bible I don't see where the KJV has steered Christendom wrong in the past, so, I still use it in my research due primarily because that's what all my 'tools' originated from.

 

[Silverhair]

Yes they are instances where it works fine in modern English. My point was that we can see that in the Old English too, because of context.

My further point is there are times where it doesn't work in the modern English. At those times, where context doesn't make it clear, the singular or plural does make it clear.

I repeat, if it doesn't work for you, that's fine. I'm telling you it is beneficial to me. For those reasons, I disagree with you.

There may be times where in modern versions it is not as clear, granted. And for the record I am not disagreeing with your choice of bible. As you say it works for you. But reality is that for the vast majority of young people the 1769 KJV is not their bible of choice because of the language. That was the point I was trying to make.

A bible that is not read is just a paper weight.

 

[MrW]

There may be times where in modern versions it is not as clear, granted. And for the record I am not disagreeing with your choice of bible. As you say it works for you. But reality is that for the vast majority of young people the 1769 KJV is not their bible of choice because of the language. That was the point I was trying to make.

A bible that is not read is just a paper weight.

I have numerous translations on my phone. My Blueletter Bible app lets me read my KJB and whatever other translation I choose side by side. That’s what I recommend to assist “young people”.

For doctrine I always take my KJB. I use several alternates to clarify or verify what I think the obscure word is.

For example, I was reading of the transfiguration, and the Lord’s clothing became whiter than “any fuller” could make them. I thought, “Must be a word that we would say use ‘bleach’ for”, and I was right. Also, sometimes word order is easier when I do the comparison.

And it takes me 14 keystrokes to bold a word if I’m not at my desktop!