Without claiming everything he's said is PERFECTLY PERFECT, this fellow below gives a great take on one of the most Astronomically Wonderful and Magnificent Masterpieces AND GIFTS OF ANY KIND FROM GOD THAT HE HAS EVER GIVEN TO MANKIND.
As opposed to your idea that "God blessed us", I have to go with God's Spiritual Advice in His Own Words, to;
"have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness". When you consider the most profound influences upon certain publications were by two individuals who founded "Societies" for the "study" and practice of anything Supernatural, with the ONE MAJOR EXCEPTION OF THE SUPERNATURAL DIVINITY AND HOLY SPIRIT ASSOCIATED WITH THE GOD OF THE BIBLE They are two folks whom we have no reason that is on record that anyone knows about that would confirm that they never even came close to claiming the Name of JESUS CHRIST, much less living for Him, if guessing something like whether they died and went to Heaven.
Something is too rotten in Denmark, with all that, for my taste. And too much rock solid confirmation, beginning with deleting nearly 20% of the New Testament, TO MAKE IT EASIER = TO NOT HAVE TO READ IT?
And then what's such a big deal about the Old Testament? Why not delete some enormous percentage of it? Didn't they feel up to it?
"
What are the benefits of using the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible over newer translations
such as the English Standard Version (ESV) or the New American Standard Bible (NASB)?
What are the drawbacks? What is your opinion on this matter?
By
Noone Kennedy:
"The Authorized KJV is the last Bible translation in any form of English to exclusively and faithfully translate the traditional text (textus receptus) word for word and literally, without any influence from the critical text. You need no other study tools to use it, just time and dedication. It is its own dictionary. Every word is defined by context, unlike the NKJV that uses words like “scruples” defined nowhere in it. It is its own reference tool. You can fallow words and phrases throughout it, like “the way” or “lamp” “the light” “faith” etc… I've found no other Bible that does this consistently. The language itself is a tool.
"In the language of the Greek New Testament and Hebrew Old Testament, there is a very distinct difference between the second-person singular and the second-person plural pronouns. We make no difference in modern English, both singular and plural are translated into you. However, in old English there exists a difference, just as there is in Greek and Hebrew. As a result, the old English used in the Authorized Version gives far more precise translation than would modern English. In our Authorized Version, THEE, THOU, THY, and THINE are always singular. YOU, YE, and YOUR, are always plural. If the second-person pronoun starts with a "t" then it is singular. If it starts with a "y" it is plural. This is faithful to the original languages. They tell you exactly who and exactly how many are being spoken to, eliminating possible identification errors. No other bible does this.
"The form and language are poetic, making it easier to memorize.
"It has something called cognitive scaffolding incorporated into it. Basically, it teaches you how to read it and how to understand it as you read it. No other version does this.
"It has been consistently rated at a 5th-grade level. So even a child or the mentally challenged will understand it, given time and exposure.
"But the two things I like most are.
#1 It simplifies study, you don't need to study another language, a dictionary, a lexicon, or a commentary, you just need to read and reread it, instead of spending your time in dictionaries or leaning on experts.
#2 When I'm reading it I know I'm reading what Christians read for centuries. The traditional text of the KJV (textus receptus) is traceable through history for 2000 years. The persecuted Christians of the first century read the textus receptus, John Bunyan's Bible was a translation of the textus receptus. The Puritan’s Bible was a translation of the textus receptus. The textus receptus is the text of the martyrs. It has a chain of custody for its OT dating back to 1400BC when it was first written down, and the NT has a chain of custody going back to the churches of the apostles.
"The critical text (vaticanus, alexandrus, sinaiticus) use by modern versions disagrees with themselves 7–8000 times and disagree with the traditional text (textus receptus) more than 30,000 times. The critical text is so filled with errors, mistakes, and contradictions that no one has ever translated it fully into a mass-marketed bible. If they did, it would be indefensibly and obviously c*****t to even the most basic laymen. The traditional text (textus receptus) is composed of 6059 Greek, 10.000 Latin, and 9300 various other language manuscripts that agree %98+/-."
) In neither his reference Bible nor his little book laying out the theology called Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth (1896) does he appear to formulate his theology from the KJV. I see nothing in his writings to validate the OP.
