Why I am KJV only

Warm Christian greetings!

Although I use the AV in my quiet times I am not KJV only. However, I would say that the people who seem to have the most problems with the AV are not the unsaved but the Christians!

Kind regards

Robert J Hutton

 

could be wrong ;but doesn't revival start with
prayer ?

 

swordsman said:

It was also the book used when we saw God working in the great revivals of our past, where whole cities were changed, people repented and trusted Christ by the thousands.

If this is the case, how come the IFB churches that stand for the KJV and against the modern versions are not spearheading the Third Great Awakening?

 

Lets examine that shall we!

Genesis 1:[1] In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

..................
Revelation 22:[12] And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

[13] I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

[14] Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Now after all those little sniplets taken from random from the KJV where is the English that is archaic and out of date?... Then again I'll take the stand that a lot of brethren like to throw around here the old strawman!... Brother Glen </font>[/QUOTE]In order to save board space I left out most of your verses, but your point is taken, however, there is a problem. As I said before, it is NOT the 1611 version of the KJV that you are quoting. The scripture you are quoting is only 300 years old while the 400 year old King James is practically unreadable.

Yes, the KJV (later version--not 1611) is the Bible the United States has grown up with, but when you look at the 200 years the U.S. has been a country, it is relatively short (very short) when looking at the past 2000 years to Christ's time and 2000 or 4000 years before that. I must disagree with your statement the KJV will be here in 20,000 years. Maybe as a historical museum document (or possibly available on your hand-held library), but technology and language will change so much that I can guarantee that it will be unreadable 200 years from now without special classes just to learn the specific text and grammar. God can preserve it, but it has only been around for the last 15% of the time since Christ. So, why would it be preserved in such an archaic language. It won't be, as you can see, many churches are slowly moving to MV's and not just liberal churches--a lot of very conservative churches. My pastor is extremely conservative and although he reads from the KJV he will often say something to the effect that a particular word can also be translated using another word--and usually his other word comes from the NIV and is more accurate when using today's American English.

This is just like hymns and church music. I have heard people say that a new hymn written in the 1960's was not what we should sing in church because that is not what we sang before.

Here is the answer: "People resist change." But, change does occur and will occur and newer, English language translations will appear and be used. They will be more accurate to the person reading them as our language changes.

Let me be clear on one point. I am talking about REAL translations, not gender neutral or politically correct Bibles where the translator varies from the original manuscripts to keep people happy. I am talking about true scholars who have attempted to the best of their ability (just like King James' scholars--in their day) to translate the best available original manuscripts.

[ November 27, 2002, 03:39 PM: Message edited by: Phillip ]

 

After reading all that I wrote about being KJV there is one piece of information I would like to pass on. There is no translation the reading of or the understanding of that can give eternal life. Though each of us my be adamant and serious in the translations that we study... It is not there brethren.

I may disagree with your versions and embrace the KJV but then that is for me and what you read is for you. Since God did not tell any of us personally to read the KJV or any other versions it is just not there. These are all no matter how heated and passionate the argument may be facts to us and opinions to others... and is really of no concern to me.

My reasons for reading and studying the KJV are my own and if I would to tell others of it they wouldn't believe it so again it is just an opinion except others within that select circle. Can I say for a fact that the KJV is the only word of God and the others are not!... Sure I can say anything I want as this is what I believe but you do not have to believe what I say. I have a right to say what I beleve as you have a right to say what you believe also.

Brethren seem to always lose sight of this scripture which is found in... John 5:39 Search the scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life and they are they which testify of me. So disagree with me all you want as I have a tough hide... As since their isn't a version on the face of the earth that can impart eternal life only to tell all Gods children about Jesus the Christ who did... Why is this a constant bone of contention?... Or do we just need something to argue about?... You know me I'm KJV for a reason!... Brother Glen

[ November 28, 2002, 01:16 PM: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

 

I certainly believe anyone has a right to choose the version of Bible they wish to read and study. I have noticed that the folks who strongly believe in the KJV as being the only Bible that one should read are the first ones who casting doubt on all other versions and are the first to cry foul when the folks who use the modern versions make an effort to defend them.

I read in an earlier post on this thread several examples that Tyndale1946 gave as examples of what would be considered easy to understand in the KJV. When I compared several of these to the NLT the latter seemed to be much clearer and easier to understand. I’ll let you decide for yourself.

Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; KJV

Now the Holy Spirit tells us clearly that in the last times some will turn away from what we believe; they will follow lying spirits and teachings that come from demons NLT

Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin KJV

So then, since Christ suffered physical pain, you must arm yourselves with the same attitude he had, and be ready to suffer, too. NLT

And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. KJV

“See, I am coming soon, and my reward is with me, to repay all according to their deeds. NLT

I'll offer the following verses from the KJV in evidence and can you say in all
truthfulness you would expect someone to know what these mean,
especially young new Christians? I understand at one time in history these words had specific meaning. Those meanings have drastically changed. It now requires the aid of various commentaries and dictionaries to figure out a KJV. Even my computer spell-checker doesn’t recognize the words.

"thou hast possessed my reins" (Ps. 139:13)
"decayeth and waxeth old" (Heb. 8:13)
"not in chambering and wantonness" (Ro. 13:13)
"the instruments also of the churl are evil" (Is. 32:7)
"Isaac was sporting with his wife" (Gen. 26:8)
"by his neesings a light doth shine" (Job 41:18)
"ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing" (Jas. 2:3)
"when divers were hardened, and believed not" (Acts 19:9)
"sick of the palsy" (Mk. 2:3)
And one of my favorites, do you really believe Goliath went into
battle with a target on his back?

As much as I believe the KJV to be the Word of God I also believe
that there are many other good choices out there. And I believe that
at the rate our language is changing no one will be able to read the
KJV in years to come. I have the same concerns that you seem to have about the large
number of new translations coming out each year, as I see changes in
a few of these that appear to be a corruption of the Word. Our biggest
difference is in how KJVO’s and I define corruption. The KJVO’s see everything other than the KJV as corrupted. I see only versions which change basic doctrine and principle as corruption. It is my sincere
hope that good Bibles containing the same principles as found in the
KJV will be available to future Christian generations. I also hope this controversy does not cause Christians to become insensitive to the “real” changes. Are the KJVO’s crying wolf to often?

Tyndale1946 said:
The problem I have understanding is why some brethren think God stood in the background and told the translators to go for it...

My question is why would God have stood in the background for versions printed after the KJV? Could He have not guided the MV translators in the same manner?

 

Lets examine that shall we! ... Now after all those little sniplets taken from random from the KJV where is the English that is archaic and out of date?... Then again I'll take the stand that a lot of brethren like to throw around here the old strawman!... Brother Glen </font>[/QUOTE]How about words like wot or wotteth; how about wist; how about a word like "let" that has changed meaning (2 Thess 2:7) with the result that the opposite meaning is given making the KJV contradict what Paul wrote. How about a word like "prevent" in 1 Thess 4:17? It too has exactly the opposite meaning. How about "neesings"? I could list a lot of words that are outdated. I don't care what version you use. My statement stands that the KJV is in a langauge that has changed over 400 years with the result that it is not the best version for general usage. It is simply out of date. It leads some to think that Scripture is hard to understand that God is not relevant. That is a tragedy that is easily remedied by a translation in the common language.

As I say, I don't really care what version you use. If you love the KJV, that is great ... use it. But do not condemn those of us who do not use it in favor of a modern translation.

 

All of you have the right to your opinion and I have been around quite a while so you know my position. The Primitive Baptist brethren are KJV but not of the other groups or those who are KJV only that seems to attack every other version that raises its head. We are KJV for a reason and a purpose none but us understand... That being said the KJV is definately archaic and out of date... Only in your churches and not ours... Brother Glen

 

I was just out last night at the Hungry House, eating with 2 of my coworkers. We had just finished our shift at FedEx Ground, and we always eat out the last work day of the week. This opportunity to eat out weekly with them before I return to my college campus has been a blessing, as one person has been saved and another encouraged in only 2 weeks.

Last night, after praying for our supper, a man from a local Baptist church comlimented us, saying that he hardly ever sees young men pray in public like that. Everything was great: conversation, food, fellowship. Then, the man asked me, "How do you feel about the KJV?" I replied, "I respect it a lot; I used it when I was growing up." He then probed further, "What version do you use?" I said, "NASB." He then proceeded to tell me one of those New Age Bible Versions objections, "You know that your version makes Satan out to be Jesus in Isaiah?" ("Lucifer" in the KJV; "star of morning" in NASB, used also of Jesus in the New Testament). I gave him the proper and correct reply: "Lucifer is not a proper name; it is a Latin word meaning 'morning star, daystar, star of morning.' The capitalization was added by the KJV translaters. I would rather not talk about this, sir." He kept on, "Wow, you're so defensive about it." I said again, "Some here are new believers; I say again I do not want to talk about it." He kept persisting. Finally, I said, "This conversation will end here." He stared at me for a minute, and then continued to eat.

We left the Hungry House on good terms, but the moral of this story is to avoid confusion. I agree that there are far too many versions, but they are here, so let's deal with it and lead some people to Jesus before the end of the world.

&gt;&gt;Luther

[ November 28, 2002, 10:23 PM: Message edited by: StMartinLuther ]

 

You are absolutely right. That was way out of line. It scares me to hear people call the Word of God (especially a good mainstream like the NASB) as being "new age" or from "Satan". To me it seems blasphemous.

I still like my KJV, but only because I grew up with it. Most of my study is with a parallel Bible--and in all of my studies there has been no doctrinal difference when (instead of counting a particular word that was left out--or more accurately--translated into another like word) you take chapters in context.

 

Amen!!! Dr. Griffin