Is the KJV more than a translation

[Stabat Mater dolorosa]

There seems a specific culture that looks at the KJV as the supreme authority of the written word of God above all else. I have a hard time following this logic as there is a whole lot of history before the KJV and after the KJV in thousands of languages that it seems rather arbitrary to pick the KJV above all else. This culture feels very ethnocentric I might add which then dips into offensive areas. Should not our quest in determining responsible scripture be a little more sophisticated and more focused at our mission?

It was the best translation there was at the time it were first published.
Stylistically brilliant and generally speaking it was great in many ways.

Since then the methods of translations have improved immensely and since the time of KJV we've discovered the Masoret scripts which makes KJV outdated as it did with most translations of its time.

They were good, but now they've served their purpose and should be put to rest on the shelf making room for better translations.

 

[Almost there]

Again, I am not looking to convince you if you don't believe the Bible is God's Word. You already start out with a wrong presupposition that pulls the carpet out from under having faith in God's Word to begin with. Carry on with not believing the Bible is the Written Word of God. Nothing I post with Scripture is going to convince you. You first need to believe then you can see what God's Word is saying.

I definitely believe. The bible is my primary source of wisdom regarding my relationship my creator, and a subset of that - my relationship with my fellow man. But when, at the end of Romans, Paul is giving salutations to his friends in a letter he wrote to a church, I don't call that "the word of God". Contrarily, when it is in red, well, I do see that as the word of God. Like I said, the bible definintely contains the word of God, but never claims to be the word of God.

Remember, when scripture is mentioned in the bible, it is not talking about the bible. It had not yet been compiled and much of what is in it had not yet been written. It is talking about some of the information in the OT, however. "Scripture" just means "something written down".

 

[he-man]

I definitely believe. The bible is my primary source of wisdom regarding my relationship my creator, and a subset of that - my relationship with my fellow man. But when, at the end of Romans, Paul is giving salutations to his friends in a letter he wrote to a church, I don't call that "the word of God". Contrarily, when it is in red, well, I do see that as the word of God. Like I said, the bible definintely contains the word of God, but never claims to be the word of God. Remember, when scripture is mentioned in the bible, it is not talking about the bible. It had not yet been compiled and much of what is in it had not yet been written.

And much of it has been contaminated like Mt> 28:13 And he said to them, a man (ανθρωπος), an enemy (FIEND), has don this thing. And the servants said to him, Do you wish that we should go and gather (συλλεγω) them up? 40 As therefore the weeds (FIENDS) are gathered and calcinated in the fire, so it shall be in the end of this world.

 

[Tayla]

There seems a specific culture that looks at the KJV as the supreme authority of the written word of God above all else.

The KJV was translated by Anglicans. The KJV has provable translation errors. God's word was not written in English.

 

[Paidiske]

MOD HAT ON
This thread has had a small clean.
Please stay on topic and refrain from flaming one another any further.
MOD HAT OFF​

 

[Paidiske]

.

 

[SummaScriptura]

I still like the KJV, I just don't use it much.

 

[gordonhooker]

The KJV was translated by Anglicans. The KJV has provable translation errors. God's word was not written in English.

I like Anglicans.