King James Bible

[ApoloTube]

I love my church but one issue I have is their belief that the only Bible we should be reading is the King James. Although I understand many of the arguments against the other Bibles, what I don't like is the attitude that the KJV is the only true Bible. I would love to hear some arguments for and against this belief.

 

[PaladinValer]

KJV-Oism has been proven to be false several times over as it is based on lies, misinformation, bad scholarship, psuedohistory, and a lot of hypocrisy.

It was under the auspices of my Anglican Church that the KJV was translated. I know how to read it, I know its history, and I know its background. KJV-Oism is a deception and no orthodox Christian can accept such a position.

No offense, but find a new place of worship.

 

[Hentenza]

Hi ApoloTube,

Welcome to CF. The KJV is a great translation but it is a translation. The original scriptures was written in Hebrew and Greek. As you probably know, semitic languages or Greek do not directly translate to English or other languages word for word so it is not accurate to refer to the KJV as the ONLY word of God. The church had a bible for almost1600 years preceding the publishing of the KJV1611.

My suggestion is to choose a few translations and read passages from each while studying the word. It helps to put things in perspective. Also, it is good to make full use of the concordances and dictionaries while exploring the original languages. It opens up a much grater understanding.

 

[dewba]

I love my church but one issue I have is their belief that the only Bible we should be reading is the King James. Although I understand many of the arguments against the other Bibles, what I don't like is the attitude that the KJV is the only true Bible. I would love to hear some arguments for and against this belief.

Since you said they believe the only Bible you should be reading is the KJV which implies that you're allowed to read a different one, if you choose...
I suggest (since you don't like the idea of it being the only true Bible) in using a different version to your liking, if that is so. Perhaps you might feel judged but it you feel strongly about it, and your church has a True belief system, then I see nothing wrong with reading one you like. A church I used to go to preached using the KJV but didn't chastise anyone for using one they preferred. The Truth is the Truth...

I personally like the NLT because I grew up in the Lord with it (and was called to God through it...). I personally feel it speaks to me more clearly than others but truthfully I haven't given all of them a solid chance; the Truth is the Truth. Love is all that matters and I believe that Jesus is God, so the NLT didn't let me down...

(Also, I've been sort of "evolving" into reading the Bible more and more online (which is very nice). I like http://bible.cc/ because it lines up various versions of a verse in one page, where I can then compare and contrast (as you can imagine). they do (the different version), most of the time, sound similar to me...not too outrageous...but I'm almost always drawn to the NLT)

 

[ApoloTube]

Thanks for the input. I did find it rather funny during a "KJV only" rant I heard someone point out the errors of other Bibles and at the end read a passage from the King James and then proceeded to say "Which in Greek means..." I think I was the only one that found that funny.

Thanks again for your help.

 

[Stephen Kendall]

Check out the "Comma Johanneum" in Wikipedia. The KJV Bible has always accepted this error. Guess why?

 

[TDickensheets]

The KJV-only Issue Page

http://www.kjvonly.org

You want the truth!

 

[lemon-aid stand]

I love my church but one issue I have is their belief that the only Bible we should be reading is the King James. Although I understand many of the arguments against the other Bibles, what I don't like is the attitude that the KJV is the only true Bible. I would love to hear some arguments for and against this belief.

apolotube, i think that you summed it up with your opening statement.. you stated that you love your church.. if that is the only beef that you have.. please refrain from stirring up a hornets nest.. there is a reason that you like your church, and i am almost certain that they like you.. so why bother.. i can see if there was actually something wrong in there teachings of bible doctrine.. but this is a matter of preference and really has no value in edifying the church or offending it.. just rejoice that you have the option to read any that you choose.. the day will come that you would be only to happy to read whatever version you can get your hands on.. keep up the good fight my friend.. in Christ Jesus..

 

[DamianWarS]

the KJV is just a trasnlation just as the NIV, NASB or whatever other translation you are looking at is. All translations have inherit limits to them and can only go so far and this is the same as the KJV. I think the KJVs use of language has lost its relevance however many people still enjoy reading it so to each his own. I personally think that using the KJV exclusively is dangerous and it promotes a type of separation of church and modern culture. Jesus himself is the greatest example of God bringing himself down to our level however the KJV in reputation and in style tends to feed a type of arrogance that is counterproductive to the gospel and is no longer on our level. Saying that the KJV is the best translation only manifests that arrogance on a whole other level. These types of focuses are not driven at giving glory to God they are driven at giving glory to a translation. Read the KJV or don't read it that is fine but I think it really should be a non-issue and our focus should be about outreach and giving God the glory not this sort of pettiness that only creates disunity.