• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

KJV Only?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bernergirl

Senior Member
Jun 21, 2006
830
39
Visit site
✟31,161.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Politics
US-Democrat
Hey KJV-Only supporters...

Why do you trust the KJV? What convinced you that it is reliable?

To what degree would you consider yourself KJV-Only? (Have heard of people who think the KJV is the only inspired Word, down to those who consider it the only really trustworthy English version...)

NOTE: Please do not reply if you do not, to whatever degree, consider yourself to be KJV-Only. I do not consider myself KJV-Only, but I am interested in hearing the knowledge/opinions of those who are and would greatly appreciate that this thread does not become a debate.

Thanks and God bless!

Lissa
 

jon914

Active Member
May 8, 2006
242
10
Laredo, tx
✟22,918.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Bernergirl said:
Hey KJV-Only supporters...

Why do you trust the KJV? What convinced you that it is reliable?

To what degree would you consider yourself KJV-Only? (Have heard of people who think the KJV is the only inspired Word, down to those who consider it the only really trustworthy English version...)

NOTE: Please do not reply if you do not, to whatever degree, consider yourself to be KJV-Only. I do not consider myself KJV-Only, but I am interested in hearing the knowledge/opinions of those who are and would greatly appreciate that this thread does not become a debate.

Thanks and God bless!

Lissa

I am not a KJV only, but that is what I use the most. I do like the NKJV and trust it, but I have delt with those who are so set on the KJV and to boot a black cover that it leave me sad.
The mentaliy of many has been born out of surmons that many have eaten as the truth. The KJV has many good and bad points, and I do have all of the versons.

It is in the heart of man to be on the side of the truth, but sadly many peoples truth is another verson of a lie.

Being patient with some is bless by God.


John914
 
Upvote 0

Nazaroo

Joseph is still alive! (Gen 45.26)
Dec 5, 2005
2,626
68
clinging to Jesus sandalstrap
✟25,730.00
Faith
Christian
To be frank, I could be called 'KJV only', even though I don't think everything in the KJV or NKJV is the best possible rendering into English.

I don't really rely upon English translations at all like I used to, but most people don't have the priviledge of being able to read Greek or Hebrew and possess the extra books and materials required to study the original languages.

And when I talk to others in my area who are mostly English speaking or at least as a working language, I simply cannot use modern translations that delete thousands of words from the New Testament, and pepper it with stupid footnotes that cast doubt upon every 2nd page of the bible.

These flaws are so painful and distracting that I now only use the KJV as a 'working' bible. I also don't like bibles that have no proper (real, useful) footnotes, namely CROSS-REFERENCES and translational notes. I can't effectively use those either. And 'small print' bibles are also a real hassle, both to read without reading-glasses (the text of the bible is hard enough without squinting) and for actually FINDING the passages you are looking for.

As a result, I often buy LARGE PRINT Centre-column Reference Bibles with the Black leather covers (KJV) such as are printed and sold cheaply by Zondervan and distributed by Chapters book chains etc.

Again, one might say, why the fancy covers? If you've ever worn out a paperback in less than three days, by reading it through once, and having the binding crack, and pages fall out, you know what I mean. The only really useful bible is one that is properly bound and that will last more than two weeks of service in a variety of conditions, from being carried and dropped, to standing in the rain reading aloud.

The Leatherbound LargePrint KJV with Centrecolumn notes is ideal, solving four problems at the same time.

It also happens to be a largely reliable and familiar translation, which, while not perfect, is certainly practical. The few dozen places where the translation is obscure are easily memorized or corrected with a few marginal notes of my own.

I would just as readily buy a NEW KJV if they offered them in LARGE PRINT , Good Bindings, Centre Column reference. I have seen them occasionally in Christian bookstores, but I no longer travel so much, or see them. The Bookstores tend to carry only the KJV in the format I find essential. Also, special orders are expensive and a nuisance.

The KJV is the poor man's solution to several practical problems, and the language isn't that difficult most of the time. And if you need clarification, just carry a pocket NIV or NKJV and use as needed.
 
Upvote 0

hoadelphos

Active Member
Jul 20, 2006
61
5
NW Florida, USA
Visit site
✟22,709.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I've been studying the original languages the Bible was written in since 1974, and have switched to reading fascimilies of the original manuscripts as my bible study...only referring to English translations when needing to communicate with others who don't know the original languages.

None of the English translations are entirely accurate for several reasons.

The KJV's source of flaws is the forcing of English grammar onto the semtic sytax to such a degree that many passages are muddied at best, and in some case are totally butchered - and do not clearly present the wording of the original texts. But none of the English translations since then have done any better...most are worse.

If you want the purest form of the word of God...then you need to learn Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. If that is not realistic for you, then I would recommend the NKJV if the KJV is too much for you. (The only real advantage of the KJV is that the English of 1611 is very good in distinguishing verb and noun tenses that are lost in modern English.)
 
Upvote 0

Bernergirl

Senior Member
Jun 21, 2006
830
39
Visit site
✟31,161.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Politics
US-Democrat
On e-Sword I have the Latin Vulgate, a Hebrew OT, a Greek NT, as well as Russian, Spanish, and German (including the Luther) Bibles. My dream is to be multi-lingual, and I have determined that someday I will be able to read them all!

(Anyhow, my dream...)

Keep the responses comin', please...
 
Upvote 0

Maccie

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2004
1,227
114
NW England, UK
✟1,939.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
God promised that he would preserve his word which he did through the Received Text and the most faithful translation of the Received Text is the Authorised Version.

Trouble is with that view is that it precludes anyone who is not English having what you consider to be the "pure" version.

And what are our non-English-speaking brothers and sisters in Christ supposed to do?
 
Upvote 0

Maccie

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2004
1,227
114
NW England, UK
✟1,939.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
God promised that he would preserve his word which he did through the Received Text and the most faithful translation of the Received Text is the Authorised Version.

But how do you know, AV1611? Have you studied the translations in French, German, Dutch, Italian, Chinese - I could go on and on?

And today there is a report of a Missal (a book of Psalms) from in Ireland, dating from 800 AD. Its in Latin, of course, but not the KJV. Are we to think those Christians in Ireland 1.200 years ago were not reading God's approved word??
 
Upvote 0

hoadelphos

Active Member
Jul 20, 2006
61
5
NW Florida, USA
Visit site
✟22,709.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
In interesting footnote to controversies over translations is that most of the debate is about the original texts used to translate the different versions.

The vast majority of Greek texts agree with each other 99% of the time, with a few variations in the wording in that 1% that they don't agree.

The interesting thing is that the original Aramaic NT was not available to western biblical scholars until very late in the 19th century, and has only recently come to public notice. All of the variations all originate with a single word in the Aramaic that can be translated into two or more Greek words...exactly the words that differ among the Greek NT texts. Thus, the Aramaic solves the textual issues.

That still doesn't solve the issue of bad translation practices when translating into English.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.