Why KJV only?

Ozarks Prodigal

Member
Supporter
Jul 31, 2019
18
12
Ozarks
✟32,196.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
I apologize. I have no knowledge of you tearing into anyone. I have met some Christians who do so. Well-intentioned I'm sure.

I looked up 1st Corinthians 6:9 and was surprised. The KJV seems to mention effeminate men, then there is a very vague reference to abusing themselves with mankind. Both the NIV and ESV very specifically list homosexual men. No ambiguity. That would seem to be a stronger admonition.

If you see that the KJV brings you closer to God, by all means, you should continue to use it and recommend it. I just don't see any reason to attribute bad motives to the other translation. As for me, I have yet to come across any evidence of a nefarious purpose behind the NIV or the ESV, and yes I did read the entire chart.

But I thank you for sharing with me the argument of those opposed to other translations. Now I know.

You asked for examples of differences in a previous message and others answered before I got a chance to look up a suitable document on the Internet to answer your question. Actually, I don't consider the differences to be a real problem (oppose any particular translation) and I used to have an answer for some folks that were dead set on the KJV only and that answer is this: the Man is in the book no matter the translation. An oversimplification perhaps but that's the way I think about it and, there may be a little bit of mumbling and grumbling but that usually ends the argument.

There's another reason that I cross check versions... I find that comparisons of versions helps me to understand what's being said when I run into something that I'm having problems in understanding. If I'm still having problems, I look into what my Bible study program has to offer in the way of parallel and cross references. If this doesn't help satisfactorily, I dig into commentaries and other references offered by the program however deep that it takes. Then, there's always the Internet... a well phrased query in a search engine can bring an answer very quickly sometimes and enable me to tightly focus my search in existing references mentioned above.

Ah well, I've gotten carried away with my answer and pretty soon you'll be nodding off while reading this reply. Nuff said.
 
Upvote 0

Mountainmanbob

Goat Whisperer
Supporter
Sep 6, 2016
15,961
10,817
73
92040
✟1,096,353.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
For it's time it was a mighty fine translation.

I use NASB mainly and look at the Greek and Hebrew from time to time.

How one would scripturally ascertain any special status of this one translation beats me...

That's true.
And that was a long time ago.
Haven't more scrolls been found since then?
M-Bob
 
Upvote 0

Endeavourer

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2017
1,719
1,472
Cloud 9
✟89,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I find that comparisons of versions helps me to understand what's being said when I run into something that I'm having problems in understanding. If I'm still having problems, I look into what my Bible study program has to offer in the way of parallel and cross references. If this doesn't help satisfactorily, I dig into commentaries and other references offered by the program however deep that it takes. Then, there's always the Internet... a well phrased query in a search engine can bring an answer very quickly sometimes and enable me to tightly focus my search in existing references mentioned above.

Another resource are the Greek Interlinear lexicons. Within the last several years I 'found' them for my own studies and they have significantly changed some of my understandings of verses that seemed so cut and dried before. You can click on the specific Greek word that is the basis for the translations and land at a page dedicated to defining that word and showing all of the other passages the word was used.

For example, here's a place where the KJV was influenced by the translator's preconceptions:

1 Tim 2:12 is translated in the KJV as that the women are to keep "silent [2271]" in the churches. When you click on the Greek word that is translated to silent, it is the exact same root of the word used in v. 2 of the same chapter as "peaceable". (For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable [2272] life in all godliness and honesty.) Further, the definition clarifies that the word does not indicate speechlessness, and that speechlessness would use a different word.

Cognate: 2271 hēsyxía (from hēsyxos, "quiet, stillness") – quietness, implying calm; for the believer, 2271 (hēsyxía) is used of their God-produced calm which includes an inner tranquility that supports appropriate action. This term "does not mean speechlessness, which is more directly indicated by 4602 (sigḗ) (J. Thayer). See 2272 (hēsyxios).

2272 hēsýxios (an adjective derived from hēsyxos, "quiet, stillness") – properly, quiet (still), i.e. steady (settled) due to a divinely-inspired inner calmness.
2272/hēsyxios ("calmly quiet") describes being "appropriately tranquil" by not misusing (or overusing) words that would stir up needless friction (destructive commotion).

So that, too, is a world of difference for half of the body of Christ. There have been a few other verses in other topics that I've found a completely different understanding upon reflecting on the actual words used instead of the concept I had previously assumed was intended.

If I had limited myself to other English speaking discussions or commentaries I would have instinctively filtered out all the commentaries or discussions that didn't agree with "my group" or my preconceived interpretation, such as one of the posters above dismissed my comment as being feminist/egalitarian. I don't belong to either the complimentarian camp or the egalitarian camp, which both assume doctrines based on how their group tells them to assume it; I just want to know what the Word actually says in each verse and live faithfully in it according to my best, sincere understanding.

I do love the KJV and use it nearly exclusively, but I do not see evidence to believe it is actually additionally inspired by God to supersede the best rendering we have of the original transcripts.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Carl Emerson
Upvote 0

Ozarks Prodigal

Member
Supporter
Jul 31, 2019
18
12
Ozarks
✟32,196.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
...deleted...) If I had limited myself to other English speaking discussions or commentaries I would have instinctively filtered out all the commentaries or discussions that didn't agree with "my group" or my preconceived interpretation, such as one of the posters above dismissed my comment as being feminist/egalitarian. I don't belong to either the complimentarian camp or the egalitarian camp, which both assume doctrines based on how their group tells them to assume it; I just want to know what the Word actually says in each verse and live faithfully in it according to my best, sincere understanding.

I do love the KJV and use it nearly exclusively, but I do not see evidence to believe it is actually additionally inspired by God to supersede the best rendering we have of the original transcripts.

Chopped out most of your post... wanted to address the latter portion only. For the most part I use the NASB but I keep the KJV and Young's Literal Translation in ready reserve for a parallel comparison (other translations are available). And, in this case, the NASB had the root word totally different as seen here in Strongs:

1511 εἰμί [einai /i·nahee/] v. Present infinitive from 1510; GK 1639; 126 occurrences; AV translates as “to be” 33 times, “be” 28 times, “was” 15 times, “is” 14 times, “am” seven times, “are” six times, “were” four times, not translated 11 times, and translated miscellaneously eight times. 1 to be, to exist, to happen, to be present.

But, the English word used in the NASB was "quiet" (εἰμί)... go figure! I don't see quiet or silence anywhere within the previous paragraph. The word used, though, coincides with Young's which said "to be in quietness" which matches up with the following from Liddell & Scott's Intermediate Greek Lexicon with the KJV as the subject document:

ἡσῠχία, Ion. -ίη, Dor. ἁσυχία, ἡ, stillness, rest, quiet, Od., Hdt., Att.:—c. gen. rest from a thing, Hdt., Plat.
2. with Preps., διʼ ἡσυχίης εἶναι to keep quiet, Hdt.:—ἐν ἡς. ἔχειν τι to keep it quiet, not speak of it, Id.:—ἐφʼ ἡσυχίας Ar.:—κατʼ ἡσυχίην πολλήν quite at ones ease, Hdt.; καθʼ ἡσυχίαν at leisure, Thuc.:—μεθʼ ἡσυχίας quietly, Eur.
3. with Verbs, ἡσυχίαν ἄγειν to keep quiet, be at rest, keep silent, Hdt., Att.:—so ἡσυχίαν ἔχειν Hdt., Att.
II. solitude, a sequestered place, h. Hom., Xen.

I've come to the conclusion that in cases like these where there's no way I can be sure of what the word was in the in the original text, Textus Recptus, or whatever, (read: almost all the time) I won't be saying much but doing a lot of watching and reading. I don't have the necessary memory, education, or time to even think about learning Hebrew and Greek so I have to rely on my Bible study program to give me an idea of what's being talked about in places such as this forum.

I read what's said to include scripture when I hit something I'm really interested in and try to learn from the experience especially when I'm reading something written by someone that follows what was said by the old masters in the 1st and 2nd centuries in the koine Greek arena. That gets my attention!

I have some access to ancient literature in my program but I don't check it as often as I should.

Ok, nuff said...
 
Upvote 0

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,667
9,977
78
Auckland
✟376,544.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That's true.
And that was a long time ago.
Haven't more scrolls been found since then?
M-Bob

He you read National Geographic 12 2019 'Bible Hunters'... a great read that includes the story of two Scottish sisters in the 1800's who on a hunch, privately, went in search of ancient scrolls and came up with the oldest scroll of the gospels from 400 AD !!!
 
Upvote 0

PROPHECYKID

Veteran
Supporter
Oct 28, 2007
5,982
527
35
The isle of spice
Visit site
✟73,654.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I agree with all of the points in the statement of purpose for this faith-group, so I am a fundamentalist. I do not agree with the KJV only position. I often compare several translations of a text to be sure I fully understand. My usual Bible for reading is the ESV. Why do some Fundamentalists continue to adhere to a KJV only position?

This is an indepth presentation to give you some answers to your question.
 
Upvote 0

Nevada Smith

Active Member
Sep 20, 2020
285
190
75
Paxton
✟14,530.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Adhering to just the KJV would bring up an interesting dilemma.

Genesis 1:28
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. KJV

"God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth," That was the same thing God commanded Noah and his sons to do.

Genesis 9:1
And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. KJV

Since Noah and his sons were not the first people on the Earth, then that would imply that there were other people on Earth before the creation of mankind in Genesis 1:28. I believe that there was more than one creation of mankind listed in Genesis. But many that adhere just to the KJV would have a problem with that.
 
Upvote 0

Nevada Smith

Active Member
Sep 20, 2020
285
190
75
Paxton
✟14,530.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
He you read National Geographic 12 2019 'Bible Hunters'... a great read that includes the story of two Scottish sisters in the 1800's who on a hunch, privately, went in search of ancient scrolls and came up with the oldest scroll of the gospels from 400 AD !!!

The story of Agnes Smith Lewis and Margaret Dunlop Gibson, Scottish twins and self-taught scholars does make interesting reading. However there have been even older ones found
I found https://jubilees.stmarytx.edu/thanneken/2018/NationalGeographic-201812-BibleHunters.pdf on line.
Annotation 2020-09-29 072847.jpg

I went and looked up the The Bodmer Papyri are a group of twenty-two papyri discovered in Egypt in 1952. They are named after Martin Bodmer, who purchased them.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: Carl Emerson
Upvote 0

timf

Regular Member
Jun 12, 2011
1,023
368
✟79,640.00
Faith
Non-Denom
I see the critical text, upon which most modern translations are based, as inferior to the majority text, from which the KJV was drawn (textus receptus)).

However, I do not see the critical text as cataclysmically inferior. I see a greater difference in going from one language to another. This is why the tools to go to the Greek and Hebrew help to get a better view of the original meaning.

A translation of any type is a good starting point. The NASB is a good translation of an inferior text, but it can be very useful anyway.

Wuest and the Amplified can be helpful translations (both from the critical text) Wuest brings in more of the verb tense information that is often lost in English translations. The Amplified also attempts to capture some of the meaning often lost in word for word translations. However, it is often best to use them as a starting point and see where the original Greek and Hebrew can shed more specific light.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JM
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums