Thoughts about using a KJV update?

[Taken]

Personally, I do favor MODERN translations of the Bible. They are based on the best manuscripts and are the products of superb scholarship. None of them are authorized by a secular king to justify his personal theology. (There is a good reason that the Pilgrims fled from England with their Geneva translations in hand!)

My favorite translation is the NET v 2.1. It is a carefully-researched superb translation with over 60,000 translator's notes. And its goal is to produce the best translation for our modern minds, not to satisfy some monarch's idea of Christianity.

Hi Jim B, thanks for sharing. Isn’t Freewill awesome?

 

[Truther]

The KJV is just one of many translations and, IMHO, is no the best by any means. It is based on earlier translations and a limited number of early texts (far fewer than what is available now). It is written to a long-dead culture in a long-dead language, not to those of us who live in the 21st Century. There is no doubt that modern translations are far better for those of us (including yourself) who read, write, and speak in modern English.

Why, if the KJV is so excellent, do you not speak or write in archaic Englyshe? IMHO you think that either a) the KJV translators were gifted more than modern translators or b) you like to feel somehow holy because you read a centuries-old translation in a dead language. Both are nonsense.

English is a long dead language???

Who declared that?

Is Shakespeare a dead language also?

 

[reformed1689]

English is a long dead language???

Who declared that?

Is Shakespeare a dead language also?

We do not speak Elizabethan English today.

 

[reformed1689]

Blame the parents, not the KJV.

We don't need a "Bible for illiterate', because we already have a cartoon Bible for them.

They need to practice reading with the KJV.

Or they could just read a Bible in the English they actually use today and not the English of 400 yester year that is no longer in use.

 

[Truther]

We do not speak Elizabethan English today.

Thou sayest.

 

[Truther]

Or they could just read a Bible in the English they actually use today and not the English of 400 yester year that is no longer in use.

If it is not in use, it is because folks can't read Shakespeare.

 

[reformed1689]

Thou sayest.

Yeah I'm pretty sure you don't go out in public talking like that. Nonsense.

 

[Michiah-Imla]

based on the best manuscripts and are the products of superb scholarship

Lol!

 

[Michiah-Imla]

just read a Bible in the English they actually use today

Sure.

And miss out one the greatest pieces of English work that does justice to God’s holy word!

And miss out on all those inspired words missing in the uninspired corrupted Alexandrian text.

And read a bunch of bland words with clumsey renderings for the sake of obtaining copyrights…

NO THANKS!

 

[reformed1689]

Sure.

And miss out one the greatest pieces of English work that does justice to God’s holy word!

And miss out on all those inspired words missing in the uninspired corrupted Alexandrian text.

And read a bunch of bland words with clumsey renderings for the sake of obtaining copyrights…

NO THANKS!

The ESV does just as much justice as the KJV did. No words are missing. Clumsey renderings? If by that you mean more literal, ok. You are out of your league here.

 

[Jim B]

Sure.

And miss out one the greatest pieces of English work that does justice to God’s holy word!

And miss out on all those inspired words missing in the uninspired corrupted Alexandrian text.

And read a bunch of bland words with clumsey renderings for the sake of obtaining copyrights…

NO THANKS!

a) If you're going to be so literal and judgmental, how come you can't spell "clumsy"?
b) The earliest Biblical source texts were written in "bland words". That is a major flaw of the KJV.
c) Every KJV that you buy today is copyrighted by the publisher.

 

[reformed1689]

c) Every KJV that you buy today is copyrighted by the publisher.

And the KJV is also copyrighted by the crown of England.

 

[Michiah-Imla]

Every KJV that you buy today is copyrighted by the publisher.

And the KJV is also copyrighted by the crown of England.

But the translators weren’t making a translation just for the sake of making it different. They used good translations from previous versions whenever they were faithful to the original languages.

 

[Truther]

Yeah I'm pretty sure you don't go out in public talking like that. Nonsense.

I trow not.

No, but I teach straight out of the KJV and neither I nor any sinners that I am teaching ever had a problem with any of it since 1980.

Folks are merely making excuses for new translations.

 

[Robert Gwin]

i was given a new KJV bible when I was ten. I tried to read it but couldn't understand it. At thirty five when I became a Christian my CoE church used the GNT which I was able to read and understand. Today there is now possible reason to use the KJV apart from personal choice. And those who choose not to go with that one have plenty of other choices which can only be a good thing. It seems it is only hard-liners that still insist on the archaic versions as nobody in my church uses one.

Understanding is so very important Pearl, it was very similar to me as well. As kids that was a valuable gift, your very own Bible, and I would go off to my room and read it, some of it seemed easy though, but even in the parts you didn't understand it made you feel great, like you have a friend in God. But now that we are grown, we realize how important it is to know God as intimately as possible. He promises some wonderful blessings, but to whom. Take a gander at 2 Thes 1:6-9 that speaks about Jesus' return. What do you glean from those verses maam?

 

[reformed1689]

But the translators weren’t making a translation just for the sake of making it different. They used good translations from previous versions whenever they were faithful to the original languages.

You realize the same thing can be said about translations such as the ESV and NASB as well right? That's not special to the KJV.

 

[reformed1689]

I trow not.

No, but I teach straight out of the KJV and neither I nor any sinners that I am teaching ever had a problem with any of it since 1980.

Folks are merely making excuses for new translations.

Yeah but you also think the KJV is what should be used for say a Chinese translation. It's nonsense.

 

[Robert Gwin]

Blame the parents, not the KJV.

We don't need a "Bible for illiterate', because we already have a cartoon Bible for them.

They need to practice reading with the KJV.

Are you one who thinks the KJV is actually the Bible sir? I used to.

 

[reformed1689]

No, but I teach straight out of the KJV

Which version of the KJV? I highly doubt it is the 1611.

 

[reformed1689]

Are you one who thinks the KJV is actually the Bible sir? I used to.

Well I would not go that far. The KJV is a good translation. And it was the best translation for several hundred years. That is no longer the case.