King James Version Only...?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Wrangler

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2021
13,489
5,066
113
55
Shining City on a Hill
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I just don’t agree that the Alexandrian texts are so superior
You keep creating a Strawmen to support the KJV/NKJV. Implied is you are admitting the Alexanderian texts ARE superior. They are just not 'so superior' to rely on compared to the manuscripts the KJV/NKJV - AS IF a greater degreee of superiority is required than what exists. The strawman is to make 'perfect' they enemy of 'better.'

Ohio State the other day lost by 1-point. To claim the other team was not 'so superior' does not change the fact that the W goes into the column for the othe team.
 

Adam

Well-Known Member
Nov 30, 2022
690
381
63
43
X
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
So you admit that the KJV is hard to read! You're making progress!
If 10 year old me could do it then I'm sure anyone who has English as their first language can manage. What is so difficult about it? Let's take Proverbs 1 for example, what here can't people understand?

1 The proverbs of Solomon the son of David, king of Israel;

2 To know wisdom and instruction; to perceive the words of understanding;

3 To receive the instruction of wisdom, justice, and judgment, and equity;

4 To give subtilty to the simple, to the young man knowledge and discretion.

5 A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels:

6 To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings.

7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.

8 My son, hear the instruction of thy father, and forsake not the law of thy mother:

9 For they shall be an ornament of grace unto thy head, and chains about thy neck.

10 My son, if sinners entice thee, consent thou not.

11 If they say, Come with us, let us lay wait for blood, let us lurk privily for the innocent without cause:

12 Let us swallow them up alive as the grave; and whole, as those that go down into the pit:

13 We shall find all precious substance, we shall fill our houses with spoil:

14 Cast in thy lot among us; let us all have one purse:

15 My son, walk not thou in the way with them; refrain thy foot from their path:

16 For their feet run to evil, and make haste to shed blood.

17 Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird.

18 And they lay wait for their own blood; they lurk privily for their own lives.

19 So are the ways of every one that is greedy of gain; which taketh away the life of the owners thereof.

20 Wisdom crieth without; she uttereth her voice in the streets:

21 She crieth in the chief place of concourse, in the openings of the gates: in the city she uttereth her words, saying,

22 How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?

23 Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.

24 Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;

25 But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

26 I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh;

27 When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you.

28 Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me:

29 For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the Lord:

30 They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof.

31 Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.

32 For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them.

33 But whoso hearkeneth unto me shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from fear of evil.

Where's the difficult language? Thee? Thou? Hearkeneth? I suppose Hearkeneth is an uncommon word, should we throw out the whole book because in 33 verses we have 1 word that, if we can't intuit the meaning via context, we need to look up in a dictionary? Are you saying that, if a few words in a book are beyond a person's reading level, then it's never worth reading? What is the whole point of our education system then, if The Hungry Caterpillar is the finest work of literature known to man, due to its simplicity to understand?

And why do you prefer a flawed translation that is centuries old when there is such a plethora of translations written in the language that you and I and many, many others use every single day?
Have you ever tried reading a "modern english" rewrite of Shakespeare? It butchers the artistry. There is a certain level of talent that goes into making a piece of writing poetic, if you can find me a translation of the Bible that is in modern English which has just as much talent, then by all means, I'll read that instead, but so far I have yet to find it.

May I ask why you don't communicate in 17th Century Englyshe? I'll answer for you: you want to communicate your thoughts clearly so that you will be clearly understood. That is the purpose of every modern translation.
Sometimes, it's more rewarding to take the difficult path than the easy path. I'd rather have to get my dictionary and look up a word once a blue moon than to read a completely butchered work.

If someone wants to communicate the Words of God that shaped the foundations of the Earth, the words should be powerful and poetic, to invoke the authority and presence of God, that is the purpose of the KJV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Keturah

Wrangler

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2021
13,489
5,066
113
55
Shining City on a Hill
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If 10 year old me could do it then I'm sure anyone who has English as their first language can manage. What is so difficult about it?
Your logic is flawed. It is not even about what my abilities are. I have no will to translate a translation.

My question to KJV-only folks is what is more important to you:
A. Force as many people as possible to read your preferred translation?​
B. Bring people to Christ?​

For me, I would NEVER read a MIddle English book written 5 centuries ago. If it means I will not be saved and will be damned to hell, so be it. Not that I am saying I am against the KJV or anything. Fortunately for me, I know God is not a KJV-only God. I know this because he called me despite my opposition to KJV-only foolishness.
 

Adam

Well-Known Member
Nov 30, 2022
690
381
63
43
X
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Your logic is flawed. It is not even about what my abilities are. I have no will to translate a translation.
It's already in English. Is it "translating" if you're reading a newspaper and find a word you don't understand? How do you suppose someone passes high school without learning to read at a high school level? Really, after reading a few pieces at the appropriate reading level, you become accustomed to it and it's no longer difficult for you, and your vocabulary grows; often without even needing to use a dictionary, because you can often infer the meaning of words by context. Like "hearkeneth", it is obvious from the context its meaning is alike to "listen". A plowshare is a part of a plow. What part of a plow can a sword be hammered into? What is the symbolic meaning of hammering a weapon into a peaceful tool? Etc. So what is there in the KJV that one might suppose to be so utterly incomprehensible?

My question to KJV-only folks is what is more important to you:
A. Force as many people as possible to read your preferred translation?​
B. Bring people to Christ?​

For me, I would NEVER read a MIddle English book written 5 centuries ago. If it means I will not be saved and will be damned to hell, so be it. Not that I am saying I am against the KJV or anything. Fortunately for me, I know God is not a KJV-only God. I know this because he called me despite my opposition to KJV-only foolishness.
Can you name a single person who was intending to become a Christian but gave up because they couldn't understand "thee" or "thou"? Such a person never had the will to persevere to begin with if something so trivial scared them off. There were people who suffered beheadings in the name of Christ. What would the martyrs say to the person who abandoned Christ because of a little formal English? And what does "5 centuries" have to do with anything? Do ideas expire? Does beauty expire? Does glory expire? I guess then, Christianity is too old and we better get with the times then and become liberal atheists. If anything, the age of the KJV gives more weight to it, because it alludes to the timelessness of our ideals, that it's not just some fad or political movement that will be gone in 10 years. Or maybe because it is so incomprehensible, which is why Shakespeare is no longer in publication? But wait - Shakespeare is standard reading in just about every highschool, so the language of the time period is clearly not that difficult if highschoolers can read it without any special preparation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Keturah

RLT63

Well-Known Member
Apr 24, 2022
3,279
1,872
113
Montgomery
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You keep creating a Strawmen to support the KJV/NKJV. Implied is you are admitting the Alexanderian texts ARE superior. They are just not 'so superior' to rely on compared to the manuscripts the KJV/NKJV - AS IF a greater degreee of superiority is required than what exists. The strawman is to make 'perfect' they enemy of 'better.'

Ohio State the other day lost by 1-point. To claim the other team was not 'so superior' does not change the fact that the W goes into the column for the othe team.
Textual Criticism is not a game. Here is another place the NIV took great liberties with their translation. There is nothing in the original in Numbers 5 to suggest pregnancy. The NIV turns this passage into a Biblical abortion. Bible Gateway passage: Numbers 5:11-31 - New International Version the KJV indicates nothing about a miscarriage.
Unchecked Copy Box
Num 5:21 - Then the priest shall charge the woman with an oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman, The LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to rot,and thy belly to swell
 
Last edited:

RLT63

Well-Known Member
Apr 24, 2022
3,279
1,872
113
Montgomery
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Your logic is flawed. It is not even about what my abilities are. I have no will to translate a translation.

My question to KJV-only folks is what is more important to you:
A. Force as many people as possible to read your preferred translation?​
B. Bring people to Christ?​

For me, I would NEVER read a MIddle English book written 5 centuries ago. If it means I will not be saved and will be damned to hell, so be it. Not that I am saying I am against the KJV or anything. Fortunately for me, I know God is not a KJV-only God. I know this because he called me despite my opposition to KJV-only foolishness.
I’m not a King James Only advocate. They attack me because I prefer the NKJV. They hate that version. And I found The Voice on Bible Gateway. I checked Numbers 5 and it goes with the Biblical abortion narrative. Sorry but I don’t agree. I know it says miscarriage but if I give someone something to drink that causes a miscarriage that’s an abortion. Bible Gateway passage: Numbers 5:11-31 - New International Version
 
Last edited:

Wrangler

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2021
13,489
5,066
113
55
Shining City on a Hill
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Can you name a single person who was intending to become a Christian but gave up because they couldn't understand "thee" or "thou"?
Not an answer to my question, A or B?

You present a False Alternative. Once be become a Christian AND not have to understand Middle English. For some reason, you are proceeding AS IF it is a requirement when it is not. You do realize Jesus did not speak Middle English, right?
 

RLT63

Well-Known Member
Apr 24, 2022
3,279
1,872
113
Montgomery
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Sure it is. One source is good. Another is better. Why not go with the better source? You never answer that question.
Because better source is a matter of opinion. Why not use both? I use the NKJV and the NET. When I was just reading for pleasure I used the NLT. But I was aware that I was reading a paraphrase. I have Interlinear Bibles that have 4 versions side by side. And by clicking a button I can look at several different versions on Blue Letter Bible or Bible Gateway . More information is a good thing. I even have The Message Bible. Lately I have been reading the NET and all the notes are amazing. Like someone said, the best Bible is the one you read.
 
Last edited:

Adam

Well-Known Member
Nov 30, 2022
690
381
63
43
X
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Not an answer to my question, A or B?

You present a False Alternative. Once be become a Christian AND not have to understand Middle English. For some reason, you are proceeding AS IF it is a requirement when it is not. You do realize Jesus did not speak Middle English, right?
Or option C?

C. Someone questions to become a Christian but reads an uninspired translation and can't feel the weight and wisdom of the words, and turns away

Isn't that more likely than someone being scared off by formal English?
 

RLT63

Well-Known Member
Apr 24, 2022
3,279
1,872
113
Montgomery
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Not an answer to my question, A or B?

You present a False Alternative. Once be become a Christian AND not have to understand Middle English. For some reason, you are proceeding AS IF it is a requirement when it is not. You do realize Jesus did not speak Middle English, right?
I’m sure Jesus speaks all languages. The NT was written in Greek but he didn’t speak in Greek did he?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Keturah

RLT63

Well-Known Member
Apr 24, 2022
3,279
1,872
113
Montgomery
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Not modern English. That's what I speak, 21st American. I don't speak Middle English from the 16th century, the King's English.
I don’t speak it either. That’s why I like the NKJV
 

RLT63

Well-Known Member
Apr 24, 2022
3,279
1,872
113
Montgomery
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Your logic is flawed. It is not even about what my abilities are. I have no will to translate a translation.

My question to KJV-only folks is what is more important to you:
A. Force as many people as possible to read your preferred translation?​
B. Bring people to Christ?​

For me, I would NEVER read a MIddle English book written 5 centuries ago. If it means I will not be saved and will be damned to hell, so be it. Not that I am saying I am against the KJV or anything. Fortunately for me, I know God is not a KJV-only God. I know this because he called me despite my opposition to KJV-only foolishness.
Why does it have to be one or the other? Why can’t we see that the KJV and modern translations both have value?
 
Last edited:

Aunty Jane

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2021
5,341
2,380
113
Sydney
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
JW aren’t big into accepting modern day miracles, are they?
No, we do not accept that modern day miracles are always from God because satan too is capable of doing his own version of miracles, signs and wonders as he did when Moses performed miracles and Pharaoh's magic practicing priests mimicked the miracles of Moses. (ex 7:11, 22)

Satan's "magic" is a sign of the apostasy he created. (2 Thess 2:9-12)

If satan and Jehovah were competing with miracles today, how would we know which was which?
So if, after the apostolic period was over, and the genuine miracles had achieved what God had sent them to do, and He ceased performing them, all "miracles" thereafter would not be from God.
Having said that, this doesn't stop God from answering prayers, sometimes in small, and seemingly miraculous ways....as he has for me.
 

RLT63

Well-Known Member
Apr 24, 2022
3,279
1,872
113
Montgomery
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Sure it is. One source is good. Another is better. Why not go with the better source? You never answer that question.
You lifted the first line out of my post and didn’t address the rest. Do you believe that Hebrew Priests were instructed by God to perform abortions? Numbers 5 in the NIV and in the Voice indicates that they were. There was a member of this forum in another thread making that case and supporting abortion. Bible Gateway passage: Numbers 5:11-31 - New International Version. and Bible Gateway passage: Numbers 5:11-31 - The Voice
 
Last edited:

David H.

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2020
2,481
1,912
113
55
michigan
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
C. Someone questions to become a Christian but reads an uninspired translation and can't feel the weight and wisdom of the words, and turns away

I’m sure Jesus speaks all languages. The NT was written in Greek but he didn’t speak in Greek did he?
I think every believer should be aware of this debate and the arguments presented by both sides. What I have found is that the modern versions omit whole sections of the Bible which I would rather have in the Bible.... footnotes that say things like "Not in the oldest manuscripts" or "some manuscripts...." draw doubt to the authenticity of scripture. And the Alexandrian texts are themselves heretical or even forgeries.... You all should know these arguments from KJV only side and process them and understand them.

I Have also found that the KJV is more "Monarchical" (authoritative) while the modern versions are more democratic in their leanings. That bias alone can be good or bad in both ways.

If I have something hard to understand in KJV I just use another version to see how they translate it or better yet use Strong's concordance or the like to see the original Greek wording. I Personally own a KJV, ESV, NIV, and NLT. The NIV is the weakest of those translations in my Opinion. I Really like the ESV for its Language clarity and some of the things it translates uniquely. For example I quoted 1 Kings 18:27 from the ESV vs the KJV..... The ESV makes it much clearer how Elijah was mocking the gods of the false prophets..... Alas maybe I just like bathroom humor :eek::My2c:
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLT63

RLT63

Well-Known Member
Apr 24, 2022
3,279
1,872
113
Montgomery
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I think every believer should be aware of this debate and the arguments presented by both sides. What I have found is that the modern versions omit whole sections of the Bible which I would rather have in the Bible.... footnotes that say things like "Not in the oldest manuscripts" or "some manuscripts...." draw doubt to the authenticity of scripture. And the Alexandrian texts are themselves heretical or even forgeries.... You all should know these arguments from KJV only side and process them and understand them.

I Have also found that the KJV is more "Monarchical" (authoritative) while the modern versions are more democratic in their leanings. That bias alone can be good or bad in both ways.

If I have something hard to understand in KJV I just use another version to see how they translate it or better yet use Strong's concordance or the like to see the original Greek wording. I Personally own a KJV, ESV, NIV, and NLT. The NIV is the weakest of those translations in my Opinion. I Really like the ESV for its Language clarity and some of the things it translates uniquely. For example I quoted 1 Kings 18:27 from the ESV vs the KJV..... The ESV makes it much clearer how Elijah was mocking the gods of the false prophets..... Alas maybe I just like bathroom humor :eek::My2c:
Who knew that out on a journey actually meant in the bathroom?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: David H.

Naomanos

Well-Known Member
Jul 5, 2021
2,183
1,013
113
49
Florida
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I know for me that the KJV is distracting. The trees and thous are distracting. Having to constantly go look at a dictionary is distracting. I don't know when the last time I had to look at a dictionary was in day-to-day life and that includes reading articles and books. I also didn't do well with Shakespeare. Actually failed that part of English class in high school.



So I'll stick to modern versions. As an Episcopalian I use a NRSV Catholic Edition for the daily office readings as it follows the Book Of Common Prayer daily liturgy and my NIV Men's Devotional for devotional reading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RLT63