Why I read/study God's Word: The Authorized Version

This passage to me answers the question. God preserves His Words to all generations, therefore, the correct Word of God was not lost for 1000 years buried in the sands of time.

After studying and comparing translations and manuscripts for many years, I know that whichever of my Bibles I use, if an actual translation, they all teach me the same things.

One of my favorite quotes from the King James Bible is from the 1611 preface,

King James Version (KJV) original preface [1611} free online

Much love!

 

1. HISTORY: The KJV of the Bible is the most influential book ever written in English.

2. PERSONAL: I will never read middle English books like that.

3. EPISTEMOLOGY: There are numerous errors in KJV that 4 centuries of improved knowledge has identified.

 

The kjv is not middle english . its early modern english .
Wycliff , his writings were middle english .
The accuracy of the kjv is a beauty . Now let all praise the glorious Lord .

 

That is incorrect. Kindly take the time to study the matter in depth. Much more could be said, but I will let you do your own research.

 

I've already done the research. If you are in denial of the many errors in the KJV, bless your hear.

Peace. Out.

 

The only reason the KJV exists, is because the Geneva Bible included commentary against human monarchy, so King Jimmy commissioned a bible that would have no such commentary in it.

BTW the words Authorized Version doesn’t mean authorized by God, as KJV only adherents seem to think, but means authorized by King Jimmy.

The AV 1611 is based on a text with a Latin name - textus receptus, because it was translated by a catholic monk named Erasmus - the catholic sources that it originated from explains why it also had the apocryphal books in it, that are rejected by Protestants.

The KJV translators admitted in the original KJV preface, their reliance on prior versions such as the Geneva Bible. It’s obvious in that preface that they didn’t claim or think that it was an inspired and inerrant translation- that’s because there is no such thing - only the original MSS were inerrant and were the inspired word of God.

The original 1611 AV had many margin notes it it that gave alternate renderings of scriptures, which completely disproves the claim that every word in it is inerrant and inspired.

It also has universally recognized translation errors in it, also disproving claims of it being an inspired and inerrant Bible.

The word of God as given to prophets and apostles, was already as pure as gold that’s been refined 7 times - Psalms 12:6 is not a prophecy, it does not mean it would take 6 tries before God finally got it right when the KJV came along, as the KJVO camp likes to claim.

If that were true, then no one in times past who had only the Old Testament Scriptures, had the pure word of God until 1611, which is clearly wrong.

 

The King James Bible is a treasure. An excellent translation with power. It’s only by the power of God that this version is still around over 400 years later with so many slanderers against it for reasons I cannot grasp too well. Why it would bother anyone that others cherish this translation so much is strange. The new versions are weak and lacking. They only have an illusion of superiority based on all the fair speeches and crafty cunning of “learned” men who know nothing as they ought to know.

The word of God is our spiritual food: I’d rather have the fine dinning cuisine of the KJV than the junk food of the new versions (which are lacking many spiritual nutrients - that is, missing verses!)

 

Exactly.

 

So far everyone I’ve talked to in person who proclaims the superiority of the KJV, has failed to accurately explain this verse: ye are not straitened in us, ye are straitened in your own bowels.

At the least you’d think all KJV only fans would use the NKJV which corrects the over 900 words that have changed meaning completely in 4 centuries, but no, that version is to be rejected as well.

I’d much rather use the ESV for daily reading, which is a very good translation, than try to wade through archaic Elizabethan English, and not understand the intended meaning of a scripture, because a word like CONVERSATION has changed meaning over centuries.

The KJV states:

1Pe 1:15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;

1Pe 1:16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.

Reading that makes you think it says to watch what we say in our dialogue - but that’s not what it originally meant. The word CONVERSATION meant your entire lifestyle, not just your dialogue.

You might think that by not cursing, you’re obeying that scripture, yet it means much more that just watching what words you say.

Other versions give the correct meaning:

ASV
1Pe 1:15 but like as he who called you is holy, be ye yourselves also holy in all manner of living;

1Pe 1:16 because it is written, Ye shall be holy; for I am holy.

ESV
1Pe 1:15 but as he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct,

1Pe 1:16 since it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.”

And that’s just one of the 900 words in the KJV that have different meanings today.

I’d rather not misunderstand the meaning of a verse 900 times.

 

Yes it is my friend . In this day and age everyone , including churches , are abandoning original scripture .
But lambs will not . No matter what we be called by men . For lambs are called by God and thus they love truth .

 

Yeah , i have me an old old dictionary . If i do not understand a word its easy to look up .
I stick to the kjv . I have read many versions . Believe me , i stick to the kjv .
I dont condemn anyone for what version they read , but rest assured i will try and convince them
to use the kjv .

 

So I imagine you never consult the Greek and Hebrew, which are MUCH older and archaic than the modern English of 1611…

Your charge of archaic words being an hindrance to the KJV is not as big an issue as you make it. The few handful of archaic words in the KJV are explained in the context and by a good English dictionary.

I’d rather not discard any of the counsel of God in exchange for modern expressions of a few archaic words because I’m too lazy to learn a few archaic definitions.

For example:

"For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost." (Matthew 18:11)

Look this up in a modern version “for clarity”.

Opps, this scripture does not exist in many modern versions based on the Greek alexandrian text.

 

Jeremiah 29:13 KJV
And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart.

John 8:31Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; 32and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

They can change words as much as they like to suit them but if you seek Jesus Christ with all your heart, mind and soul and remain in his doctrine you see everything clearly, I myself have studies most bible versions of scripture and knowing Jesus Christ is aware they would change words prior to the beginning its probably all truth, God leads us to what he wants us to know.

My main go to is the KJV, NLT, CJB, TOL, NKJV and I have studied the NIV and its popular but ill just say what's popular normally isn't what is best and I am not a fan of it will most likely do a comparison bible next with 4 different versions on each page.

 

You have given a lot of good reasons sir, no doubt any reason one gives to study Gods word, is a good reason. More power to you in that very noble goal.

 

I love the King James and have used it for over 35 years. However even the much loved King James is imperfect. Whjy? Because it is a translation! Any time you go from one language to another you can lose significant nuances that bring much meaning to a passage .

If one wishes to study the bible with the Best versions, KJV, NKJV, NASB,AMP, and NIV are all excellent translations. Then one should modify their study with extensive use of Hebrew and Greek Language tools and cultural studies to fully understand how words were used 2,000-6,000 years ago.

 

This strawman argument has been around for ages, and has little or no validity. The King James translators were faithful to the diction of the Hebrew and Greek, and the equivalents of "thee" and "thou" are still valid in many European languages. And the King James 2000 Bible has addressed this issue already (which most people simply ignore).

As you say there are only an handful of truly archaic words, which can easily be clarified by going to Strong's Concordance (or Thayer's Lexicon). Generally the context itself makes the meaning clear.

Also, there is really no need for anyone to turn to the modern translations for clarity, but if they do, they should be fully aware that the text itself has been corrupted in these versions.

And thousands of UNNECESSARY changes have been introduced to simply annoy a serious student of the Word (or was it to demonstrate "superiority" over the KJV translators?)

 

No thanks. There’s a version called the NKJV that corrected that problem

BTW the whole point of mentioning those 900 word is, a lot of them are familiar words, such as the word CONVERSATION. Who’d look up a familiar word such as that, when they think they know what it means, but don’t realize the definition changed.

Your way of looking words up in the dictionary would mean one has to look up every word of every verse, in case any of the words changed meaning.

KJV only advocates already proved to me they don’t understand that bible, by not having a clue what the verse about being straitened in their own bowels means, as I stated earlier.

ESV, my favorite modern English version, doesn’t have Matthew 18:11, but look at this verse, that it DOES have:

Luk 19:10 For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.”

My, my.