Why the king james?
- Thread starter Blain
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
So what? If the translation of what Nebuchadnezzar is THAT important to your salvation, perhaps you need to re-think your beliefs.
According to someone on the "Tongues" thread, the original Greek didn't say "unknown" tongues in the 14 Corinthian passage, and they were castigating me for saying that one of the gifts was speaking in "unknown tongues".
Guess what the KJV says? Yep.... "unknown tongues".... so, is the Greek correct, or is the KJV correct?
No, it really doesn't matter... but where did the infallibility go?
According to someone on the "Tongues" thread, the original Greek didn't say "unknown" tongues in the 14 Corinthian passage, and they were castigating me for saying that one of the gifts was speaking in "unknown tongues".
Guess what the KJV says? Yep.... "unknown tongues".... so, is the Greek correct, or is the KJV correct?
No, it really doesn't matter... but where did the infallibility go?
Ok let me help you try to figure it out, here are a few points.
The KJV is just one translation, there has been many before it and many after and
God willing if we don't all blow ourselves to smitherenes or Jesus returns, there will
be many more to follow.
I wonder if when the KJV came out, people also had
the same debate saying the KJV was in error and a previous version was better etc.
The language is archiac, old, out dated, yes some can follow it - im one of them I was
brought up with the KJV. I even still remember various verse better in the KJV than
other version. But I would never insist that people must read the bible in old
language only.
Here is one reason why as an example. My elderly aunt is a Christian she is 80, she
easily gets confused, she finds it hard to follow complicated story lines on TV, or follow
news or other reading material, including the bible if they are not straight forward and
easy to take in. For her now the KJV is too complicated, she cannot get past all the
thees and thys to understand the passages. So I bought her an easy to read
translation in modern language which flows better. It is possible she may have early
stage vascular dementia. For someone in that position would you still recommend the
KJV?
Another example, I know a lady in our women's group who has learning difficulties. So
much so that she got breast cancer 18 months ago but did not tell anyone about the lump
or know how to deal with it. She did not tell anyone until it was very advanced. Praise God
though he has brought her though all that now. But this learning difficulty also makes it
hard for her to understand things unless they can be broken down in simple truths.
Would you tell her that she should only read the KJV.
Other instances where other versions are better. I have not done it for a while now but
on a few occasions I have set about the task of reading through the bible very quickly.
To refresh myself about the settings, the truths, the characters of the bible etc. It is not
intended to be an in depth bible study. But a quick read of the bible with the aim to read it
through within maybe 9-10 months or shorter if possible. When I have done this I have
used an easy to read version. Along the way I note down passages to go back and study
in depth later. Then during what I think of as a proper bible study, I use a few different
versions to better understand the passage.
In other words the bible is a tool, a resource, it isn't a golden calf. Just as a carpenter
uses different types of saws, screws, nails for different jobs. Different versions of the
bible assist different circumstances. If you still cannot figure this out I honestly don't
know any other way to explain it to you.
I do understand what you mean about disliking certain versions, there are ones I
chose not to use. But if a person is having a wonderful time of discovering God via
a particular version and they find it is helpful to them. Then I am not going to put
them off by saying "oh but that doesn't mean anything as its not the KJV" etc.
People usually learn and grow at their own pace and come to decide on their
own about which version they prefer. If it inspires them and draws then closer to
God, then it is doing what it was intended for.
The KJV is just one translation, there has been many before it and many after and
God willing if we don't all blow ourselves to smitherenes or Jesus returns, there will
be many more to follow.
I wonder if when the KJV came out, people also had the same debate saying the KJV was in error and a previous version was better etc.
The language is archiac, old, out dated, yes some can follow it - im one of them I was
brought up with the KJV. I even still remember various verse better in the KJV than
other version. But I would never insist that people must read the bible in old
language only.
Here is one reason why as an example. My elderly aunt is a Christian she is 80, she
easily gets confused, she finds it hard to follow complicated story lines on TV, or follow
news or other reading material, including the bible if they are not straight forward and
easy to take in. For her now the KJV is too complicated, she cannot get past all the
thees and thys to understand the passages. So I bought her an easy to read
translation in modern language which flows better. It is possible she may have early
stage vascular dementia. For someone in that position would you still recommend the
KJV?
Another example, I know a lady in our women's group who has learning difficulties. So
much so that she got breast cancer 18 months ago but did not tell anyone about the lump
or know how to deal with it. She did not tell anyone until it was very advanced. Praise God
though he has brought her though all that now. But this learning difficulty also makes it
hard for her to understand things unless they can be broken down in simple truths.
Would you tell her that she should only read the KJV.
Other instances where other versions are better. I have not done it for a while now but
on a few occasions I have set about the task of reading through the bible very quickly.
To refresh myself about the settings, the truths, the characters of the bible etc. It is not
intended to be an in depth bible study. But a quick read of the bible with the aim to read it
through within maybe 9-10 months or shorter if possible. When I have done this I have
used an easy to read version. Along the way I note down passages to go back and study
in depth later. Then during what I think of as a proper bible study, I use a few different
versions to better understand the passage.
In other words the bible is a tool, a resource, it isn't a golden calf. Just as a carpenter
uses different types of saws, screws, nails for different jobs. Different versions of the
bible assist different circumstances. If you still cannot figure this out I honestly don't
know any other way to explain it to you.
I do understand what you mean about disliking certain versions, there are ones I
chose not to use. But if a person is having a wonderful time of discovering God via
a particular version and they find it is helpful to them. Then I am not going to put
them off by saying "oh but that doesn't mean anything as its not the KJV" etc.
People usually learn and grow at their own pace and come to decide on their
own about which version they prefer. If it inspires them and draws then closer to
God, then it is doing what it was intended for.
well if context is relevant to the reader, I guess the KJV means different things to different people
oh wait...it does!
your arguments are one step forward and two steps backwards
do you ever get into the NT?
oh wait...it does!
your arguments are one step forward and two steps backwards
do you ever get into the NT?
M
[I'm sorry but I totally disagree. You can't grow spiritually by picking and choosing which parts of the bible you think are right and which parts you think are wrong.... you end up with the god you made up, not the God of the bible.]
And yet you would deny people the opportunity to come to God, full stop,
And yet you would deny people the opportunity to come to God, full stop,
If we don't have a Bible that we can trust, then man becomes the final authority of what God has said. No thank you. God promised to preserve His pure words without mixture for all generations. Absolutely I am trusting a book. It's the book that tells me about the Savior. It sounds like you're trusting in voices in your head. I'm trusting God's preserved words. It's what I need to be right. "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." We have all that we need to live out of the mouth of God in Scripture.