The Importance of How to Interpret a Biblical Text

not necessarily. That is the problem. You might know the words, but probably don't understand the meaning/context of many of them.
That is the issue I have with the KJV.... it is in an archaic form of English. There are so many better translations that can actually be understood...
Like the scripture that said something about going to "divers places".... I knew an older man that used that to say you could not go to a bar or pub, because you were not supposed to go to a "dive"....

Amen

sadly, so many churches teach things that we hear and take as gospel truth. without studying and testing if they are true or not

this leads to interpreting the word to fit our belief system, instead of using the bible to determine our belief system.

which has lead to a multiple of beliefs in so much of scripture.. and all these different groups of churches teaching different things..

sadly we become men followers and not God followers. then many get mad if you try to share why you do not agree with them (i know. I used to be that way)

We had an English teacher in the 7th-8th grade that wanted us to learn Greek and Latin root words, because by knowing those, we can figure out the meaning of words we've never seen before, simply by knowing the root word.

I remember this one.... the root word for dynamite is "dyn" it's also the root word for many others, as has been mentioned.

-dyn- comes from Greek, where it has the meaning "power. '' This meaning is found in such words as: dynamic, dynamism, dynamite, dynamo, dynasty.

The KJV glorifies Christ more correctly and accurately than any other translation. That much is a fact.

The majority of his audience spoke Greek.

And when you add up all the omissions/corruptions pertaining to Christ, you realize that those are serious attacks on the doctrine of Christ. Gnostic heretics were hard at work corrupting the same "precious" manuscripts loved by modern critics today.

I didn't, and I don't know where you got the idea that I did. Perhaps you should concern yourself with that log in your eye.

More ignorance. 400 + years of "imperfection" and no one stopped using it?????

Perhaps. But Palestinian Jews spoke Aramaic. However God chose Greek for the NT because it was the lingua franca of the Roman empire. Hence only a few Aramaic words appear in the NT.

Why does the abundance of years dictate if something is more accurate than something else?

Better technology, more discoveries, and textual criticism have improved the KJV which was a great translation but it became evident that it was becoming outdated when compared to the ability to systematically cross-compare manuscripts that the translators did not have at the time.

I prefer the ESV as Bible translators used the English religious reformer William Tyndale works and thd King James Version of 1611 as it's foundation but they also used Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic text with over 100 scholars who put the ESV together.

https://www.crossway.org/articles/10-things-you-should-know-about-the-esv-translation/

Here is one example why the update was needed to bring text accuracy.

In the area of gender language, the goal of the ESV is to render literally what is in the original.

For example, “anyone” replaces “any man” where there is no word corresponding to “man” in the original languages, and “people” rather than “men” is regularly used where the original languages refer to both men and women.

Just like the KJV the ESV is a Word for Word translation which in my opinion is the best type of translation.

You should concern yourself with actually posting Bible passages and rightly exegeting them. If indeed you are able.

I don't do proof text debates. There's no point. But it's interesting that you went here after several comments in a row that weren't. Eye meet log.

This place if filled with feckless clueless self-appointed referees. Enjoy the camaraderie.

ESV is a particularly bad piece of work. Personally, I never touch it. Even the NKJV (which I do use) has been "watered down".
Yes, the KJV has its own set of problems. But it has the LEAST (and least onerous/offensive) set of problems IMO.

And as I have stated so prolifically (and accurately) earlier, the Masoretic is definitely corrupt.

Moving on...

This place if filled with feckless clueless self-appointed referees. Enjoy the camaraderie.

. Errrmmmmmmm. Did you get my postcard 😊

Well, I'll believe the scholars who disagree. They make a good argument otherwise. Yeah, some disagree with them as well but all we can do as laymen is weigh the arguments since we are not majors in ancient language translations.

i requested that my mail be sorted to filter out the junk mail, sorry, did not get it.