Why Choose the King James Bible?

There are still a lot of people that choose to read from the King James Bible.  There are also those who believe that the King James Bible is the only true and accurate translation in English (which I don’t believe).

So for those that choose to read that translation who do not believe it’s the ONLY accurate translation, I do not understand why you choose it.  People don’t talk like that anymore.  It takes more effort and learning just to learn the language usage to be able to effectively understand it.  Nobody uses thee, thou, …eth.  So then why the draw towards this translation, especially when you have the New King James Version, which has all that old style language converted?

Is it because it sounds more “holy” or reverent?  I would argue that it doesn’t.  It is simply a different style of speaking.  We can use different words today and it means the same exact thing.  What about old English speaking is more reverent?  I think that if we feel that it is more reverent, it is only because we choose to think that way for no real reason other than we like the sound of the language itself and we assign reverence to the sound.  You can say the same things with our modern language, and mean it just as much or more.  The meaning and reverence, I believe, comes from the heart, not the sound of the language.

Also, we need to consider that the original languages of the Bible were Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic.  So, it is not as if old English speaking is any more near to the original languages than modern English is.

I find the King James Bible to be outdated, and not worth choosing to read because of some the great modern English literal translations (NASB, ESV, NKJV).  Yet, these are merely my own opinions and thoughts on the matter.  If you choose to read the King James Bible, I would love to hear why.  What about it is worth choosing over the modern English literal translations when you don’t ever talk that way?  I’d love to hear your thoughts on it, not for argument’s sake, but to learn more about this topic and hear different perspectives.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Why Choose the King James Bible?

  1. Guess since you have it all figured out and are a master of bible versions guess you tore out revelation 22:18-19 out of your watered down version since you obviously have disgraced your title as Christian and have mocked and scorn The Bible….all I can say dear friend is be careful when handling and talking about God’s Holy Word.

    • Ace – I do not appreciate your comment, as it really tears down instead of builds up. I have no interest in further dialogue with you on my blog unless you are willing to engage in a positive and constructive manner. I am always willing to learn and discuss topics like this, but instead of giving me any constructive reasoning as to why you believe the KJV is the supreme version, you tell me that reading any other version is, as you say, mocking and scorning the Bible and being a disgrace to being a Christian. I find that abrasive and rude.

      I read my post again, as it was written over a year ago. I feel that it was a fair approach to the topic from someone who does not believe as you to about Bible versions. I even specifically said at the end, “I’d love to hear your thoughts on it, not for argument’s sake, but to learn more about this topic and hear different perspectives.” I do not see how this warrants an attack such as you issued against me in your comment.

  2. Sir, I can tell you why I believe The KJV is the only true and accurate Bible for the English speaking people.

    First, God promised He would preserve His Word. Second, God is capable of preserving His Word perfectly. Third, he does not lie… so when he says he will preserve His Word, I believe it.

    The question is, then, where is God’s Word that He promised to preserve? For over 400 years Bible believing Christians have accepted the King James Version as the Word of God. Translations have come and gone and no new bible had seemed to take hold in today’s Church until the niv showed up in the late 70s and early 80s. Since then it seems there is no end to the new translations, none of them alike, and all giving heed to the Alexandrian manuscripts that were rejected by those who God chose to preserve His Word in the English language. The funny thing is… when you take some time to compare them, none of them are quite alike. It makes God out to be some cheesy, weak being who can’t preserve his Word and someday, if we’re lucky, some scholar will be able to figure out what was actually in the original manuscripts. That’s not the God I know. The God I know is powerful and so is his Word. Even if the English language changes, God’s Word will remain powerful, whether you know what the old, archaic words mean or not. You sound as if you think the bible is nothing more than Sports illustrated. As if God has to change His Word to accomodate us and our lack of efforts to study His Word. I can assure you, I am no rocket scientist, nor Biblical scholar, but I can read the English language and if I don’t know what a word means, I know how to look it up in a dictionary. There are so many study tools to help you understand what the old archaic words mean it’s not even funny. The funny thing is, even as we become more educated, we seem to be able to understand God’s Word less and less.

    To believe all the new translations are God’s Word is to mistake God’s perfect unchanging character. It would be wholly outside of his character to preserve a bunch of bibles that don’t even match up when compared. It would be wholly within the character of the adversary, to replace God’s Word with a bunch of cheap imitations. sadly, he has done that in many of today’s Churches with the help of “scholars” who are teaching pastors and college professors who, in turn, teach their congregations that all we really have is a bunch of translations that have errors and we hope we can believe God anyway. My friend, if there is one mistake in God’s Word, it renders the whole thing worthless because then God would not be who He says he is. Thankfully there is a perfect English translation and it is based on the Antiochian manuscripts where the Christian Church is rooted. See Acts 13.

    So much more could be said, but I’d recommend you believe God over the scholars, and accept the Bible that His Church accepted for over 400 years, based on the manuscripts from Antioch, the center of the early Church. Find a Church that believes it and worship with them.

    • Kadin,

      You and I are most likely going to be able to see eye to eye on this topic. And, that’s ok. Thank you for your thoughts and opinions on this subject. The first thing I want to comment on, because it is such an outrageous comment, is that you think that I “think the Bible is nothing more than Sports illustrated.” I’m not even sure exactly what you mean there, but I can assure you, my views of Sports Illustrated and the Bible are at polar opposites.

      The “meat” that you provided in your comment is this: Differences in manuscripts, translation principles, the fact that the church has accepted the KJV for a long length of time, that some translations have really minimized God and have taken too great of liberties in the translation, and the language/readability.

      Manuscripts – The Antoichian manuscripts were few in number, and were found very early, but are late in date. Since the writing of the KJV, many more manuscripts have been found allowing for greater textual criticism. Many earlier manuscripts have been found that all play an important role in the more modern translations. To claim that the Antiochian manuscripts are the only accurate ones is to do yourself a disservice to this debate. Scholars have also learned a great deal in the last 400 years about the original languages. Why should we ignore this?

      Translation Principles – The translation process is interesting here. The KJV was written by the Church of England. King James instructed the translators (about 54 of them) “to use the Bishops’ Bible as a basis and departed from it only when the text required it.” The made some liberties in translation here and there so that nothing would contradict their own tradition. The NASB (my main reading Bible), for instance, was written by approximately 100 people across American and Europe across many different denominations. Accuracy, not denomination-specific tradition, was the guiding principle here.

      There will always be differences in opinions, and morphing of languages. A “perfect” translation is impossible because english was not the language to which the Word of God was directly inspired. So we must do our best, and that’s what many translators continue to do. I think it is better to have the understanding of the principles and teachings more correct than an absolute literal word-for-word that is very difficult to read and understand. God’s Word was given to us to teach us about him, and about salvation through Jesus. That can absolutely be learned through versions other than the KJV.

      KJV Long Acceptance – There is always something to be said about things that last. The KJV is a good translation, few question that. Good translations will last much longer than poor ones. But this is no evidence that the KJV is the ONLY good translation. This is merely a backing that this translation was well done.

      Weak Translations – I agree with you. There are many translations out there that I do not care for at all, and I would not recommend to anyone for anything other than an occasional reference (like The Message). There are other translations that are not bad, but are definitely not word-for-word accurate. This is kind of a grey area. I highly prefer the more precise translations.

      Also – you say that none of the translations out there are alike. That is definitely not true. If I pull up a parallel of the NASB, ESV, NIV, and the NKJB, they are extremely alike.

      Language/Readability – Old english is very different than modern english. It is not spoken anymore. The language has morphed quite a bit. There is nothing “stronger” about old english vs modern english. It is simply different. If you are going to claim that the old english translation is the only accurate translation, and that we need to use tools to even understand the words that are written, why not put in the extra effort then to learn the original languages and just ditch the KJV, as the original language is definitely going to be more accurate than an english translation. Writings need to be translated so that the current language can read it and understand. Old english is gone and is no more powerful than modern english. I believe it is far more helpful for the everyday layperson to have a translation in their modern language.

      —-

      Thanks again for sharing your thoughts. Here are some interesting articles that I would be interested to hear your opinion about: http://www.kjvonly.org/robert/joyner_which_bible.html, http://www.kjvonly.org/robert/joyner_have_we_been_lied_to.html.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s