Why do some Christians think "Only the KJV"?

Question

It is good and traditional, but it is not the most accurate translation. They seem to act as if it is Hebrew and Greek itself! Come into the world of scholarship and Biblical exegesis and translation...

Answer 1

The KJV is considered by many to be "the most accurate translation into English" because it is the only major translation that has gone back to copies of the original texts that (yes) have been maintained meticulously over the years.

The other "english-based" editions are "translations of the KJV" thus making them one step away from the original text.

Answer 2

I can read Greek, and I've got to say that while recent translations like the NRSV can capture the spirit of a text really well...let's just say I was surprised when I first started to learn Greek. Before that, I'd had an opinion much like yours.

But I was surprised by how much the KJV is a work of spare elegance - it tries as hard as any translation I've seen to grab the word for word sense of the text it translates... and when it can go word for word it does.

I started a project to translate the Gospel of John fro Greek, upgrading the very similar Dhouay Rheims translation to modern language, and I really have to say... it is astonishing how well these older translations get it right.

So don't be too quick to dismiss the KJV. I may not be a KJV-onlyist, but the newer translations aren't anywhere near as superior as you might think...

Answer 3

The fact that it's traditional has a lot to do with it. They were probably also told that it is the only uncorrupted version of the Bible. But really, it most likely is one of the most accurate translations out there.

When it was translated multiple people were responsible for translating each book. After they completed translating it the would compare their translations. If there was the slightest difference they would start over and keep going at it until each version matched 100%. Given that language changes over time it's not as accurate now but it is still very close to it.

Answer 4

I know you believe, so don't be insulted by my answer.

I live in Turkey, where 99% of the country is Muslim, but probably no more than 5% have a decent grasp on Arabic. I was surprised to find that there are many Turks who are offended at the concept of 'Turkish translations' of the Qur'an, saying that the Qur'an is to be read in Arabic or not at all.

When I ask the rather logical question, 'But how do you understand it?', they say that it is God's word and it is understood in your heart, if not your mind.

When the proto-Germanic people first started using the runic alphabet, it was interpreted by many as sorcery. I think that not quite understanding things increases their 'mystical' value. For many Turks, the Qur'an is not to be treated as a book from which to learn, but as a book with 'mystic' qualities. The KJV was written in what was then modern English, and it was written specifically to break down the communication barrier between English believers and Latin scripture. At that time, of course, there were English-speakers who revered the Latin translations precisely because they didn't understand them. It was something like 'tongues' - a different language that must belong to God, because it doesn't belong to me.

Five hundred years later, the KJV lies on a bridge between comprehensibility and incomprehensibility. But its linguistic differences give it enough of a mystique to impress certain people just as an original Arabic-language Qur'an impresses some Turks.

There may be theological differences and distinctions of which I am unaware, but this answer also has, I think, a specific validity to it. The fact that it's rather more difficult to understand than the NIV makes it seem more demonstrably 'God's Word'.

Answer 5

Personally, I use the NIV and if I have a question I refer to KJV.

I asked a preacher once why he always used KJV and he said he didn't have a problem with other translations, it was just that God had blessed the KJV so much (I guess in terms of sales) that he felt the most comfortable with it. Besides, it is very graceful and poetic if you like that kind of writing.

Answer 6

I don't know about one being more accurate, but I think some of the other versions are easier to understand. I do think ppl like the kjv because of the wording. I think it makes them feel smart reading it.

Personaly I have 6 versions on my computer. I have American standard, 1965 bible in basic english, contemparary english, english standard, king james, and literal translation.

Answer 7

To be totally honest with you I ahve been a Chirstain for 35yrs and I don't think that the KJV is totally without mistakes.
If you really want to know what I think here the jest of it King James diluted the word of the origional test because if he had told you what was really in it you could not have handled it.
The Words in the real book would burn holes in you heart because of their power and purity.
What we have is just good enough for one to get save but the real thing will tell you how to stay saved and to destory the works of satan in your life how to walk on water and set others free.

Answer 8

I like the niv better but when you get deeper and you want to go back the greek you can use a strongs concordance with the king james, every word is in there, no so with the others. but i think your first time through it should be a NIV because the language is faster!

Answer 9

For 1611 it's a good translation..not perfect. It's a revision of the old bishops bible. Some believe Jesus wrote this version..I don't get up set with them...they just don't know the truth

Answer 10

I don't know why. I try to use a few different ones so that I can really get the gist of what the passages are saying.