Why do some advocate the KJV over others?

Question

Sometimes they even insist on the 1611 version. Is this because of the language? Do they think it has better manuscript support? Do they think the translation (wooden: word for word instead of thought for thought) is better? Or is there a broad theological assumption at work? I've never understood this.

Answer 1

Some think the KJV is hard to read. I would have to argue that it's hard to read only for those with maybe a fifth grade comprhension level. This is still stretching it. The KJV actually is the easiest to read. People just don't want to learn what some of the old words mean. As for thee and thou and ye and those words...just remember if it starts with the letter T it's singular and Y is plural.

The KJV is based on the Textus Receptus (recieved text). There were over 5300 copies of the New Testament in the time of KJV translation. Today many more are found. They were only a few hundred years old most of them. The new translations rely heavily on only three or four ancient texts. They date back to as early as the third or fourth centuries. There are only one of each of the new ones. They are trusted because of their age. I think this is a terrible mistake. I believe they lasted so long because they weren't in use (being infierier). Try

http://www.avpublications.com/

or

http://www.watchuntoprayer.org/

for more on this issue.

If you compare the prophecies of the Old Testament that speak of the return of Jesus, you will find that most are different than that of the KJV. And that's only a small part of the problem. The 'Blood' is removed from most of the new versions. Jesus is no longer holy or Lord . There are too many to list. See avpublications webpage and look around for the pdf document that shows verse by verse comparisons.

By far the worst book yet is the 'Message Bible' This one is full of New Age terminology to make ready the apostate churck to accept the one world religion and government and economy.

Please study the issue and pray. God bless.

Answer 2

The King James Version is based on the the Textus Receptus compiled by Erasmus in 1516. This text has a number of additional verses not found in other texts. The theory is that the missing verses were deleted by those with a eye to altering Christian theology. Also, the Byzantine family of texts is one of the more common texts, so some feel it should be preferred. The strongest advocate of this position would probably be represented by "The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text" by Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad.

The contrary position is generally based on "textual criticism". This is an area of study for examining documents to determine the original reading based on multiple manuscripts. One of the basic rules is that shorter readings are to be preferred over longer ones since a scribe is more likely to add text than delete it. This is actually the view held by the majority of scholars. As a result, most modern translations depend on "critical texts" which are primarily from the Alexandrian and Western families of texts.

While my own opinion is that the second view is preferable, it doesn't seem to matter much. There is no important point of theology which relies on a disputed text. Whether you read the KJV, NIV or RSV, the message stays the same.

Answer 3

If you look at a parallel Bible it can have up to four translations, laid across facing pages. There is a distinct difference among the translations.

You can purchase Bibles that have the original texts next to the KJVersion to compare.

I have seen the Hebrew and I own the New Testament with the KJV along side the original Greek text. It is very very close.
New King James is also very close to the original Greek. NIV take a lot of liberties as does the RSV.

Answer 4

If I had to walk through fire with either one I think I would choose the 1611 version. I just feels like it has more power and authority in the way the words come to life off of the page.

Answer 5

there's a significant false impression approximately KJV version of the Bible being maximum precise. it is not. The Bible pupils and serious Bible pupils who made an attempt to earnings approximately manuscripts and subject concerns of translations comprehend that maximum precise version is the hot American usual Bible. in certainty KJV it truly is maximum deceptive and complicated translation I certainly have ever examine. The archaic words in it that we now no longer use and know it which potential, save the reader away to understand the certainty. And devil loves it. examine case in point KJV verses 2 John 10 and Heb 2:18 and you will see what I recommend. For all KJV in easy terms persons i desire to advise to envision ‘The King James in easy terms Controversy’ by potential of James R. White and ‘King James in easy terms?’ by potential of Dr. Robert A. Joyner. provide up worshiping King James worship King Jesus.

Answer 6

from everything I've seen the KJV is extremely unreliable, and the one I've looked at is utterly incomprehensible in format... nearly unreadable.

but I can't conceive of why you'd want anything other than the most literal text possible, every word of a scriptural text, even in its screwy old english-esque cryptic style, has its value in the way its originally said. the further from its original form, the less reliable and harder to decipher its real meaning it would be.

but then again for some I guess its just text... nothing more.

Answer 7

Well I don't think there is a wrong or right reason there....some people......... like me, for instance like the King James Version better because of it's poetic writing stlye...As far as the other versions I have most of them too...and read them to claify things...we all have different reasons to prefer something over something else,,,Why do we choose different color cars or clothing... why do we choose different decors for our homes or offices,,,Why do some of us prefer yellow roses over red? It is just a personal choice...we all have different ways of expressing ourselves...and as long as we learn that Jesus is our Savior....Does it really matter which Bible we read it from?

Answer 8

Here is a great video explaining why the KJV is the Bible you should use.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=42385501735388990&q=prophecy+club

If you have a problem with some of the wording, here is a great dictionary for the KJV.

http://www.amazon.com/Archaic-Authorized-Version-Laurence-Vance/dp/0962889849/sr=8-1/qid=1160285539/ref=sr_1_1/104-4091606-6306352?ie=UTF8&s=books

Answer 9

Manuscript-- the Textus Receptus..not tampered with by the Vatican so called scholars Horte and Westcott.

30 archaic words that have to be remembered..

PAR ADVENTURE==means PERHAPS,
etc. That is all the difficulty.

Fewer big words in it than the NIV, etc..

Answer 10

Simple the British influence.