What's the big deal with KJV?

Question

Many christians swear by the KJV of the bible, written in 1611. I am a Christian, and it is very hard to follow the text and meaning given the 400 year old language difference.

If you and/or your church only reads from this translation, I'd really like to know what you see in it, and maybe why you only read that translation?

Answer 1

I too had that question. It is a language that is very hard to follow and I like to rely on my own ability to understand what is written then someone telling me "that is what it means." Who wants to go before Jesus on Judgment Day and be told that you were told the wrong thing?

I was told that it was the most accurate translation of the original writtings. The original works of the Bible were written in now what is a dead language, which means that the meanings of the words have not changed with time. My question on that was how do you know? King James was an actual King. The bible translation was O.K.ed by him, what if he did not like something that was translated, would he just have it left out? That being said, there are some translations out there that really add or take away from the KJV. I would suggest that you try a NKJV, it is written in todays language and stays strictly by the KJV.

All we can do is have faith that God will reveal all of His Truths to us as we study. I do not believe that anyone has ever challenged the KJV of the Bible as being accurate and I guess it has stood the test of time. Use the New King James Version, I think that you will be pleasantly surprised by the ease of understanding.

Good luck and God Bless

Answer 2

The main issue in Bible translations is the text from which they were translated. Not trying to get too technical (there are lots of books written on the subject), but there are several texts used for Bible translations. The KJV uses the Textus Receptus, which was copies of Bible manuscripts diligently kept and copied by religious leaders. Other Bible versions use different texts, including one text that was found in the trash can of an ancient monastery and texts found in Egypt that had been modified over time.

It basically comes down to the texts used to translate the Bible. Which would you rather have, harmonious texts diligently kept by church fathers and religious leaders or a variety of texts (which don't agree with each other) found all over the place?

Answer 3

Read the history of the bibles to know how many people died for KJV to even come into existance. Then many died to keep the KJV alive today for us. I have always heard that the KJV was written on a 3 grade level, but our 3 grade level would be different from theres back then. It takes the Holy Spirit to help you understand plus some study guides. Have you ever used a concordance. That will help you know the meaning of those words in the greek and hebrew. Some of there words was different from what we think they mean. I believe in the KJV. God has spoken to me through his word. I have a little booklet that shows me all the times the NIV takes away from the KJV. Many words are taken out and whole scriptures. NIV has destroyed God's word. If many people would die for the KJV and did die I should say then I think there is a reason for me to read it as well.

Answer 4

the king james version is actually a closer translation from the hebrew language than what most newly translated bibles are today

for example the text in genesis that reads
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Genesis 2:7 KJV

would read like this in the new international version
the LORD God formed the man [a] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

the main difference bing the ranslation of the words for breath from the hebrew language that also means spirit

and the translation of the word for soul

this saying that the body and soul are not two seperate things but one and the same that without the breath or spirit of god we are no more there is no soul that only the combination of the body and the breath of life makes US the living soul

alot has been lost through translation of the hebrew language especialy since they have no punctuation and english rules will not allow a sentence to run on in such a manner

so the text that reads:
Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." Luke 23:43

should actually read like this:
Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth today, you will be with me in paradise."

jesus spoke like this many times throughout the gospel but we misplaced the comma and so everyone believes that the thief went to heaven with christ when he died when in reality jesus was telling him that he would be with him in heaven after the second coming

so what i see in it is a not an exact translation as would be portrayed if you were to read it in the hebrew language but a more accurate translation than what is placed in newer versions.

it is kind of like a game between children who sit in a circle and one tells another a story secretely and they pass it around the circle untill it reaches the person who told it to see how much it has changed by the time it reaches the end.

the further you translate it the more will be lost from it

Answer 5

I am not suggesting that one be 'married' to the KJV bible.
However, one of the 'bright stars' in favor of the KJV is it is a translation, not a paraphrase, transliteration etc of the Bible. It was translated by several people (50+), a committee if one will, rather than one person, so 'personal opinion' minimizing the process, as may be possible with other 'Bibles'.

Answer 6

Many people think it to be the authentic version. Consider this: There are adaptations and translations of Shakesperean plays into modern day English, however many people still enjoy the original versions. I think it's fine to read the KJV, NKJV, NIV or whatever. All these translations are valid. It's really a matter of preference and understanding.

Answer 7

2 extremely significant factors to make with reference to the King James version. First the only that maximum persons did no longer comprehend is that the English Bible variations till now the King James such via fact the Wycliff and Tyndell and such have been written in a various variety of english. you does no longer have the skill comprehend lots of it. next you may desire to contemplate the Greek text cloth used to create the King James version and the greater moderen variations. The King James version grew to become into translated from a Greek text cloth of the coed Erasmus. It grew to become into taken from the oldest and maximum precise manuscripts and the text cloth Erasmus used is traditionally the excellent Greek text cloth obtainable to this point. In 1881 2 men named Wescott and Hort claimed they got here upon "new' manuscripts and created a greater moderen Greek text cloth. those so called new manuscripts have been deemed inferior and includes blunders so the Wescott and Hort Greek text cloth from 1881 is declared to no longer be a competent source to translate from. almost all the variations from 1881 till at present are taken from the Wescott and Hort Greek text cloth. They contain many verse deletions and hundreds of ommitted words.

Answer 8

God will speak to your heart in a language you can understand many versions say the same thing just in a different way yes i understand that the thees and thous might confuse some but it is still the inspired word of God the is nothing wrong with reading a version you can understand try the children's version it is good to God will speak to your heart listen to him

Answer 9

I'm pretty sure the confusion of the masses is the reason they put those handy little passages in the reference section. It's like reading Shakespeare, really. There are more modern versions out there.

Why do people like the old books? Tradition. Same as mass in Latin.

Answer 10

I prefer the KJV because it's the one I grew up with, but I reference all versions.