Is it because one needs a 16th grade level to comprehend it? (unfortunate that the average american reads at an 8th grade level).
I thought King James was poorly translated because he only had like 9 people working on the translations, where as the NIV etc, have had hundereds of people working on the translations?!?
2006-11-28 16:58:26 · 10 answers · asked by ♫O Praise Him♫ 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The KJV is referred to as the correct bible by people who want to believe it is the correct bible.
It's not hard to comprehend, you just have to take your time with it.
2006-11-28 17:24:27 · answer #1 · answered by Black Dragon 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well any translation is just that, a translation. The original manuscripts were in hebrew and greek and aramaic I believe. These languages are far more complicated than english, for example in greek a simple word like "love" or "friendship" are represented by many different words to imply the tense of the word and the nature of the word etc... The people that call the KJV bible the "correct" bible forget that there have been revised versions of the KJV bible over the hundreds of years to bring the language up to date as the english language has changed. I like the KJV but I prefer the NIV, the amplified version and the NKJV because the language is easier for me to understand.
2006-11-28 17:04:48 · answer #2 · answered by sheepinarowboat 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The KJV is translated from the Textus Receptus [TR] (collection of Hebrew and Greek manuscripts) which is believed to be by many the most accurate text.
The NIV is translated from the Critical Text [CT] (collection of Hebrew and Greek manuscripts), which is considered by some to contain corrupt manuscripts.
The KJV is a formal equivalent translation, which is as close as possible to a word for word translation while still maintaining readability. Direct Literal word for word translations are very difficult to read due to the sentence structure differences between Hebrew, Greek, and English. The men who translated the KJV we all fluent in the languages they were translating.
The NIV is translated using Dynamic Equivalence. This is the method whereby the translator's purpose is not to give a literal, word-for-word rendition but to transfer the meaning of the text as would be best expressed in the words of the receptor [native] language. The problem with this type of translation is that it is much easier for theological bias to influence the text.
My opinion is that the KJV is as close to perfect as any translation can possibly be. The NKJV runs a very close second IMHO. The NIV has many errors even when compared to the CT.
Listed in the sources below is a great site that has a lot of information about the differences.
Many people are very militant about the KJV being the only Bible for the English-speaking people (the are referred to as KJVO or KJV onlyist). Many more are like myself and are KJV preferred., We believe that the KJV is a great translation but not necessarily the only translation. Then there are others who seem like they belong to the Bible of the month club and switch between versions like many switch between novels.
You can't go wrong with the KJV but if you really think you need a easier to read version I suggest either the Modern KJV (MKJV) New KJV (NKJV), Amplified version, or the Defined KJV. If you really want one of the simple language versions I suggest a Parallel version with the KJV or NKJV paralleled with NIV or NLT so you can compare the two versions and see the differences.
2006-11-28 17:34:27 · answer #3 · answered by Tim P 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The sections translated from the Jewish bible were translated fairly well except a few obvious verses mistranslated for 'continuity' with their particular school of Christian thought. The teacher of the translators was an andalusian rabbi and one reason the names in the translation if pronounced with a spanish accent are closer to the original hebrew. Many of the newer translations tend to be far less literal and have even less of a handle on the idioms used in the original hebrew. So perhaps that is related to the "correct" bible title.
2006-11-28 17:24:04 · answer #4 · answered by David Botton 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The King James Version of the bible is seen by the protests as the correct version of the bible not the Catholics because a lot of books which are in the Catholic book bible were left out of the King James Version of the bible.
The reason it is so hard to read and understand is because it is written for the most part in Old English not modern English.
2006-11-28 17:12:07 · answer #5 · answered by JUAN FRAN$$$ 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The King James Version is referred to as the "correct version" by people who are close minded and stuck in the Middle Ages. They like to think that's how God would talk. Actually, though, the King James is a pretty good translation, it's just that a lot of manuscripts have been found since that time.
2006-11-28 17:01:41 · answer #6 · answered by keri gee 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Damn I didn't know that. Hundreds of people and they still can't get it right. Probably have a hard time getting that many people to agree. Probably translate by the majority rules. Who is to say what they are translating from is right in the first place. Kisses Betty.
2006-11-28 17:20:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The KJV is the most inaccurate translation of the Bible...
2006-11-28 17:00:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Some people have the mistaken idea that it was the origional bible because it is the one they were raised with.
2006-11-28 17:03:03 · answer #9 · answered by October 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most people don't know any better. Their clergymen tell them this, so they believe it.
2006-11-28 17:05:41 · answer #10 · answered by LineDancer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋