It is not the Elizabethian English people have a problem with, it is the "Message" of God. They are blinded.
I grew up on the KJV. My children quote KJV, like their children quote the trash the rappers sing.
2006-12-16 18:10:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by Wise ol' owl 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
THE KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE IS SO VERY OLD
Some of us have got used to it.
Moses Exo.7:7[ age 80 ];
Exodus 12:40,41 [ Gal.3:16-18 430 years after Abraham, is the law ]; 857 years after the flood, is Genesis, Job, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers & Deuteronomy done 897 years after flood.
Joshua 5:6,10,12; Ends 40 years at 14 days in the new year at 898th years.
Judges 11:26; 300 yeas is 1198 years after the flood. This is 1212 before Christ.
Acts 13:20; 450 plus 857 Moses 1307 after flood is 1103 before Christ, Samuel age 80.
1Ki.6:1; 480 plus 897 Solomon is 1377 after flood, 1Ki.11:42; 36 is 1413. 997 before Christ. Adam to Noah #10 son, Abraham #20 son, Mat.1:1-17; David #34 son, to #48 son at Babylon Empire #3, captivity, Promised Land kings end. THERE WILL BE NO KING BUT JESUS AT HIS SECOND COMING. He will be son #62 in Roman Empire #6.
KJV Bible 1611 published plus 303 is 1914 CE an excepted translation for world of WW1, WW2 and holocaust and all the things that was never before to establish all
things of the last days.
Satan will go out and Jesus will come the second time.
It is even in old English a simple book, it does not use complex words. It is a big book and connecting it together from Genesis to Revelations takes a while.
Eph.2:7; 3:31; The would with Jesus is without end.
2006-12-16 18:24:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by jeni 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
A lot of people are offended by the KJV because when it was written in 1611, it used the English of that time. A lot of the verb usage and words have changed over the years. That'a why new translations appeared starting around 1880 and continuing to the present day.
I was raised on the KJV. It's the only translation I use, because I'm familiar with the English. This version also is easy for me to use, and the best notes are in the Dake's.
2006-12-16 18:15:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by curious cat 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
It's the KJV that is written at a 12 grade level and NIV that was written at a 4th grade level. The fact is that people gravitate to the version that best suits them. Most people don't understand the KJV. I personally love the way it flows, another good version is the NKJV.
2006-12-16 18:30:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by disciple 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
The KJV was written only 400 years ago in 1611.
The NIV was compiled in 1965 and published in 1978.
Aramaic and even an understanding of Coptic Egyptian was unheard of. The KJV Bible itself was printed in English, but first had to be translated from Greek to Latin, Latin to German, and then finally German to English.
It is not the closest thing to Gods word and is in fact filled with both inconsistencies and MANY mistranslations. With each translation in turn the errors grew, and since the original text was in Aramaic, and many of the supporting documents were in all manner of text (hence the Egyptian comment) it has gotten very much out of hand now.
Your nieces read it, but they do not truly understand it.
If you think that they do, ask them what the "Book of Job" means to them.... ask them why there are differences in the NT Gospels of Matthew Mark and Luke.
They can 'read' it, but they do not comprehend it.
You actually don't comprehend it either for that matter or you'd know these things already.....
2006-12-16 18:19:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by wolf560 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
The KJV *is* archaic and difficult to modern readers. It was written 400 years ago, and the English language has changed since then so that some meanings are no longer clear. And FYI, it was edited and altered to fit the interests of the power structure of the time, just like every other 'holy' book. Nonetheless, for historical and literary purposes it is still *the* definitive version, and in places (IMNSHO) still the most poetic. The fact remains that the NIV is more accessible to modern readers, which is important for attracting and retaining new converts.
2006-12-16 18:15:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by dukefenton 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Why use a Bible that uses old or archaic english. I realize most people prefer the KJV and that's fine. How do u prove that it's the most accurate translation though? it's not even the oldest english version, the Geneva and a couple of others predated it. IN the last 2 centuries , they've also discovered older , original manuscripts to compare and thus newer versions can be considered closer to what was written.
2006-12-16 18:14:30
·
answer #7
·
answered by jaguarboy 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Differ ant Bibles other than the KJV offers easier reading and translations. Ask a minister what Bible they teach out of and why. If it isn't KJV you may be required to buy & try to read the 12th grade level Bible or continue to be able to translate back to KJV.
2006-12-16 18:19:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am all for the KJV. I only believe the bible to be true as far as it is translated correctly. I have read and prayed about the KJV bible, and i KNOW that it is true. These new "translations" take away the language and some of the hidden truths in the bible. We read scripture to learn what God has for us. Simply making the Bible easier to read takes away the part where we dilligently study the scriptures to learn.
2006-12-16 18:29:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by theflamingspork88 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Wrong. and Wrong. The KJV is a very beautiful Bible, especially for reading out loud. However, we have many better translation of the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic of the ancient Bible. We understand the original languages quite well and our translations become more sophisticated. There are bibles that point out every language ambiguity. The KJV is one of many good Bibles in its current edition.
2006-12-16 18:10:39
·
answer #10
·
answered by BigPappa 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I believe the choice of a bible depends on one's denomination. Catholics, for example, do not use the KJV of the bible--honestly, its best to leave at "to each his own." As many people have stated, the KJV has numerous linguistic inaccuracies, as do most of the printed bibles.
2006-12-16 19:10:59
·
answer #11
·
answered by animavecchia 2
·
1⤊
0⤋