kjv bible,is this why so many people turn away?

Question

you know i think alot of people are turned off from the bible because of the way it is written. but Jesus was a jew and did not talk like that, no one in the bible actually said stuff like- thou, thee, unto---so if this is one of the reasons you turned away from it, try reading a different version(i read the amplified bible, it is in plain english, i am a little leary of the things written in "",but i think there are other american versions). this is something that came to my mind one day.

im not writing this because i have a problem, i am writing this in hope that there may be one person this might reach and help turn them back to God!

Answer 1

The book of the Scripture was originally written in Hebreo,Greek and Aramaic languages and was later translated to different languages in the world.

Thou, thee, unto and others new to you are old English languages which were used by the English translators of the bible.

If you could not understand the meaning of those words, you consult your dictionary.
jtm

Answer 2

The english used in the King James bible wasn't even the english in use by the population at the writing of the bible. It was from a period not too far in the recent past of the time of the writing when the english language had reached the highest standard that it has ever attained to. That's the english that we read in the King James bible today, and the language that God authorized his preserved word to be written in for the english speaking people who have lived since its publication. Today there are few who will say that we have the infallible and inerrant word of God. Those who recognize the King James translation as such will stand by it and declare without any hesitation that the King James bible is the infallible and inerrant word of God.

Answer 3

I was kind of turned off by the thee's and thou's too. But when I got saved, I was able to understand and even grow to like the old English writing.

However, now I use the New King James Version along with a parallel bible for studying.

Answer 4

The King James was written that way because people talked that way in 1611. There was a formal and a familiar version of the second person pronoun then, just like in other European languages. "You" and "yours" was formal, "thou, thee," and "thine" were familiar. ("Ye" was plural.) When they were dropped, they ironically became an odd kind of "formal", reserved for God talk.

There's always a tendency to think of archaic forms as somehow more honorable than contemporary forms. That's why the Catholic Mass continued in Latin for so long, because the gutteral Ostrogoths and Vandals thought it sounded beautiful and angelic. (They certainly couldn't understand it.) KJV is just another example. It stands out. Even if it's hard to understand, it's got all that "tradition" behind it. So people latch onto it, like trying to latch onto a piece of divinity. Yeah, that could be intimidating to someone who is sincerely trying to understand.

Answer 5

The KJV is the original translation of the Bible. The Books were written by the knowledge given to the writers by GOD.
They are written how He wanted them.Anyone turned off by
this version, probably wouldn't understand it anyway, written any other way. God will let a person have knowledge if they desire it,by prayer and the reading of the Bible.

Answer 6

Surely there can only be one way to say the word of God. If people go changing bits to make it easier to read, then things will be lost in translation. The current bible has been mis-translated already. Why amplify the fact.

Answer 7

Use a solid translation of Scripture! The Douay-Rheims version is the traditional Catholic standard in the English language; the Latin Vulgate, translated from the Greek and Hebrew by St. Jerome (A.D. 340-420 ), is the "official" Scripture of the Church. I strongly encourage you to get a copy of the one of these you are able to best understand, and use it exclusively for Lectio Divina, family devotions, etc. Though the Vulgate and Douay are not perfect translations, they are vastly superior to most modern translations, even so-called "Catholic" ones, which can be quite modernized -- not only with obvious things such as "inclusive language," but with subtle changes that can profoundly affect one's understanding of God's Truth. As an example: I Corinthians 9:5 reads:

Have we not power to carry about a woman, a sister, as well as the rest of the apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?

But in the 1991 New American Bible, a translation approved by American Catholic Bishops, the same verse reads:

Do we not have the right to take along a Christian wife, as do the rest of the apostles, and the brothers of the Lord, and Kephas?

And which is the right translation? The words translated as "a woman, a sister" in the Douay, and as "Christian wife" in the NAB, are "adelphên gunaika" in the Greek. "Gunaika" means both "woman" and "wife," just as "femme" does in French; "adelphên" means "sister." St. Paul used "adelphên" to modify "gunaika" in order to make clear that he was not referring to "wives," Christian or not, but to female disciples such as those that always followed Jesus -- women who are referred to as "gunaika" in Matthew 27:55-56, Luke 8:1-3, etc. The new "Catholic" translation is one written by "Catholics" who want to attack celibacy. And so it goes. For more on the out and out heresies of the New American Bible -- the Bible used as the basis for American Novus Ordo lectionaries -- see this article (off-site, will open in new browser window): New American Bible: Is It Good for Catholics?

As said, the best all around English-language Bible to have is the Douay-Rheims, but if you can get the version of the Douay-Rheims that includes commentary by Fr. George Leo Haydock, all the better. Printed originally in 1812, this complete Bible comes in two volumes and includes not only Fr. Haydock's commentary, but the commentary of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church throughout. It can be purchased here (link will open in new browser window).

For a nice but less complete Bible commentary for the average layman, see A Practical Commentary on Holy Scripture by Bishop Frederick Justus Knecht, D.D. (844 pp. Link will open in new browser window).

Here are a few online tools to help you (will open in new browser windows):

Douay-Rheims Bible
The Vulgate
The Unbound Bible
Douay Concordance
Bible Citations in the Summa

Answer 8

If that's your only problem, just use the New King James Version. That's basically all they did to it - convert it into something we can understand today. But that's not the problem most people have. They would rather strain at gnats of typo's and such while swallowing the camel of Satan's lies about the Bible.

Answer 9

Nah, a version of the Bible is way beyond the point of rejection. They could care less about the scripture, no matter how it is put down on paper.

Answer 10

Not sure. I have a NKJV bible (among several others) and that is the one I keep going back to. However, I do agree that other versions (NIV, NAS, etc) are probably a tad easier to understand for someone who is not a whiz at bible reading.