Do you think the King James Version of The Bible is the only true version?

Question

Why? Why not?

Answer 1

it is one of the oldest books that contain the OT and NT
that has been transferred to English, old English

Answer 2

As far as accuracy in English, yes. For today's world, the New King James- this I say because not everyone can get by the Old English. Remember, when KJV came out, it was written in the language of their day, too.
Personally, the Greek is favored. The words are much more precise than English.
I think it was Haddon Robinson that wrote in his book, Biblical Preaching, that going to the Greek from English, is like going to color television from the black and white...there's so much more clarity of meaning.

If the KJ were the only true version, there is a flaw immediately in that argument. To say that, is to say that God has chosen only the English speaking people in the world to give His words to....see the difficulty?

Answer 3

No! Nowadays there are so many versions of the bible such as the NIV, The Message, and Life Application Study Bible, etc... if your looking for the "only true version", I believe they all are true, some bibles are just worded differently. Do actually think God would allow fake versions to be out in the world he created?

Answer 4

It is an English translation of the Bible. One of many. It is good, but not without error. The errors do not make it useless or any less valuable than others.

English speaking people tend to only think their way is the only thing in existence. These same people are the ones who believe shouting louder at someone who does not speak English will some how enable them to understand!

What is important is to have a Bible translation written in our modern language, whichever that might be. We need it to understand what was originally written in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. It wasn't written originally in Olde English.

Answer 5

No.
Why would it be? It was a good translation for its day, and I use it all the time. But I see no reason to think that it is the only true version. The translators certainly didn't believe that!

As for the texts, the KJV and NKJV are the only ones that use the majority text in the New Testament. But they still suffer from several difficulties. First, they used the Byzantine Majority Text for the New Testament, but they rejected the Byzantine Majority Text of the Old Testament in favor of the Masoretic Hebrew (which is at odds with the text used by the authors of the New Testament, as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls). They based their text on the NT put out by Erasmus, who was a little rusty on the Greek, and who was forced to fabricate certain parts of the Greek text because no manuscripts were available. And the KJV actually resorts to the minority reading on some verses, and new manuscript discoveries show that their version of the majority text wasn't actually the majority text at all.

There is also the problem with the Protestant slant in the King James, a lack of historical context in many passages, ignorance of many Greek idioms, and an almost complete ignorance of Greek philosophical terminology. And contemporary religious dogmas also influenced the translation, leading to terms like "baptism" for "immersion," or "righteousness" for "justice," "faith" for "belief," etc.

Answer 6

All the "versions" of the bible have to much human influence in them. Prejudice, superstition, fear mongering, and wishful thinking. I think the basic concept and the stories are close enough. But those who rely on individual verses to judge and pester other people, are going to be judged harshly by God. The bible is just a tool for us to use wisely. Not for beating other people over the head.

Answer 7

James I reigned as king of England from 1603 to 1625. He was the son of Mary Queen of Scots, and he had been king of Scotland before succeeding to the English throne at the death of Queen Elizabeth I. He was prompted to produce an English Bible because of the poor and tendentious copies being circulated in England. He feared these could be used by seditious religious and political factions.

His authority was one usurped from the Catholic Church, beginning with his predecessor King Henry VIII. Henry had broken with the Catholic Church and made himself the head of the Church in England, which soon enough became the Church of England. You could say James had no more authority in biblical matters than any head of state, basically none. What authority would a "George Bush Bible" have? The true authority and safeguard over Scripture was and has to be the Catholic Church, to which Christ gave his authority. No secular authority has any rightful authority over the Bible.

Answer 8

Nope it has been proven lingistically to be the most errant translation of the bible. the language and translations were so bad the Protestant councils went back and retranslated from scratch. The King James compilation was from a political council.

we won;t even get into the books they removed and altered.

This is why most mainline denominations do not use the King James Version.

Answer 9

The bible in any version is myths, ancient oral history and fairy tales. No versions can be the truth.

Free your mind.

Answer 10

i think its the BEST version there is...you always need to question the motives of someone who creates a new version
just becuase they dont like the other one.

Answer 11

Thanks for bringing this up. The front of the Bible clearly states "King James Version". Does anyone know about King James?? He was not a very good person. I think the book, in general, is full of misconception and outright "stories".