Jump to content

The Christian Protestant Community Forums

Sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community forums. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Community Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
E Morales

Why I prefer in English the KJV

Recommended Posts

First, it beats the test of time, it is easy to read and understand, it has not been water down,  and is easy to hear. $0.00 Its free to use, without any special permission. I'm not a KJV only person, I do have a Spanish bible, the Reina Valera bible. I believe with each translation of the bible is making God's Word weaker through the years. New bibles are easy to the ears, and are not as firm in its teaching . Everyone of these super pracher out there are trying to help God, making new bibles and they are making lots of money at the same time.

 

So think about it my friends, and my brothers in Christ, do you want your lemonade strong or weak?

 

lemon squeeze GIF by Zu

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff

If you haven't already vote in our poll:

 

 

  • Yay 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, William said:

If you haven't already vote in our poll:

 

 

Thank you I just Voted... Trump again.   😉   KJV

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
1 hour ago, E Morales said:

First, it beats the test of time

There are translations that have been around much longer.

 

1 hour ago, E Morales said:

it is easy to read and understand

Hmmmm!  According to whom?  The fact is many of the words and idioms used in the KJV are no longer used and have been out of date for some time now.

 

 

1 hour ago, E Morales said:

it has not been water down

I don't know what that means.  Translations try to covey the meaning of a verse as best as they are able.  The ESV, NASB, the NET bible etc. all try and fulfill that goal.

 

1 hour ago, E Morales said:

and is easy to hear.

Personal opinon.

 

1 hour ago, E Morales said:

Its free to use without any special permission.

Most translations can be read online for free.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a example of watering down the Word the bible.

 

I was reading this in a  post that nobody replayed too. Interesting Post

 

EXPRESSING YOUR OPINION

 

Pr 18:2  A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions. (NIV)

What's your opinion of that verse?

 

Or the NKJV translates it this way:

Pr 18:2 A fool has no delight in understanding, But in expressing his own heart. (NKJV)

How do you feel about that?

 

Opinion and heart does not means the same thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
1 hour ago, E Morales said:

Here is a example of watering down the Word the bible.

 

I was reading this in a  post that nobody replayed too. Interesting Post

 

EXPRESSING YOUR OPINION

 

Pr 18:2  A fool finds no pleasure in understanding but delights in airing his own opinions. (NIV)

What's your opinion of that verse?

 

Or the NKJV translates it this way:

Pr 18:2 A fool has no delight in understanding, But in expressing his own heart. (NKJV)

How do you feel about that?

 

Opinion and heart does not means the same thing. 

The first thing I noticed is your shift from the KJV to the NKJV.  I find it odd after stating the KJV "it is easy to read and understand" you cite an up to date English translation.

 

Second, there is no real difference in meaning.  When one expresses "his own heart" that person is in fact "airing his own opinions."  The clause "expressing his own heart" is an idiom while the phrase "airing his own opinions" is more straightforward.

 

The point is the same in either case.  A "fool" does not care about really understanding or learning some topic\subject.  The "fool" only cares about their OWN ideas and thoughts.  Such a path does not seek the truth of a matter but is egotistical, self centered.  As one scholar puts it: "This kind of person is in love with his own ideas and enjoys spewing them out."

 

The NET Bible expresses the same idea differently: "A fool takes no pleasure in understanding but only in disclosing what is on his mind."

 

By the way the KJV has "A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself."

 

My point is that can be more than one way to express a thought.  The goal is to express the author's intent\thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Origen said:

The first thing I noticed is your shift from the KJV to the NKJV.  I find it odd after stating the KJV "it is easy to read and understand" you cite an up to date English translation.

 

Second, there is no real difference in meaning.  When one expresses "his own heart" that person is in fact "airing his own opinions."  The clause "expressing his own heart" is an idiom while the phrase "airing his own opinions" is more straightforward.

 

The point is the same in either case.  A "fool" does not care about really understanding or learning some topic\subject.  The "fool" only care about their OWN ideas and thoughts.  Such a path does not seek the truth of a matter but is egotistical, self centered.  As one scholar puts it: "This kind of person is in love with his own ideas and enjoys spewing them out."

 

The NET Bible expresses the same idea differently: "A fool takes no pleasure in understanding but only in disclosing what is on his mind."

 

By the way the KJV has "A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself."

 

The KJV  "A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself."  is a much clearer version than the others mentioned, Thank you, for we do know what does come from the heart. For we believe with our hearts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
1 hour ago, E Morales said:

The KJV  "A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself."  is a much clearer version than the others mentioned,

That is a personal opinion.

 

I don't know of anyone who does not know what the phrases "airing his own opinions" and "disclosing what is on his mind" mean, but I have never heard anyone say "his heart may discover itself" in the course of everyday conversation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/19/2019 at 7:35 AM, E Morales said:

 

The KJV  "A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself."  is a much clearer version than the others mentioned,

Thank you, for we do know what does come from the heart. For we believe with our hearts

Hang in there with the 1611 KJV Bible. It's still the most accurate Bible version for English speaking peoples.

 

Later more modern Bible translations, like the NIV, used a different set of New Testament Greek manuscripts than the KJV translators used.

 

The KJV used the Majority Texts for the NT. More modern Bibles like the NIV used Wescott & Hort's Alexandrian Greek texts. Wescott & Hort started a belief in the 1800s that since the Alexandrian manuscripts were older, it meant more accurate than the Majority Texts that only later copies exist. However, the KJV NT from the Majority Texts means just that, from the majority of NT Greek texts. Whereas, the Alexandrian texts are few in number and show little wear, and thus little usage.

 

Another thing brethren should be aware of. The Christian Alexandrian school at Alexandria, Egypt was subjected to paganism which existed all around it. A melding of ideas with ancient philosophy can be recognized in some of their early interpretations, such as those of Clement of Alexandria, Origen, etc.

 

Some things to think about:

http://www.pawcreek.org/the-corrupt-new-international-version-bible-niv-apostasy-in-print/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
On 9/19/2019 at 6:18 AM, Origen said:

The first thing I noticed is your shift from the KJV to the NKJV.  I find it odd after stating the KJV "it is easy to read and understand" you cite an up to date English translation.

 

Second, there is no real difference in meaning.  When one expresses "his own heart" that person is in fact "airing his own opinions."  The clause "expressing his own heart" is an idiom while the phrase "airing his own opinions" is more straightforward.

 

The point is the same in either case.  A "fool" does not care about really understanding or learning some topic\subject.  The "fool" only cares about their OWN ideas and thoughts.  Such a path does not seek the truth of a matter but is egotistical, self centered.  As one scholar puts it: "This kind of person is in love with his own ideas and enjoys spewing them out."

 

The NET Bible expresses the same idea differently: "A fool takes no pleasure in understanding but only in disclosing what is on his mind."

 

By the way the KJV has "A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself."

 

My point is that can be more than one way to express a thought.  The goal is to express the author's intent\thought.

 

shaun the sheep movie ok GIF

 

Mark 7:21-23 - "For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person." Matthew 15:19.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
51 minutes ago, davy said:

Another thing brethren should be aware of. The Christian Alexandrian school at Alexandria, Egypt was subjected to paganism which existed all around it. A melding of ideas with ancient philosophy can be recognized in some of their early interpretations, such as those of Clement of Alexandria, Origen, etc.

Because England and surrounding areas had not contained Paganism, ancient philosophy, and there was no political motivation behind the KJV. 

 

sarcastic willy wonka GIF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God used the KJV translators to get His Word to the English speaking peoples. It's undeniable that God's hand was in it. Even though there is no such thing as a perfect translation, even as the translators themselves admitted its faults, there had never been such a committee of scholars come together in agreement to do the work. And king James was instrumental in causing the work to go forth when not long prior leaders in England were persecuting those trying to get The Bible into the peoples' hands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff

God used the KJV Tyndale and Geneva to get His Word to the English speaking peoples.

 

And the KJV removed and altered what was to advance a political agenda.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
33 minutes ago, Antus67 said:

KJV is the only version i I have or accept.

You may be interested in this thread. You decide whether the KJV only creates a communication barrier today and whether you're fully grasping what the author intended. That is, whether we read things from the KJV and take for granted we are understanding as well as more modern versions. Sometimes I find someone misunderstanding something in the KJV and when that misunderstanding is challenged by another modern translation it is quickly dismissed and rejected for what the reader wants the verse to mean. In such time it is generally very fruitful researching why the difference and understanding as well as why the translators made changes. 

 

Speaking of did anyone catch that movie "The Professor and the Madman"? Interestingly, challenges arose when attempting to create the first Oxford dictionary. The English language changed faster than the team convened to put together the dictionary could keep up. If that is true today what issues may arise to a reader which depends on translations?

 

My only suggestion is that it doesn't hurt to parallel or read more than one translation. We all have our preferences. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, davy said:

God used the KJV translators to get His Word to the English speaking peoples.

And, the Wycliffe Bible(1395), Tyndale Bible (1536), Great Bible (1539), Geneva Bible (1560), Bishops' Bible(1568) somehow failed to do that?

I seem to recall that some insignificant English speakers on a little boat called the Mayflower use the Geneva BIble, but then again who cares about them they didn't do anything special, right?

 

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

davy quote

Quote

 Hang in there with the 1611 KJV Bible. It's still the most accurate Bible version for English speaking peoples.

I must agree with this statement however William you have a valued point on making comparisons with other versions.KJV has been the foundation to go by IMHO/ So where do we draw a line....................that's why we have Bible studies to seek Gods word ............that's why we have forums like Christforum to seek answers.............and that's why have church's to pray and fellowship with others

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
5 hours ago, Antus67 said:

davy quote

I must agree with this statement however William you have a valued point on making comparisons with other versions.KJV has been the foundation to go by IMHO/ So where do we draw a line....................that's why we have Bible studies to seek Gods word ............that's why we have forums like Christforum to seek answers.............and that's why have church's to pray and fellowship with others

The KJV is not the foundation. The manuscripts in Hebrew and Greek are. The KJV isn't even our foundation for the English language.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can’t go wrong using a bible like the King James, unless you’re a liberal and need to be more flexible, and to please the more. New is not always better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
Just now, E Morales said:

You can’t go wrong using a bible like the King James

And why is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me rephrase that statement when I meant foundation I should have used a better wording as the KJV is the most widely used version. I tend to disagree with you on the statement KJV isn't even our foundation for the English language.

===============================================================================================================================

King James Version (KJV), also called Authorized Version or King James Bible, English translation of the Bible published in 1611 under the auspices of King James I of England. The translation had a marked influence on English literary style and was generally accepted as the standard English Bible from the mid-17th to the early 20th century.

=============================================================================================================================

Now when did the English language come into play:

English is a West Germanic language that originated from Anglo-Frisian dialects brought to Britain in the mid 5th to 7th centuries AD by Anglo-Saxon settlers. With the end of Roman rule in 410 AD, Latin ceased to be a major influence on the Celtic languages spoken by the majority of the population.[citation needed] People from what is now northwest Germany, west Denmark and the Netherlands settled in the British Isles from the mid-5th century and came to culturally dominate the bulk of southern Great Britain until the 7th century. The Anglo-Saxon language, now called Old English, originated as a group of Anglo-Frisian dialects which were spoken, at least by the settlers, in England and southern and eastern Scotland in the early Middle Ages. It displaced to some extent the Celtic languages that predominated previously. Old English also reflected the varied origins of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms established in different parts of Britain. The Late West Saxon dialect eventually became dominant. A significant subsequent influence on the shaping of Old English came from contact with the North Germanic languages spoken by the Scandinavian Vikings who conquered and colonized parts of Britain during the 8th and 9th centuries, which led to much lexical borrowing and grammatical simplification. The Anglian dialects had a greater influence on Middle English.

==========================================================================================================================

 Based on these facts the KJV  was the first English translation. Now the translation I agree is from

The manuscripts in Hebrew and Greek

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/18/2019 at 12:11 PM, E Morales said:

First, it beats the test of time, it is easy to read and understand, it has not been water down,  and is easy to hear. $0.00 Its free to use, without any special permission. I'm not a KJV only person, I do have a Spanish bible, the Reina Valera bible. I believe with each translation of the bible is making God's Word weaker through the years. New bibles are easy to the ears, and are not as firm in its teaching . Everyone of these super preacher out there are trying to help God, making new bibles and they are making lots of money at the same time.

 

So think about it my friends, and my brothers in Christ, do you want your lemonade strong or weak?

 

lemon squeeze GIF by Zu

Can someone correct the word  (Preachers) spelling for me thanks. Original post near the end. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
14 hours ago, Antus67 said:

Based on these facts the KJV was the first English translation.

The English language is divided into 2 periods:

 

(a) Early Modern Period (ca. 1450-1800)

(b) Late Modern English (1800 to the present).

 

This means all English translations of the Bible up to ca. 1800 are Early Modern English translations.  This would included the translations listed by @Ben Asher (post 16) and others such the Coverdale Bible (1535) and Douay–Rheims Bible (1582).

 

Furthermore, the KJV translator also consulted other English translations. Two of the most notable are the Bishops' Bible and William Tyndale translation. In fact the KJV relies so heavily on Tyndale translation something like 83% of the KJV (in the N.T.) can be traced to Tyndale's translation.  The KJV was not the first English translation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, E Morales said:

 I believe with each translation of the bible is making God's Word weaker through the years.

This is a key point of view and I feel very important. (Over the years I've spoke to Moslem they state we over have 1 Bible the Koran and make note they say we have numerous versions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
12 minutes ago, Antus67 said:

 I believe with each translation of the bible is making God's Word weaker through the years.

The vast majority of New Testament Greek scholars would disagree with you.  The increase in resources and knowledge concerning the N.T. manuscripts and the Greek language is beneficial to the Church.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...