With all of the religious conversations going on these days, I was wondering, why is the King James Version of the Bible the most preferred translation used.
Feel free to
With all of the religious conversations going on these days, I was wondering, why is the King James Version of the Bible the most preferred translation used.
Feel free to use any logical explanations, scripture and historical context.
Above all else, keep it respectful.
__________________
GhettoFabulous - all day EVERYDAY
The Following User Says Thank You to GhettoFabulous For This Useful Post:
I've been doing a lot of research on it lately - being a Bible student and that is true, it in fact was preceeded by a couple of other translations, but from what I'm finding out those translations didn't edify the kings of the time, even before James.
__________________
GhettoFabulous - all day EVERYDAY
The Following User Says Thank You to GhettoFabulous For This Useful Post:
Indeed, there are several verses that seem to be missing from the NIV (partial list: Matt 17:21, Mark 7:16, Mark 11:26, Acts 8:37, Acts 9:6). There are other verses that seem much shorter in the NIV. In the KJV, John 6:47 reads, “He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.” In modern translations, the same verse reads, “He who believes has eternal life,” with the words “on me” left out. Did the NIV and NASB leave verses and portions of verses out? Well, not exactly. The earliest manuscripts found do not contain those verses and extra phrases. Those are, in fact, additions to the KJV, rather than subtractions in later translations. Some of those words and verses do appear as margin notes in some early texts, but were clearly not part of the verses.
As stated earlier, the purpose of the KJV translators was to produce a translation that was understood in the common language of the day. That is also a driving force behind many of the modern translations. This is, in fact, why we cite verses from the NIV in our articles more frequently than we cite verses from the KJV. Tests show that reading and comprehending the KJV requires a 12th grade reading level. In contrast, the NASB requires an 11th grade reading level, and the NIV only a 7.8.
Some of the words that were common language 400 years ago are not so common today. Consider the following words and phrases from the KJV: “ceiled” (Haggai 1:4), “clouted upon their feet” (Joshua 9:5), “cotes” (2 Chronicles 32:28), “sackbut” (Daniel 3:5), “brigandines” (Jeremiah 46:4), “wen” (Leviticus 22:22), “tabret” (Genesis 31:27), etc. That’s not including other KJV words such as almug, neesing, chode, habergeon, etc. Even as I write these words, my spell-checker is creating a sea of red in this paragraph!
I haven't seen that one, I'll have to check it out. Thanks for the post.
Neither had I before tonight. I just Googled "KJV" and all kinds of things popped up, mainly the controversy that it is the only "true" version of the Bible. But of course that's kinda silly cuz the original texts weren't even written in English. I know grownups who get confused reading A Tale of Two Cities. And if the whole idea is to translate into a language everyone can understand and be able teach to others, then why would we need to dwell on archaic speech this way?
Someone please help me understand what makes this translation THE translation.
__________________
virgin minister extraordinaire
The Following User Says Thank You to kornkobbler For This Useful Post:
Neither had I before tonight. I just Googled "KJV" and all kinds of things popped up, mainly the controversy that it is the only "true" version of the Bible. But of course that's kinda silly cuz the original texts weren't even written in English. I know grownups who get confused reading A Tale of Two Cities. And if the whole idea is to translate into a language everyone can understand and be able teach to others, then why would we need to dwell on archaic speech this way?
Someone please help me understand what makes this translation THE translation.
good ole sydney carton
__________________
In the depths of winter I finally learned there was in me an invincible summer.-Camus.
The Following User Says Thank You to Quixote For This Useful Post:
I also 'unearthed' that the reason for the NIV and other newer editions of the KJV were because the words they used then can be said easier now - in other words so that more can get the message. I have this version, as well as the NIV and an 8 translation Bible that I love because it lets me see the scriptures all at once. It really helps to get the meaning, especially when I'm door to door and can help others go to THEIR Bible. I guess thats why I like talking about it - if it gets people to read the word. I think there are so many self help books out there now - with a lot of the same principles that are found in the scriptures, that it's really the only self help book you need, wouldn't you say?
Either way, I hope more who use the KJV can help out here.
__________________
GhettoFabulous - all day EVERYDAY
The Following User Says Thank You to GhettoFabulous For This Useful Post:
I was thinking about getting the New Living Translation at the bookstore. What you think about it Korn? I've noticed that the big difference is that they use LORD instead of Jehovah. I was just browsing I wasn't able to sit down compare. I look at two scriptures and they convey the same meaning thats in my bible.
The Following User Says Thank You to L0VE For This Useful Post:
I currently have the following translations
NWT - New World Translation
King James Version - my mothers Bible, it's also a womens study Bible.
NIV
The Eight Translation New Testament available at Amazon
I was thinking about getting the New Living Translation at the bookstore. What you think about it Korn? I've noticed that the big difference is that they use LORD instead of Jehovah. I was just browsing I wasn't able to sit down compare. I look at two scriptures and they convey the same meaning thats in my bible.
I've never picked up a copy of it. But I do make regular use of a website which cross-references it with at LEAST five other versions including:
King James Version
New King James Version
New Living Version
New International Version
English Standard Version
New American Standard Version
Revised Standard Version
American Standard Version
Young Literal's Version
I get SO sick of this claim that Jehovah's Witnesses have their OWN Bible. That's not only stupid, it's a flat out LIE. Not only are there plenty of nonwitness people using the New World Translation, there are plenty of witness people who use the King James Version, myself included. Get your facts straight, kiddies. Go attack the Mormons if you wanna say someone is writing Bibles of their own BUT GET OFF MY BACK.
__________________
virgin minister extraordinaire
The Following User Says Thank You to kornkobbler For This Useful Post:
and that is true, it in fact was preceeded by a couple of other translations, but from what I'm finding out those translations didn't edify the kings of the time, even before James.
Linear Mode
