[KJV]

(Edited - copied from website)
To learn more about Bible Versions go to www.biblediscernment.com

[mcmama]

Please do not copy/paste from a website. If you wish to start a discussion about the King James Bible over other English language versions, please do so in your own words.

The website reminds me of something my former mother in law encountered in the Evangelische Kirche she grew up with in Missouri way way back in the 1920s. The minister argued that their particular German language version of the book was the most authoritative, and even God must agree, because the very first thing God says in that version is:

"Adam, wo bist du?"

I love the language and cadence of the KJV, but I really don't see it as effective for study as other english language versions.

[KJV]

"I love the language and cadence of the KJV, but I really don't see it as effective for study as other english language versions."
So what other english language version is the WORD of God?

[mama2riley]

Just curious - I've heard of people who believe that the KJV version is the only truly inspired version of the Bible, but what makes you think that? I don't really want to get in a debate about it, because personally I believe that different versions work better for different groups of people and God works through those versions to reach many people, more people than just the KJV alone. I don't personally prefer the KJV bc I find it difficult to read. And I know that my life has been changed dramatically through the reading of the Bible in translations other than KJV. I agree with mcmama. But what I don't understand how anyone can say any one verson is the ONLY one that is the Word of God. If you were gonna say that then I'd have to tell you to go learn Greek and Hebrew because you better go start reading from the original text in the original languages. A translation is just that, a translation, regardless of whether it is KJV, NIV, NES, or whatever. Is that just something you were taught in your church all your life?

[KJV]

Originally Posted by mama2riley

Just curious - I've heard of people who believe that the KJV version is the only truly inspired version of the Bible, but what makes you think that? I don't really want to get in a debate about it, because personally I believe that different versions work better for different groups of people and God works through those versions to reach many people, more people than just the KJV alone. I don't personally prefer the KJV bc I find it difficult to read. And I know that my life has been changed dramatically through the reading of the Bible in translations other than KJV. I agree with mcmama. But what I don't understand how anyone can say any one verson is the ONLY one that is the Word of God. If you were gonna say that then I'd have to tell you to go learn Greek and Hebrew because you better go start reading from the original text in the original languages. A translation is just that, a translation, regardless of whether it is KJV, NIV, NES, or whatever. Is that just something you were taught in your church all your life?

Please see BIBLE VERSIONS link at www.biblediscernment.com for answers. This subject can not be answered here with just a few words. May God give you discernment about this very important issue. EVERY CHRISTIAN should know the REAL word of God. The WORD of God is all His words not just some of His words. God Bless

[MJ7]

A good point was made about going back to the origional Greek and Hebrew versions. The author of the website you linked might have overlooked some things in their proclaimation.

First off, the Philip. 2:6 argument suggesting the NKJV states a different point than the KJV is false. My version is from 1979 as well and states the same information. "who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,"

In Luke 2:33 the argument about it being so wrong that Joseph is Jesus' father is a bit rediculous. If anyone actually reads the scripture prior, it would be known what that scripture is talking about. My dh is father to our boys even though he did not create them.

The reference to "Morning Star" and Lucifer is factual. If you look up the origional Hebrew you'll see the translation of Lucifer to be "heylel" (ref. 1966 Strong's) which means "the morning star". Using that reference is a bit deceptive and confusing I agree, but it is in fact the translation.

Grave, shehol, hell,... they all need to be studied a bit. The translation in reference from Psalm that was shared in the site translated as Shehol (ref. 7585 Strong's).

I don't like that some translations have left out being saved by the blood either. I pretty much stick with the NKJV and read the reference notes for changes.

I do NOT believe the KJV to be the absolute and most accurate version. I am glad there was updated versions (well, glad for some of them). I too don't agree with the removal of scripture or the twisting of words, but I don't believe that turning words like "thy, thee, thou..." into modern English are corupting the word. I do think there are easier translations which bring the actual Greek and Hebrew translations out better. This is why I will use the online parallel Bible or the Strongs. You might argue it's better to just stick with the KJV, but I think it just depends.

You DO bring out an excellent point about some of the newer translations which have really watered down the Bible!

[QueenAngie]

They probably told Martin Luther the same thing, when he translated the Holy Bible for the mass of Christian believers too.

[mama2riley]

All I know is that the gospel is universal regardless of which "version" or language it is told in. All that matters for eternity is whether or not your faith is in Christ and details like which version you use to study and learn from and share the gospel from is not going to affect that. Sounds very nitpicky and foolish to say only one version is the "right" one...is that really what we should be focusing on where there are millions of people in the world who need to be reached by the gospel message, regardless?

[mcmama]

We had a question of versions today when studying 1 Kings prior to services. Somehow, all anyone could find were the "good news" versions, which everyone agreed were not really good news for study. We switched to RSV as soon as someone came in with a key to the right closet.

While studying, our priest was careful to point out the literal hebrew translation for some words which might be missed in meaning in the RSV. It added to our understanding of just how strongly Elijah was challenging the false prophets.

RSV may have its faults, but it is hardly a tool of Satan. I have an older RSV that I have used in Bible studies led by Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, and Baptists. Works for me, and the notes I have made through the years are handy. And of course, the perspective of those who lead the studies who have read the original language is invaluable.

[oweirdo]

I grew up reading the KJV, and I love it. It was the first book I read. But my mom recently bought a new study Bible, and I find it a great one as well, its an Amplified version, the one Joyce Meyer uses with her notes and commentary. I read a lot of verses in each one, yes they are different, but the meanings are the same, and so are a lot of the words.
Luke 2:33 in the amplified Bible says
and His (legal) father.....
But why does it matter, if a new Christian read the NIV (which I really don't like) and can understand it, learn from it great!!! As they grow they can get a more challenging bible to read and learn from. We all have to start somewhere