Have you ever been talking to someone and they start to talk all about there new Bible version they just got? Then say to them well I don't like other translations, I believe the King James is the only true Bible. I run into this often and every time they get really defensive and give all kind of excuses why they don't read the King James vs. the others, and they don't really want to hear your view. Any of you have any thing like this?
14 comments:
It has always amazed me how many people will admit to such a lack of intelligence of not being able to understand the simple words "thee" and "thou".
I can't wait to read what Daddy writes!
Please everyone, make sure you are looking at KevinW's pictures located underneath the last post. They are awesome!
What always baffles me is that it is us KJ Bible believers that are accused of being divisive just for believing the KJB is the Word of God, we don’t even have to say anything. I use to work with a fellow that was an independent fundamental Baptist and it drove him up the wall because I wouldn’t agree with him that the NIV was just as much the Word of God as the KJ Bible. He would get loud and his face would turn red and accuse me of worshiping a translation more than worshiping God. He was a graduate of a Bible college so he would imply that those that believed the KJ Bible is the only English Bible were not educated on the subject. Over the 4 or 5 years that we worked together, a few his favorite things he brought up to try and degrade the KJ Bible were:
1. the italicized words were added by translators so how could they be the Word of God
2. the pronouns thee, thou, ye and all the archaic wording are so confusing to the modern reader
3. the KJ Bible has been revised several times since 1611 and the modern versions are just additional revisions to improve it and keep it updated
4. most of the Bible colleges and all of the big name preachers that have written books and that are on TV and radio all agree that the KJ Bible has mistakes in it and needs improving
continued below in the next comment
I tried to stay calm (it wasn’t easy) and tried to answer him (and others) with the following:
1. The KJ translators used a method that translators call “formal equivalence” ….all that means is that they had to translate word for word with no exceptions. Of course it is impossible to translate 100% of the words of one language into second language while keeping the sentence structure correct in the second language. Where this situation occurred, the KJ translators italicized the word in our KJ Bible that they had to add to keep sentence structure that the Greek implied. I asked him why his NIV didn’t have any italicized words, he didn’t have an answer. I would tell that all the modern versions were translated using the “dynamic equivalence” method of translating….all that means is the translator is trying keep the idea or concept of the verse the same as the Greek, not each and every word. Therefore these new versions don’t need to use italicized words because they are not a word for word translation. He never brought this up again.
2. The KJ translators always translated plural pronouns as ye or you and singular pronouns as thee or thou. With this in mind look at Luke 22:31 & 32. Notice in the KJ Bible the Lord Jesus tells Peter in verse 31 that Satan desires to sift YOU ……remember that you is always plural in the KJ Bible, so the Lord is telling Peter that Satan desires to sift all of the disciples. Now look at verse 32 and see how the Lord Jesus now uses the pronoun thee while He is still talking to Peter. “But I have prayed for thee”. Since the modern versions use you in both verses the reader will miss this very personal care that the Lord wanted Peter to know. …HE personally intercedes for each of us by name!!!!!!! The KJ Translators used these different English pronouns to keep the pronoun preciseness that is in the Greek. You can not get the correct interpretation of these verses (and many more) using the modern versions because they use the word “you” for singular and plural pronouns.
3. The KJ Bible has had 4 editions (not revisions) since 1611. They occurred in 1629, 1638, 1762, and 1769. These editions corrected printing errors, changed the letter type from gothic to roman, and standardized the spelling of words. No retranslating or updating the language took place in any of these editions. I have a copy of the 1611 edition and it reads just like the 1769 edition, that is why it is still called the 1611 KJ Bible because the actual language and words have not changed since 1611 even though the edition we all use is the 1769.
4. We are going to be held personally accountable for what we believe about God’s Word. Early in their ministry most of these big name preachers believed the KJ Bible was the Word of God and preached against the modern versions. I have to stand for what is right no matter if I am the only person in the world that does.
Several years after this brother moved to another group, I heard that he had stopped using the NIV and was using the KJ Bible!!!!!
Yea, I found this very interesting when Kevin came home from work and told me about this conversation that he had with his co-worker. I told him that others will not be like his mom when it comes to this subject. She is always so open and willing to discuss any topics that are about the bible and God. I loved what you wrote Daddy. I went through a year or two of wondering if there might be another version out there that was just as good as the King James, but I know the Holy Spirit used the "pounding" of teaching that we got when we were young to keep me going back to the King James, until I finally realized the Truth on my own.
Of course there are literally thousands of places the NIV (and all modern versions) either change words, delete words (and sometimes whole verses), or add something to the verse. They justify this because they say the Greek text they translate from is better than the Greek text that the KJ Bible was translated from. That's odd, I thought they only updated the archaic words, now they say they used a totally different Greek text...then we find out that the Greek text all the modern Bibles are translated from are Catholic in origin. This is also odd since this is the same "church" that tried to murder all the 14th,15th, & 16th century English Bible translators for translating the Bible from non-catholic manuscripts into English. Now 400 years later our modern "christian" scholars say that the same Catholic church that murdered the men the Lord used to get us our non-catholic English KJ Bible" is their source for the Greek text they use to translate the modern versions. If this is true, why would the Lord had men like Wycliffe, Myles Coverdale, Tyndale, John Rogers, and the KJ translators risk there lives to give our KJ Bible when all they would had to do was to conform to the catholic churches program?....as Tyndale was being burnt at the stake by the catholic church he prayed "Dear Lord open the eyes of the King of England".....a few decades later a new King was crowed and he was King James that authorized the KJ Bible.
Of course Daddy's answers are fascinating as usual. I have never had a second thought about whether the KJ Bible was the only accurate "version" or not. But after reading all this, I'm going to do more reading on WHY I believe this is accurate.
Dear Kevin,
I appreciate the your blog picture and starting the discussion about the KJB. I didnt go into all the key doctrinal verses that the modern versions change and/or delete. But they change a lot and all the changes line up with the corrupted greek text.
And I appreciate all the comments Jim. One day I would love to study more on this topic with you.
I felt that the Lord has been really telling me that we all need a firm foundation and from what I have seen in other versions of the Bible; they seem to be lacking that, and not to judge others but it seems you can tell in how others are living in what Bible they choose and church they go to. I only say that because of ones I am around every day that use Bible versions like the NIV and NAS. It is hard to change there minds on the topic;so I would like to get more knowledge on it.
I know what you mean when you say you are "not judging others" and of course we are not judging them we are just observing their behaviour and comparing it God's word. The Lord instructs us to do this so that we wont be lead astray by doctrines of men. The "dont judge others" comment is one of their favorite phrases to try and hinder discernning Christians from pointing out the errors in their modern versions. AND THERE ARE PLENTY OF ERRORS!!! maybe we can get into some of them-----OK lets everyone DO IT----post your favorite error in one of the modern versions----I'll start with mine----Luke 2:33 the NIV makes Joseph Jesus's father by changing the word "Joseph" to "father"....so much for the Virgin birth of Christ!!!!
OK, who's next?
Well my favorite verse is because of recent discussions with a guy I work with that likes the NAS version. He is what started this discussion. I asked him if the other version are right then why do they take the Blood out of some of the verses that are very important for understanding the redemption through the Blood of Christ. He said well I would have a problem with that. Then I showed him this verse in;
Col: 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.
Then he read his version and it read;
In whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
Where is the; (through his blood)?
We need the shedding of blood for it all to work.
Thats why in the old testament the law was that the high priest was to enter into the most holy place to offer atonement for all Gods people and sprinkle blood.
Hebrews 9:6 But into the second went the high priest alone once a year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:
Hebrews 9:11-12 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.
I forgot to mention that after the guy I work with read the verse I showed him and it was missing the blood,
it was like he didn't even see it, and continued to say there was no difference.
1Ti 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
NIV says this "Beyond all question the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body,was vindicated by the spirit,was seen by angels,was preached among the nations,was believed on in the world,was taken up in glory.
A wonderful verse to show us that Jesus was God. This is destroyed in the NIV.
These verses are excellent examples of how Satan (thru unknowing modern scholars) is trying to destroy the power of God's word by changing the pure doctrines that our faith is built upon.
So far, verses have been given that show that the following doctrines have been damaged by the NIV:
1. The virgin birth of Jesus Christ
2. Jesus Christ's blood purchased our salvation
3. The Diety of Jesus Christ (God in the flesh)
WHO's next???
This evening, Pastor Ray brought up an interesting translation error.
In John 3:7, Jesus tells Nicodemus, "Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again."
The NAS and others change the little word BUT very important plural word "Ye" to the singular "You". Aren't you glad that, contrary to what the Calvinist believe, ANYONE can be born again...it's not just a few "chosen" people? I sure am glad Jesus spoke the plural word "Ye"! :)
Post a Comment