KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES
- Thread starter KingJamesVersionBibleOnly
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
How many more times? By that reasoning we should only be using Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. Translation is not plagiarism.
I explained the fear/torment verse to you. You have chosen to ignore that. The meaning is the same in a dozen translations. You simply fail to understand the old English use of the word 'torment'. Languages change over time. All languages including English, it's a fact not an evil plot. If you want a bible that says only what you want it to say perhaps you should write your own.
mayhap we should incorporate Appalachian dialectical pronouns like "y'all" and "you-uns" or "abody"
i grew up in hillbilly country & understand these things perfectly well & naturally. the American "hillbilly" English is I'm told actually the closest to old English of all American regional speech ((owing to their relative isolation after immigration)), and the presence of such plural and non-specific forms of pronouns in it is one example relevant to this particular topic.
yes, a hillbilly translation please.
I do not think that Christians are supposed to individually discover and decide every detail.
Church is a body. One knows Greek, another one know something else. We complement each other.
Its not just you and Bible. Thats what God did not intend for us.
BTW you let someone else to tell you what it means, the only reason is that you trust people from 17th century and most Christians trust people from 21st century.
Church is a body. One knows Greek, another one know something else. We complement each other.
Its not just you and Bible. Thats what God did not intend for us.
BTW you let someone else to tell you what it means, the only reason is that you trust people from 17th century and most Christians trust people from 21st century.
that's just what happens when you & i read any translation. we are trusting one group of scholars or another to tell us what it means.
but trusting one group of scholars and distrusting another isn't 'trusting God' -- trusting God in this is harkening to the Spirit that teaches us when we read -- even were we fluent in Hebrew and Koine, without His help, though we comprehend each word, we would not have understanding. ((re: Acts 8:30-31))
but trusting one group of scholars and distrusting another isn't 'trusting God' -- trusting God in this is harkening to the Spirit that teaches us when we read -- even were we fluent in Hebrew and Koine, without His help, though we comprehend each word, we would not have understanding. ((re: Acts 8:30-31))
I have a friend who is KJVO re his own reading; but has no desire to impose his preference on others.
We often study the Bible together and/or with others. When other translations are referenced, well over 98% of the time there are no misunderstandings. I have observed that there is the same level of misunderstandings among groups using the same version even if that version s the KJV.
We often study the Bible together and/or with others. When other translations are referenced, well over 98% of the time there are no misunderstandings. I have observed that there is the same level of misunderstandings among groups using the same version even if that version s the KJV.
Welcome back-but-not-back... 
Yours is a good question. I would say either learn the original languages (or at least enough to use the references), or consult several versions to get a sense of the range of possible meanings. If you choose to go with one version, hold lightly the conclusions you draw.
The one thing that should not be done is to say, on the basis of any single translation, that another translation is wrong.
Yours is a good question. I would say either learn the original languages (or at least enough to use the references), or consult several versions to get a sense of the range of possible meanings. If you choose to go with one version, hold lightly the conclusions you draw.
The one thing that should not be done is to say, on the basis of any single translation, that another translation is wrong.
i would disagree with the last part, English is my language and I understand it well. When some one tells me "hate" doesn't really mean hate, I can call bull.
Do the same with the Greek word for hate and I have no clue if you're telling me the truth or not and sadly neither does the Greek scholar, he's basing a whole language understanding on a flipping dictionary.
Do the same with the Greek word for hate and I have no clue if you're telling me the truth or not and sadly neither does the Greek scholar, he's basing a whole language understanding on a flipping dictionary.
You said that languages or the meanings of words change over time. So it's perfectly acceptable to write a new Bible according to the modern understanding of terms, changing the interpretation to suit your fancy. You're the one who should write your own Bible to say what you want it to say. Oh, but you already have one. I'll stick with the one I have, thank you.
Updating the language does not change the interpretation. You have your terms mixed up. You misunderstood a verse which is not even a difficult one and you are happy with that. You are free to read whichever text you like. Just stop thumbing your nose at modern translations and blaming them for your own mistakes.
It is a basic principle of Bible interpretation that Scripture does NOT contradict Scripture. When an apparent contradiction is found, it is necessary to look for another reading, consistent with common usage, that resolves the conflict. There will ALWAYS be one.
Ex 20:12
12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
KJV
Luke 14:26
26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
KJV
Hate usually means detest or despise. However this reading is at variance with Ex 20:12.
A secondary meaning of hate in Elizabethan English was to love less or to regard as less important or worthy.
While this meaning has fallen into disuse, it resolves the conflict and is the preferable reading.
Ex 20:12
12 Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.
KJV
Luke 14:26
26 If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
KJV
Hate usually means detest or despise. However this reading is at variance with Ex 20:12.
A secondary meaning of hate in Elizabethan English was to love less or to regard as less important or worthy.
While this meaning has fallen into disuse, it resolves the conflict and is the preferable reading.
