Why do some tout the "if it ain't King James, It ain't bible" philosophy when the original scripts of the bible were written in Hebrew, Greek, and other languages, not Olde English?
by 
Fiddle Playing Creole Bastard
ANSWERS: 6
-
Because the KJV was a direct translation and hundreds of scholars spent a lot of time making sure that the translation was accurate and concise at the time. While the language can be hard to understand at times, it is accurate for what it represents and today's translations can be a bit "wrong" in the words they use because they are trying to make it more readable to today's society.
-
Cause the King James is right on with the original translations.But if you use the Nasb,or the ESV,or New King James,they line up with the King James,and I think the ESV is a more literal translation.There is no scripture that states King James is the only bible you can use.Just make sure they all line up.
-
I have heard a lot of KJV only people explain that the reason they hold this theory is because they believe that God inspired the KJV translators. Hence the KJV version is considered to be the "ultimate" for English speakers. The Hebrew and Greek served their purpose back when but God guided the KJV guys so that His word was perfectly communicated in English. I know this doesn't really make sense but I have had them tell me this to my face. While it is possible for God to guide anyone He wants I don't think I would take it that far.
-
The KJV is a horrible translation. It uses one word, like hell, when the original text used three separate words, 'in the grave', 'dead' and 'Hades'. Also, 'Thou shalt not' sounds more ominous than 'You should not'. It feeds the need of the hellfire and brimstone preacher. I keep my KJV because my mother gave it to me, but I don't read it anymore.
-
Not to be pedantic, but the King James Version uses early Modern English, not Middle English or Old English. Beowolf was written in Old English. I believe each translation has its own strengths and weaknesses.
-
I believe that it is more tradition than anything. It is hard to understand with words like shambles, which no one that has read it that I have asked knew what a shambles was. There were rules that King James involked on the translators such as using Church rather than Congregation. There are several mistakes, some dangerous such as handling serpants. Mark 16:9-20 is not in the oldest manuscripts, which the King James does not tell you, and some Churches handle snakes to prove that they are believers. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark16:9-20;%20John13:35;%20James1:13;&version=31;50;78;47;49; There are also other mistakes that help support some ideas that came about in the 4th century that many preachers like to quote. http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1John5:7-8;&version=31;77;50;51;49; I studied from the King James when I first started studying the Bible, as most of my family say that is the only one to use. I prefer truth over tradition myself.
RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC