Pages: 1

Is the KJV not the best bible?

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: Frederik

I always thought the KJV was the best and now I read totally contrary stuff. This is slowly getting on my nerves! Why can't the people finally decide what's right?
If the scriptures which the KJV are based on are not intact then how can we even be sure that the other scriptures which the other bibles are based on are okay? If there is no bible today which is 100% God's word then we do have a problem, don't we?
Then you can always ask yourself wether a verse is translated correct or not.


This, the most famous of English versions, is named after King James I of England who initiated the work. It is basically a revision of previous translations: Tyndale's, Coverdale's, the Great Bible and the Geneva Bible. Over fifty scholars worked on the project, which started in 1607. It was finished in 1611.

"The King James Version, known in England as the Authorized Version because it was authorized by the king, has become an enduring monument of English prose because of its gracious style, majestic language, and poetic rhythms. No other book has had such a tremendous influence on English literature." (Comfort, pp. 48-49)

However, the KJV translators had access to only a few ancient manuscripts. Since their day many older manuscripts have been discovered, resulting in a more reliable Greek and Hebrew text. In addition, many words in the KJV are now obscure; others cannot be traced back to the most reliable manuscripts. While IBS is glad to provide the historic KJV, we feel the NIV is both more accurate and more readable for today's audience.


Posted by: Christian Commando

Frederik-

The KJV has always been one of the most accurate versions around for years. Notice I stated- one of the most accurate. There are a few others rated nearly if not just as accurate as the KJV.

God Bless!!


Posted by: Frederik

But what about this here?

THE KING JAMES VERSION
Reading Level: Grade 12

This, the most famous of English versions, is named after King James I of England who initiated the work. It is basically a revision of previous translations: Tyndale's, Coverdale's, the Great Bible and the Geneva Bible. Over fifty scholars worked on the project, which started in 1607. It was finished in 1611.

"The King James Version, known in England as the Authorized Version because it was authorized by the king, has become an enduring monument of English prose because of its gracious style, majestic language, and poetic rhythms. No other book has had such a tremendous influence on English literature." (Comfort, pp. 48-49)

However, the KJV translators had access to only a few ancient manuscripts. Since their day many older manuscripts have been discovered, resulting in a more reliable Greek and Hebrew text. In addition, many words in the KJV are now obscure; others cannot be traced back to the most reliable manuscripts. While IBS is glad to provide the historic KJV, we feel the NIV is both more accurate and more readable for today's audience.


Posted by: Christian Commando

Look, I've got about 5 different versions of the KJV Bible, from the 1611, 1957 version, 1980's version, a family Bible version and an amplified version. Thats how one version can be so easy to read it's at a 12 grade level.

God Bless!!


Posted by: Frederik

What troubles me is this here:

However, the KJV translators had access to only a few ancient manuscripts. Since their day many older manuscripts have been discovered, resulting in a more reliable Greek and Hebrew text. In addition, many words in the KJV are now obscure; others cannot be traced back to the most reliable manuscripts. While IBS is glad to provide the historic KJV, we feel the NIV is both more accurate and more readable for today's audience.


Posted by: Christian Commando

Dear Frederik-

When a multitude of Bibles were checked out for accuracy of Scriptural writngs etc to the Dead Sea Scrolls, the KJV was found to be one of the most accurate.

The New Test Books were written out from the closest writings we got from Early church Leaders as close as possible to the Apostles.

So, it appears your analogy of man not having much of a record to go by before that of Scripture evidence is not true. It's pretty clear, those who followed after the original writers of the Biblical Scriptures had kept most accurate and well kept copies of it, which eventually became a book- the Bible.

Maybe these copies were not wide spread, as most of the New Test came from documented writings and teachings of Early Church Leaders, some of which are claimed to have lived way back during the latter part of the 1st century AD of which the Apostle John is claimed to have lived into the latter part of that century.

God Bless and merry Christmas!!


Posted by: Frederik

But the others say the exact opposite!
They say that the KJV is based on a few not so old manuscripts and that the NIV for example is based on many older ones.
How am I supposed to know who's right? I also mailed a few apologetic ministries and they also said that the NIV is more accurate.

Merry Christmas to you,too.


Posted by: Christian Commando

Well, I suggest you check back into the records of where the KJV got thier info for producing thier version of the Bible yourself. Check thru the various archives I'd mentioned before to research this.

God Bless!!


Posted by: MarkSentMe

Why do you take this article at face-value and doubt the Bible? How accurate is the information in the article you read? What is the motivation of the writers? This is another way for "scholars" to get people to question the Bible and lean toward a more secular society.
The enemy will use whatever means available to attack our faith. Be careful.

Personally I cannot read a KJV. I never got into Shakespeare and the language of the KJV just does not speak to me. I like the New American Standard version and on my desk is a New Life Version, but I cross-reference with the NAS. My husband reads a Revised Standard Version and my daughter has an NIV. All a matter of preference because they all say the same thing.


Posted by: eagle4him

Frederick,
The Old Testament was basically written in Hebrew, and the New Testament in Greek. Sometimes you have to look up the root word in order to understand what the writer of the Scripture intended. For instance, the word love: There are at least four different types of love in the Greek language. Agape love is the highest love--that you would be willing to lay down your life for another. This is different than loving someone as a friend. When Jesus appeared to Peter after His death He asked Peter if he loved Him three different times--and three different types of love.

Personally I had a King James Bible first. Shortly after I got saved I tried reading this and didn't get much understanding from it. Then I tried the New King James. This because our Pastor used the NKJV Bible. Then he switched to the NIV Bible, so I bought the study version. This helped me to understand a little more. Lately I have been reading the NASB, which does not have a study version, and according to some is the most accurate translation.

Bottom line is this. When you read the Bible, it is the Holy Spirit that gives you the understanding, not the version of the Bible. Use whatever version helps you to grow in your relationship with the Lord!


Posted by: akabezalel

There are two books by Josh McDowell called "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" and "Evidence that Demands a Verdict 2" that I strongly suggest you read Frederik.

I do not generally recomend books but these can and will show you why we can trust the Bible as we have it today.

I cannot find my husband's copies or I would type a few excerts here to help with this question now, I am sorry.

If you like technicalities and minutia (and trust me... you do ) these books will be a major help to you.


Posted by: akabezalel

Ok... found it online for you but as authors do they have recompiled the two books into one called "The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict" and I found the title of another one that I know will help you "More than an Carpenter", you can find them on Amazon.

Here is the Review of the book to explain it better.

Bestselling author and Christian apologist Josh McDowell hopes The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict will further document historical evidence of the Christian faith. As such, it is a straightforward compilation of notes prepared for his lecture series, "Christianity: Hoax or History?" The entire book (over 750 pages) is laid out in outline form, which makes it easier for researchers, scholars, and students to access. As a result, this is not reflective fireside reading. Rather, it is a tool for locating supporting "evidence" whenever the need arises. Part I addresses the trustworthiness of the Bible; Part II offers historical evidence and supporting attestations for Jesus' claim to God; Part III addresses "radical Christian criticism" of the Bible; Part IV is devoted to quelling the voice of numerous skeptics, including "a defense for the existence of miracles" and "answers to divergent worldview."--(This text refers to the Hardcover edition.)

Book Description

Evidence I & II-The classic defense of the faith: Now fully updated to answer the questions challenging evangelical faith today.

The New Evidence maintains its classic defense of the faith yet addresses new issues.

The New Evidence is destined to equip believers with a ready defense for the next decade and beyond


Posted by: Frederik

Quote:
Originally Posted by eagle4him

Bottom line is this. When you read the Bible, it is the Holy Spirit that gives you the understanding, not the version of the Bible. Use whatever version helps you to grow in your relationship with the Lord!


But I don't understand the bible very well. If the holy spirit is supposed to explain the bible then why don't I understand the whole stuff? If I understood it I wouldn't be forced to ask so many questions. Sure, there are books in the bible which you can read pretty easily. But books like romans for example are terrible. They are packed with important information. Every single sentence is important. This demands so much concentration and I read it and still cannot pull much out of it, this is very frustrating.
What shall I do when I read the bible and come across sentences which I don't understand all the time? Shall I simply ignore it and read on? This is not very productive.

* aka

Thanks.
I have the first volume of this book. But it doesn't address the King James issue. It only talks about how many thousands of manuscripts we have, but it doesn't even mention that there are manuscripts which differ. He doesn't address this topic at all. This is why I was so surprised cause the whole time I thought that all the manuscripts which we have are the same. And then I read that obviously there are slight differences between the textus receptus and the other manuscripts.

Looks like part 3 might address this issue.


Posted by: Christian Commando

God with a different version as in the new international one. That is a suggested top version in accuracy.

God Bless!!