King James vs Modern Translations

[Lonnie Odom]

What Bible do you preach from?  King James or a modern translation.

Please share with us your feelings on this subject.  I personally preach 99% of the time from the KJV, but do on occassion quote from another translation for clarity.  I am not opposed to more modern translations, but there are some I don't care for, NIV being one of them.

Remember all discussions are for our enlightenment not for badgering, name calling, etc.....

Lonnie

[ABC_Ron]

I use them all but I expect I am most familiar with the New American Standard. It is the Bible I read from the onset of study and I return to it for comfort. While in my Seminary, ISOT or International School of Theology, A Campus Crusade institution, founded by Dr Bill Bright, Our Professor from Dalles Theological Seminary said two things that stuck in my mind about chosing a Bible. First that a survey was completed by Barna Associates and discovered that to fully understand the KJV one needed a college education, High school for NASB and grade school for the NIV. The second was that a new Bible translation was selling like 'hot cakes' for Zondervan. It was the CEV or Childrens Version. At first Zondervan was pleased that it was selling so well then when the sales kept going up wondered why. They first thought that parents and grand parents were buying it for the children it their lives. Well, that was true but also parents where buying them for themselves as well because they were able to understand what was written. Zondervan was sorry that they used Children in the title and are making a motion to change that. So, I feel that there is a real desire by people to understand what is written and apply it to their lives. Perhaps Barna is right and the college educated can use the KJV. But a whole lot of people don't understand it or miss understand it, (side question, is this where we get differing theologys?) The easier english versions are a god send to some people. I personally have several versions. I select one each year and read it through cover to cover during the year. This year is the NIV Next year its the New Living Translation. God bless, Ron

[Shiloh]

KJV only.  I use it heavily and when I spell check my sermons the grade level is seldom past 7.1.  Ron means well, but the stats are flawed and the NIV uses archaic words as well as being from flawed texts.

[boB]

If the KJV was good enough for the Apostle Paul and for the Pilgrims, than its good enough for me!

[Shiloh]

OY, boB, I don't believe you did that!!!

www.av1611.org/kjv/vanceniv.html
www.revelationwebsite.co.uk/index1/

Besides I thought we were to educate people not dumb down to them.  The reason some think it takes college training to understand the KJV is because the schools are dumbing down and turning out folks that are not as educated as our forebears.    

www.truthquest.fsnet.co.uk/jm_tds00.htm

The bogus scholarship of the 1880s which bred the new versions have even caused us trouble with converting Islamics.  


www.visi.com/~contra_m/ab/cschirrmacher/rationalism.html

there are plenty of pages that speak to the issues and not from a Ruckmanite position, who is what the TR detractors point to and most of the TR proponents find him to be nuts and a hindrance to the issue.


staggs.pair.com/kjbp/
www.abible.org/biblefortoday/BFT2695.html
www.deanburgonsociety.org/
www.wayoflife.org/fbns/questionsanswered.htm
av-swordfighter.home.att.net/tidbit65.html  Please note chart at bottom shows shoddy and "light" scholarship of the group who even admitted they were not qualified t do the type of work they ended up doing.  Akin to your GP doing brain surgery.

Also, Westcott and Hort's doctrines are bogus and their salvation suspect. Are these the lads we can trust the Word to?

www.picknowl.com.au/homepages/rlister/wh/wh.htm

As to reports it is always whose you read that tell the story or stats can say what you want the to say.  According to the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level research study (which is used by MS Word) out of 26 categories The KJV rated easier in 23 categories.  In analysis the KJV average grade level was 5.8, the NIV 8.4.  Thus even in my sermons that average 6.9-7.1 the higher grade average comes from my commentary not the KJV.

The NASB

The man responsible for getting me to church and ultimately saved was afraid that the KJV would turn me off so he gave me a NASB as a gift and I read that for awhile.   However, I went back to the KJV when I came across John 7:8-10 in the NASB.  Jesus tells His brethren to go up to the feast, but he is not going up to it in verse 8, but He does up in verse 10.   This was rather disconcerting because it appeared that Jesus has just lied to His brethren.   As a new convert, I wondered how Christ could lie to those folks like that.  I don't know why I did, but I pulled the KJV off the shelf and it said, "I go not up yet..." It is a big difference between not going up at all and not going up later.  The word yet was not italicized which indicates that it is not in the text, but rather supplied by the translators to allow flow of reading or to allow proper context and intent of the Greek to be viewed in "modern" English.  The word yet was in the Greek text. All it took was the word yet to change the whole tenor of the passage and remove any doubt about Jesus' intent or character.  With that I put the NASB on the shelf.  Had it not been a gift, I would have thrown it away.  

If upgrading the English was all that the 1881 group would have done, I would say Bully!  However, the issues are far deeper than thees and thous or giveth versus gives.  

Add to it that every major denomination that has left behind the KJV/TR has fallen into apostasy.  Most "mainline" denominations are now sideline ones.  Ron, there are far more interpretation issues today then there were when on the TR/KJV was used.  Just look at the  division on the other board.  All denominations held to the Conservaive position until recently so that division did not come from the TR, but arose as part of the apostasy that started in 1881.

I have seen how some of these issues went on the other board so I will refrain from further comment, but hopefully I did the url thing right and will give some of you something to study and consider.  

[boB]

Shiloh,
I would like to thank you, sincerly, for your reply. First, let me metnion that when I preach, I always preach out of my KJV.  I do use other study aids including various translation.
 My concern of the "KJV only" crowd is the fact that the KJV seems to be the major issue within their church.  I have seen signs outside churches where the lettering of 'KJV 1611"  is just as large as the name of the church.  I believe in immersion, but I would never consider naming a church "Immersion Only Baptist Church.  What would you think if you saw a chuch sign reading, "No Food In The Church Bldg Baptist Church"?  Yet many churches, especailly in the South, find if very sacrilegious to comsume food in a church building.
Let me emphasis I can respect their beliefs.  But on the other hand, I don't believe they go "overboard" in over-emphasising their belief on the food issue.  
 In my first post I mentioned the Pilgrims.  Is it not true the Pilgrims were very conserative and would not consider using that new translation authorized by the King in the early 17th Century.
 In my secular job as a driving instructor, there are some "fundementals" all drivers must do properly.  However, there are procedures  I must use different techniques to help some students "translate" their drving skills.  
 Is it ironical I can have fellowship with a "KJV only" but often they will not fellowship with me.
 Lord bless you in your minstry Shilo, and May the Lord bless your church tomorrow on Resurrection Sunday!

[Rev_C]

When I preach, it is from the KJV.  However, I am not opposed to the other translations.  When I was in seminary, I had to read three other translations of the Scripture when I took Revelation as a course.

In lieu of that, I do all my memorization from the KJV.

Just my .02.

Rev C

[Yankee3]

I primarily use the NKJV, and occasionaly the HCSB.  For my personal reading, I enjoy the HCSB (from Lifeway) and am looking forward to the OT translation due out soon.  I never use the NIV or The Message.  I've been troubled lately to realize how many pastors use The Message, and will probably use the TNIV in order to reach the new believers.  This, I realize, occurs in the new "cutting edge" congregations. Even though the church I serve in is contemporary, I don't like to see the dilution of the Word by using paraphase versions.

[Shiloh]

Yankee3, when you are living in the last days you see a lot of things that should not be.  I expect a homosexual version anytime now.  Many the phrase for the new versions should just be cutting rather than cutting edge.  

Part of the trouble is our seminaries and the fact that we turn out thousands of pastors each year, which is far more than we need.  And most of these lads come out with the "cutting edge" theology, which is nothing more than old heresies with new names and more colorful Kool-aid to package the cyanide.  

This thing about watering down the Word to reach new believers is a doctrine from Hell.  What is needed is what one lad called, "The Ten Cannons of God."  We need to start with the Law and the 10 Commandments because most people do not even know about them anymore.  Until you get a man to understand that he is a dead man walking he will not be interested in a pardon.  Telling him that God has a wonderful plan for his life when he does not even know who God is or that he is in trouble with God does not do much good.  The reason we have sickly, sallow and shallow saints is because we watered down the message to get them inand then we thin it out even more to keep them.  Of course, it is very hard to say, "Thus saith the Lord" when you don't know if you have a perserved Word of God or not and each new translation cuts more out or casts dispersion about more verses and even changes the meaning of what they have left behind.  God is not the author of this confusion.

If you believe that there is a coming one-world government and a one-world "church" you should have no problem in understanding that they will need a "bible" that everyone can accept and to do that it will have to be watered down and polluted to accomodate all the groups and especially the Mother of that group.  

After enough versions have been printed and a generation or so of non-believing open-minded but blinded believers has been raised up you can then "sell" the perfect perversion with very little fight.  The old frog in the slow boil bucket example.  Shoot, it may not be long until we have the version that allows 15 minute marriages like the Koran since some "Christian" leaders
have called the Muslims kin.  

If you look at Christ's ministry, He put things in terms that people understood, but did not make it easy for them to enter the kingdom.   He gave them a lot of hard sayings like about His blood and body, which made people turn away rather than stay and "inquire."  He did not cater to their whims or desires for certain formats of worship or music.  As far as we can tell they had no music at all in their meetings except for at the last supper.  And if they did, I don't think they had special meetings where the genre of various groups dominated that service.  

In one way, we are actually deceptive.  I once was a member of a church we will call the IT Church.  The sign would lead you to believe that it was a non-denominational church.  In fact, this hurt some because we had unique furnishings.  People would look in the window and thought we were either Pentecostal or some cult.  So, we bring them in and never deliberately talk about our affiliation with the SBC until they join and get into Membership 101 where we tell them we are SBC.  All of our papers says IT Baptist Church, but not the sign.  Even Lifeway fell into this. Unless they are going to sell Pentecostal, Mormon, Catholic, Methodist and other literature they are still a Baptist bookstore.  If you are ashamed of the name get out of the game.  If you are in truth a Baptist then say so.  

If you have the Word of God then proclaim it with authority as an oracle of God and quit watering it down.  Repent is still in some of the versions at least so preach like people need it not like all they need is some introduction to rites and phrases and sign a contract while having a cup of coffee with Amy Grant or Puppies In Barb Wire playing in the background.  The World has never found the Word to be anything but offensive no matter how hard you try to preach the truth in love.  So preach it in love and let the chips fall where they may.  You are not luring people into a sale. You are proclaiming an offer of amnesty to a World that is at war with God to people in the army of the enemy.  It does not need to be made pretty or watered down and twisted just preached.

[Duke]

I thought the scripture tells us that Gods word is never void. If it works to bring souls to the kingdom then who cares what version of text one uses. I like and use the KJV but I also read Petersons Message, The Living Bible, The CEV, The NKJV, and The New Living Translation. Being a Prison Minister I have had good and less than good experiences with almost all versions I have listed. The Good was the adding to the Kingdom and the not so good was planting a seed for future addition. So let's forget the attacks on each other and concentrate on serving God where he wants us and being equipped as He desires us!
God Bless,
Duke  

[Shiloh]

I started to answer this, but after the last debacle on the other board I will refrain.  My answer would be very unpopular to say the least so I will let the majority opinion respond as they will.

[enoch]

There is much in what you posted earlier Shiloh.
I will state that I was raised using the KJV by my priests because that was all we had.  The diocese hadn't got around to sending our parish the New Oxford Bible, and we felt no great need to demand one.  
As a result I came to love and revere the KJV as God's word.  I do not believe Jesus quoted the KJV as I have even heard professed.  God said His word would be preserved, He further promised in Isaiah 55:11 that it would not come back to Him void.
I preach from the KJV, but I also add clarification from the NIV.  I attended a Church of Christ College and was introduced to one of the scholars who translated the NIV.  He was one of my professors, and a more Godly or Christ like individual I would be hard pressed to find.  He stood up strongly for God's Word.  He was conservative beyond any reproach.  
As a Christ follower of Baptistic pursuasion, I had some issues with some of what he was teaching.  But when it came down to the bottom line, the water baptism issue was a matter of semantics.  He believed and taught that baptism was a matter of obedience and not a work which would produce salvation.  The individual had to be a Christian first, or else baptism was just another ritual bathing.
He was fluent in Greek and Hebrew.  And he loved the LORD.

It is inconceivable to my mind that he would promote any translation of the Bible that he found to be erroneous in any way.

I have used many different translations, but have put them back onto the shelf of disuse because I found errors that I could not consciencously live with and teach from.  
As I said, I still preach and teach from the KJV, but I will use the NIV or the Amplified to clarify from.
What good the teaching if the hearer does not understand.  God's word will not return void.  But the hearer has to first hear and understand what is said.

First and foremost, we have to preach HIS WORD!  Then we may rest in His promises to finish the desired work.

[Shiloh]

Actually, I am a TR only person.  If all you want to do is take "eth" off of giveth, well and good, but the plot is much thicker than that.  My bottom line is that the other versions contain the Word of God whereas the TR is the preserved Word of God.   Hence, where the other versions remain true to the majority text, which is supported by far older versions, lectionaries and early writers than God can use that portion and indeed it will not return void.  However, the others have ripped words and chapters out and that is not a good thing.  Anyway, that is enough of that. This message could go on forever to no fruit for I will die for the TR and those who like the newer versions will only stay with them.  Further comment would just be a waste of time and bytes.  

[boB]

Shilo,
 May I respectfully disagree with you.  You say it would be a waste of time to continue this discussion.   For the most part we have been looking at this discussion from a mature Chrstian point of view.  Lets take a look from the young or even new Christian.  Lets say a young believer is exicted about reading Gods word.  They start with the KJV but they seem to have a lot of trouble.  Soon after a friend recommneds the NIV, the Living Bible,  Williams, Beck or ect.  They choose one of these and start reading. They come to you and tell you how exicted they are about reading their Bible.  Do we:
 A.  Demand their repentence and go back to KJV
 B.  Give them a Bible thelogy course
 C.  Grin and bear it
 D.  Rejoice they are into Gods word daily.

 Does I Cor 13:11-13 (any version*) apply here??

*  Jehova Witness bible excluded  

I suppose what I am saying is lets get folks into the Word of God, and let them matrue.

May the Lord bless you today

[enoch]

There are so many new translations out there today claiming this and that, and you really have to be a Greek and Hebrew scholar of no mean talents or skills to dig through each translation.  

You could literally spend all your life and that of your progeny investigating each and every one.  And what would you have in the end.  A wonderfully spent life of reading God's Word.  

But nearly useless I'm afraid as far as evangelizing the world.  Also I have no idea what you mean by the TR.  Which version is this?

Brother Jack van Impe has spent his life memorizing God's word to use to win others to Christ Jesus before it is too late.
There are many good translations out there.  My suggestion is to pick a good one to study (in my humble opinion, the KJV, NKJV or NIV) and maybe another for easier reading, the Living Bible or the Message.  I preach from the KJV but for clarification on a point I use the NIV or the Amplified Bibles.
I believe that God will use whatever Bible translation a seeking believer chooses to look for Him in.  But I see time and again where He will not leave them there, but will over time bring them to a better translation, a more faithful rendering.  The same applies to denominations.  I have a dear friend who was saved through the reading of his KJV Bible after being challenged to read it.  He asked the Lord to save him, and joined a liberal denominational congregation.  But he loved the Lord and His word, and eventually the Lord led him into a conservative church that he was able to grow and minister through.  8)
God will use anything and everything to save His people and lead them to the truth. [glow=red,2,300]Praise God![/glow]