All About GOD - Growing Relationships with Jesus and Others
The Antioch and Alexandria Bibles
The poetic prose of the King James Bible, although a little hard to understand sometimes, has always felt comfortable to me in that I was hearing from God when I read its pages. If ever we needed to hear from God, it is now.
This is not, nor will it be, a crusade but a one-time series of three postings. I want to cover the NIV in this posting. Next week I’ll cover the NKJV and NASV. The third and final week, I want to discuss the KJV. I just want to report what I have learned. The only way you can persuade yourself that you are really reading the Word of God is to do the research for yourself. You be the judge. I have already made my decision. I will also give you some sites to use as references. You could write a book on the differences - so I will barely scratch the surface with this information.
Recently on AAG, I started a discussion based on a movie I’d seen many years ago (Planet of the Apes). Although I really didn’t believe in the concept I presented (and said as much)[1], I just thought it might be fun. I had some very interesting comments put forth and I enjoyed reading them tremendously. I even learned a few things in the process.
The concept came from Genesis 1:28 and the word “replenish.” Someone made the comment that the KJV was the only version that used that word. Now I knew of some of the existing alleged discrepancies in other modern day translations but the comments prompted me to do some personal research. Although I have talked to many other people about this, I wanted God to lead me to my answer and conclusion – not man. I think that’s prudent. Don’t take my word for it, do the research yourself. The only trouble is, you’ll need a copy of the AVKJV to make the comparison. I have learned that the KJV is the standard by which we judge all others.
I love the Word of God and love researching it, so I thank those who participated in my discussion and prompted me to study this. I had a ball with the discussion and the research. There is not enough room to do this topic justice and will only be a few examples out of hundreds of examples that I could present. This will only be a comparison. You decide.
However, what I learned solidified my belief. So, out of love for my brothers and sisters in the Lord, please allow me to exhort you to, minimum, do the research for yourself. I did, and here is what I have learned.
Formal/Dynamic Equivalency
Translators use two basic approaches to creating a Bible translation: formal equivalency and dynamic equivalency. Bibles translated by formal equivalency will take careful reading. At times, you will have to study history to learn the cultural background before you can fully understand the text.
The translator is simply rendering the text in your language...nothing more. . .nothing less. Nevertheless, you will have the confidence of knowing that you do not have to trust another man's understanding, or theology, but can make up your own mind as to what God has said. In the English language, the King James Bible is the only available translation using this approach.
On the other hand, Bibles translated by dynamic equivalency will read as easily as a novel. When a story seems difficult to understand without a little history, the author may even change it to a form he believes you will better understand! You will never know for sure what God said, but must trust the translator's theology to lead you into truth. The translator here is acting as a teacher, not just telling you what God said, but he is adding his understanding of what God meant! All present day versions use this approach.
Antioch and Alexandria Bibles
We hear much talk these days about "older" and "more authoritative" manuscripts, but we aren't hearing much about the origin of these manuscripts. It is an established fact that there are only two lines of Bibles: one coming from Antioch, Syria (known as the Syrian or Byzantine type text), and one coming from Alexandria, Egypt (known as the Egyptian or Hesycnian type text).
The Syrian text from Antioch is the Majority text from which our King James 1611 Bible comes, and the Egyptian text is the minority text from which the new translations come. (As a side note), in the Bible, notice how the Holy Spirit casts Egypt and Alexandria in a negative light, while His comments on Antioch tend to be very positive.
Deleted Verses
You might be shocked to know that the NIV deletes over forty verses from the Bible. Here are just a couple: Mathew 18:11. What are the NIV readers missing? "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost." (KJV) Sort of important, don’t you think? How about this one: 1 John 5:7. What are the NIV readers missing? "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." (KJV)
1 John 5:7 is one of the greatest verses in THE Bible that testifies to the trinity. This is why the Jehovah’s Witnesses leave it out of their bible. They don't believe in the Trinity. So. . .why does the NIV leave it out? If we believe in the Trinity, then this deletion should greatly offend us. I know I am tremendously offended. The NIV removes these two major verses.
How about a couple more?
The NIV completely removes Mark 11:26. What are the NIV readers missing? "But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses." (KJV) How about Acts 8:37, which the NIV completely removes, "And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." (KJV) Its deletion makes one think that people do not need baptism or saved to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. This goes against our faith, in that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and The Life and is the only way to the Father. Rather important Scripture I think.
“If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? [3]” (KJV)
Contradiction
One of the most famous and recognizable verses in the Bible is John 3:16. The KJV says, “For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son. . .” Here is the NIV: “For God so loved the world that He gave his one and only Son. . .” This change causes a contradiction in the word of God because God has more than one son according to both the King James (Genesis 6:2, Job 1:6, John 1:12) and the NIV (Genesis 6:2). The NIV even contradicts itself. If there is one contradiction, then the rest loses credibility and needs rejecting.
Deleted Words
The NIV removes 64,576 words from their bible. In other words, don’t look for the word “mercyseat,” its gone; don’t look for the word “Jehovah,” it is gone, and don’t look for the word “Godhead,” it is gone. The word “sodomy” is also gone. (The deletion of the word sodomy sounds suspiciously PC to me.) Are you sitting down? Sixty-four and a half thousand words are like removing thirty books from the Bible. THIRTY!!! The NIV removes words like, remission, regeneration, impute, propitiation, New Testament and many, many others. All this despite the Bible’s warning about “taking away” from His words (Prov 30:5, 6; Rev 22:19).
Jesus is Lucifer?
For me, here is the capper: the NIV bible calls Jesus, Lucifer. Don’t believe me? Check it out for yourself. We first have to look at Isaiah 14:12. This is what THE Bible (KJV) says: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations." Here is the NIV: “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations.” This Isaiah passage is all about Lucifer. . .remember that. Also remember now, while continuing to read, who is the Morning Star.
Is there anywhere else in the NIV that mentions the Morning Star? Check out Revelation 22:16, which says, “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.” What about 2 Peter 1:19? “And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.” The NIV has Jesus and Lucifer as the same person by its own words. This is in black and white and irrefutable. This is highly offensive to me. Lord Jesus, please have mercy on us.
I offer this series only because I love the body of Christ and want to help and warn you in your walk. Time for us is running out. I don’t want to keep silent on a truth that I have learned. This would be a lie of omission[2].
As a comparison, what if I was consistently prone to not telling the truth, how much credibility would I have with you? Would you come back to me to seek the truth? I doubt it. You would consider me a poor and unsuitable character reference with zero credibility. We seek the Bible for truth so if one verse is wrong or missing, that bible has zero credibility.
The Holy Spirit convicts us but He also convicts us through the Word of God. His Word is where we reference our convictions and learn from them. If the Bible we are reading has mistakes, lies of omissions, and deletions, then how can we be sure that any of the passages are correct and with which we can base our convictions?
God has given us all free will and we now have a choice. I want to make sure that I am hearing from God because of the times that are ahead of us and not from man’s interpretation of what he thinks God may have said. I don’t have any titles next to my name for I am just His humble servant. However, I do, as we all do, have the Holy Spirit to guide us.
First and foremost, you should test everything that you read on these four pages, as well as elsewhere, against THE Word of God. He is the definitive answer. Therefore, I leave you in His hands and offer these few pages for your testing.
I pray that this information is useful in your walk.
GBY all
Much information taken from:
Jesus-is-Lord
Bible Study Resource
The King James Bible Page
Bible versions F.A.Q
Lie of Omission
________________________________________________________
[1] When the Bible uses the word replenish, it gives the connotation of a previous creation before Adam and Eve. Many theologians agree with this. This would explain the fossil records. I believe that God created "MAN" once at the Garden of Eden.
[2] To lie by omission is to remain silent and thereby withhold from someone else a vital piece (or pieces) of information. The silence is deceptive in that it gives a false impression to the person from whom you hold the information. It subverts the truth; it is a way to manipulate someone into altering their behavior to suit the desire of the person who intentionally withheld the vital information; and, most importantly, it's a gross violation of another person's right of self-determination.
A lie of omission is the most insidious, most pervasive, and most common lie on the entire planet. Commonly, those who use this type of lie, have conned themselves into believing that to intentionally remain silent when ethical behavior calls for one to speak up is not a lie at all. In spite of overwhelming evidence that their silence deceives, misleads, and often causes untold grief and misery, they refuse to speak the truth.
[3] Psalm 11:3
I believe in my heart that I have given you the truth.
This is not, nor will it be, a crusade but a one-time series of three postings. I want to cover the NIV in this posting. Next week I’ll cover the NKJV and NASV. The third and final week, I want to discuss the KJV. I just want to report what I have learned. The only way you can persuade yourself that you are really reading the Word of God is to do the research for yourself. You be the judge. I have already made my decision. I will also give you some sites to use as references. You could write a book on the differences - so I will barely scratch the surface with this information.
Recently on AAG, I started a discussion based on a movie I’d seen many years ago (Planet of the Apes). Although I really didn’t believe in the concept I presented (and said as much)[1], I just thought it might be fun. I had some very interesting comments put forth and I enjoyed reading them tremendously. I even learned a few things in the process.
The concept came from Genesis 1:28 and the word “replenish.” Someone made the comment that the KJV was the only version that used that word. Now I knew of some of the existing alleged discrepancies in other modern day translations but the comments prompted me to do some personal research. Although I have talked to many other people about this, I wanted God to lead me to my answer and conclusion – not man. I think that’s prudent. Don’t take my word for it, do the research yourself. The only trouble is, you’ll need a copy of the AVKJV to make the comparison. I have learned that the KJV is the standard by which we judge all others.
I love the Word of God and love researching it, so I thank those who participated in my discussion and prompted me to study this. I had a ball with the discussion and the research. There is not enough room to do this topic justice and will only be a few examples out of hundreds of examples that I could present. This will only be a comparison. You decide.
However, what I learned solidified my belief. So, out of love for my brothers and sisters in the Lord, please allow me to exhort you to, minimum, do the research for yourself. I did, and here is what I have learned.
Formal/Dynamic Equivalency
Translators use two basic approaches to creating a Bible translation: formal equivalency and dynamic equivalency. Bibles translated by formal equivalency will take careful reading. At times, you will have to study history to learn the cultural background before you can fully understand the text.
The translator is simply rendering the text in your language...nothing more. . .nothing less. Nevertheless, you will have the confidence of knowing that you do not have to trust another man's understanding, or theology, but can make up your own mind as to what God has said. In the English language, the King James Bible is the only available translation using this approach.
On the other hand, Bibles translated by dynamic equivalency will read as easily as a novel. When a story seems difficult to understand without a little history, the author may even change it to a form he believes you will better understand! You will never know for sure what God said, but must trust the translator's theology to lead you into truth. The translator here is acting as a teacher, not just telling you what God said, but he is adding his understanding of what God meant! All present day versions use this approach.
Antioch and Alexandria Bibles
We hear much talk these days about "older" and "more authoritative" manuscripts, but we aren't hearing much about the origin of these manuscripts. It is an established fact that there are only two lines of Bibles: one coming from Antioch, Syria (known as the Syrian or Byzantine type text), and one coming from Alexandria, Egypt (known as the Egyptian or Hesycnian type text).
The Syrian text from Antioch is the Majority text from which our King James 1611 Bible comes, and the Egyptian text is the minority text from which the new translations come. (As a side note), in the Bible, notice how the Holy Spirit casts Egypt and Alexandria in a negative light, while His comments on Antioch tend to be very positive.
Deleted Verses
You might be shocked to know that the NIV deletes over forty verses from the Bible. Here are just a couple: Mathew 18:11. What are the NIV readers missing? "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost." (KJV) Sort of important, don’t you think? How about this one: 1 John 5:7. What are the NIV readers missing? "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." (KJV)
1 John 5:7 is one of the greatest verses in THE Bible that testifies to the trinity. This is why the Jehovah’s Witnesses leave it out of their bible. They don't believe in the Trinity. So. . .why does the NIV leave it out? If we believe in the Trinity, then this deletion should greatly offend us. I know I am tremendously offended. The NIV removes these two major verses.
How about a couple more?
The NIV completely removes Mark 11:26. What are the NIV readers missing? "But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses." (KJV) How about Acts 8:37, which the NIV completely removes, "And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." (KJV) Its deletion makes one think that people do not need baptism or saved to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. This goes against our faith, in that Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and The Life and is the only way to the Father. Rather important Scripture I think.
“If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? [3]” (KJV)
Contradiction
One of the most famous and recognizable verses in the Bible is John 3:16. The KJV says, “For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son. . .” Here is the NIV: “For God so loved the world that He gave his one and only Son. . .” This change causes a contradiction in the word of God because God has more than one son according to both the King James (Genesis 6:2, Job 1:6, John 1:12) and the NIV (Genesis 6:2). The NIV even contradicts itself. If there is one contradiction, then the rest loses credibility and needs rejecting.
Deleted Words
The NIV removes 64,576 words from their bible. In other words, don’t look for the word “mercyseat,” its gone; don’t look for the word “Jehovah,” it is gone, and don’t look for the word “Godhead,” it is gone. The word “sodomy” is also gone. (The deletion of the word sodomy sounds suspiciously PC to me.) Are you sitting down? Sixty-four and a half thousand words are like removing thirty books from the Bible. THIRTY!!! The NIV removes words like, remission, regeneration, impute, propitiation, New Testament and many, many others. All this despite the Bible’s warning about “taking away” from His words (Prov 30:5, 6; Rev 22:19).
Jesus is Lucifer?
For me, here is the capper: the NIV bible calls Jesus, Lucifer. Don’t believe me? Check it out for yourself. We first have to look at Isaiah 14:12. This is what THE Bible (KJV) says: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations." Here is the NIV: “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations.” This Isaiah passage is all about Lucifer. . .remember that. Also remember now, while continuing to read, who is the Morning Star.
Is there anywhere else in the NIV that mentions the Morning Star? Check out Revelation 22:16, which says, “I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.” What about 2 Peter 1:19? “And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts.” The NIV has Jesus and Lucifer as the same person by its own words. This is in black and white and irrefutable. This is highly offensive to me. Lord Jesus, please have mercy on us.
I offer this series only because I love the body of Christ and want to help and warn you in your walk. Time for us is running out. I don’t want to keep silent on a truth that I have learned. This would be a lie of omission[2].
As a comparison, what if I was consistently prone to not telling the truth, how much credibility would I have with you? Would you come back to me to seek the truth? I doubt it. You would consider me a poor and unsuitable character reference with zero credibility. We seek the Bible for truth so if one verse is wrong or missing, that bible has zero credibility.
The Holy Spirit convicts us but He also convicts us through the Word of God. His Word is where we reference our convictions and learn from them. If the Bible we are reading has mistakes, lies of omissions, and deletions, then how can we be sure that any of the passages are correct and with which we can base our convictions?
God has given us all free will and we now have a choice. I want to make sure that I am hearing from God because of the times that are ahead of us and not from man’s interpretation of what he thinks God may have said. I don’t have any titles next to my name for I am just His humble servant. However, I do, as we all do, have the Holy Spirit to guide us.
First and foremost, you should test everything that you read on these four pages, as well as elsewhere, against THE Word of God. He is the definitive answer. Therefore, I leave you in His hands and offer these few pages for your testing.
I pray that this information is useful in your walk.
GBY all
Much information taken from:
Jesus-is-Lord
Bible Study Resource
The King James Bible Page
Bible versions F.A.Q
Lie of Omission
________________________________________________________
[1] When the Bible uses the word replenish, it gives the connotation of a previous creation before Adam and Eve. Many theologians agree with this. This would explain the fossil records. I believe that God created "MAN" once at the Garden of Eden.
[2] To lie by omission is to remain silent and thereby withhold from someone else a vital piece (or pieces) of information. The silence is deceptive in that it gives a false impression to the person from whom you hold the information. It subverts the truth; it is a way to manipulate someone into altering their behavior to suit the desire of the person who intentionally withheld the vital information; and, most importantly, it's a gross violation of another person's right of self-determination.
A lie of omission is the most insidious, most pervasive, and most common lie on the entire planet. Commonly, those who use this type of lie, have conned themselves into believing that to intentionally remain silent when ethical behavior calls for one to speak up is not a lie at all. In spite of overwhelming evidence that their silence deceives, misleads, and often causes untold grief and misery, they refuse to speak the truth.
[3] Psalm 11:3
I believe in my heart that I have given you the truth.
Tags: alexandria, antioch, avkjv, contradiction, deletion, dynamic-equivalency, formal-equivalency, kjv, niv
Replies are closed for this discussion.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Greg, TheNET Coordinator on -
James,
There are responses to everything you have said above and there excellent reasons why verses have been left out of modern translations and words have been changed and it is not due to some conspiracy to water down or corrupt God's Word. The reasons have to do with using the best biblical scholarship and methodology. It also has to do with what you yourself admitted, that the King James Bible is "... a little hard to understand sometimes." If it is a little hard for you (a studious, educated native English speaker), imagine what its like for an uneducated, barely literate, non-native English speaker or the typical modern day English speaker who surfs the internet and hardly reads anything.
In regard to the "verses left out" of modern translations, do you really want to consider verses added years later by copiests (with their own theological biases and desires to make the Bible more clear) to be the Word of God? I contend that the verses that were supposedly "left out" were never there in the first place! If verses are omitted in modern translations they are footnoted with the alternate readings so people can decide for themselves.
I don't have time right now to respond point by point to your statements above, but trust that someone else will. I appreciate your research and the passion you have on this topic. I might suggest you take the time to do some research on the side of the pro-modern translation arguments for a more balanced view.
Again, if you love the KJV and are encouraged and edified by it, then praise God and I support you in your choices, brother. But please, stop bashing the modern translations. You are only throwing the brothers and sisters here into confusion and potentially causing them to be upset and shaken over nothing.
-
Permalink Reply by LT on -
James,
Without addressing everthing here, which I will get back to some of the stuff later, I will address only two things.
1) You claim that the KJV is the only word-for-word (formal equivalency) when in fact the NASB is a word-for-word rendering..
2) The change in the word "Replinished" deals with the change in the original meaning of the word. Research shows that the word meant "to fill" between the 1300 and 1700 AD.. At some point , as many words do, the definition changed and now means "to fill again." Note that the translation work done that brought us the KJV was finished during the time when the definiton of the word carried a different meaning than our understanding of that same word today.
Also, Greg makes some good points for you to ponder.
Lord Bless,
LT
-
Permalink Reply by LT on
-
James,
I have an idea. Let's look at this from another angle since this is the 3rd time as far as I know this subject has come up on AAG two other times (at least) and who knows how many other times I have heard these same arguments presented over the years.
Answer the following regarding the NIV:
Does the NIV present that Jesus is the Son of God?
Does the NIV present that Jesus is God?
Does the NIV ever refute or deny the Trinity?
Does the NIV claim that there are other ways to get saved besides faith in Jesus?
Does the NIV not present that one must be born again to be saved?
Does the NIV not present that a person must repent in order to be born again?
Does the NIV offer a different sacrifice besides the blood of Jesus for the sins of man to be eternally forgiven?
Does the NIV promote false teachers or present that we are to be on guard?
Does the Niv present the virgin birth?
Does the NIV fail to exalt Jesus as Lord, Savior and Coming King?
Has the NIV changed any sin into a thing of righteousness?
Two final thoughts.
1)Is the KJV sacred or is the Word of God that the KJV presents sacred? (Mat. 23:18-22)
2) Did the translators of the KJV take liberty and impose their will on Acts 12:4 or is it a grammaticaly correct rendering of the verse in your opinion?
Lord Bless,
LT
-
Permalink Reply by Bev on -
I have a few questions.....if I open ANY version of the bible after praying for God to reveal to me His message for me do you think it matters to Him which one He reveals it thru? And if perhaps I read one bible and do not understand what is being said there do you think God will not honor me finding one in which I can? And last, if I ernestly seek His clarity and revelation thru His Word do you think Him incapable of delivering it thru a bible such as say, The Message? God will get His point across and I am sure He does it in and thru whichever medium I seek Him in, even if the only message is that I should look elsewhere. I find that reading the KJV causes me to not want to read....is hard to understand and I, being a person who does not like to read in the first place, will put it down after reading very little. I believe God is in all of them.
Thanx for listening,
Bev
-
Permalink Reply by Scribe D'Nucov on -
Brother James, I appreciate your passion for the Word of God. It is a vital part of being a true disciple. In pursuing the truth, we must however, become students of whole truth. Your discussion above presents only half the story.
Let's start off with thanking God that we, English speaking people, have been among the most blessed of all people in the history of the world: we have not one, not two, but more than a dozen translations of the Holy Bible in our language, and have had an English Bible since Tyndale - about 500 years! We have been the recipients of the greatest blessings in the history of mankind. There are ethnic groups that have waited for over 40 years while work is being done to write the Bible in their native tongue. Translators agonize over how to interpret vital concepts from scripture - clearly and plainly.
At the same time, let us recognize that we English speakers are also among the most cursed. We have fought wars, both figurative and literal, over which version of the Bible we read. Let me say this: If your assertions above told the entire story - I would burn every other version of the Bible I own immediately and never read anything but the KJV.
However, there are some vital points you have not even addressed. I'm going to give you three reasons why I do not consider the KJV to hold water as well as the modern translations, such as NASB.
1. The KJV adds words which are not in the Hebrew or Greek text. (How do you square that with Rev 22:19?) One of my favorites, 1Corinthians chapter 13, adds words that change the meaning from the original text. This has led to a commonly held controversy for over 100 years, particularly among people who do not know that the italicized words of the KJV are published in italics because they ARE NOT in the original text, but rather are there to clarify the point made, as well as the writers could understand it. (what was your point about the translator adding his understanding of what God meant?)
So, some church doctrines use the italicized words of the KJV for EMPHASIS, when in fact they are the parts we ought not emphasize at all - because they are the opinion of the translators. This has led to confusion, particularly among those who are not scholarly on the topic of translations. If the KJV translators had known a few Rabbis, maybe they would have understood that the Apostle Paul was using Rabbinical Rhetorical style when he wrote and that those words were not intended by him.
2. The New Testament was written in Koine Greek, the language of the street in the 1st Century world of the Greco-Roman and Greco-Persian people. The most common language, for the greatest number of people, throughout the Roman, Greek and Persian lands of that time. It was the language of every man and woman on the street.
HOWEVER, the KJV was written in High-Church Elizabethan English (HCE-English). That form of English has never, at any time, been the common language of the street for English speaking people anywhere. There was never a time when HCE-English was spoken by all of the people of Britain. It was the language of the Royal Court. It was never the language of the street. Therefore, the language of the KJV has always eluded the common man - the very person that the original New Testament was written for.
The KJV has always had a “churchy lingo” feel to it, for all English speaking people, ever since it was written. It became as far out-of-synch for many native English speakers as Latin was after the 5th century in the former Roman empire.
3. Today, we are so removed from that version of English that we do not even use the grammatical structures of HCE-English any longer. They didn't use that language in George Washington's time - even though the KJV was the common Bible of that period. And we are certainly not speaking the English of George Washington today.
There are so many words and phrases used in the KJV that are completely obsolete in modern English, that it is ridiculous to assert that the average person should use this version of the Bible in every day devotions. There are over 800 words or phrases in the KJV that have entirely lost their meaning in modern English and there are more which have subtle changes in meaning, which can be misleading without a modern translation.
One good example is the name that is generally hardest to translate in any new culture: the Holy Spirit. The King James Translators chose “Holy Ghost” because the word Spirit was never considered to relate to a person in 1611, but rather to a non-personal force. So, in 1611 the term “Holy Ghost” was applied. The problem is that today, Ghost only ever refers to an apparition of a dead person, and we know scripture says Ghosts are actually demons. So, the name “Holy Ghost” actually translates in some people’s mind as “holy demon”. At the very least, it confuses the issue of "ghostly visitations" and whether they are of God or of demons.That, by itself should make anyone’s skin crawl.
Yes, The King James Version has some beautiful prose; but it is prose that is deeply misunderstood by most people. The KJV is not the “word of God” any more than any other translation – it is a translation of the Word of God.
Indeed, I challenge you that you may have misunderstood it yourself! Take time, go over the verses you are most emphatically passionate about, the ones that you say have been lost from the NIV. Read those verses in NASB and read them in NKJV and then read them in a very modern version like the CEV. You may find that you get new understanding of the meaning of the actual word of God – from a better understanding of the original languages. I have spent many years reading the Old and New Testament in the original languages and spent countless hours researching words and phrases. The CEV is actually very insightful, particularly to the sayings of Jesus.
Furthermore, I challenge you to go witness to your neighbor, using exclusively King James English in your speech. I’m serious: He will think you have lost your mind. If you can’t communicate to your neighbor in King James English, how can you expect the Spirit of God to fully communicate to him through that version? If you struggle to communicate using that form of language, how do you know you actually understand what is written?
There are an abundant number of versions that DO speak very well to people today. The New King James Version is a modern Bible that takes the legacy of the KJV, updates it’s language and removes the arcane nature of some phrases. But, I think you will find that the dynamic equivalency translations give you more insights than NKJV. The NIV is very good for that, across the majority of it's phrases, but some others are even better.
If you just can’t live without the KJV, I would suggest reading it along with a more modern version by your side for comparative analysis – you may find you get more clarity on some vital things, about which you may have been slow to fully understand through the lense of a 400 year old version of the language.
One of the reasons expository preaching is so important today – is to remove the antiquated concepts that cause misunderstandings of the KJV. Imagine if half of the sermon could be reduced, because the language being used in the first place is already understood! Why use a Bible in church that is as antiquated from people today as Latin was from the people of the middle ages?
-
Permalink Reply by James Lindquist on -
You have a great grasp of Scripture. I also have been reading God's word for many years and do not have too much problem understanding the KJV. Are there verses or some things I don't understand? OH, you betcha. I am not all knowing. ( and I know you didn't intimate that. Some have.) But I am a student of the Bible and when there is something I don't understand, I study the Hebrew or Greek or Jewish customs and traditions.
I have Strongs beside me as well. But guess what Bible the Strongs uses? You got it - the KJV. If anyone has any trouble understanding the KJV or can't understand a word, invest in a Strongs or Bible software that has this app in it. What's wrong with studying the Word, not just reading it. Many have gotten away from studying.
Every serious student of the Bible should have a copy of Jewish customs and traditions by their side when STUDYING the Word, not just reading it. Of course the language has changed but the falacy is to develop other methodologies for study and translation. This, right off the bat, I have a problem with. WE HAVE TO study God's Word in the context in which it was written and of when it was written NOT by using modern language.
This discussion/article was to help my brothers and sisters. I have found MANY things wrong with the modern translations but yet people still seem to defend them. That's okay. It is their prerogative. I am just a messenger. Not just wrong things but TERRIBLE things. Calling Jesus Satan and leaving out the most important verse in the Bible about the Trinity. I am VERY offended at that.
A book(if not 2 or 3) could be written on this topic. Of course, I wasn't completely thorough. You can't explain in 1600 or so words what should take 40 or 50 chapters. I hadn't even got to the NASB or other translations yet. I felt the unction to warn everybody because of my research - so I did. I told everyone so at least I will not be held accountable for their blood.
Your opinion was quite eloquent and filled with much knowledge. However, I do not have the time right now to rebut your remarks although I can with some clarity for you. I will return at another time and answer for you your dilemma about the translations.
Why should we use a Bible in church today with Old English? Because it is what the Lord gave us. KJV is translated from the Antioch and is a word for word version. Myself, I want to hear from God - not from man's theology. When God wants us to understand His Word, He'll bring it to light. Until then, I just have to live on faith.
I'll have to reread my article to see what the context of your question to me (in bold) was. I WILL answer you however. I won't forget D'Nucov.
GBY brother and thanks for the wonderful remarks and for taking all that time. Bless you.
Jim
About
The Good News
© 2009 Created by AllAboutGOD.com on Ning. Create a Ning Network!
