Why is the KJV superior to modern Bibles?

[John the Baptist]

So in other words you don't believe that God has kept His promise to preserve His perfect word for today?

Psa 12:6 KJV The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psa 12:7 KJV Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Don't tell me that God has only preserved His word in the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts because that is simply not true. Why would God only preserve His word for the select few who can read those languages? That makes no sense to me. God has preserved His perfect word for us in English and that perfect word for us is in the KJV!

You may believe as you will. I do not want to stir up more trouble. Yes, I believe that inerrancy was in the orginal manuscripts, do not believe that copies of the manuscripts we have are perfect. As any one who has some knowledge of the manuscripts know. This is documented fact. There are even variations with the Textus Receptus which the KJV was translated from. So if the copies of the manuscripts we have are not perfect then how can the translation be perfect? They are not inerrant. But still God has preserved His word. There is such a high degree of accuracy in the copies we have that the translations are totally trustworthy. The variation in the manuscripts are minute most are minor scribal errors. Like mistaking a similar word for another. Yes their are some variations in the ending of Mark and other Scripture. But no change of truth. You will have to believe as you are led ofthe Lord.
Sorry that I stirred up trouble, but I am not KJV Only.
God Bless
John

[Kenny5682]

Hi BaptistGirl.

I came in on this subject a little late so forgive me if I'm repeating what has already been said. I'll sum up for you why I choose to read the King James Bible.

The King James Bible is the only Bible that does not include specific manuscripts which were discovered in Egypt during the translation process. These manuscripts water down scripture and change small phrases which give a completely different meaning than the original.

Just a brief outline, the NKJV omits the word "repent" 44 times and the word "blood" 23 times.

As for the meaning being changed...

Hebrews 10:4 is changed from "are sanctified" to "are being sanctified."

1st Corinthians 1:18 is changed from "are saved" to "are being saved."

I used to be a huge fan of the NIV, until I bought a NIV / KJV parallel Bible. I noticed that the NIV leaned way toward doing things ourselves and the KJV leaned more toward depending on God.

For example...

2nd Timothy 2:15 (NIV) - Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.

2nd Timothy 2:15 (KJV) - Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

At first glance those two do not seem much different. Think about it though.

Do your best to handle the word of truth. Well that could just mean giving the Gospel couldn't it?

"Rightly dividing the word of truth" leads me to believe I must be on my feet, testing what I hear against the Word of God.

Satan uses scripture, and he waters it down and misuses it. That's what he did with Jesus. He simply left some of it out. Satan quoted Psalm 91:11-12, only he left out the phrase "to keep thee in all thy ways." That's basically what these new translations do. They leave out subtle words which change the meaning just by a hair, but just enough to throw off somebodies theology. Subtlety is a characteristic of Satan (Genesis 3:1)

[chev1958]

I guess we all have our favorite "differences" between the translations. This one goes along the same lines as what Kenny5682 just posted. One I like to use is 1 Cor. 27:

(KJV) Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
(NIV) Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.

The word "unworthily" refers to a person, whereas "in a unworthy manner" refers to an act. For example, an unworthy person shouldn't partake of the Lord's Supper, according to the KJV. However, the NIV says the supper should be conducted properly, which is true, but concentrates on the act of the supper, rather than the people partaking. Maybe that's nitpicking, but that's what the grammar says.

Mitch

[Bakershalfdozen]

I'm not sure what you mean here, Chevy. :puzzled:

In English Grammar, "unworthily" is an adverb describing the compound verb "shall eat/drink". If the person is himself unworthy, wouldn't it say something like "If an unworthy person..."? (Unworthy being an adjective there)

[Jerry]

I agree with Bakers - the context is HOW a person is partaking of the Lord's Supper: unworthily because of undealt with sin in their lives while partaking.

[chev1958]

unworthily (Webster's 1828): "Not according to desert; without due regard to merit; as, to treat a man unworthily."
unworthy (Webster's 1828): "Not suitable; inadequate."

The way the verse is written in the KJV, "unworthily" does modify the action, but it still focuses on the actor. "If I drink this cup unworthily ..." Is the drinking unworthy or is the person unworthy? Is the manner with which I drink this cup unworthy?

In the NIV, "unworthy" is placed as an adjective modifying "manner." For example, "If I drink this cup in an unworthy manner ..." That changes the focus more toward the procedure rather than the person performing the action. I could be a "worthy" person, yet still take the Lord's Supper "in an unworthy manner," i.e., eating banana bread instead of unleaven, or drinking Diet Coke instead of grape juice.

Now, if the NIV had written the verse as such: "If I, as an unworthy person, drink this cup ..." then it would have the same meaning as the KJV verse. But as it's written in today's translation, the verse -- to me, anyway -- changes the meaning of what the KJV says.

Mitch

[chev1958]

Jerry, your post agrees more with mine than Bakers. "Unworthily" focuses on the person -- the "undealt sin" as you call it. After dealing with how the Corinthians were physically conducting the supper earlier in the chapter, he changes the focus to their spiritual worth in partaking of the supper.

[Jerry]

This makes sense in what I said: without due regard to merit. If someone partakes of the Lord's supper without due regard to merit of what it signifies and has unrepentant sin in their life (when they are observing something that is about being forgiven and cleansed of their sin), then they are taking of the Lord's Supper unworthily. The passage is regarding Christians - there is no unworthy Christian partaking of the Lord's Supper - but many believers partaking of it in a wrong manner.

[chev1958]

there is no unworthy Christian partaking of the Lord's Supper

Maybe I'm straining at gnats, but wouldn't a Christian with unresolved sin in their lives be an unworthy Christian? Webster's 1828 defines "manner" as "Form; method; way of performing or executing. Custom; habitual practice." That defines the procedure of the Lord's Supper. Therefore, partaking in the Lord's Supper "in an unworthy manner" is what Paul discussed earlier in the chapter. In verse 27, he's talking about the partakers' spiritual condition with regard to the supper.

I think we agree on the meaning of the verse. I'm simply arguing that the NIV changes the focus from the Christian to the act itself. Preach it sometime, and you'll see the difference.

Mitch

[zealyouthguy]

Just a note to those who believe the Dead Sea Scrolls support the TR.

The Dead Sea Scrolls support the Masoretic text, the TR is used to refer to the Greek New Testament.

The DSS can be used to defend our modern KJV's Old Testament, but shouldn't be used in argument for the TR/NT.

Here are the corresponding books found in the DSS.

Books ? No. found ?
Psalms 39
Deuteronomy 33
1 Enoch 25
Genesis 24
Isaiah 22
Jubilees 21
Exodus 18
Leviticus 17
Numbers 11
Minor Prophets 10
Daniel 8
Jeremiah 6
Ezekiel 6
Job 6
1 & 2 Samuel 4

[HappyChristian]

Just a note to those who believe the Dead Sea Scrolls support the TR.

The Dead Sea Scrolls support the Masoretic text, the TR is used to refer to the Greek New Testament.

The DSS can be used to defend our modern KJV's Old Testament, but shouldn't be used in argument for the TR/NT.

Here are the corresponding books found in the DSS.

Good to see you - been missing your posts. Hope the church planting is going well.

[Jerry]

Maybe I'm straining at gnats, but wouldn't a Christian with unresolved sin in their lives be an unworthy Christian?

The Bible teaches only those who are not in Christ, not saved, are unworthy.

I'm sure studying the passage out will give me the meaning, more than preaching it out would. Need to have it studied before you can preach it.

[John the Baptist]

Hi BaptistGirl.

I came in on this subject a little late so forgive me if I'm repeating what has already been said. I'll sum up for you why I choose to read the King James Bible.

The King James Bible is the only Bible that does not include specific manuscripts which were discovered in Egypt during the translation process. These manuscripts water down scripture and change small phrases which give a completely different meaning than the original.

Just a brief outline, the NKJV omits the word "repent" 44 times and the word "blood" 23 times.

As for the meaning being changed...

Hebrews 10:4 is changed from "are sanctified" to "are being sanctified."

1st Corinthians 1:18 is changed from "are saved" to "are being saved."

I used to be a huge fan of the NIV, until I bought a NIV / KJV parallel Bible. I noticed that the NIV leaned way toward doing things ourselves and the KJV leaned more toward depending on God.

For example...

2nd Timothy 2:15 (NIV) - Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth.

2nd Timothy 2:15 (KJV) - Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

At first glance those two do not seem much different. Think about it though.

Do your best to handle the word of truth. Well that could just mean giving the Gospel couldn't it?

"Rightly dividing the word of truth" leads me to believe I must be on my feet, testing what I hear against the Word of God.

Satan uses scripture, and he waters it down and misuses it. That's what he did with Jesus. He simply left some of it out. Satan quoted Psalm 91:11-12, only he left out the phrase "to keep thee in all thy ways." That's basically what these new translations do. They leave out subtle words which change the meaning just by a hair, but just enough to throw off somebodies theology. Subtlety is a characteristic of Satan (Genesis 3:1)

Hebrews 10:4 is changed from "are sanctified" to "are being sanctified."

I think you mean Hebtews 10:14, For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

The phrase "are sanctified" is the present tense in the Greek which more clearly means "are being sanctified." It is linear or continuing action. It refers to the continuing process of santification.


1st Corinthians 1:18 is changed from "are saved" to "are being saved."

The verb "are Saved" is again in the Present tense and means "are being saved. It refers to the process of Salvation or santification.

God Bless
John

[deputydog530]

I think I get where you coming from John. I dont agree with you but I think i get it. let me know if im wrong.

You hold to Conservative theology under the direction of Dynamic Inspiration. In other words, the Originals were inspired perhaps along the mechanical dictation lines. I come to this conclusion because you dont believe in the inerrant preservation of the Word of God.

Inspiration is basicaly defined as the Holy SPirit moved the human writers of the bible so that they recorded the very words and sense of God, but stayed in thier own literary style.

You do not accept Confluent Inspiration (which means the scriptures are a product of human and divine work). 2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

So, the bible teaches this inspiration clearly.

So It would seem to me you must believe in Dynamic Inspiration (mechanical dictation) as you do not believe God could Preserve his Word though the generations.

I only post this trying to understand where those who do not believe in the preservation of the Word of God come from.

P.S. No, I was not taught to believe in preservation of the scriptures. I came to it on my own study. I say this because some folks here (not nessecarily you) claim "you follow only what you were taught by your pastor".

If im of or you hold to another type of inspration such as "thought inspiration" let me know.

God Bless

[Jerry]

The phrase "are sanctified" is the present tense in the Greek which more clearly means "are being sanctified." It is linear or continuing action. It refers to the continuing process of santification.

The verb "are Saved" is again in the Present tense and means "are being saved. It refers to the process of Salvation or santification.

1) Which Greek text are you referring to?

2) I can't remember the specific grammatical term for this, but basically it is a past action that effects the present: ie. are saved (we still are saved, not being saved), are sanctified (we were set apart by God, and still are set apart). We can see these same usages in other terms, such as "are baptized." We are not being saved, being baptized - we are saved, are baptized with Christ.