Can we bring the KJV into 21st century English?

[Psalms18_28]

Well, I did say, "If the Lord tarries" and "eventually". That doesn't mean next week or even next year.

At one time everyone could read Latin. Then there eventually came a time when no one but a certain hierarchy could read it. Why? Because languages change.

probably why people had to rely on catholic priests during the dark age. Well it made catholics the sole authority over religion.

[Alimantado]

Thank u 4 advise.

[pneu-engine]

:thumb

[PreacherBen]

Though we have introduced alot of new words into our vocabulary, a large percentage of the AV1611 is still easily comprehended in 2007. It is like world history, though alot goes on today, all the old stuff is still the same. Though we introduce new things, the information in the AV is still able to be understood by my small children. The key will always be:

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
2Ti 2:15

[John81]

Though we have introduced alot of new words into our vocabulary, a large percentage of the AV1611 is still easily comprehended in 2007. It is like world history, though alot goes on today, all the old stuff is still the same. Though we introduce new things, the information in the AV is still able to be understood by my small children. The key will always be:

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
2Ti 2:15

Our children grew up reading the KJB. Our oldest son began reading the KJB on his own when he was 4!

[PreacherBen]

I have a dear Christian brother that is going to a non-Baptist church that is Calvinistic and relatively conservative, but are being influenced by the contemporary crowd. You know, contemporary music, contemporary dress, and contemporary bibles...deadly combo!

Anyways, he has been standing on the KJV and trying to persuade them away from their move toward the NKJV. He has caused quite a stink and he wrote them the following letter. I realize it is off topic a little bit, but it is somewhat pertinent. You can pray for this dear brother as he tries to save them (that church) from their unwise direction.

Dear brothers and sisters at Faith:
First of all I would like to apologize for any discomfort or distress that I might have caused you. This was not my intention. Please forgive me this wrong. Secondly if you would permit me I would like to clear up any misunderstandings that might exist. Although the KJV has been a bone of contention for some, it is really a secondary issue. The primary issue for which we contend is the doctrine of inherency. Simply stated, it means that God?s Word is perfect, pure, complete and without error. This doctrine was the doctrine of the ancient Jews, the apostles, and the early church and was the watchword of the reformation. This doctrine stands in counter distinction to that of Rome which believes that the church along with its bishops, priests, and popes are on an equal level with Scripture and in some cases greater than Scripture. We believe this doctrine is a true doctrine of God?s Word. Psalms 12:6,7 states,? The words of the Lord are pure words; as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever.? Seeing then that God has promised to preserve His word and every doctrine must have its application, we simply apply this doctrine to the KJV. We are not saying that the KJV is the only Bible translation and the rest are of no value. What we are saying is that the KJV is the best English translation and our standard of excellence. All the other English translations have their relative merit and value to a lesser or greater degree. Again we are not saying that everyone ought to switch to the KJV simply because we say so. Our purpose was simply to present this subject to you for your earnest consideration. Of course we realize that it takes a considerable amount of time and research on this subject to sift through the bias and prejudices of some and the false information circulated by others. Some may not have the time to do this; others may be simply indifferent about the subject. These are honest responses. But please lets not fall into the trap of adding one bad reaction to another and using these bad reactions of the past to form our opinions. We encourage you rather to base your conclusions on an unbiased and honest consideration of the facts. This alone can lead us to a sound conclusion concerning the matter.
Since this subject has come up, I have been accused of biting and devouring, being divisive, sowing discord among the brethren, and undermining the authority of Brother L. Is this true? Or has the subject that I have introduced been in the interest of honest investigation, and if so, what do we have to be afraid of? Do we fear for Brother L?s authority? When Moses was confronted with others prophesying in the camp he said, ?Enviest thou for my sake, I would that all God?s people were prophets?. Where there is a lack of the true power and authority of God, fear and insecurity must always be the result.
But you say that it is intellectually dishonest to believe that this doctrine can apply to a translation. The scholars have spoken, the New Greek has spoken, Strongs has spoken, John Macarthur has spoken, Greek interlinears and lexicons have spoken, recently discovered manuscripts have spoken. But wait, does God ever ask us to believe things that do not square with human reason? God asked Abraham to believe his wife was going to have a child at 100 years of age. If Abraham lived today and was a member of this church and he announced in a meeting that his wife was going to have a child at the age of 100 what would you tell him? Abraham, you?re a fine fellow, but the evidence is all in: the doctors have spoken, the scientists have spoken, the intelligencia of our day has spoken, and recent discoveries in human anatomy have spoken; therefore, it is impossible and intellectually dishonest to believe that. So I ask the question: is the preservation of God?s Word given to us pure, complete, and without error in a translation any greater an impossibility then the deadness of Sarah?s womb? Could it be that God is asking us to exercise our faith in this area? Rom. 4; 19,20, ?And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about a hundred years old, neither the deadness of Sarah?s womb: He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief: but was strong in faith, giving glory to God?.
Another argument is that we just don?t talk that way any more. But consider this: the Elizabethan era from whence our King James Bible came was the high water mark for the English language. The English language reached its crescendo during that period. Since that time our language has degenerated. The King James Bible represents English in its purest form. Why would we want to sacrifice the purity, accuracy, and beauty of the King James Bible for the way we talk today? This line of reasoning will eventually lead us to adopt the NIV or worse, The Message. In Gen. 3 The Ebonic Translation says something like this: ?The devil was one big bad dude.? Do we really want a translation that reads the way people talk today? Why would we want to exchange the palace for the slums, consider this verse, Philippians 1:9,10a ?And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment; That ye may approve things that are excellent.?
Still another argument is that the King James Bible is difficult to understand and the new versions are easier; but the Flesch-Kincaid Research Co. grade level indicator puts the KJV at 5.8, the NKJV at 6.9 the NIV at 8.4 the NASB at 6.1 the TEV at 7.2. This information comes from a secular research company and therefore would have no reason for personal bias.
Brothers and sisters, our greatest fear ought not to be that we are undermining human authority: our greatest fear should be that we might undermine Divine authority. The Scriptures are God?s authoritative standard for us; it must not be allowed to become elastic. This is the effect often produced by a multitude of translations: men because of the wickedness of their hearts love to take liberties with God?s Word. We dare not indulge their license. I leave you with these two verses to ponder: Deut: 4; 2 ?Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish aught from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you?. Rom. 3; 4, ?God forbid; yea let God be true and every man a liar; as it is written, that thou mightiest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.? Thank you for your time and patience. Your brother in Christ,

Signed, a brother

What do you think?

[dwayner79]

Well, he probably does not mean the doctrine of inherency

[dwayner79]

The letter is passionate, ill-informed, and will, I would expect, be met with a measure of pity. No one wants to hurt this guy's feelings, I'm sure, but they will proceed anyway. That letter would certainly not change my mind.

[John the Baptist]

The letter is passionate' date=' ill-informed, and will, I would expect, be met with a measure of pity. No one wants to hurt this guy's feelings, I'm sure, but they will proceed anyway. That letter would certainly not change my mind.[/quote']

He probably means the doctrine of inerrancy.

[kevinmiller]

lol, I didn't know there was such a thing as "inherency." Learn something new every day. Thanks Dwayne. :frog

And while I admire this guy's stand, I think he could have done a better job presenting his position. I don't know if I would go as far as to say that it was "passionate" but he was ill-informed when he wrote this letter. He should've done more research ahead of time.

[Guest Guest]

I'll stick with the trustworthy KJV!

[Kubel]

Though we have introduced alot of new words into our vocabulary, a large percentage of the AV1611 is still easily comprehended in 2007. It is like world history, though alot goes on today, all the old stuff is still the same. Though we introduce new things, the information in the AV is still able to be understood by my small children. The key will always be:

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."
2Ti 2:15

The primary issue for which we contend is the doctrine of inherency.

Ah, the irony. :lol