ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Read Other Than King James

How can I explain to others that it's not the law that you have to read the "King James" Bible, but it is more important that they read the Bible and understand. Am I right?

Join Our Christian Friendship and Take The Apostasy Bible Quiz
 ---douga3773 on 10/16/06
     Helpful Blog Vote (10)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog

The KJV has many faults, since it is a translation just as the NIV, RSV and NEW LIFe so th good thing o do is to ghet a strongs and in doubt of comparising look int to the concordance. thats what I do
---Andy on 8/29/08

The King James version of the bible, is widely accepted in Christiandom to be accurate. Some of the newer versions are differing on certain points. The reason many refer to the KJV< is because of its acceptance with the overall body of Christ. My advice would be to always revert back to it, as an accurate source of divine guidance.
---gayla on 8/17/08

You will not convince a KJV Only person of that. I personally do not read KJV. I prefer a modern translation. I believe that the Holy Spirit can work through any good translation, and that the archaic language in the KJV can be a stumbling block to many.
---Madison1101 on 8/15/08

Shakespeare btw quoted not from the King James version but from the Geneva Bible.

It never ceases to amaze me that some people cannot understand that the King James version of the Bible is just that - another version; good for the age it was created.
---lee1538 on 11/19/06

If not the "language of the day" then what language did they use?
---Bruce5656 on 11/19/06

r.w. Bruce should perhaps have been more explicit in what he said. The translators in thier introduction were not intending to write a literarary work, wherease they were when composing the translation. Compare the KJV with the slightly earlier works of Shakespeare,,and you will see the similarities
---AlanUK_quent5969 on 11/19/06

Bruce said something else not true, that the KJB was written in the language of that day. not so. the language of the KJB is of itself. you can read the language of the translators in their preface or epistle dictatory. if you wouldve read this bruce, possibly you wouldnt have made that statement
---r.w. on 11/18/06

shawn-you sure it doesnt matter which you read? 2 sam 21:19 in the niv(not inspired version)says that Elhanan slew Goliath. I thought David slew Goliath. KJB says goliath's brother. Matt 18:11 KJB 'For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.' niv removes this. I reckon it's because the niv is a better translation, huh. KJB is a 5th grade reading level. pretty tough stuff
---r.w. on 11/18/06

ShawnM.T. , Amen! We need the direction of the Holy Spirit to properly discern God's Word. God Bless!
---Mrs._Morgan on 11/12/06

---ShawnM.T; appears to have hit the submit button three different times. But what is said, certainly deserve to be read three different times. The guidance of the Holy Spirit is absolutely necessary in understanding the Scriptures.
---mima on 11/12/06

Rev Herb, do you actually read this stuff somewhere or did you make it up. the KJV is not the best version out there. In fact it is the one that added stuff to scripture not the other way around, like the lords prayer in KJV is the same in Matthew and Luke, but it's different in NIV and Most versions, this is because it was different in the original language. and the bibles make note of it.
---Jared on 11/11/06

The best bible to read is the one that you can understand enough to read. if thee's and thou's discurage you then don't read a KJV. it's not the only accurate translation by far.
---Jared on 11/11/06

Its the guidance of the Holy Spirit that is essential in hearing the word of God. If the Holy Spirit is not interpreting the bible for you, it does not matter which translation youre reading, its just a book of empty words on paper. 1 Cor. 2:10-14
---ShawnM.T. on 11/11/06

Its the guidance of the Holy Spirit that is essential in hearing the word of God. If the Holy Spirit is not interpreting the bible for you, it does not matter which translation youre reading, its just a book of empty words on paper. 1 Cor. 2:10-14
---ShawnM.T. on 11/11/06

Its the guidance of the Holy Spirit that is essential in hearing the word of God. If the Holy Spirit is not interpreting the bible for you, it does not matter which translation youre reading, its just a book of empty words on paper. 1 Cor. 2:10-14
---ShawnM.T. on 11/11/06

Holiness and miracles may or may not walk hand on hand. Lack of miracles do not make for unholiness.
6:4: But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.
6:5: And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them.
---Nana on 10/21/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause

Nana, the way I was taught is that holiness is a goal, which, on this earth, Christ alone has attained. Like Christ said to go and do even greater miracles than I have done. I havent seen anyone raise the dead in my life time, but I believe it is possible if our faith is strong enough. But sadly we have all fallen short.
---randy on 10/21/06

Only God is holy? We are called to holyness:
Leviticus 20

20:7 Sanctify yourselves therefore, and be ye holy: for I am the LORD your God.

20:8 And ye shall keep my statutes, and do them: I am the LORD which sanctify you.

I Peter

1:15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;

1:16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.
---Nana on 10/20/06

Our discussion at work centers around if the bible is holy is it God - not just Gods word but God? I was raised to believe, in the Baptist tradition, that God alone is holy. Just curious to hear what others think.
---randy on 10/20/06

correcting of them, is the thing that we are specially charged with; let us see therefore whether they themselves be without fault this way, (if it be to be counted a fault, to correct) and whether they be fit men to throw stones at us: O tandem maior parcas insane minori: they that are less sound themselves, out not to object infirmities to others. [Horat.]"
---Bruce5656 on 10/19/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals

They allowed for alternate translations:
"They that are wise, had rather have their judgments at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other." (emphasis added)

They did not see their translation as infallible:
"But the difference that appeareth between our Translations, and our often
---Bruce5656 on 10/19/06

Read this, I pray thee," he was fain to make this answer, "I cannot, for it is sealed." [Isa 29:11]"

The KJV translators did not see their bible as the only one. They said: " do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in Englishis the word of God." (emphasis added)
---Bruce5656 on 10/19/06

It is interesting that the KJV translators saw the need of the bible to be written in the common language of the day. Otherwise, the unlearned are but like children at Jacob's well (which is deep) [John 4:11] without a bucket or something to draw with; or as that person mentioned by Isaiah, to whom when a sealed book was delivered, with this motion, "
---Bruce5656 on 10/19/06

None of those words mean the same to us today as when they were written and that is just a few examples. There is no way to know what they mean unless someone tells you or you research it for yourself. Then there are words like:
chambering, champaign, charger, churl,cieled, circumspect, clouted upon their feet, cockatrice, collops and on and on it goes..
---Bruce5656 on 10/19/06

Locate Christian Jobs


Abraham Lincon's parents may have known God but it would only have been as somone else told them what was in the word if they could not read.
I am not talking about thees and thous. Do you know what these words mean?
- conversation - Phil 1:27 etc.
- let - II Thess 2:7
- suffer - Mark 10:4
- prevent I Thess 4:15
- spoil Coll 2:1
---Bruce5656 on 10/19/06

Steveng, the adding and subtracting have to do with All of Scripture, not just the book of Revelation: "Add you not to his words, else he correct you, and you be found a liar. And to all them lying ones, of their part in that lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is second death. And where not at all may enter into the New Jerusalem every profaning, and making an abomination, and a lie, except those having been written in the Lamb's Book of Life." Proverbs 30:6; Revelation 21:8,27.
---Eloy on 10/19/06

Bruce: If he has eyes, let him read. If he has ears, let him listen. Abraham Lincoln's parents were illiterate, yet they knew God.

Ralph: the adding and subracting concerns only the book of Revelation (don't take the verse out of context).

As for the thees, thous, and thys; it's not these words that are being misinterpreted, they are the politically correct words. Have you read the Feminist Bible? or the Gay Bible? or the dozens of other modern Bibles?
---Steveng on 10/18/06

Ralph, if the newer version were only updating as you said, that would be acceptable; but they do not do that. They omit scriptures and add words not in the original Scripture; thus they have produced lies, and not truth. For example, if I said "love your neighbor as yourself", then a newer version says, "love yourself", are these two statements equal, and did the original statement need updating to be understood? Such like things are in the new fandangle "Unholy Bibles".
---Eloy on 10/18/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting

About 90% of the old manuscripts were used to produce the KJV bible, the other 10% were found to have errors in them. However, the new versions uses the 10% and call it a more accurate version. Up dating the language is one thing, but corrupting it is another.
---Rev_Herb on 10/18/06

Question...if a church decides to update the hymn book by changing thee, thou, and thy to you, him, and he so it people can understand what is being is wrong? Is it wrong to update the Bible from old English to comtempory English? Some people do stumble when reading the KJV...I do. REading the KJV only frustates me...I do not speak old english. Why should I or others be told we are wrong in reading more comtempory version when we do not speak or write in old english?
---Ralph on 10/18/06

The only reason I responded to this blog is if I was a new Christian...I would be confused. I say this in love. Any Christian who teaches the KJV is the only version is being mislead and decieved. KJV only is false teaching and that is what it is. If updating language from Old English to comtempory is a sin, learn to write old english and speak old english and speak no comtempory english.
---Ralph on 10/18/06

In Revelaton, we are told not to add or subtract...correct teaching. But where in the Bible does it say updating language is wrong? If updating the Bible to comtempory language is wrong, condemn me if you want. But I still call KJV only false teaching and legalism. If you choose NIV or NASB or KJV or Amplified, God bless you in which version you choose to study. May you grow strong in version God calls you to read.
---Ralph on 10/18/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers

No MileFl ... surely the Bible was written by God (through Moses, the prophets, the apostles and so on) in Elizabethan/Jacobean English?
---alan8869_of_UK on 10/18/06

"For those of you who have a problem understanding the KJV then the Holy Spirit is not working in you"

So someone who can barely read let alone read KJ english, should consider them selves not to be a christian if they cannot understand the complicated language and archaic words that can be found in places in the KJV?
---Bruce5656 on 10/18/06

Rev Herb, Thank you gor your comment about Sister Riplinger. To all who read this, truly consider reading this book. It's a true eye opener. Thank you Lord for the A.V.
---Jason on 10/18/06

The King James is the only Bible that can be used with the Strong's Concordance. thereby taking the text back to the original languages and escaping what has been added by man..
---Eagle on 10/18/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce

Jack, I suggest you get one of those books Rev Herb is suggesting. Many of the new translations have missing texts and some totally different meanings to the supposed texts. Unless you know your bible well, you will never see the errors printed out in these NTs. I guarantee it will be an eye opener. Get one.
---mmadm on 10/18/06

Bro. Alan, was that the Original English, the Renaissance English, the New English, or maybe the American English??? All those versions have so many errors I just don't trust 'em.
---mikefl on 10/17/06

Let me ask this very simple question How old is the KJ Bible ? Ok now lets just go back 1970 English is diffrent than today English in communcation!! Lets go back to the 1950 communication is total diffrent than todays English and meaning think about how time change words and meaning !! thinking about it !!
---Douga3773 on 10/17/06

Riplinger has been shown to be not exactly accurate--to put it sweetly.
---Jack on 10/17/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Jewelry

Douga, Absolutely. you are right.
---Okebaram on 10/17/06

If any one cares about knowing the truth, they should get a real Holy Bible to read, for there are many many Unholy Bibles on the market today. I don't recommend any English Bible written after the 1611 KJV, for there are just too many adulterations written in them. I personally favor the 1560 Geneva Bible for it's accurracy.
---Eloy on 10/17/06

For those of you who have a problem understanding the KJV then the Holy Spirit is not working in you for He will put understanding in your heart. Most, if not all, modern translations are taken from the KJV and of the interpretation of one person. Many verses were all slanted towards their own agenda the Feminist Bible, the Black Bible, the Gay Bible, etc. King James hired over 60 scholars and linguists from all over the known world to write the KJV to make sure it wasn't of one man's interpretation.
---Steveng on 10/17/06

Besides, once you read through the entire Bible from beginning to end (and not a verse here and a verse there and without concordances, novels and other Christian references), your relationship with God gets closer. Once your relationship congeals, you will be able to wholey depend on the Holy Spirit without the use of the Bible or any other script.
---Steveng on 10/17/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Furniture

I suggest you read (New Age Bible Versions, by G.A. Riplinger) It is an eye opening book to these new versions. I know, you are afraid you might learn something that goes against what you believe. You have your own belief and no amount of evidence will convence you otherwise.
---Rev_Herb on 10/17/06

Actually, the KJV was not just "good enough for Paul" Didn't he write most of the NT part of the KJV.
And John wrote another part of the KJV. And Moses was responsible for most of the first books of the KJV.
I'm sure Abraham, Moses, the prophets and the disciples spoke in English.
---alan8869_of_UK on 10/17/06

Sure am glad I moved from both ancient and modern religion right into a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. That keeps me contending for the faith instead of contending with people (or idols for that matter).

Ezekiel 14:4,7
Jeremiah 28:9
---Linda6563 on 10/17/06

If you have trouble understanding the KJV bible it is because the KJV is a spiritual bible and only a spiritual person can understand it. All other versions are carnel and carnel minds perfer it.
---Rev_Herb on 10/17/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Laptops

If the new versions are so good, then why did they leave out so much and make them more sodomite friendly? Why not read the New World translation,(JW bible)it reads the same as the new translations, even leave out the same verses.
---Rev_Herb on 10/17/06

**Give me that old fasion religion with its old fasion music and the old fasion KJV bible. **

It's interesting, Rev Herb, but what you're calling "old fashioned religion" doesn't go back further than 19th century America, and was called "New Light" when it appeared.

If you want the REAL old-fashioned religion with old-fashioned music and the old-fashioned Bible, try Orthodoxy--especially at a Greek parish where the NT is read in the ORIGINAL, OLD FASHIONED language.
---Jack on 10/17/06

Re: The old fashioned KJV

Yep, if it was good enough for Paul, it ought to be good enough for us right?
---Bruce5656 on 10/17/06

**I believe that the Holy Spirit can work through any good translation, and that the archaic language in the KJV can be a stumbling block to many.**

Well put, Madison. The language of the KJV was deliberately archaic. Read the Epistle Dedicatory or From the Translators to the Reader, and note the differences in diction.

I was brought up on the KJV and have no trouble with it, though there are obsolete phrases and words that have shifted their meaning, sometimes by as much as 180 degrees.
---Jack on 10/17/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Lawyer

We now have a modern religion with modern music, modern bibles and modern ways to worship. When people argue with me about tongues they say that God is the same yesterday, today and forever. Well, this applies to the bible. Give me that old fasion religion with its old fasion music and the old fasion KJV bible. All the new versions have been perverted and people have been blinded to that fact. The blind leading the blind. Wake up and open your eyes, the devil has blinded you.
---Rev_Herb on 10/17/06

I personally prefer a parallel bible with the KJV and NLT. The KJV is harder to understand, but the NLT, while very accurate contains paraphrase, like many easy-to-read translations.
Since the KJV was written some things have become better understood and is reflected in some newer translations, but not all.
Studying the Bible with good commentary and comparing an easy-to-read translation to the KJV or NKJV is the method of study that works best for me.
---Lee on 10/17/06

You can tell them and that is all,but unless God intervenes don't expect them to listen. In the church some relatives attended they didn't just belief it,they were fanatical about it,forbidding anyone who taught in their church to use any other Bible and frowning upon any members using anything else but KJV. Pray before you talk to them and ask God to open their hearts and minds to hear and the door for you to speak.
---Darlene_1 on 10/17/06

Right on, but some will argue.

The precepts given by Jesus don't change with connecting words and phrases.

The words of Christ are much more powerful, they are spirit and truth, and anyone who repents and obeys that spirit will meet our Lord.

The Holy Spirit is at work, and his work won't be stopped by the folly of men.
---Pharisee on 10/17/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Dedicated Hosting

Surely, (by my reasoning) the older the version of the bible the nearer it is to the origional, and therefore the true version.
---David on 10/17/06

The adherents of the KJVonly Superstition will disagree with you, but you are right.
---Jack on 10/16/06

Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.