Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So I'll just post it here. In reference to the KJV-only controversy:
You do NOT have to strictly read KJV 1611 to be saved. That being said, there are some versions that are better than others. For example, I would not bother with one of those versions where someone "puts it in their own words". Too much room for error from the original manuscripts. God will show a sincere heart if something is wrong with the version they are reading.....and I also believe that He can even work on someone's heart through a version that's not the greatest!
I like the King James (not necessarily the Authorized 1611 version....read that with a holy, pious, Alexander Scourby-type voice, with reverb...LOL) because it is poetic and easier to remember than most. Or it may just be easier for me to remember because it's what I grew up hearing. But when I want to study something in an in-depth manner (KJV is a literal, word-for-word translation and it was sometimes hard to turn Hebrew and Greek, word for word, into English), I use the Amplified.
I do know people who believe that KJV-only nonsense (not that they believe you can't be saved unless you use KJV, just that it's the only one Christians should read).....there are some in my church, and a former pastor (a wonderful man of God, btw) believed that way and actually brought a guy in years ago who preached on it and asked people who were reading anything other than the KJV to come to the altar and repent! I ignored his request and went on reading my Amplified and learning (and so did most of the rest of the church). None of our subsequent pastors have believed this, and I believe that, by being respectful of those people who still do by using the KJV version when reading out loud in Sunday School (our books have KJV and Holman Christian Standard side-by-side, and my SS teacher believes the KJV only stuff) but also pointing out what my Amplified says from time to time, some of them (teacher included) are coming to realize that there is a possibility that some other version besides KJV just might be ok.
Ignore Chick tracts. Some of them make some good points, I suppose, but a lot of them are out in left field.
Last edited by Luvvarkansas; 09-14-2009 at 08:09 AM..
I like the KJV too, its a pretty good translation, with a couple of exceptions (the words/concepts "eternal" and "hell). Other than that it is good, although it is sometimes a bit tricky to understand the meaning.
I will use Young's literal when I want to check a verse that has the words "eternal" or "hell" in them - Young's is a better translation for those, but again it is not the easiest translation to read in general.
I really like the amplified and it gives a clear and precise expanded meaning in a lot of cases. Its sometimes too wordy for quick reading though.
Often I will use the NIV, NLT, or NASB because they are easy to read "every day language". The NASB is pretty close to the KJV I think, but easier (for me) to read.
And then sometimes I will read The Message just for fun. It gives some whacky translations, but sometimes you will get something you missed from the other translations.
But in general I will read in the NIV or NASB, and then double check the verses in the other translations above. I like the NIV for ease of reading, but every once in a while it gets a verse totally wrong (which frustrates me), so I alwasy have to check the other versions if I want to be sure on the meaning.
I also really like all the cross-references in the NASB for every single verse. Its good for studying (on biblegateway).
KJV a.k.a. AV is O.K. Just be sure to rely on the margin where in the text it might say "everlasting" in the margin it will have "age."
The horror of the KJV is it is the source which put a lot of people in the funny farm and worse all because the KJV mistranslated aion and aionios thus giving people the false impression that God will eternally torture people.
KJV a.k.a. AV is O.K. Just be sure to rely on the margin where in the text it might say "everlasting" in the margin it will have "age."
The horror of the KJV is it is the source which put a lot of people in the funny farm and worse all because the KJV mistranslated aion and aionios thus giving people the false impression that God will eternally torture people.
There is plenty of mistranslations in all versions. We have the tools to bring out the true meaning of the Word in Lexicons and Concordances, combined with the Holy Spirit, if so need be fit, and because they are there, every Christian should have one.
About aion, isn't that another thread?
I see your name is Eusebius, how do you feel about Eusebius' staement about the New Heavens and Earth already fulfilled?
You can start another thread so we don't hijack this one...just curious.
KJV a.k.a. AV is O.K. Just be sure to rely on the margin where in the text it might say "everlasting" in the margin it will have "age."
The horror of the KJV is it is the source which put a lot of people in the funny farm and worse all because the KJV mistranslated aion and aionios thus giving people the false impression that God will eternally torture people.
I use biblos.com which has all the translations parallel or you can use the reference section to see what other verses have the same or a similar meaning. It's good for other languages too. In fact, nearly everything you could want to study with is right on one site. Of course I also use other sources for easy copy/paste. But if I want to see what the verse looks like in every version I can do that too.
There is plenty of mistranslations in all versions. We have the tools to bring out the true meaning of the Word in Lexicons and Concordances, combined with the Holy Spirit, if so need be fit, and because they are there, every Christian should have one.
About aion, isn't that another thread?
I see your name is Eusebius, how do you feel about Eusebius' staement about the New Heavens and Earth already fulfilled?
You can start another thread so we don't hijack this one...just curious.
Aion is in another thread but just wanted to point out that the KJV's rendering of it and many other words is appalling.
It is impossible for the New Heavens and New Earth to have already been fulfilled. Christ has return and personally set up His 1000 year kingdom on this earth 1000 prior to the New Heavens and New Earth.
Thanks for the link! I had never heard of that one. I saved it and will use it next time I want to look something up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
