Another reason to avoid the KJV

[strefanash]

I was being whimsical, Im afraid. A facetious sense of humour in this instance.


But why complicate comprehension of a text by presenting it with archaic english usages. I have posted on this before,
"the same they case in his teeth" - teeth is not any where in the Greek, but it was the thieves railing at christ as he hung on the cross before one changed his mind and repented


"the goodman of the house" no meaning "good" appears in the Greek.

I used to say that if you can sit through a Shakespeare (died 1616 cf KJV 1611) and perfectly understand it, then, by all means use the KJV.

That can in part be answered by appeal to the fact that teh Bible has a much smaller vocab than any Shakespeare, but even so, why confuse those who are not scholars of old fashioned language?

Then there is the "did you receive the spirit since you believed" appearing in acts somewhere. The greek was "And believing, did you receive" the whole sense of "since" as in a time after you believed, is a mistranslation, did you receive WHEN you believed" is correct, and pentecostals make heresy on the KJV reading.

I have also noticed readings were KJV uses NOT but other versions do not. I have also notivced that different versions of the KJV differ on this. The meaning is changed diametrically, of course.

I flatly deny that the KJV is inerrant and I regard KJV only-ism as pure idolatry

As for which version i use, I have a KJV because an old lady friend gave it to me years ago, and I have a NIV. For various reasons, to do with connotations associations and despair, i got rid of my NASB.

But I did say on another thread that I dont read the Bible at all, as I still really cant bear to. I only use it as a brief reference from time to time