People don't understand KJV. they say OLD English is confusing.................?
400159
I don't think you're going to hell because you can't read the KJV of the bible.  There are so many versions out there...who can say which is really 'right'?  I think it's all a matter of finding your own path to spirituality.  Tomayto...tomahto.\n\nI do think it's sad how many people can't appreciate older versions of the English language...when I hear good actors perform Shakespeare or I read a classic novel like Wuthering Heights, I realize how LAZY and TRITE modern English is.
136189
The Old Testament for-warns us of up coming events and how it all came to be. Its like going to the end of the story and reading the last page...we need the old with the new to better understand and to encourage our faith.
902978
i think u need to open the bible and read it , u are taking things way out of context. maybe read something before u start asking these questions that even if we gave u the answer u still won't understand. im not going to try to explain the whole bible to u, u can't just take 1 verse and go from there about what its talking about
714723
I can attest that the KJV does mistranslate a lot of words. My trusty NIV holds up pretty well, I think I've only found two slight errors, but the KJV is definitely shaky at best. And no, the "thee" and "thou" parts of the KJV are not problematic, that is simply the language of the day and it doesn't matter if you translate, "thou art happy" or "you are happy", its the same thing. I love Greek.
556763
its the english language. they try to make it as complicated as possible, so just get used to it.
462593
I don't think that people understand his message and they take it way out of proportion. I saw a show on TV that says everything in the bible isn't true because back then no one could read or write anyways. Personally, I don't believe in the whole crock of it.
338774
Because they think it's God Sent, it has hundreds of errors, and it was not the first Bible printed in English, it just happen to have King James backing.  It's long, feel like I just wrote a novel\n.\nPeople in the English-speaking world use and accept the King James or Authorized Version than any other single Bible translation. In fact, so highly esteemed is this translation that many persons venerate it as the only true Bible. This raises some questions.\n\nDo these countless persons who use the King James Version know why, despite objections from churchmen, modern translations keep rolling off the presses? Do they know why the King James Version itself was once opposed by the people? Do they know why, despite vigorous protest and opposition, the King James Version entered into the very blood and marrow of English thought and speech? Do they know what illuminating document is probably missing from their own copies? In short, do they really know the King James Version?\n\nThe purpose of Bible translation, then, is to take these thoughts of God, originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, and put them into the common languages of today. Bible translation makes God’s Book a living Book. So true Christians read the Bible, not to be entertained by clever turns of expression, unusual words, excellency of style, striking rhetorical devices or felicities of rhythm, but to learn the will of God. It was for this reason that the King James Version came into existence. That was in 1611.\nFrom almost every quarter the King James Bible met opposition. Criticism was often severe. Broughton, a Hebrew scholar of the day, wrote to King James that he “should rather be torn asunder by wild horses than allow such a version to be imposed on the church.”\n\nThe translators, not unaware that people preferred to keep what had grown familiar, knew that their work had unleashed a storm. They tried to calm the people down. They wrote a “Preface of the Translators” to explain why the King James Version was made. This preface is called by the Encyclopedia Americana “a most illuminating preface describing the aims of the translators which unhappily is omitted from the usual printings of the Bible.” Thus most Authorized Versions today, though they contain a lengthy dedication to King James, omit the preface. Its presence would clear up many misunderstandings about the purpose of the revision. The reader would learn that strong opposition was expected.\n\nThe reader would learn that the King James Version was a revision of earlier works made with a modest hope of improvement and no thought of finality, In time the clamor died down, and the King James Version prevailed over the Geneva Bible. For more than two and a half centuries no other so-called authorized translation of the Bible into English was made. Little wonder that many people began to feel that the King James Bible was the only true Bible. Like many people who once objected to any change in the Geneva Bible, many persons today object to any change in the King James Bible. They oppose modern translations perhaps as vigorously as the King James Version itself was once opposed.\n\nKing James Bible has already been changed; today no one reads the King James Version in its original form. Explaining why this is so the book The Bible in Its Ancient and English Versions says: “Almost every edition, from the very beginning, introduced corrections and unauthorized changes and additions, often adding new errors in the process. The edition of 1613 shows over three hundred differences from 1611. . . . It was in the eighteenth century, however, that the main changes were made. . . . The marginal references were checked and verified, over 30,000 new marginal references were added, the chapter summaries and running headnotes were thoroughly revised, the punctuation was altered and made uniform in accordance with modern practice, textual errors were removed, the use of capitals wa
47687
First you have to look at the age of the book.  The bible is cut into 2 general parts.  The new testament is from about 0ish AD  The old testament claims to go to the beginning of time.  \n\nNow, let's revisit the "Phone game" from kindergarten.  Before they had paper and pen, stories were told from generation to generation.  Now let’s say there are 4-6 generations per century.  So the “phone game” is passed from person to person many times per century.  Hmmm, having been in kindergarten, I seem to remember that each retelling seemed to change fact into fiction.  Since the Old testament dates before written techniques, we can surmise that it is folklore and not fiction.  Now the new testament is a different story.  Here we know that monk’s mostly did the copying of the bible.  However we also know that kings enforced changes to suit the times. So if it is socially acceptable to change the text, who is to say that what you read is even remotely true.\n\nNow let’s add in the ambiguity of language.  The last time you read a Shakespearean play, did you take it verbatim word for word?  The bible also uses such vague diction.  Taken literally would be insane.  The moral basis of the text is good, but little fact can be derived from the text. \n\nNow for my personal opinion.  You can trust it to teach a general set of good morals to live by.  Aside from that, it is a good story.
419936
actually even the king james version is currupte (nice try trying to help) the only way you'll get the full effect is reading the hebrew text. the message bible is nice but its more of a study guide to the bible then a translation
1086541
Hello hippoterry2005.. :)\n\nThey won't differ..\n\nFor there are some, that attend our Church that read the KJV..and some that read the NIV..we do not believe any different.. :)\n\nIn Jesus Most Precious Name..\nWith Love..In Christ..
494392
What are you saying? That we shouldn't read the Bible because we don't speak Hebrew?\nThere are basically two different kind of translations. There are the literal translations which aim to translate the original text word for word and then there are paraphrases or so called "dynamically equivalent translations", which aim at reproducing the meanings, the original readers would have understood.\nSo not all English translations are inaccurate. In the King James Version, although a literal translation, there were some mistakes, such as the one you mention. These have been corrected in the New King James version. \nIn the NKJ it reads "murder", not "kill".
761890
I use KJV translated in the 1500's. Its the most accurate version to this day. you can find different translate dates at the link below.
690958
the NIV was translated by many (including a homosexual woman) who chose to leave out things that would be offensive to their causes.  That's why many of us stick with the KJV, as it has been tried and true for centuries.
716196
The content of the Bible has remained constant for many centuries.  It has been translated many times, into different languages.  It has also been "revised" to make the language more accessible to the masses.  For example, the King James Version (my personal favorite) is written in Shakespeare-like language.  The Revised Standard and the New Revised Standard update the language so people can understand it, but when you line up the 3 Bibles and read all 3 versions, the meaning is the same.  It is like reading "Taming of the Shrew" by Shakespeare, and then reading a modern version of the story written by the New York Daily News.  Same story, different words.
180362
This is a logical fallacy, appeal to novelty, that states that because something is newer it is better.  There is nothing, per se, wrong with following customs that are centuries old just because they are old.  It's just as wrong as the "Give me that old time religion" argument, which states that because it was good enough for Paul and Silas, it's good enough for "me".  That's an appeal to tradition.  People should follow what actually works, regardless of when it was developed.  I guess this isn't really an answer to the question, though.
795311
And not at all in the Hebrew Bible.\n\nHowever, the KJV (A.V.) almost always used the "LORD" [usually that is a large capital "L" and small capitals "ORD" to indicate it is God's name, the "I AM", the tetragrammaton, which others mis-translate as "Jehovah".
397073
Get yourself a Bible that is easy for you to read. You will stall out with the old English of the King James Bible. Just read as much as you want every day. If you only have time to read one verse, then so be it.  Just do it every day. Start at the beginning and put a book mark in after each reading. Don't worry how long it will take. Just enjoy it.