One thing I've always wondered was why many churches still insist on the old KJV. With words like thou, doest e.t.c that are no longer in use in todays English language, one would wonder why they stick to a version of English that is more difficult to understand.

Is it that versions in modern and simple to understand English do not appear as 'weighty' and 'spiritual'?


The main guiding principle behind different translations boils down to better understanding and accurrate translation from manuscripts. Why do we insist on a version of English that is largely outdated and difficult to understand?

So, since 2005 that Nairalanders asked this, no acceptable response has come out?

The reason why churches insist on kJV is bc they know that many people going into the business of translation do not care about the message. So they jump into doing without being led. They translate their imagination into the word.

Also you have to understands that modern humans are very much confused, to they change the meaning of words to suit their own ideas so their works cannot be trusted.

KJV had many parts where the context of the message is different from what’s obtainable in other religions.

jedisco:
■One thing I've always wondered was why many churches still insist on the old KJV. With words like thou, doest e.t.c that are no longer in use in todays English language, one would wonder why they stick to a version of English that is more difficult to understand. Is it that versions in modern and simple to understand English do not appear as 'weighty' and 'spiritual'?

■ The main guiding principle behind different translations boils down to better understanding and accurrate translation from manuscripts. Why do we insist on a version of English that is largely outdated and difficult to understand?

1. The simple answer is there con/scam works best when they use a version of the bible that there gullible followers can't comprehend even though they pretend to.

2. Most of their members aka Churchians do not understand this and so they gullibly believe lies fed them of one translation being more spiritually acceptable than the rest when the book is nothing but paper and glue.

Here's a truth about King James most folks don't know. Before he commissioned the translation of the Bible, he wrote the book Demonologie for his thesis work.

Techobeys:
The reason why churches insist on kJV is bc they know that many people going into the business of translation do not care about the message. So they jump into doing without being led. They translate their imagination into the word.

Also you have to understands that modern humans are very much confused, to they change the meaning of words to suit their own ideas so their works cannot be trusted.

KJV had many parts where the context of the message is different from what’s obtainable in other religions.

It's not about using multiple translations.
There's new KJV which has been around for decades. Uses thesame theme as the old version but in modern English.

English is not the first language for many Nigerians. How much more sticking to an archaic version we barely understand. Things like doest, sayest, thou e.t.c.

Kobojunkie:
1. The simple answer is there con/scam works best when they use a version of the bible that there gullible followers can't comprehend even though they pretend to.

2. Most of their members aka Churchians do not understand this and so they gullibly believe lies fed them of one translation being more spiritually acceptable than the rest when the book is nothing but paper and glue.

Here's a truth about King James most folks don't know. Before he commissioned the translation of the Bible, he wrote the book Demonologie for his thesis work.

Hmmm... not always about scams. Many are fervent believers.

I believe folks just like the way words like thou, sayest e.t.c sound. To them, its more spiritual

Going on,

The reason the bible was translated to other language including English was to aid understanding among locals at the time. It used to be a whole church would have one bible in front and the priest would read and interpret to the locals during the service. Hence understanding was poor as most followed what was told them.


The efforts at translation was strongly resisted by church leaders at the time who believed some languages were 'holy' and it was heresy to translate the bible into other common language like English. Many Christians lost this life in the effort to translate.

jedisco:
Hmmm... not always about scams. Many are fervent believers.
I believe folks just like the way words like thou, sayest e.t.c sound. To them, its more spiritual

Fervent believers of what? That which they comprehend or that which they are fed from the mouths of their pastors and mogs regarding that which is written? What does it mean to say a thing is "spiritual"?

How many of those "fervent believers" would pick up a play by Shakespeare today to read?

jedisco:


It's not about using multiple translations.
There's new KJV which has been around for decades. Uses thesame theme as the old version but in modern English.

English is not the first language for many Nigerians. How much more sticking to an archaic version we barely understand. Things like doest, sayest, thou e.t.c.

The old KJV and NKJV differ on certain things. It’s centuries afterwards and motive might have changed. The NKJV tends to follow popular opinions on certain issues bc people tend to make personal inferences when translating.

Also, the old KJV is easy to read if a person has been impacted by the spirit of knowledge. It’s not the book itself that gives understanding but the spirit that lives within that gives understanding of the book.

There are many people who have come to understanding of grammar structure and better comprehension by reading the old KJV, you can’t get such experience with newer translations. In fact, anyone who truly understands English language is going to look at certain bible translations and laugh at the lack of understanding of English language of the translators.

Techobeys:


The old KJV and NKJV differ on certain things. It’s centuries afterwards and motive might have changed. The NKJV tends to follow popular opinions on certain issues bc people tend to make personal inferences when translating.

Also, the old KJV is easy to read if a person has been impacted by the spirit of knowledge. It’s not the book itself that gives understanding but the spirit that lives within that gives understanding of the book.

There are many people who have come to understanding of grammar structure and better comprehension by reading the old KJV, you can’t get such experience with newer translations. In fact, anyone who truly understands English language is going to look at certain bible translations and laugh at the lack of understanding of English language of the translators.

We spiritualise basic things. We struggle with todays English talk more of an archaic version used centuries ago. Perhaps, the bible should have never been translated from the Hebrew, Greek and latin texts into other languages.

Regarding grammar structure, can you share examples of where the KJV has a better structure than the NKJV?

Kobojunkie:
Fervent believers of what? That which they comprehend or that which they are fed from the mouths of their pastors and mogs regarding that which is written? What does it mean to say a thing is "spiritual"?

How many of those "fervent believers" would pick up a play by Shakespeare today to read?

You made certain points but the majority truly believe but for many reasons just stick to the KJV though some phrases there are difficult.

jedisco:
You made certain points but the majority truly believe but for many reasons just stick to the KJV though some phrases there are difficult.

Truly believe what exactly?

To have Jesus Christ, you require understanding of His Truth -- of your own. Now, if your understanding comes from that fed you by others, it won't work. And if you are unable to comprehend what is written in the KJV translatiok which you cling to, what understanding can you truly claim to possess?

Kobojunkie:
Truly believe what exactly?

To have Jesus Christ, you require understanding of His Truth -- of your own. Now, if your understanding comes from that fed you by others, it won't work. And if you are unable to comprehend what is written in the KJV translatiok which you cling to, what understanding can you truly claim to possess?

Yes it it good to have gain understanding by ones study. Much of that could also be by being taught. Or are those in whom the bible has not been translated to their mother tongue or language they easily understand set aside from being saved?

Christianity is not as complex as we make it. Of note is that there's general understanding of the KJV, I'm more about what folks can better grasp and relate to. Improvements here.

jedisco:
■Yes it it good to have gain understanding by ones study. Much of that could also be by being taught. Or are those in whom the bible has not been translated to their mother tongue or language they easily understand set aside from being saved?
■Christianity is not as complex as we make it. Of note is that there's general understanding of the KJV, I'm more about what folks can better grasp and relate to. Improvements here.

1. Try to make certain you comprehend what Jesus Christ in fact taught His followers to do aside from that which people do.

A. Jesus Christ said the following to His followers, those who believe in Him.

10 The followers came to Jesus and asked, “Why do you use these stories to teach the people?”
11 Jesus answered, “Only you can know the secret truths about God’s kingdom. Those other people cannot know these secret truths.
12 The people who have some understanding will be given more. And they will have even more than they need. But those who do not have much understanding will lose even the little understanding that they have.
13 This is why I use these stories to teach the people: They see, but they don’t really see. They hear, but they don’t really hear or understand. - Matthew 13 vs 10 - 13

B. He made it clear to them that the way to gain more understanding is through the application of the understanding they currently have of His teachings and commandments.

21 Then Jesus said to them, “You don’t take a lamp and hide it under a bowl or a bed, do you? Of course not. You put it on a lampstand. 22 Everything that is hidden will be made clear. Every secret thing will be made known.
23 You people who hear me, listen!
24 Think carefully about what you are hearing. God will know how much to give you by how much you understand now. But he will give you more than you deserve.
25 The people who have some understanding will receive more. But those who do not have much will lose even the small amount they have.” - Mark 4 vs 21 - 25

C. Pay particular attention to the fact that Jesus Christ never once said one first needs to be taught any of this in order to be granted this understanding of the Kingdom of God.

16 “No one lights a lamp and then covers it with a bowl or hides it under a bed. Instead, they put the lamp on a lampstand so that the people who come in will have enough light to see.
17 Everything that is hidden will become clear. Every secret thing will be made known, and everyone will see it.
18 So think carefully about what you are hearing. The people who have some understanding will receive more. But those who do not have understanding will lose even what they think they have.” - Luke 8 vs 16 - 18

We live today in a world where language is no longer considered a major barrier for the majority. So we are not here discussing the minority at all. Instead, we are on the topic of people using the KJV translation of the Bible — you created this topic yourself — which is translated into a version of the English language as it existed over 400 years ago.

2. How close to the Truth of God is that general understanding which you claim people have of what is written in the KJV version?

3. A good example of the misconceptions is the verse from Romans which you attached to your response. The general understanding of that verse is a lie, where the truth — the intended message of the writer — can only be found by examining the verse within its original context.

jedisco:
One thing I've always wondered was why many churches still insist on the old KJV. With words like thou, doest e.t.c that are no longer in use in todays English language, one would wonder why they stick to a version of English that is more difficult to understand.

Is it that versions in modern and simple to understand English do not appear as 'weighty' and 'spiritual'?


The main guiding principle behind different translations boils down to better understanding and accurrate translation from manuscripts. Why do we insist on a version of English that is largely outdated and difficult to understand?

Because it still remains the most accurate/detailed of the English versions. That's the simple and short answer.
Words like doest, thou are not a challenge for a student of the Word, which all believers are. Like reading Shakespeare and other great works in literature, they don't complain about it but appreciate and even revere it.

jedisco:


We spiritualise basic things. We struggle with todays English talk more of an archaic version used centuries ago. Perhaps, the bible should have never been translated from the Hebrew, Greek and latin texts into other languages.

Regarding grammar structure, can you share examples of where the KJV has a better structure than the NKJV?

I don’t think the highlighted part was necessary for this conversation. But it was good that the bible was translated because this makes the message reach a lot more people.

Like I said about grammar laws and sentence structure, it’s not for everyone. If a person understands grammar and reads both translations, they’ll see certain difference between a person who doesn’t understand grammar will assume they’re saying the same things.

I don’t think I can bring out examples rightaway, maybe when I study and remember something I’ll bring some.

jedisco:
One thing I've always wondered was why many churches still insist on the old KJV. With words like thou, doest e.t.c that are no longer in use in todays English language, one would wonder why they stick to a version of English that is more difficult to understand.

Is it that versions in modern and simple to understand English do not appear as 'weighty' and 'spiritual'?


The main guiding principle behind different translations boils down to better understanding and accurrate translation from manuscripts. Why do we insist on a version of English that is largely outdated and difficult to understand?

Truth is always old and in the past hence the Bible said "Show us the Ancient Paths and lead us along eternal Highways"! Tom iglis song . Jeremiah 6:16

The Truth is always in the Past!

jedisco:


You made certain points but the majority truly believe but for many reasons just stick to the KJV though some phrases there are difficult.

Now you understand what it means "it is the glowry of God to hide a matter".

If any truly wants Truth, then they ought to pay the price of seeking it out.

The kingdom of God is for the will full and diligent and not an all comers affair.

Thus, only the earnest and the serious will embark on the Way The Lord hath laid before men. All unserious people shall be cut off.

Image123:


Because it still remains the most accurate/detailed of the English versions. That's the simple and short answer.
Words like doest, thou are not a challenge for a student of the Word, which all believers are. Like reading Shakespeare and other great works in literature, they don't complain about it but appreciate and even revere it.

The primary function of Language is to communicate.
The KJV has had a number of revisions before the NKJV arrived. The KJV popular in Nigeria is the one that was used when there was a local revival and far from the 'original'

I have been opportuned to read earlier KJVs and can assure you most of what is written there is hardly understandable

jedisco:


The primary function of Language is to communicate.
The KJV has had a number of revisions before the NKJV arrived. The KJV popular in Nigeria is the one that was used when there was a local revival and far from the 'original'

I have been opportuned to read earlier KJVs and can assure you most of what is written there is hardly understandable

Again, i never said anything is wrong with other versions or with revisions. Even Jesus Christ quoted from revised versions. What i said is  it still remains the most accurate/detailed of the English versions. If you don't understand it, use another version no fight.

Dtruthspeaker:


Now you understand what it means "it is the glowry of God to hide a matter".

If any truly wants Truth, then they ought to pay the price of seeking it out.

The kingdom of God is for the will full and diligent and not an all comers affair.

Thus, only the earnest and the serious will embark on the Way The Lord hath laid before men. All unserious people shall be cut off.

Interesting... I wonder if this same notion was put forward to prevent the translation of the bible into English in the first place. Many of the earlier translators were seen as heretics and killed...

Talking about hiding things, should the bible even have Hausa, Igbo or other indigenous translations? It's truth should also be hidden from more folks

jedisco:


Interesting... I wonder if this same notion was put forward to prevent the translation of the bible into English in the first place. Many of the earlier translators were seen as heretics and killed...

IThey were not killed for translating to English but for letting The Truth come out!

The worst thing you can do to evil people is to reveal the Truth! They will always kill to hide the Truth!

But God is The Ruler and Truth will always come out.


Émile Zola — 'If you shut up truth and bury it under the ground, it will but grow, "

Techobeys:


I don’t think the highlighted part was necessary for this conversation. But it was good that the bible was translated because this makes the message reach a lot more people.

Like I said about grammar laws and sentence structure, it’s not for everyone. If a person understands grammar and reads both translations, they’ll see certain difference between a person who doesn’t understand grammar will assume they’re saying the same things.

I don’t think I can bring out examples rightaway, maybe when I study and remember something I’ll bring some.

Culture is dynamic and language being a fundamental part changes with time. Most English speakers today would not understand it's earlierst forms. Many of the English words today were also borrowed from earlier languages.

One can only argue the 'correctness' of a language structure based on it's contemporaries within a given time and what's widely acceptable.

It would be good to share examples of how the version of the English language spoken in 1100 has better grammar and sentence structure than that spoken in 1600 and that of 2000

Dtruthspeaker:


IThey were not killed for translating to English but for letting The Truth come out!

The worst thing you can do to evil people is to reveal the Truth! They will always kill to hide the Truth!

But God is The Ruler and Truth will always come out.


Émile Zola — 'If you shut up truth and bury it under the ground, it will but grow, "

You're saying thesame thing.
Nothing brings out the truth of Gods word better than getting the bible in people's language- one they truly understand.

jedisco:


You're saying thesame thing.
Nothing brings out the truth of Gods word better than getting the bible in people's language- one they truly understand.

Ok