KJV superior to other translations?

[5wide]

I'm intrigued by this discussion that was started and then abandoned in evolution vs creation vs ID catch all thread...particularly this...

 

...I can show where all other Bibles fall short of King James. Missing verses...changed verses....

 

I'd like to hear some specific examples/reasons that the KJV is superior to all other translations. If you don't mind...

[MoreheadEagle]

It's not. That's something that always sets me off. In some languages you can't translate things without losing meaning. English (being the mutt of languages that it is) is very difficult to take things from other languages and translate them well.

 

I always like to ask people if French folks aren't getting the true gospel b/c it's not in 17th century English.

[mr wong]

I have no problem with the bible being translated into every language. But the NIV and other bibles are not translations, they are interpretations. There are many verses in the NIV where things are simply left out. This is not due to a different translation.

 

NIV

Matthew 18:10 “See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven. 12 “What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off?

 

 

KJV Matthew 18:10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. 11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. 12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?

 

The KJV states that the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. The NIV drops this completely. I do not think that you can leave out whole sentences and call it a translation.

 

There are many verses in the NIV where Jesus is taken out of the verse. Other bibles have the same problems. I do not have time right now but if someone really wants to compare a bible to the KJV I will be happy to do that for them.

[hoopboy]

^ If the KJV was good enough for the apostles it's good enough for me.

[Hearsay]

All Bible versions are both translative and interpretive in one respect or another, and the KJV was no exception. Any brief research project on the Internet will detail, for example, that the KJV New Testament was merely translated from a Greek text that had itself been translated in 1568, just 43 years before, and that there were instructions from the king to keep the Episcopal style, etc. etc.

 

I find these debates to be instructive only in the sense that they help teach us about history, but otherwise I think they are dangerously fraught with peril. I read the English Standard Version, I like it, I use it because I can neither read nor speak ancient Masoretic, Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew, and so I am glad to have people who can help me with that, and can at least get it pretty darned close.

[Watusi]

^ If the KJV was good enough for the apostles it's good enough for me.

 

:laugh: Thats pretty funny. You finally made me laugh hoopboy.

[Hearsay]

^ If the KJV was good enough for the apostles it's good enough for me.

 

We need the tongue-in-cheek smiley, do we????

[mr wong]

Here are a few more verses that are left out of the NIV.

 

Matthew 17:21

Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting.

 

Mathew 18:11

For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.

 

 

Matthew 23:14

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater Word Filter ViolationWord Filter ViolationWord Filter ViolationWord Filter Violationation.

 

 

Mark 7:16

If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.

 

 

Mark 9:44

Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

 

 

Mark 9:46

Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

 

 

Mark 11:26

But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.

 

 

Mark 15:28

And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.

 

 

Luke 17:36

Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.

 

 

Luke 23:17

(For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.) .

 

 

John 5:4

For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.

 

 

Acts 8:37

And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

 

 

Acts 15:34

Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still.

 

 

Acts 24:7

But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,

 

 

Acts 28:29

And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.

 

 

Romans 16:24

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen. Comment: The NIV seems to dislike calling Jesus, Lord and Christ. This verse calls Him both.

 

 

I John 5:7

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. Comment: This would be a Denial of the Trinity.

 

Again I am not telling you what Bible to use. I am telling you why I would never use anything but the KJV. I do not want someone to take away or add to Gods Word. There is not anyone other than God that I can give that authority to.

[Watusi]

I have no problem with the bible being translated into every language. But the NIV and other bibles are not translations, they are interpretations. There are many verses in the NIV where things are simply left out. This is not due to a different translation.

 

NIV

Matthew 18:10 “See that you do not look down on one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven. 12 “What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off?

 

 

KJV Matthew 18:10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. 11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. 12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?

 

The KJV states that the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. The NIV drops this completely. I do not think that you can leave out whole sentences and call it a translation.

 

There are many verses in the NIV where Jesus is taken out of the verse. Other bibles have the same problems. I do not have time right now but if someone really wants to compare a bible to the KJV I will be happy to do that for them.

 

 

The early manuscripts available to the transcribers did not include that verse. Several translations leave it out, some put it in brackets.

 

I don't think the NIV translators were trying to hide that verse, they did include it in Luke's Gospel in v 19:10.

[Hatz]

Someone doesn't know much about translating manuscripts into an English Bible.

 

The NIV didn't "choose" to leave out anything. Neither do other translations. The more modern ones "choose" to be accurate with the oldest manuscripts available, many of which were not discovered or utilized by the KJV panel that translated them.

 

For example:

 

In John 14:3 the KJV translated the Greek word monai as "mansions." This is not what the word means. It means "an abode, a place to dwell." The KJV group chose the word as an illustration of the grandest place they thought would convey the message Jesus was imparting.

 

When the RSV translated it "rooms" people were in an uproar. But the actual word monai means that much more than "mansions." In fact to use the term "mansions" does not make grammatical sense. Jesus said: "In my Father's house are many monai."

 

To use the word "mansions" is to say: "In this house are many houses." It doesn't make sense. So RSV translators changed it to "rooms." Same message and closer to the meaning of the Greek.

 

 

The KJV primarily used the works of Tyndale and Wycliffe whose English translating of scripture cost them prison and life. They relied more heavily on translations of translations than they did manuscript research and language studies.

[ladiesbballcoach]

This is one of those threads, that I like to shut up and learn as the rest of you teach me. At least till I have a question.

 

I have always felt it was important to know if the Bible is being translated from the original manuscripts and language on the authenticity of it's translation.

[Hatz]

Here are a few more verses that are left out of the NIV.

 

 

Mark 15:28

And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.

 

 

 

Here is why this verse is ommitted from the NIV.

 

It does not appear in :

 

Sinaticus (4th century), Alexandrinus (5th century), Vaticanus (4th century), Ephraemi Rescriptus (5th century), Bezae Catabrigiensis (5th to 6th century), and several other of the oldest copies of the New Testament.

 

It also does not appear in any of the oldest fragments of Mark.

 

The KJV translators chose to use the copies that included it that were not nearly as old as the ones mentioned above. Most of those listed above are the very oldest whole manuscripts we have an therefore closest to the era of original autographs.

 

So when the NIV or other translation deviates from KJV it is with good reason and mounds of transcript evidence and language study. It is not a whim or a conspiracy. :irked:

[Covercorner]

English has got to be one of the worst languages to translate something into.

 

 

Won't really find this in the Bible translation but anyway: Had a friend riding in the car with me once, and he grew up in France so English was his second language. Imagine the look on his face when I asked him to "crack" the window.

[Hatz]

This is one of those threads, that I like to shut up and learn as the rest of you teach me. At least till I have a question.

 

I have always felt it was important to know if the Bible is being translated from the original manuscripts and language on the authenticity of it's translation.

 

You might read my post that cites some of the most used manuscipts by anyone when it comes to translating. The oldest "fragments" of the NT we have are only from the middle of the 2nd century. The oldest "whole" canon manuscripts date from the 4th century.

 

One thing to remember is that unlike the Mormon belief, Christians have never claimed that scipture "fell out of the sky" and was handed to us at one place and time. It was a process of inspiration, writing, collection and copying over centuries. But make no mistake, those who copied the scriptures (whether the Masorites of the OT or the Monks of the NT) there was great care taken in copying the scripture in front of them.

 

The problem with going from Hebrew or Greek to any other language is the problem with translation in anything. Not every word fits perfectly in another language. So you have search for and build a case as to why you choose this word or that phrase based on what you have as your best evidence from the texts.

 

I think God does a pretty good job of keeping the eternal message the same regardless of the "translation" that is produced.

[Hatz]

English has got to be one of the worst languages to translate something into.

 

 

Won't really find this in the Bible translation but anyway: Had a friend riding in the car with me once, and he grew up in France so English was his second language. Imagine the look on his face when I asked him to "crack" the window.

 

I experienced this on a mission trip in Brazil. I was preaching and my interpreter was having a hard time getting the gist of my sentence. (I even was being careful not to use slang) He looked at me and said, "I'm not listening to you. I'm not listening to you."

 

Afterwards I asked him, "Ishmael, when you said 'I'm not listening to you,' did you mean 'I don't understand you.'?"

 

When he replied yes I told him the other phrase he had used was what my kids say to me when they don't like what I have to say.