Series On What The Bible You Are Reading Part 1- By Craig Wilson

[chikachuks1]

This is my conclusion and Short statement at the end! Last major Bible that is in print !! Although there are many others I have not touched in and will give insight tomorrow, Holy Spirit willing – will do!

New King James Version (1979,1982)

The NKJV translators claim to have “preserved the authority and accuracy” and “improved the purity and beauty” of the original KJV. We disagree that the “purity and beauty” have been improved. Although the NKJV uses the underlying Textus Receptus Greek text, the translators repeatedly use marginal notations to reference the Modem Critical Text upon which all of the modem versions are based. The NKJV advocate opens a door that lends credibility to a perverted underlying text used by all the other versions. Furthermore, changes in the text are made which simply are not warranted. The NKJV primarily uses the 1967/ 1977 Stuttgart edition of Biblia Hebraica and draws from sources which result in a Hebrew text that is different from the Jacob ben Chayyim text underlying the KJV Old Testament. As a result the NKJV preface rightly stated, “significant variations are recorded in footnotes.” We believe the potential for most textual problems and variants between the KJV and NKJV will be found in the Old Testament.

While recognizing the extreme difficulties involved in translations of any kind and especially of a book as important as the Bible, I’m convinced that the King James Bible has been blessed by God for hundreds of years and should be used by believers today. It will be far better for us to expand our vocabulary in order to understand its terminology than to continually rewrite the Bible to suit those who will not be able to understand it anyway apart from the New Birth or to suit those Christians who are too lazy to study. It is true that the meanings of some English words have changed and others are no longer commonly used. Yet such words are comparatively few and can easily be comprehended with the use of a good dictionary; but if the word is missing altogether, what then?

The promotion and use of so many different Bible versions has resulted in great confusion among God’s people. Why don’t more pastors and Christian leaders see this? Congregational reading is becoming virtually impossible. Bible memorization is most difficult. Men and women lose confidence in the validity of God’s Word when some verses are included, some are bracketed, and some are missing completely.

May you always search for Truth! If you have friends in Christ not using the KJV – then show them my series and this should convince any believer on “ What Bible you should be reading”
Thank you so much dear God for allowing me to go on this adventure! May all of you be blessed by a Loving Large and in Charge Savior Jesus Christ!! Shalom.

Source: http://www.christianityupdate.com/blog/series-on-what-the-bible-teaches-part-1-by-craig-wilson/

[GandalfTheWise]

The debate about whether the KJV is the only version that English speaking Christians should use has been going on for some time on this forum.  This article bring nothing new to the issue.  

I'm not sure that referring to Christians who choose to read other English translations as "too lazy to study" (as Craig Wilson in the quoted article says) is appropriate.

Some Christians are convinced that God's true Word was preserved for English speakers via a particular set of Greek and Hebrew manuscripts and the translators of the KJV.  These KJV-only believers (as they are often referred to) seem to believe that it is spiritually unhealthy to read any other English translation or use Greek or Hebrew texts other than the particular ones used to translate the KJV from.  Some of these people are quite zealous in this belief and generate a plethora of "proofs" why they are correct and why other Christians should just throw away all non-KJV Bibles.  Some of them view the use of any version other than the KJV as a satanic plot to destroy the church.  Some go so far as to refer to anything other than the KJV (and its underlying texts) as "perversions".

The bottom line is this.  Those holding to KJV-only views take it as a matter of faith that God preserved His Word only in the KJV.  For them, the case is closed.  It is a matter of faith that the Greek and Hebrew texts underlying the KJV are the correct ones.  It is a matter of faith that the KJV translators made all of the correct translation decisions.   For them, any departure from the exact words of the KJV is a departure from God.  Any discussion of historical manuscripts, translation choices, or anything related to the topic boils down to this: they believe it is a historical fact that God preserved His Word for English speaking people only in the KJV.  God made sure it happened exactly as He wanted it to so any criticism or questioning of the KJV and its underlying texts is basically the same as attacking God.

For them, this is a critical matter of faith that they cannot compromise on and I respect that.  I just mostly ignore this unless they are trying to proselytize people to their view.  I'll also jump in when their heated attacks on manuscript traditions are providing fodder and arguments for unbelievers to use as to why the Bible is unreliable.  I do cringe most times I read vitriolic attacks on various manuscripts and translations because unbelievers are taking those things seriously as to why not to bother to believe the Bible.  Christian apologists already have a hard enough time convincing unbelievers about the historical consistency of scripture across millennia without them hearing KJV-only Christians refer to the earliest available manuscripts as being unreliable and only fit for the garbage can or similar epithets. 

As a practical matter, most Christians I know have a particular version that they prefer for their daily devotional reading and memorization.  Some prefer a more word-for-word translation such as the KJV, NKJV, ESV, or NASV.  Others prefer a more dynamic equivalent translation such as the NIV or TEV.  Also, most Christians I know then use multiple versions for study.

[other one]

I think it wise to familiarize one's self to several....    Also if you can afford it a digital transliteration with both the TR and Nestle/A so you can compare them both with Strong's definitions for each word.

[Jaydog1976]

This debate will never end until we finally come face to face with our Savior. Yowm was correct in saying that older isn't always better or more accurate. I use both the KJV and the NIV and realize that they are translations. Translations tend to use terms and vocabulary that was bias towards those that translated the text. I know that the translators got as close as possible but neither the KJV, NIV or any other translation for that matter is entirely perfect. But I do recognize them as the Word of God and will live my life as best I can according to what God says in the Bible.