I ran this one on March 31, 2014 and to date it has 145 “likes”, 178 comments, and 14 emails telling me I’m going to hell… (no joke)
Long ago I grew accustomed to receiving “hate” emails from KJV fans. I should have kept them, because I’m sure you would be greatly amused if I posted a list of the names I’ve been called because I use the NIV in this blog most of the time. The first few times I received these emails, I thought that maybe I should reconsider, then I began to find them amusing and even hilarious, but now I’m just bored!
Dear reader, I do not use the KJV because it is written in a language that nobody speaks; it’s just that simple. In that sense, it has much in common with things that are written in Latin, it’s a dead language that isn’t spoken anywhere, with the possible exception of Ivory Tower professors somewhere.
With that out of the way, I will agree with those who would say that the King James English is beautiful and poetic. Why should that surprise anyone? After all, it is the language of Shakespeare! Yet ask any freshman student about studying Shakespeare: they have to translate it into modern English before they can follow it! Many of my detractors claim that the KJV is the only accurate translation of the Bible. While it is my view that the KJV is a fine translation, it is very far from perfect! The other day, I saw a post that consisted of a list of words and the number of times they were used in the KJV and the NIV. They were words like “hell” “damnation” and so on, all dealing with judgment and punishment. The KJV had these word more than the NIV, and judging from the fact that the same blog had another post attacking the NIV for being “politically correct” I’m going to assume that the blogger was trying to show that the NIV is soft of judgment and condemnation. (I apologize for not having the links here for you to verify this, but this morning I couldn’t find the post again…)
To be honest and fair, however, the KJV would have the word “hell” more often than the NIV because the KJV renders five different words “hell” even though the five different words mean five different things. This is an example of a KJV weakness, not a KJV strength! Of course the NIV doesn’t have the word “damnation” a single time, it is a word that is no longer in use in the English language, but it means “condemnation, judgment, punishment” and those are the words the NIV uses, depending on context. Here’s a KJV weakness that you might not even want to know about: The Greek word baptiso is a verb which means “to immerse.” King James was translated in a rough time in history, during the time of the English Reformation. Those poor translators couldn’t be sure who was going to win out, and the way they handled this word could spell either life or death, so they transliterated it rather than translating it, thus creating a new English word: Baptize. Now you figure out what it means! Can you translate “immerse” into “sprinkle”? We still can’t all agree on that question, can we?
The KJV has its problems, the NIV has its problems; they all have their problems! That’s why many of us study in Greek and Hebrew and then look at the English; KJV fans, the original language is the best, not the KJV. Still, I like the KJV, I learned this stuff in KJV, I can even speak King James English, but I don’t teach in it because few can fully understand it today.
Over 20 years ago, I was teaching in a church where several of the older members complained about the NIV, saying that they prefer the KJV. “If it isn’t King James, it isn’t the Bible” was the rallying cry. So being young and eager to please, I announced one Sunday in church that I would be starting a new class that would be all King James. We would use the KJV exclusively, all teaching would be in King James English, and all questions and comments by participants would be in King James English. ” There is a sign up sheet on the table outside, so be sure and sign up so I will know how many class handouts we will need; and they too will be written in King James English!”
Well of course nobody signed up! They wanted to hear King James, but they wanted it explained in language they would understand…
In conclusion, if you prefer the King James, by all means use it. As I have said, it is a fine translation. But if another person uses a different translation, it really isn’t your place to order them to switch! It really doesn’t mean they are the “devil’s blogger”!
Yes, that is by far the most hilarious thing I’ve been called for using NIV! 🙂
Tomorrow is the most viewed post in the history of this blog: you won’t believe what it is!!
Life Project Blog 
Apparently we see eye to eye on this. Sometimes I wish I could put things into words the way some of the people I read can. Great article. I do love the KJV words. My Mother in Law, bless her, is a KJV only person, as are 99.999% of my friends. I love to mess with her when she gets on a roll about it being best…I just say..um, “why.” It makes her nuts LOL.
On the other hand, my stepson was also raised that way. He was called to preach and is at Seminary now. He wasn’t there for two weeks before he learned the value of other translations. On his first trip home, he almost begged me to let him take my nice NIV, KJV, NLT, NASB parallel translation back with him. He simply had a hard time doing all of the studying he had to do with the KJV,
Folks really should just relax some about the whole issue.
And yep, that whole baptiso thing is a problem. Which really tickles me sometimes. You of course know, that I would say immersion is the only way, and so would every person I know basically. Now, these are the same people who are KJV hardcases too. We have some fun there at church. And it is fun, actually. They just look at me like I’m crazy and pat me on the head.
Thanks for another great post, I just really enjoy that you are so reasonable. We need much more reasonableness.
We just need to remember that 1611 English was what everyone spoke in the Roman Empire of the first century! 🙂
If you were told that, Don, those people wouldn’t like Tim Conway, as he’s been heard to say something in that version was mis-translated! Oof, aye!
I do have a copy, but when I see it used on WP, I start thinking: ‘I wish, I wish, I wish (blogger) would use something I can read…Almost everyone puts up the KJV. I do like the NKJV 🙂
🙂
I found it easier to memorize scripture in KJV because it’s like poetry. But for study I use a number of translations, as well as study as best I can in original languages. David prevented the dawn, did you know that? (Ps. 119:147) Thanks for another good article, Don!
indeed! Thank you Bette!
This is good. I grew up on NIV and KJV. But is I got older I shifted to NLT. Everyone understands differently. My dad uses KJV as his main bible but he uses other versions too. God wants us to understand His Word. So that’s why it’s translated into a language we can understand. We would really be stuck if all Bibles were written in Greek and Aramaic
We certainly would be!
Great points. I’ve had the same NIV-hate emails and talks with people myself. Usually from people who’ve been scared into believing these things. But, sadly, they are unaware of the problems with all translations, as you have pointed out.
I’m currently discipling a group of young men who are very relieved that they can read the Bible in their language (NLT, in this case). I also had them put the YouVersion app on their phones so they can check out several translations to get the essence of what was said in the original language.
Blessings brother. Thanks for re-posting these for us newcomers. 🙂
Thank you, great comments!
Its really sad that so many still take such a hard stand for the KJV. Ive had followers to leave me that were very faithful commenters and readers until they found out that I use different versions.
I lost a bunch when I posted this 🙂
Thats sad, Don. Hope youre doing well.
I don’t get caught up in that purist mentality. Using multiple translations of the same verse can even deepen the understanding, so really it helps to use other translations more than it hurts.
One thing that I’ve noticed is that many Christians aren’t content unless they have something to argue about. It’s senseless. God’s heart isn’t for us to sit around behind a computer screen and argue about His word, causing division and dissension (which are sins by the way).
I use NIV 95% of the time, and I am a Spirit-filled believer who loves Jesus more than being right and arguing.
Amen!!
I’m not sure if it is a comment in the original post, but, I have heard people say that the KJV is the only inspired translation, and therefore, the only accurate one. I, personally, don’t know how that is possible since there have been discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls that have helped to clarify translations and even improve (again in my understanding) word usage in the translations.
What about those people who speak German? Chinese? Japanese? Swedish? Are their translations less inspired because it isn’t KJV? I have a hard time thinking that English is the only inspired language out there.
Great post and thanks for the reminder that all translations have their issues.
Great comment, thank you!
While I don’t use the KJV myself (I read the Greek text from which the KJV was translated), I have serious reservations about the NIV. In too many places it doesn’t translate the Greek, but rather by a loose paraphrasing it imposes an ‘interpretation’ upon the Greek which is questionable. The NIV often takes the English reader away from what the Greek is actually saying. I believe the term for this is ‘dynamic equivalence’. I think ‘formal’ equivalence is a better way to go in translating. For example, in the gospels, when Jesus’ death is referred to, the Greek often says that Jesus “expired” which means he died. In the NIV (and in too many other modern versions), we read in the Jesus ‘breathed his last’, which is not only not what the Greek word means, but is also completely incorrect historically. Jesus rose from the dead three days later and breathed again.
You are right in that it gets a little dicey translating into an idiom, even though the idiom is a common usage equivalent, it is still inexact. Great points!
Reblogged this on Meredith's Musings and commented:
One of my favorite thinkers, bloggers and Bible teachers, Don expresses a clear viewpoint on translations. I agree with him it’s important to understand what you are reading.
Don, I agree with you.
Thank you Meredith!
I cannot help myself, I need to say (write) thank you! I am myself no native English speaker, and had my struggles with decipher KJV when I first started to read my Bible in English. We have our own problems with the traditional translation in my country language – that is Romanian – and I am well aware of some discussions surrounding the traditional translations in German (which is, by the way, my mother-tongue). I absolutely agree with you on this – I needed to study (and I am still studying!) Greek and Hebrew to have it right. And yes, I am a NIV fan myself. It’s less a barrier for comprehending God’s word as it is – since I didn’t grow up in church. Blessings to you!
Great comment; thank you for sharing it!
I used to work in a Christian Bookstore and have heard the same complaints because we carried so many different translations. Whenever someone would tell us that the KJV is the original bible we would politely correct them and show them the bible in Hebrew and Greek. Needless to say they did not buy the KJV or probably never returned to the store! 😉 I was also amazed at how many people said the Hebrew bible was not the bible but the Jewish text not to be confused with our bible. Why do so many people forget Jesus was Jewish?
Wow, now that is something sad!
Truly!
The KJV seemed easier to memorize because the verses were all numbered at the left side (and yes I know sometimes a sentence is broken up). For me – and I’m past 65 – the paragraph style is harder to memorize from (or maybe it’s my tired brain! Haha). Hubby uses the NASV, and I read from the ESV (both are used in our church, depending who preaches). It’s a little disconcerting when I can quote a verse, but it isn’t quite the same when I look it up. Also, the key words in the verses I’ve memorized aren’t in the NASV or ESV concordances. Sigh.
Well at least I’m not the only one with that problem! When I teach, I always read the text, because when i quote it, i start out in NIV and invariably end in KJV just because that’s how I learned it way back when!
Oh, by the way, Bible Study Fellowship International uses the NIV, so that’s what I read when I go to those classes.
🙂
It is interesting to me that so many believe that the KJV is inspired. I hold to the teachings that I was taught at Pensacola Theological Seminary that the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts are inspired (not the KJV), and that the KJV is the best translation because it is the only translation that uses the “Received Text” as its basis, and not the “Critical Text”. I usually encourage people to get a good dictionary and concordance to help them with their Bible study because their are some good vocabulary words in the KJV (and as you mentioned, some transliterated words). So I encourage people to use the KJV, but I do believe God can work through other translations. My biggest concern is that do we use translations that are translating the “words” of the manuscripts, or the “meaning” of the manuscript which is what Don’ttakeitfromme was referring to. I believe the very words are important.
I agree, the very words are important, thus the original words are vital, and none of those are English words.
A jail chaplain once shared his most hilarious KJV only comment he ever heard.
“I use the KJV because it’s the one the Apostle Paul used!”
LoL
LOL
Well of course it is! If Paul would have just written a “forward” page, he could have avoided the whole controversy! 🙂
I agree with you, for your reasons and for this one, too: as a student of History I know that King James I of England, also King James VI of Scotland, spent the first 6 years of his royal reign standing over the “experts” in Bible at the ecumenical council he formed to interpret the Bible because he had a compulsion to interpret the Bible the way he saw it. That was from 1603-1609.
Remember that in those days the king was God’s representative on Earth, also. He held the scepter of the Lord, so what he said it was, was what it was.
If what you said did not match what he thought, you were dead. Simple.
I have been taught that the KJV is also the first interpretation to use the word Church (please confirm this for me- I can’t find my original justification for this), which is a terrible inaccuracy since the first Believers in the Way were Jews and Gentiles who were being converted to Judaism. After all, that’s all there was then- Jews and Pagans. I believe the most accurate and appropriate word for the early “church” would be Kehillah.
In any event, You rule, Don!!
Interesting points for sure; thank you for sharing them!
As for the first English translation rendered “church,” I would need to check some older translations, and I don’t have any here. As I recall, earlier translators tended more toward “Body” or “Assembly” than “church” but again, i would have to recheck that to be certain. Paul used the word “ekklēsia” which in context could be rendered “Body of Believers” or “Body of Christ”. In fact, I would give “Body of Christ” as the definition of “church.” Unfortunately, some doctrinal traditions use the tern “church” to indicate either an architectural structure and/or a human institution which is clearly not the meaning of “ekklēsia”.
At any rate, thanks for your insight and your kind words!
Wow, I didn’t know that this was such a controversial issue. I love the New King James Version as it retains some of the beauty of the language and it is easier to follow. Perhaps the NIV haters need to read their KJV bibles more! The name-calling doesn’t sound like the right application of Philippians 2:2-5 (KJV): ” Fulfil ye my joy, that ye be likeminded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves. Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others. Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:”
Well said Debbie!
Amen! When I study/write sermons, I like to have a few different translations in on the desk. I actually had a person tell me they wouldn’t come to the Christmas Eve. service unless it was going to be read out of the King James Bible…
I can well imagine! If it was good enough for Charlie Brown to use… 🙂
Personally I do like KJV but that might be because I’m English, a bit of a history buff and an avid Shakespeare fan ha! (The language comes easy) However I have several versions on my laptop and often read different ones both to compare and because you can sometimes get so familiar with a verse you’ve memorized to hear it said another way can rekindle your vision of it. I’m happy that folks read any Bible (though some versions are admittedly better than others). I’ve always been amazed just how far God will go to reach those He loves so I like to put the cookies on the lowest possible shelf – that generally means simple language.
I agree entirely. KJV, Shakespeare… never a problem for me personally. For teaching? Well, I’ll stick with modern English as long as that’s what the students understand.
It’s much more about the manuscripts that certain translations are based on than antiquated ‘Elizabethan’ English. And I think you know this.
For the most part, I’m still a ‘TR’ guy but the more I read about the issues of finding reliable, accurate, and genuine manuscripts that can be shown closer and more faithful to the originals the more I lean away from my king james. Change takes time I guess.
-mike
Very true Nike
I used to think the KJV was confusing. But it’s getting easier to read. There’s documented proof these new age Bibles change doctrine. I won’t hate on anyone who uses such Bibles, that’s not how Christian’s should act. Though I disagree with your use of the NIV, there’s no reason to be hateful with you. 🙂 I had a copy of the NASB and found a quite damning change in one of the scriptures. The differences are quite clear. As far as concordances and lexicons, that, as I recently learned is dangerous ground. We should never let “Man” define the Bible, we should let the KJB define itself. A good dictionary to have is the 1828 Webster Noah dictionary. Yes, it takes longer for me to read the KJB, but that language is the word.
I very much appreciate your having shared your views on this; thank you!
Here’s a great article I found on the subject. http://creationliberty.com/articles/kingjames.php
It shocked me when I read it and then found the discrepancies in my NAS Bible, they all have discrepancies. So I had to and still have to force myself to learn to read it. The 1828 Noah dictionary helps a lot with word definitions. Over time a lot of people, including myself have lost the true definition of words. A good example would be “Muse”, which literally means to think. Now, put an “A” in front of it. “Amuse”, which literally means not to think. Take that and now look at the world. Especially here in the United States, amusement is abound everywhere! From gaming to sports to the very television that sits in people’s living room. Read the article if you can find time, it’s worth it. 🙂
Actually, I am quite familiar with the article; it is a very interesting one, and I use the Webster 1828 edition quite a lot, I have it bookmarked in fact. Yet that is because I read quite a lot of old literature, and I want to be sure that I understand what the authors intended when they wrote their works. Your example of “muse” and “amuse” is an excellent example of how language has changed over the last 2 centuries, but that’s all. Here’s an example: Both you in your comments, and I in my replies, are writing in contemporary 21st century English. Why aren’t we writing in 1828 English, or 1611 English? (They are quite different from each other, by the way) The answer is really quite simple: We don’t speak either of those languages all that well, and we desire to be understood.
At any rate, it is an interesting conversation, and I thank for your contribution; keep on using the KJV which is a perfectly good translation as long as you understand it.