Hello, I've been a Christian for a couple years now. I've really struggled with all the different Bible translations and which to use for my primary reading Bible. I know all translations are the word of God and I'm not asking which is more accurate. All have their strengths and weaknesses. I'm considering using the KJV as my primary reading Bible. In light of the wealth of modern translations available is it still recommended for Christians to use the KJV as their main Bible? Will I be doing myself a disservice using the KJV as my main reading bible?
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Is the KJV good?
- Thread starter GraceC
- Start date
handy
Member
Hi, GraceC, Welcome to the forum! 
The KJV is a solid translation. Most people are more put off by the archaic language rather than any serious issues with the translation.
Myself, I prefer the New American Standard bible... it's very similar to the KJV, but addresses, quite fairly, any issues that have come to light via ancient texts and manuscripts. However, if you like the KJV and a vast amount of Christian people have and have done so for centuries, then by all means enjoy! I find the almost lyrical language of the KJV to be very beautiful... my preference for the NASB is due in large part to the fact that it was my first study Bible.
The KJV is a solid translation. Most people are more put off by the archaic language rather than any serious issues with the translation.
Myself, I prefer the New American Standard bible... it's very similar to the KJV, but addresses, quite fairly, any issues that have come to light via ancient texts and manuscripts. However, if you like the KJV and a vast amount of Christian people have and have done so for centuries, then by all means enjoy! I find the almost lyrical language of the KJV to be very beautiful... my preference for the NASB is due in large part to the fact that it was my first study Bible.
farouk
Member
[MENTION=96771]GraceC[/MENTION]: God bless you as you deepen your reading and understanding of God Word, centred as it is on the Person and Work of the Savior!
Re. 'good': this subdivides into the further question: 'good for what sort of reading'?
Some people find a paraphrased or dynamic version of the Bible to be helpful particularly for absorbing narrative passages of the Bible. This may be particularly so for people who did not have a Biblically based background in their youth.
But because the King James is a formal translation, it is more suitable for word studies than a paraphrase, because despite the archaisms, the King James translators, who were heavily influened by Tyndale's version, and its successors, did make a serious attempt to translate words which they recognized as from a Spirit-inspired text.
Blessings.
farouk
Member
[MENTION=4376]handy[/MENTION]: Yes, a solid observation! Blessings.
For my main reading Bible I want a bible I can do general reading, devotional reading, study and take to church. For study I use my main reading bible and use other translations alongside for further in-depth study.
farouk
Member
[MENTION=96771]GraceC[/MENTION]: Yes, certainly the King James is a reliable, well-known and time honored version, that is also the basis for a lot of Bible helps and is what many authors have quoted in classic Christian writings in English. (I use the King James.)
Blessings.
farouk
Member
[MENTION=142]Free[/MENTION]: ESV is fairly formal and has a conservative reputation: it's basically the old RSV with modernized language and some of the liberal bobos fixed.
Blessings.
As in my OP I'm all too familiar with all the modern versions. I've used them all, I just can't settle on any one as my main Bible. Seems I keep going back to the KJV.
farouk
Member
[MENTION=96771]GraceC[/MENTION]: Yes, well in terms of its history and the sheer widespread use that it has commanded over the decades and centuries even, the King James does have a unique place among Bible versions in English. (Up here in Canada, where French is also spoken, it's a bit different, though in Anglophone Canada the King James is certainly well known, too.)
Blessings.
acarrollfan
Member
Hey, I personally like the Good News bible. Maybe it is because, English is not my first language and the good news bible is easier for me to understand. They are meant for kids and I am a full grown adults. However, I am now using NKJV because the church I used to attend uses them.
Obadiah
Member
I've been a Christian for several decades now and still find myself going from Bible to Bible without settling on any one translation. I find it helpful to see how different translators word the same passage and that can add a lot of understanding.
farouk
Member
[MENTION=93344]Obadiah[/MENTION]: Did you see the KJ21? based on the King James, and indeed, claims to be the King James, albeit 'updated' (spelling, vocabulary) rather than 'revised'. I like it; part of the edition lies in the single column spacing and good typeface. Some of the verses are in bold, which is a little intepretive, but it makes for ease of reading.
Blessings.
Obadiah
Member
Nope, haven't seen that one yet. One of the biggest problems with the KJV has always been that it's old english is hard to understand and that has caused a lot of misunderstandings, especially among new Christians or Christians that haven't used it much in the past. Sounds like they've done something to solve that problem. I think that's great.
farouk
Member
[MENTION=93344]Obadiah[/MENTION]:
The KJ21 is basically an even milder revision (and the KJ21 Publishers don't even call it a revision) than the NKJV is.
The publishers are based in Gary, SD.
Blessings.
J
jahjahwarrior
Guest
I grew up going to traditional Baptist churches, so I grew up on the KJV. But I found the old English to be hard to understand. I prefer the New King James because it is the KJV I've become used to, but with modern English to make is easier to read and understand. To me the NKJV is like the bridge between KJV and NIV. Sometimes when studying verses, I like to read the KJV version, then the NIV, then the KJV again, then it makes more sense to me.
What I can't understand are legalists who think that the KJV is the ONLY good bible and all others are "evil" (especially the NIV). Sadly, I've dealt with that a lot in the Baptist churches I've attended growing up (which is one of the reasons why I'm glad my wife and I now attend a non-denominational church). Yes, I agree the KJV is a good translation, but the problem with thinking it's the "only good bible" is that the KJV is NOT the original inspired word of God. It's a TRANSLATION of the original inspired word of God. So obviously it can't be the ONLY good version of the Bible. It just doesn't make sense (along with many other rules and regulations that legalists have created).
What I can't understand are legalists who think that the KJV is the ONLY good bible and all others are "evil" (especially the NIV). Sadly, I've dealt with that a lot in the Baptist churches I've attended growing up (which is one of the reasons why I'm glad my wife and I now attend a non-denominational church). Yes, I agree the KJV is a good translation, but the problem with thinking it's the "only good bible" is that the KJV is NOT the original inspired word of God. It's a TRANSLATION of the original inspired word of God. So obviously it can't be the ONLY good version of the Bible. It just doesn't make sense (along with many other rules and regulations that legalists have created).
farouk
Member
I agree that there is a distinction between the original and a translation; this needs to be maintained. (I appreciate the King James thoroughly, but am not King James Only.)
Blessings.