Thursday, February 21, 2008

KJV or Something Else?

Working at a church, we see mail that doesn't come to a lot of households. We received an announcement today about an upcoming revival at a neighboring church. After the visiting evangelist's name was this sentence: "The King James Version will be used." I noticed in the announcement that Wednesday night will be youth night. Will they be checking bibles at the door to make sure all those kids bring the right one?

I think it's hilarious how some people get so hung up about the KJV being the ONLY REAL bible. The KJV was first published in 1611. Those men weren't first hand witness to the events from Genesis to Revelation. That group of scholars took existing manuscripts and translated them into the speech of the time (with certain instructions: I got this note from in the Authorized King James Version article)

(King) James and the Bishop of London wrote the brief that guided the translation, such as prohibiting the marginal notes found in the Geneva Bible and ensuring the position of the Church of England was recognised on various points.

I don't believe there is anything magical about any version of the bible. If the manuscripts used and the linguists employed are authentic and knowledgable, we have as close as we're going to get to the original without having to learn Hebrew and Greek for ourselves.

I'm keeping my NIV and NCV.

No comments:

Post a Comment