Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 10:
Line 10: − +
Reasons were previosly given as to why people decide not to be KJV only, so for completeness and objectivity we need to add reason why people decide to be KJV only.
A recent attempt to "update" the King James Version was the New King James Version, which most notably modernized pronouns such as "thou" and verb forms such as "art".
A recent attempt to "update" the King James Version was the New King James Version, which most notably modernized pronouns such as "thou" and verb forms such as "art".
Some Christians believe that the original 1611 Authorized Version of the King James Bible is the only acceptable English translation of the Bible.<ref>http://www.isitso.org/guide/kjvonly.html</ref> This is referred to by some Christians, especially those who do not hold to this viewpoint, as the "KJV-only movement". On the other side of the debate, many Christians avoid the King James Bible because of its archaic language, advances in scholarship's understanding of ancient languages, and discovery of (arguably <ref>[http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/vol06/Robinson2001.html Maurice A. Robinson, ''New Testament Textual Criticism: The Case for Byzantine Priority'']</ref>) more reliable manuscripts. Note that the King James Bible uses British spellings like "favour" rather than "favor" (Acts 2:47).
Some Christians believe that the original 1611 Authorized Version of the King James Bible is the only acceptable English translation of the Bible. These Christians believe that certain verses, or even groups of verses, in the Bible are contradictions in modern versions but are not so in the King James Version of the Bible. For example, the King James Bible says in Isaiah that Lucifer fell from Heaven for wanting to be like the most high. The New International Version of the Bible claims that Jesus in fact fell from Heaven for wanting to be like the most high, an incredible heresy. <ref>http://www.isitso.org/guide/kjvonly.html</ref> This is referred to by some Christians, especially those who do not hold to this viewpoint, as the "KJV-only movement". On the other side of the debate, many Christians avoid the King James Bible because of its archaic language, advances in scholarship's understanding of ancient languages, and discovery of (arguably <ref>[http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/vol06/Robinson2001.html Maurice A. Robinson, ''New Testament Textual Criticism: The Case for Byzantine Priority'']</ref>) more reliable manuscripts. Note that the King James Bible uses British spellings like "favour" rather than "favor" (Acts 2:47).
The King James Version uses a total vocabulary of only about 8,000 words.<ref>See [[Essay:Best New Conservative Words]].</ref> In contrast the [[English Standard Version]], published nearly four centuries later in 2001, draws upon a larger English vocabulary that developed in the interim and uses nearly 14,000 different words.
The King James Version uses a total vocabulary of only about 8,000 words.<ref>See [[Essay:Best New Conservative Words]].</ref> In contrast the [[English Standard Version]], published nearly four centuries later in 2001, draws upon a larger English vocabulary that developed in the interim and uses nearly 14,000 different words.
(username removed)