| | The King James Version does not make full use of the possessive form, instead often spelling things out in wordy and cumbersome form rather than using an apostrophe "s". See, for example, the cumbersome lack of the possessive at Luke 5:33: "And they said unto him, Why do the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise the disciples of the Pharisees; but thine eat and drink?" The KJV also fails to make full use of the variety of punctuation available, such as avoiding the exclamation point.<ref>Note, however, that the KJV does use both the possessive and the exclamation point in chapter 6 of the Gospel of Luke.</ref> | | The King James Version does not make full use of the possessive form, instead often spelling things out in wordy and cumbersome form rather than using an apostrophe "s". See, for example, the cumbersome lack of the possessive at Luke 5:33: "And they said unto him, Why do the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise the disciples of the Pharisees; but thine eat and drink?" The KJV also fails to make full use of the variety of punctuation available, such as avoiding the exclamation point.<ref>Note, however, that the KJV does use both the possessive and the exclamation point in chapter 6 of the Gospel of Luke.</ref> |
| − | The King James Version contains some arguably feminist language, such as "prophetess" (Luke 2:36)<ref>though it refers to a rebellious Jezebel women in Rev. 2:20 as such</ref> and gender neutral language for "man" (see, e.g., Luke 3:4; Luke 3:16; Mark 9:17)<ref>where gender specific language is absent.</ref> Also, the KJV uses "children of God" perhaps as a gender neutral version of "Godly men," with some seeing that neutralizing the gender has the effect of inserting a connotation of submission that might be more characteristic of Islam than Christianity. Modern versions picked up on this, and use "children of God" far more pervasively than the KJV did. In Luke 4:34, the KJV refers to "Holy One of God" rather than "Holy Son of God." On the contrary, certain modern versions have changed most male references for gender neutral references, and have been criticized for such.
| |
| | The King James Version translators did not have access to earlier ancient manuscripts that were discovered in the 1800s. As a result, the King James Version includes passages that are not in the earliest ancient manuscripts. Instead, the AV is based on the majority of the manuscripts, which agree extremely well, as opposed to modern versions, which are based upon some few older manuscripts which disagree greatly between themselves. The oldest manuscript fragment, dated to A.D. 66, agrees with the reading used by the AV.[https://www.icr.org/index.php?module=home&action=submitsearch&f_submit=Search&f_context_any=any§ion=bible&f_search_type=bible&f_keyword_any=Matthew+26:22] | | The King James Version translators did not have access to earlier ancient manuscripts that were discovered in the 1800s. As a result, the King James Version includes passages that are not in the earliest ancient manuscripts. Instead, the AV is based on the majority of the manuscripts, which agree extremely well, as opposed to modern versions, which are based upon some few older manuscripts which disagree greatly between themselves. The oldest manuscript fragment, dated to A.D. 66, agrees with the reading used by the AV.[https://www.icr.org/index.php?module=home&action=submitsearch&f_submit=Search&f_context_any=any§ion=bible&f_search_type=bible&f_keyword_any=Matthew+26:22] |