The KJV is God's chosen bible

They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. The King James version of the Bible is about as divorced from the original texts as you can get. It was not translated from the original manuscripts, it was taken from the earlier Geneva Bible and several other copies all of them in English. When you start dealing with translations of translations it becomes impossible to really know what the original manuscript said. Here is a short history of how the Bible came to America. "The Anglican Church’s King James Bible took decades to overcome the more popular Protestant Church’s Geneva Bible. One of the greatest ironies of history, is that many Protestant Christian churches today embrace the King James Bible exclusively as the “only” legitimate English language translation… yet it is not even a Protestant translation! It was printed to compete with the Protestant Geneva Bible, by authorities who throughout most of history were hostile to Protestants… and killed them. While many Protestants are quick to assign the full blame of persecution to the Roman Catholic Church, it should be noted that even after England broke from Roman Catholicism in the 1500’s, the Church of England (The Anglican Church) continued to persecute Protestants throughout the 1600’s. One famous example of this is John Bunyan, who while in prison for the crime of preaching the Gospel, wrote one of Christian history’s greatest books, Pilgrim’s Progress. Throughout the 1600’s, as the Puritans and the Pilgrims fled the religious persecution of England to cross the Atlantic and start a new free nation in America, they took with them their precious Geneva Bible, and rejected the King’s Bible. America was founded upon the Geneva Bible, not the King James Bible." This was taken from; http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/ The site is a very interesting history of how the Bible we have today came to be. If you are interested I recommend and spending a little time with it.

It is tempting to imagine that if only the bible where written in Aramaic and that we spoke the same then we would have the authentic meaning undiluted or modified. Muslims make this claim about the Quran (though interestingly the Quran contains words unknown in the language in which it is written, clear indication that it borrows heavily from previous scripture, linguists concur) However, this is not so, the meaning of any and every language drifts over time being a function of usage; nice, for instance, originally meant polite, Anon meant immediately and no means later, Apparent meant not clear or certain but now means obvious. The meaning of words is determined by a community of language users thus even if we spoke Aramaic the meaning of the words will have subtly shifted. Furthermore, every text stands in need of interpretation, even by the author, I must interpret the words I write here. Thus we are left with an interesting situation that an early translation into English or another language may actually render a closer meaning to the original Aramaic or not. What is truly remarkable is that the spirit behind the words of Jesus shines through. Whilst the KJV is far from perfect it is poetic. all the best urban

I don't agree with it.. the King's Englishe is outdated, for one thing. Of course there will be more modern language translations.. Actually I'll put a link here of a humorous page which pokes a little fun at the 'king's english'! Imagine giving a Bible or New Testament to an unbeliever or new christian with all the thee's and thou's and goeths and doeths.. Though I do realize there is the "New King James"... I've read many translations and do not find them to be incorrigable like some others seem to.. They usually say they are "diligently compared" to the original languages.. NoT to King Jame's translation.. They truly all say the same thing.. including the one word translation error ("hell"/is the grave, as sheol always was), and another error of perception (inherent immortality/that oh so ancient "surely.. you won't.. die?")

Jesus Christ is the true word of God. The Bible just happens to be the only book which tells you this. So it doesn't matter which version you use, because without the spirit of God to interpret it for you, it's all just words.

I would rather see them read the KJV than any of the others. King James corrupted the KJV, but ignorance corrupted the others. King james made certain that things that agreed with him were put into the bible and the rest was destroyed or hidden. The other versions take from that and they misinterpret it. My biggest pet peeve is anything that says the word, Homosexual, in the bible. yeah, I have a gay thing, but the fact is that the term homosexual was not coined until the 1920's. Effeminant, which is in the bible should not be replaced by homosexual, for not all gay men are effeminant and not all effeminant men are gay. They also refuse to see that the relationship between david and Jonathan was not a platonic one. The two men were bound by the soul. The different version of scripture actually change the words to SAY, brothers and friends. So, to summerize, better KJV than the others, but they should do their homework. unless one reads aramic and hebrew and has access to the original scrolls, the bible in any translation needs to be taken with a grain of common sense.

Although I am fuuly aware thaat the KJV is not the only version of the Holy Bible, of its true history, nor the Bible the only religious work, I do not find this statement or this view very surprising. It is a self-defense stance and point of view. Put simply, if I am ordering my life by the words written in a book which, true or not, I believe to be directly inspired by my God, would I not believe in the version I use? To show how this works, I present a pretend example. There are three books, Book 1 and Book 2 which are of my personal god and Book 3 which is of another diety. No matter which book I choose to live by, I must claim that it is the one, true, chosen version. Why? Because it would make little sense for me to say, 'I follow and believe in Book 1, but I know Book 2 is the real one.' now would it? As humans we seek what we think is best and we will defend our choice or change it. We are this way about most things, from our religion to our ball teams to the kind of car we drive. I do get frustrated with people who refuse to acknowledge the historical facts around what we know of as the Bible and some of its contents. but I understand that most of this stubbornness is fear generated.

Yes and there are religious groups which use only the authorized version of King James Version of the Holy Bible. It is translated by people commissioned by King James and they are not people of God like the Israelites. And there are mistakes which they openly admit and so how could it be when God is perfect? People should be open minded and get what is right and good from whatever.

The King James Version and the New American Standard give a literal translation of God's Word, while the NIV gives a thought to thought translation. You can refer to this link http://www.comereason.org/theo_issues/theo025.asp for more research on the subject If you want to read an accurate Bible, I would recommend the King James version, and The New American Standard, but you have to do your own research and find out what Greek translation was used. For instance, if someone says that he found a Greek manuscript and said it was older than the one used by the KJV and the NASB, you have to ask, was the one used by the KJV, newer because it was made later, or newer because it was a word for word copy of an original and had the original been destroyed because it was torn apart through much reading? So instead of insulting Fundamental Christians, you have to go through all the internet and the scholarly urls and find out for yourself. I am a Conservative Christian by the way, which is rather different that what you conceive as Fundamentals . I believe the Bible is the word of God, am against abortion, am pro=life, against homosexual behavior, believe one has to be married to have s*x, etc. and drinking in moderation. Many Fundamentals believe you should not drink period.

I don't believe its the version of the bible that makes it the originally bible created, its more what does the bible teach? does it talk about God and his name? does it talk correctly about Jesus and does it teach about God? Those are the questions I go thru before choosing a bible to read and except. I don't believe that the King James version is the first bible created and its holy. because I read the autobiography on King James and he copied most of the words of the bible and made his bible. i say most of the words because he wrote all buy God's true name in it and he twist a few scriptures. He changed the words in john 3:16 so that it would sound like the trinity was real. but its not cause Jesus said he did nothing without his father. So therefore he is not God.

I believe the KJV is the most widely available version of the Bible and thus would be the most trusted by many people. Suffice it to say that many people have only had access to KJV all of their lives, and so trust it and reject other versions of the Bible. Personally I am a little more comfortable using KJV b/c it is the Bible of my youth, all the memory verses in Sunday school I memorized from KJV and most of the Bible studies I have partaken of also used that version. However, many of the more modern translations have also been taken from the original transcripts by Godly men who were well educated in the original languages of the texts and could possibly do a better at clarifying the true texts in modern day languages. If anyone studies extensively they will discover that words were actually put in to the KJV by the translators in order to render the meanings of the passages in the English language even though those words did not exist in the original texts. I believe the Bible to be the infallible Word of God, the different translations are definitely of use for clarity and understanding of the scriptures, whatever version one may be using. I may think in KJV, but I can receive knowledge and clarity about the meaning of those words from many trusted sources, including other translations trusting that they also contain the Word of God.

they say its because it was translated directly into english from the original scriptures. another thing about that is no one can be sure anyway. if you put shakespeares books into normal english, does that suddenly mean its not shakespeare anymore? even though some grammar and words had to be changed... no. its the same...

Bible is inspired by God.,Versions has significance.

Yea I grew up hearing that. I don't think it's very accurate. I mean how can they prove it. All Bibles are an interpretation of what was really said. Some are more understandable than others. KJV is just not real clear. Maybe that's why they think it's God's chosen Bible. So it gets more confusing and force us to believe their interpretation. Maybe the real interpretation is hiding elsewhere. Personally I understand the Living Bible a lot easier. I mean it puts it in my terms and my understanding.

hi lancingboy, i wonder sometimes which is the real and fakes.. but i think to our Catholic since it is the most credible... straight Catholic, digerati

This is the first time I've heard this being said. I think it is hilarious!!!