WHY I STILL USE THE KING JAMES VERSION
By some folks I guess I would be considered old fashion for continuing to use the 1611 King James Version of the Bible. For those who have chosen to use the NKJV (New King James Version) or the 1601 American Standard Version (Both of which are excellent translations) will probably laugh and think, “Ole Acuff just can’t get out of the dark ages.” They are partially right.
I use it because I am comfortable and familiar with it. There are so many changes in our world today. On our recent trip to Hawaii we stayed in a condo. Some nerdy guy had programed the TV and you couldn’t just turn the power button on. The remote had a screen like a GPS. You had to figure out which button to push just to get the thing to come on. Finding a program to watch took a degree from Georgia Tech. I just got my old KJV and read. I may have torn up the TV because the condo owner had to buy a new one while I was there. The fellow who installed it wasn’t technically as savvy so we were able to just turn it on. The language of the KJV is familiar. Identifiable. When you hear someone quote it you know what it is.
Being familiar and comfortable with something is not always a good reason to continue with it. However, the KJV has been proven over the years to be accurate and reliable.
I use it because the language is distinctive. Someone has said, “Any book man can write man can master but man did not write the Bible.” The “thee’s” and “thou’s” make it distinctive. “…holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Pet. 1:21). When you read the KJV it doesn’t read like a book man has written. Where else are you going to read, “…We wot not what is become of him” (Ex. 32:1).
I use it because modern translations are perverted. The new revised NIV has gone even further off the track in catering to the modern feminist view. The revised NIV refers to Phoebe as a deacon (Rom. 16:1). How can that be when scripture says that a deacon is to be the husband of one wife (1 Tim. 3:12)? The KJV says, “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” (1 Tim. 1:12). The revised NIV says, “I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority [emphasis mine] over the man….” It leaves the idea that as long as she doesn’t “assume authority” but the authority is given to her then she could participate in the leadership role which God has held exclusively for the man.
My observation is that man seeks a modern translation to find something that is more in line with his thinking than really wanting to know what God thinks. God says… but man says “Whoa, let’s retranslate this so we can do it our way.”
Well folks, I wot not has become of some of our people on Sunday night.
Larry