KJV or others?

If you are a Christian and read the Bible you have probably realized that there are a lot of different translations available. NLT, ESV, The Message, The Passion, NSAB, The Amplified Bible, NIV, NIRV, and of course the NKJV and the KJV. Why are there so many different translations and why can’t we just stick with the good old fashion KJV? Well answering that is a very complex and lengthy answer so what I’m going to do is break down just a couple of points about the different translations.

In all transparency, the question I am trying to answer is this “ since the KJV is one of the oldest and seems to be the most accurate, and it’s what we’ve used for 400 years; is that that only version that should be used for preaching and bible studies? (For the sake of this article, we are focusing on how we received English translations).

Before we can answer that question we have to go back into history even further than 1611.
Language: The first thing we must realize is that the bible was inspired by God but written at the hands of different people over many centuries. The three predominant languages that the Bible was written in were Hebrew, Greek, and a very small portion was written in Aramaic. In the fourth century the Latin Vulgate was written and became the official Bible the Catholic Church. A century before that the old testament which was originally written in Hebrew was translated into Greek. So these were the establish Bibles for hundreds of years but the common person was unable to read them. To read the Bible you had to either know Greek or Latin or go to a church where a priest would read the Scriptures in Greek or Latin and then translate it to the common language that the people spoke. At this time the priest was able to translate it in real-time and so what the people heard may not have been an accurate translation of the Scriptures.

So for 1000 years give or take, in middle ages the word of God was mainly in Latin and Greek.
That is until John Wycliffe produced a handwritten English manuscript in the 1380s. And these were translated out of the Latin Vulgate which was the only source that Wycliff had.

John Hus a follower of Wycliffe was burned at the stake in 1415 because he was an advocate of being able to read the Bible in one’s language and fought viciously to make this a possibility.
In The 1450s the printing press was developed in Germany with the first book to be printed a Latin language Bible. During this time the church would martyr and imprison people for trying to translate the Bible into other languages, but Martin Luther and William Tyndale proceeded to rebel against the church. In 1525 and 1526 the Tyndale New Testament became the first English printed Bible. But this cost Tyndale greatly and most of the English bibles were burned.

In 1537 John Rogers, under the pseudonym Thomas Matthew, printed another edition of the English Bible. It is most commonly known today as the Matthew Tyndale Bible and a second edition was printed in 1539 into the English language that was spoken of that day. (This English was much different than the English we know and speak today.)

Somewhere along the way chapters were added to the different books of the bible to help find different sections of wording and the Geneva Bible which was published in 1560 added numbers to the verses for the first time.
In the early 1600s, King James wanted a Bible to be translated into the language spoken of the day which has been referenced by some as the King's English. The translators used a lot of the Geneva Bible for their translation instead of using only original Latin or Greek texts.

In the 1700s a revised oxford edition of the 1611 King James Bible was printed which helped correct 20,000 spelling and punctuation changes. There were also over 400 wording changes made to the original 1611 Bible because the English language continued to evolve and the words that were written in 1611 were not truly accurate anymore. (NOTE: This is a foreshadowing of why modern English translations were developed.)

Realizing that the English language was changing yet again, Noah Webster produced a Bible in 1833. Though, It wasn’t until 1880 that England planned it’s own the revision of King James Bible and it became known as the English Revised Version.
For 1500 years the Apocrypha was included in protestant Bibles because it wasn’t until the 1880s that they decided to drop 14 books pulling out the Apocrypha which was originally part of the Tyndale Bible, The Great Bible, and even the King James Bible 1611 Edition.
Americans realize that their language had changed even more than the Britains and words had different meanings from their native English language so in response to England's ERV the American Standard Version was published in 1901. Seventy years after it was first published it was revised again and called the new American standard version Bible.
Two years later the NIV was published and offered a new way of translating Bibles which was a phrase for phrase translation instead of a word for word translation which had been the method of translating up until that point.
In 1982 the New King James Version was released to get rid of the early middle English and replace Elizabethan words with more accurate words of understanding in the modern English language.
In 2002 The English Standard Version was released, once again to make the Bible more readable for the modern reader. Since that time several paraphrases have been published as well.

Let’s look at the types of Bible translations as there are three main types.

Word for word:
Word for Word translations take each Greek or Hebrew word and tries to find the closest English word available and then put the word in the sentence structure as it would be in the original text, taking into account grammer, conjugations, and sentence structure. Examples are the NASB, ESV, RSV, KJV, NKJV
Thought for thought:
Thought for thought translations take the original thought of the Greek or Hebrew sentence or sentence fragment and then translates the complete thought into English. This is often thought of as a better translation model as it’s not just translating words that may have different meanings. This way we get the complete thought of the author in our language as it was inspired by God. Examples are NRSV, NJB, NIV, TNIV
Paraphrase:

Paraphrases are not actual translations from the original language but rather an adaptation of modern languages that have already been translated. Eugene Peterson did this with The Message Bible which is great to use with brand new converts, or inner-city areas where comprehension levels are low or for people in which English is their second language. Examples of this are the NLT, TLB, The Message, The Passion Translation

So back to the question is the KJV most accurate and should churches always use it?

The KJV was one of the most accurate early middle English translations in the 1600s, but since then other manuscripts were found and language has changed. Some of the words no longer have the same meaning and therefore could cause a reader to misinterpret the verse of scripture or take scripture out of context. Modern America no longer speaks Early Middle English a.k.a. The King's English. Martin Luther, and Tindell were both punished greatly for advocating for people to be able to read the Bible in their common language. So what is the common language of the day? (Hint: not language that includes thees, thous, gainsay, heareth, doths, etc.) If Luther and Tindell were indeed fanatics about people in their culture being able to read and understand every word of the Bible, I believe that it is OK that we do the same thing.

There is no biblical reason for someone to use the King James version or the NIV, or the NLT for that matter.
The Bible does not say use KJV, because KJV was translated 1500 years after the last of the new testament was written.

So there is nothing sinful about using another translation outside of KJV but only traditions and personal preferences that one may have.

What about Revelation 22:18 and 19 and do modern translations omit or add additional scripture.

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

My response is this: The King James Version has already done this (presumably) and other translations have followed likewise.
1 John 5:7 is not recorded in most of the earliest Greek manuscripts but was added in KJV because it confirms the theology of the Trinity. There are other verses were not in the Septuagint or the Vulgate that were added to the KJV and other translations. I am not arguing that they were not part of the original text at some point just that it is hard to know quickly and easily if they were or not.

In summary, I am suggesting to use the translation of the Bible that you are most comfortable with but also one that you can understand. I have had family members and friends who only read KJV, and then one day picked up a NKJV or NIV and was finally able to understand the Word in more powerful ways.

When picking a translation, do research and ask questions of a pastor or at a Christian bookstore, but know this; the King James Version 1611 Edition is not the threshold in which one should judge modern translations by.

Pastor Morgan