●The King James Version is the only TRUE version.
One summer at camp, my friend Emily, a fellow camp counselor, had a camper who asked her what language Jesus spoke. She replied that he probably spoke Hebrew, but she wasn't exactly sure. Another camper, Sarah, piped in and said that her mother had a Hebrew Bible. It said "thee, and thou, and thine, and stuff like that." The child was completely serious. I come from a region where the King James Version, is the ONLY Version. Verily, verily, when I was but a babe, I didst think that mine Lord spake Elizabethan English. I tell you the truth, though, now I know he spoke Aramaic and Hebrew.
● The King James is the only version translated from the Greek and Hebrew.
Some people still say it is the most true translation as it was translated from the Greek and from the Hebrew, and all subsequent versions are rephrased from the King James. This is false. Check the preface of your modern versions, and the "Translation Teams" and their sources are clearly listed. They check through MANY different versions, trying to find the most common words--because what is most often written is more likely to be true. They also note when a different translation or when several texts had different words altogether at the bottom margin of t he page.
● The King James is the closest translation to Greek and Hebrew
After consulting many of my seminary professors, they all say that the closest literal word-for-word translation of the Greek and Hebrew in English is the New American Standard Bible. Greek and Hebrew professors also gave me this answer. The King James is not the closest. It is, indeed, VERY close, but not actually the closest.
● The King James is the closest in essence to the Greek and Hebrew.
That may have been true once. However, some of it is lost as we do not natively speak Elizabethan English. I have to translate my translation, and therefore, some things get lost. For instance, Jeremiah 4:19a in KJV:
"My bowels, my bowels! I am pained at my very heart." It sounds like someone needs some pepto. That sounds very irreverent, but let's face it, I was born in the 1980's, not the 1580's. That's where my mind is going to go. Check it out in the New American Standard Bible: "My soul, my soul! I am in anguish! Oh, my heart!" Wow. That changes everything! It's not a bad case of 4th-meal-from-Taco-Bell-coming-back-with-a-vengeance", but someone crying out from their very soul! I know what the King James is talking about, but it simply does not have the same impact, because it makes me think of irritated bowel syndrome.
I didn't do a lot of research for this random blog post complaining about the state of Biblical affairs in America. My strongest argument, though, comes from the preface of the 1611 King James itself:
Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtaine, that we may looke into the most Holy place; that remooveth the cover of the well, that wee may come by the water, even as Jacob rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, by which meanes the flockes of Laban were watered. Indeede without translation into the vulgar tongue[here meaning vernacular or common language], the unlearned are but like children at Jacobs well (which was deepe).The original translators were removing the veil of mystery from about the Holy texts so that every man could understand its meaning. They "put the curtain aside," like the veil was torn before the holy of holies. They made "the water in the well accessible to all." The original Greek of the New Testament is called "koine Greek" which simply means "common Greek." The writers of the New Testament wrote in a dialect that no one had ever seen before, until the advent of modern archaeology. Then, the archaeologists found it on shopping lists, book keeping ledgers, and personal journals. It was the language of the people. To quote one of my professors, God "put the cookie jar on the bottom shelf," like the writers of the KJV drew water for Jacob's children from his very deep well. They, like God, were trying to help the common man understand the most extraordinary message of all.
I. Do. Not. Speak. Elizabethan. English. I understand it mostly because of my Lit Minor. I've read a lot of Shakespeare, and a lot of the King James because it was beneficial for class. Do I find beauty and understanding in the King James? Absolutely. Do I love to read it? Yes, I do. Is it the right choice for everyone? No, absolutely not.
I teach Sunday School and on Wednesday nights to the fifth and sixth graders. I could beat them senselessly with the King James, but they're simply not going to get it. They don't have the background in English literature necessary to get it.
We don't ask French-speaking African natives to learn to read the King James. We give them a French Bible. We don't ask Chinese people to read the King James. We give them a Chinese Bible. Why? Because they wouldn't understand. So why should we require our congregation to read it?
One dear friend said that people should be willing to try and understand it, because it's the word of God. She almost has a valid point, but that's not what God required of us. He put the New Testament into the most common language available at that time. He placed his new covenant in the empire famous for building roads to connect all the known world. He reduced it to the lowest common denominator. And if we are to follow God's example, as he commands us to, shouldn't we do likewise?
