Is the KJV Only debate dividing the Christian Church?

[Jayhawker Soule]

I wish I could find the source, but I read Robert Alter note somewhere the he held the KJV prose in high regard. I find that interesting.

 

[anotherneil]

Are you in the least familiar with the language skills of the teams behind these other Bibles?

I'm not interested in answering this - you included an altered post of what I was responding to, which obfuscates things.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

To bring the conversation back to the topic at hand:

The KJV is, for the sheer poetry of its language, non pareil among bibles. For the sheer pleasure of reading, it is my go-to. However, when I'm perplexed by meaning, I will generally turn to my NIV, which while not nearly as poetic, is a better literal translation. (Sadly, I don't read biblical Hebrew or Koin Greek.)

(Of course, I also read Shakespeare for pleasure, so now you know how strange I am.)

A perfect example of mis-translation in KJV is 1 Corinthians 13. In the KJV it begins:

1. Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
2. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

But charity is simply the wrong word here.

1. If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.
2. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

KJV translates the Latin caritas to charity, whereas NIV more correctly translates it as love. Thus, KJV weakens this basic Christian doctrine about God and man that Paul is trying to articulate.

 

[anotherneil]

The monarch controls nothing

Get real

Be in total denial all you want, I don't mind. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Eddi]

If you say so; you can keep telling yourself that. The fact is that monarchies (any and all monarchies, not just what's headed by the monarch from London) are essentially soft forms of slavery, and religion is usually involved in some way.

You do realise that the late Queen Elizabeth's personal rating was around 80% or more throughout her reign? That's the type of rating politicians can only dream of

And all polls indicate that the public support the monarchy to a very decisive extent

I support it. Look at what's happening in your country! You have as population of 350 million people and over the centuries the USA has produced some very, very great individuals. Yet look at the two candidates for the top job! They're both awful. And your country has so many brilliant and talented individuals....

Also, there is a very strong republican sentiment within the UK. At the recent Glastonbury music festival the crowds were chanting "**** the king"

The new PM is on record as harbouring republican sentiments

So I think saying that the monarchy is slavery is ridiculous.

There is more to democracy than voting you know

A vital part is consent and the British state has the consent of the people - around 60% of the public voted in the recent election

It's all about consent, that's the most important thing - it provides legitimacy.

Yes, I'm aware of it & I would imagine that you're aware that not only do British voters not elect the prime minister, but the prime minister even has to be approved by the British monarch.

The monarch has to appoint whoever wins a parliamentary majority PM

That's the convention - our constitution is based mostly on conventions

When the old PM concedes defeat he/she does so by ringing the new PM. They then go to see the head of state (the monarch) and resign. The head of state then appoints the person who now commands a parliamentary majority

If the monarch refused to play along with this then we'd have a republic in two week's time, maybe sooner

The PM is elected indirectly, just like how your president is elected via an Electoral College. Don't you find the Electoral College a bit undemocratic?

I'm personally opposed to this presence of American military air bases on British soil (or anywhere else around the world, for that matter) - and even if I wasn't personally opposed

Personally I don't mind them

I am not an anti-American, and if the Americans feel as though they need airbases on UK soil then that would be fine by me

Yeah, and co-operation for what purpose?

Re: Chatham house, etc:

There is a trans-atlantic establishment, that's for sure

The American elites and the British elites are very cosy together

In the UK this is commonly interpreted as the USA controlling the UK

Take for instance the Iraq war - public opinion was against that but Blair was a part of the establishment and nobody could stop him

He will always be remembered as George W Bush's poodle

I can assure you that no intelligent British person whose opinion matters wants to conquer or control the USA

Would you oppose having the UK get annexed by the US and turned into a republic or becoming part of one (meaning no more titles of nobility)?

The thing with that would be that we'd lose our independence and be absorbed into the much larger USA

However I would be glad to see the back of the titles and nobility, I think the honours system is ridiculous, an affront

I don't think anyone is actually seriously suggesting that but it's an interesting idea!

as in British Overseas Territories, Commonwealth realms, and Commonwealth of Nations? Do you have any idea how many countries, territories & islands that is?

I think that all the tiny island nations that the UK controls are a very tiny and almost insignificant part of the world

And the other nations where the British monarch is head of state are completely free to become republics if that is what they want - look at all the nations that peacefully left the British Empire after the war

The key issue is consent

Scotland had a referendum to leave the UK and it chose to stay

Spain on the other hand would never let the Catalonians or the Basques have an independence referendum

I'm for removing US military bases from foreign countries & in fact I'm for dismantling the US military and replacing it with privately owned & operated security services to deal with the same things when appropriate.

Where would the personnel for a privately owned standing army come from?

I believe that with private military companies as they currently exist get their manpower from the state military

If you abolished the military how would young people be recruited into whatever replaces it?

And wouldn't the government end up paying for a private military anyway? What difference would it make?

What would motivate people to fight in a band of mercenaries? Would patriotism still be a motive?

It's an interesting idea but I think it needs more thought

It would be shameful if you desire imperial worldwide conquest.

I was kind of joking there

Well - this is quite a triggered reaction: I wonder why (well, not really).

You said that the people of my nation want to take over the world

That's quite a broad act of slander

I wish the USA no ill will, I think it's a great nation that has made an enormous contribution to world culture. It's just that I don't like my own nation being maligned in the form of non-sensical paranoid fantasies

 

[Eddi]

Be in total denial all you want, I don't mind. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Check this out:

Amazon.com

If I knew you in the world away from the internet I would buy you this as a present

 

[IndigoChild5559]

@Sitara

I doubt it will seriously divide the Church there really is only a teeny tiny number of Christians who somehow think that God divinely inspired the version. For one thing, most Christians don't even speak English. But even among English speaking Christians, KJV only folks just don't make up a significant population. There are a great many number of things that divide Christian churches; this just isn't really one of them. I think it is important to KJV only folks, but everyone else just doesn't bother with it.