King James Bible: Difficulty to understand

[ChaosGamma]

Its just a matter of getting used to the style. I have read the whole Bible cover to cover in the KJV translation. The more you read it, the more you will be able to understand it.

This, basically. If you’re not used to the style, it will be difficult. Of course, I also read Shakespeare for fun and I’m planning on getting a copy of Chaucer in the original Middle English. So I’m probably not exactly typical.

Generally I prefer the older translations specifically for the style. Modern translations are too, well, plain. I recently watched the movie The Gospel of John which uses the Good News Bible and I couldn’t help but cringe at some verses. “Look! Here is the man!” just doesn’t have the same ring to it as “Behold the man!” It’s not even as though the older rendering is any more difficult to understand. Msgr. Knox’s translation and RSV aren’t my favorites, but I like that they’re more modern while still retaining some of that more traditional style.

 

[Vico]

I have ALWAYS had issues reading the King James Version - so many words I didn’t understand and, as I rarely went to church as a kid, what I did not understand could not be put into context by myself.

Here is one verse that always bothered me:

King James Version
And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

One of many ! I was thrilled when the updated versions finally came out!!

God bless, all!

Rita

Many translations do not include that. It is included in the Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550 ( σκληρόν σοι πρὸς κέντρα λακτίζειν.)

The Haydock Commentary on Acts 9:5 has:

Ver. 5. To kick against the goad. Others translate against the pricks; others, against the sting. The metaphor is taken from oxen kicking, when pricked to go forward. (Witham)

 

[signit]

I have often wondered what translation non English speaking Protestants would use. Obviously not the KJV since the prose does not translate. Are the KJV-only people exclusively English speaking to the detriment of other nationalities or are there actually non- English translations?

At least according to this pro-KJV writer, Bibles in other languages aren’t perfect because God promised to preserve His word for every generation, but not in every language.

biblebelievers.com/KJV3.htm

KJV-only believers might accept that some foreign language versions are translated from the same “stream” as the KJV but that they’re not the perfect version preserved by God.

 

[gabydup]

Might I suggest friend you try thr Douay Bible.

It’s the oldest and truest English version

drbo.org/

Easter Blessings,

PJM

+1 for Douay-Rheims

I would also recommend you this site if you want to read it:

douayrheimsbible.com

If you’re on mobile you can navigate through chapters or verses by swiping. I find that feature very handy.

 

[Vico]

+1 for Douay-Rheims

I would also recommend you this site if you want to read it:

douayrheimsbible.com

If you’re on mobile you can navigate through chapters or verses by swiping. I find that feature very handy.

That is actually the Douay-Rheims-Challoner, and I read it. The original is difficult to find except in special reprints.

Douay-Rheims (O.T. Douai 1609 and N.T. Rheims 1582)
The city of thy holy one is made desert, Sion is made desert, Jerusalem is become desolate.

Douay-Rheims-Challoner (1752-1754 A.D.)
10 The city of thy sanctuary is become a desert, Sion is made a desert, Jerusalem is desolate.

 

[The_Old_Maid]

In the Kudzu comic strip, the Rev. Wil B. Dunn reads Psalms 19:14:

“May the words of my pie hole and the meditations of my ticker be acceptable in Thy sight, O LORD my clout and my mojo.”

(beat)

“I hate these modern translations.”

It really does depend on whether you’re used to it.

I was exposed to KJV at an early age. So when a strange minister send me a small square of burlap fabric in the mail, I knew he was reading the Bible wrong.

“Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.” –Matt. 18:19

The letter explained that if Pastor Stranger and I touched the piece of fabric and prayed for the same thing, we would get it. Also, please send money.

I just knew that was wrong. Jesus did not say, “if you both touch a piece of cloth, or your noses, or a full-service gas station,” He will give us both a pony.

It was a strange sensation to be smarter than a minister/preacher/pastor/whatever. Nevertheless, I knew my KJV, so that part was easy.

The hard part was worrying what would happen if I said No to a man of God. Well, that, and writing a letter asking him why he was asking me for money. I was six or seven years old!!!

And would you believe I got an answer declaring, “I do not know why God has put us in touch,” but touch the cloth, and pray what he prayed (enclosed). Also, please send money.

I lived in dread of what Jesus would say or do if I didn’t give the nice man money. Fortunately, being a little kid I didn’t have any. Surely Jesus would take that into account.

Also, wondering if the nice man was a real pastor because only fake Christians would so clearly misread the KJV.

…

This was before computers. What I really should have worried about was where some stranger got my name and address. I can only suppose that some Bible summer school passed along the information. Thanks a bunch.

 

[MichaelP3]

I have always struggled to understand older translations. As time goes on, languages change.

I remember, when I was searching for the right church, I attended a KJV-Only Baptist Church. It was an independent Fundamentalist Baptist church, very very conservative.

I told them that I had trouble understanding the KJV and they said that I might have a demon in me. So I stopped attending that church.

Is this a Church by a very controversial pastor S.A? anyway, if not, good you got away I don’t feel an explanation is needed!

 

[Pulvis]

There are many factors to consider when choosing a Bible translation. The AKJV and the DR used the same ancient texts, mostly, for both old and new testaments. When the RSV came along, Bible scholars were debating the authenticity of the base texts and began using different base texts for translation. One who wishes can google Bible versions and find a wealth of information on this issue. It is very contentious in protestant circles as to which translation is more accurate.
I am somewhat in the KJV camp. I use both the KJV and the NKJV. I find the base texts from which they are derived from to be the most accurate. For deep Bible study it is very important to know what the underlying meaning of the original words used is. This is where apps and websites such as Blue letter Bible and Logos are invaluable.
As a Dispensational Baptist we believe in Verbal Plenary Inspiration. Simply put, every word in scripture was inspired by God and means exactly what it says, in context, and nothing more. That is why a proper study and understanding of Scripture is so important to a properly developed doctrine. Just as the ancient Bereans searched the Scriptures, we too must do likewise to insure that what is taught, what is preached, what is held as doctrinal is solidly based in Scripture. As a favorite Pastor of mine says, “question the assumptions”.*

• Dr. Randy White Randywhiteministries.com

 

[Rosebud77]

For a 400-year-old translation, it is pretty good. It has held up remarkably well.

A wise answer.I grew up with the King James and my university degree was in English including Anglo Saxon texts, Shakespeare, Marlow etc so it is sweetness and home for me. ( I am very old of course… )

 

[Hatikvah]

A local Christian commented that he felt the King James version of the Bible was hard to understand.

Sometimes, the KJV is hard to understand, but I do like that it has dramatic language (I know, not the purpose of Scripture!). I prefer the ESV because the NIV is untrustworthy as a translation (it was intended to be “gender-inclusive,” it is said). There are some reasons that the NIV is a bad translation here, if you are interested.

 

[Michael68]

A local Christian commented that he felt the King James version of the Bible was hard to understand.

He was right!

 

[gcnuss]

Sometimes, the KJV is hard to understand, but I do like that it has dramatic language (I know, not the purpose of Scripture!). I prefer the ESV because the NIV is untrustworthy as a translation (it was intended to be “gender-inclusive,” it is said). There are some reasons that the NIV is a bad translation here, if you are interested.

I. too, appreciate some phrases in the KJV, probably because I heard it in my childhood and it continues to be written in my memory. One particular phrase comes from Saint Luke’s account of the nativity, describing the reaction of the shepherds in the fields to the appearance of the angel. The KJV’s "and they were sore afraid’ is still my favorite when compared to the RSV’s “and they were filled with fear,’ the NAB’s 'and they were struck with great fear,” or the NRSV’s “and they were terrified.”

In the great scheme of things, though, the more recent translations may be better in allowing more people to read and understand the scriptures. Despite its beauty, the English language of 400 years ago is not the same language that we commonly use today. Our first concern must be that the sacred texts be accessible for study and contemplation.

 

[Rosebud77]

Many modern versions are banal . Lacking in holy dignity.

 

[Kielbasi]

A local Christian commented that he felt the King James version of the Bible was hard to understand.

Maybe for young people who made it through the schools in recent decades it could be difficult.

A lot of schools have abandoned teaching Shakespeare or other English language works from that time, and the young people grow up to be functionally illiterate in Old-School English.

 

[Vico]

Maybe for young people who made it through the schools in recent decades it could be difficult.

A lot of schools have abandoned teaching Shakespeare or other English language works from that time, and the young people grow up to be functionally illiterate in Old-School English.

Do English Lit. courses include Chaucer anymore?

16 Of Engelond to Caunterbury they wende,
17 The hooly blisful martir for to seke,
18 That hem hath holpen whan that they were seeke.

 

[JonNC]

A local Christian commented that he felt the King James version of the Bible was hard to understand.

I grew up in a Lutheran setting, mostly with the RSV, most of my adult life shifting from the RSV to the NIV, then finally the ESV. Now that I am in an Anglican setting, I’m trying to adjust to the KJV. It takes some time. I still like the DRB better.

Jon

 

[Vico]

I grew up in a Lutheran setting, mostly with the RSV, most of my adult life shifting from the RSV to the NIV, then finally the ESV. Now that I am in an Anglican setting, I’m trying to adjust to the KJV. It takes some time. I still like the DRB better.

Jon

RSV includes the Alexandrian sources (through the Latin Vulgate) excluded from the KJV.

 

[alwayswill]

A local Christian commented that he felt the King James version of the Bible was hard to understand.

I think we all agree that language changes :

The Lord’s Prayer in Middle English
( a few centuries before King James English)

The Lourdes Preyere

Oure fadir that art in heuenes,
halewid be thi name;
thi kyngdoom come to;
be thi wille don, in erthe as in heuene.
Yyue to vs this dai oure breed ouer othir substaunce,
and foryyue to vs oure dettis, as we foryyuen to oure dettouris;
and lede vs not in to temptacioun, but delyuere vs fro yuel. Amen.

 

[Pulvis]

RSV includes the Alexandrian sources (through the Latin Vulgate) excluded from the KJV.

After doing some personal study on the issues between the Alexandrian sources and those used in the development of the KJV, i stayed away from the ESV.
The ESV is the newest revision of the RSV. There is a good bit of discussion on the web as to the High Critical method used for the RV( known here as ASV) which has carried through to the ESV, now with a 2nd edition.
The other issue i have, which is purely personal, is the team which worked on the ESV are mostly of the Calvinist/Reformed persuasion.
I decided to just stick with the KJV and the NKJV.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Take a look at the Navarre translation.