King James Only?

[yogosans14]

I watched some videos on KJVonlyists and why they believe its the 100% word of God and they think all other Bibles out there are corrupt.

The KJV is beautiful and poetic but isnt the Douay Rhiems just as good?

What do you think of it Catholics?

 

[codefro]

I watched some videos on KJVonlyists and why they believe its the 100% word of God and they think all other Bibles out there are corrupt.

The KJV is beautiful and poetic but isnt the Douay Rhiems just as good?

What do you think of it Catholics?

KJV is a beautiful bible, but it is not an approved translation for Catholics. Douay Rheims is a better translation anyways from what I have heard. I have heard for Catholics to use the RSV-CE2 for fans of the KJV

 

[JonNC]

KJV is a beautiful bible, but it is not an approved translation for Catholics. Douay Rheims is a better translation anyways from what I have heard. I have heard for Catholics to use the RSV-CE2 for fans of the KJV

I actually like the DRB better than the KJV.

Jon

 

[Catholic4Jesus]

What Bibles are approved for Catholics?

 

[codefro]

Approved translations in the US, I believe are:

New American Bible
Douay Rheims
Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition
Revised Standard Version, Second Catholic Edition
Knox Version

 

[anruari]

What Bibles are approved for Catholics?

This question gets asked so often we should have a sticky on it.

The Catholic Bible includes boss the Protestant Bibles leave out.
They must also have the approval of the Vatican or the Bishop responsible we’ve they were published.

Options include:
DRC ( Douay)
Knox
Confraternity
Jerusalem
New Jerusalem
RSV- CE
RSV-2CE
NRSV-CE
NAB
NABRE
GOOD NEWS BIBLE CE
Christian Community Bible

I assume there are some I’ve forgotten. But these are the main ones.
There are variants of those with other names and commandos but are the same translation like the CTS Bible (Jerusalem). The RSV CE ans 2CE are sold under the name Ignatius Bible

If you know what does and does not belong in the Canon you can use other Bibles “with aphocryphra.”

 

[anruari]

A Catholic edition of the ESV is very likely in coming years. But not yet available

 

[anruari]

Re the OPs question:I have no love for the KJV or the Douay. I like to read the Bible in the language I speak not what was already considered archaic in the 1600’s

I see no true piety in that.

 

[Hat4]

The big question then becomes which KJV translation is the inerrant one? They’ve had some interesting translations in the past. You might find this interesting. I can’t remember who I stole this from or I would give them credit.

betterbibles.com/2005/08/24/kjv-editions-and-some-humorous-errors/

 

[po18guy]

I watched some videos on KJVonlyists and why they believe its the 100% word of God and they think all other Bibles out there are corrupt.

The KJV is beautiful and poetic but isnt the Douay Rhiems just as good?

What do you think of it Catholics?

KJV only-ists are a very odd group, indeed. However, a King James Version which includes the Deuterocanonical books is not a bad bible. I find it very easy to demonstrate Catholic doctrine from the KJV - easier in fact, than to demonstrate it from the official Catholic bible. How strange is that? I see both the NAB and NAB/RE as very weak translations. The GNT? Forget about it. Horrible, if only because of John 2:4.

My personal favorite is the little known Confraternity bible, produced in variuous forms from 1941-1969. Most have the douay-Rheims version of the Old Testament combined with a 20th century theological English translation of the New Testament. From the language difference, you immediately know which testament you are in. You can find them in thrift stores or on eBay for about $10. A great bargain.

 

[Daizies]

My first question is usually, WHICH KJV Bible. You see, I have a reprint of the 1611 edition of the KJV Bible, and modern versions are nothing like it. The 1611 also contains the Deuterocanonical books.

 

[Indifferently]

I use the Authorized Version (KJV) at home, and yes, it is beautiful, but if others want to use other legitimate translations, then so be it.

The Douay-Rheims Bible in present circulation is a Richard Challoner revision, largely based on the KJV. If anyone wants to get hold of the ‘authentic’ Douay-Rheims published in 1610 beware: it is more or less unreadable:

Compare Ephesians 3:6-12 from the pre-Challoner Douay-Rheims:

“The Gentiles to be coheirs and concorporat and comparticipant of his promise in Christ JESUS by the Gospel: whereof I am made a minister according to the gift of the grace of God, which is given me according to the operation of his power. To me the least of all the saints is given this grace, among the Gentiles to evangelize the unsearcheable riches of Christ, and to illuminate al men what is the dispensation of the sacrament hidden from worlds in God, who created all things: that the manifold wisdom of God, may be notified to the Princes and Potestats in the celestials by the Church, according to the prefinition of worlds, which he made in Christ JESUS our Lord. In whom we have affiance and access in confidence, by the faith of him.” (spelling updated)

With the Authorized Version:

“That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord: In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.” (spelling as updated)

No comparison.

 

[CMSUVulcan]

I watched some videos on KJVonlyists and why they believe its the 100% word of God and they think all other Bibles out there are corrupt.

The KJV is beautiful and poetic but isnt the Douay Rhiems just as good?

What do you think of it Catholics?

Yes, Douay Rheims is equally as poetic as the KJV, and as its a Catholic version with a complete canon of 73 books, its much better in some ways. That being said, and its probably a result of my upbringing the Assembly of God and Southern Baptist denominations before I entered full communion with the Church at Easter 2010, I find Douay and KJV somewhat difficult to read at times because the language found in both is very archaic. As such, for study purposes I much prefer the Navarre Bible and Commentaries, the RSV Catholic Edition and even the NKJV. Don’t get me wrong, I think the KJV and the Douay are triumphs in literature and love how the psalms are translated in each. However, for study, devotional readings (for Lent, I tried and mainly succeeded in reading through the Gospel according to St. John) I prefer more modern translations such as the RSV, Jerusalem Bible, Navarre, and even the NKJV.

That being said, I should say that pretty much any bible, except perhaps the Message Bible and the one used by The Watch Tower Society (Jehova’s Witnesses) is useful for spiritual nourishment. I even knew a sister once who stated that she often liked the NIV because she found it the easiest to read. I don’t personally care for the NIV but as long as you are submitted to Rome and adhere to the Teaching and Magisterium of the Church it does not so much matter what Bible you read. IMHO, at a minimum it should have all 73 books and not the abridged 66 books that most protestant versions have, and should not be a blatant work of heresy.

 

[Indifferently]

Not to CMSUVulcan the Church of England did not remove the Apocrypha from the Bible and the Authorized Version presented in 1611 (the KJV) contains all the appropriate material. It is also in the Church Lectionary.

 

[CMSUVulcan]

Not to CMSUVulcan the Church of England did not remove the Apocrypha from the Bible and the Authorized Version presented in 1611 (the KJV) contains all the appropriate material. It is also in the Church Lectionary.

I am aware of this, it was the 1670 version that removed the Apocrypha yes? The funny --okay its more sad – thing about the gaggle of KJV only people I know is that their version of the KJV is not the 1611 version but the later one that has the seven books protestants don’t tend to recognize. Again my issue with KJV is my exact same issue with Douay. While the language is beautiful and while both the KJV and Douay represent great intellectual, literary, and artistic achievement, I find the language of both to be too archaic for me.

 

[Adamski]

I watched some videos on KJVonlyists and why they believe its the 100% word of God and they think all other Bibles out there are corrupt.

The KJV is beautiful and poetic but isnt the Douay Rhiems just as good?

What do you think of it Catholics?

I have a Baptsit friend that is a kjv only the douay rhiems doesn’t even come to thought most kjv onlys thier big gripe is bibles such as the niv which se what more different

 

[Indifferently]

I am aware of this, it was the 1670 version that removed the Apocrypha yes? The funny --okay its more sad – thing about the gaggle of KJV only people I know is that their version of the KJV is not the 1611 version but the later one that has the seven books protestants don’t tend to recognize. Again my issue with KJV is my exact same issue with Douay. While the language is beautiful and while both the KJV and Douay represent great intellectual, literary, and artistic achievement, I find the language of both to be too archaic for me.

I do also find that rather amusing. Look up “Pastor” Steven Anderson of “Faithful Word Baptist Church”. He is “King James Only” and yet rails against Christian bookshops even stocking the Apocrypha! I don’t understand this.

My preference for its use is generally cultural-historical, as well as aesthetic - I have no doubt that it is a good translation as translations go (maybe it’s not the best? I don’t know) but I find it such a pleasure to read aloud. Not only that, it sort of makes comprehension of the succeeding centuries of English literature and culture that much richer. And as for comprehension, I don’t really look for that in the pages of Bible, since I rely on the Church to interpret Scripture anyway.

 

[po18guy]

The Douay-Rheims Bible in present circulation is a Richard Challoner revision, largely based on the KJV. If anyone wants to get hold of the ‘authentic’ Douay-Rheims published in 1610 beware: it is more or less unreadable:

How is this possible, since the D-R predates the KJV?

Your KJV quote sounds rather like the 1769 revision, does it not? How can the English channel account for such a vast difference in linguistics between contemporary Englishmen?

 

[po18guy]

I have a Baptsit friend that is a kjv only the douay rhiems doesn’t even come to thought most kjv onlys thier big gripe is bibles such as the niv which se what more different

Stop it! Stop using a mobile device!!!

 

[Indifferently]

How is this possible, since the D-R predates the KJV?

Your KJV quote sounds rather like the 1769 revision, does it not? How can the English channel account for such a vast difference in linguistics between contemporary Englishmen?

1611 KJV (I have modernized the spelling):

“That the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ, by the Gospel: Whereof I was made a Minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me, by the effectual working of his power. Unto me, who am less than the least of all Saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, And to make all men see, what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world, hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places, might be known by the church, the manifold wisdom of God, According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord: In whom we have boldness and access, with confidence, by the faith of him.”

I modernized the spelling of all three. The 1611 and 1769 versions of the Authorized Version are almost identical. The 1610 Douay-Rheims is unrecognizable from Richard Challoner’s 1750s revision. The Challoner Bible, commonly called the “Douay-Rheims” is based on the King James Version.