Is the KJV truly the best Bible translation?

Is the KJV truly the best Bible translation?

Man-made Horrors Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

Man-made Horrors Shirt $21.68

  1. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    It’s the most literary. I assume that’s why you’re reading the Bible in the first place: as literature.
    New King James is a fine alternative if the Shakespearean English is difficult for you.

    • 7 months ago
      Cult of Passion

      >I assume that’s why you’re reading the Bible in the first place: as literature.
      Do Anons really?...

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's definitely not the most literary. I would even say that it's one of the less literary bibles out there. It changes so much that you can't even differentiate between the different writing styles of the different authors, they all write like King James instead.

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        It is by definition the most literary because it is the one that is most widely read and referred to.

        • 7 months ago
          Anonymous

          What's your definition of "literary"?
          According to Oxford, its:
          >concerning the writing, study, or content of literature, especially of the kind valued for quality of form.

          How can you say that a translation that changes a lot of things from the original to even have it's own writing style to be the most literary? You are not studying the original bible, you are not taking the original content from the original bible. It might have more quality but that quality was not in the original.

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            As a rule: When someone pulls up a dictionary definition, the discussion is over and can go nowhere

          • 7 months ago
            Anonymous

            First of all, this is not a discussion. Second, I asked you for your definition before giving the one from Oxford
            >What's your definition of "literary"?

  2. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    the kjv is barely even a translation
    like 70% is verbatim taken from an earlier translation, yet you never see anyone jerking that one off.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >revision of a translation is similar to the original one

  3. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    no

  4. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Most definitely. Don't make the mistake of starting with the NIV and then moving on to the NKJV like I did. Nothing compares to the KJV

  5. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Reading the KJV feels like the real deal, everything else feels dumbed down.

  6. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    The Gutenberg Bible is the only one I read.

  7. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Missing the apocrypha
    It's not even a Bible

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      there are kjvs with apocryhpa, you just gotta look anon.

  8. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    No, it's protestant, for God's sake.

  9. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    no, King James was a gay

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's incredible how all of the most hardline anti-groomer, anti-sodomy, antisemitic Protestants are militant about only accepting a Bible supervised by a serial-sodomite who was molested as a boy and took instructions on the Biblical canon from israelites.

  10. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    I enjoy it, but I'm not sure it will be easiest for many to understand. ESV or NASB is a good entry if you find KJV difficult.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      NASB makes Jesus a liar in John 7:8-10

      • 7 months ago
        Anonymous

        >John 7:8-10
        Pish posh. What nonsense. Are you literally unable to comprehend the obviously implied "right now" in that verse? Apply a little common sense.

  11. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why are Americans so obsessed with the King James though?

  12. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Elisabethian Church Slavonic Bible is the best and it's not even close

  13. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    You have to imagine it in this kind of voice to really get it: https://ia601906.us.archive.org/34/items/lp_the-cambridge-treasury-of-english-prose-vo_unknown-artist-cambridge-university-member/disc1/02.04.%20Authorized%20Version%20Of%20The%20Bible%2C%201611%2C%20Ecclesiastes.mp3

  14. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    The Bible is outdated anyway and the future of spirituality lies in NDEs as NDEs are irrefutable proof of life after death, because anyone can have them if they come close to and survive death. And they are so undeniably real to those who have them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U00ibBGZp7o

    As this NDEr described their NDE:

    >"I saw how life never ends. I remembered the process of reincarnation is endless, wonderful and truly eternal. I witnessed my own spiritual evolution and saw that I had existed long before this present incarnation (where I am now a male human). For me, watching the process of living life, after life, after life unfold, was mind-blowing! I undeniably observed that I had lived an innumerable amount of lives. My NDE clearly showed me that these bodies (we now inhabit) are not the first and only time we have existed! I saw that our soul and spirit is ancient! I also observed that there is no such thing as death."

    And importantly, even dogmatic skeptics have this reaction, because the NDE convinces everyone. So anyone would be convinced if they had an NDE, we already know this, no one's skepticism is unique. And the book in pic related is known to convince even hardened skeptics that there is an afterlife.

    >muh brain chemistry

    Neuroscientists are convinced by NDEs too. What do skeptics think they understand that neuroscientists do not?

    >muh DMT causes it

    Scientifically refuted already, and NDErs who have done DMT too say that the DMT experience, while alien and really cool and fun, was still underwhelming to the point of being a joke when compared to the NDE.

    • 7 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Neuroscientists are convinced by NDEs too.
      source?

  15. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    Is that the bible that made American evangelicals believe unicorns were real but got extinct in the flood?

  16. 7 months ago
    Anonymous

    it's by far the most aesthetic and literally, having the most influence on the English language than any other work, also the translators weren't tainted with modernism.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *