Sign in or signup

4,436 active users!!Bandwidth
MONDAY
MAY 30, 2016
Home
NewsSITE
Events & Blogs
New Audio & Video
BroadcastersNew Stuff!
Local Church Finder
Live Webcasts
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Date
Staff PicksNew Stuff!
CommentsALL -46 min
Top Sermons
VideosPDFs
Daily Log
PhotosNew Stuff!
StoresNew Stuff!
Online Bible
Hymnal
Daily Reading
About | Ends Today!
Submit Sermon
Members Only

Breaking News Home | All | Religion | Society | Tech | Choice | FF | SA News
FRONT PAGE  |  5/30/2016
FRIDAY, APR 22, 2011  |  60 comments
Bible readers prefer King James version

If thou hast a Bible in the house right now and readeth it at least once a month, chances are strong it’s the majestic King James Version of the Bible in Elizabethan English, a new survey out today finds.

Of the 89% of U.S. adults who own at least one Bible, 67% own a King James, which marks its 400th anniversary this year, according to LifeWay Research, a Nashville-based Christian research agency.

Although there are two dozen English-language Bibles in many contemporary translations, the King James Version reigns even more supreme among those who actually read their Bibles: 82% of those who read the Good Book at least once a month rely on the translation that first brought the Scripture to the English-speaking masses worldwide. ...


CLICK HERE to Read Entire Article
www.usatoday.com

How Do We Know Bible is True?
  START  
  Recommended sermons | more..
•  Desiring God's Word • Pastor William Rogers | 12/29/2013
•  What Teacher is Right? • Frank Jones | 10/6/2002
•  Why I Believe the Bible • Voddie Baucham | 6/30/2005
•  How Do We Know Bible is True?Brian Edwards | 7/17/2008

   05/30/16  |  Bills aim to force Calif. Christian colleges to embrace... • 9 comments
   05/29/16  |  A Tale of Two Assemblies: The future of the Church in Scotland • 2 comments
   05/28/16  |  Khartoum re-arrests pastor, holds others 'pending serious... • 3 comments
   05/28/16  |  A Bible Made With Emojis • 52 comments
   05/27/16  |  Overtime Pay Mandated for More Ministry Employees • 12 comments
MORE RELATED ( RELIGION ) NEWS | MORE..
   05/30/16  |  Trudeau defends assisted suicide bill • 3 comments
   05/30/16  |  Bills aim to force Calif. Christian colleges to embrace... • 9 comments
   05/23/16  |  KFC is getting killed by a restaurant half its size • 47 comments
   05/22/16  |  Obama names transgender to faith post • 76 comments
   05/22/16  |  Church of Scotland votes in favour of ministers in gay marriages • 14 comments
OTHER CHOICE NEWS | MORE..
   05/27/16  |  Feedback Friday for 05-27-16 • 1 comments
   05/24/16  |  SermonAudio Tip: Next Generation API Available for Programmers! • 9 comments
   05/20/16  |  Feedback Friday for 05-20-16 • 4 comments
   05/13/16  |  Feedback Friday for 05-13-16 • 1 comments
   05/11/16  |  SermonAudio Tip: SermonAudio App v2.9 for Android Mobile Devices • 65 comments
MORE SPECIAL | MORE..
   05/30/16  |  Why Morality is the Only Thing We Should Legislate • 6 comments
   05/30/16  |  About 100,000 in U.S. now work for Chinese firms
   05/30/16  |  Trudeau defends assisted suicide bill • 3 comments
   05/30/16  |  Bills aim to force Calif. Christian colleges to embrace... • 9 comments
   05/30/16  |  Daughters for Sale: How Young American Girls Are Being Sold... • 42 comments
OTHER RECENT NEWS | MORE..
COMMENTS | show all | add new  
    Sorting Order:  
· Page 1 ·  Found: 60 user comment(s)
News Item9/10/15 6:22 AM
yes | real  Find all comments by yes
You ever noice that
Some people that tell
Other groups and
Some that claim to be
Born again but still
go to fellowdhip with
Roman Catholics to
prevent them from thinking
Their false doctrines are right
come to a site that featured
On every page
A link to the AV as the
Word of God
And still does
Yet these who want to say
"Don't participate in supporting falsehhood"
Come to a site that THEY say lies about
What is the Word of God-
And thus do exactly what
Hypocritically they tell others
"Do not support Groups That
claim to teach Truth from God but Lie"
I would think this level of
hypocrisy mandates ignoring their statement-
Because their deeds put to lie their actions"
60

News Item9/10/15 12:42 AM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
As I have often pointed out, when it comes to Bibles on SA, use what you wish.
James White, Doug Kutelik, etc wrote:
...the reality that the King James Version is very difficult for most children, teens, and beginning Bible students in general to comprehend. There is no doubt that someone who has studied the KJV Bible for years, with the assistance of commentaries, Bible dictionaries and such, can eventually read it without stumbling over the archaic phraseology and obsolete words. But to think that thus the average reader "ought" to be able to easily read it is not being honest with the facts. It is doubtful if any KJVO critics have insisted that the KJV was difficult for the average educated person to read back in 1611. It was intended to be a "popular" version which could be understood by the masses. But that says nothing about its "readability" in the 21st century.
excerpt from, Field Guide to the King James Only Movement.

My church, like many others, prefers the NASB. I'm not shoving that down SA's or any other person throat! King James Onlyism (schismatic aberration)

59

News Item9/9/15 7:33 PM
yes | real  Find all comments by yes
SermonAudio Prefers the Authorized KJB!
Find Exact Phrase: in Entire Bible Search!

Find These Words: in Entire Bible Search!

Search Quotes: in Famous Quotes Database Search!

Search Dictionary: in Easton's Bible Dictionary Search!

Search for Topic: in Thompson-Chain Reference Search!

Genesis 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ...

Exodus 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1

Leviticus 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Numbers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Deuteronomy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Joshua 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Judges 1 2

Ruth 1 2 3 4

1 Samuel 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

2 Samuel 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

1 Kings 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

2 Kings 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 Chronicles 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1

2 Chronicles 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ...

Ezra 1 2 3 4

Nehemiah 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Esther 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Job 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Psalms 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1

Proverbs 1 2 3 4 5 6

Ecclesiastes 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Song of Solomon 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Isaiah 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Jeremiah 1 2..etc.
And All the New Testament too
And more!
NIV removed 63,625 words!
SA gives it all: no dumbed down fake here!

http://www.sermonaudio.com/biblesearch.asp

58

News Item9/9/15 3:37 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
I didn't bring up Dr. Wallace at all, though his comments on, Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible Is the Best Translation Available Today are completely valid, it can stand on their own. THE KING JAMES ONLY DEBATE I suggest you look over all four articles.

If a Bible is not in contemporary English -- throw it in the trash heap! Alright at least a recycle bin. This is a fitting end for all KJV's that are not a family heirloom.

If you want to discuss anything relevant - - tell me why you like the American King James Bible. I would prefer New King James Version

57

News Item9/9/15 3:09 PM
truth.forJim  Find all comments by truth.forJim
Jim Lincoln wrote:
Educating everyone
Jim
You should have read the previous post on this thread it is especially for you.
Quote;
"We keep advising you to get some honest and intelligent theologians for you edification.
"Daniel B. Wallace has written an essay he titled "Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible Is the Best Translation Available Today." Dr. Wallace is the senior editor of the NET Bible, an also-ran modern English Bible version, so it's interesting to see how he defines his dismissal of the KJV. Interesting, because his essay brings forth quite a few false charges against the underlying text of the King James Bible, the Textus Receptus. The same old allegations are trotted out as if they haven't already been answered before. "Why you shouldn't care what Daniel Wallace thinks about the King James Bible"
http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/staggs-wallace.html

"Wallace pulls out the old "six verses in Revelation" standby:
"In the last six verses of Revelation, Erasmus had no Greek manuscript."
Wallace is lying anyway. The text and variants in question are not only found in various Greek manuscripts today, they were available in Erasmus' time. It is Wallace's assumption that Erasmus did not have access to these texts."

56

News Item9/9/15 2:52 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
King James Onlyism (schismatic aberration) Read the article given as a link at the bottom of this article as well.

Educating everyone, a comment I don't use often enough and should always end this nonsense about a 450 year old Bible.

Doug Kutilek wrote:
...I affirm that anything--ANYTHING--which unnecessarily puts an obstacle between the present-day Bible reader and a better understanding of the Word of God is wrong and evil. To enslave English readers to a single translation which is often archaic and obscure, occasionally wholly unintelligible and sometimes plainly inaccurate when other versions that remedy these defects are easily accessible is a monument to mere human tradition and is, as it were, to spit in the face of the very purpose of Bible translation, and to deny to the mere English reader the fuller knowledge of God and His revelation he could have if, IF such obstacles were removed by use of a revised translation which conforms to current English usage, and the infallible standard of the original text.
excerpt from, Restating The Obvious About Bible Translations
55

News Item4/29/11 5:37 AM
educatingjim  Find all comments by educatingjim
Jim Lincoln wrote:
people have noticed the defects in the AV for centuries, as another of your favorites pointed out, Dr. Wallace
Jim
We keep advising you to get some honest and intelligent theologians for you edification.

"Daniel B. Wallace has written an essay he titled "Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible Is the Best Translation Available Today." Dr. Wallace is the senior editor of the NET Bible, an also-ran modern English Bible version, so it's interesting to see how he defines his dismissal of the KJV. Interesting, because his essay brings forth quite a few false charges against the underlying text of the King James Bible, the Textus Receptus. The same old allegations are trotted out as if they haven't already been answered before."Why you shouldn't care what Wallace thinks about KJV

"Wallace pulls out the old "six verses in Revelation" standby:
"In the last six verses of Revelation, Erasmus had no Greek manuscript."
Wallace is lying anyway. The text and variants in question are not only found in various Greek manuscripts today, they were available in Erasmus' time. It is Wallace's assumption that Erasmus did not have access to these texts."

54

News Item4/28/11 3:39 PM
John UK | Wales  Find all comments by John UK
Jim Lincoln wrote:
John, U.K., people have noticed the defects in the AV for centuries...
On the contrary, people (the VAST majority) have NOT found defects in the KJV, but rather have endorsed the fact that it IS the very word of God, inspired, preserved and inerrant, suitable for Christians in every generation to decide matters of doctrine and practise, especially in giving the light of the gospel, assisted so very obviously over the centuries by the Holy Ghost, which authored the work, and who applies the word to God's elect as and when HE chooses.

Put that with your ecumenical baccy and chew on it.

53

News Item4/28/11 2:26 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
John, U.K., people have noticed the defects in the AV for centuries, as another of your favorites pointed out, Dr. Wallace, Part II: The Reign of the King James (The Era of Elegance and Part III: From the KJV to the RV (from Elegance to Accuracy).

As has been pointed out, the AV has sloppy grammar, As was pointed out in the musical, "My Fair Lady," H. Higgins, said,"The French don't care what they say, as long as they pronounce it properly." The AV was meant for Anglican churchmen who have the same philosophy.

The NKJV correct many of the errors of language and grammar of the AV.

Drs. Ankerberg & Weldon wrote:
In fact, the NKJV followed the Greek text of the Textus Receptus throughout the New Testament and "anywhere the NKJV appears to differ from the Greek text used by the KJV translators, it is because it has corrected the KJV departures from the Textus Receptus. Consequently, the NKJV adheres more closely to the Textus Receptus than does its predecessor the KJV".
from The Conflict Over Different Bible Versions - Part 9
52

News Item4/28/11 1:56 PM
Mike | New York  Find all comments by Mike
SBrowne wrote:
---
The question is where are we going from here? Will language be corrupted to such an extent that literature becomes defunct? The problem also is in communication and how future generations will deal with this growing current trend?
Me ain't got no idea, er, I mean I ain't got no idea.

You've probably noticed how often words get their proper meanings changed, right here on good old SA, by intelligent people no less. The rules of language are sometimes modified for whatever cause requires it. Maybe it's all part of the same corruption you refer to.

51

News Item4/28/11 12:30 PM
SBrowne  Find all comments by SBrowne
Mike wrote:
Mr Kutilek's use of "degrading and debasing" ignores historical use, while your "historically correct" ignores the fact that though language does change, it does not necessarily denote deterioration.
I'm not completely convinced of that Mike. I have three children and noticed whilst they went through school there was a decrease in the teaching of grammar and an increase in the use of modern technical "jargonese" such as abbreviated words used in text etc. Also what does the word "gay" convey to our generation then the generations coming up behind? I hear the atheists are trying to do the same thing with the word "bright" to make them more acceptable.

The modern versions are grammatically wrong thats a fact and when you add the dimension of dynamic equivalence then you are "taking from" the Word of God. Curiously enough the NASB does actually use "itself" in connection with a spiritual being so they are being hypocrical when calling the KJV names.

The question is where are we going from here? Will language be corrupted to such an extent that literature becomes defunct? The problem also is in communication and how future generations will deal with this growing current trend?

50

News Item4/28/11 12:29 PM
John UK | Wales  Find all comments by John UK
I don't really have any time for Mr Kutilek.

Think about it Jim, will you?

Does this chap really imagine that all on a sudden, modern 21st century man has discovered a "blasphemy" in the King James Bible which, ooo la la, no-one ever noticed before!!

Not even noticed by the great men translating the Bible?

You know what I call it, that is, men like Mr Kutilek? Proud, arrogant, patronising, haughty, and any other words useful for describing someone who talks a lot of woffle yet imagines it is high scholarship.

p.s. Did you ever answer my question about why no-one has produced a perfect modern version yet, seeing as these heretics and ecumenists make a whole load about supposed errors in the KJV, yet seem unable to produce a Bible without errors?

It's far easier to buy an inerrant, inspired Bible like the KJV, and you'll never need another Bible as long as you live.

49

News Item4/28/11 10:14 AM
Mike | New York  Find all comments by Mike
SBrowne wrote:
---
In Samuel Johnsons Dictionary of 1756 alongside the word "It" he writes,
""It is used absolutely for the state of a person or affair." And "It is sometimes used of the first or second person, sometimes of more."
So I'm afraid your Mr Kutilek is either a liar or ignorant of historic english grammar.
This will mean that the KJV is correct in it's usage of "it/itself" as indeed it is historically correct in all of it's grammar.
It is in recent times that the english language has deteriorated into such an abysmal application of grammar, even today in its literature.
Mr Kutilek's use of "degrading and debasing" ignores historical use, while your "historically correct" ignores the fact that though language does change, it does not necessarily denote deterioration.
48

News Item4/28/11 7:50 AM
SBrowne  Find all comments by SBrowne
Jim Lincoln wrote:
Strange when it comes to persons the AV refers to "Holy Spirit" as "it" which of course a blasphemy.
from,
Doug Kutilek wrote:
...the KJV shares this distinction only with the NWT of the Jehovah's Witnesses, and to a lesser extent with the RSV and NRSV translations of the apostate National Council of Churches....
To call any person, but especially to call one of the Persons of the Trinity by the English pronoun "it" is degrading and debasing, and is inexcusable. The correct pronoun--the ONLY correct pronoun--in such a case is "He."
Jim
You need to get better theological advisors than Mr Kutilek obviously is.

In Samuel Johnsons Dictionary of 1756 alongside the word "It" he writes,
""It is used absolutely for the state of a person or affair." And "It is sometimes used of the first or second person, sometimes of more."

So I'm afraid your Mr Kutilek is either a liar or ignorant of historic english grammar.

This will mean that the KJV is correct in it's usage of "it/itself" as indeed it is historically correct in all of it's grammar.
It is in recent times that the english language has deteriorated into such an abysmal application of grammar, even today in its literature.

47

News Item4/27/11 2:19 PM
Mike | New York  Find all comments by Mike
wa wrote:
Mike
Grammar used by KJV translators was perfect. Thou, Thee are definitely singular. You is definitely plural.
BTW "you" is used by Jesus in that chapter for example at v8 and 9.
The Greek word for "you" is "humin" [5213] = Irreg. Dative case/ fm Irreg Plural.
V35 "Thee" Greek word "soy" [4671]. Dative case. Fm "su" Pers. Pronoun, 2nd pers Singular.
Which as the Scots might say, "Maks it a wee bit mair coplucatit."
Is you is, or is you ain't?
46

News Item4/27/11 2:14 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
Most everything you never wanted to know about "thee," "thou," "ye"
Preface of the NIV wrote:
As for the traditional pronouns "thou," "thee" and "thine" in reference to the Deity, the translators judged that to use these archaisms (along with the old verb forms such as "doest," "wouldest" and "hadst") would violate accuracy in translation. Neither Hebrew, Aramaic nor Greek uses special pronouns for the persons of the Godhead. A present-day translation is not enhanced by forms that in the time of the King James Version were used in everyday speech, whether referring to God or man.
from, The KJV's Archaic Language Pros and Cons Actually this commentary does point out some pros. In other words, KJVO types should find parts of the article interesting.
45

News Item4/27/11 11:44 AM
wa  Find all comments by wa
Mike wrote:
wrong again, as you say, he's addressing all. Apparently "thee" is not always thee, pronoun, objective, singular, after all. Sometimes it means you, especially if a crowd is being addressed. But maybe it's because it's a single crowd. That works.
Mike
Grammar used by KJV translators was perfect. Thou, Thee are definitely singular. You is definitely plural.

BTW "you" is used by Jesus in that chapter for example at v8 and 9.
The Greek word for "you" is "humin" [5213] = Irreg. Dative case/ fm Irreg Plural.

V35 "Thee" Greek word "soy" [4671]. Dative case. Fm "su" Pers. Pronoun, 2nd pers Singular.

Which as the Scots might say, "Maks it a wee bit mair coplucatit."

44

News Item4/27/11 11:19 AM
Mike | New York  Find all comments by Mike
John UK wrote:
I think you will find, Mike, that a preacher will address an individual because he is seeking to convince an individual, even though there be a crowd. Each one in the crowd is an individual, and each one needs to hearken to the message individually. I think that makes more sense than your "single crowd" idea.
Maybe a minister or others would like to comment on that.
That makes more sense than what I've heard so far, John. Sorta. Thee is one, or thee is one of many ones, or thee is many ones. Seems like there's no need for "you" at all. Guess it doesn't amount to a hill of beans anyway.
43

News Item4/27/11 6:25 AM
John UK | Wales  Contact via emailFind all comments by John UK
Mike wrote:
wrong again, as you say, he's addressing all. Apparently "thee" is not always thee, pronoun, objective, singular, after all. Sometimes it means you, especially if a crowd is being addressed. But maybe it's because it's a single crowd. That works.
I think you will find, Mike, that a preacher will address an individual because he is seeking to convince an individual, even though there be a crowd. Each one in the crowd is an individual, and each one needs to hearken to the message individually. I think that makes more sense than your "single crowd" idea.

Maybe a minister or others would like to comment on that.

42

News Item4/26/11 11:04 PM
Alan H | Washington State  Protected NameFind all comments by Alan H
Mike wrote:
wrong again, as you say, he's addressing all. Apparently "thee" is not always thee, pronoun, objective, singular, after all. Sometimes it means you, especially if a crowd is being addressed. But maybe it's because it's a single crowd. That works.
Your interpretation cannot supercede the Greek language Mike. If it does, you are forced into changing your interpretation. TRY AGAIN!
41
There are a total of 60 user comments displayed | add new comment |Subscribe to these comments
Jump to Page : [1] 2 3 | last
Last PostTotal
Daughters for Sale: How Young American Girls Are Being Sold...
dave from oz: "sorry, but you are displaying ignorance sc , i also do at times. i..."
-1 min 42 
Trudeau defends assisted suicide bill
wayfarer pilgrim from lubbock,tx: "connor, if good people don't stand for good..."
-37 min 
Bills aim to force Calif. Christian colleges to embrace...
wayfarer pilgrim from lubbock,tx: "christians need to look long and hard and decide..."
-41 min 


Bill Parker
Mystery of Church in Last Age

The Mysteries of the Kingdom
Sunday Service
Eager Avenue Grace Church
Play! | MP4 | RSS


Hourly: A Prayer Meeting in Hell
Rev. Reginald Cranston
Port Hope Free...
Staff Picks..

E. A. Johnston
Violated God In Apostate Land

Evangelism Awakening
Teaching
Transcript!Play! | MP3

Sponsor:
The Expositors Summit 2016 Conference

The Pastor and the Pulpit Mohler | Begg | Lawson
events.sbts.edu/expositorss..

Sermon: The Spirit of Sorcery - Part 1
Samson Jebutu

SPONSOR | 4,700+

SPONSOR




                   
Spiritual growth consists most in the growth of the root. ... Matthew Henry

Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal


MOBILE
iPhone + iPad
Church App
Android New!
Church App
Kindle + Nook
Chromecast TV
ROKU TV
Amazon Fire TV
BlackBerry | Win
Apple Watch
Android Wear
Kindle Reader


HELP
Knowledgebase
Broadcasters
Listeners
Q&A
Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Webcasting
Tips & Tricks
YouTube Screencasts

FOLLOW
Weekly Newsletter
Staff Picks Feed
Site Notices New!
RSS | Twitter | Facebook
SERVICES | ALL
Local Church Finder | Info
MP3 Play & Download
Mobile Apps
Podcasting
Video Support
Live Webcasting
Transcripts | PowerClips
Business Cards
SOLO | MINI Sites
Domain Redirect
Favorites | QR Codes
Online Donations
24x7 Radio Stream
INTEGRATION
Sermon Browser
HTML Codes
WordPress
Twitter
Facebook
Logos | e-Sword | BW
JSON API New!

BATCH
Transfer Agent
Protected Podcasts
Upload via Email
Auto-Upload Sermons
Auto-Blog Import
Picasa | FTP | Dropbox
ABOUT US
The largest and most trusted library of audio sermons from conservative churches and ministries worldwide.

Our Services | Articles of Faith
Broadcast With Us | PowerClips New!
Advertising | Local Ads
CONTACT
info@sermonaudio.com
Support Us | Feedback Fridays New!