Posted on 03/14/2014 9:15:38 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
When Americans reach for their Bibles, more than half of them pick up a King James Version (KJV), according to a new study advised by respected historian Mark Noll.
The 55 percent who read the KJV easily outnumber the 19 percent who read the New International Version (NIV). And the percentages drop into the single digits for competitors such as the New Revised Standard Version, New America Bible, and the Living Bible.
So concludes "The Bible in American Life," a lengthy report by the Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture at Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI). Funded by the Lilly Foundation, researchers asked questions on what David Briggs of the ARDA, which first reported the results, calls "two of the most highly respected data sources for American religion"—the General Social Survey and the National Congregations Study.
The numbers are surprising, given the strong sales of NIV translations in bookstores. The NIV has topped the CBA's bestselling Bible translation list for decades, and continued to sell robustly in 2013.
The high numbers of KJV readers confirm the findings of last year's American Bible Society (ABS) State of the Bible report. On behalf of ABS, Barna Group found that 52 percent of Americans read the King James or the New King James Version, compared with 11 percent who read the NIV. The KJV also received almost 45 percent of the Bible translation-related searches on Google, compared with almost 24 percent for the NIV, according to Bible Gateway's Stephen Smith.
In fact, searches for the KJV seem to be rising distinctly since 2005, while most other English translations are staying flat or are declining, according to Smith's Google research.
(Excerpt) Read more at christianitytoday.com ...
But they won't, because they own the copyright.
Maybe when the copyright runs out they'll use the RSV/C. Or Knox. I'd even prefer Douay.
In His providence, God had prepared the Eastern Mediterranean beginning more than 500 years before the birth of Christ.
First, when the northern and southern kingdoms of Israel were destroyed Jews were dispersed throughout the region.
Second, just over 300 years before Christ, Alexander the Great established Greek speaking enclaves throughout the region. Greek became the standard language of commerce which the Romans left in place.
After Alexander the Romans replaced the Greeks and established Pax Romana, the Roman Peace. They built, maintained, and guarded roads throughout their empire. These are the roads employed by Peter, Paul and the others. In most of the places Paul visited he would start at the Synagogues. The first church services in Rome were held in synagogues which had been wrested from the Jewish leadership by Jewish converts. Home churches in Rome did not occur until after the ejection from and return to Rome by the Jews. The returning remnant found the synagogues destroyed.
200-250 years B.C. Jews who were in Alexandria, Egypt translated the LXX, Septuagint from Hebrew. This was an attempt to accommodate the dispersed Jews who were unable to read Hebrew.
By the time Jesus was born the table was set for the spread of Christianity throughout the Western world. Paul and the Apostles were blessed with peace, roads, Jewish communities with copies of LXX in hand, and the common Greek language.
I should add that the Roman peace and the Roman roads allowed the dispersed Jews to visit Jerusalem for Passover in time to hear the Apostles preaching in the power of the Holy Spirit.
There was such a tight relationship between Judaism and the spread of Christianity that the Romans assumed followers of Christus were merely a sect of Jews and afforded Christians the protected status that they had given to the Jews in the rest of the empire.
I have read through the Bible in numerous translations - KJV, NKJV, NIV, NAS, NLT, Holman, etc. Have also read through “The Message” paraphrase version.
My favorite translation is New Living Translation - it is readable and yet the Spirit speaks clearly through it. I use NLT for teaching kids at church because they can understand it easier than other translations.
Hebrews 1 should be on your list! I consider it to be one of the most beautiful words in the English language.
Since you mention 1 COR 13, I will tell a story. Most of us have heard entire sermons on 1 Cor 13, the love chapter.
Basic Bible study has as one of its first principles that chapter and verse markings are later additions to the text and are in no way inspired. We must always be on the lookout for being misled.
I use Bible software called “Logos”. It has a feature which allows me to put visual filters in the text. I built a filter which would highlight words in the English text which had been translated from Greek Imperative words. I liked the result since the highlighting shows me where the original author had been using the IMPERATIVE mood; i.e., he was SHOUTING! :)
During subsequent reading I noted that 1 Cor 13 does not have ANY imperatives in the original Greek. This means that 1 Cor 13 is entirely “descriptive”; i.e., this is what Love IS. However, my highlighting kicked in on 1 Cor 14:1:
“PURSUE love, and earnestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy.” ESV
In the very next verse Paul uses the imperative mood and commands: “PURSUE love!” So one chapter describes love followed by Paul commanding that we PURSUE it!
The newer NAB’s if my memory serves me correct have been updated so the previous problems have pretty much been fixed.
I also have the old and new King James versions, and I have found a couple of "bugs" in the NKJV since obtaining it about six months ago: bugs that I consider significant in interpreting prophecy (which is already difficult enough.)
For example, both the New and old King James new testaments indicate that the covenant went to a single seed of Abraham, which is Christ:
"Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ." (Gal 3:16 KJV)
"Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “And to your Seed,” who is Christ." (Gal 3:16 NKJV)
But in the old testament, the NKJV translators changed the "single" seed to a "plural," which make the interpretation more difficult, in my opinion:
" In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:" (Gen 15:18 KJV)
"On the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying: “To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates— " (Gen 15:18 NKJV)
In Daniel 9:27, the NKJV completely changes the meaning of the passage:
"And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:…" (KJV)
"Then he shall confirm a covenant with many for one week;. . ." (NKJV)
In the old King James, verses 26 and 27 are tied together with the conjunction, "And," which means the verses can be read and interpreted in any order. In the New King James, which is tied together with the adverb, "Then," the verses must be read in consecutive order. As aforementioned, that completely changes the meaning of the prophecy.
For example, in the King James the passage could be read in a manner where it is understood that Messiah was "cut-off" in the "midst of the week." Not so with the New King James.
Philip
I get the “suffer” duality — you allow something even if it pains or inconveniences you. But I don’t get that “let” means “don’t let”. Thanks for ‘splainin’, tho.
It must be like “sanction” — which can mean approve or disapprove.
The Noticeably Inferior Version.
The two different "let"s originated from two different words - the one meaning "let go" or "loose" from the Old English lætan, while the one meaning hinder or hold back is from the Old English letten. Must have confused the Anglo Saxons too.
As usual, your posts are most informative! Thank you!
Good arguments, and I can’t disagree. Whether the new or old is the best interpretation I don’t know. Other than the work of Arnold Fruchtenbaum, I think most theologians get it way wrong anyway.
Who says a liberal arts degree is useless? :-D
Have you read from the Joseph Smith translation of the King James Bible?
Before you quote the NIV you may want to get a copy:
Mark 1:17 says “Come follow me” Jesus said “and I will make you fishers of men.” (NIV)
The NIV was translated from the ORIGINAL GREEK AND HEBREW. And although I love the KJV, the NIV is a great book with little change other than the old language of the English.
Let us remember not to change the wording of the scriptures as they are presented in any translation. Thank you.
KJV is a great cure for insomnia. I’ll stick with NLT and The Message, thanks.
In Genesis it says in Ch 1: vs 27 NIV translation from the original Greek and Hebrew:
“So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.”
So in that context ‘man’ means both sexes; male and female equally.
The man is the spiritual leader in marriage, and Jesus is the head of the man, and man is the head of the woman....
However, the person you copied and replied to did not quote the NIV for Mark 1:17 correctly as it says “Come follow me” Jesus said “and I will make you fishers of men.” in NIV.
the KJV is a pretty acurate interpretation of most of the bible..however,the parts they intentionally left out are just as important as those included......it’s like leaving out the “S” book from the encyclopedia....too much missing information!!
nope
My take is “man” and “men” in the big picture means “Mankind.” So both male and female.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.