To be fair, one of my reasons is more personal than rational. I associate the Shakespearean English of the KJV with people trying to manufacture a vibe of Godliness, and so that style of speaking in a church or when reading Scripture rings fake to me on a visceral level. That in itself does not mean the version is better or worse than other versions available today, but it influences me personally.
On a more rational note I do believe this translation of the Bible is more difficult to understand, and this has caused a lot of issues that simply do not crop up with modern English versions. There are two reasons for this, and the second is less obvious than the first.
The first reason I believe that the KJV causes modern readers to not understand is simply that it takes a lot more conscious effort to understand this archaic version of English than what is found in a modern translation. Words that are not even in use today are scattered throughout the text, and there are oddly-structured sentences throughout. Until I was fourteen I only had a King James Bible and I rarely understood anything I was reading for this reason. I didn't understand Shakespeare for the same reason, but not understanding Macbeth is not as big of an issue as not understanding Romans.
The second reason is really what I wanted to get at in this post. This is that verses are presented as individual statements rather than portions of a more complete thought. There are no paragraphs, and sentences that span multiple verses are not laid out as if they are a complete thought. Rather each verse is presented on a new line as if it is a completely separate statement from the verse prior.
This entered my mind because I recently realized that I had not heard a specific verse improperly quoted for a very long time. This specific verse is one that I had heard quoted out of context throughout my life in prior years by multiple people many, many different times. Why did I stop hearing the misusage? Simply put, the mistake is due to how the KJV presents the verse and most people use modern translations of the Bible now. The verse in question is 1 Thessalonians 5:22, and I present below the context from both the KJV and the NIV to illustrate my point (emphasis mine).
1 Thessalonians 5:16-22 - KJV
16 Rejoice evermore.
17 Pray without ceasing.
18 In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.
19 Quench not the Spirit.
20 Despise not prophesyings.
21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.
1 Thessalonians 5:16-22 - NIV
16 Rejoice always, 17 pray continually, 18 give thanks in all circumstances; for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.Notice how completely different that verse appears in these versions largely because in one case it is presented as a complete thought and in the other it is presented inline with the rest of the context.
19 Do not quench the Spirit. 20 Do not treat prophecies with contempt 21 but test them all; hold on to what is good, 22 reject every kind of evil.
Throughout my life I have heard the instruction that we are to abstain from the very appearance of evil, which sounds great at first but ultimately leads to subjective legalism that does not in any way resemble the Gospel. It turns out that this popular interpretation of verse 22 only makes any sense when the verse is forced to stand alone as a statement in a vacuum without a hint of context. Reading the complete thought establishes that this is about what to do with bad prophecies rather than not doing something because someone in the church believes it has an appearance of evil. In the NIV this complete thought is obvious, but in the KJV noticing it takes an observant eye.
There are other reasons to prefer more modern translations over the KJV as well that largely deal with the reliability of the texts used in translating that version of the Bible. However, the issue of simply understanding the text is significant enough to me that I question the advantages for those who continue to prefer the KJV even without considering the underlying texts. Is there a possibility that you're missing something in the text due to the choice of version?
1 comment:
I tend to read in a modern version and then if I have any doubts or want to understand more deeply an original context I will look at several versions. I'm big on context. Just recently read and am exploring that most "prophesying" in the OT was about calling the people to account for wrong doing (ie not standing for justice) and not about the future.
Post a Comment