King James Version vs. Modern Translations

The King James Version (KJV), also called the Authorized Version (AV) by some, is by far the most well known and largest printed translation of the Bible.  The form we have today is the 1611 version that was produced from the work of William Tyndale’s 1525 translation, the very first English translation of the Bible.  The AV moniker comes from the fact that King James actually commissioned, or authorized, its production.

The vast majority of people today that have a ‘church background’ were raised with the KJV as their primary, if not only, translation used.  Many churches and individuals today are strong believers that the KJV is the only version of the Bible that is accurate and the Word of God.  In fact, some go as far as to imply or outright say that the KJV is the inspired Word of God, thereby, by implication if not outright proclamation, that any and all other translations are not God’s Word, dangerous, blasphemous, heretical, etc. 

In 1960, during a Crusade event in Florida, Billy Graham said that the KJV was written in a “dead language” we “no longer use”.  He then went on to say that although he and Ruth loved the KJV, he would encourage everyone to go out and get a modern translation that they could easily read and understand.  Opponents to this position would say that one needs only the guidance of the Holy Spirit, or Holy Ghost, to understand the Bible, meaning the KJV.

After the publication of The Living Bible (TLB), Dr. Graham often used this translation.  In fact, the daily devotions published on the BGEA website often use this translation still today.  Dr. Charles Stanley also, in a recent sermon from his Atlanta, GA, church, said that he understood that his children, when they were young, had a difficult time comprehending the KJV.  Consequently, he went out and bought them leather-bound TLB when it was published, too.  These are but two examples of ‘big name’ preachers that have, long ago, departed from the KJV as their only Bible.  Incidentally, Ruth Graham was said to have over 20 translations she regularly consulted.  And Dr. Stanley uses both the New King James Version (NKJV) and the New American Standard Bible (NASB) for his Life Application Bible.

The group that many would label ‘KJV-Only’ has many arguments against the modern translations.  Some of the arguments include the change of words, which are archaic today to modern equivalences, the addition and or subtraction of words, citing Bible passages as support for this, and many other items that a simple Internet search will reveal, if you are interested in learning more about them.

In my opinion and in the opinion of many Christians today, the autographia are the inspired Word of God.  I will not ‘pledge allegiance’ to a translation.  Although we do not at this time have those original documents, God may reveal their location to the collective us at anytime He might choose.  We do have enough pieces (over 20,000) of very early (as old as middle first century) papyri and parchments that we know we have very, very accurate documentation of His Word.  So, though I personally will not call any ‘version’ the one, I do believe that the Bible is God’s revealed and inspired Word.

In recent years there have been a vast number of translations made available to the public.  Some of these are word-for-word translations, such as the NASB, the NKJV and the English Standard Version (ESV), while others are thought-for-thought translations, such as the well known New International Version (NIV) in its various forms and more recently the New Living Translation (NLT).  There is a third category that is not, in my thinking, a translation; this category is the paraphrase.  Paraphrase versions do not attempt, as do both previously mentioned types of translation, to say what the original text said in a very close manner.  Rather, they try to get the point across that the text was trying to make originally.  Examples of this type of version are The Message and TLB.  Personally, I do not like these, do not choose to read them and would not recommend them to anyone.

The Bible teaches that we, in our Christian lives, are babes as we begin our walk of faith and we mature with time.  It also teaches us that the mature Christian should be on spiritual “meat” and the babes on “milk”.  Taking this Biblical concept into consideration, I feel that the thought-for-thought translations are “milk” and the “meat” would be the word-for-word translation.  Therefore, I believe it proper that a young person or a new Christian should start out on “milk”; I recommend the NLT for this. 

I find the NLT to be very readable for people of all different ages and reading abilities.  It is fresh, modern and well laid out.  I also would like to mention that if you are looking for a study Bible in this translation, the Life Application Study Bible (LASB) is a very good choice.  Coming in multiple translations, it is the best seller in the NLT.  It also, in its second edition (this is an important thing to note when making a purchase of this translation or the LASB in any translation, with much more information being included in the newer edition of the LASB) is accurate in getting the meaning of Scripture across to the reader without altering it significantly.  Its smooth readability makes this a good choice both for public readings as well as for personal devotional reading.

For “meat” I have two translations that I like and recommend: the KJV and the ESV.  Before I explain why I like these two for my “meat” I’d like to say something about word-for-word translations and why I like them and these in particular.  Generally speaking, the Bible should, I feel, be written in a manner that is reverent.  This is, after all, God’s Word.  God being the Creator of all and the King of the universe, I think it proper and fitting to have His Word in a format that relates it to us in a manner worth of the King.  The “milk” doesn’t have to be so reverent else it might be less easily understood by the babes.  They’ll get the reverence when they get to the “meat” when they are ready.  I should also say that no matter where one fits on the milk-to-meat-scale, the leading of the Holy Spirit and prayer for His leading is absolutely essential in all of your Bible reading.

As for why I have the preference for the KJV and the ESV, there are a few reasons really.  Firstly, both of these translations are reverent in their language, something I have already stated is of importance, to me at least.  They are also both word-for-word translations, which is essential for proper Bible study I believe. 

The ESV is a modern, clear translation with the elimination of archaic wording and the inclusion of proper, modern punctuation.  These two facts make it much easier to read, especially for public reading of Scripture for any purpose.  There is also the rectification of some of the mistranslations found in the earlier translations.  These are the result of many hours invested by respected scholars as well as our access to more and older copies of texts that were not available to earlier translators.  Of course, these manuscripts are a source of contention among some.  There are arguments that these texts are from the Egypt area and are different because they were corrupted by that culture.  This is something that you, as an individual will have to mull over and decide if it makes sense to you and is a factor in your decisions as to which translation(s) you will use.

As for which version of the ESV to purchase there is really only one choice in my thoughts: The ESV Study Bible.  Schofield does publish their chain reference version in the ESV but it simply isn’t as good as the ESV Study Bible.  Take a few minutes to compare them or just to read some reviews on the Internet and I am certain that you will agree with me on this.  And the price difference between faux leather, bonded leather and genuine leather are not large so go for the genuine.  If price isn’t a consideration, the calf-skin is a luxurious option you may want to consider as well.  But I’d save the money and get one of the KJV discussed below to supplement your study.

The KJV is almost a necessity, in my opinion, for proper Bible study, too.  Many of the better commentaries, Bible dictionaries and other materials for study are written using the KJV as their reference.  I find that sermons and letters written by great preachers and evangelists of the Reformation to be wonderful sources for more in depth commentary and meditation.  These are obviously all going to refer to the KJV, too.  One of the most important study tools is a good concordance, with Strong’s being the concordance for most serious Bible readers.  While Strong’s is slowly being published keyed to other translations, the KJV is readily available, usually at public libraries, and comes in many editions.  Both the KJV Bible and Strong’s concordance are also priced from economically to moderate.  Some editions of the KJV, such as the Thompson Chain Reference and The Hebrew-Greek Key Word Study Bible, can cost up to and even over $100 though.  But for the avid Bible reader/student an investment of this size will be most worthwhile over time and the life span of the Bible itself.  I own both of these editions and would recommend them to anyone looking for a good study tool.  Depending on what you are looking for in a study Bible would make the recommendation different for one person to another. 

The Thompson is wonderful in linking Scripture topically and had many valuable charts, maps and other sections.  The chain-reference system is unmatched by any other chain-Bible, covering an immense number if subjects.  There is no commentary in the Thompson, which, incidentally, also comes in versions other then the KJV (many people do not know that).  The reason for this is to let the Bible comment on and explain itself, which is often the case.  However, with this approach a good concordance and Bible dictionary are very useful tools.  Another potential ‘downfall’ to the Thompson is that there are no real cross-references, only the chains.

The Hebrew-Greek Key Word Study Bible (HGKW) has in text references keyed Strong’s numbers.  There are also some commentaries, called Keys, to certain passages of Scripture.  They are helpful insights but, depending on your doctrine, you may not agree with these.  That is something that one faces with all commentary though and not a negative for this study Bible.  The HGKW also has an annotated concordance and Bible dictionary right in-between the covers (located in the back of the volume).  The numbers are keyed to Strong’s, so it is easy to cross check that concordance it you find the need to.  The concordance is the “concise” edition of Dr. Strong’s work and dictionary is a word by AMG.  I think both are very good tools.  Here, too, there is an earlier first edition and a newer second edition with many differences. 

The first difference I will point out to some will be the most important: word changes.  In the earlier edition, some of the archaic words are replaced with more modern one and many words that were spelled in the old English are merely respelled with modern English equivalents (ex.- in Philippians 3:17 the older edition uses the modern word “example”, whereas the newer edition uses the  ‘original’ old English word “ensample”.  There are several times this type of thing are done and to some this is a big deal and will make the HGKW undesirable in the first edition.  But take heart, the new 2008 edition goes back 100% to what we refer to the ‘original, true’ KJV (editions like the one mentioned in the early version of this study Bible are oftentimes called “counterfeit” KJV Bibles). 

Secondly, the 2008 edition combines the concordance and dictionary into a more seamless resource.  In the earlier version, they were separate sections and if you wanted to look up one word in both, you had to turn to separate pages in different sections of the study helps.  The dictionary entries in the 2008 edition now follow the concordance entries making the previous two sections into one easy to, time saving use tool.

The third unique and very helpful tool in the HGKW is that the New Testament has a Greek grammatical guide.  Many words are keys with symbols that explain the tense and grammatical usage of the word in its originally used form.  There is also a section that explains what each grammatical term means, with examples and references, for those of us that didn’t major, or even comprehend well, grammar from our school years.

I would say that the Thompson is made somewhat better, quality wise.  But it should be since its price is substantially higher than the HGKW.  In a perfect publishing-world, these two great tools would be combined into one study Bible giving is all the best of both in one superb volume.  I don’t foresee that, though, in the near future though since these two fine study Bibles are published by different entities.  I would encourage you to examine both Bibles yourself and get the one that fits your needs best.  Or if the cost isn’t prohibitive, buy them both; I can attest that they both have different uses and think you’ll put both to use.