Charisma House Announces 'Most Modern Version' of KJV

Sounds like this version won't please anyone. Those looking for a more current language version based on the King James already have the NKJV. The King James only crowd won't like any 'modern' translation (especially with a new name) and those looking for a better translation won't like the fact that it will just follow the KJV and not change anything that could have been better translated from the original manuscripts.

I wonder the reason for this. I hope it isn't a way of making money for the publishers.

I wonder the reason for this. I hope it isn't a way of making money for the publishers.

thats exactly what it is. i believe the kjv is a public domain, or something similar to that. by changing it they can create a new copyright 4 their transcript which is owned by the publishing company, and they make money on every copy sold. bible publishing is BIG $$$. so is music publishing and other print media such as sunday school and vbs material. every year there is a new vbs theme that is the hottest thing while the owners of the publishing companies line their pockets. and the sheeple gobble it up.

stand and sing with me:

my faith is based on nothing less
than scofields notes and scripture press

i am not sum scholar on bible versions but i do know that when u go to the bookstore there are literally hundres of versions that are supposed 2 be in modern english, so-called. how many modern english versions will they have 2 make before they get it right? this is all about copyrights and MONEY. u do not have 2 be a rocket surgeon 2 figure this out. my 8 year daughter figured this out.

Heydave wrote ///Sounds like this version won't please anyone. Those looking for a more current language version based on the King James already have the NKJV. The King James only crowd won't like any 'modern' translation (especially with a new name) and those looking for a better translation won't like the fact that it will just follow the KJV and not change anything that could have been better translated from the original manuscripts.///

Its success will be based on what Strategies they will use for marketing, The advantage they have is that There is a Large charismatic crowed which does not have a version to claim for their own, They will need to follow in the steps of the succesful (ESV), in declaring the (MEV) as a word-for-word translation and for this reason a much more reliable translation than a 'dynamic equivalence' approach such as that of the (NIV). If they propaganda this fact strong enough as what the (ESV) has, than they can draw more conservative charismatics away from the (NIV) to the (MEV) as how the (ESV) has been successful with drawing conservative reformed and calvinist away from the (NIV) in favour of the (ESV)

As with the (NKJV) they have another quality that can benifit them, but they have to walk this tight rope very carfully as not to be thrown into being sterotyped with the KJV only crowed, As the NKJV They will need to make the case that there is an increasing opinion that the Majority text is superior to that of the Critical (eclectic text.) This argument can draw some as what the (NKJV) has, of those whom are disturbed by verses like Acts 8:37, Mat. 18:11 etc. being removed from the modern versions but of whom are not completely sold on the KJV only position.

They will probably spend alot of effort in promoting their version as containing these superior qualities and like the NKJV maintaining the beauty of the past but providing a more updated version with more clarity and easer readability for a new generation.

They will also need to get popular christian leaders that they are in association with to openly promote the (MEV) as we see happens with all new versions.

proudpapa u nailed it. its all about the almighty dollar.

I may be the only one, but I'm actually happy to see this.

The KJV and NKJV are the only English translations currently available which are based on the Majority text.

It would be great to have a dynamic equivalent translation based on the Majority Text.

While we have a lot of translation debates etc., I think the plethora of translations, while unnecessary, can be quite a blessing. Many times I have learned something new by comparing translations or reading through a translation I haven't used before. I've read 5 different translations all the way through and was glad I did each time.

Since shortly after my conversion to Christ as a teen-ager I have been addicted to the habit of acquiring and being disappointed with new versions of the Scriptures, both revisions and new translations.

It is a habit I cannot shake off. In spite of a long record of frustrated hopes and cruel disappointments, to this day I have but to hear a new version of the Scriptures has come out and I am off to the book-seller to pick up a copy.

- A.W. Tozer, "Confessions of a New Version Addict"

Original source: http://www.orange-street-church.org/text/addict.htm

u can lead a horse to water, but u cant make him drink.

conversely, real believers do in fact read their bibles in whatever form they may have it in be it a bible big enuf 2 choke a mule, or a page or two torn out and passed around in a cave. a christian who does not have a desire to read gods word duz not have the holy spirit residing inside them becuz he gives the believer that desire. no desire no holy spirit. no holy spirit no salvation. no salvation no christian.

Whether the reason for the proliferation of translations is the copyright and the money that comes with it, or whether it is a true desire to see the word of God available to all people?...I am sure it is a mixed bag. I agree with earlier posts. The problem that I have in my own life is allowing the word of God to become revelation to me that changes the very fabric of who and what I am. As a teacher of the word, I often find myself struggling with this. The translation is not, in my opinion, the key. The key is getting into the word and allowing the word to transform my life. The Holy Spirit is the one who quickens the word to us. To borrow from Wigglesworth, I need to read my Bible in the Holy Ghost and allow Him to reveal it to me.

One of the greatest deceptions of the enemy in the West is to make it so that believers do not trust the words of God with the multiplicity of translations. This is tragic..

I think When meditating on Bible translations, It is absoulte necessary to ask ourself where is the enemy in all of this?
Has he just put distorting and destroying the Scriptures on the back burner?

The above quote is a reality, It is one of the fruits that has been created as the serpent of historical criticism has increasingly crept its way into the church.

The issue at hand is not so much one of prefrence of Bible translation as it is one of inspiration, Few people today believe that the scriptures we have are inspired.

Charles C. Ryrie wrote "For if even one part of our Bible is thought to be false, how can any of it be trusted to be true?

Is the Pericope De Adultera, John ch 7:53-8:11 a Counterfeit or Genuine??

"....not trust the words of God with the multiplicity of translations."

So what ARE the words of God?

If the translations would all agree with each other it would be easy. But someone does not want it to be easy for us. He actually makes us want to doubt the inspiration and the preservation of God's words. So we can claim "this translation says it in that way...not God says so". There you go, not responsible to God, it's just a translators's opinion that made me do it.

King James Version
2 Corinthians 2:17 "For we are not as many which corrupt the word of God"

New King James Version
2 Corinthians 2:17......"peddling the word of God" ( like the NIV, NASV and RSV )

Both sounds generally true, but which Paul is the original, and what did God inspire and preserve here, at this position 2 Cor 2:17?

Re: a-servant quote: "Both sounds generally true, but which Paul is the original, and what did God inspire and preserve here, at this position 2 Cor 2:17? "

Hi a-servant. Here is what I do when I see two different wordings of a passage of scripture. I go back to look at the original language and what the lexicons say is the definition of the words.

So using the KJV greek we find that the word 'corupt'(KJV) comes from the original greek 'kapēleuō'. This word means to be a huckster, to peddle; to corupt; to make money by selling. So to answer your question, both are technically correct, but I would say that the NKJV gives a better definition of the word.

If we choose the words of the KJV, just because it is the KJV then I think we are being disengenuous. Why should we choose one over the other when we have access to the original language text and in this instance both the NKJV and the KJV draw from excatly the same manuscripts?

By looking into this particular verse and seeing both ways that it is translated and then checking the meaning of the word, I got a blessing, thank you! I now see what it means in a deeper way. I draw something from both the NKJV and the KJV and it tells me that it is talking about those who corupt the word by making it a means of financial gain. Probably very relevant to the topic here!

In fact it would not make sense to infer that Paul is talking about changing the 'translation' of the written word of God, as part of it was still being written here. In fact in the context of the rest of this verse it is clear he is talking about the 'spoken' word of God. "...in sight of God speak we in Christ" he says, i.e preaching.

I'm just trying to be a good berean :). I think both the KJV and NKJV are good translations, but it's good to check out meanings if we are unsure. God gave us the intelligence and resources to do this. Did God preserve His word? Absolutely He did. We have hundreds of reliable manuscripts. Unfortunately for you and me God decided not to have them written in English!

Seems like there is always some "newer" more "readable" to this Generation Bible. Hmmm

Heres some more food for thought ...Jesus actually didnt want his words to be understood ( by all)

Lest they hear with ears - and there hearts should be converted.

Therefore do i speak to the multitude in parables.

More readable ( sorry but i now laugh at ) more readable translations

In ten years from now language will change yet again:

Back to the publishing for profit drawing board ... we need ...a more legible readable bible translation ( qoute unqoute )

That was supposedly the quest of Niv and new kjv ( more readable )

Only problem - is language keeps changing. ( Grrrr)

Hey HeyDave,

"Why should we choose one over the other when we have access to the original language text and in this instance both the NKJV and the KJV draw from excatly the same manuscripts?"

Ahhhh, that's what the publisher of the NKJV wanted to make us believe. And you answered my question based on the assumption of the correctness of that statement.

Let me quote you a source that also looked into this in detail:

"The NKJV repeats the lie that "There is only one basic New Testament used by Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox, by conservatives and liberals." In fact, there are two: the perverted Alexandrian line that was continued by the Roman Catholic religion and the preserved, apostolic, Antiochian line that progresses from the Christians at Antioch of Syria ( Acts 11:26 ) to our precious King James Bible."

"The New King James is NOT a King James Bible. It changed thousands of words, ruined valuable verses, and when not agreeing with the King James Bible, it has instead copied from the NIV, NASV or RSV"

So it looks to me like the mix & match of all available text streams based on their liking.

To my understanding after reading the context of 2 Cor 2:17 only the first makes sense here, since nobody would accuse Paul out of thin air in the middle of a sentence to sell the word for wordly profit.

"For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ"

When you're aware to be in the sight of God in fullest sincerity, you're first of all concerned to be truthful according to the word received. Corruption of the message is impurity that has serious consequences in his position. "Peddling" isn't content related, it's a completely different topic and has nothing to do with the rest of the sentence.