Acts20.com

In my sermons, I typically use the KJV (although I am not at all against other versions). However, there are times when I will use another version's wording because it is more understandable.Sometimes, I make a change to the KJV (to provide clarity)--e.g., If it says, And, lo, he said unto them..., I might reword it to say, And Jesus said unto them.... When I do that, I change the KJV notation (on the verses I have copied and pasted) to AES (my initials)...just so I know that it's not precisely like the KJV.

Why do you favor the KJV?

A little detail not to cool down your youthful enthusiasm, but to encourage further discussion.You most probably do not use a KJV because there are very few people who actually own an original 1611 KJV print. They are very old to preserver in a home setting, very heavy to carry around, very rare to find and quite pricey.In most probability, you use a very renewed and revised KJV with 20th century print, clean from all the original wife-beater-like print errors and the corrupt TR, and heavily adapted for the modern American speaker. There is a similar trend with the printed NIV, which were popular in the 1980-90s, and the current online NIVs in various apps that have been largely and freely redacted. Now, there is an original KJV app which is free. It downloads the pages as pictures and some use it, but I strongly doubt anyone prefers it

I suppose growing up with it is at least part of my reason.Another is that a good portion of my church is best acquainted with the KJV.But the MAIN REASON is that I simply think it is the superior version. I know that is absolutely disputable, but over and over, when I read other versions, I often find that they seem almost infantile (i.e., TOO simplistic) compared to the KJV. It's about like a high school book compared to a kindergarten book in many cases.Also (and I could of course be missing this in the KJV), it seems that some of the versions are tailored along a specific line of doctrine that aligns with their church.Also, I have yet to find anyone who has found any earth-shaking error in the KJV. In fact, no major doctrine (or even minor one, that I know of) is twisted in the KJV. If we found that were the case, then, yeah, I'd probably want to take an extra look, etc.

I'll take this opportunity to highlight two excellent resources that I recommend to any minister--First, Daniel Wallace's excellent lecture series on textual criticism, which is available for free on BiblicalTraining.org -- www.biblicaltraining.org/textual-criticism/daniel-wallaceDr. Wallace teaches at DTS and is one of the leading evangelical textual critics in the world. He is also a firm defender of the integrity and authority of Scripture. This is an absolutely spectacular lecture series where you will learn the history of the manuscript tradition from the earliest days until now, how early and later scribes worked, how errors are introduced into copies and how they can be detected, and more. I cannot recommend this lecture series strongly enough.I also recommend the book

This is, in my opinion, an excellent reason to choose the KJV as your primary preaching text, especially if you are using the AES where appropriate. I disagree with your opinions about the superiority of the KJV, but I greatly respect this decision to make the text approachable in the context in which you serve.You are also 100% correct that no major doctrine is challenged or in question due to any variation present in the KJV. In fact, of the many significant variants we have in the text, absolutely none of them concern any major Christian doctrine. This is in my opinion a testimony to God's providential care for his word and for the transmission of that word to his people.

Not to be repetitive, but I quite strongly doubt that most of your congregation has ever seen an actual KJV none the less being acquainted with one:www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/John-Chapter-1 Original-1611-KJV/Most proponents of KJV, which I prefer as well in my personal readings, don't even know it contains the Apocrypha. Hence, the new app has a special note there called: What is this?www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/1611-Bible

I am aware that the KJV I use is not the one from way back in the 1600s. At the same time, I understand that it is closely derived from the original version.I also use the NKJV sometimes. For new converts, I would personally recommend the Readers's Digest Condensed Version--it is about 40% shorter (if I recall) due to combining certain stories (e.g., the episodes related in more than one gospel...stories of the kings that appear in multiple books, etc.) and condensing things like repetition and so forth.

I would avoid the reader's digest form at all costs. The Spirit is our teacher regardless if we are a new christian or not. Why baby anyone. All this talk about bible translations. We don't have the original to compare so nobody can say which is best. Very few have that have the knowledge of the languages, biblical criticism and transmission to make even a scholarly guess. It is personal preference, tradition and how many were taught

The sad truth is that many people do not read the Bible due to it's length...or due to its difficulty. The Condensed Version solves both of those to some degree.It is far more readable than the KJV and many other versions.