TexasCHLforum.com

KBCraig wrote:to insist that it is the only acceptable Bible means that non-English speakers are just out of luck when it comes to reading the Word. That's rather at odds with the Great Commandment.

Beat me to it. As a future missionary I find this to an interesting viewpoint - that non-english speakers must use the KJV, lest they be "modern."


To Carlson1:
If the KJV pushes you closer to Jesus, great, but don't impose you're rule on those that prefer a more literal translation (NASB, NKJV) now - I'm sure you think that the NASB or New King is the devil's translation, but, well you're just wrong.

But I am glad to see that you are carrying and a preacher.

I would be curious to see your view on defending yourself against persecution. Certainly if someone came in the church to shoot you up, that would be persecution (which historically has furthered the church and strengthened the faith).

-nick

Just to jump in late...

The NASB is a word for word translation from the greek lexicon. Here is what it has to say:

"for just as JONAH WAS THREE DAYS AND THREE NIGHTS IN THE BELLY OF THE SEA MONSTER, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." - Matt 12:40

(emphasis is original to the NAS indicating that it is an approximate translation as there is no direct english correlation).

As for study sheets I can offer tons of pages that show why the KJV is NOT the best translation...but honestly it doesn't really matter in the scope of this board.

-nick