Hi SHANE,
SF>Sorry to step in here
SF>Brother Charlie but:
 -=> On the 02-14-98  08:05 <=-
-=> Charlie chatted with Bill regarding Modernism, etc. <=-
SF>------Lots removed------
 CR> I still use the KJV for memorization because of its beautiful and
 CR> poetic language.  However, for preaching and teaching I use either
 CR> New King James Version or the New International Version (and somet
 CR> the New American Standard Bible).  I never use the KJV because it 
 CR> obsolete as far as I'm concerned.
SF>Could you please explain to this brother what you mean by the word *obs
SF>in the above paragraph? Please......
I mean two things.  First, the English language of the KJV is obsolete and 
so its translation may have been good for 1611 but many of the English 
terms are now archaic except for those church groups using it.  The culture 
at large is unfamiliar with some of those terms and doesn't understand the 
KJV.  An example would be "cloven" which modern translations change to 
"divided."  
Second, I mean that the KJV is obsolete because in 1611 the scholarship 
committee had only a few hundred Greek manuscripts and the regarding the OT 
the Dead Sea Scrolls had not yet been discovered.  We now have over 5,000 
Greek manuscripts supporting the NT and we have hundreds of copies of the 
Masoretic text manuscripts of the OT which are supported by the Dead Sea 
Scrolls.
What is inspired is not the KJV--it is only a translation of the inspired 
Word of God.  What is inspired is the original autographs which the 
apostles and prophets wrote, none of which we have today.  What do have are 
copies of copies of copies.  The discipline of textual criticism is a 
scientific method by which we can reasonably reconstruct the original 
reading of the original autographs.  Modern translations done by 
Evangelical scholars are much more accurate than the KJV.  A few examples 
are the NIV, NASB, NASB updated version, TEV, NKJV, etc.  I also consider 
the RSV and the NJB good translations, though they are not done by 
Evangelicals.
SF>I don't know why but I became rather alarmed upon reading it and would 
SF>calm my fears if you will...
The truth is nothing to be afraid of.
 CR> 1 Timothy 4:16
 CR> Watch your life and doctrine closely.
 CR> Persevere in them, because if you do,
 CR> you will save both yourself and your hearers.  (NIV).
SF>Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in
SF>this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee. KJV
SF>I think this is much nicer to read don't you?   :) IMHO
It is meaningful to those of us who are familiar with the KJV.  I grew up 
reading the KJV.  The problem was that as a child I often had to exegete 
the language of the KJV.  Who talks that way in real life?  Did you know 
that the NT is written in the common everyday trade language of the day?  
Koine Greek was not a scholar's language or some archaic classical 
language.  It was the fisherman's and trader's language of the day.  In 
other words, the NT was written in the plain and common language of the 
working man.  Why should we do any less?
The KJV was good translation for its time and it still conveys accurately 
the Word of God for those who prefer that version.  However, I refuse to be 
bound by the traditions of men when I know better:)  I have studied Greek, 
Hebrew, textual criticism, etc. and am aware of the issues.
I would highly recommend James R. White's book, THE KING JAMES ONLY 
CONTROVERSY, (St. Paul, MN: Bethany House, 1996).  A mind is meant to be 
used.  God did not tell us to turn off our minds but to worship Him with 
all of our mind.  That means that we must also deal with issues like this 
head on while not forsaking the truth of the Gospel or selling out to 
modernism.
Sincerely in Christ,
Charlie Ray, 
Chaplain
1 Timothy 4:16
Watch your life and doctrine closely.
Persevere in them, because if you do,
you will save both yourself and your hearers.  (NIV).
chaplain@isgroup.net
---
 * WR  # 461 * Sola Scriptura, Solus Christus, Sola Gratia, Sola Fide.
---------------