Hi Doris,

Yes, the KJV often gets spoken about as the Authorised version  here in the 
UK.

I'm afraid I haven't used E-Sword so can't offer any advice of its use with 
JAWS.  The Online Bible still remains my preferred method of looking up when 
on the computer, though I do sometimes do this online instead.  I also carry 
Bibles around in various formats on my BrailleNote.  How blessed I am and 
how much is available to us when I look back on the days where Braille Bible 
books were always strewn around my bed for study and had to be put back up 
on the top shelf before bed . . ..  Praise God, at least I had it!

--
Carol
[log in to unmask]



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chipmunks" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: READING AND RESPONDING TO DIFFERENT TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE


>I take it the AV is the equivalent of the KJV? Over the years since 
>becoming a Christian, I have encountered many individuals who preferred the 
>KJV bible and several who actually think it to be the only inspired bible 
>version. My husband and I once even encountered a Bible college who had 
>"Sole Scriptua, sole KJV" as the motto they wentby.
>
> Being a non-native speaker of English originally, I grew up without any 
> tradition of any particular Bible version. I cannot subscribbe to any 
> doctrine of the KJV being the only inspired bible translation for the 
> simple fact that there are hundreds of bible translations in other 
> languages besides English and I think they are as valid as any English 
> translation and this very fact already prooves to methat there cannot be 
> just one legitimate Bible version or translation.
>
> After devouring a good part of the Old Testament of a German bible as a 
> second grader before becoming bored with the repitition of Chronicles 
> after The Books of Samuel and Kings, my first encounter with the Bible as 
> a young adult was actually with the KJV. I had heard that the KJV used 
> language very similar to Shakespearean English, which I loved,and i 
> originally set out to read the bible as literature for the beauty of its 
> language. I first met the Messiah in passages from Psalms and the Prophets 
> and in KJV English.
>
> When I started reading for meaning and content, I found the KJV fairly 
> archaic and hard to understand.
>
>
> I started reading more modern translations. I have always enjoyed working 
> with different translations and comparing them. I find this very enriching 
> and the next best thing to being able to read the bible in the original 
> Greek and Hebrew. the church I attended as a young Christian encouraged 
> the use of multiple bible translations and I much enjoyed our weekly bible 
> studies where people brought their preferred trnaslation and we took turns 
> reading passages. It was enriching to compare versions at times.
>
> I did over time adopt a translation that I used the most and as Carol 
> said, when I remember verses or passages, the wording is that of my 
> preferred translation usually, but I maintain my interest and enjoyment of 
> multiple translations.
>
> When discussing the validity of the use of modern translations in 
> contemporary English over the traditional translation of the KJV, i think 
> it is important to remember that the Scriptures in the original languages, 
> especially the New Testament, were not written in any one particular 
> literary style. the old Testament is a library of many different styles of 
> literature, ranging from the beautiful poetry of the PPsalms in the Jewish 
> Hymanal to the historical accounts of the Jewish Scriptures. The New 
> Testament was not written in Classical lliterary Greek but in the 
> colloquial Greek that Jesus contemporaries spoke, many of which were 
> non-native speakers of Greek, as were the majority of the New Testament 
> authors.
>
> I find the variety of translations refreshing and enriching and think it 
> is most important to prayerfully consider which translation works best for 
> the individual to receive God's work.
>
> Anyone intersted in studying multiple tramslations of the Bible might want 
> to have a look at the free E-Sword Bible package available from
>
> www.e-sword.net
>
> While not that easily accessible, the latest version of E-Sword works well 
> enough with speech to permit reading of different Bible versions. 
> Unfortuantely I find that the notes and commentaries remain inaccessible 
> to me. If anyone on here has found jaws scripts for E-Sword or come up 
> with a way to access all the material and resources in the program, i 
> would be grateful for a pointer.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Doris
>
>
>
> At 09:54 AM 7/6/2006 +0100, you wrote:
>
>>Hi there Sharon, and all,
>>
>>Hmmm!  I have been thinking over the past hour or two, since seeing your 
>>message . . ..  (I've taken the liberty of changing the subject header 
>>here because some may find that "upgrading" thought a little tackey.
>>
>>First, in full defence of the AV, I am very prepared to agree its 
>>outstanding accuracy and truthfulness and the need for this in the Church. 
>>I know and respect those who feel so passionately they wouldn't use 
>>anything else!  (I even know some on this list and I reckon they won't 
>>keep quiet for too long <SMILE>!)
>>
>>For me, I grew up with the AV and learned and got to know its wording so 
>>well that, if I am imprisoned or without a Bible in later years, I know 
>>these are the words I will be crying out!  Therefore, there is something 
>>very special for me about the AV.
>>
>>However, alongside this, I do find its archaic, old English language both 
>>a bit sweet and treakley and certainly it's something which I do not fully 
>>understand or identify with.  For example, I even find 1 Corinthians 13 
>>causes me to feel I'm being called (though not drawn) to the litergy of 
>>the church and not the real meaning of the passage on occasions, 
>>especially when this is delivered in a large church with a lot of echo, 
>>and for me there are far better, more modern, translations of that lovely 
>>passage.  It is for this reason that I still read the old but also more 
>>modern translations and allow God to speak with me and refresh me as I do 
>>so!
>>
>>Your example in Luke 7 is so right, to my mind.  "Cry" and "weep" are 
>>words I understand and appreciate, and even think there is a difference 
>>between them, and that comment is based on my own experience.  Why say 
>>something more when these words are adequate!
>>
>>I don't want to say too much about individual versions, but I do keep a 
>>copy of the NIV around on my BrailleNote because it sort of is the general 
>>version I can keep with me.  I love, love the Amplified, when I want to 
>>think some more about words!  There are some very refreshing things about 
>>The Message Bible also.  In some ways its language gets me a bit hot under 
>>the collar (perhaps it's a little over the top in some of its "American 
>>expression" for us Britts) but in others I find it refreshing.  It seems 
>>to move on a pace that cannot be conveyed to me as I read the AV.  I think 
>>you would like to read the Message and maybe you already have it.  (The 
>>Message also uses the word "cry" in that passage, by the way, Sharon.)
>>
>>Finally, here's one further thought which I want to convey and it's meant 
>>by no means to take away any of the truth and reverence of the older 
>>versions of the Bible.  My thinking goes something like this:  "Well, 
>>Jesus expresses Himself to us in ways we can understand.  He meets us 
>>where we are.  He speaks words in the church which often are brought by 
>>younger, enthusiastic ones whose language understanding and presentation 
>>is more like the Message than the AV.  So be it!  God will still speak His 
>>truth into hungry hearts! God will still make His ways known!  I 
>>personally don't want to examine every word etc for its accuracy either, 
>>because I'm not that kind of scholar, but I do want to be blessed inside 
>>as I read His word!
>>
>>Anyway, I'm off my soap box now.  Have been up many hours so guess it's 
>>brunchtime for me!
>>
>>--
>>Carol
>>[log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Sharon Hooley" <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 7:27 AM
>>Subject: Upgrading Versions of the bible?
>>
>>
>>>Well Julie, of course the Bible doesn't change, but our understanding of 
>>>some things in the bible can change as we grow in the Lord, and maybe 
>>>it's possible to "upgrade" as far as contemporary language is concerned, 
>>>not to change the meaning of what the Bible says, but to speak our 
>>>everyday language.  Unfortunately, many of those who create a new 
>>>translation tend to try to make the bible say what they want it to say, 
>>>instead of what it's really saying.  Personally, I want my bible to speak 
>>>the language I use, not the ancient language of the KJV, as long as the 
>>>modern translation is accurate.  From the bible, I wish I could hear 
>>>things like, "Serving God is so much fun!  So cool!"  But I need to 
>>>remind myself that, even if I read it in an ancient language, it can be 
>>>just as expressive as we are today.  For example, there's the story about 
>>>when Jesus approached a funeral procession. His hart went out to the 
>>>widow who had just lost her son.  In the KJV, we read, "Weep not."  But 
>>>in the NIV, (which may not be a perfectly accurate translation), we hear 
>>>Him simply saying, "Don't cry." I would rather hear the latter, but 
>>>maybe, just maybe, Jesus is depicted just as strongly compassionate, 
>>>affectionate and comforting, in the KJV. What are your thoughts?
>>>
>>>Sharon
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.9/382 - Release Date: 7/4/2006
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>>Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.9/382 - Release Date: 7/4/2006
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.9.9/382 - Release Date: 7/4/2006
>