Hi there Doris,

What a beautiful message.  I loved it.  Please write more of those!

There are some Bible study tools available on line at 
www.crosswalk.com.  I hope I wrote that out right.

Well, gotta run.  Time to test the glucose values, take morning meds 
and think about fixing something to eat.

Luv in HIM,

Mari and the Collective



At 05:02 AM 7/6/2006, you wrote:
>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
>