Julie,
The NIV translators say that they are more accurate because they  not 
only went back to the original texts, but there have been more 
originals found since 1611, when the KJV was translated, and they do 
have a point there.  I mean, the Dead Sea Scrolls weren't even 
discovered until 1947 and their discovery made it impossible for the 
Jewish community to deny that Isaiah 53 really belonged in the 
prophet's writing.  Up until that time, many believed that Isaiah 53 
was inserted by the New Testament church because it describes so 
accurately the death of Christ.  I believe that the attachment to the 
KJV really is partly emotional in nature.  It's tradition and 
familiar and A lot of people have a hard time giving that kind of 
thing up.  Since, however, the KJV, truly was written to be the bible 
for the people, in the common, Elizabethan language of the day and I 
believe that the more modern translations are designed with that 
spirit of common language of the people  in mind.  I'm learning that 
some people are attached to the KJV, just like some people are 
attached to the flag.  It kind of makes me wonder what some people 
are really worshiping.
Kathy


At 10:18 AM 7/6/2006, you wrote:
>Sharon,
>
>Yes, I thought it may have been referring to the NIV but not 
>sure.   Some people think it was not accurately translated, but I 
>haven't been convinced of that.  I use the NIV or the NAS for bible 
>study.  I'm also reading from Teh Message, but thats a paraphraise, 
>not a literal translation.  In using that paraphraise, I also keep a 
>copy of a translation closse by to remind myself of what the Bible really says.
>
>The most important thing, no matter what the translation, is to let 
>the Holy Spirit speak through His word.
>
>
>
>JulieMelton
>visit me at
>www.heart-and-music.com
>Keep smiling!
>
>
>
>
>
>>From: Sharon Hooley <[log in to unmask]>
>>Reply-To: The Electronic Church <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>Subject: Upgrading Versions of the bible?
>>Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2006 00:27:16 -0600
>>
>>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
>