LibertyGal on Nostr: I do like the KJV. It is more poetic than most modern translations. I don't agree ...
I do like the KJV. It is more poetic than most modern translations.
I don't agree with some of your statements about these verses. Your conclusions about 1 Corinthians 44 - 49, seem arbitrary. The statement "the second man is of heaven." implies that Jesus is God. It seems that I agree with your interpretation of what the Bible really says, but disagree that the ESV/NASB say something different.
The ESV and NASB are written based on older and more accurate documents and therefore have at least the probability of being more accurate.
One thing to know about the KJV Bible is that originally, the godly believers, like the Pilgrims, hated the KJV. They didn't trust this translation by a tyrannical King that forced unbiblical sacraments on the churches. At the time, all of the strongest English speaking Christians preferred the Geneva Bible (I have one from the 1600s. It is one of my favorite possessions) and rejected the KJV. That being said, I still think the KJV and the NKJV are both in the top 10 English translations (and there are soooo many).
One other issue with the KJV is that it is written in older English. Many words, that were used and that were very precise at the time it was written, have now changed meanings to be less precise and/or mean something different. This can cause problems for anyone not familiar with the original meaning of the words. This makes it less ideal for many people. The NKJV tried to fix this problem, but it is a little less poetic than the original.
I don't agree with some of your statements about these verses. Your conclusions about 1 Corinthians 44 - 49, seem arbitrary. The statement "the second man is of heaven." implies that Jesus is God. It seems that I agree with your interpretation of what the Bible really says, but disagree that the ESV/NASB say something different.
The ESV and NASB are written based on older and more accurate documents and therefore have at least the probability of being more accurate.
One thing to know about the KJV Bible is that originally, the godly believers, like the Pilgrims, hated the KJV. They didn't trust this translation by a tyrannical King that forced unbiblical sacraments on the churches. At the time, all of the strongest English speaking Christians preferred the Geneva Bible (I have one from the 1600s. It is one of my favorite possessions) and rejected the KJV. That being said, I still think the KJV and the NKJV are both in the top 10 English translations (and there are soooo many).
One other issue with the KJV is that it is written in older English. Many words, that were used and that were very precise at the time it was written, have now changed meanings to be less precise and/or mean something different. This can cause problems for anyone not familiar with the original meaning of the words. This makes it less ideal for many people. The NKJV tried to fix this problem, but it is a little less poetic than the original.