If there was a newer Bible using the same manuscripts as the KJV,
there should be no ommissions or additions...I know of kids who
understand the KJV in this modern age.  And they are average students.
 If they have a question about any word, they ask their parents to
give them an explaination...In general, even with newer versions
people still have a hard time understanding the scripture...But if we
were to rely on man or modern words and not on the holy spirit, then
we shall not have a true understanding of God's Word...


On 8/22/06, John Reisinger <jreisinger24@...> wrote:
>
>
>         I remember discussing the KJV only position with a very zealous
> brother. I asked him if he thought we were honoring God by giving men and
> women a book that we claimed was the inerrant Word of God and that book had
> words in it that most people could not undertand even with a dictionary. He
> asked me for one example of such a word. I said, "The Bible says," 'Jacob
> sod his pottage. What did Jacob do?" He did not know, and I suggested he
> look up the words in a dictionary. He did OK on the word pottage, but drew a
> blank on the word sod unless it meant he put grass sod in his pottage.
>         I then said, "It is people with your attitude that are indrectly
> responsible for the deluge of Bible versions. If the KJV had been upgraded
> every 25 or 50 years and nothing but the obsolete words had been changed,
> there may never have been any other translation. One the first one rolled
> off the press, the flood gates were open.   JGR
>
> --
> Read the Sound of Grace pages at
> http://www.soundofgrace.com
>
> To unsubsc
> ribe, send ANY message to:
> soundofgrace-unsubscribe@...
>
> To view o
> ur online archive go to our web page at
> http://www.associate.com/groups/soun
> dofgrace
>
>
>
>
>
>
>