KING JAMES' BLUNDERS

[Arial]

I object to the word "lack" substituted for "want" Those are two entirely different concepts. "Want" and "Lack" are so far apart in meaning that the word "lack" makes the statement untrue. There is a huge difference between "lack" and "want." Rewriting the KJV into "modern" English is fraught with the possibility of changing the meaning or even making the verse untrue.

Doesn't "want" mean to be in need or to desire? So, couldn't the meaning be "shall not be in want"? And doesn't that mean will not lack anything. Of course, that must be somewhat qualified as "any good thing". Our daily needs and God's sustaining power.

When my siblings and I were lilttle, the Bible that was used (even though we were not Christians) was the KJV and my mother used to read us Psalms such as the 23rd. My brother, as an adult, told me he thought that meant he shouldn't want anything.

 

[JesusFan]

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Same logic used by Geneva Only when that upstart Kjv came around

 

[QVQ]

Same logic used by Geneva Only when that upstart Kjv came around

The Geneva Bible is a good substitute for the KJV
One of the primary differences is the KJV was intentionally meant to be more poetic.
Words that are pleasing to the ear yet true to the original meaning and intent.
The KJV is the most quoted, sometimes indirectly in paraphrase, book in human history.
Anyone can distinguish the primary changes, "congregation" to "church", and it is an interesting topic to discuss on the threads as witness Post #141 @Rella illustrates.
We are to listen, read, study, contemplate the Word.
The more examination accorded the Good Book in all languages and all translations is to our benefit.

 

[QVQ]

Doesn't "want" mean to be in need or to desire? So, couldn't the meaning be "shall not be in want"? And doesn't that mean will not lack anything. Of course, that must be somewhat qualified as "any good thing". Our daily needs and God's sustaining power.

I read it as a shepherd. I had a flock of sheep, all rams, (males) no ewes.(females) I watched over them, moving them to greener pastures and monitoring their water supply, protecting them from coyotes and keeping them from stampeding off the cliff when bears were around.
Now...Those Rams did want ...Ewes and that was lacking and they did truly desire...
They also wanted to graze in pasture containg plants that were bad for sheep.

So the sheep lack and they desire. That is not what I am doing as a shepherd.

Now, I Shall Not Want means when the sheep gets there, to any point, wherever they may roam, I, the shepherd, wll be there to guide and provide what is necessary, according to my judgement and will, not theirs.

And it goes beyond that with God because obviously we are all going to lack and want when we draw our last breath.
However when we lack and want another breath and it isn't given according to our needs (lack) and wants (desire) God has prepared a table before us. We shall not want for life even after we have drawn our last breath for God is with us.
God provides and God is the summation of man's desire.
I shall not want

 

[JesusFan]

Maybeso
However, we are not so far removed from the English of the KJV that it needs a major overhaul.
The fact that it has been and remains the most popular Bible means that people can still understand the words.
I haven't seen any improvements in the various translations.
I am used to "thee" and "thou." The "eth" rather than "s" endings are hardly enough to justify a major, modernizing overhaul because when you start with the little, the entire project becomes huge.
Then there is change from "want" to "lack" and that is a fundamental change in meaning and intent.

I am sufficiently educated, intelligent and literate to understand the meaning of thou and runneth. I am not going to contend with changes to the fundamental meaning embodied by substituting "lack." for "want."

Mark ward did a very interesting survey with Pastors who identified themselves s being KJVO, and he discovered that many of them had misunderstood te actual intended meaning of the Kjv for
many passages, so if even they could not understand, how could the laity do so then?
Home - The King James Bible Study Project

 

[QVQ]

Mark ward did a very interesting survey with Pastors who identified themselves s being KJVO, and he discovered that many of them had misunderstood te actual intended meaning of the Kjv for
many passages, so if even they could not understand, how could the laity do so then?

I have seen this argument before
Decided by committee there is now an official actual intended meaning for the KJV?
Was that survey produced by the Magisterium? Is Mark Ward the Pope?

 

[JesusFan]

I have seen this argument before
Decided by committee there is now an official actual intended meaning for the KJV?
Was that survey produced by the Magisterium? Is Mark Ward the Pope?

No, he is a Baptist brother who was himself in the cult of the KJVO for many years, and now out of it, still appreciates and uses the Kjv, but does not view it as KJVO