115 thoughts on “Korean King James Bible”

  1. Wait….. I thought the mantra was “The King James Ain’t Copyrighted, Hallelujehr”

  2. So let me get this straight… They took a Bible, that was translated from a Hebrew and Greek text in 1611, and translated the translation into Korean sometime in the last few years, and this is the BEST translation… Riiiiiiiiight…. Makes PERFECT sense!

    1. Everybody knows a translation of a translation is better, right?
      By which logic you could make it even better if you translated “the Korean King James Bible” back into English and then into Korean again.
      Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

      1. I used google translate to bounce John 3:16 (KJV of course) to Korean, then back to English, and again and again. Purified it 7 times. Here’s the result:
        “Do not believe in God destroy him, eternal life, he was the son, gave birth to the love of the world” (John 3:16, purified KKJV in English)

    2. Dear Jonny:

      You appear to capture perfectly the irony and the absurdity of Preacher Silas’ claim.

      Any Bible translation must build bridges to a world from which we are separated by millennia, by language, by culture and by social conditions. That is true for our culture, for contemporary Korean culture, and it was true for King James’ England.

      Indeed, contemporary US and Korean culture require bridging if understanding is to occur. Bridges are needed if we are to understand King James’ world.

      The premise that these four worlds separated as they are in time, location, culture and circumstances join in meaning with no attention to these issues is worthy of all the scorn which it receives. Thank you for nailing it.

      Christian Socialist

    1. Yes we can translate these words. Although I get the point and I agree, don’t make stupid racial comments like these

      1. Huh? How is it “racial” to speculate about “cockatrice,” “unicorn,” and “leviathan” might be translated?

  3. Was it translated from the original autographs? No, probably from King James directly into Korean.

    That’s not a valid translation of any Bible….

    1. Dear Linn:

      You wrote: that’s not a valid translation of any Bible….

      I reply: A HA!

      Christian Socialist

  4. Logical fallacy. More KJVO nonsense. This cult essentially believes that inspired scripture did not exist until 1611. That means the original spoken word of our Lord and the original records of what he said are inferior to a translation of them 1600 years later. Think about that.

    Think about that and then push them over the edge of the flat earth that they dwell on. Also make and join support groups to help anyone that had to be in their midst.

    …and now the spankings. Yes, the spankings and the oral se…

    1. The King James Bible was translated from the manuscripts the Church used through the centuries. The world was essentially evangelized via the KJV as printing came about the same time and long distance travel began to be more economical.

  5. “Converts” in reference to a bible version … So far removed from real Christianity

  6. I went to Seminary with a guy from there. He said that the KJV only cult is worse there than here. They hate anyone who does not use the KJV. If you don’t use it, you are not a true Christian.

  7. Wait, wait.

    None of the arguments that anyone uses for why the KJV is the (re)inspired Word of God work for this “translation.”

    And the KKJB has a copyright? I thought that was of the Devil! That’s why these modern translations are so BAD and EVIL, because they can change the words at any moment.

    Also, if the translators of this new Bible are so eager to have the “true Word of God” in the hands of these poor deluded modern-version-using Korean, why copyright it?

    This is a clear demonstration that the KJV-only position is logically and intellectually bankrupt.

  8. I’m still rather new to this KJVO nonsense so I am genuinely curious as to why so many Fundies cling to it. Is it simply tradition? Is it because the archaic language somehow sounds more reverent? Is it because some IFB doctrines like dispensationalism are difficult to defend without the KJV rendering of certain verses? Or is it just that KJV Onlyism puts the MOG in the position of being the interpreter of what the Scriptures “really” say?

    1. I think it’s a mixture of “old is better” and the “doctrine” of separation. People weren’t as evil when the KJV was translated, so it must be better, after all. And the more that separates them from the current culture, the more spiritual they are.

    2. It’s some of each of those things, combined with very faint knowledge of Bible history and a massive misunderstanding of how translations are done.

      1. I agree. That’s a lot of it, but also in the very real fight against modernism in the 1900’s, they became very skeptical of new translations because of the modernism on the translating agencies. Especially when something like the RSV translated the hebrew into young girl instead of virgin. Although even there, mathews quotation of Isaiah used virgin, so I am not going to assign any malevolence.
        Anyhow, as fundies are wont to do, they forgot the spirit of the law and maintained the letter, so instead of being able to differentiate, all new translations were assumed bad. For many years, KJV was the best translation available. Not anymore and not since what, the 60’s? At the latest? Nuance does not exist in fundystan.

    3. Dear Lost Highway:

      KJVOism is a transparent ploy by religious hucksters to render the worship of the whole church heretical and seize the whole religious market for their own enrichment.

      Christian Socialist

      1. Exactly.

        It is nothing more than a marketing ploy.

        This explains why many who want to leave their abusive KJVO church believe there is literally no other church in their entire town that is honoring God. The KJVO heresy keeps many Christians locked into these bad churches.

    4. To what Mag and Big Gary said I would add a mistrust of any modern Biblical scholarship even remotely connected with liberal theology.

      1. Of course! Because there was no sin or corruption in the world before the Higher Criticism came along.

    5. I think you’re right on all counts. Also consider the burden of Sola Scriptura as interpreted by fundamentalists. If anybody should be able to look at the text and understand the meaning that is right there for all to see, but there are multiple texts in English alone, and some of them contain footnotes specifying that different ancient manuscripts use different words in the same verse, which one contains the meaning that is right there for all to see? And if the solution is to read the Bible in its original languages and use that knowledge to choose a translation and help your flock understand the context, what happens to understanding the meaning that is right there for all to see?

      Don’t underestimate the typography as it has been passed down either. Looking at the KJV, it’s easy to think of the verse numbers as neat lines demarcating separate ideas, instead of pointers meant to help people find their way around in long passages that are about the same topic from beginning to end. And this opens the way to preaching long sermons on a single verse without considering the meaning of the other verses in the passage, stitching together verses from hundreds of pages apart in a zigzag pattern to form an End Times checklist, etc. Before Doug Phillips had his great fall, I dug into his educational guidelines that were then posted at the Vision Forum site. He kept hopping around in Moses’ discourses to the Israelites to use isolated verses in support of homeschooling, shunning non-Christian teachers, etc., when the entire passage is about the conduct of God’s chosen people (hint: not Doug Phillips). Likewise, he used cherry-picked verses from a psalm that explicitly bewails the moral decline of Israel in support of his assertion that each generation is morally superior to the previous generation. People who are trained to look at the nice big verse numbers and handy capitalization of the KJV may not realize what is going on.

      1. I remember a man who preached often and at great length about all the 3:16s God had given us. His point was that the chapter and verse numbers were also inspired, not just the words.

        1. The original texts aren’t divided into verses or chapters, but I guess that’s no problem for people who think that the KJV is the only truly inspired Bible.

        2. I tried to point that out. Once. Once only. I really needed a shovel to deal with what happened to me.

        3. 1 Yea verily are the numbers preceding my thoughts that are spelled out in electronic ink;
          2 Inspired by Lord such that one can feel the breath of our Saviour.
          3 For thou wicked liberals lust after ideas contrary to Arabic numbers;
          4 It truly is a sign of the purity of the Roman numerals that will release us from this life:
          5 Forever and ever. Amen.

    6. I’d say the whole “everyone is apostate but us” thing is a big part of it, and a huge misunderstanding of why there are differences in wording in the newer translations. (Hint: it’s not because new translators are trying, on the whole, to destroy the Bible.) It’s also a weird intellectual arrogance combined with woefully poor education. And it’s a concrete thing to stand in: KJV good; all else bad. Easy, simple, clear. People who simply want to be told what to believe instead of having to think for themselves like such black and white teaching. The propagators of this line of thinking often will hand their Christian friends tracts on the matter and try to argue with them about translations. Which is pretty frustrating when your opponent honestly doesn’t care one way or another.

  9. FOR YEARS they have argued that the modern versions are only made to make $$$$ because they are copyrighted.

    So now what do they do?

    Make their own modern version (based not on the original languages, but of a translation) and sell it for profit $$$$$.

    What a racket! Create the need by calling all the competition corrupt, make your own allegedly *pure* product, convince the poor churches to throw out the product they have already invested in, and raise money to replace it.


    1. My thoughts also! So you have the “best Bible!” It is the Only Way to Get Saved. So what do you do? Sell It! Make Lots of Money!

      Because letting people have the Word of God for free is so wicked or something. Somebody has to make a profit. After all, Jesus loved the Free Market System in the Temple, didn’t He? He charged admission to His sermons, and he made sure he got your insurance information before healing you (or else you didn’t get an appointment!).

      1. The Korean KJB costs $65 per copy.

        Donate early & often to Pastor Silas.

        1. Yup. This is a fundamentalist scheme to serve Mammon while “serving” God. Of course, Jesus said it won’t work. It is sickening.

          Much of fundamentalism is this way. Most fundamentalists are poor people, preyed on by their own leaders and entrepreneurs. That style of enrichment is popular in the US, even among non-fundamentalists.

          It is absolutely true that the nation’s economy would be better if people were paid more, if a middle class were enabled. But the middle class is being systematically dismantled by business and corporate interests because the true objective of keeping people poor and ignorant is Power.

          At a certain level, more money can’t raise your standard of living. But taking money away from others gives you feelings of entitlement and makes them subservient.

        2. ”Leaders and entrepreneurs” that gave me chills. It is so absolutely spot on and so horrible.

        3. How do they justify THAT?

          Oh wait, they don’t have to. It’s the only real Bible so everybody has to have it. No matter what the price.

  10. Well it’s about time!!!! 8)

    Finally the Koreans will have a Bible….

  11. I guess this should be obvious – and is to us and to all Christians who can actually think: a proper translation of any piece of literature always begins with the work in its original language. If they want to translate Shakespeare into Korean, fine – begin with English since it was written in English. But the Scriptures? Ludicrous.

    Oh – did I mention that scholars trained in both languages should do the translating?

    1. Dear DayLilly:

      The ‘devil’s advocate’ role comes to me easily. So I’ll do it …

      ‘Ludicrous’ makes it apparent that our faith rests not on the wisdom of man, but on the power of God. Of course that is SO not what the text intends. But still, we’re talking KJVOs here…

      Christian Socialist

    2. Daylily:

      Scholars should not attempt to translate the God-breathed KJV into Korean. Leave that to the pastors. Haven’t you read: “much learning doth make thee mad”? Or translated into the Korean (and back): “He angered many lessons you.”

  12. I found this question posted on Yahoo:

    “Is there a Korean Translation of King James Bible?
    NOT New King James, I’m taking about the original KING JAMES BIBLE, the one with Thou and Shalt”

    You can’t make this shit up.

    1. I suppose to be valid, the Korean KJV will have to be in early-1600s-style Korean.

        1. OK, Daniel Shin, you’re a troll. Asking if a comic is sold in Korea is racist?
          Go back under your bridge.

  13. I have never heard of anyone who has themselves ever done a translation of anything who supports the KJV-only ideology.

    There just is no single, perfect translation of any text of three or more words.

    1. I’d imagine the kids from the Latin class my old church’s school finally offered would possibly qualify.

      On several occasions people who knew I’d taken college-level Latin expected me to be impressed by the bulletin boards in the hallways where everyone got the same wording translating a verse from English to Latin and everyone got the same wording translating a verse from Latin to English.

      We were not KJVO, so they were at least spared trying to translate 1611 English verb constructions. But that exact sort of ‘translation’ could lead to a belief it really is a one-to-one process with no interpretation by the translator required.

  14. The solution to this “problem” is so easy and obvious. Teach them the King’s, (James) English. Sigh. Then they could be KJVO in English not Korean.

    1. I suppose that’ll be the next thing for the Korean IFBs to strive toward to be even holier. The KKJB will be good for a while, but soon God will expect them to take the next step and study the Authorized KJB.

  15. KJV to Korean and to Modern English: e the tongue and a talk, although and a charity of the man and the angel did not provide, I am doing do the acoustic brass, or with the cymbals which rings. 2 I to be having the amnesty of prediction, the interests to do all mysteries, though all knowledge; I will be able to remove the mountain, all believing, has, although did not provide a charity, I do not think also anything. In order to supply poor people 3 and within will present all goods, and I will record my body to give, although did not provide a charity, it although is useless to me. 4 charities long kyekk u and type; Charity do envieth; Charity vaunteth haughty, the own transversal toy fault one itself be does not operate 5, is not easily caused an evil with, 6 is not under own do nine is not pleased to sin, but to truth to be glad; Everything and everything everything believes a silk D and everything 7 Hasee increases, hopeth. 8 charities do not fail: But regardless of presence of prediction, them there can be a dialect which fails, them the incompleteness regardless of presence of the knowledge which does, it will disappear far. 9 we are knowing partially, and we predict partially. When the perfect thing coming 10 but, is the next part the fact that far. (11), me whom I said with the interests child with the child when was young, with the child thought: When but became the person, I remove the young child thing. 12 now we are dark through profitable reference; But at the front: Knows now, partially but me although also was known like, know. (13) and now believing, desire, love to stay, this three kind; But these people are the biggest charity organization.

  16. Dear KJVOists:

    Since Scripture alone determines your lifestyle, does this mean that Korean women are required to dress in 1611/IFB_2015 style clothing? Jest wondering …

    Christian Socialist

  17. As others have pointed out, the best translation is one using original texts. Preacher Silas is just giving evidence to what we have often discussed here–the KJV has become an idol. When it is the standard for other languages–its an idol.

    1. Agreed.

      I have discussed with with strict KJB people, and they point out that if the local translation is corrupt, it is better to translate from the KJB than to wait for someone to do a translation from the Hebrew/Greek.

      I can understand that, given the mindset, even I think they’d be better waiting for someone who knows Hebrew/Greek and Korean to make a translation.

      1. My question would be what they consider “corrupt” and how, if they apparently haven’t got anybody around who knows both Korean and Hebrew/Greek, they would know this.

        1. That’s the giant flippin’ fallacy.
          Their standard for comparison is the KJV, not any ancient texts.

      2. Glaring problem:

        The IFBx has historically been so anti-intellectual they have no one who is qualified to translate the Scriptures from the original languages to Korean.

  18. Houston… (or would that be Seoul?) We have a problem! I just took a look at “traditional Koren dress” and found lots of men wearing sissified pink dresses…. but (thankfully) no women in britches. They are such pagans! How are we get them to understand the rules. I wonder how they respond to knocking on the pulpit and yelling, “여기 봐” (look up here!) or “세 TI는 번창” (three to thrive) That right thar is a field white unto harvest. I hope they have doorbells.

    1. “Houston, we’ve had a problem” is the quote. Just so everyone knows going forward.

    2. Are you freaked kidding me? Those dresses as you call it are traditional clothing.

  19. It gets more idiotic (if that’s possible) when the Pentecostal types jump on the KJVO wagon. They claim that one can only understand Scripture if the Holy Ghost reveals it to them/if the Holy Ghost-anointed preacher explains it to them. So why, exactly, would it matter how the Bible is written if we can’t understand it on our own anyway? Maybe it has something to do with the magical ‘washing of the Word’, where you get God’s blessing just by reading; if you’re reading the incorrect magical text, well, then…

    I feel like a freaking rebel after writing that. It kinda sucks. But I know it gets better.

    1. Leo! My father used to go on and on about how just reading the Word would cleanse him like water washed a sieve. It wasn’t so much retaining it as it was reading it. You are so right, it seems all a bit “magical.”

        1. I loved my father but he was a tortured soul, a difficult person. I really believe that he was looking for something to magically make him what he expected of himself and no God ever would expect of a human being. Magical reading to keep him clean, praying ”hard”, singing hymns, whatever it took to comfort him, I believe it was his demons he was exorcising not his God that he was pleasing.

  20. I wonder if it is even true to the KJV, or if any ‘fixes’ slipped in. For example, Jesus was clearly turning water into grape juice, right?

    1. I would love to know how Deu 14:26 was translated.

      “and thou shalt bestow that money for whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, for oxen, or for sheep, or for wine, or for strong drink, or for whatsoever thy soul desireth: and thou shalt eat there before the Lord thy God, and thou shalt rejoice, thou, and thine household, “

  21. This reminds me of a quote from Star Trek: “You’ve not experienced Shakespeare until you’ve read it in the original Klingon.”

  22. I wonder how many people realize this whole KJO thing is not part of the Old Paths? When I was young this was a fringe movement. It snuck in and took over silently like all modernistic movements do. Anything ‘new’ is suspect…right?

  23. I’ve always been (& remain) “KJVP”..King James Version Preferred. 😉

    I don’t believe that ‘all other versions’ are “apostate”, etc. However, I appreciate the beauty of the way that the KJV is written.

    1. Well, it is either beauty of language or what you were used to growing up.

      Here is a test. Do you read Shakespeare? Is he on your preferred reading list? Who is your favorite secular author, and why?

      If you like to read modern authors and like to speak modern English, then “beauty” is probably not the reason you prefer it. If your term of respect is usually “sir” and not “lord,” and you use “you” and “your” instead of “thee” and “thou” when talking to important people, it isn’t a matter of reverence, either.

      I grew up with it. I am used to it. I have many mental references made with it. The language is distinct enough that I recognize the different origin of such passages.

      But the Scriptures were written in the common speech, and the KJV translation was common language at the time. It wasn’t meant to be a “beautiful” translation, but an accurate one, as best as possible with the manuscripts and the political realities they had at the time.

      And perhaps the real reason we like the KJV so much — it’s “otherness” — indicates the problems in our spiritual life. The Scriptures are “other,” not the way we think everyday. That thinking is kept in a separate place in our lives and doesn’t inform the common, the ordinary. It explains why people can read it and not sense that God finds Social Justice to be important. Or that people find more comfort in individual snippets of Scripture than in the lengthy passages that comprise a whole message.

      Our Christianity is more Churchianity. Our faith is meaner, individualistic. KJV-onlyism might be showing us why.

  24. I translated properly. I went from KJV to Greek (the original language) to Korean. Then I put it in English to see what it said: “He loved the word of God , so that God believes in him should have eternal life does not destroy anyone who gave birth to a son.”

  25. Among IFB churches in the Spanish speaking country I live in, the Reina Valera (usually 1960) is the only way to go. Someone produced a Spanish KJV several years ago, and I have heard it bashed from the pulpit. Yep, IFB preachers shouting against a KJV-based work.

    Interestingly, a translation “error” in the RV1960 caught my attention, but it turned out the KJV was the one who was a bit free with the meaning. Thus began my journey away from KJV-onlyism…

    1. The 1960 Reina-Valera is an excellent translation of the Scriptures. Newer translations, such as the Nueva Versión Internacional, have not been as popular (although I like it very much). The NVI is very useful because it avoids the use of “vosotros”, which is not used much in Latin America. It is also more accessible for Hispanics here in the United States, who may not have had much education past primary school in their home countries.

  26. The IFB church is all about 3 things; money, power, and control. The current form of hyper KJV onlyism supports this in two ways.

    First is through creating a fear that any group that is not KJV is not right with God, does not have the blessings of God, is intentionally or inadvertently an enemy of God, and probably is not saved. To side with them is to side with the enemy of God who will pour out chastisement upon you and those close to you. Fear is a powerful ally for religious leaders.

    Second is an elitist mentality. Only the KJV only group has the total, complete, perfect, pure word of God. Therefore only they can truly know gods mind, will, and purpose. Only KJV onlyists can stand firm against the evils if this world and the wiles of the devil. Other groups may try but they lack the strength and understanding to do so. Just as David had his mighty men, few in number but valiant and strong, so God has his might few, the KJV only Christians.

  27. Although this is wrong, all those that are commenting seem to lack the general knowledge of how the Korean language works. those people need to shut the hell up.

    1. There is a lot of silliness, Daniel. I’ll give you that.

      And yes, using these on-line translation programs gives us junk.

      As a Korean, can you tell us how the Korean language works? Do you think it is better to translate from the KJV to Korean, or from the original languages? Could you tell us why?

      The silliness is a response to (what we see as) idiotic fundamentalist arguments. It won’t stop because you tell us to. But if you wish to bring reason and enlightenment to the discussion, most of us are willing to listen.

    1. Nicholas: The Spanish translation you mention was published by a Virginia church in the 1990s. Only 3,000 copies were printed (a facsimile is available on Amazon). Besides the Spanish and Korean versions, I’ve seen folks translate the KJV (or creating a new translation using the same principles and/or texts as the KJV) into Thai, Chinese, French and Mongolian.

      As for me, I’ve had my run-ins with fundies over the last two decades. Very interesting people.

      1. Interesting in the same way the stomach flu is interesting, and they are the people I prefer to avoid more than the stomach flu.

Comments are closed.