Of Bible reading plans and changing translations

I ran across two intriguing Bible reading plans recently. One is by James Martin Grey, an English clergyman who wrote “How to Master the English Bible” in 1907. (You can find it on Google Books if you want. It’s pretty short.) The other is by Prof. Grant Horner, who teaches literature and the Bible out in California. You can peruse the plan here if you wish.

Grey’s plan is simple, almost brutally so: Open up to the book of Genesis. Read it straight through in one sitting. Do it again. Repeat twenty more times. Then, open to Exodus. Read it straight through in one sitting. Do it again. Read twenty more times. Keep going until you’re done with Revelation. It seems like a drag at first but Rev. Grey makes some pretty attention-grabbing claims, in his modest way. He says that this method will acquaint one with the books of the Bible in ways that no other method of study can. He says you’ll have a better grasp of the whole of Scripture and how its various parts fit together when you’re done. Nothing else helped his preaching and teaching so much, he claimed, as this one method of study. The key seems to be the repetition. After a few times through a book, he says, you see the book in a different light and you begin to be drawn in by what you’re reading. It almost pulls you onward, and you start to pick up speed.

I was attracted to this method for a few reasons: 1) its simplicity. It’s reading the Bible, basically. 2) The repetition seems to be the most useful part. Especially for someone like me,  things sink in after repeated readings. You begin to see under the surface more as you go along. The blogger whose post pointed me toward this system initially stated that if you follow through on this, it will change your life. Given the power Scripture has, I don’t doubt that. That one statement, more than any others, was what got my attention and got me thinking about it, and I know that I need to know the Bible better for myself — we all need help in that area. This seemed like a pretty effective way to really get to know Scripture.

However, the method also raised a few questions for me. The time factor was one. I’d have to plan my days (or at least the starts of them, because I’d probably wake up early and do the reading then) around this. I’d be willing to do that, but it would be an effort, and that’s not always easy (especially if the baby wakes up at 3 am and doesn’t feel like going back down too easy.) The other question I have would involve some of the books themselves. I’m reading Ezekiel right now, for instance, and I can hardly imagine reading Ezekiel twenty times straight through in a row, without a breather on some other book in between. I suppose that if I’d read Genesis through Lamentations well enough to master their contents, Ezekiel would be a lot more interesting and hold a lot more that I hadn’t known was there before; I’m willing to grant that possibility, not having attempted the method yet. One variation I saw on the Internet consisted of starting with the shortest books, reading those twenty times through, then working up to the longer ones. That would take out one of the main benefits Grey advocates, which is becoming acquainted with the foundations before going on to later revelation. Still, it would be good. Any time you’re reading the Bible, you’re benefiting. The other question I had I’ll get to later, towards the end.

Prof. Horner’s system has gotten rave reviews and has become quite popular on the Internet, apparently — both in America and around the world. It’s a little more complicated than Grey’s system, but not much. The books of the Bible are divided up into ten lists, and each day you read one chapter from each list. You start out reading Matthew 1, Genesis 1, Romans 1, and whatever the other lists say to start out with. Then here’s where it gets interesting: since you’re reading books of different lengths, the combinations of chapters constantly changes as you follow through the lists. You never read the same set of chapters twice by cycling through these lists. You follow along that way basically for the rest of your life, filling yourself up with the Scriptures (Horner refers to it as “imprinting”, where the contents of the Scriptures become part of your mind and soul.)

It sounds intense but I’m drawn to it for a couple of reasons: 1) I don’t mind doing something intense if the payoff is there — and it definitely sounds like it’s there. It sounds disorienting to read in so many different books at once at first, but Horner claims that rather quickly you begin to see Scripture as a unified whole. You begin to observe Scripture interpreting Scripture in action (#2) as you cycle through big swaths of the Old and New Testaments. 3) It seems pretty customizable. You can probably tweak it to your preferences pretty readily. Horner himself modified an existing plan into his own plan years ago. 4) It treats Scripture as an organic whole instead of disparate parts or a box full of M&Ms (or loose gems, if you prefer that) — and it does so in a way I haven’t encountered before. 5) It seems to pick up on & amplify something I’ve noticed in my own scattered studies: everything in Scripture is connected. You can be reading in Ezekiel one day, and it will tie in with Psalms, part of one of the Gospels, something in Paul’s letters, and Genesis — all at once. This program takes that self-referential character of the Word and kicks it into high gear.

Drawbacks? Again, the time thing — but Bible reading is something you have to just commit to anyway. Once you do, the benefits come to you, but first you have to dig into it and trust that they’ll come. (Believe me, they do.) Two, the main obstacle I can see is one that Grey’s plan has in common: picking a Bible to use, both the physical book and the translation. Horner, even more so than Grey, insists that using one Bible for the long haul gives the best results with his program. I’d want to follow that advice, because it makes sense to me. I want to find one Bible to use for everything for as long as possible. My difficulty is exacerbated by the fact that the NIV, the Bible we use in church and that I grew up with, is going away in its present form. The 1984 revision of the NIV will be phased out in a year or two, and is already being replaced by the new revision coming out this year. The jury’s still out on whether the new NIV (NNIV?) will be worth using, but initial things I’ve seen make me wonder. NIV 2011 seems determined to pick up on generic “they” — instead of saying “him” or “him and her”, they use “they” or “them.” This is common in colloquial English, but personally I think it’s hapless and ugly and I grit my teeth every time I see it in NIV 2011. The Bible is supposed to sound majestic and beautiful, and generic “they” just doesn’t cut it. More troubling is the issue of gender neutral language — saying “people” where the original texts might say “men” but mean “people”, that sort of thing. Some of that is okay, but some of that tampers with word pictures in Scripture and you lose richness and depth of meaning if it’s not kept. The worst excesses of this can lead to God no longer being addressed as Father or Jesus as Son, which is outright false teaching. God revealed Himself to us in a certain way, and we court trouble if we speak of Him in a way that differs from what He Himself said.

My particular dilemma can be traced to a modern trend in Bible publishing: revising the text every few years. No modern translation (i.e. pretty much anything other than the KJV) is immune to this. It’s an expected norm now, that translations will be revised in the light of recent archaeological and philological evidence, and also adjusted to keep pace with current usage of English. The constant revising is due in part to market pressure; Bible translations are products like everything else publishing houses sell now, and they need to be “new” and “improved” periodically to keep customers’ attention. The downside is that if the Bible changes every few years, nobody can remember anything in it after a while. This cycle of revising is speeding up, too. The NIV took 27 years to get around to a revision, but the ESV, one of its biggest competitors, was revised in 2007 after being released in 2001. How much did the English language change in that time? Yeesh…I can see correcting typos or printing mistakes, but wholesale overhauls of the text are bad news if you want to pick a Bible and stick with it, and actually remember what’s in it.

The only long-term option for a Bible that won’t change is the KJV. It will never be more obsolete than it is today, and nobody’s fiddling with it anymore — they put out new translations based on it, but the KJV itself is fossilized, so to speak. Which is kind of nice. The Bible shouldn’t change every few years. But even there I run into problems. Which KJV should I use? I have a bunch, but I don’t know if any of them are what I’d want to subject to that kind of wear and tear. The Cambridge New Paragraph Bible, an edition of the KJV that’s set in single columns and paragraphs instead of a new verse on each line and double columns, is much more readable and would be my choice, but I only have a trade paperback of that and I don’t think it would hold up. Cambridge is releasing a much nicer version, but that’s delayed indefinitely (I haven’t been able to find out why.) I could get a nice KJV, a lifetime companion sort of book, but it would most likely be double column & verse per line, which I’d prefer to avoid. Then there’s the translation itself. I dig the KJV and think it’s timeless, but it isn’t what we currently use at our church (nor will it be in the foreseeable future.) It’s great for just reading Bible, but if I want to familiarize myself with the same version I use for preaching, teaching, counseling, etc, I’d be looking at one of those shifting modern translations. Dipped if you do, dipped if you don’t. Even if I decide to stick with NIV84 just as my personal reading Bible, there I’d have problems. My Cambridge Pitt Minion is a quality Bible, but unfortunately the cover is splitting from the text block. All Pitt Minions do that eventually, apparently. I wish I’d known that before I got it, but oh well. Cambridge has a lifetime guarantee on their books so that won’t be a problem to get it taken care of  — I just need to contact them. But I’m not entirely sold on the Pitt Minion as the perfect all-rounder. Maybe what I want doesn’t exist. I do have a potential candidate for that coveted honor. I have a single column NIV that I really like, but I’d realistically need to get it rebound before it would be ready for long-term duty. The cover it came with is basically cardboard impressed with a leather grain. It looks like it won’t hold up past Tuesday. Rebinding is an option, but it can set you back quite a bit — and if you wear that one out, where will you get another? Maybe the solution is to buy a dozen copies of the same edition and sock them away in a closet, still in the shrink wrap, then bring one out as I need it. Even if I didn’t get it rebound (which I’d probably want to, if it’s the edition I’m thinking of right now), it would still be a sizeable outlay of funds to ensure the Bibles I want to use. By that time the NIV should be entirely obsolete — about where the ASV is now. (Don’t know the ASV? Not surprised. It was an early 20th century attempt at updating the KJV. It was widely used but it’s out of date, obscure, and in the public domain now, which contributes to most of its use these days, frankly. People don’t have to pay for it, and free is always attractive.)

The whole thing is a boondoggle. Right now I have to wait and see how the NIV 2011 pans out, and what our synod does. I may just say the heck with it and start reading the KJV for myself, if I can get a decent enough edition to use. If the translations thing works out soon and the dust settles, and if I can find one (or two) particular Bibles that I want to use as my mainstays over the long haul, then I should be set and the way should be clear to try Prof. Horner’s system. Stay tuned for what transpires.

We know that whatever translation we read (within reason — some are better than others), reading the Bible and knowing it better is always beneficial. God’s Spirit always works through His Word, and He is not bound by considerations of translation or the life of physical books. Sometimes we just need to remember how urgent the task of knowing and believing Scripture is, and once we start the rest will fall into place.

Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you. (i peter 1.23-25 kjv)

…of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh. (ecc 12.12 kjv)

Your words of wisdom for today

All languages have expressions for human birth, though these are frequently in idiomatic forms, for example, ‘to drop a child’ or ‘to cause a baby to pass between the legs.’ A number of languages have a variety of terms referring to giving birth, and some of these may involve unfortunate connotations. One must therefore be careful about the selection of appropriate expressions.

Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996, c1989). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament : Based on semantic domains (electronic ed. of the 2nd edition.) (1:256). New York: United Bible societies.

Sermon for First Midweek Advent service, 1 Dec 10

We’ve never had midweek Advent services at Zion, so I figured, why not start? It’s another chance to preach and for people to hear the Word, and we get to use Evening Prayer. We had 15 people and I was full of joy. You might expect someone to be bummed for only 15 people showing up (we had 75 for Thanksgiving Eve the week before), but I was so happy because God’s Word had drawn those people to His house. We got to sing and pray and hear God’s Word together before we all went home and turned in for the night. What could be better?

I remember hearing a sermon on this text while I was in college. Pastor Wayne Laitinen in New Ulm did his customary excellent job, and it stuck in my memory. This was a chance for me to study it and preach it for myself. And I just kind of like the name Shiloh. Hope you are edified — Jesus be with you!

“The scepter will not depart from Judah,
nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet,
until he comes to whom it belongs
and the obedience of the nations is his.” (gen 49.10 niv)

“The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.” (gen 49.10 kjv)

When I say “Shiloh”, what comes to mind for you? You might think of an American Civil War battlefield. You might think of a song by Neil Diamond. You might think of a person’s name. Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie named one of their children Shiloh, for instance. You might or might not think of our text for tonight. If you still remember the King James Version, you might recall that it has this verse as, “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come, and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.”

The reason that the King James says “Shiloh” and the NIV doesn’t has to do with the way each version translated the Hebrew word here. The King James simply gives you the Hebrew word straight across without trying to explain it. They leave it up to the reader to decide who or what Shiloh is. That works fine if you know who this is talking about, or if you can find out. The NIV doesn’t use the word Shiloh, but instead they try to explain what they think it means to you. They look at all the evidence and try to give you the best equivalent in English. Sometimes Hebrew has words that look similar but mean different things. In those cases the translators have to decide which one they think makes the most sense. Neither approach is always better than the other; both ways have their advantages and disadvantages.

These times where it could be one Hebrew word or another never change any of the teachings of the Bible. The Bible is still clear and able to be understood, even without any special knowledge or training. We always can get the main idea of a passage. We always know what God wants us to know. We might talk about the details in different ways, but we can always know what God’s Word says.

With that being said, who or what is Shiloh? There was a town in Judah named Shiloh. The ark of the covenant was there for a while. But that doesn’t seem to fit here. This verse sounds like it’s talking about a person, not a town. If you look at the NIV, it sounds an awful lot like the Messiah. Someone who’s coming, someone who will rule over the nations – that sounds like Jesus.

If you think this verse is pointing ahead to Jesus, you’re right. People have noticed that this prophecy sounds Messianic ever since it was first given. The Jews always understood it as being Messianic. They just don’t believe that Jesus is the Messiah. In the Dead Sea Scrolls this verse is pointed to as being Messianic. Lots of Christian teachers have seen this as pointing to the Messiah too. Just the words themselves that you have in front of you lead you to conclude that.

History helps show us that this prophecy is referring to Jesus too. The scepter is a symbol of power and authority in the Bible. Here it says that the scepter wouldn’t go away from Judah until the One came to whom it belonged, the One who should rule. That’s Jesus. It’s true – the nation of Judah lost their power shortly before Jesus was born. When Jesus came into the world, Judah was ruled by a foreigner, someone who wasn’t even Jewish – Herod, and he was backed up by the Romans. The historical circumstances help show us that Jesus is the Ruler, the Messiah, promised in this verse.

What you might not know is Shiloh in Hebrew is related to the word for rest. This is like a title – Shiloh, Rest, the One who is rest. The One who brings rest with him or who gives rest to people. That’s a great title for Jesus.  Jesus gives us the rest we need – rest for our souls. He says, “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.” Before Christ comes into a person’s heart, fallen man has only one way to get rest for his soul: he’s got to earn it. In order to have peace and rest within yourself without Jesus, you’ve got to be worthy of it. You need to keep God’s law perfectly – no slipups, no goofs, nothing done wrong intentionally or unintentionally, because only then will God reward you with everlasting life. Only then will you be able to say to God, “Give me eternal life. I deserve to be in heaven, because I’ve been a perfect person. Only perfect is good enough, and I am good enough to get into your heaven.”  The thing is, none of us can say that. None of us are able to keep God’s law perfectly. We sin lots, all the time. We don’t even know all the times we sin – but God does. So in order to have rest for our souls on our own, apart from Jesus, we’ve got to work at it – a lot! We need to sweat and strain and push ourselves to keep God’s commands. We need to silence that little voice inside us that whispers, “Did you do enough? Did you do it all?” If we try to earn God’s favor on our own, we will never succeed. That little voice will never be quiet. We’ll have to keep working until we die, and then we’d find out it wasn’t enough.

Contrast that with the rest Jesus gives. Jesus’ rest consists of the forgiveness of sins. He paid for everything you would have to work off before God. Everything you’d have to make up to God, all the sins you’ve committed and mistakes you’ve made, — they’ve all been paid for by Jesus. Jesus’ rest is complete. It is total. It is finished. He said so from the cross, and every word is true. Jesus lived and died and shed His blood to silence that little voice inside you forever. He lives to remind you that you don’t need that little voice anymore, and to show you one day that He has saved you in spite of your sins and your unworthiness. There’s nothing more we need to do to make God happy! Jesus has done it all. Jesus did everything God wanted Him to, perfectly. There’s nothing left to do. It is true and it is yours, every day from now until you go home to heaven – and it will be true in heaven too.

Now Jesus gives you that rest for your soul. Jesus’ rest comes to you through His Word, whenever you hear it or think about it. That’s God’s way of working in your heart and causing that rest to spread and grow in your soul – through His Word. Jesus’ rest comes to you every time you come to His table and He gives you His body and blood. That’s your personal assurance that Jesus’ rest is real and it’s for you.

Jesus reigns as King over all to make sure you never lose the rest He’s given you. He still guides and controls all things for your good. All nations serve Him, whether they know it or not. He has purchased them for God with His blood, and all things are from Him and to Him and through Him, Paul tells us. Jesus rules over everything that happens in the world. Nothing happens without His permission or His approval. Nothing happens that He doesn’t use for your good. Do you understand what that means? Nothing happens that’s not for your good. Nothing. Even when tragedy hits your family or you suffer unjustly and you don’t understand why, Jesus is still in control. He is still your loving King who lives forever. He still is your Rest. He still is Shiloh, and He will be, forever – for you and for me. Thanks be to Christ, our wonderful Rest and our Advent King. Amen.

Random language study goodness

I ran across a nifty little factoid while I was studying for my next sermon. This is an entry from Strong’s Lexicon for bapto. (If you’re wondering why I’m posting this, skip to the second paragraph.) It starts:

911 βάπτω, ῥαίνω [bapto /bap·to/] v. A primary word; TDNT 1:529; TDNTA 92; GK 970 and 4817; Three occurrences; AV translates as “dip” three times. 1 to dip, dip in, immerse. 2 to dip into dye, to dye, colour. Additional Information: Not to be confused with 907, baptizo.

Ok, here’s the interesting part.

The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be ‘dipped’ (bapto) into boiling water and then ‘baptised’ (baptizo) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change. — Strong, J. (1996). The exhaustive concordance of the Bible : Showing every word of the test of the common English version of the canonical books, and every occurence of each word in regular order. (electronic ed.) (G911). Ontario: Woodside Bible Fellowship.

So when you’re baptized, the word itself points to a change that takes place. Neat, huh? And from a recipe for pickles! Who knew?

Thoughts on the King James Version

Some of you may have noticed that I use the King James Version quite a bit on this blog — almost as much as the NIV. I’ve been getting into the KJV more and more lately, and I’m becoming convinced it’s an underrated treasure. It’s become my daily reading Bible, and I consult it whenever I’m preparing a translation for a sermon or Bible class now. Since comparatively few people use and read the KJV (at least compared to the amount that once did), and it’s not the main version I preach and teach out of (that distinction goes to the NIV), you might be wondering why I’m bothering with it. Isn’t that old, you ask? Isn’t it hard to understand? Forthwith, my reasons for liking the venerable King James Version:

1) The King James Version makes you work harder — which is a good thing. When you have to work at understanding what you read, it tends to stick in your head better. That’s why I can remember things I read for Latin classes in the past, or for translating work I’ve done out of the Bible — I had to rack my brains over it in order for it to make some coherent sense.  The King James Version does the same thing for its readers, although not to that same extent (depending on one’s reading level, of course.) Familiar passages from the NIV come alive with a twist of phrase that you’re not used to hearing, or when you have to go back and look twice at the words in order to make sure you really know what it’s saying. This is kind of annoying when you’re doing any other kind of reading, but it is actually beneficial when you’re reading the Bible. It forces you to slow down, take your time, consider, think, ponder — all good things that our fast-paced, hyper-productive society is allergic to. When you have to work at it, you retain the information better. It’s often more memorable then, too, because once you’ve sweated it over and it’s in your head, it has a lot better chance of staying there than if you didn’t have to work at it.

Interestingly, one of the selling points of many modern translations — their ease of comprehension through their modern, simple language — can be considered a drawback when viewed from this angle. Sure, you may get reading easier and quicker with the Message (which isn’t even really a translation, it’s Eugene Peterson’s opinions of what God said) or the NLT, say, but how long will you keep reading before you get bored, put it down, and walk away? I submit that that’s the problem with a lot of people’s personal Bible reading and they don’t even know it. The NIV is another one I would put in that same category. Admittedly it’s difficult to find a translation that covers all the bases (serious scholarly work, catechism instruction, adult learning, and Sunday school, to name a few) and can be understood by the widest variety of people, but sometimes the choices you make can pay off (or not) in ways you hadn’t anticipated.

2) The King James Version has wonderful language. The KJV has often been lauded for its poetic quality. One commentator praised its “fine roll of Bible English.” It just sounds right. Part of the reason for that is that the original translators of the King James Version worked out loud. They each did their work, brought it to the whole group, and then read it out loud as the other scholars compared it with other versions. They then revised and improved based,  in part, on what they heard. The ear will often catch things that the eye will not. This ties in with the fact that Bible was originally meant to be read aloud and primarily heard — not read in silence out of a book on your lap. For many people, the King James Version just sounds like Scripture should sound. The sound of the King James Version is the Bible, for them. Give me enough time, and I might become one of them.

Part of the reason for the King James’ wonderful language is that it’s often closer to the Greek and Hebrew originals than many modern translations. The KJV translators preserved many ancient idioms and phrases in their translation, which can be a two-edged sword. Sometimes it makes the text sound awkward or stilted. But at other times — and especially moreso as you become used to the language — they communicate the thoughts and the wording of the original with clarity and overwhelming force. As you read the King James more, the awkward and stilted parts seem to recede, and the beauty of the language begins to come to the fore. You begin to appreciate the melodious, powerful words themselves and you don’t think so much, “This seems weird or old.”

Because it’s so close to the originals, the KJV is a reliable translation for those who translate the Bible into English for themselves, or as part of pastoral or scholarly pursuits. You can rely on it to be telling you with the same words in the same order what a particular passage says in the original. A lot of modern translations aren’t like that. They might get the basic thought across — but how much of your thoughts is shaped by the words you use (or leave out)? I’d rather have the translation give me the words God gave and let me sort out any difficult or obscure words and phrases on my own, rather than deciding for me what a passage means (or, what’s far worse, doing violence to a passage by straining to import an interpretation foreign to the true sense of the passage, and to the rest of Scripture’s doctrine.) No translation is perfect, but I’ve found that the King James, while certainly not perfect (or inspired by God, as some misguided souls claim), manages to avoid a lot of pitfalls that many newer translations get swallowed up by.

3) The King James Version is foundational to the English language. There are two main influences on the development of the modern English language: Shakespeare and the King James Version — and the King James Version wins hands down in my mind, because there are people who never gave a fig for Shakespeare yet knew and loved their King James Bibles, or who never read or heard Shakespeare yet heard or read the King James at pivotal moments of deep personal significance in their lives — marriages, births, deaths, and so on. Shakespeare gave us lots of words and phrases, but the King James Version did more by helping to shape the very structure and sound of our language. There has never been anything to compare with it in terms of effect on the English language, and there never will be again. The Internet might (I say might) come close, but it’s still debated exactly what effect, if any, the Internet is going to have on our language.

4) We owe it to those who went before us. Part of the reason for at least becoming familiar with the King James, in my mind, is because of the multitudes now gone who used it. Not only to help us understand what they thought and felt when we read the same words they did and experience the same text, but the Bible they used shaped their thoughts, their devotion — their whole inner life. It informed the art and the literature they produced. People who knew only the King James as their Bible naturally drew much of their vocabulary, their phrasing and cadences, and the imagery they used from it. In many cases it supplied the raw material for what they created. The King James Version was the standard Bible for over 300 years. Don’t you think that would have an effect on what people wrote and created? We miss out on so much in art and literature, especially, if we do not know the King James Version, or even the Bible at all. Many of today’s students (and professors) have been robbed of more fully experiencing the literature they study and dissect by the cherished liberalism and rationalism that they are indoctrinated with — a sad irony. Come to think of it, we owe it not so much to the believers of the past, but ourselves, to be at least passing familiar with the King James.

I  probably won’t ever preach or teach out of the King James Version extensively — if at all. That’s okay. I understand the world has changed and most people haven’t been equipped by their educations to handle it, nor do they have the time, energy, or desire to put in the work to become familiar with the King James, whether for the first time or again. But the value is still there. For those who are willing to work with it, I highly recommend it. The luster of its beauty and the stirring power of its language are undimmed by the passage of time. Even such an “old” sounding version as the King James can still have still have a big impact in our fast-paced, superficial, ADD-addled world. For those who are interested in the King James but who feel intimidated & aren’t sure where to begin, I recommend the New Cambridge Paragraph Bible. You can also investigate ordering one here. Cambridge is to be commended for making this classic of classics, the KJV, more accessible for people.

Anybody reading the KJV? Anybody love the KJV or puzzled by it? Let me know!