You know what really annoys me? People who insist on the KJV as the best or only translation of the Bible.
It isn’t, obviously. It isn’t even a good translation of the Bible, compared to what we have today. The translating was done centuries ago, and in accordance with the political views of the Anglican church. It’s better than nothing, of course, but hardly the most accurate or useful translation available.
And even if the KJV were a great translation, it’s awfully silly to never consult more than one translation. Hebrew and English are very different languages, and no translation can hope to capture the complexity of the ideas expressed. (Personally, I like reading the Amplified Bible, which makes a valiant attempt, but I still consult other translations or the original Hebrew sometimes.)
And yet there are people out there who regard the KJV as the only valid version, with other versions tainted or apocryphal. Who think the Messiah cannot be called “Yeshua” because “the Bible” says Jesus, and that complex passages can be accurately interpreted by looking at the English meanings of the words used in one English translation. It’s incomprehensible to me. Silly prejudice leading to bad theology.
I was going to say that KJV-only types are as silly as those who believe that diluting something makes it stronger, but considering the number of dilutents involved in the creation of the KJV, you could almost say the former are among the latter. A pretty conceit.
This all came up recently because I found myself choosing not to join an ATC swap because it was hosted by a KJV-only Christian. That, of course, is stupid prejudice on my part. She didn’t specify that the ATCs had to use the KJV, though she may have assumed they would, and in all likelihood she simply doesn’t know any better and my irritation should be directed at her parents or pastor. So I will have to work on that. I don’t particularly want to, but I will.