[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]

Author Topic: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism  (Read 34418 times)

John B.

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 40
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a llama!
The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« on: September 18, 2003, 08:27:13 PM »
Hello everyone!

I am quite distrurbed with how the Bible translation debate has been framed. First, I want to state for the record that I believe that any translation of the Bible that is based on the texts discovered by Westcott and Hort are based on corrupt and unbiblical manuscripts. I believe that the KJV is the only translation that is based on trustworthy manuscripts.

Now, the question arises: is the KJV a translation without error? I believe that it is not. Clearly, many more manuscripts that make up the majority text have been discovered after the KJV was translated. The KJV translators had far fewer texts to draw from than do translators have today. But they did a wonderful job of translating the Bible into the English language. But there are a few things that they probably had done differently if they were translating today. But, I am confident that they would not give consideration to the Westcott and Hort manuscripts!

What is distrurbing to me are those who elevate the KJV to same level as the original autographs. It is to these folks that the KJV-onlyism label has been given. Unfortunately this label is often given to those who reject modern translations based wholely, or in part, on the Westcott and Hort manuscripts, but also recognize that the KJV had a few minor translation errors.

Your thoughts....

John B.

Layla

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2003, 10:18:14 PM »
Greetings John B

I thought your post was well written in that it conveyed your thoughts very well without condembing the KJV which imo is the best translation available.  I have some very good studies on the reliability or validity of the KJV text as opposed to other versions, if you would care to view them.

Peace,
Layla

iGreg

  • Guest
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #2 on: September 19, 2003, 02:20:47 AM »
I agree, that the KJV (Authorized Version) is the best English translation. The original languages are, of course, closer to the original penned manuscripts, however, the KJV does the job well in the English language.

Personally, I believe this enormous growth in various so-called modern English translations does nothing but create confusion. Where there is some question about the accuracy of part of the KJV, it is best to go to the original language, rather than rely on so-called modern English Bibles.

In addition to the issue of literalness, there is the issue of literary beauty. The old English of the KJV is poetic in sound and structure, so Biblical quotations from the KJV are set apart from modern English. Therefore, when someone quotes the KJV it is usually easy to know that they are probably quoting scripture.

When I first was drawn to the Bible in the early 90's I compared the various translations (in order to pick one to read), mainly by comparing some Psalms. The Psalms in the KJV have no equal in the other, I think inferior, English translations. It was no contest, I picked the KJV. I use no other English Bible.

Jen

  • Guest
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #3 on: September 19, 2003, 01:15:27 PM »
I believe that the reason for the KJV onlyism error lies on the side of an "extreme desire" to have the Word fo God without error. I had a friend who fit the mold about the "onlyist position." I agree that the KJV is the best english translation . Jay Green also used the Textus Receptus or Recieved Text in both his Modern KJV and the Literal Translation of the Bible. Both of those translations are worth studying. The Literal can be particularly helpful. I have also gained some light from reading Young's Literal Translation, also based upon the Received Text. The issue will continue to be debated until people understand that God's Word is preserved in the Hebrew and the Greek. The KJV has no real competition in my opinion. You can study it with a Strong's Concordance or other helpful study tools. There are scriptures or specifc words which can be better translated in the KJV which is why it is so important to study God's Word alone and in it's entirety. I have learned the lesson the hard way by reading many... many of the newer translations, more so out of curiosity. NONE of them compare to the KJV. I either became angry reading what I felt was a deliberate mistranslation of a text, or confusion arose due to reading badly translated scriptures. Just reading the original preface written by the scribes about the KJV translation causes one to respect it as a excellent translation of the Bible they had a fear of God and His Word that you do not find in today's so called scholarship. My 2 cents.
May the LORD richly Bless the reading and the hearing of His Word.
In His Mercy and Grace,
Jen

John B.

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 40
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a llama!
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #4 on: September 22, 2003, 08:14:04 PM »
Layla,

I did an intense study on the Biblical tranlations issue for six months and was stunned to learn how Biblically divergent the different translations can be, even on basics of "essential" doctrine. I would love to read more, so point me in the the direction of more literature on this topic. Thanks.

John B.

brandplucked

  • Guest
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #5 on: October 26, 2003, 01:47:06 AM »
Hi all, I am a convinced King James Bible only for a whole lot of very good reasons.  I have not always been of this conviction until a few years ago.

I also have a website a fellow believer helped me set up.  I personally wrote most of the articles and I try to deal with the common objections that are brought up against the KJB.

If God hasn't preserved His inspired, complete, infallible words somewhere here on this earth in a recognizable form, then He lied.  The KJB is by far and away the best candidate on the scene.

In His grace,

Will Kinney

inspector

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #6 on: December 23, 2003, 09:24:25 PM »
Layla,

I did an intense study on the Biblical tranlations issue for six months and was stunned to learn how Biblically divergent the different translations can be, even on basics of "essential" doctrine. I would love to read more, so point me in the the direction of more literature on this topic. Thanks.

John B.

If you studied the issue over 6 months then I am sure you already know of this book, but just in case, since you asked, I would recommend "The Text of the New Testament" by Aland/Aland.

I read it from cover to cover back in 92' and learned much about the transmission of the Bible text. I really still to this day do not see how anybody could be a KJV onlyist.

iGreg

  • Guest
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #7 on: December 23, 2003, 09:43:25 PM »
Layla,

I did an intense study on the Biblical tranlations issue for six months and was stunned to learn how Biblically divergent the different translations can be, even on basics of "essential" doctrine. I would love to read more, so point me in the the direction of more literature on this topic. Thanks.

John B.

If you studied the issue over 6 months then I am sure you already know of this book, but just in case, since you asked, I would recommend "The Text of the New Testament" by Aland/Aland.

I read it from cover to cover back in 92' and learned much about the transmission of the Bible text. I really still to this day do not see how anybody could be a KJV onlyist.
Interesting. I don't understand why anyone would bother with any English translation, other than the beautiful King James Version.

Peng Bao

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 174
  • Gender: Male
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #8 on: December 24, 2003, 05:38:26 AM »
Interesting. I don't understand why anyone would bother with any English translation, other than the beautiful King James Version.


I agree. I find it sad that most people say that the King James Version is an excellent Bible, but then follow up with the comment that they don't see anything wrong with society now coming up with all these other versions. Why would a christian want to have so many different versions of the bible when they're trying to convince people it's the word of God? It makes no logical sense, and just makes for a tougher battle and a cause for mockery by the reprobates.  :'(

The King James version is the most accurate translation, and there was never a need for a new English translation. Especially since the NIV, one of the worst, is the replacement of choice. You figure it out. At least the KJO Christians have respect for God's word. In my book, that makes them better than those who don't seem to have a clue about preserving God's word faithfully.


inspector

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #9 on: December 24, 2003, 06:32:44 AM »
Interesting. I don't understand why anyone would bother with any English translation, other than the beautiful King James Version.


I agree. I find it sad that most people say that the King James Version is an excellent Bible, but then follow up with the comment that they don't see anything wrong with society now coming up with all these other versions. Why would a christian want to have so many different versions of the bible when they're trying to convince people it's the word of God? It makes no logical sense, and just makes for a tougher battle and a cause for mockery by the reprobates. :'(

The King James version is the most accurate translation, and there was never a need for a new english translation. Especially since the NIV, one of the worst, is the replacement of choice? You figure it out. At least the KJO christians have respect for God's Word. In my book, that makes them better than those who don't seem to have a clue about preserving God's Word faithfully.



I agree that the NIV is a paraphrase. I agree we do not need another translation. I agree the KJV is the most accurate translation from the Byzentine text. The NASB is of  the the Alexanderian text. When I do a word for word study from the Greek, I understand the differences between the texts and go from there. There is no essential doctrine at stake. We all believe the same thing.

• The Bible, Old and New Testaments, are inerrant, infallible, God breathed, complete and final.

• Belief in the one true God of the Bible.
a. God is one true God revealed as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

• The Deity of Christ
a. Jesus was virgin born.
b. Jesus is God incarnate.
c. Jesus’ literal physical bodily resurrection.
d. Jesus died for our sins.

• The Deity Holy Spirit
a. The Holy Spirit is God.
b. The Holy Spirit indwells the true believer.

• Salvation is a free gift of God and is said to be by grace, by believing, or by faith.

I use both the NKJV and the NASB, they neither one hurt my feelings.

Peng Bao

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 174
  • Gender: Male
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #10 on: December 24, 2003, 07:05:28 AM »

• Salvation is a free gift of God and is said to be by grace, by believing, or by faith.

I use both the NKJV and the NASB, they neither one hurt my feelings.


As is common in these type forums, you missed the point entirely. We didn't disagree that salvation is a free gift of God and is by grace, or with any of the other things you've listed. That wasn't my point. But you seem to have no understanding of what I actually said. You should go back and read my post again. It had nothing to do with how we are saved, the deity of Christ, or Grace. I am at a loss why you don't understand that.

These other things are an entirely different topic and thread.

inspector

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 21
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #11 on: December 24, 2003, 07:11:53 AM »
As is common in these type forums, you missed the point entirely. We didn't disagree that salvation is a free gift of God and is by grace, or with any of the other things you've listed. That wasn't my point. But you seem to have no understanding of what I actually said. You should go back and read my post again. It had nothing to do with how we are saved, the deity of Christ, or Grace. I am at a loss why you don't understand that.

These other things are an entirely different topic and thread.

"At least the KJO christians have respect for God's Word. In my book, that makes them better than those who don't seem to have a clue about preserving God's Word faithfully."

I understand just fine.

Kenneth White

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 311
  • Gender: Male
  • Thinking Christians, Intelligent Theology
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #12 on: December 24, 2003, 07:55:44 AM »
I agree. I find it sad that most people say that the King James Version is an excellent Bible, but then follow up with the comment that they don't see anything wrong with society now coming up with all these other versions. Why would a christian want to have so many different versions of the bible when they're trying to convince people it's the word of God? It makes no logical sense, and just makes for a tougher battle and a cause for mockery by the reprobates.  :'(

Excellent point. I know that the web sites that specialize in online bibles take great pride in the number of different versions they have available online, and go to great lengths to get licenses to have a large variety to choose from. As if a variety of ways to understand what's written was a virtue.


Quote
The King James version is the most accurate translation, and there was never a need for a new english translation. Especially since the NIV, one of the worst, is the replacement of choice? You figure it out.

The NIV is most popular by far because it has so changed God's word to conform to modern norms. The new version NIV is now even worse, as it has gone gender neutral. And even with that, many conservative and reformed Christians swear by it. Just look at the number of reformed articles that quote from the NIV. Don't anyone tell me attitudes are not changing. As you say--you figure it out!


Quote
At least the KJO christians have respect for God's Word. In my book, that makes them better than those who don't seem to have a clue about preserving God's word faithfully.

I hate to take sides, but I have to agree with you here. But is it a loss of respect for God's word, or loss of love for God's word? I've been reading a theme about love in connection with God's word in one of Tony's articles, and it struck a cord with a lot of posts I read here. What does love waxing cold really mean? Does it show itself in how we treat God's word?

Matthew 24:12 And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold.

Tony says yes, and from what I see taking place today, I agree. I definitely see a falling away from biblical principles today. One of the greatest being the way Christians don't seem to understand how precious God's word is anymore, or understand how diligent we should be in preserving it as accurately as possible. It's an attitude change. Love waxing cold. Very few seem to care about how supporting all these new versions is contributing to the confusion of the Church.

 1Corinthians 10:23  All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not.

Just because we can do something, doesn't always mean that we should do it.

Proverbs 1:5-6 "A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels: To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings."

Kenneth White

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 311
  • Gender: Male
  • Thinking Christians, Intelligent Theology
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #13 on: December 24, 2003, 08:02:06 AM »
"At least the KJO christians have respect for God's Word. In my book, that makes them better than those who don't seem to have a clue about preserving God's Word faithfully."

I understand just fine.


Maybe not. The point is, preserving God's word as faithfully as possible should be a priority, not a option available but unnecessary. I think most Christians who love God's word would have more respect for those who tended to preserve God's word. Since that person would generally tend to be more faithful than one who didn't think that sort of thing was important.

See my signature line below.
Proverbs 1:5-6 "A wise man will hear, and will increase learning; and a man of understanding shall attain unto wise counsels: To understand a proverb, and the interpretation; the words of the wise, and their dark sayings."

brandplucked

  • Guest
Re: The King James Only Controversy - King James Onlyism
« Reply #14 on: December 25, 2003, 12:59:50 AM »
The King James version is the most accurate translation, and there was never a need for a new english translation. Especially since the NIV, one of the worst, is the replacement of choice? You figure it out. At least the KJO christians have respect for God's Word. In my book, that makes them better than those who don't seem to have a clue about preserving God's Word faithfully.


Hi brother Peng Bao, excellent points.  Thank God for your faith.

Regarding this statement by Inspector who said: "There is no essential doctrine at stake. We all believe the same thing.
• The Bible, Old and New Testaments, are inerrant, infallible, God breathed, complete and final.

I have a question for you then, Inspector.  What are you referring to here?  You say the Old and New Testaments ARE inerrant, infallible etc.  Exactly to what are you referring when you say this?  Did you know there are several different Hebrew texts and that the nasb, rsv, niv, esv, etc. all frequently depart from all Hebrew texts?  I can prove this to you if you like.  Did you also know there are at least 30 different Greek texts out there?  So, when you talk about an inspired, complete, infallible Bible, exactly what do you have in mind? Something you can hold in your hands, read, and believe every word, or some kind of mystical, non-existent fabrication that nobody has ever seen and doesn't have?

A little clarity of your position would be appreciated.  Maybe you haven't yet thought through the ramifications of your present understanding.  Thanks.

Will Kinney

 


[ Home | Eschatology | Bible Studies | Classics | Articles | Sermons | Apologetics | Search | F.A.Q. ]