The KJVO myth...

robycop3 · Dec 22, 2019

Albion said:
I appreciate the point, but for all of that, when you go to the KJV, you find that 9 out of 10 times, the meaning is the same as if you'd picked up one of a dozen versions that came out more recently. Meanwhile, most of these have their own problems which are not shared by the KJV.

And the KJV has probs not found in newer versions.

I guess my point is that the much-discussed inadequacies of the KJV really seem to be not that serious most of the time. And if we still feel that the NIV or one of the others is better on balance, we ought to consider the loss we suffer with them in the areas of beauty and inspiration, etc.

To read some of these editions, it seems like one is back reading at the fourth grade level. And this does matter, IMO.

Actually, it's ACCURACY that's the most-important. The KJV was largely made from older versions, & carried over many of their goofs Main thing the AV men did was make some of the language & spellings more-modern, and did SOME re-translating of some passages. (A glaring KJV goof is "Easter" in Acts 12:4, carried over from older versions. By the 1600s, passover and Easter were separate words.)

robycop3 · Dec 22, 2019

1Reformedman said:
I totally disagree. The only inspired texts were the originals. No copies of the originals are inspired text. They are copies of the inspired text.

Agreed. All Bible translations are the products of God's perfect word being handled by imperfect men.

createdtoworship · Dec 22, 2019

Shrewd Manager said:
Not enough. You made the claim, so why don't you do the homework there bro? Just make 3 columns: Book, Chapter, Verses, then go through the KJV and tally it up. If it works, do it for say the NASB and the NKJV (2 witnesses). You can then present the working papers as proof. Thanks, I'll wait.

Well think about it for a second. You have snopes which has attacked the Bible for what ten years now? don't you think that if they could have ammunition against the Bible they would do it? Either one of two things happened. They did research and it was in fact true and they didn't want to say it. Or they feared it true and didn't study it, and just assumed that because the verse divisions were added in the 12 th century that that dismisses it. Which is obviously errorsome, because the supernatural element involves the verse divisions as a critical element.

robycop3 · Dec 22, 2019

createdtoworship said:
Please.go.back to the link in that post. I show an image proving the inspiration of not only the KJV but also God's hand upon the all.of the organization of the KJV verse divisions etc. It's not saying they are perfect but that God's hand is upon the KJV. And as far as I know this does not work with other bibles like the NIV or ESV or NASB.

If God's hand was upon it, it'd be perfect!

But God DID cause the KJV, & all valid Bible translations before & after it to be made.

robycop3 · Dec 22, 2019

Heavenhome said:
Here I go, ready to be shot down, but I don't know why those who do not like the KJV or KJVo are so obsessed about it.
It comes up time and time again.

If you don't like it, don't read it, but also there is no need to go out if your way to harp about it or try to convince us that your way us the right way.
It is the King James for me all the way, if I was Greek or Jewish I would read it in its original languages but I'm not.
I have gone back to the original languages at times to compare and I am happy with the King James translation.

It's because the KJVO crowd tries to claim the KJV is perfect, when it definitely ISN'T! And they wrongly claim the KJV is the ONLY valid English Bible translation. But, when asked to provide SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT for their assertions, they wilt & melt.

createdtoworship · Dec 22, 2019

I have solid verifiable evidence that modern translations are all fraudulent, so one would think God's hand must have been upon at least one translation to be consistent yes? Why let them all be poor examples of scholarship like the NIV? At least the ESV tries to maintain greek integrity, but that is another story. When people read this text they instantly have faith in God's power. That is why it went viral on social media. I am using it here because it only works with the KJV. That I think is an important distinction. What else does God have to do? How many signs and wonders does God have to give an unbelieving world?

here is my original post:

robycop3 said:
I notice one "Bible Highlighter" tried to defend the KJVO myth with some 40-yr. old stuff that's been long-refuted.

Does he, or any other KJVO have anything new ? Far as I'm concerned, the KJVO myth is just that-a MAN-MADE MYTH -& is phony as a Ford Corvette!

One question for KJVOs-

WHERE IS THE SCRIPTURAL SUPPORT FOR THE KJVO MYTH ?
Without Scriptural support, no doctrine of faith/worship can be true.

I'm asking RESPECTFULLY; no flaming or word war intended. I just want to see some ACTUAL JUSTIFICATION for the KJVO myth.

JackRT said:
There is none.

I am not KJV only, I use the NKJV. But I did run accross a proof that God inspired the KJV of the Bible, it was on another thread but it got no replies. I guess it was that good.....just kidding...but I will post it here. It's pretty amazing actually.

Most scholars have what is called a view that is called "verbal plenary inspiration." At least the most reputable ones do anyway. Basically every dot, or grammar mark is there by divine inspiration. Granted grammar markings were added roughly a thousand years later. But you get the point. And further more what is inspired is the original autographs in hebrew, greek and parts of aramaic. English translations have numerous errors and that is why I have never heard of a scholar even claiming remotely that the english translations are inspired. Yet something must be. God's hand must have been on the Bible, because it survived all these years. The Bible is getting more and more accurate in english. Well as long as they use the proper manuscripts (but more on that later). Well anyway, there was something that popped up in social media this week, and I did some digging and it's sort of interesting. It supports at least a partial inspiration of an english translation (the KJV). I am not sure if this works with any other translation, but we can talk about that here. Anyway I will post the initial picture so you can read it. Notice that the original Bible did not have verse markings, or chapter markings, or maybe even the same book order. So this is sort of a unique version of your typical inspiration argument. This is at least a partial evidence of a partial inspiration behind the KJV. Now don't get me wrong, the KJV has numerous errors and had numerous revisions. But the point is that God's hand was on this translation, and I believe as I will get into later, there is reason for that. I actually use the NKJV, which is heresy to the KJV onlyist. So please don't say I am KJV only. But I think it's interesting this only works on the KJV bible, and there are books out that say that all other modern translations are based on forged manuscripts.

Here is a link for more info on the forgery, as well as an open thread to discuss it:
OneTab shared tabs

But I didn't want to ruffle feathers about the forgery, so forget I mentioned it. what I want to focus on is that it appears the Holy Spirit endorsed at least one english translation (I am not saying it's perfect, by any means, but that the project itself was endorsed).

Here is the image that I want to submit as evidence:

Inspiration of the bible translations.png

Here is a review of the above evidences, that mention this only occurs in the KJV Bible: possibly the NKJV too. The implications of this study are staggering, is God endorsing the chapter and verse divisions of the scriptures? If so how? I mean many many greek scholars have found errors in verse and chapter divisions. So again it's not God saying this english work is perfect. But that God is saying, I just want you to know I am here, I see your work in trying to preserve my word and I am with you, I endorse your effort.

Psalm 117 the Shortest Psalm in the Bible – This 'n That

(in conclusion: I posted this on facebook and did not say that it only worked with KJV and everyone reposted it as a miracle of God, then here when I mention it only works with KJV everyone is like, well did you fact check it? I was just wondering if you can see that when you saw it last few weeks on social media and you reposted it as a miracle, why that when I say it only works with the KJV that now you want more solid evidence?" I thought it is pretty much solid evidence as it sits, but maybe that is just me. And apparent you did too, last week.

Shrewd Manager · Dec 22, 2019

Redwingfan9 said:
It's also based on the Geneva Bible. As for copyright, at least in the US the KJV is in the public domain. I can't speak for the UK.

Between the Tyndale and Geneva, there's very scant 'original translation' in it, the experts seem to generally concur.

I think technically the publication rights to the KJV are still held by the British Crown and letters patent issued to their printer Cambridge Press. I doubt Her Majesty would sue you if you commercially republished it, but legally it would amount to infringement under UK law, regardless of where it takes place. You might need to head to Antwerp or Geneva to build your KJV bootleg empire lol.

https://www.cambridge.org/about-us/who-we-are/queens-printers-patent

Strong in Him · Dec 22, 2019

Heavenhome said:
Here I go, ready to be shot down, but I don't know why those who do not like the KJV or KJVo are so obsessed about it.
It comes up time and time again.

If you don't like it, don't read it, but also there is no need to go out if your way to harp about it or try to convince us that your way us the right way.

I don't read it, but I don't object at all to anyone who does and who values it.
What I dislike is the "this is the ONLY Bible/way of doing things", attitude with the implication that anyone who does/says differently is a 2nd class Christian. I have seen people write that the newer translations of Scripture - God's holy word - are corrupt. What does that then say about the faith or spirituality of the people who read them?

Strong in Him · Dec 22, 2019

createdtoworship said:
I have solid verifiable evidence that modern translations are all fraudulent,

What evidence do you have that ALL modern versions are fraudulent?
Why do you think that God would allow fraudulent, or false, copies of his word to be in circulation? And what are you saying about the Christians who read these "fraudulent" Bibles - that they aren't converted, born again or God's children?

robycop3 · Dec 22, 2019

Nicolaus Mourer said:
I much prefer a church like mine that only uses and advocates for the King James, rather than a multitude of versions. The primary benefit is unity of the scriptures, a single Word of God. This prevents confusion when discussing the scriptures which I've seen can come first-hand in a church where all of its members use differing translations. Trying to have multiple versions say the same things differently cannot all be the Word (singular) of God.

Either agree on one superior translation, or leave KJVO alone.

The KJVO myth is false; it has no Scriptural support.

The KJV is not in OUR English now. it's a "Model T" version.

And it's less-accurate than many newer versions.

Shrewd Manager · Dec 22, 2019

createdtoworship said:
Well think about it for a second. You have snopes which has attacked the Bible for what ten years now? don't you think that if they could have ammunition against the Bible they would do it? Either one of two things happened. They did research and it was in fact true and they didn't want to say it. Or they feared it true and didn't study it, and just assumed that because the verse divisions were added in the 12 th century that that dismisses it. Which is obviously errorsome, because the supernatural element involves the verse divisions as a critical element.

That's not how we do evidence. It's just speculative opinion. Why don't you test their claim by tallying up the verses in each chapter of each book. Would probably take less time than pursuing empty argument with me and be far more satisfying either way, no?

robycop3 · Dec 22, 2019

The copyrights issue is KJVO horse feathers. A US copyright allows the work to be used for its intended purpose(s) And, for a Bible there are many intended purposes. The main thing a copyright prohibits is reproducing a work & selling those repros for profit.

The British copyrights on the KJV authorize it to be printed & sold in the realm by the Universities of Oxford & Cambridge, the Ayres & Spottiswoode Co. & Harper Collins. (Owned by Ruppert Murdoch)

I'm happy to see the copyright on my Cambridge Edition KJV. That tells me I have the genuine article! Same for those in my American newer versions.

createdtoworship · Dec 22, 2019

Strong in Him said:
What evidence do you have that ALL modern versions are fraudulent?
Why do you think that God would allow fraudulent, or false, copies of his word to be in circulation? And what are you saying about the Christians who read these "fraudulent" Bibles - that they aren't converted, born again or God's children?

I won't post it here because it's off topic, but there are at least two other open threads about it, I just read a whole book on the fraudulent aspect of the manuscripts behind the modern translations. I was skeptical and was shoving off the whole idea into conspiracy theory until I read the book. He probably has a good twenty evidences of tampering with the manuscripts behind the modern translations. All funded by the vatican no doubt. (at least that is where the paper trail led). Which I don't doubt. Rome is very powerful and can fund their own Bible at a whim. And they did a few times through the centuries. But anyway....here are the threads on it:

OneTab shared tabs

To answer the question of why would God allow fakes, well one could ask the question of why God allows jehovah's witnesses to exist, or mormons, or any one of dozens of christian cults out there today that are frauds of the original religion.

I presume it's a test, to make sure we are ready for truth. Many times heresy is attractive because it caters to our sinful desire.

DamianWarS · Dec 22, 2019

JackRT said:
Were you aware that until about AD1000 there were no chapters in any Biblical manuscript. They were added quite arbitrarily and don't follow any particular pattern. They even break up perfectly coherent stories. The same thing happened with verse numbers several centuries later. All of the above is purely coincidental and has no hidden meanings attached.

The King James Version of the New Testament was based upon a Greek text (the Textus Receptus) that was marred by mistakes, containing the accumulated errors of fourteen centuries of manuscript copying. It was essentially the Greek text of the New Testament as edited by Beza, 1589, who closely followed that published by Erasmus, 1516-1535, which was based upon a few medieval manuscripts. The earliest and best of the eight manuscripts which Erasmus consulted was from the tenth century, and yet he made the least use of it because it differed most from the commonly received text; Beza had access to two manuscripts of great value, dating from the fifth and sixth centuries, but he made very little use of them because they differed from the text published by Erasmus. We now possess many more ancient manuscripts (about 10,000 compared to just 10) of the New Testament, and thanks to another 400 years of biblical scholarship, are far better equipped to seek to recover the original wording of the Greek text. Much as we might love the KJV and the majesty of it’s Jacobean English, modern translations are more accurate.

I thought the KJV's Greek critical text was the 1550 Textus Receptus edited by Stephanus

createdtoworship · Dec 22, 2019

Shrewd Manager said:
That's not how we do evidence. It's just speculative opinion. Why don't you test their claim by tallying up the verses in each chapter of each book. Would probably take less time than pursuing empty argument with me and be far more satisfying either way, no?

Let me ask a question. Sir. Would you ask for evidence, if I posted that exact argument on a thread called "inspiration of the bible" and did not put the KJV text in there. My studies have said that no you would not. So I find it hypocritical to question it now. I think it's not being honest with yourself and your God. If you would believe it yesterday and doubt it today. and the only changing factor is I said the three letter word of KJV, then that is a problem with you, not the argument. I would ask the question, why are you so angry at the term KJV? Is it because people claim it is the exact word of God, the only Holy Bible? I would be frustrated too. But that is innacurate, I myself have never made that claim. I know there are errors in every Bible translation, because they are literally changing the meanings of hundreds of words when they cross over to english. But I happen also to know God's hand is still upon the KJV. (btw I use the NKJV, not the KJV, which is heresy to a KJV only)

Shrewd Manager · Dec 22, 2019

robycop3 said:
The copyrights issue is KJVO horse feathers. A US copyright allows the work to be used for its intended purpose(s) And, for a Bible there are many intended purposes. The main thing a copyright prohibits is reproducing a work & selling those repros for profit.

The British copyrights on the KJV authorize it to be printed & sold in the realm by the Universities of Oxford & Cambridge, the Ayres & Spottiswoode Co. & Harper Collins. (Owned by Ruppert Murdoch)

I'm happy to see the copyright on my Cambridge Edition KJV. That tells me I have the genuine article! Same for those in my American newer versions.

Sure, no problem dealing in authorised editions in the US, but publishing (ie reproducing) the text for sale would not be legal according to UK law, because copyright is by law a worldwide right.

So let's say you did that in the US and then went on holiday to England, you might find your stay becomes a little extended at Her Majesty's pleasure.

Shrewd Manager · Dec 22, 2019

createdtoworship said:
Let me ask a question. Sir. Would you ask for evidence, if I posted that exact argument on a thread called "inspiration of the bible" and did not put the KJV text in there. My studies have said that no you would not. So I find it hypocritical to question it now. I think it's not being honest with yourself and your God. If you would believe it yesterday and doubt it today. and the only changing factor is I said the three letter word of KJV, then that is a problem with you, not the argument. I would ask the question, why are you so angry at the term KJV? Is it because people claim it is the exact word of God, the only Holy Bible? I would be frustrated too. But that is innacurate, I myself have never made that claim. I know there are errors in every Bible translation, because they are literally changing the meanings of hundreds of words when they cross over to english. But I happen also to know God's hand is still upon the KJV. (btw I use the NKJV, not the KJV, which is heresy to a KJV only)

In the time you took to ask that one question in 46 parts, interlaced with various accusations and redundancies, you could have counted half the verses in the Bible. Just do it brother.

dqhall · Dec 22, 2019

createdtoworship said:
I have solid verifiable evidence that modern translations are all fraudulent, so one would think God's hand must have been upon at least one translation to be consistent yes? Why let them all be poor examples of scholarship like the NIV? At least the ESV tries to maintain greek integrity, but that is another story. When people read this text they instantly have faith in God's power. That is why it went viral on social media. I am using it here because it only works with the KJV. That I think is an important distinction. What else does God have to do? How many signs and wonders does God have to give an unbelieving world?

here is my original post:

I am not KJV only, I use the NKJV. But I did run accross a proof that God inspired the KJV of the Bible, it was on another thread but it got no replies. I guess it was that good.....just kidding...but I will post it here. It's pretty amazing actually.

Most scholars have what is called a view that is called "verbal plenary inspiration." At least the most reputable ones do anyway. Basically every dot, or grammar mark is there by divine inspiration. Granted grammar markings were added roughly a thousand years later. But you get the point. And further more what is inspired is the original autographs in hebrew, greek and parts of aramaic. English translations have numerous errors and that is why I have never heard of a scholar even claiming remotely that the english translations are inspired. Yet something must be. God's hand must have been on the Bible, because it survived all these years. The Bible is getting more and more accurate in english. Well as long as they use the proper manuscripts (but more on that later). Well anyway, there was something that popped up in social media this week, and I did some digging and it's sort of interesting. It supports at least a partial inspiration of an english translation (the KJV). I am not sure if this works with any other translation, but we can talk about that here. Anyway I will post the initial picture so you can read it. Notice that the original Bible did not have verse markings, or chapter markings, or maybe even the same book order. So this is sort of a unique version of your typical inspiration argument. This is at least a partial evidence of a partial inspiration behind the KJV. Now don't get me wrong, the KJV has numerous errors and had numerous revisions. But the point is that God's hand was on this translation, and I believe as I will get into later, there is reason for that. I actually use the NKJV, which is heresy to the KJV onlyist. So please don't say I am KJV only. But I think it's interesting this only works on the KJV bible, and there are books out that say that all other modern translations are based on forged manuscripts.

Here is a link for more info on the forgery, as well as an open thread to discuss it:
OneTab shared tabs

But I didn't want to ruffle feathers about the forgery, so forget I mentioned it. what I want to focus on is that it appears the Holy Spirit endorsed at least one english translation (I am not saying it's perfect, by any means, but that the project itself was endorsed).

Here is the image that I want to submit as evidence:

View attachment 268905

Here is a review of the above evidences, that mention this only occurs in the KJV Bible: possibly the NKJV too. The implications of this study are staggering, is God endorsing the chapter and verse divisions of the scriptures? If so how? I mean many many greek scholars have found errors in verse and chapter divisions. So again it's not God saying this english work is perfect. But that God is saying, I just want you to know I am here, I see your work in trying to preserve my word and I am with you, I endorse your effort.

Psalm 117 the Shortest Psalm in the Bible – This 'n That

(in conclusion: I posted this on facebook and did not say that it only worked with KJV and everyone reposted it as a miracle of God, then here when I mention it only works with KJV everyone is like, well did you fact check it? I was just wondering if you can see that when you saw it last few weeks on social media and you reposted it as a miracle, why that when I say it only works with the KJV that now you want more solid evidence?" I thought it is pretty much solid evidence as it sits, but maybe that is just me. And apparent you did too, last week.

The King James Version is from the 17th century. Since then the Codex Sinaiticus was discovered at St. Catherine’s in the Sinai desert during the 19th century. It is a Greek Bible from the fourth century. Sinaiticus is one of the three oldest Bibles ever found. Some describe it as the oldest Bible.

In 1945 the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered at Qumran near the Dead Sea. They are from the first century or earlier. These scrolls were hidden during the 66-70 AD war. The scrolls are in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. They were written on papyrus and parchment (animal skin).

The KJV translators had no knowledge of these manuscripts. The NIV translators used them. I liked to read the NIV Bible, but quoted from a Bible that is not copyrighted.

Strong in Him · Dec 22, 2019

createdtoworship said:
I won't post it here because it's off topic,

Well it's not really.
The thread is about the false statement that ONLY the KJV is inspired, true and the word of God. Those who make this claim, that the KJV is the only true Bible, are saying that therefore all the other translations of the Bible are false/wrong/misleading.
It seems that you would agree with that, and what's more you claim to have evidence.

If there was indeed evidence that EVERY Bible apart from the KJV was false/wrong/fraudulent/corrupt, then, by default, it would prove the claim that only the KJV is correct.

createdtoworship said:
I was skeptical and was shoving off the whole idea into conspiracy theory until I read the book. He probably has a good twenty evidences of tampering with the manuscripts behind the modern translations.

WERE the manuscripts "tampered with", or were they in fact more accurate translations from the Greek?

I've seen posts on these forums that compare KJV texts with those text in other translations, and the conclusion is always, "look how that verse in the newer translation differs from the KJV; it obviously proves that the newer translation is at fault."
No it doesn't.
The person who writes these things is invariably coming from the position of "the KJV ONLY is true". Therefore, they will not admit that the KJV could ever be wrong, mistranslated or that other more accurate translations have been made since. Therefore, ANYTHING that differs from the, apparently perfect, KJV HAS to be wrong.
That is the wrong way to look at it - what do the KJV and newer Bibles say compared to the Greek? Could it be that the KJV uses language which nowadays means something else? No, say the KJVonlyists; not possible.

But let's see the Greek/Hebrew texts and how various Bibles translate them before we make any claims, or judgements.

createdtoworship said:
To answer the question of why would God allow fakes, well one could ask the question of why God allows jehovah's witnesses to exist, or mormons, or any one of dozens of christian cults out there today that are frauds of the original religion.

For the same reason that he allows sin to continue.
But we are talking about the word of God which people have translated for the purpose of making it and the Gospel more accessible to others - so that unbelievers can read God's word and come to faith. I am sure that many, if not all, of the translators were Christians who believed they were guided by the Holy Spirit and doing the work for God's glory - not cult leaders trying to peddle their own, self devised, doctrines.

createdtoworship said:
I presume it's a test, to make sure we are ready for truth.

Jesus is truth, the Holy Spirit is truth, God's word is truth.
And God wants us o know the truth. He is not going to test or mislead us by producing false Bibles - "the truth is around here somewhere; you have to search for it."

Shrewd Manager · Dec 22, 2019

dqhall said:
The King James Version is from the 17th century. Since then the Codex Sinaiticus was discovered at St. Catherine’s in the Sinai desert during the 19th century. It is a Greek Bible from the fourth century. Sinaiticus is one of the three oldest Bibles ever found. Some describe it as the oldest Bible.

In 1945 the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered at Qumran near the Dead Sea. They are from the first century or earlier. These scrolls were hidden during the 66-70 AD war. The scrolls are in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. They were written on papyrus and parchment (animal skin).

The KJV translators had no knowledge of these manuscripts. The NIV translators used them. I liked to read the NIV Bible, but quoted from a Bible that is not copyrighted.

Some of these documents are of dubious provenance. At least with Tyndale et al you know who you're dealing with.

Given that fraud across archaeology and paleontology has been the rule and not the exception over the last 2 centuries, I take a lot of convincing.

The KJVO myth...

Newbie

Newbie

In the grip of grace

Newbie

Newbie

In the grip of grace

Through him, in all things, more than conquerors.

Great is thy faithfulness

Great is thy faithfulness

Newbie

Through him, in all things, more than conquerors.

Newbie

In the grip of grace

Follower of Isa Al Masih

In the grip of grace

Through him, in all things, more than conquerors.

Through him, in all things, more than conquerors.

Well-Known Member

Great is thy faithfulness

Through him, in all things, more than conquerors.

Similar threads