Is King James onlyism a heresy?

YeshuaFan said:

Which Greek TR, and which version of the Kjv is the correct one?

Click to expand...

I believe the King James 1900 Cambridge Edition is the pure Word of God (Which would obviously be based on the supporting TR manuscripts which can be traced back in time).





For…



So according to Psalms 12:6-7:
Why are the Lord's words pure?
Why are the Lord's words preserved forever?

Well, I believe one reason is so that we believers today can...

“...take...the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God” (Ephesians 6:17).

So as to...

Study to show ourselves approved unto God (2 Timothy 2:15).
And earnestly contend for the faith (Jude 1:3).
For all Scripture is profitable for doctrine and instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be perfect unto all good works (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

But how can we be perfect unto all good works if the faith itself is imperfect?
For faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17).

Side Note:

As for which New Testament TR (Textus Receptus): There is only one Textus Receptus line of manuscripts (a collective of various trustworthy manuscripts) mentioned in relation to the TR and not two. Even many Modern Scholars would agree with that.

So if I lived during the time before the Critical Text 1881 existed (which is where all Modern Bibles come from), and all I knew about was the King James Bible, and that was the one and only Word I trusted, I would be a heretic?

Surely not.

Why would it be any different if I trust it today?

Do I all of a sudden become a heretic because I reject Modern Bibles? If so. Why?

pescador said:

Off-topic, but why do you consider yourself a sinner? If you have been born again, born from above, God doesn't consider you to still be a sinner.

Click to expand...

You should ask an Eastern Orthodox member as that is an EO prayer. I could also tell you, but I just had a terrifying experience on the drive home.

hagios24 said:

You know, Athanaceus seems like such an interesting guy every time I read about him. He was the one who selected the 27 books we use for the Bible. I did not know that, wow. And, of course, he was also the O-N-L-Y guy on the Council of Nicee that defended the Deity of Christ...

Click to expand...

I believe in the truths established by the Nicene creed, but I do not believe the council was something that established truth that did not already previously exist by evangelical Scripture Alone believers.

I believe Athanaceus merely agreed with the already established canon in his passing discussion at Nicaea, and he was not deciding the canon of Scripture as a part of this council.

Why 66?

The council of Nicaea was more about refuting Arianism. But I believe Christians who are not Ecumenical already established the true nature of God long before Athanaceus was even born. The council of Nicaea was an ecumenical council. Ecumenical is a distasteful idea to an evangelical Scripture Alone believer. For the evangelical Scripture Alone believer holds to the view that they must be holy and separate when it comes to fellowship. Athanaceus is Orthodox. The Orthodox believe in praying to the saints, and they believe in the reverence of icons (pictures of saints). I find these practices to be unbiblical. So I doubt this council decided anything that evangelical Scripture Alone Christians did not already believe.

The Protestant Bible (Which I believe is the Holy Bible) has 66 books (as I am sure you are aware of). This is the Bible that I believe God inspired and it is the Bible I follow.

Now, that said, I believe 2 Corinthians 3:2 is saying that our life is an epistle or book to shine our faith in Christ for all to see.


So some may say that our life in following God's Word is the 67th book. Well, it would be the life testimony of the whole body of Christ with Christ being the head of that body. But such a book can only be written by God in the end. Our inclusion in the book can only be if we endure to the end. Oh, and the 67th book is not us creating any new doctrine or teachings by our hand, either. The 67th book is merely our following our instructions that come from Jesus and His followers. It is living faithfully to what is already written in the Holy Bible.

Side Note:

Again, we cannot write our own story and claim it as inspired Scripture. Only God can do that. We cannot add or take away from His Holy Word.

MoreCoffee said:

Those who like the KJV are free to use it. Those who do not like it are free not to use it. The majority of Christians have no need to go any further.

The few who hold to KJV-Onlyism will not use nor will they trust any English bible but the KJV. They actively teach their followers to reject "modern translations of the bible" and go as far as to call such bibles 'corrupt' and 'evil' and make attempts to link modern English bibles to satanic forces. This is an absurd perspective for KJV Only people to adopt. They ought to stop following people like Gail Riplinger.

Click to expand...

I consider myself a KJB-Onlyist and yet I use Modern Translations. I look at Modern Translations as if I was panning through the dirt to get to the gold in the KJB. Modern Translations are sort of like using an old dictionary or a Bible dictionary when I read and or study the King James Bible. I also encourage others who have a hard time with the KJB to read it side by side with a Modern Bible. But I tell them to be extremely careful to not make that Modern Bible their final Word of authority because only the KJB is the pure Word of God. So I see the Modern Bibles as only being helpful to update the 1600’s English at times and or to give added clarity to others on what the KJB says. But I do not agree with telling a person to read Modern Bibles alone because there are many doctrines that are changed, and the devil’s name is placed in them where they do not belong, etc.

hagios24 said:

I don't think following anyone for that matter just because they have degrees is a good idea. We follow them because they have the Spirit of God, and speak with the same authority that Jesus has. The Apostles were notably uneducated men, and rightly so. To prove a point. You don't need to study in a stuffy little room buried six feet under the ground, for sixty-six years before entering ministry. And people were amazed by the Authority with which Jesus spoke, but that's just me, hey.

I don't know what is worse. Complaining that KJV English is too archaic, or complaining that KJV English is too simple, but either way - actively/passively trying to discredit it. It's a nice book written by God. Worth a good read, me thinks. Anyway. Got to go. Ta.

Click to expand...

I am KJB Only. The KJB is the pure Word of God. I am a KJB lover and defender. However, I am not one of those KJB-Onlyists who is going to pretend the King James Bible is easier to read. In fact, this is the one thing that kind of rubs me the wrong way by own KJB-Only brethren. They act like it is not hard to read the KJB when in truth everyone knows it is difficult to read because there are TONS of archaic 1600’s words a person would not know unless they look those words up in an older dictionary, bible dictionary, Defined King James Bible, or by comparing it with a Modern Translation. Yes, it’s true, Modern Translations are tainted in that they have changed doctrines, and they attack the Trinity, water down the blood atonement, the deity of Christ, etcetera; But I do believe they can be used for good.

However, what about the archaic words in the King James Bible?

Well, do the archaic English words in the KJB mean that His word is not perfect? No. Of course not.
Jesus spoke in parables and those who were not of the kingdom did not understand them.
Jesus’ own disciples did not understand Christ’s own words on His death and resurrection before the cross. Were Christ’s words imperfect because they were not spoken with more clarity? No. Of course not. God’s words are still perfect whether those words are more veiled or not.

So for me: Jeremiah 6:16 speaks to me about the old English King James Bible. We need to get back to the old paths where men of God just followed one book to truly live righteously and honor God’s grace and give glory to the Lord Jesus Christ.

For it makes sense that God’s words would be readable in many places, but yet in other parts it would be really difficult so as to show that God’s Word is distinct, separate, and holy from the Modern tongue (i.e. Today’s English).

But His words are also hard at times to read because God tells us to study to show ourselves approved unto God (2 Timothy 2:15). We need to be a workman. Work hard. For by working hard, we appreciate God’s truth more (Instead of just being spoon fed).

Rhamiel said:

New Age Books?
is the NIV "New Age"?
really, the KJV was translated in AD 1611, that is about 1580 years after Christ died and rose from the dead and rose again
so wouldn't all modern translations be "new age" in the fact that they happened in the Modern or Post-Modern eras?

Click to expand...

If you know anything about the New Age, one of it’s teachings is about having a new world order.

Hebrews 9:10 NIV They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washing–external regulations applying until the time of the new order.

Hebrews 9:10 NAB … imposed until the time of the new order.

Hebrews 9:10 KJB “being only (with meats and drinks and divers washings) carnal ordinances, imposed until a time of reformation.”

The KJB gets it right, and the Modern Versions fail.

stan1953 said:

I forgot about this site....for those who want some truth on the matter.

"KJV Only" advocates refuted!

Click to expand...

And these claims by Bible.ca have been refuted or explained in return, my friend.

Another King James Bible Believer

The Liturgist said:

You should ask an Eastern Orthodox member as that is an EO prayer. I could also tell you, but I just had a terrifying experience on the drive home.

Click to expand...

Wow! I hope that you're okay!!

The Liturgist said:

You should ask an Eastern Orthodox member as that is an EO prayer. I could also tell you, but I just had a terrifying experience on the drive home.

Click to expand...

I hope and pray that you are alright!

pescador said:

Off-topic, but why do you consider yourself a sinner? If you have been born again, born from above, God doesn't consider you to still be a sinner.

Click to expand...

A brother sinned and the presbyter ordered him to go out of church. But Bessarion got up and went out with him, saying, ‘I, too, am a sinner.’

A young monk said to the great ascetic Abba Sisoes: “Abba, what should I do? I fell.” The elder answered: “Get up!” The monk said: “I got up and I fell again!” The elder replied: “Get up again!” But the young monk asked: “For how long should I get up when I fall?” “Until your death,” answered Abba Sisoes. —Sayings of the Desert Fathers

Lenten Prayer of St. Ephraim the Syrian
O Lord and Master of my life, take from me the spirit of sloth, despair, lust of power, and idle talk.

But give rather the spirit of chastity, humility, patience, and love to Thy servant.

Yea, O Lord and King, grant me to see my own transgressions, and not to judge my brother, for blessed art Thou, unto ages of ages. Amen.

Bible Highlighter said:

If you know anything about the New Age, one of it’s teachings is about having a new world order.

Hebrews 9:10 NIV They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washing–external regulations applying until the time of the new order.

Hebrews 9:10 NAB … imposed until the time of the new order.

Hebrews 9:10 KJB “being only (with meats and drinks and divers washings) carnal ordinances, imposed until a time of reformation.”

The KJB gets it right, and the Modern Versions fail.

Click to expand...

But that passage isn't speaking of a yet-to-come future event. In context, the "reformation" or "new order" refers to the replacement of the old covenant with the new one, through Christ, which occurred 2,000 years ago.

pescador said:

Wow! I hope that you're okay!!

Click to expand...

@GreekOrthodox

I am thanks to the intervention of my guardian angel, and a man named Angel Rodriguez, who runs a restaurant on Highway 18, who helped me put the spare tire on my car after my right rear tire had a catastrophic blow out, the first time I have had a tire completely disintegrate.

The tires on the vehicle are relatively new (2017 or 2018) Bridgestone EcoBoosters, but after that failure, where within 10 seconds I went from having four tires to having three and running on my rim, and which also caused cosmetic damage to the rear fender on my Dodge Charger R/T which will doubtless be just under the insurance deductible, I am thinking I should rip them off and go back to using Michelins, which I had historically used (my Michelins were 9 and 10 years old when replaced; I had lost two in downtown LA due to a nail in the road, a damaged surface, basically the sort of rubbish downtown LA is famous for, but neither failed catastrophically).

Bible Highlighter said:

If you know anything about the New Age, one of it’s teachings is about having a new world order.

Hebrews 9:10 NIV They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washing–external regulations applying until the time of the new order.

Hebrews 9:10 NAB … imposed until the time of the new order.

Hebrews 9:10 KJB “being only (with meats and drinks and divers washings) carnal ordinances, imposed until a time of reformation.”

The KJB gets it right, and the Modern Versions fail.

Click to expand...

ChetSinger said:

But that passage isn't speaking of a yet-to-come future event. In context, the "reformation" or "new order" refers to the replacement of the old covenant with the new one, through Christ, which occurred 2,000 years ago.

Click to expand...

Right, yes. We all know that it is referring to the New Covenant. Nobody is saying otherwise. But words have meaning and the Modern Bible translators chose “new order” so as to refer to the New Covenant of which began with Christ’s death and is still in effect now. The New Covenant is not just a one time event in Hebrews 9:10. The New Covenant is now and it exists today. So the problem in the Modern Bibles, is that it renders Hebrews 9:10 as referring to a “time of reformation” (i.e. the New Covenant) as the “new order.” This sounds suspicious because it sounds like the “new world order” that is tied with the New Age. Again, it’s not a coincidence that the New Age teachings that are creeping into the church has to do with men falling away from a tried and true trusted Bible (like the KJB) and they have chosen to look to more hip and modern Bibles.

Again, as I told another person here, you have to look at the patterns of evidence and not just one rare occurrence of something that seems off (but could be okay in the fact that it could simply read another way). By doing so, we can then see a pattern that should hopefully get you to sit up on the edge of your seat and pay attention of what is really going on here (Instead of just shaking one’s head and throwing reasons of objections without hearing my case).

Let’s look at some more so you can see the pattern.


This sounds like new age mumbo jumbo to me.



There are several movements in the New Age “tent” – one of which is neopaganism, and it is from here that the link to environmentalism enters the picture.

https://www.womenofgrace.com/blog/58968
(Note: I agree with their condemnation of the new age in this article, but it does not mean I agree with everything this website believes or teaches).



Here we see the message Bible as referring to the husband and wife as being equals. Yes, they are one flesh, but the husband is the head of the wife according to Scripture. “For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.” (Ephesians 5:23). In the new age, they are all about equality; Especially gender equality (Which they are espousing here).

Do you even know that a sodomite was on the translation committee on the NIV? That is why the NIV uses transgender pronouns. This is all about the equality agenda in the New Age. Just look up gender equality and the New Age on Google, and you will see what I am talking about.

The Liturgist said:

@GreekOrthodox

I am thanks to the intervention of my guardian angel, and a man named Angel Rodriguez, who runs a restaurant on Highway 18, who helped me put the spare tire on my car after my right rear tire had a catastrophic blow out, the first time I have had a tire completely disintegrate.

The tires on the vehicle are relatively new (2017 or 2018) Bridgestone EcoBoosters, but after that failure, where within 10 seconds I went from having four tires to having three and running on my rim, and which also caused cosmetic damage to the rear fender on my Dodge Charger R/T which will doubtless be just under the insurance deductible, I am thinking I should rip them off and go back to using Michelins, which I had historically used (my Michelins were 9 and 10 years old when replaced; I had lost two in downtown LA due to a nail in the road, a damaged surface, basically the sort of rubbish downtown LA is famous for, but neither failed catastrophically).

Click to expand...

Sorry about your situation. Glad you are okay.

May God bless you.

The Liturgist said:

@GreekOrthodox

I am thanks to the intervention of my guardian angel, and a man named Angel Rodriguez, who runs a restaurant on Highway 18, who helped me put the spare tire on my car after my right rear tire had a catastrophic blow out, the first time I have had a tire completely disintegrate.

Click to expand...

Glad you are okay! And thanks to God and your guardian angel who was definitely working that day!

Bible Highlighter said:

Right, yes. We all know that it is referring to the New Covenant. Nobody is saying otherwise. But words have meaning and the Modern Bible translators chose “new order” so as to refer to the New Covenant of which began with Christ’s death and is still in effect now. The New Covenant is not just a one time event in Hebrews 9:10. The New Covenant is now and it exists today. So the problem in the Modern Bibles, is that it renders Hebrews 9:10 as referring to a “time of reformation” (i.e. the New Covenant) as the “new order.” This sounds suspicious because it sounds like the “new world order” that is tied with the New Age. Again, it’s not a coincidence that the New Age teachings that are creeping into the church has to do with men falling away from a tried and true trusted Bible (like the KJB) and they have chosen to look to more hip and modern Bibles.

Again, as I told another person here, you have to look at the patterns of evidence and not just one rare occurrence of something that seems off (but could be okay in the fact that it could simply read another way). By doing so, we can then see a pattern that should hopefully get you to sit up on the edge of your seat and pay attention of what is really going on here (Instead of just shaking one’s head and throwing reasons of objections without hearing my case).

Let’s look at some more so you can see the pattern.

Psalms 8:5 KJB
“For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.”

Psalms 8:5 (The Message)
“Yet we’ve so narrowly missed being gods,
bright with Eden’s dawn light.”​

This sounds like new age mumbo jumbo to me.

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 KJB "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders [sodomites] nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified..."​

1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (The Message): "Unjust people who don't care about God will not be joining in his kingdom. Those who use and abuse each other, use and abuse sex, use and abuse the earth and everything in it don't qualify as citizens in God's kingdom. A number of you know from experience what I'm talking about, for not so long ago you were on that list. Since then, you've been cleaned up and given a fresh start...."​

There are several movements in the New Age “tent” – one of which is neopaganism, and it is from here that the link to environmentalism enters the picture.

https://www.womenofgrace.com/blog/58968
(Note: I agree with their condemnation of the new age in this article, but it does not mean I agree with everything this website believes or teaches).

1 Peter 3:1, 1 Peter 3:7 KJB: "Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands... Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives, and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life..."​

1 Peter 3:1, 1 Peter 3:7 (The Message): "The same goes for you wives: Be good wives to your husbands, responsive to their needs... The same goes for you husbands: Be good husbands to your wives. Honor them, delight in them. As women they lack some of your advantages. But in the new life of God's grace, you're equals. Treat your wives, then, as equals...."​

Here we see the message Bible as referring to the husband and wife as being equals. Yes, they are one flesh, but the husband is the head of the wife according to Scripture. “For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.” (Ephesians 5:23). In the new age, they are all about equality; Especially gender equality (Which they are espousing here).

Do you even know that a sodomite was on the translation committee on the NIV? That is why the NIV uses transgender pronouns. This is all about the equality agenda in the New Age. Just look up gender equality and the New Age on Google, and you will see what I am talking about.

Click to expand...

I suggest to you that your response to Hebrews 9:10 is influenced by cherry-picked trigger phrases with "time of reformation" being a good one and "time of the new order" being a bad one. Even taken out of its context the verse alone describes what is being made obsolete: "matters of food and drink and various washings".

ChetSinger said:

I suggest to you that your response to Hebrews 9:10 is influenced by cherry-picked trigger phrases with "time of reformation" being a good one and "time of the new order" being a bad one. Even taken out of its context the verse alone describes what is being made obsolete: "matters of food and drink and various washings".

Click to expand...

Is not the name “time of reformation” (Modern Bible: new order) referring to the New Covenant or New Testament? Yes, or no? If yes, then the New Covenant was not a one time event that took place and ended but it continues today. That’s what your failing to get. Also, I realize that certain Modern Bibles like the Message Translation promotes more the New Age agenda, but this merely shows the flaws in all Modern Bibles.

For obviously if the new age verses is all I had to make my case, I would even think I would be reaching. However, you fail to realize that Modern Bibles attack the Trinity, water down the blood atonement, water down the deity of Christ, place the devil’s name in the Bible where it does not belong, they make Jesus appear to sin, etcetera.

A List of Doctrines Changed in God's Word:
(Between the KJV and Modern Translations):

#1. Doctrine of The Trinity is Effected; For the Only Verse (1 John 5:7) That Point Blank Tells Us About the Trinity is Removed:
If I was on an island, and I had no clue about Christianity, the odds of my understanding the Trinity is better if I had a King James bible vs. a Modern Translation bible that removes this valuable truth on knowing the Trinity. So this proves that Modern Translations are less helpful for me to understand the Trinity by using the Bible alone.

#2. The Doctrine of Fasting So As To Cast Out Persistent Demons is Removed:
Matthew 17:21 that tells us that casting out persistent or really strong devils is by prayer and fasting. Yet, Matthew 17:21 is oddly removed in Modern Translations. Mark 9:29 mentions that you can pray to remove these kinds of devils, but it does not mention fasting. So the key doctrine of fasting so as to cast out really strong demons is gone. So the enemy wins if a person only adheres to the Modern Translations and they have a hate on for the KJV. For if you ever encountered strong demonic activity like this before, you know that fasting does actually help greatly, and not just prayer alone.

#3. The Full Version of the Doctrine on Having "No Condemnation" According to Romans 8:1 is Removed:
Romans 8:1 says, "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Modern Translations leave out the part that says, "who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." The KJV says, as a part of having no Condemnation: We have to (a) Be in Christ Jesus, AND: (b) Walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. The enemy wants Christians today to justify sin instead of battling against it. So the enemy will do everything he can to give a person a water down version on His holy Word to promote the idea that they do not need to worry about sin destroying their soul.

#4. The Doctrine of Psalms 12:7 that the Lord will Preserve His Words Forever is Altered.
Psalms 12:6 says the words of the Lord are pure words, and in Psalms 12:7, the Psalmist says that the Lord will preserve them forever. It's kind of funny or odd that those who are against a perfect Bible existing in our world language today (i.e. the KJV) just so happen to favor Modern translations that remove and alter this very verse. Some do not even believe there is a perfect Bible out there. So who decides what words in the Bible are the true words of God? Do they decide? Now, some may say the perfect Word exists in the original languages. But Habakkuk 2:2 says write the words plainly so that he that reads it may run. So it's not going to be some gobbledygook language that nobody can understand (like biblical Hebrew, and biblical Greek). In fact, all we have today are copies of the original languages. This is not the case with the KJV. Meaning, His Word is preserved forever. His Word moved with the times. For God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. His Word does not exist perfectly in some dead language, but His Word exists in the English (Which is the world language of today).

#5. In Genesis 3:16, the ESV (Which is one of the most popular Modern Translations)Doctrinally Changes the Nature of the Truth in the KJV by Saying that Eve's (the wife's)Desire is Contrary To Her Husband.



#6. 2 Corinthians 3:12, and Habakkuk 2:2 is Altered by Modern Translations To Eliminate That God Uses Plainness of Speech.

This is important to understand because Modern Translation folk tend to prefer to look to the original languages to understand God's Word as their one and only go to source. This is not the plainness of speech that God employs. While God can speak in metaphor, or parables, He also speaks in plainness of speech, too. This has to be applicable to our life today in some way. Surely it is not a coincidence that these two key verses are eliminated in their favored Modern Translations (that influences their way of thinking).

#7. Philippians 2:7 Changes Doctrine by Removing an Aspect of the Deity of Christ During His Earthly Ministry.
Philippians 2:6-7 says correctly,

6 “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:” (Philippians 2:6-7).
King James correctly says that Christ made himself of no reputation.

Various different Modern Translations say that He “emptied himself,” and the NLT says that, “he gave up his divine privileges;” (Philippians 2:7). This is false and it is a denial of the deity of Christ. God cannot cease to become God. God cannot cut out an aspect of who He is at His core in having divine power and yet still be God. That would be a contradiction. The Modern Translations are teaching a gnostic heresy in denying that Jesus has power as God. Granted, Jesus had grown in wisdom (See: Luke 2:52), but I believe this was not an elimination of His divine powers as God, but it was a suppression of them (See: John 17:5, Habakkuk 2:14). For Jesus needed to be a like figure or type of Adam; For Adam also was limited in knowledge when He was in a right relationship with God before the Fall (See: 1 Corinthians 15:45-47). However, Jesus clearly had power as God as a man before the cross. For...

Jesus had power as God:
(during his earthly ministry):


So Modern Translations are wrong. In fact, many Christians today think Jesus gave up His divine powers; This is because of the wrong teaching (or wrong doctrine) behind Modern Translations.
Anyways, these are just a few of the red flags in Modern Translations.
But there are so many red flags in Modern Translations, it would make one think they were in a Russian airport.

Side Note:

Please keep in mind that I do believe a person can be initially saved with a Modern Translation and even grow in the faith to some level. But I believe that Modern Translations opens the door to confusion & doubt, and it can lead to wrong doctrines and or affect a person's faith or destroy it in certain cases.

Bible Highlighter said:

@hagios24

You may be interested in my 30 reasons for the King James Bible.

I have come up with 47 reasons for the King James Bible but I am hoping to increase this number to 67 or 77 with the help of God and include it in a future blogger article (of which I hope to share here at CF).

I did provide reason 31 already in another KJB thread. But I will repost that point here:

Reason #31 for the King James Bible:

In a sad chapter of the Catholic Church: Unfortunately it appears that they burned anyone for owning the Scriptures (Note: This is not to say that all Catholics agreed with such a thing at the time). But why bring this up? Well, later in history we learn that the translation of the KJB began in 1604. However, one year later in 1605, we know that the Catholics tried to kill King James and stop the translation of the King James Bible with a super bomb. Check out the documentary called, The KJB: The Book that Changed the World starring “John Rhys-Davies.”

KJB: The Book That Changed the World:

Trailer:

Watch Kjb - The Book That Changed The World | Prime Video

Also, the ties to the Vatican involving Modern Bibles is like crazy extensive. It’s not just like one or two things. It’s a lot. It’s too much to ignore. Westcott and Hort started the Modern Translation movement we now have (that was a great departure from the trusted KJB). Westcott and Hort used two manuscripts for their Greek NT translation called the Critical Text. Manuscript #1 came from a Catholic vault (Codex Vaticanus) (Note: The word “Vatican” is very similar to the word “Vaticanus”). Manuscript #2 is called the Codex Sinaiticus (which was found in a waste basket to be burned in an Orthodox monastery). In fact, Westcott and Hort were into Catholicism, as well. Now, if anyone here is Catholic, and or they agree with the practices of Catholicism (then simply ignore my points here). But if not, please keep reading. For many years later after Westcott and Hort, Nestle came along, and then years later Aland came along (With both of them updating the Critical Text). Aland met the pope. There are pictures of this.

Unlike the KJB, most of all your Modern Bibles comes from the Nestle and Aland’s Critical Text.

This constantly changing Critical Greek Text is under the direct supervision of the Vatican. They come right out and tell you this. They aren't even trying to hide it. Here is a photo of page 45 from right out of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition.

Source:
The KJB Only versus the Latin Vulgate Only Argument by: Another King James Bible Believer

But Guess which Bible the Roman Catholic Church does NOT want you to read -

Source:
Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT etc. are the new "Vatican Versions" by: Another King James Bible Believer

Note: I am aware this forbidden book of the Catholic church is an older version, and they have updated it. But the point here is that at one time, they considered the KJB to be a forbidden book.

Very interesting.

Side Note:

Oh, and yes, I know about Erasmus, but he was not exactly in agreement with many Catholic doctrines, and he was later rejected by the Catholic church and he died among his Protestant friends.

To learn more about Erasmus, check out this article here.

To learn more about the Critical Text, check out this video here:

Bridge to Babylon:

Watch Bridge to Babylon | Prime Video

Again, I want to repeat this point: It’s common knowledge among Modern scholars that the Nestle and Aland Critical Text (the original language Critical text) is the basis for most of all your Modern English Bibles today (Unlike the KJB which is based on the Textus Receptus manuscripts).

In fact, check out the Nestle and Aland Critical Text page at Wikipedia called:
“Novum Testamentum Graece”

Novum Testamentum Graece - Wikipedia

Now, here is where things get really interesting.
Scroll down the page, and look at the picture below the pic of Kurt Aland.

Who is he?

He’s a Catholic cardinal.

Source:
Carlo Maria Martini - Wikipedia

You can click on his name in the same article for the Nestle and Aland Greek text.
If anyone here agrees with Catholicism, then there is no reason to be concerned, but if one does not agree with Catholic practices, I believe this should concern a person. For I do not agree with Catholic practices, and this is one of many reasons why I choose the King James Bible. It is free from Catholic influence.

Click to expand...

There are NO valid textual or historical or biblical evidences to support Kjvo!

YeshuaFan said:

There are NO valid textual or historical or biblical evidences to support Kjvo!

Click to expand...

Why isn't this in all caps??? It is so very true.

BTW, John 1:14 says "Now the Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We saw his glory—the glory of the one and only, full of grace and truth, who came from the Father." It doesn't say that the KJV (or any other translation) took up residence among us.

We are to worship God through Christ, not worship the KJV.

YeshuaFan said:

There are NO valid textual or historical or biblical evidences to support Kjvo!

Click to expand...

As for a historical basis for King James Bible Only: What other Bible did Protestant Bible believing Christians use for hundreds of year besides the KJB before the Critical Text came out? As for a biblical basis for the King James Bible Alone: Well, when we read the Bible, do we see a defense for:

(1) One Word of God being communicated that we could trust?
(2) Multiple Words of God with us having to look to old variant manuscripts with believing there was never any perfect Word of God? We see two dividing factions with Christians on this issue. Those who believe there is only Word of God that is perfect and those who don’t believe that. Which one is more biblical? I would say the KJB Only position is more biblical position to have. For we do not see any person in the Bible taking the Modern Scholarship Approach to God’s Word.