I suggest that KJVOnlyism is based mainly upon two guiding principles. One main idea is inurement. As any who have personally experienced it can aver, repeated use of the same words in the same order leads to a dulling of meaning. A well known example is the use of 'the Lord's Prayer' in denominational services, chanted in unison, with some present thinking about Sunday lunch, and others trying to remember the words, and no-one at all, from the practical outcome, actually living and loving the truth of doing God's will on earth. How very different the earth would be today if all those endorsing God's kingdom were to have actually obeyed their supposed king.
As the saying goes, familiarity breeds contempt, and after a while, people parrot off the same old words without any real thought as to what they mean. A colleague in mission of mine would readily gabble the same memorised passage from the KJV whenever the situation seemed appropriate, and it was only later that I realised that he never actually applied this in his life, and was no more converted than the pagans we were trying to reach, and indeed had no intention of actually converting them. It should be noted that KJVOers very frequently advocate memorisation.
So what KJVOers want is everyone to use the same English translation, so that people will not think too much about meaning.
The other main principle of the KJVO movement is obscurantism. It should never be forgotten that William Tyndale, whose own words are found in great number in the KJV, was burned for writing them. Those who preferred the Bible to be preserved for ever in Latin, which language very few not in the pay of the popes could understand, were those guilty of that murder. It would be the height of foolishness for any saint to suppose that the same instinct is not still at large in the world now. But Tyndale wrote when the English language was in transition to fully modern English. (The majority of scholars classify Jacobean English as Early Modern, but this is mainly on the flimsy basis of spelling, which has no effect on the spoken word, unlike archaic verb forms, word endings and prepositions, etc., which have an enormous effect, enough to readily assist the efforts of comedians who wish to lampoon Christianity. The language of the KJV is therefore properly classified as Middle English, imv.) I have several times presented KJVOers with anonymously translated Bible passages, and in every case they have been flatly rejected without explanation. Yet every one of those passages was from the KJV, with no alteration at all but modernisation into current English. So it is archaic language that KJVOers value, Latin being no longer feasible in the modern, educated and democratic age. KJVOers invariably adopt a superior pose and make a pathetic excuse for this archaism, saying that Scripture is worth the hard work involved in reading it.
So not only is there desire for one translation, it should be the most inaccessible and discouraging available. And, apart from one or two others of its era, the KJV is that translation- it was 'stuffy' even on the first day of publication. I asked a leader of a well-known mission to young people whether he would use the KJV in the mission's work. "Only if we wanted to put them off for life," came back the reply; and I had forecast the very words used!
However, Scripture was never hard to read when it was written. On the contrary, it is direct and written in contemporary langage that has clear meaning- too clear for those who do not love the truth, of course. Styles vary, quality of Greek varies, but there is no resort to special religious language anywhere. So there is no virtue whatever in dense, inaccessible language. There is no reason to suppose that KJVOers have any superior ability in English, either. In fact, their linguistic ability often seems restricted, if anything, and one wonders if many of them have to look up passages in a modern version to find out what they actually mean! Which of course is precisely what countless thousands, if not millions of ordinary people have done ever since modern versions arrived. When the Good News Bible was first published (then as Today's English Version) it was commonly said, "This can't be the Bible, I understand it." It is noteworthy though, that, even though the RSV, NEB, GNB and other versions had been published, the KJVO movement did not begin until the scholarly, highly accessible and very popular NIV hit the shelves, which casts even more doubt upon the sincerity of the movement.
Here are some examples of differences of KJV versus modern translations:
'Who is this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah? this that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of his strength? I that speak in righteousness, mighty to save. Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth in the winefat? I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me: for I will tread them in mine anger, and trample them in my fury; and their blood shall be sprinkled upon my garments, and I will stain all my raiment. For the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come. And I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold: therefore mine own arm brought salvation unto me; and my fury, it upheld me. And I will tread down the people in mine anger, and make them drunk in my fury, and I will bring down their strength to the earth.' Isa 63:1-6 KJV
'Wherefore art thou red in thine apparel'? Is it any wonder that comedians mock? And who sets up the skittles for them to aim at, if it is not the enemies of the gospel? Here is the GNB in the same passage, and who can complain at a little explanation after 350 years of the above?
'"Who is this coming from the city of Bozrah in Edom? Who is this so splendidly dressed in red, marching along in power and strength?" It is the Lord, powerful to save, coming to announce his victory. "Why is his clothing so red, like that of a man who tramples grapes to make wine?" The Lord answers, "I have trampled the nations like grapes, and no one came to help me. I trampled them in my anger, and their blood has stained all my clothing. I decided that the time to save my people had come; it was time to punish their enemies."' Isa 63:1-5 GNB
'And he said unto them, This is that which the Lord hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the Lord : bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning. And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade: and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein.' Ex 16:23-24 KJV
'He said to them, "This is what the Lord commanded: 'Tomorrow is to be a day of rest, a holy Sabbath to the Lord. So bake what you want to bake and boil what you want to boil. Save whatever is left and keep it until morning.'" So they saved it until morning, as Moses commanded, and it did not stink or get maggots in it.' Ex 16:23-24 NIV
'That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God.' 1Th 4:4-5 KJV
'So that every one of you may keep his body holy and in honour; Not in the passion of evil desires, like the Gentiles, who have no knowledge of God.' 1 Thess 4:4-6 BBE
So hard work is what KJVO people want for Bible readers, and preferably enough of it to put them off the Bible for life. Here, ironically, seems to be their very own verse:
'But unto thee have I cried, O Lord ; and in the morning shall my prayer prevent thee.' Ps 88:13 KJV
KJVoers have now been reduced to only one argument that could be worth serious examination, which that all modern English translations including the NKJV are based on the wrong text-types. Whatever the merits or otherwise of this argument (and text-type makes no difference to any Bible doctrine anyway), they are nullified by the obstinate refusal of KJVOers to simply accept their chosen version in anything but archaic English.
Upvote
0
