KJV Only?

[James Is Back]

No one is saying that the KJV is bad or no one should use it. The KJVO people however have gone too far to condemn those who use other translations and claim that the KJV is the only true Word of God.

If their claim is true I guess no one prior to the KJV were saved. See how absurd that sounds. When someone is claiming you're not saved if you are using anything other then the KJV, you're saying that Christ wasn't sufficient in saving anyone. It's like a works base Salvation issue but instead you can call it KJV Salvation.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Trust God wants you to have his word without doubt or comparison.

Trust God to give us increasingly more accurate translations of the Bible as our understanding of ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek improves as it has over the past 400 years. Trust God to give us increasingly more accurate translations of the Bible as our knowledge of the original texts improves as it has over the past 400 years.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

The English language is very much alive and constantly changing. Therefore, translations of foreign language works into English must either be revised often to maintain the accuracy and readability or they gradually become more and more inaccurate and unreadable. The most popular versions of the Bible are being revised frequently because the English language is rapidly changing and because of progress in Biblical scholarship. Here are some examples along with their revision dates:

Jerusalem Bible, 1966
New Jerusalem Bible, 1985

New American Bible, 1970
New American Bible, with the Revised New Testament, 1986
New American Bible, Revised Edition (with the 1986 revised New Testament and the 2010 Revised 0ld Testament), 2011

Revised Standard Version, 1946, 1952, 1971
New Revised Standard Version, 1989

New American Standard Bible, 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977
New American Standard Bible, Updated Version, 1995

New English Bible, 1961, 1970
Revised English Bible, 1989

New International Version, 1978, 1984, 2011

 

[BornAgainBrian]

No. Knowing the manuscripts and seeing the basic words changed/deleted that do NOT
add but take away from the deity, some doctrines, etc. I couldn't.

I'm sure some can without and problem. I don't fault them. They have to go with the "light" they've been given. I feel blessed to have what I have. There are repercussions (even hateful from Christians) but just being a Christian in this world, I get flack.

I don't judge anyone for sticking to any translation. I don't think it's appropriate for anyone to judge which translation I should use either, and certainly not to claim they know that it is some kind of truth that God wills me to exclusively, or even primarily, the translation they like.

 

[James Is Back]

I don't judge anyone for sticking to any translation. I don't think it's appropriate for anyone to judge which translation I should use either, and certainly not to claim they know that it is some kind of truth that God wills me to exclusively, or even primarily, the translation they like.

 

[faroukfarouk]

No one is saying that the KJV is bad or no one should use it. The KJVO people however have gone too far to condemn those who use other translations and claim that the KJV is the only true Word of God.

If their claim is true I guess no one prior to the KJV were saved. See how absurd that sounds. When someone is claiming you're not saved if you are using anything other then the KJV, you're saying that Christ wasn't sufficient in saving anyone. It's like a works base Salvation issue but instead you can call it KJV Salvation.

..and then of course; What about the Hispanic family along the street that uses the Reina-Valera version in Spanish?

 

[DeaconDean]

DeaconDean,

Do you believe 1) or 2)?

1) The Hebrew and Greek being immediately inspired by God, in the originals.

2) The Greek and Hebrew: "being immediately inspired by God, and by His singular care and providence kept pure in all ages".

Hint:

The first teaches that the scriptures were inspired by God, and therefore inerrant (pure) only in the original autographs.

The second teaches that not only were the scriptures inspired by God, and therefore inerrant in the original autographs, BUT, they (the scriptures [in the Hebrew and Greek]), were "by His singular care and providence kept pure in all ages".

These two are NOT THE SAME. In the second, God continues (by His singular care and providence) to keep the copies of the originals "pure in all ages".

If they are not referring to copies of the original autographs, to what are they referring?

I await your response to both questions presented:

Do you believe 1) or 2)?

1) The Hebrew and Greek being immediately inspired by God, in the originals.

2) The Greek and Hebrew: "being immediately inspired by God, and by His singular care and providence kept pure in all ages".

If they are not referring to copies of the original autographs, to what are they referring?

Jack

First off, because I don't believe that God preserved His word "pure" in the KJV does not make me a bad Baptist.

Secondly, I believe that God inspired the prophets and the Apostles. The words written by them are the words of God.

I do not believe that God inspired the KJ translators, and kept His word "pure" in the KJV.

I do, however, believe that the message God wants us to know, salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, has been preserved.

Third, I was overly generous when I said the KJV translators used 67 MSS.

In reality, it was more like 40. Just to be generous.

Fourthly, there are now some estimated 5660 Greek MSS.

It seems funny to me that in light of all the MSS that have been discovered in the last century, that somebody could say that with only fourty copies of copies, they got it absolutely correct.

fifthly, the KJV is estimated to be 98.7% correct. And, I agree that no major doctrine of Christianity stands or falls on any disputed texts. However, even at 98.7%, it is not "pure", it is not "perfect".

However, in the originals, we had the "pure", "perfect" word of God.

Are we able to extract the original word of God now? Perhaps, but until somebody sits down with all 5660 MSS, and does a through "textual criticism" of them, examining the variants, comparing, etc.

Well, you think on it.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[now faith]

First off, because I don't believe that God preserved His word "pure" in the KJV does not make me a bad Baptist.

Secondly, I believe that God inspired the prophets and the Apostles. The words written by them are the words of God.

I do not believe that God inspired the KJ translators, and kept His word "pure" in the KJV.

I do, however, believe that the message God wants us to know, salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, has been preserved.

Third, I was overly generous when I said the KJV translators used 67 MSS.

In reality, it was more like 40. Just to be generous.

Fourthly, there are now some estimated 5660 Greek MSS.

It seems funny to me that in light of all the MSS that have been discovered in the last century, that somebody could say that with only fourty copies of copies, they got it absolutely correct.

fifthly, the KJV is estimated to be 98.7% correct. And, I agree that no major doctrine of Christianity stands or falls on any disputed texts. However, even at 98.7%, it is not "pure", it is not "perfect".

However, in the originals, we had the "pure", "perfect" word of God.

Are we able to extract the original word of God now? Perhaps, but until somebody sits down with all 5660 MSS, and does a through "textual criticism" of them, examining the variants, comparing, etc.

Well, you think on it.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Dean can you define the parameters of your use of the word pure in your post?

 

[DeaconDean]

Dean can you define the parameters of your use of the word pure in your post?

I posted a quote from another member who said the KJV was the "pure" word of God.

I debate that.

I think "pure" pretty much speaks for itself.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[now faith]

Well it's not that easy at times,let me rephrase.

Deacon:

Is the Bible God's infallible Word?

Please no offence meant in this statement:

If we believe the Bible is not God's infallible Word but has a basis of truth,is it The Holy Spirit that reveals the truth?

Or as scripture instructs we are inspired to rightly divide the Word?

If we are to rightly divide the Word,do we remain in a foundation of what God has given us or does the Word evolve due to a cumulative process of theology?

If we relied on the authors of the Bible for their perfection,we would fall short.
All of the written Word was written by men who were burdened with Sin.

God uses inperfect vessels,to pour out his perfection by the Holy Spirit.

I believe the translators of the King James were inspired by God in their work.

This shouldn't be a profound statement after all when a man of God steps in to teach or preach you and most of us know when it is inspired.

 

[kiwimac]

The KJV translators were not inspired by God, they were fallible men working on a translation that was dated even at the time.

 

[Jack Koons]

First off, because I don't believe that God preserved His word "pure" in the KJV does not make me a bad Baptist.

Secondly, I believe that God inspired the prophets and the Apostles. The words written by them are the words of God.

I do not believe that God inspired the KJ translators, and kept His word "pure" in the KJV.

I do, however, believe that the message God wants us to know, salvation by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, has been preserved.

Third, I was overly generous when I said the KJV translators used 67 MSS.

In reality, it was more like 40. Just to be generous.

Fourthly, there are now some estimated 5660 Greek MSS.

It seems funny to me that in light of all the MSS that have been discovered in the last century, that somebody could say that with only fourty copies of copies, they got it absolutely correct.

fifthly, the KJV is estimated to be 98.7% correct. And, I agree that no major doctrine of Christianity stands or falls on any disputed texts. However, even at 98.7%, it is not "pure", it is not "perfect".

However, in the originals, we had the "pure", "perfect" word of God.

Are we able to extract the original word of God now? Perhaps, but until somebody sits down with all 5660 MSS, and does a through "textual criticism" of them, examining the variants, comparing, etc.

Well, you think on it.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Well it's not that easy at times,let me rephrase.

Deacon:

Is the Bible God's infallible Word?

Please no offence meant in this statement:

If we believe the Bible is not God's infallible Word but has a basis of truth,is it The Holy Spirit that reveals the truth?

Or as scripture instructs we are inspired to rightly divide the Word?

If we are to rightly divide the Word,do we remain in a foundation of what God has given us or does the Word evolve due to a cumulative process of theology?

If we relied on the authors of the Bible for their perfection,we would fall short.
All of the written Word was written by men who were burdened with Sin.

God uses inperfect vessels,to pour out his perfection by the Holy Spirit.

I believe the translators of the King James were inspired by God in their work.

This shouldn't be a profound statement after all when a man of God steps in to teach or preach you and most of us know when it is inspired.

Let us now keep things simple:

Let's imagine that God wanted John to tell you that Jesus loves you. God by inspiration (God breathing the words), would say to John, "Ο Ιησούς σας αγαπά".

So John (an imperfect man), would by the power of God write; Ο Ιησούς σας αγαπά.

I must now be very clear, It is NOT John that was inspired, it IS the WORDS that God gave to John that ARE inspired. The paper upon which the words are written is not inspired, the ink used to write the words is not inspired, it is the WORDS that were (and are) inspired.

Let us suppose that some wanted to take this message to others. What would they do? They would copy the INSPIRED WORDS ("Ο Ιησούς σας αγαπά") onto another piece of paper, and as long as each word was copied correctly, the copy would therefore be the exact same message as the original. This copying, done by the power of, and leading of God is known as "derivative inspiration". Why? Because it is the WORDS that were inspired by God, not the Apostle that wrote them.

Each time the words "Ο Ιησούς σας αγαπά" were copied, the power of God goes with the WORDS, because they are the WORDS OF GOD. The letter does not just "contain" the words of God, they are in fact the "DIVINELY PROVIDENTIALLY PRESERVED WORDS OF GOD".

When God decided to have His message translated into another language such as English, God DID NOT RE-INSPIRE the words, (they are already inspired). What God did do was give the translators that wisdom which is from above to do the translation, to ensure each word in the "target language" (English), would be the proper word, just as if He (God), had given it in English, in the original.

Now for those who would say that something is always lost in translation, I submit the following: 1) God had the Apostle Paul tell the Corinthians, "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Cor. 2:14) This means that the Greek speaking people that actually received the "original autograph", could NOT understand what was written without aid of the Holy Spirit. In other words, no mater what the intellect, no matter how many Ph. D's, from no matter how many accredited colleges or seminaries, WITHOUT THE AID OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, NO ONE can understand the Holy Scriptures. 2) Since God is a) omniscient (knows everything, including AlLL the languages of the world), and is b) omnipotent (is ALL powerful), I'm absolutely positive that He (God) has the wherewithal to put His WORD into ANY language He chooses. (And it is so easy, He can do it with His feet propped up, while sipping on a large glass of iced tea!!!)

Think about it.

Jack

 

[BornAgainBrian]

Can He do it to modern English or only to a language which has changed in both spelling and the definitions of dozens upon dozens of words, which is a very confusing thing of God to do.

 

[kiwimac]

You are busily raising a book to the status of a perfect thing. Only God is perfect. The Bible is not.

 

[DeaconDean]

Let me break this dowwn and answer it.

Well it's not that easy at times,let me rephrase.

Deacon:

Is the Bible God's infallible Word?

Baptist beliefs are that in 1858:

The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments were given by inspiration of God, and are the only sufficient, certain and authoritative rule of all saving knowledge, faith and obedience.

Abstract of Principles, James P. Boyce, 1858, Source

In fact, when the SBC adopted their CoF, it read:

We believe that the Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired, and is a perfect treasure of heavenly instruction; that it has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter; that it reveals the principles by which God will judge us; and therefore is, and will remain to the end of the world, the true center of Christian union, and the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds and religious opinion should be tried.

Source

The Baptist Faith and Message of 2000 says:

The Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is God's revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter. Therefore, all Scripture is totally true and trustworthy. It reveals the principles by which God judges us, and therefore is, and will remain to the end of the world, the true center of Christian union, and the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinions should be tried. All Scripture is a testimony to Christ, who is Himself the focus of divine revelation.

Source

None of these says the KJV is what ya'll want it to say.

Please no offence meant in this statement:

If we believe the Bible is not God's infallible Word but has a basis of truth,is it The Holy Spirit that reveals the truth?

"he will guide you into all the truth" -Jn. 16:13

Or as scripture instructs we are inspired to rightly divide the Word?

Yes, it does say a workman rightly dividing the word of truth.

If we are to rightly divide the Word,do we remain in a foundation of what God has given us or does the Word evolve due to a cumulative process of theology?

I wouldn't say theology, rather language.

If we relied on the authors of the Bible for their perfection,we would fall short.

No arguement from me.

All of the written Word was written by men who were burdened with Sin.

If that is the case, then I assume you believe that the Holy Spirit didn't "inspire" the Apostles.

I believe the Holy Spirit so inspired the Apostles, that the common language of the time, they used so as to be "the very words of God".

God uses inperfect vessels,to pour out his perfection by the Holy Spirit.

Again, no arguement from me.

I believe the translators of the King James were inspired by God in their work.

Now this is where we part ways.

First off, this belief is not supported in any way. It's sheer conjecture.

Secondly, why would God "inspire" the KJ translators and no others?

Thirdly, that is your opinion, and while you're allowed to have that, and I respect it, it cannot be proven.

This shouldn't be a profound statement after all when a man of God steps in to teach or preach you and most of us know when it is inspired.

Again, no arguement from me, except I have seen otherwise.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[now faith]

Let us now keep things simple:

Let's imagine that God wanted John to tell you that Jesus loves you. God by inspiration (God breathing the words), would say to John, "Ο Ιησούς σας αγαπά".

So John (an imperfect man), would by the power of God write; Ο Ιησούς σας αγαπά.

I must now be very clear, It is NOT John that was inspired, it IS the WORDS that God gave to John that ARE inspired. The paper upon which the words are written is not inspired, the ink used to write the words is not inspired, it is the WORDS that were (and are) inspired.

Let us suppose that some wanted to take this message to others. What would they do? They would copy the INSPIRED WORDS ("Ο Ιησούς σας αγαπά") onto another piece of paper, and as long as each word was copied correctly, the copy would therefore be the exact same message as the original. This copying, done by the power of, and leading of God is known as "derivative inspiration". Why? Because it is the WORDS that were inspired by God, not the Apostle that wrote them.

Each time the words "Ο Ιησούς σας αγαπά" were copied, the power of God goes with the WORDS, because they are the WORDS OF GOD. The letter does not just "contain" the words of God, they are in fact the "DIVINELY PROVIDENTIALLY PRESERVED WORDS OF GOD".

When God decided to have His message translated into another language such as English, God DID NOT RE-INSPIRE the words, (they are already inspired). What God did do was give the translators that wisdom which is from above to do the translation, to ensure each word in the "target language" (English), would be the proper word, just as if He (God), had given it in English, in the original.

Now for those who would say that something is always lost in translation, I submit the following: 1) God had the Apostle Paul tell the Corinthians, "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Cor. 2:14) This means that the Greek speaking people that actually received the "original autograph", could NOT understand what was written without aid of the Holy Spirit. In other words, no mater what the intellect, no matter how many Ph. D's, from no matter how many accredited colleges or seminaries, WITHOUT THE AID OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, NO ONE can understand the Holy Scriptures. 2) Since God is a) omniscient (knows everything, including AlLL the languages of the world), and is b) omnipotent (is ALL powerful), I'm absolutely positive that He (God) has the wherewithal to put His WORD into ANY language He chooses. (And it is so easy, He can do it with His feet propped up, while sipping on a large glass of iced tea!!!)

Think about it.

Jack

Amen,and Amen.
Jesus certainly loves us all.

 

[now faith]

Let me break this dowwn and answer it.



Baptist beliefs are that in 1858:



Abstract of Principles, James P. Boyce, 1858, Source

In fact, when the SBC adopted their CoF, it read:



Source

The Baptist Faith and Message of 2000 says:



Source

None of these says the KJV is what ya'll want it to say.



"he will guide you into all the truth" -Jn. 16:13



Yes, it does say a workman rightly dividing the word of truth.



I wouldn't say theology, rather language.



No arguement from me.



If that is the case, then I assume you believe that the Holy Spirit didn't "inspire" the Apostles.

I believe the Holy Spirit so inspired the Apostles, that the common language of the time, they used so as to be "the very words of God".



Again, no arguement from me.



Now this is where we part ways.

First off, this belief is not supported in any way. It's sheer conjecture.

Secondly, why would God "inspire" the KJ translators and no others?

Thirdly, that is your opinion, and while you're allowed to have that, and I respect it, it cannot be proven.



Again, no arguement from me, except I have seen otherwise.

God Bless

Till all are one.

The Baptist confessional of Faith is sound doctrine.

[None of these says the KJV is what ya'll want it to say.]QUOTE.

This statement is a Strawman,The King James Bible is not conditional upon any denomination.

A Translation from English to English that has a significant amount of change and deletion,is
Theology a true translator does not use a red pen to cross out scripture.

The Holy Spirit indeed inspired the Apostles,I did not imply otherwise.

Is it conjecture to believe a Teacher or Preacher would be { inspired} in their words?

Why discount a group of scholars commissioned by a King?

 

[DeaconDean]

The Baptist confessional of Faith is sound doctrine.

Never said it wasn't.

This statement is a Strawman,The King James Bible is not conditional upon any denomination.

Again, never said it was.

But, I have heard the usual KJVO arguments.

A Translation from English to English that has a significant amount of change and deletion,is Theology a true translator does not use a red pen to cross out scripture.

Again, never said it was.

But how many people today say "ye", "thee", "thou"?

The Holy Spirit indeed inspired the Apostles,I did not imply otherwise.

Again, never said otherwise. I just couldn't make heads or tails of your statement:

All of the written Word was written by men who were burdened with Sin.

Can you name one person other than Jesus who wasn't?

Is it conjecture to believe a Teacher or Preacher would be { inspired} in their words?

Here again, I've seen otherwise.

I've seen pastors sitting in the Sunday school class, preparing their sermon that was to be given in 30 minutes.

I've seen pastors sitting in deacon's meetings, preparing their sermon for Sunday night.

So yes, theuy are supposed to pray and let the Holy Spirit guide then what to preach, but more times than not, that is not the case.

Why discount a group of scholars commissioned by a King?

I never discounted them. I just don't believe that with only a possible 40-50 Greek MSS at their disposal, they got it completely correct for all time.

In the original foreword to the 1611 KJ version, the translators themselves said:

The originall thereof being from heaven, not from earth; the authour being God, not man; the enditer, the holy spirit, not the wit of the Apostles

By their own words, the KJ translators believed all authority was in the originals.

The KJ translators did not attack the LXX, which was used by Jesus and the disciples also:

The translation of the Seventie dissenteth from the Originall in many places, neither doeth it come neere it, for perspicuitie, gratvitie, majestie; yet which of the Apostles did condemne it? Condemne it? Nay, they used it,

Even though the LXX might have been faulty, the KJV translators did not fault it.

Even the KJV translators sawe to the need for revisions as needed:

For to whom ever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to goe over that which hee had done, and to amend it where he saw cause?

They themselves never saw them as "inspired". They thought the translations before them were good, but they only wished to make "good ones better".

Truly (good Christian Reader) wee never thought from the beginning, that we should neede to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one,...but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principall good one,

The above outs were taken directly out of the "Original Preface to the 1611 King James Version".

Their own work wasn't "inspired", by their own words.

And in light of the noe more than 5600 Greek manuscripts that been discovered, we are to endevor to do the same thing they did?

Come on dude.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Jack Koons]

Can He do it to modern English or only to a language which has changed in both spelling and the definitions of dozens upon dozens of words, which is a very confusing thing of God to do.

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (2 Tim. 2:15)

God has the power and the ability to do as He wishes, after all, He is sovereign. The real question is, Has our language so 'evolved' that one cannot, with a little effort, understand the 1769 King James? The answer is an emphatic No!

According to the 2015 Merriam-Webster Dictionary the word "Study" means,:

" 1 : a state of contemplation : reverie
2 a : application of the mentalfaculties to the acquisition of knowledge <years of study>&#8232;b : such application in a particularfield or to a specific subject <the study of Latin>&#8232;c : careful or extended consideration<the proposal is under study>&#8232;d (1) : a careful examination or analysis of a phenomenon, development, or question (2) : the published report of such a study
3 : a building or room devoted to study or literary pursuits
4 : purpose, intent <it has been the study of my life to avoid thoseweaknesses — Jane Austen>
5 a : a branch or department of learning : subject — often used in plural <American studies>&#8232;b : the activity or work of a student<returning to her studies aftervacation>&#8232;c : an object of study or deliberation<every gesture a careful study — Marcia Davenport>&#8232;d : something attracting closeattention or examination
6 : a person who learns or memorizessomething (as a part in a play) — usually used with a qualifyingadjective <he's a quick study>
7 : a literary or artistic productionintended as a preliminary outline, an experimental interpretation, or an exploratory analysis of specificfeatures or characteristics
8 : a musical composition for the practice of a point of technique
Other forms: plural stud·ies
Examples
• Becoming a doctor requires yearsof study.
• You can improve your knowledgeof the natural world by study and observation.
• She is engaged in the study of law.
Origin: Middle English studie, fromAnglo-French estudie, from Latinstudium, from stud&#275;re to devoteoneself, study; probably akin to Latintundere to beat — more at contusion."

As you can see, study requires a particular amount of labor. Hence, God does not want us bottle, or spoon fed; he wants us to do a certain amount of labor in His Word, that we may get to know Him.

The truth of the matter is, the entire issue of the KJV being too hard to understand is nothing but a straw man; while sounding legitimate, there is absolutely no truth in it whatsoever.

Jack

 

[morningstar12]

To me, it is not MY choice, but God's. My responsibility is to make an informed decision. Which is more important, obeying God or looking for what is easier for us? I've read Shakespeare and the KJV is very "user friendly" in comparison. You'd be surprised just how much you can get out of reading without doubting OR studying sometimes, not that studying isn't essential. But just trusting God is speaking to you things jump out of that living book!

I'd really like to hear from more KJV believers than debating with those who are only here to debate. Sorry, but I don't have a lot of believers where I am right now. Would appreciate some support.

Glad for all the believers though, whatever you choose to read, read it, and especially love the Lord and live it!