The KJVO myth...

[Bible Highlighter]

There is only one major edition used by Bibles today - Nestlé Aland.

Nobody uses the edition of Erasmus anymore, its based on too few manuscripts and one of the manuscripts was even a fabrication, very probably, made by the Roman Catholic Church just to add the longer reading of 1J 5:7 into the Greek text.

Nope. It’s still the Critical Text.

According to Gotquestions, they say the following:

“With the discovery of new manuscript evidence, the Critical Text has been revised many times. Currently, the Nestle-Aland text (now in its twenty-eighth edition) is the critical text in common use, along with the Greek New Testament published by the United Bible Societies (UBS).”​

Source:
What is the Critical Text? | GotQuestions.org

So there are only two MAJOR lines of manuscripts used by Bibles today.

The Textus Receptus line, and the Critical Text line.

There are two major vines (or lines of manuscripts).
People choose which vine or line they want for their own reasons.
I want a Bible that is more pure in it’s doctrine, and truths. This is why the KJB (even if it is written in archaic English) is my final Word of authority. For I can look to dictionaries and even Modern Translations to get the meaning behind what the KJB is saying at those few times it may be difficult to read.
The point is that I have to choose one Bible to be under authority. I cannot say there are mistakes in God’s Word, and I did not grow up with an apostle Paul to truly know the Koine Greek like he did. Sure, there are churches claiming to know Koine Greek, but I respectfully do not agree with their other religious practices (because I do not believe those practices are biblical). Also, those who say they look to the original languages tend to side with the Critical Text (Which is clearly inferior).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Also, God would have to expect people to be experts in Koine Greek in order to properly have His Word. So the light of God’s Word would not technically be so widespread upon this Earth. English is spoken in all international airports. The English language is studied as a second language in many parts of the world. But what about Kione Greek? It’s only to a select few who claim that they know this language and I remain skeptical that they know it like the apostle Paul because they are usually religious folk who many times have their own biased practices that I do not agree with in light of reading God’s Word.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

To say that some medieval English king produced a perfect inerrant bible is quite close to a blasphemy and very ignorant.

The Majesty and Uniqueness of the King James Bible:

What many fail to realize is that the King James Bible was the only Bible around for hundreds of years. So if we lived during that period of time, there would be no debate between the KJV and Modern Translations because the Modern Translations did not exist yet. The KJV existed hundreds of years before they (the Modern Translations) even showed up.

Men died trying to get the KJV Bible we have today. What if they were living during that time when men were hungry for the Word and they died to protect the KJV?

There are two really great documentaries that I would encourage folks to watch. The first documentary is called “KJB: The Book That Changed the World.” The second documentary is called “Forbidden Book.”

These two documentaries both show how believers gave their lives as a part of the precious Bible we have today (the KJV). There was even a plot by another sect of Christians to kill King James with a super bomb that would have destroyed a giant portion of the city. This was all a part of the plot to stop the King James Bible from coming forth. It will show you uniqueness of the King James in how it is unlike any other translation that came afterwards.

Rent on Amazon: "KJB - The Book That Changed The World."

Unique Features of the King James Bible That Set it Apart:

• Translated by the authority of a God ordained king.
• No copyright (Note: This is in the US, and not the UK).
• 47 translators worked on the translating committee.
• They all peer reviewed each other's work in groups.
• Came Against Heavy Opposition.
• It has been around hundreds of years long before the Modern Translations showed up.
• Came at the eve of printing technology to give it to the common man.
• Emerged at a high point in the English Renaissance, and held its own among some of the most celebrated literary works in the English language (like William Shakespeare).
• #1 top seller among all other translations here in the United States (a book above all books).

Translated by the authority of a God ordained king:

Ecclesiastes 8:4
"Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?"

The King James was translated under the authority of a king (Which is not the case with modern translations). What you may find interesting is that the king's first name was called "James," which is the English word for "Jacob."

Genesis 32:28 says,
"And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed."

In other words, Jacob is a special name here because Genesis 32:28 says that Jacob (who was later renamed Israel) had power with God and with men and he has prevailed.

No copyright on the King James:

A person should not take credit or ownership of God's Word. It is God's Holy Word and not their word. Copyrights also means "money." Are they translating it with the goal of making a huge profit?

Came at the eve of printing technology to give it to the common man:

The new translation brought the Bible out of the church’s sole control and directly into the hands of more people than ever before. A special time in history.

A Brief Look at
the KJV vs the Modern Translations
in American History:​

Abraham Lincoln had used and quoted from a King James Bible.
Old school literary authors quoted from the King James Bible.
It's influence here in America can never be forgotten.

Riots broke out here in America over their desire of having the Catholic version of the Bible in public schools. One took place in 1844 in Philadelphia. Others took place at a later date in Cincinnati, Ohio.

What Bible were Catholics up against being used in school?

The King James Bible.

In 1852, the King James Bible was ruled in court fit for use in public schools since it was common to all Christians.

It wasn't until 1872 that the state of Ohio banned mandatory Bible reading in public schools. However, the United States Supreme Court did not ban the practice of reading the bible in public schools on a national level until 1962.

While these riots were one reason that resulted in the ultimate banning of Bible reading in public schools, another reason was the declining favor for the King James Bible over the slight rising increase of interest in Modern Translations.

In New England: The first major departure from the King James Bible (Textus Receptus) took place in 1881 with Westcott and Hort's Greek New Testament based on two Catholic manuscripts (The Codex Sinaiticus, and the Codex Vaticanus).

This English Revised Translation of the Old Testament done in 1885 (ERV) (Also known as the Revised Version - RV). The ERV or RV (Revised Version) was copyrighted in the United States in 1885 for publication here in America.

Note: No Modern Translation existed here in America before 1885.

The ERV was based on supposedly more advanced scholarship, but it sold poorly here in the United States.

So an effort was created to bring in the American Standard Version (ASV). It was launched in 1901. This version also was faced with a lack of success.

Then the Revised Standard Version (RSV) came out in 1947, and then the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) followed in 1971.

However, the perception of the “New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)” at this time was that it leaned more towards liberalism and ecumenism.

The last in line of these Modern Translations (mentioned here) was an implicit eucumenical translation that was intended to look good to Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox Christians equally.

It was the NIV.

The NIV (The New International Version) released in 1973 was designed supposedly to return to the Protestant distinctiveness of the King James (Which was not true). The NIV was also designed with advances in supposedly trusted Biblical scholarship.

The NIV became the most popular Bibles ever with the American public, whereas all other versions up to this point attempted word for word translation, the NIV relied less on former translations that would be easier to understand for the average reader.

This is why the boom of Modern Bible movement went mainstream in the 1970's. It was because of the NIV. Then all the other popular candy coated Bible versions followed.

 

[Bob_1000]

How do you know He did? Also, why lead billions of people astray?

Is that the type of God that you serve? I serve the God of the New Testament that sent his only begotten son to earth to die for my sins and the sins of the world.

The God of the New Testament is the same God in the Old Testament. It blows my mind that you don't understand this. I also don't understand why you would ask if he would lead billions astray. Do you read the bible? If so how can you not see that God abhors people that don't heed his word. Have you read 1 Kings 22?

1Ki 22:22 And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.
1Ki 22:23 Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Worse - a Scottish Reformation King.

Just glad the KJV is mostly Tyndale and some Geneva, plus only a little Scottish Freemason.

This false claim has been debunked already.

PROOF KING JAMES WAS NOT A FREEMASON

 

[robycop3]

That pure inerrant word in the ancient manuscripts doesn't exist anymore. Yes I can name a perfect inerrant bible, it's the KJV.

No, the KJV is NOT perfect. It is NOT inerrant.
Error: "Easter" n Acts 12:4
Error: "The love of money is THE root of ALL evil" in 1 Tim. 6:10
Error: The words "and shalt be" in Rev. 16:5. No known ancient manuscript of Revelation has those words in that verse.
There are plenty more goofs & booboos in the KJV, but no KJVO can get past any of these in my very-short list. Thus, the notion that the KJV is perfect & inerrant goes "POOF!"

 

[robycop3]

Can you provide a link to these documents and do they exist today?

I have no idea, but they're in various universities & museums worldwide. One, of course, is the Dead Sea Scrolls.

 

[robycop3]

By looking at them. Reading them. Comparing them.

You can do the same with those that contain the 4 Gospels. All are different, as they were written by different people, same as other Scriptural mss.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Oh, and just recently…. I desired to watch a King James Bible video on YouTube, and I got an advertisement promoting how all English bibles today are the same (Which is simply not true).

 

[Isilwen]

The God of the New Testament is the same God in the Old Testament. It blows my mind that you don't understand this. I also don't understand why you would ask if he would lead billions astray. Do you read the bible? If so how can you not see that God abhors people that don't heed his word. Have you read 1 Kings 22?

1Ki 22:22 And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.
1Ki 22:23 Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee.

All of which has nothing to do with the KJV.

Modern translations are fine, especially for those of us who cannot read the King's English.

 

[trophy33]

You can do the same with those that contain the 4 Gospels. All are different, as they were written by different people, same as other Scriptural mss.

I do not know what is your point.

 

[trophy33]

King James Bible was the only Bible around for hundreds of years.

This is absolutely wrong statement.

 

[Isilwen]

This is absolutely wrong statement.

Exactly! It means nothing in the scheme of things.

 

[trophy33]

Nope. It’s still the Critical Text.

According to Gotquestions, they say the following:

“With the discovery of new manuscript evidence, the Critical Text has been revised many times. Currently, the Nestle-Aland text (now in its twenty-eighth edition) is the critical text in common use, along with the Greek New Testament published by the United Bible Societies (UBS).”​

Source:
What is the Critical Text? | GotQuestions.org

So there are only two MAJOR lines of manuscripts used by Bibles today.

The Textus Receptus line, and the Critical Text line.

There are two major vines (or lines of manuscripts).
People choose which vine or line they want for their own reasons.
I want a Bible that is more pure in it’s doctrine, and truths. This is why the KJB (even if it is written in archaic English) is my final Word of authority. For I can look to dictionaries and even Modern Translations to get the meaning behind what the KJB is saying at those few times it may be difficult to read.
The point is that I have to choose one Bible to be under authority. I cannot say there are mistakes in God’s Word, and I did not grow up with an apostle Paul to truly know the Koine Greek like he did. Sure, there are churches claiming to know Koine Greek, but I respectfully do not agree with their other religious practices (because I do not believe those practices are biblical). Also, those who say they look to the original languages tend to side with the Critical Text (Which is clearly inferior).

Nestlé Aland is no more critical than so called Textus Receptus. But its better because its based on many more manuscripts that are much older. Erasmus had just few manuscripts and very late ones.

If Erasmus lived today, he would be the leading personality of the Nestle Aland committee. He was no traditional fetishist.

 

[trophy33]

Not in the Eastern Orthodox church, we used our own internal lectionaries in developing the Patriarchal Text.

I do agree that the TR had few manuscripts but that the Johannine Comma is probably where someone took a gloss and added it to the text. In fact, Erasmus did not originally include the Comma in his first two editions.

I know he did not. He did not want to, because no manuscript had it. Then, suddenly a mysterious manuscript appeared behind his door which had the longer reading in it. Perhaps a fabrication.

Thats why no continental reformation Bible has it. Neither Luther Bible, not Czech reformation translations, none. Only the KJV translators have chosen the worst version. But England was quite isolated from the world back then.

 

[robycop3]

I do not know what is your point.

My point is, GOD preserved all the ancient Scriptural mss. we have, and all should be considered when a new Bible translation is being made.

 

[trophy33]

My point is, GOD preserved all the ancient Scriptural mss. we have, and all should be considered when a new Bible translation is being made.

The fact that God preserved you to your current age does not mean you are inerrant or perfect.

So I do not understand your point. There is no causality between preservation and inerrancy. You said all manuscripts are inerrrant.

The need for critical editions like that of Erasmus or of Nestlé Aland is caused by the fact that every manuscript we have is very errant and we therefore need to compare them with each other and so to come to the most probable original reading.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I have no idea,

So you take it by faith.

but they're in various universities & museums worldwide. One, of course, is the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Please take no offense, but I see several problems here in this claim.

#1. You are suggesting that there is more than one set of manuscripts out there. This implies that they are not the same. For you are claiming that there are manuscripts in museums worldwide and than you say there is one known as the Dead Sea Scrolls. They cannot both be correct. You either believe the Dead Sea Scrolls are the perfect Word of God, or you believe there is another set of manuscripts that are perfect. But seeing the Dead Sea Scrolls is not a complete 66 book Bible, we cannot conclude that it a perfect Word of God kept in it’s original state.

#2. You have never seen and examined this perfect Bible and understood it for yourself.

In reality, most who deny the King James Bible as the preserved Word of God do not believe any Bible in existence today is perfect in any language whatsoever. So they believe all bibles in all languages no matter how old is in error. This is a problem because God said He would preserve His words and they are pure words in Psalms 12:6-7. Also, you have to be the arbiter of truth in deciding what words belong in the Bible and what words do not belong in the Bible. I don’t have that problem. I just believe God’s Word. All of His words have been preserved for us faithfully today. For Jesus said Heaven and Earth shall pass away, but His words shall not pass away. Modern Translations have actually changed even the words of Jesus for the worse and not for the better. But of course you see what you want to see for your own reasons, friend.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

My point is, GOD preserved all the ancient Scriptural mss. we have, and all should be considered when a new Bible translation is being made.

So your on a continual hunt to hopefully have a pure inerrant Word of God that we can understand one day. I don’t have that problem. I just believe God’s Word in that He would preserve His words for all generations.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Nestlé Aland is no more critical than so called Textus Receptus. But its better because its based on many more manuscripts that are much older. Erasmus had just few manuscripts and very late ones.

If Erasmus lived today, he would be the leading personality of the Nestle Aland committee. He was no traditional fetishist.

I think Gotquestions knows more about the topic than you do. But even they are wrong about the King James Bible (because they do not accept it as the pure Word of God today). Anyways, Nestle and Aland based their work off of Westcott and Hort’s Greek NT text and they were known occultists.