This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Edwardjones2320 (talk | contribs) at 14:05, 18 November 2014 (Undid revision 634342573 by Widr (talk)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 14:05, 18 November 2014 by Edwardjones2320 (talk | contribs) (Undid revision 634342573 by Widr (talk))(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
The "King James Only movement" advocates the superiority of the Authorized King James Version (KJV) of the Protestant Bible. This phrase is disputed and has been described as a term meant to discredit the group of supporters that use this translation to the exclusion of all others. For instance, KJV proponent D. A. Waite states the term is a "smear word."
Adherents of the movement hold that the King James Version of the Bible is superior to all other English translations, with some teaching that it is the greatest English translation ever penned, needing no further enhancements. It is believed by many that the King James Version has influenced the direction of Christianity more greatly than any other English Bible. Some Christian and Protestant church leaders will use no other translation of the Bible for their individual studies and public preaching. Many King James Bible supporters also cite flaws in the modern English translations. They also call into question the manuscripts that the newer versions are translated from. The major reason for many moving away from this translation to newer translations is the outdated readability of the 400-year-old English text contained in this version. Since languages naturally evolve over time, older translations become more difficult to understand as the language evolves and becomes increasingly different from the older version. Opponents of the King James Only movement propose that this natural evolution of language demands that a Bible translation will eventually need to be replaced by a newer version.
Variations
James White has divided the King James Only movement into five main classifications:
- "I Like the KJV Best" – Although White lists this point of view as a subdivision of the KJVO group, this is disputed by some. This group simply regards the KJV as a very good translation and prefers it over other translations because the church they attend uses it, has always used it or prefers its style.
- "The Textual Argument" – This group believes that the KJV's Hebrew and Greek textual base is more accurate than the alternate texts used by newer translations. Many in this group might accept a modern Bible version based on the same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts used for the KJV. White claims Zane C. Hodges is a member of this group. Hodges considers that the Majority Text "corrects" the Received Text. The World English Bible is an example of an English translation that uses the Majority Greek text.
- "Received Text Only" – This group holds the position that the traditional Greek texts represented in the Textus Receptus are supernaturally (or providentially) preserved and that other Greek manuscripts not used in this compilation may be flawed. The KJV is viewed as an exemplary English translation that is based on this Greek grouping of Bible manuscripts put together by Desiderius Erasmus, but it is also believed that other translations based on these texts have the potential to be of equal quality. The views of the Trinitarian Bible Society fit into this TRO division. The Trinitarian Bible Society does not believe that the Authorized Version (KJV) is a perfect translation, only that it is the best available translation in the English language. The Society believes this text is superior to the texts used by the United Bible Societies and other Bible publishers, which use texts that incorporate as their basis a relatively few manuscripts from the 4th century, and some going back to the early 2nd century.
- "The Inspired KJV Group" – This faction believes that the KJV itself was divinely inspired. They view the translation to be an English preservation of the very words of God and that they are as accurate as the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts found in its underlying texts. Often this group excludes other English versions based on the same manuscripts, claiming that the KJV is the only English Bible sanctioned by God. They believe that this English translation should never be changed.
- "The KJV As New Revelation" – This group claims that the KJV is a "new revelation" or "advanced revelation" from God, and it should be the standard from which all other translations originate. Adherents to this belief may also believe that the original-languages, Hebrew and Greek, can be corrected by the KJV. This view is often called "Ruckmanism" after Peter Ruckman, a staunch advocate of this view.
Note: These last two views have also been referred to as "double inspiration".
These classifications are not mutually exclusive nor are they a comprehensive summary describing those who prefer the KJV. Douglas Wilson, for instance, argues that the KJV (or, in his preferred terminology, the Authorized Version) is superior because of its manuscript tradition, its translational philosophy (with updates to the language being regularly necessary), and its ecclesiastical authority, having been created by the church and authorized for use in the church. The KJV's wide availability, popularity and public domain status also come into play in addition to any theological preference.
History
The history of the King James Version Only (hereafter KJVO) movement can best be described by a genealogical outline of writers whose books have not only given birth to the movement but also have influenced their doctrines. Dr. James D. Price's book, published in 2006, gives the same information in a summary.
Benjamin G. Wilkinson (1872–1968), a staunch Seventh-day Adventist missionary, theology professor and college president, wrote Our Authorized Bible Vindicated (1930) in which he attacked the Westcott-Hort Greek text and expressed strong opposition to the English Revised Version New Testament (ERV, 1881). He was the first to apply Psalm 12:6–7 to the King James Bible, claiming that the reference is a prooftext for divine preservation of the Scriptures.
Jasper James Ray (1894–1985), a business manager, missionary and Bible teacher, wrote a similar booklet entitled God Wrote Only One Bible (1955).
Regular Baptist pastor David Otis Fuller (1903–1988) edited a book entitled Which Bible? published in 1970. It is an anthology by authors such as Robert Dick Wilson (1856–1930), Zane Clark Hodges (1932–2008) and others. Almost half of the book is dedicated to the ten out of sixteen chapters from Wilkinson's Our Authorized Bible Vindicated.
Peter Sturges Ruckman (1921–), a Baptist preacher, wrote a series of uniformly bound commentaries on various Bible books, topical books on Bible-related subjects and books related to Bible text and translation issues. At least some of his books are characterized by harsh criticism of almost everyone involved in textual criticism, such as Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield (1851–1921), Archibald Thomas Robertson (1863–1934), Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834–92) with the likes of Julius Wellhausen (1844–1918) and Harry Emerson Fosdick (1878–1969). The Christian's Handbook of Manuscript Evidence (1970) is among them. Ruckman was influenced by JJ Ray's God Wrote Only One Bible, and Ruckman's The Bible Babel (1964) is nearly identical to Ray's 1955 book. Some supporters of the KJVO movement reject Ruckman's position that the King James Version Bible is superior to existing Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, and criticize Ruckman because "his writings are so acerbic, offensive and mean-spirited that the entire movement has become identified with his kind of confrontational attitude."
Edward F. Hills (1912–81) works Believing Bible Study (1967) and King James Version Defended (1956, 1973) are commonly cited to give support to the KJVO's position, although Hills personally never supported such KJVO positions.
Gail Riplinger (1947–), known for her book New Age Bible Versions and a number of other works, has also addressed in some detail the issue of differences in current editions of the King James Bible. However, a lengthy critical review of her book New Age Bible Versions, originally published in Cornerstone magazine in 1994, authored by Bob and Gretchen Passantino of Answers In Action, described the book as "erroneous, sensationalistic, misrepresentative, inaccurate, and logically indefensible."
Benefits of Usage
One of the benefits of using the King James Bible, perhaps also along with a modern translation, is that there are a number of Bible study tools that link King James text to Greek concordances such as Strongs and Thayers. This is very helpful for examining the underlying Greek and Hebrew definitions of Bible words. A large percentage of modern Bible translations do not have these tools available.
Single translation usage is also considered beneficial because it is easier to memorize portions of the Bible since the underlying translated text doesn't change over the years or over a lifetime. Bible verses that you memorized as a child can be quoted with the exact same wording decades later. This is one of the reasons that some people do not want to switch to another Bible translation, because they don't want to re-memorize Bible verses that have already been committed to memory.
Using a single translation over the course of a lifetime also makes it easier to search for Bible verses since you know the words contained in the various passages. You are able to use those memorized words to launch the search and find the desired passages quickly. If you change to a different Bible translation, the words of the verses also change, and the search that worked before now doesn't because the keywords being used don't match the new translation of the text.
Church reading is also much more consistent when a single translation is used, especially in Bible studies where multiple participants read scriptures out of their own Bibles.
It can be challenging to follow a dynamic equivalence translation reading when you are using a formal equivalence translation. Dynamic equivalence translating techniques tend to move the sentences around making it difficult for your eyes and mind to follow a reading when you're looking at one version of text and hearing another that scrambles the words.
If everyone in the group standardizes with the King James Version, you are seeing and hearing the same text which makes it easier to focus on the message rather than trying to unscramble in your head the variations between the reader's Bible and your Bible. The problem isn't as bad if someone is reading from another formal translation, such as the New King James Version, and you are following along in the King James Version.
See also
- Bible translations
- List of Bible verses not included in modern translations
- Bible version debate
- Dean Burgon Society
- List of major textual variants in the New Testament
- Modern English Bible translations
- Textual criticism
Notes
- The relationship of Ray's booklet to Wilkinson’s text is documented in Hudson, Gary (Spring 1991), "The Real Eye Opener", Baptist Biblical Heritage (article), II (1).
References
- Waite, Donald A (3 February 2007). "King James Only As Slander".
{{cite web}}
:|access-date=
requires|url=
(help); Missing or empty|url=
(help) - Waite, Donald A (6 February 2007). "King James Only As Slander".
{{cite web}}
:|access-date=
requires|url=
(help); Missing or empty|url=
(help) - Riplinger, GA, In Awe of Thy Word: Understanding the King James Bible, Its Mystery & History Letter By Letter.
- http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/niv_exposed.htm
- http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/esv.htm
- http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/NASV/new_american_standard_version_exposed.htm
- http://chick.com/bc/2009/lied.asp
- http://chick.com/reading/books/158/158_44.asp?FROM=biblecenter
- Facts & Trends magazine, LifeWay Christian Resources, May–June 2004.
- ^ White 1995, pp. 1–4.
- White 1995, p. 5.
- Watts, Malcolm H. (2007). "The Accuracy of the Authorised Version" (PDF). Quarterly Record. 578 (1). Trinitarian Bible Society: 8.
- "The Text of the Bible used", Principles, The Trinitarian Bible Society.
- Price, James D (2006). King James Onlyism: A New Sect. James D. Price Publisher. p. 279. ISBN 0-9791147-0-5.
- Wilson, Douglas. "Hearers of the Word". Credenda/Agenda. 10 (1). Archived from the original on 27 September 2007. Retrieved 1 July 2008.
- Price, James D, King James Onlyism: A New Sect (PDF), SG: Truth, p. 4.
- Kutilek 1998, second paragraph: "All writers who embrace…"
- Kutilek 1998, 2nd paragraph: "Wilkinson was the first…"
- Kutilek 1998, 3rd paragraph: "when J. J. Ray…"
- Hudson & Kutilek 1990, 2nd paragraph: "But the overwhelmingly longest…"
- Kutilek 1998, 11th and 12th paragraph: "Also in the third generation…"
- White 1995, p. 109.
- Schnaiter, Sam; Tagliapietra, Ron (2002), Bible Preservation and the Providence of God, Xlibris, p. 364.
- Kutilek 1998, 13th paragraph: "A word needs to be said…"
- Riplinger, Gail A. "Settings of the King James Bible" (PDF). Our KJV.
- New age vers. (book review), Answers
Bibliography
- Hudson, Gary; Kutilek, Doug (Summer 1990), "The Great 'Which Bible?' Fraud", Baptist Biblical Heritage, I (2), KJV only: 1, 3–6.
- Kutilek, Doug (1998), The Unlearned Men: The True Genealogy and Genesis of King-James-Version-Onlyism, KJV only.
- White, James (1995), The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust the Modern Translations?, Minneapolis: Bethany House, p. 248, ISBN 1-55661-575-2, OCLC 32051411.
Further reading
- Anderson, Robert (1903). The Bible and modern criticism. ASIN B00069Y39O.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help) - Ankerberg, John; Weldon, John (2003). The Facts on the King James Only Debate. Eugene, OR: Harvest House. ISBN 0-7369-1111-1.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help) - Beacham, Roy E.; Bauder, Kevin T (2001). One Bible Only? Examining Exclusive Claims for the King James Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications. ISBN 0-8254-2048-2.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help) - Carson, D.A. (1978). The King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House. ISBN 0-8010-2427-7.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help) - Comfort, Phillip W. (2000). Essential Guide to Bible Versions. Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers. ISBN 0-8423-3484-X.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help) - Dewey, David (2005). A User's Guide To Bible Translations: Making The Most of Different Versions. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press. ISBN 0-8308-3273-4.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help) - Macgregor, Alan J (2004). Three Modern Versions: A Critical Assessment of the NIV, ESV and NKJV. Salisbury, Wiltshire, ENG, UK: Bible League. ISBN 0-904435-87-3.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help) - Mauro, Philip (1924). Which version?: Authorized or revised?. Boston: Hamilton Brothers. Retrieved 23 July 2008.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help) - Paisley, Ian RK (1997). My Plea for the Old Sword. Emerald House Group. ISBN 1-84030-015-9.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help) - Ryken, Leland (2002). The Word of God in English: Criteria for Excellence in Bible Translation. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books. ISBN 1-58134-464-3.
{{cite book}}
: Invalid|ref=harv
(help)
External links
Pro King James Only
- The Bible For Today
- Way of Life Literature
- AV Publications
- Bible Believers
- King James Bible Society
- Bible Inspection Checklist with downloadable Authorized Version
- A Wiki style site promoting the Textus Receptus and the King James Bible
Anti King James Only
- Confessions of a King James Only Advocate
- Missing Verses? What Missing Verses?
- King James Only Movement
- The King James Only Resource Center
- The KJV-Only Issue
- The KJV Only Debate Blog
- Ruckmanism