The Error of KJV-Onlyism

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,637
13,038
113
King James created his Bible to serve his own political ends. I would avoid it for that reason alone.
This comment simply displays ignorance on your part. A true believer would never say such a thing.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
#22. Modern Bibles Corrupt John 3:16.

Modern Bibles corrupt John 3:16 (the most beloved verse by Christians). In John 3:16: The NIV reads, "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life" However, Jesus was NOT "the one and only son" because Adam is also called the "son of God" in Luke 3:38, there are "sons of God" in Job 1:6, and Christians are called "sons of God" (See: Philippians 2:15) (I John 3:2). The King James Bible correctly says that Jesus was the “his only begotten Son” By removing the critical word "begotten" - The NIV perverts John 3:16 into a lie! The NIV does the same in John 1:14, John 1:18, and John 3:18.

#23. Modern Bibles distort major Messianic prophecies.

In one example: Genesis 22:8 correctly says in the KJB: "My son, God will provide himself a lamb”; However, the Modern counterfeit Bibles say, "God will provide for Himself the lamb," or they will falsely say, "God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering." The fulfillment of Genesis 22:8 is found in John 1:29; In other words, Modern Bibles distort this prophecy that God would become the Lamb. Also, Galatians 3:16 says: “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.” Now, if we were to look back at one of the Old Testament references for Galatians 3:16, we can see that the King James Bible correctly refers to Abraham’s seed (singular - which is a reference to Christ), and yet the Modern bibles change this reference in Genesis 12:7 with using the word “descendants” instead of the word “seed” (Which destroys the whole point Paul was making in Galatians 3:16).

#24. The gospel is subtly attacked in Modern Bibles.

In 1 Corinthians 1:21: Many counterfeits change ". . .the foolishness of preaching. . ." to the "foolishness of what was preached" or "foolishness of the message preached." The deceitful counterfeits change the object of "foolishness" from the act of "preaching" to the "message" of preaching – the gospel of the Lord Jesus. There’s nothing "foolish" about the "message" of Jesus Christ – it’s the greatest and most reasonable message in the history of the universe! 1 Corinthians 1:18 shines some eye-opening light on the counterfeiters. 1 Corinthians 1:18 says, ". . . the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved, it is the power of God.”

#25. In 1 Thessalonians 5:22 - The counterfeit Bibles change "all appearance of evil" to "every form (or kind) of evil."

This verse in the KJB refutes the idea that Christians can celebrate Halloween and or make themselves look like a bad guy (i.e., an evil person) that would scare or alarm the average person on the street. In other words, we should not appear to dress up as if we look evil or endorse those who do.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
Okay??? So you won't just simply answer the question? Why the need for all the tap dancing if it's such a strong position?

I'm not trying to be rude or snarky here, but I'm just trying to have a straight forward conversation about this topic. Again, I get the argument for it, but I disagree with many of the assumptions made and conclusions reached when diving into the finer details of the "KJV Only" case.

I understand you don't want to be offensive or blatantly aggressive with your position, but you said that God will hold us accountable for not using the KJV exclusively, yet when I asked straight up you kind of side stepped it, now jump into why you think other versions are corrupt. Look I get it, but the thing is even before we get to that point there are some glaring problems with holding up a particular version of His word as "above" all things. First and foremost being that His word itself doesn't tell us of some perfected version (coming in 1611) that invalidates everything else around it. That's why I ask you very specifically what you believe, because there are many that take this you make this almost mythical standard about it being "god's prefect word in every conceivable way, without error and perfected to every degree". Which for the record, I agree with, but present it in way that opens a whole world of unnecessary and pointless debate distracting from the TRUTH. Even worse in my eyes, is it splits the body from the jump before a word is said forb NO good reason.

Listen I am not trying to just fight with you guys for fun, or because I'm board, I want to sharpen myself as well as learn, to come together to draw closer to Him. I get how this view is appealing, and the way it's presented is convincing, but there is a deception to it if you see it or not. It's honestly what they leave out when making this case that I find deceitful. They only lay out the details and slant towards their view while never saying a thing about how or why any of these things were different in other versions. This is where KJV onlyism lost me, was when you start researching why and how these verses were changed or worded differently. While not every single case in every version "makes sense" (I say this because I haven't researched it nearly that much and wouldn't even make such a sweeping claim anyway), but everyone I have researched was explained to my satisfaction, and made sense in a very non-nefarious way. I don't see the devil behind it changing His word. I don't even believe that he could prevail against His word.

I just see too many problem with this view for it to be truth and I don't think we should make it a thing to divide over. I defiantly don't believe God will punish us for using other Bibles than the KJV.
Ten Main Categories That Defend The King James Bible:

#1. Manuscript Witnesses (Majority of manuscripts or witnesses favor the KJB). Compare 5,800 manuscripts for the TR with only 45 or so for the Alexandrian texts. In the mouth of two or three witnesses let every word be established. There are four gospels, etcetera. In Textual Criticism, they say the old is better after having tasted the new. Also, just because something is older does not mean it is better. A pagan religious document that would predate the Incarnation of Christ is not better just because it is older to the NT Scriptures. In fact, Paul said that even in his time, the Scriptures were being corrupted. Is it not odd that this very verse that talks about this corruption is altered in modern Bibles?

#2. Doctrinal (The KJB is doctrinally superior. Meaning, vitally important doctrines are found in the KJV, but yet, they are missing in the Modern Bibles. Also, Modern Bibles teach false doctrines, as well).

#3. Influence or Fruit (The KJB is the most printed book in the world and it had the greatest influence positively in history leading to many great revivals whereas the Modern Bibles are tied to this recent Laodicean church age). (a) There are 200 plus idioms or phrases in the English-speaking world that are found in the KJB. (b) Here in America, the KJB has had an amazing impact and influence. In America: The first printed English Bible (including the OT and NT) was the King James Bible that was endorsed by Congress (i.e., the Aitken’s Bible). The KJB became the dominant translation here in America from the 18th century to the early 1960s. Lincoln was gifted a King James Bible by the black community and he spoke highly of it. Lincoln’s famous Gettysburg address was peppered with the language of the KJB. Other US presidents in history spoke highly of the King James Bible, and it had a significant impact here in America; Especially around the timing of the 300th anniversary of the KJB. Two US presidents spoke in high regard of the KJB a few days apart from the KJB anniversary.

#4. Biblical; The Word of God speaking about the Word (Meaning, the Bible supports that there is a book, and it is perfect, and would be preserved forever - which aligns with the KJB belief; Whereas Textual Criticism cannot be demonstrated by Scripture).

#5. Historical: Comparing the Origins of Each (One can see the hand of God upon the origins of the KJB, and it had the best translators, whereas with the Modern Translation movement, its origins are tied to deceptions, Catholicism, Unitarianism, liberalism, and other problems; In short, the KJB has noble and good origins and the Modern Bibles have dark origins).

#6. Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 1) There is no singular standard and everyone does what is right in their own eyes. They have phantom bibles that exist only in their own minds or the minds of their chosen respected scholars. Dan Wallace does not agree with James White. They cannot actually point to a singular book and say it is the Word of God or the Bible (a.k.a. the Book of the Lord as mentioned in Isaiah 34:16). They become the authority or the scholar becomes the authority when they find what they believe is an error in God’s Word. There is no true reverence for the words of God when the Bible warns not to add or take away from his words and Jesus tells us His words would not pass away.

#7. Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 2) The Men Attached to Modern Scholarship. Check out this PDF by WayofLife.

#8. Problems of Textual Criticism (Part 3) Deceptions in Textual Criticism (See my post here).

#9. Unique superior qualities of the KJB. (a) Thous and Thees help you to distinguish between a singular person being spoken to vs. two or more people. Many modern Bibles do not have this distinction or quality. (b) The KJB was not originally created with a copyright and so its creation was not motivated by one, unlike Modern Translations. (c) The KJB has italicized words, which shows the honesty of the translators. (d) KJB is easier to memorize (e) KJB was designed to be spoken and heard by the ear.

#10. Divine Nature of the Text: Biblical Numerics (The King James Bible is the only Bible that has amazing unexplainable numerical patterns within it that can only be the hand of God upon such a book; Note: Rather than go into detail myself about this point, I would recommend checking out several videos on the topic instead to truly see the magnitude and depth of this topic fully). See this video here to start.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
Okay??? So you won't just simply answer the question? Why the need for all the tap dancing if it's such a strong position?

I'm not trying to be rude or snarky here, but I'm just trying to have a straight forward conversation about this topic. Again, I get the argument for it, but I disagree with many of the assumptions made and conclusions reached when diving into the finer details of the "KJV Only" case.

I understand you don't want to be offensive or blatantly aggressive with your position, but you said that God will hold us accountable for not using the KJV exclusively, yet when I asked straight up you kind of side stepped it, now jump into why you think other versions are corrupt. Look I get it, but the thing is even before we get to that point there are some glaring problems with holding up a particular version of His word as "above" all things. First and foremost being that His word itself doesn't tell us of some perfected version (coming in 1611) that invalidates everything else around it. That's why I ask you very specifically what you believe, because there are many that take this you make this almost mythical standard about it being "god's prefect word in every conceivable way, without error and perfected to every degree". Which for the record, I agree with, but present it in way that opens a whole world of unnecessary and pointless debate distracting from the TRUTH. Even worse in my eyes, is it splits the body from the jump before a word is said forb NO good reason.

Listen I am not trying to just fight with you guys for fun, or because I'm board, I want to sharpen myself as well as learn, to come together to draw closer to Him. I get how this view is appealing, and the way it's presented is convincing, but there is a deception to it if you see it or not. It's honestly what they leave out when making this case that I find deceitful. They only lay out the details and slant towards their view while never saying a thing about how or why any of these things were different in other versions. This is where KJV onlyism lost me, was when you start researching why and how these verses were changed or worded differently. While not every single case in every version "makes sense" (I say this because I haven't researched it nearly that much and wouldn't even make such a sweeping claim anyway), but everyone I have researched was explained to my satisfaction, and made sense in a very non-nefarious way. I don't see the devil behind it changing His word. I don't even believe that he could prevail against His word.

I just see too many problem with this view for it to be truth and I don't think we should make it a thing to divide over. I defiantly don't believe God will punish us for using other Bibles than the KJV.
I have also come up with 101 Reasons for the King James Bible, as well. Many of them are based on what the Bible actually says. Some are regarding the unique qualities of the King James Bible in history that make it stand out as a book unlike any other. Other reasons are doctrinal changes for the worse, as I have demonstrated to you already.

But ultimately it is a faith issue in your believing what the Bible says about itself.

#1. God’s Word says His words are in a book (See: Deuteronomy 17:18, Joshua 1:8, Isaiah 30:8, Jeremiah 30:2, Jeremiah 36:2, Job 19:23-24, Mark 12:26, Luke 4:20, Luke 20:42, Hebrews 10:7, Acts 7:42, Revelation 22:7). In fact, not only are His words in a book but we are told to seek out this book and read from it (Isaiah 34:16). Furthermore, Isaiah 34:16 is a prophecy of the “End Times.” This prophecy talks about how we would have the Bible (i.e., the Book of the LORD) during the Tribulation period mentioned in Revelation. Seeing we are currently living in the last days and we are drawing closer to the Tribulation period with each passing day, logic dictates that we would be able to hold in our hands the very “Book of the LORD” today. In other words, God’s words are not in numerous manuscript copies of the original languages, but they are in a book, as Scripture says.

#2. God’s Word says Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35); It is: “incorruptible...the word of God...” (1 Peter 1:23).

#3. God cannot err, and therefore God’s Word (the Bible) cannot err. In fact, these two truths are taught in the Bible. We know it is impossible for God to lie (Hebrews 6:18, Titus 1:2). Numbers 23:19 tells us, “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?” God’s Word is trustworthy. Psalm 119:105 says, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” Revelation 21:5 says His words are faithful (trustworthy). Meaning: God’s Word is so reliable it cannot lead you down the path of error. God’s words are rock solid, and they are always faithful and good to us. The word of the LORD is right (Psalms 33:4).

There are many more truths like this in God’s Word.
The Bible says of itself that is pure and that its words would be preserved for all eternity.

Furthermore, what is highly suspicious is that the Modern Bible Movement makes changes or favors the wrong texts in support of their modern Bibles that conveniently supports their beliefs, as well. Care to hear them?
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,637
13,038
113
Sample of Corruption in Ephesians 3:9
Comparing the Textus Receptus of Stephanus with the Critical Text of Westcott/Hort/Nestle etc will make this even clearer.

Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550
καὶ φωτίσαι πάντας τίς ἡ κοινωνία τοῦ μυστηρίου τοῦ ἀποκεκρυμμένου ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων ἐν τῷ θεῷ τῷ τὰ πάντα κτίσαντι διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, (omitted below)

Westcott and Hort / [NA27 variants]
καὶ φωτίσαι [πάντας] τίς ἡ οἰκονομία τοῦ μυστηρίου τοῦ ἀποκεκρυμμένου ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων ἐν τῷ θεῷ τῷ τὰ πάντα κτίσαντι, ...............................

That the Textus Receptus is correct is confirmed by the RP Byzantine Text and also the Greek Orthodox Church 1904 text (which are independent of the Received Text)

RP Byzantine Majority Text 2005
καὶ φωτίσαι πάντας τίς ἡ οἰκονομία τοῦ μυστηρίου τοῦ ἀποκεκρυμμένου ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων ἐν τῷ θεῷ τῷ τὰ πάντα κτίσαντι διὰ Ἰησοῦ χριστοῦ,

Greek Orthodox Church 1904
καὶ φωτίσαι πάντας τίς ἡ οἰκονομία τοῦ μυστηρίου τοῦ ἀποκεκρυμμένου ἀπὸ τῶν αἰώνων ἐν τῷ Θεῷ, τῷ τὰ πάντα κτίσαντι διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ,

King James Bible
And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

This is only ONE out of hundreds of such corruptions. The doctrine of Christ was targeted by the Gnostics, and the modern bible versions reflect this:
New American Standard Bible
and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things; BLANK BLANK BLANK
New International Version
and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things. BLANK BLANK BLANK
American Standard Version
and to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages hath been hid in God who created all things; BLANK BLANK BLANK

So is Christ the Creator of all things according to Scripture? Absolutely. Then why was He omitted here? Was that not to downgrade Him? And are there not many other changes which also downgrade Christ?
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
First and foremost being that His word itself doesn't tell us of some perfected version (coming in 1611) that invalidates everything else around it.
Actually, there are clues that the 1611 King James Bible is the Word of God.

#1. The Bible talks about how there will be a Book of the LORD during the Tribulation period (Isaiah 34:16).
#2. Adding the verse numbers for the 3 verses that talk about how man shall not live by bread alone adds up to 1611.
#3. The 1611th mention of LORD (capitalized) first appears in the 1611 King James Bible. This is important because the 1611th mention of LORD just so happens to fall in the 16th chapter of Deuteronomy, 11th verse (Deuteronomy 16:11).
#4. Acts 16:11 also points to England and the mountain on the way is exactly 1,611 feet tall.
#5. The King James Bible is a unique book in history, unlike any other book. It is the most printed book in the world (with billions of copies). It was a part of the Great Awakening in history leading to many revivals.
#6. It was not originally created with a copyright and received one a hundred years later.
#7. It was almost destroyed by Catholics with a super bomb (a.k.a., the gunpowder plot).
#8. Many in the English-speaking world still speak like the King James Bible and do not even know it. There are 200 plus idioms contained within its pages that influenced multitudes in history.
#9. 47 of the best scholars gathered together in one place unlike ever before or after. There were translators who knew the languages far better than anyone today.
#10. Personal Pronouns (Which do not appear in Modern Bibles). So if you are reading a Modern Bible in John 3, you cannot distinguish between when Jesus is referring to Nicodemus and speaking to everyone.
#11. Purity of Doctrine.
#12. The Many Deceptions in Textual Criticism (Which is the popular alternative position).

I will provide some videos for you to check out for some of the claims above.
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
Okay??? So you won't just simply answer the question? Why the need for all the tap dancing if it's such a strong position?

I'm not trying to be rude or snarky here, but I'm just trying to have a straight forward conversation about this topic. Again, I get the argument for it, but I disagree with many of the assumptions made and conclusions reached when diving into the finer details of the "KJV Only" case.

I understand you don't want to be offensive or blatantly aggressive with your position, but you said that God will hold us accountable for not using the KJV exclusively, yet when I asked straight up you kind of side stepped it, now jump into why you think other versions are corrupt. Look I get it, but the thing is even before we get to that point there are some glaring problems with holding up a particular version of His word as "above" all things. First and foremost being that His word itself doesn't tell us of some perfected version (coming in 1611) that invalidates everything else around it. That's why I ask you very specifically what you believe, because there are many that take this you make this almost mythical standard about it being "god's prefect word in every conceivable way, without error and perfected to every degree". Which for the record, I agree with, but present it in way that opens a whole world of unnecessary and pointless debate distracting from the TRUTH. Even worse in my eyes, is it splits the body from the jump before a word is said forb NO good reason.

Listen I am not trying to just fight with you guys for fun, or because I'm board, I want to sharpen myself as well as learn, to come together to draw closer to Him. I get how this view is appealing, and the way it's presented is convincing, but there is a deception to it if you see it or not. It's honestly what they leave out when making this case that I find deceitful. They only lay out the details and slant towards their view while never saying a thing about how or why any of these things were different in other versions. This is where KJV onlyism lost me, was when you start researching why and how these verses were changed or worded differently. While not every single case in every version "makes sense" (I say this because I haven't researched it nearly that much and wouldn't even make such a sweeping claim anyway), but everyone I have researched was explained to my satisfaction, and made sense in a very non-nefarious way. I don't see the devil behind it changing His word. I don't even believe that he could prevail against His word.

I just see too many problem with this view for it to be truth and I don't think we should make it a thing to divide over. I defiantly don't believe God will punish us for using other Bibles than the KJV.
As for the prophecy of the Bible in the End Times:

As for the 1611th mention of LORD in the Bible:

As for Acts 16:11:

Revelation 13:18 says,

“Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.”​

In Revelation 13:18 the word “him” implies us believers or the Christian reader who hath understanding. What is this “understanding” that we believers are to have? I believe this “understanding” is about the knowledge of biblical numerics. You (who hath understanding) are told to count a particular number whereby it gives you an ascribed meaning for that number. The number is 666 which is the number associated with the Beast. The verse presupposes that “him” (you or the believer) is already aware of biblical numerics because Revelation 13:18 also says that his number is the number of a man. If you have the understanding to count, you would already know Man’s number according to the Bible is 6 (See here). Yet, the Beast’s number is 666. Meaning, the beast’s number is taking man’s number (Which is 6) and it is tripling it (666). This is why the “him” (you or the believer) who has understanding is told to count man’s number (representing the number 6) three times to get the number of the beast (666).

As for the year 1611 tied to the only three verses that talk about how man shall live by every Word of God:

IMG_2848.jpeg
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
24,822
13,440
113
View attachment 259765

@Dino246

First, poster “John146“ just refuted your claim with Scripture.
Second, you gave the “boring” rep in response.
How on Earth can you see this as boring?
He posted Scripture!
Any discussion of Scripture should never be boring, even if you disagree.
This is why I am flabbergasted by such responses by you.
The Bible says that the entrance of God’s words brings light (Psalms 119:130).
In fact, God’s words taste sweeter than honey (Psalms 119:103).
Doesn’t seem like you agree with what the Bible plainly teaches (unless you care to explain).
Who died and made you the Forum police?
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
Okay??? So you won't just simply answer the question? Why the need for all the tap dancing if it's such a strong position?

I'm not trying to be rude or snarky here, but I'm just trying to have a straight forward conversation about this topic. Again, I get the argument for it, but I disagree with many of the assumptions made and conclusions reached when diving into the finer details of the "KJV Only" case.

I understand you don't want to be offensive or blatantly aggressive with your position, but you said that God will hold us accountable for not using the KJV exclusively, yet when I asked straight up you kind of side stepped it, now jump into why you think other versions are corrupt. Look I get it, but the thing is even before we get to that point there are some glaring problems with holding up a particular version of His word as "above" all things. First and foremost being that His word itself doesn't tell us of some perfected version (coming in 1611) that invalidates everything else around it. That's why I ask you very specifically what you believe, because there are many that take this you make this almost mythical standard about it being "god's prefect word in every conceivable way, without error and perfected to every degree". Which for the record, I agree with, but present it in way that opens a whole world of unnecessary and pointless debate distracting from the TRUTH. Even worse in my eyes, is it splits the body from the jump before a word is said forb NO good reason.

Listen I am not trying to just fight with you guys for fun, or because I'm board, I want to sharpen myself as well as learn, to come together to draw closer to Him. I get how this view is appealing, and the way it's presented is convincing, but there is a deception to it if you see it or not. It's honestly what they leave out when making this case that I find deceitful. They only lay out the details and slant towards their view while never saying a thing about how or why any of these things were different in other versions. This is where KJV onlyism lost me, was when you start researching why and how these verses were changed or worded differently. While not every single case in every version "makes sense" (I say this because I haven't researched it nearly that much and wouldn't even make such a sweeping claim anyway), but everyone I have researched was explained to my satisfaction, and made sense in a very non-nefarious way. I don't see the devil behind it changing His word. I don't even believe that he could prevail against His word.

I just see too many problem with this view for it to be truth and I don't think we should make it a thing to divide over. I defiantly don't believe God will punish us for using other Bibles than the KJV.
You say there is a deception to believe in the King James Bible as the pure Word of God. I don’t believe you are looking at all the facts in the Bible on this topic, or history, or looking at the problems in Modern Scholarship and Modern Bibles.

If you want deception, then Modern Scholarship is a master at such deception. However, I am not just saying this without any proof. I can actually prove it, and you can check the facts for yourself. While there are many, here are two of them.

Deception #1.

Adding to the challenge for Textual Critics, there was a deliberate attempt to mislead by relocating the segment of 1 John 5:8, which reads, “For there are three that testify:” It's shifted to fill the gap in 1 John 5:7, creating the illusion that there's no crucial missing verse. This should immediately raise alarm bells. However, within the Textual Critic community, many might dismiss it with a casual "No cause for concern here, move along," which is worrying. If it were a trivial detail in the Bible that didn't impact doctrine, it might not be as critical, but this directly relates to a fundamental aspect of understanding God's nature.​

Deception #2.

The NKJV Trojan Horse Deception.​
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
One of the main issues I have with KJV onlyism is the idea that the manuscripts on which modern Bibles are based are corrupted. In my opinion they're of an inferior quality but not corrupted; it's still the word of God. That's why I reject KJVO.

On the flipside, I don't really appreciate how these inferior manuscripts are always presented as "the best." This just simply is not the case.
Well, you say the KJV is inferior but you are not giving us any reasons why. I actually proved that the KJB is superior by pointing out all the false doctrines in Modern English Bibles (Which are based upon the two inferior NT Greek manuscripts, i.e., the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus). See my post #1777 for the false doctrines that are changed in Modern Bibles. See my 10 Main Categories that prove that the King James Bible is the Pure Word of God for today (See my post #1,783). This is also just the tip of the iceberg. I have 101 Reasons for the King James Bible (that are really strong points - IMHO).
 

Kroogz

Active member
Dec 5, 2023
596
209
43
Actually, there are clues that the 1611 King James Bible is the Word of God.

#1. The Bible talks about how there will be a Book of the LORD during the Tribulation period (Isaiah 34:16).
#2. Adding the verse numbers for the 3 verses that talk about how man shall not live by bread alone adds up to 1611.
#3. The 1611th mention of LORD (capitalized) first appears in the 1611 King James Bible. This is important because the 1611th mention of LORD just so happens to fall in the 16th chapter of Deuteronomy, 11th verse (Deuteronomy 16:11).
#4. Acts 16:11 also points to England and the mountain on the way is exactly 1,611 feet tall.
#5. The King James Bible is a unique book in history, unlike any other book. It is the most printed book in the world (with billions of copies). It was a part of the Great Awakening in history leading to many revivals.
#6. It was not originally created with a copyright and received one a hundred years later.
#7. It was almost destroyed by Catholics with a super bomb (a.k.a., the gunpowder plot).
#8. Many in the English-speaking world still speak like the King James Bible and do not even know it. There are 200 plus idioms contained within its pages that influenced multitudes in history.
#9. 47 of the best scholars gathered together in one place unlike ever before or after. There were translators who knew the languages far better than anyone today.
#10. Personal Pronouns (Which do not appear in Modern Bibles). So if you are reading a Modern Bible in John 3, you cannot distinguish between when Jesus is referring to Nicodemus and speaking to everyone.
#11. Purity of Doctrine.
#12. The Many Deceptions in Textual Criticism (Which is the popular alternative position).

I will provide some videos for you to check out for some of the claims above.
Heb 6:13
New American Standard Bible
For when God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear an oath by no one greater, He swore by Himself,:cool:
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
56,484
26,461
113
I understand you don't want to be offensive or blatantly aggressive with your position
:unsure::ROFL:
You got your answer, but did not like it. So once again, when someone deliberately
chooses the corrupt over the pure, God holds them accountable.
You have admitted that the KJV has mistakes...
 

Sipsey

Well-known member
Sep 27, 2018
1,371
654
113
At what point does a spirited defense morph into arrogance? Asking for a friend.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,637
13,038
113
There is no holy grail, against which every other must be compared
Do you seriously think that God preserved His written Word for over 3,500 years so that at the end thousands of omissions and additions could be made with impunity? Yes. there is a "holy grail" and the traditional Hebrew and Greek printed texts fairly present the true Word of God. Both the doctrines of divine inspiration and divine preservation of the Scripture apply as noted below:

If the doctrine of the divine inspiration of the Old and New Testament Scriptures is a true doctrine, the doctrine of the providential preservation of the Scriptures must also be a true doctrine. It must be that down through the centuries God has exercised a special, providential control over the copying of the Scriptures and the preservation and use of the copies, so that trustworthy representatives of the original text have been available to God's people in every age. God must have done this, for if He gave the Scriptures to His Church by inspiration as the perfect and final revelation of His will, then it is obvious that He would not allow this revelation to disappear or undergo any alteration of its fundamental character. (Hills, The King James Version Defended).

The traditional Hebrew Text called the Masoretic Text was found in the Leningrad Codex from about 900 AD. The book of Isaiah in this text was matched by the Isaiah scroll found with the Dead Sea Scrolls (c 200 B.C.) This proved that the Hebrew Text was preserved over that 1100 year period. But the Lord Jesus Christ Himself was confident that His Hebrew Tanakh was the same from the time of Moses (c 1500 B.C.) See Luke 24.

That the New Testament traditional text existed from the very beginning is confirmed by the Peshitta from the 2nd century AD.
The Peshitta Syriac version, which is the historic Bible of the whole Syrian Church, agrees closely with the Traditional Text found in the vast majority of the Greek New Testament manuscripts. Until about one hundred years ago it was almost universally believed that the Peshitta originated in the 2nd century and hence was one of the oldest New Testament versions. Hence because of its agreement with the Traditional Text the Peshitta was regarded as one of the most important witnesses to the antiquity of the Traditional Text.

The Gothic translation from around 350 AD is also a match to the traditional NT text:
The Gothic version also indicates that the Traditional Text is not a late text. This New Testament translation was made from the Greek into Gothic shortly after 350 A.D. by Ulfilas, missionary bishop to the Goths. "The type of text represented in it," Kenyon (1912) tells us, "is for the most part that which is found in the majority of Greek manuscripts." (13) The fact, therefore, that Ulfilas in A.D. 350 produced a Gothic version based on the Traditional Text proves that this text must have been in existence before that date. In other words, there must have been many manuscripts of the Traditional type on hand in the days of Ulfilas, manuscripts which since that time have perished.

When Erasmus prepared his printed Greek New Testament text, he had access to many more manuscripts than he is given credit for (including those used in the Complutensian Polyglot): It is well known also that Erasmus looked for manuscripts everywhere during his travels and that he borrowed them from everyone he could. Hence although the Textus Receptus was based mainly on the manuscripts which Erasmus found at Basel, it also included readings taken from others to which he had access...Through his study of the writings of Jerome and other Church Fathers Erasmus became very well informed concerning the variant readings of the New Testament text. Indeed almost all the important variant readings known to scholars today were already known to Erasmus more than 460 years ago and discussed in the notes (previously prepared) which he placed after the text in his editions of the Greek New Testament.

We also know that those scholars who followed Erasmus (Beza, Stephanus. and the Elzevir brothers), had further access to additional manuscripts. So when the Elzevirs published their Greek Text in 1633, they called it the Textus Receptus (Received Text). The differences in the TR from 1516 (Erasmus) to 1633 are minimal.

But the critical texts of Westcott & Hort (and those who followed them ) are seriously at variance with the Received Text. Dean Burgon made this very clear in his book The Revision Revised where he made it clear that the Received Text would remain the standard (and his opponent Bishop Ellicott also agreed at one time):

We deem it even axiomatic, that, in every case of doubt or difficulty—supposed or real—our critical method must be the same: namely, after patiently collecting all the available evidence, then, without partiality or prejudice, to adjudicate between the conflicting authorities, and loyally to accept that verdict for which there is clearly the preponderating evidence. The best supported Reading, in other words, must always be held to be the true Reading: and nothing may be rejected from the commonly received Text, except on evidence which shall clearly outweigh the evidence for retaining it. We are glad to know that, so far at least, we once had Bp. Ellicott with us.

Dean Burgon proved that in the Gospels alone the Critical Text of W&H varied from the Received Text about 8,000 times (omissions, additions, transpositions. etc). He carefully collated Codex Vaticanus (B) and Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph). He called them corruptions of a "depraved text". So now you can take your pick.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
24,637
13,038
113
You have admitted that the KJV has mistakes...
That makes no difference since those are in fact minor flaws. So let's focus on the serious corruptions in the modern versions (which you have conveniently ignored).
 

Bible_Highlighter

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2023
1,715
300
83
I just see too many problem with this view for it to be truth and I don't think we should make it a thing to divide over. I defiantly don't believe God will punish us for using other Bibles than the KJV.
I wouldn’t divide over this issue, but at the same time, there are going to be problems that will inevitably crop up in Bible study. One will seek to explain away the English wording in the King James Bible or they will favor a false doctrine in a Modern Translation (Like the ESV, NAS95, NET). These things will likely naturally cause friction because the Modern Bibles teach different things than the KJB that are very serious. Then there is the confusion of others doing a Bible study with different translations. Confusion will eventually result because not all Modern Bibles even agree with each other. Not even the NIV editions agree with each other and this is not due to trying to correct any imperfect printing process like with the KJB editions.

I mean, what if the warning in Revelation 22:18-19 is referring to the whole Bible?
If such were the case, I see the Modern Scholarship Movement as falling under this warning and not the King James Bible translators.
If one takes away words from the prophecy of this book, God will take their name out of the Book of Life.
If any words are added, He will add unto them the plagues of this book.
Oh, and we actually have reports of certain translators of Modern Bibles losing their voice, as well.
Even if you did not want to make Revelation 22:18-19 about the whole Bible, the Modern Bible Creators have altered words in Revelation. So they cannot escape God's Judgment. I mean, the words in Revelation 22:18-19 cannot make any sense from the Modern Scholarship viewpoint because words are added and removed all the time with no problem. In Modern Textual Criticism: There is no real reverence for the Word of God in what it says precisely. How many NIVs do we have now? What edition number are they on in the Nestle and Aland? How many more are they going to create? It's ridiculous.

You listen to a preacher hold up the Bible and claim it is the Word of God when in reality it is not.
Your Bible says, “Holy Bible” and yet it is not holy and divine. It is a holey bible that if a book full of holes and errors instead.
So the very cover of your Bibles are lying to you.
 

Lanolin

Well-known member
Dec 15, 2018
23,460
7,178
113
I kind of lost his thread when some posters started posting what they thought I believed, and I'm like, no.
That is just a total lack of reading comprehension on your part.

Also too much study is wearying.

I am waiting for the Bible Code thread. Thats when you read the Bible backwards, put it in water, and out comes a revelation. Kind of like those word search puzzles combined with water colour markers.