The Error of KJV-Onlyism

[Bible_Highlighter]

King James aficionados...

Since the original King James Bible has undergone two major revisions and quite a few minor revisions, which version of the King James Bible is the inerrant word of God???

The Pure Cambridge KJV Edition (circa. 1900).
There are several reasons for this but I am not sure you would be open to hearing them.
If you are interested, I can explain it if you like.

In other words, how many mistakes did the translators make???

If you are referring to their work while under the inspiration of God, the answer would be... none.
If you are referring to their work while they were not given illumination by God…. the number is simply impossible to find out.
I believe God employed Selective Temporal Inspiration to give the KJV translators understanding. Meaning, the KJV translators sometimes operated on their own (Whereby you might see corrections, thoughts expressed in the KJV preface, marginal notes, etc.) and other times God moved at the right moments in time to illuminate their understanding and ensure that the right words were chosen in the end for the translation. Peter said that Jesus was the Son of God, and Jesus said that the Father revealed this truth to him. Yet, at another point in time, Jesus called Peter as Satan because he tried to prevent Jesus in going to the cross. So sometimes a believer can operate by God, and other times this is not the case. So while the KJV translators made mistakes while they were not under the illumination of the Holy Spirit, that does not mean this was the case when God gave them the understanding and helped them to choose the right words that end up in the final handwritten master copy.

 

[jamessb]

Why does anyone in their right mind believe that a translation created over 400 years ago (and has been modified since) is the only "true" Word of God?

Does any sane person really think that once the KJV was created, that God said "that's it. I have created a perfect Bible. All others are not accurate".

What kind of God would play games like that? Why didn't He create a single set of infallible source documents? Why did He give the KJV translators perfect understanding and not give it to anyone else? What about translations in other languages that are not duplicates of the KJV? Are they error-filled?

It is completely beyond my understanding how seemingly-normal people can believe that the KJV is the only true word of God. They make up all kinds of excuses and create all kinds of myths, none of which stand up to even reasonable scrutiny.

 

[jamessb]

Alright... here is the truth!

There has been only one perfect "word of God". Do you know what that is? Hint: it is not, and never was, the King James Bible.

Give up? IT WAS THE STONE TABLETS INSCRIBED BY GOD HIMSELF!!!

There is no translation of the Bible that is "the perfect word of God".

Proof: all English translations are derived from two sources: a) earlier English translations and b) source documents, none of which are the originals. In reality, the source documents differ because they are all copies hand-written by fallible human beings. It is tragic that some misguided human beings, particularly the KJVO people, believe that their one translation is the inerrant Word of God.

Think about it! How you ever known anything to be that absurd? An English translation, based on a) imperfect earlier English translations and b) an incomplete set of copies of copies, themselves imperfect copies of the original source documents, cannot be perfectly accurate. => It is IMPOSSIBLE for any translation to be the true, accurate, inerrant word of God! <= (READ THAT SENTENCE AGAIN!)

Frankly, I am tired of indulging people who believe that their preferred translation is inerrant. They may have convinced themselves of that, but they are wrong. Again, it is impossible for any translation to be the perfect word of God!

Choose the translation (or translations) that gives you the clearest understanding of God's message. Do not take the word of any fallible human being. Let the Holy Spirit enlighten you about what God wants you to know.

 

[fredoheaven]

2 Tim 3:16

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

What is scripture? The OED defines this as:

scripture, n.

The sacred writings of Christianity contained in the Bible; the Old and New Testaments; the Bible. Also… In singular, without the or other determiner.

https://www.oed.com/search/dictionary/?scope=Entries&q=scripture

This is the widely accepted English definition of scripture, hence, I believe with all my heart the KJB is an English scripture. To deny this is to deny reality. The text states that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God…” So simply, then the KJB English text ”is given by inspiration…” and what does this mean? That KJB is perfect, pure words of God. It is inerrant as it claims. As per the admission of the opponent of the KJB, all English Bibles have their errors. So you don’t have to blame us because we have got one “a more sure word…” that makes a difference. Inspiration, Preservation, and Translation are “three-fold cords” they are binding together to make a strong witness. “All scripture is…” not ‘was’ given by inspiration. If it is ‘was’ this only refers to the original, however, the context of Paul are copy of the Old Testament and probably a translation. So, simple as that the Bible declares the inspiration of a Translation. The Bible demonstrates in many ways, that translation is the words of God. This of course only be accepted if you operate in faith, a belief that God will preserve his words through translation. Exactly, not every other English of today’s translation fits what Paul says. They have been corrupted in many ways as it had been expressly admitted by those who cannot produce it. The point is do you have faith in God to preserve his inerrant words. If you answered it YES, where? I believe I found it in KJB, so what about you? Can you tell it?

 

[fredoheaven]

Alright... here is the truth!

There has been only one perfect "word of God". Do you know what that is? Hint: it is not, and never was, the King James Bible.

Give up? IT WAS THE STONE TABLETS INSCRIBED BY GOD HIMSELF!!!

There is no translation of the Bible that is "the perfect word of God".

Proof: all English translations are derived from two sources: a) earlier English translations and b) source documents, none of which are the originals. In reality, the source documents differ because they are all copies hand-written by fallible human beings. It is tragic that some misguided human beings, particularly the KJVO people, believe that their one translation is the inerrant Word of God.

Think about it! How you ever known anything to be that absurd? An English translation, based on a) imperfect earlier English translations and b) an incomplete set of copies of copies, themselves imperfect copies of the original source documents, cannot be perfectly accurate. => It is IMPOSSIBLE for any translation to be the true, accurate, inerrant word of God! <= (READ THAT SENTENCE AGAIN!)

Frankly, I am tired of indulging people who believe that their preferred translation is inerrant. They may have convinced themselves of that, but they are wrong. Again, it is impossible for any translation to be the perfect word of God!

Choose the translation (or translations) that gives you the clearest understanding of God's message. Do not take the word of any fallible human being. Let the Holy Spirit enlighten you about what God wants you to know.

The stone tablets written in the finger of God were broken by Moses Exodus Exodus 32:19 and were rewritten by the same finger of God Exodus 34:1. What's up? The original tablets were lost. Then we got original No. 2 written on the finger of God. When the New Testament is either cited or quoted them, they were written in Greek, which constitutes translation and it is ALL scripture given by inspiration of God.

 

[jamessb]

2 Tim 3:16

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

What is scripture? The OED defines this as:

scripture, n.

The sacred writings of Christianity contained in the Bible; the Old and New Testaments; the Bible. Also… In singular, without the or other determiner.

https://www.oed.com/search/dictionary/?scope=Entries&q=scripture

This is the widely accepted English definition of scripture, hence, I believe with all my heart the KJB is an English scripture. To deny this is to deny reality. The text states that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God…” So simply, then the KJB English text ”is given by inspiration…” and what does this mean? That KJB is perfect, pure words of God. It is inerrant as it claims. As per the admission of the opponent of the KJB, all English Bibles have their errors. So you don’t have to blame us because we have got one “a more sure word…” that makes a difference. Inspiration, Preservation, and Translation are “three-fold cords” they are binding together to make a strong witness. “All scripture is…” not ‘was’ given by inspiration. If it is ‘was’ this only refers to the original, however, the context of Paul are copy of the Old Testament and probably a translation. So, simple as that the Bible declares the inspiration of a Translation. The Bible demonstrates in many ways, that translation is the words of God. This of course only be accepted if you operate in faith, a belief that God will preserve his words through translation. Exactly, not every other English of today’s translation fits what Paul says. They have been corrupted in many ways as it had been expressly admitted by those who cannot produce it. The point is do you have faith in God to preserve his inerrant words. If you answered it YES, where? I believe I found it in KJB, so what about you? Can you tell it?

Can you spell "rationalization"? (Oh darn, I just showed you how!)

Your "logic" is full of holes...

a) Of course the KJV is an English scripture. Nobody says that it isn't. But, it's just one of many English scriptures.
b) The text states that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God", but that is not limited to the KJV. Every complete published Bible is scripture. It is not limited to one translation.
c) Your extending this to mean that the KJB English text ”is given by inspiration…”and is perfect, pure words of God" is nonsense!. It is not inerrant. It has flaws, as does every translation. I could say that the NIV ”is given by inspiration…”and is perfect, pure words of God" with just as much validity. You cannot prove that the KJV is the pure, perfect words of God! It is not inerrant! (BTW, why has it been REVISED over time???) Which version of the King James Bible is inerrant in your opinion?
d) "All English Bibles have their errors" is a true statement. That includes the KJV. Saying that you KJV people have got “a more sure word…” is nonsense!
e) Claiming that they -- all other translations -- have been corrupted in many ways is total nonsense! There is no such thing as a perfect translation! That includes the imperfect KJV.
f) If you are happy with the KJV, fine. Go ahead and use it. But it is not a perfect translation. It is one of many English translations and, in my opinion, not the best.

Others, including myself, prefer other translations, which I and others consider superior to the KJV. Of course, none of us will claim that our preferred translation is perfect, and neither should you!

 

[jamessb]

2 Tim 3:16

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

What is scripture? The OED defines this as:

scripture, n.

The sacred writings of Christianity contained in the Bible; the Old and New Testaments; the Bible. Also… In singular, without the or other determiner.

https://www.oed.com/search/dictionary/?scope=Entries&q=scripture

This is the widely accepted English definition of scripture, hence, I believe with all my heart the KJB is an English scripture. To deny this is to deny reality. The text states that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God…” So simply, then the KJB English text ”is given by inspiration…” and what does this mean? That KJB is perfect, pure words of God. It is inerrant as it claims. As per the admission of the opponent of the KJB, all English Bibles have their errors. So you don’t have to blame us because we have got one “a more sure word…” that makes a difference. Inspiration, Preservation, and Translation are “three-fold cords” they are binding together to make a strong witness. “All scripture is…” not ‘was’ given by inspiration. If it is ‘was’ this only refers to the original, however, the context of Paul are copy of the Old Testament and probably a translation. So, simple as that the Bible declares the inspiration of a Translation. The Bible demonstrates in many ways, that translation is the words of God. This of course only be accepted if you operate in faith, a belief that God will preserve his words through translation. Exactly, not every other English of today’s translation fits what Paul says. They have been corrupted in many ways as it had been expressly admitted by those who cannot produce it. The point is do you have faith in God to preserve his inerrant words. If you answered it YES, where? I believe I found it in KJB, so what about you? Can you tell it?

You quote 2 Timothy 3:16 from the KJV. Why are there words in italics? Because those words are added; they are not in the original. Now you have learned something!

 

[jamessb]

The stone tablets written in the finger of God were broken by Moses Exodus Exodus 32:19 and were rewritten by the same finger of God Exodus 34:1. What's up? The original tablets were lost. Then we got original No. 2 written on the finger of God. When the New Testament is either cited or quoted them, they were written in Greek, which constitutes translation and it is ALL scripture given by inspiration of God.

Are you okay??? a) the stone tablets were written by God (in ancient Hebrew). b) the New Testament is written in Greek which is a different language than ancient Hebrew. So they are a translation, meaning they are not identical to the Hebrew!

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God. The Hebrew is given by inspiration of God. The Aramaic is given by inspiration of God. The Koine Greek is given by inspiration of God. BUT THEY ARE DIFFERENT!!! When the New Testament cites the Old Testament, it is different wording. (THINK ABOUT THAT!!!) The New Testament quotes are from the Septuagint, which is a translation of the Hebrew. So which one, according to you, has the correct words of God???

See, your logic "falls flat on its face". You are trying to prove that the King James translation is the perfect, inerrant words of God. I've got new for you: it isn't!!!

 

[fredoheaven]

You quote 2 Timothy 3:16 from the KJV. Why are there words in italics? Because those words are added; they are not in the original. Now you have learned something!

Umm, you needs to prove they were not in the original. Give your best shot man!

 

[fredoheaven]

Are you okay??? a) the stone tablets were written by God (in ancient Hebrew). b) the New Testament is written in Greek which is a different language than ancient Hebrew. So they are a translation, meaning they are not identical to the Hebrew!

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God. The Hebrew is given by inspiration of God. The Aramaic is given by inspiration of God. The Koine Greek is given by inspiration of God. BUT THEY ARE DIFFERENT!!! When the New Testament cites the Old Testament, it is different wording. (THINK ABOUT THAT!!!) The New Testament quotes are from the Septuagint, which is a translation of the Hebrew. So which one, according to you, has the correct words of God???

See, your logic "falls flat on its face". You are trying to prove that the King James translation is the perfect, inerrant words of God. I've got new for you: it isn't!!!

So you see, the need to to translate. It might your confuse!

 

[fredoheaven]

Can you spell "rationalization"? (Oh darn, I just showed you how!)

Your "logic" is full of holes...

a) Of course the KJV is an English scripture. Nobody says that it isn't. But, it's just one of many English scriptures.
b) The text states that “All scripture is given by inspiration of God", but that is not limited to the KJV. Every complete published Bible is scripture. It is not limited to one translation.
c) Your extending this to mean that the KJB English text ”is given by inspiration…”and is perfect, pure words of God" is nonsense!. It is not inerrant. It has flaws, as does every translation. I could say that the NIV ”is given by inspiration…”and is perfect, pure words of God" with just as much validity. You cannot prove that the KJV is the pure, perfect words of God! It is not inerrant! (BTW, why has it been REVISED over time???) Which version of the King James Bible is inerrant in your opinion?
d) "All English Bibles have their errors" is a true statement. That includes the KJV. Saying that you KJV people have got “a more sure word…” is nonsense!
e) Claiming that they -- all other translations -- have been corrupted in many ways is total nonsense! There is no such thing as a perfect translation! That includes the imperfect KJV.
f) If you are happy with the KJV, fine. Go ahead and use it. But it is not a perfect translation. It is one of many English translations and, in my opinion, not the best.

Others, including myself, prefer other translations, which I and others consider superior to the KJV. Of course, none of us will claim that our preferred translation is perfect, and neither should you!

Please present scripture, you not put any scripture to your post. So you are allowing the logic of men. Paul says " he reasoned out of scripture", the LORD say " cone, let us reason together" Of course, my logic start with the logic of faith which I believe the Bible is given by inspiration. Now what Bible is it? You said all Englisg Bible is in error in it, so simple as that, you have none, and please don't promote that to the one who believes there is!

 

[jamessb]

Umm, you needs to prove they were not in the original. Give your best shot man!

"you needs?"

I gave you the reasons for the italics, but you don't accept it. Why do you think that those words are italicized?

 

[jamessb]

So you see, the need to to translate. It might your confuse!

"So you see, So you see, the need to to translate. It might your confuse!

I am going to try to say this gently... "So you see, the need to to translate. It might your confuse!" is poor English. How then can you understand the King James translation?

 

[jamessb]

Please present scripture, you not put any scripture to your post. So you are allowing the logic of men. Paul says " he reasoned out of scripture", the LORD say " cone, let us reason together" Of course, my logic start with the logic of faith which I believe the Bible is given by inspiration. Now what Bible is it? You said all Englisg Bible is in error in it, so simple as that, you have none, and please don't promote that to the one who believes there is!

Read my post above, which applies to this post of your also.

BTW, I never said anything like this: You said all Englisg Bible is in error in it, so simple as that, you have none.

a) I never said that all English bibles are in error. What I did say is that it is impossible to perfectly translate the languages of the Bible into English. If you knew anything about those languages and/or translation, you would know that.
b) I have none??? Of what?

Again, I see a great contrast between your knowledge of English (judging by what you write) and the difficult-to-understand 17th Century Englyshe of the King James translation.

Why don't you use a translation commensurate with your ability to read English?

 

[jamessb]

Look, it's this simple: the King James Bible, a.k.a., the Authorized Version, is one English translation of many. There were English translations before the KJV and there were/are translations after the KJV. Each translation attempts to communicate God's message to humanity. They vary across the spectrum of very literal (word-for-word) to paraphrase (rewording the texts for their ideas). There may be a few which are intentional distortions to fit false doctrine, but by far, most Bibles are sincere attempts to communicate God's words/thoughts to people in their language.

THERE IS NOTHING SPECIAL ABOUT THE KING JAMES TRANSLATION (A.K.A. THE AUTHORIZED VERSION). It was authorized by King James to be the official Bible of the Church of England, and just happened to justify his rule. (Quite a few people objected to it for that reason, but that is another topic.) There are some people who claim that the KJV is a perfect Bible because God personally oversaw the work of the translators. Of course there is no evidence for this claim, but believe believe it because they want to believe that their preferred translation is perfect. It isn't! A simple proof is sufficient: the King James translation has undergone several revisions, so -- which one of the revisions is perfect?

It is absurd to think that God oversaw one single translation created over four centuries ago, and decided that He would never oversee any others. There have been a) discoveries of more (and older) source documents in the last 412 years and b) the art/science of textual criticism has advanced over the years. (Textual criticism is a branch of textual scholarship, philology, and literary criticism that is concerned with the identification of textual variants, or different versions, of either manuscripts or of printed books.)

Several facts must be clearly understood: 1) there is no single source document of either the Old Testament or the New Testament. There are multiple source documents, all of which are a) hand-written and b) incomplete. Additionally, and extremely important, there is no one-to-one correspondence between the ancient languages of the Bible source documents and the destination language, such as English. Translation is a difficult art/science, and translators try their best to communicate what the source documents say to the readers in their own language. Some translations try to communicate as well as they can the words of the (conflicting) source documents, while others try to convey the meaning of those same documents. (There is no right or wrong here; it is a decision made by the translation committees).

My advice to anyone choosing a translation for herself/himself is this: a) don't listen to what others tell you is the best translation!, b) read a translation with an open mind and let the Holy Spirit communicate to you what He clearly wants you to understand from your reading.

If you want my recommendation, I suggest the NRSVue Bible (New Revised Standard Version updated edition), the NIV (New International Version), or the NET (New English Translation). These are all excellent, well-respected translations created by teams of scholars to find the best balance between the wording of the (multiple) source documents and the meaning of the writings.

Don't take what I say as the best Bible for you and don't take anybody else's recommendation. Decide for yourself (asking for God's guidance when you make your choice). There is a Bible that is best suited to your faith and ability to understand God's message. YOU must make that choice for yourself!

 

[jamessb]

Please present scripture, you not put any scripture to your post. So you are allowing the logic of men. Paul says " he reasoned out of scripture", the LORD say " cone, let us reason together" Of course, my logic start with the logic of faith which I believe the Bible is given by inspiration. Now what Bible is it? You said all Englisg Bible is in error in it, so simple as that, you have none, and please don't promote that to the one who believes there is!

Read the post immediately above this for my thoughts.

If you believe that there is a perfect English Bible, I have news for you: there isn't!

P.S. The Lord never said " cone, let us reason together"!

 

[fredoheaven]

"you needs?"

I gave you the reasons for the italics, but you don't accept it. Why do you think that those words are italicized?

Vain babbling! You cannot prove it in the ORIGINAL you are saying. Your old mantra make no sense!

 

[fredoheaven]

Read my post above, which applies to this post of your also.

BTW, I never said anything like this: You said all Englisg Bible is in error in it, so simple as that, you have none.

a) I never said that all English bibles are in error. What I did say is that it is impossible to perfectly translate the languages of the Bible into English. If you knew anything about those languages and/or translation, you would know that.
b) I have none??? Of what?

Again, I see a great contrast between your knowledge of English (judging by what you write) and the difficult-to-understand 17th Century Englyshe of the King James translation.

Why don't you use a translation commensurate with your ability to read English?

Circular!
Isah 8:20

20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

 

[fredoheaven]

Read my post above, which applies to this post of your also.

BTW, I never said anything like this: You said all Englisg Bible is in error in it, so simple as that, you have none.

a) I never said that all English bibles are in error. What I did say is that it is impossible to perfectly translate the languages of the Bible into English. If you knew anything about those languages and/or translation, you would know that.
b) I have none??? Of what?

Again, I see a great contrast between your knowledge of English (judging by what you write) and the difficult-to-understand 17th Century Englyshe of the King James translation.

Why don't you use a translation commensurate with your ability to read English?

Bottomline: You have no perfect Bible, I do have!

 

[fredoheaven]

Read the post immediately above this for my thoughts.

If you believe that there is a perfect English Bible, I have news for you: there isn't!

P.S. The Lord never said " cone, let us reason together"!

Yes, I'm writing on my cellphone at that time. Yet the bottom line here is that you have no scripture reference while giving your conceited opinion. No evidences, I've found so far