The Error of KJV-Onlyism

I already pointed out that the doctrine of the divine preservation of Scripture was thoroughly undermined. How? We were told to believe that only in the late 19th century was the true Word of God discovered in a handful of corrupt manuscripts (Aleph, A, B, C, D, and E). That was a blatant lie therefore an elaborate theory was cooked up to support it. So how did God preserve His Word? Through faithful copying by scribes and monks. Who corrupted the Word? It was the Gnostics who did so. So now Christians are using bibles based on Gnostic corruptions. I will give you just one example, because it will cause you (and others) to search for all the other corruptions.

JOHN 6:69 ALTERED AND CORRUPTED
As an example of how doctrine can be changed, we take John 6:69 and analyze the changes made to it: “And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God”, has been changed to “And we have believed and have known that thou art the Holy One of God” (Nestle, RSV, NEB, JB, NAS, NIV). Here's how your favorite NASB puts it: And we have already believed and have come to know that You are the Holy One of God.”

(a) “we believe” changed to “we have believed” – by putting this in the past tense, it implies that this believing is not a continuous and continuing faith and trust, but something that occurred in the past;

(b) “and are sure” vs “and have know” are two different things. To know something does not necessarily mean to be sure of something, but Peter stated on behalf of himself and the apostles that they were sure, they were certain, they were positive, they were unshakeably convinced;

(c) “that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God” is an unequivocal declaration of the Deity (Godhead) and eternal Sonship of Jesus the Messiah. Christ is called “the Holy One of Israel” or “the Holy One” consistently throughout Scripture. However, “that thou art the Holy One of God” was an expression used only by unholy demons when fearfully addressing Christ with full knowledge of their judgment and doom (Mk. 1:24; Lk. 4:34), and not once do we find the apostles addressing Christ in this manner. Thus the words of demons have been put into the mouth of Peter, and there is a huge difference between the two statements. Therefore several Bible doctrines have been changed very seriously through these few alterations. When this is repeated over and over again throughout the Scriptures, we can be sure that Satan is behind these changes.

And that justifies its use? Are you serious? The preaching of the cross correspond to "we preach Christ and Him crucified". The NASB is simply another corrupt modern version. Check out its Preface. This translation has had four revisions since it was published in 1971. Yet it was touted as the best and most accurate translation right at the beginning. And one does not revise something that is "near perfect".

3. No factual arguments have been made against the KJV.

4. There can be only one true version of God's word, or none.

God is not the author of confusion.

5. Multiple versions has caused confusion and dissension among the brethren

and disbelief among non-believers.

6. Greek text? Where? Do we have the original Greek text? Nope.

7. God has always preserved his word throughout the course of human history. He made it available completed in one book in the KJV.

8. God foresaw the explosion of the English language and the boldness and courage of those who would use his word to evangelize the world.

To me it just seems NASB vs KJV is more of an argument between two countries, USA (NASB) and England (KJV) since USAs language American english is so very different from the way Anglos speak.

The KJV bible was brought over from Britain and Americans have long wanted to disassociate themselves from the British monarchy and church of England, worshipping how they want to worship and not under any King or Queen. Thats why they prepared newer translations, like NASB and NIV. But they didnt use the manuscripts that the KJV used, they used the discarded ones that were a bit different from the ones the KJV used. They had copying errors and things that didnt match up, while the KJV used the majority text.

I do get confused when people use and quote from the NASB because it is quite different from KJV, and it ends up in needless arguments. NIV is more like a storybook/novel version of the Bible, and I struggled with it. It wasnt inspired for me.

I think its great that the Bible has been translated and preserved to this day from the original tongues and has the power to guide us, scripture is precious but certainly English isnt the ONLY language in the world but seeing it as one of the most mongrel adaptable languages and widespread it does have an impact when it is carefully translated from the original tongues rather than carelessly done. Otherwise its more a game of chinese whispers of a translation of a translation of a translation.

And why? Thanks

Do you think the king James version has errors in it? If so what ones, and if not why change to a version that clearly does

Americans may have had a very strong desire to disassociate themselves from the British crown in the early 1800s but most Americans don't even think about that much right now. America is the global superpower. Americans tend not to be self conscious when we think of Britain, and maybe tomanticize British history, like the accents from there, etc.

Most Americans aren't that familiar with vocabulary differences between rge two places. I would imagine the Brits are more eager to assert their place in the world when it comes to the English language than Americans are.

And the language spoken at the time of King James is just as much at the root of American English and Australian English and New Zealand English as it is at the root of British English.

And the NASB is not that popular of a translation these days.

The NIV, ESV, NLTV, and NKJV all outsell it. I think the NIV has a UK version, preserving the u in armour and such.

This is silly fearmongering based on circular reasoning and narrow-minded thinking. Frankly, I think you give far more credit to the devil on his ability to corrupt God's word than you do to God to preserve it. "Huge difference? No. "The words of demons"? Really? Is your confidence in God so small? It looks like you aren't sure who's in charge.

You are claiming that someone reading a modern translation will come to a fundamentally different conclusion about Jesus' identity than someone reading the KJV. I don't buy it. Just because you use "know" and "sure" differently doesn't mean everyone does. "We have come to believe and to know" looks like "sure" to me.

Most people don't normally dig into the precise meaning and usage of words; they get the gist of the statement and move one. Preachers preparing for a sermon and regular people who are studying (as opposed to simply reading) may do such research. They will look at other passages that address Jesus' identity and not make any conclusions on a single verse. Does "Holy One of God" mean something other than "Christ"? No.

Though many claims of "corrupted doctrines" have been made, I haven't seen anything in any KJV-only source that actually supports such a claim. In order to make a reasonable comparison, you need to stop looking at individual verses in isolation. You need to look at the entire translation and see whether a whole doctrine is undermined, changed, or removed. You would also need to dispense with the biased fearmongering comments like you used above. Just present the evidence and your calm, rational, and brief commentary.

I don't think you're prepared to do that. I don't think you would like the conclusions. I think you'd rather rant about the alleged danger.

1 Corinthians 1:18, If a new believer in Christ uses the NASB, he might be confused over the Doctrine of Eternal Security. The NASB says to us who are “being saved” require fulfillment for completeness. Yes, I am not saying we cannot be saved using modern Versions but a new believer in Christ might be confused on this aid doctrine. God bless.

King James Bible
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

New American Standard Bible
For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

I believe YHWH not Jesus, wakes those dying.

Faith in the word of God. Faith in God's righteousness which is by faith of Jesus Christ.

This topic has caused me to wonder along the way of the development of the English language that, by the time Elizabethan came into being some English sovereign had a lisp so the commoners had to adopt it as "proper" English, so that nobody would make fun of it.

1 Corinthians 1:18, If a new believer in Christ uses the NASB, he might be confused over the Doctrine of Eternal Security. The NASB says to us who are “being saved” require fulfillment for completeness. Yes, I am not saying we cannot be saved using modern Versions but a new believer in Christ might be confused on this aid doctrine. God bless.

King James Bible
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

New American Standard Bible
For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.