The Error of KJV-Onlyism

Hebrews 5:8-9 says Jesus was being made perfect by His obedience. Obviously, Jesus was ALWAYS perfect, but the word "perfect" here is used in a different sense.

I have indeed heard, that because it had gone through 7 revisions, their thinking was that since 7 is a Biblical indication of “Completion, or perfection,” it was simply proof of their assertions.

I am in no way “anti” KJB. I love it, but it took a few decades before I realized there were other ways to clarify what has been handed down to us mere mortals to better understand who God is, what we can expect from Him, and what He expects from us.

No that is not common sense. You refuse to believe the same thing can be said different ways even though you are doing that very thing over and over for the last 56 pages yourself.

Your thinking goes along the lines of 'this piece of bread has mold on it, therefore I conclude that all bread everywhere has mold on it.

The KJV has errors, so it cannot be the word of God (by your reasoning). What do you not understand?

Already addressed. Bible versions don’t ‘do’ anything; people do things.

From the 1611 Preface to the Reader.

To all:

Rick Beckman showed some differences between the 1611 KJB edition and the 1769 KJB edition.
Please take note of the writing of his article, Rick was a believer. However, later in the comments section, he basically claimed that he no longer believes anymore in Christianity.

https://www.rickbeckman.org/log/more-changes-between-the-1611-and-the-1769-editions-of-the-kjv/

A poster named, “Jason” in the comments section below in the article gives some good apologetics in explaining these small differences between the KJB editions that Rick Beckman initially pointed out (Note: Do a "find a word on the page" type search for the verse numbers). This is why I believe believe Psalms 12:6 is also prophetic. It refers to the Word being so pure it was purified seven times, and yet it speaks ahead in time to the Bible being purified seven times because it is God's Holy Word.

God can still convey 100% truth in the purifications of His Word (even amongst subtle small differences) I would call these small differences as gnats and not like swallowing a camel in accepting all of the BIG false doctrines we find in Modern Bibles. I believe these subtle small changes between the first 6 KJB editions are where God employed advanced revelation. We see in Jeremiah God editing His own Word by telling Jeremiah to "add many like words" to the copy of the previous scroll that was destroyed in the fire by the King. But the seventh purification (the 7 Major KJB edition) would NOT convey any advanced revelation. The seventh purification would be the final settled KJB edition that would perfectly convey the same meaning of what was in the originals. I and other KJB believers believe this seventh purification (or 7th KJB Edition) to be the Pure Cambridge Edition (circa. early 1900). 1 John 5:8 is one quick way to know that the Pure Cambridge Edition reading is superior to the Authorized Version (i.e., the 1769 Blayney Oxford KJB - with the Apocrypha removed in 1885). 1 John 5:8 in the Pure Cambridge makes it clearer that this is man's testimony with the lowercase "s" involving the word "spirit." 1 John 5:7 is the witness of God in Heaven. 1 John 5:8 is the witness of man on the Earth. 1 John 5:9 says that the witness of God is greater.

Anyway, Textual Criticism is what led to Rick Beckman losing his faith, like many other Bible college students.
Bart Erhman is another example of this, as well.
One either believes God's Word by faith, or they don't believe it.
It's just that simple. Faith comes by hearing and hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17).
We walk by faith and not by sight (Hebrews 11:1).

I will try to explain more in my next post.

God’s Word Purified Seven Times:

If you knew anything about the printing process back in the old days before they perfected it, you would understand that printing errors was a common thing in many books (Especially larger ones like the Bible). Book authors’ complaints to the printers was a common thing. Printing back in the early days was a messy and difficult process that they could not master; Especially for larger works until one day the technology was perfected. Also, there were updates in spellings, and font changes, as well. But those are not changes to what the words say. Yes, there were updates in various editions, but this was to get back to the handwritten master copy, and even those who made corrections would make mistakes sometimes themselves. So that is why you will see subtle differences in wording for certain verses between the KJB editions. But God is sovereign over His Word. I believe that God is in control of the outcome of the casting of lots (See: Proverbs 16:33). So then if there was a printing error, God would be in control of that if it was His Word that He wanted the people to have.

In addition, more importantly, Psalms 12:6 refers to the words of the Lord being purified seven times, I believe this is also a prophetic verse and it prophetically refers to the 7 Major KJB editions God chose involving the Bible.

So any small differences between the MAJOR six editions (due to printing errors) would be true. One purification was the removal of the Apocrypha in 1885 in the 1769 Blayney Oxford Edition by the Church of England. While the Apocrypha was never considered Scripture by true Christians, I believe it was included as a witnessing tool to reach Catholics because of the times they lived in. In other words, we could point out inconsistencies in their Apocryphal books in comparison to the Old and New Testaments.

As I mentioned before, we learn in Jeremiah that God can edit His own Word. When the King cut up and burned the scroll in the fire, God told Jeremiah to make another scroll and add many like words to it. Granted, there are things that needed to be filtered out of the first KJB 1611 edition like the Apocrypha, the marginal notes, the Greek pagan pictures, and stuff. I believe it was not until the Pure Cambridge Edition (circa early 1900) when the printing process and standardization of spelling and grammar whereby we had a Word that was finally purified the seventh time.

Here is….


Others like Matthew Verschuur at BibleProtector.com, and John M Asquith at PureCambridgeText.com have different lists.

Bible Protector’s List of the Seven Purifications in Psalms 12:6.



PureCambridgeText.com website offers a different list of the seven purified KJBs, and he offers some great reasons why, although I do not agree entirely with his list.

1. The 1629 Cambridge
2. The 1638 Cambridge (authored by the King).
3. The Paris 1762 Cambridge
4. The Blayney 1769 Oxford
5. The Scrivener 1873 Cambridge Paragraph
6. The Pure Cambridge (A.W. Pollard) (circa 1914-1918)
7. The Updated Public Based Pure Cambridge (used between the 1920s and 1985).

The changes to actual words and their meaning are very minute. But again, this was the fixing of printing errors and the mistakes made by some of the editor’s corrections on certain editions. This is why we see that the words were different. But God is in control and He can convey truth despite printing errors and the imperfections of men. The testimony of the KJB itself is a book unlike any other book on the planet. It is a holy and special book unlike any other.

Have faith in God’s Word the Bible!
It will change your life unlike any other book.


Side Note:

@GRACE_ambassador

I think this post might interest you.

May God bless you.

"Deal with it." ???

Yes - that comes straight from the KJV.

It's just another one of their logical fallacies that they use to support its exclusive use. I grew up with it, but prefer others since I don't speak "Elizabethan."

We see that Samuel and his men prophesied against their own wills.
So God can move in men despite what they desire to do.
John the Baptist said he was not Elijah and he later questioned if He was the Messiah.
Jesus said John was Elijah (i.e., he came in the spirit of Elijah), and we know John the Baptist had correctly said that Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. No doubt John said this by the Holy Spirit. So men can sometimes move in God and other times they may say things that are not in line with God’s thinking. Remember, when Jesus told Peter, “Get behind me, Satan”?
But that does not mean Peter did not correctly commune with God at other times. Peter said that Jesus is the Son of God. This was revealed to him by the Father. So the work the KJB translators did was guided by God but that does not mean everything else that they thought, said, and did later was guided by God. This is why the KJB marginal notes are not of any concern, either.

My statement is the exact opposite. If this piece of bread has mold on it, then don't eat it. If this particular version contains an untruth, then it is not the word of God.

To you, the KJV is not the word of God because it contains errors. That's fine. You're allowed to have such opinion. As long as you believe that all other versions are not the word of God, unless there is a version that is without error.

Thanks So Much!:

Looking forward to meeting you, After meeting
The Lord Jesus, In God's Great GloryLand! ♫ 😇 ↑

Thank you for the response but of course, I just gave 'proof' that’s all you need. Yes, I know Galatian 3:1 of which I haven’t given that as an example and I too believe that many modern English Bibles out there use unfamiliar, archaic, outdated words as well. The fact is not KJB alone that uses archaism and that claims to devalue KJB are certainly false. Yes, I am not questioning sorcery as used in my example to demerit modern versions rather the key to understanding 'bewitched' is from that word which eventually many modern versions failed in this particular passage though they got one right in Galatians 3.

I could no longer respond to your other remarks, that’s yours but it is great to know you grew up with the KJ.

Meant to say…. John the Baptist questioned at one point Jesus was the messiah.

No. I disagree. It's a figure of speech for how the text was changed or written differently by translators or copyists or those seeking to corrupt the Word. Just research more about this. You are taking a figure of speech and making it literal.

No there is no of course. Who are you that we should take whatever you say as proof?

Hysterically funny that you think that, while actual experts do not agree with you.

Actually you did question the wording in that verse from Acts and I demonstrated from other translations that you were under the false assumption that your "proof' was gold...sorry but it's not even rust.

My response that I am referring to is post # 1096 and includes your original post I was responding to

The only people here devaluating the KJ, are you and several others with comments that illustrate you believe your opinions are superior to actual linguists and offer as proof whatever you say. Do you have a clue how ridiculous that sounds?

Thankfully, you are not the authority or the judge of what Christians study, read and gather from any Bible they choose to have in hand...with a few exceptions of course.

Because you can't with any hint of honesty do so. Thank you

Oh did you change how you think? I am not actually discussing bread....

smh