The Error of KJV-Onlyism

The LSV follows the Masoretic and Textus Receptus.
Are you a Majority Text Proponent?
Do you see a problem with Westcott and Hort and their line of texts?
What is the influence of the LSV?
Do we see the hand of God upon it like we did in history with the KJB?
That’s also kind of the point here, as well.
The real Word of God would have passed the test of time and be used by the church.
If you look at the history of the KJB, you cannot ignore its unique history that was divine.
Well, you could if you simply do not want to see such a thing (of course).

I tried, go in peace.

Also, regardless of whether you favor this one translation as being representative of God’s Word, to ignore that most Modern Bibles follow the Westcott and Hort line of texts is to ignore the big pink elephant in the room. There are primarily two positions here. A Bible believer or a Bible corrector. Which one will you be in this life?

Ask yourself: How can the warning in Revelation 22:18-19 apply in your viewpoint?
God warns not to add or take away WORDS. WORDS and not thoughts or ideas or major doctrines.
There are serious consequences to messing with God’s words. So this means there has to be a perfect set of His words like the Bible, or at least a perfect Book of Revelation in order for such a warning to have any weight or threat. But in your view, these words must be whitewashed or go ignored. That’s what I see your belief as not aligning with what the Bible actually says. We also don’t see Textual Criticism in the Bible, either. It is unbiblical. This is just one of the many reasons why I believe in a perfect Word.

Changing Scripture now, are you?

Not a chance. I am not creating an update of the King James Bible or any Bible whereby it would change any words. The word "confound" is the correct translation of the preserved words of God. I believe "confound" has the meaning of "confused" and that is my interpretation of such a word. It does not change the word. It is within the perimeters of the definition of that word.

I see a difference between following Modern Translations as one’s authority vs. using them to help flesh out what the King James Bible says at times. I believe the KJB is perfect and without error. The KJB is my core foundational text. I obviously would not recommend a person to read Modern Bibles if they do not have a final Word of authority because they teach false doctrines. I believe Modern Bibles can only be used if one has a final Word of authority like the KJB. If somebody does not see this truth, I try to work with them where they are at. But yes. I agree that God will judge those who lead others into believing wrong bibles fully which could lead them to potentially believe false doctrines found within them. No doubt about it.

Technically, there can only be one Word of God and not many. The King James Bible is that Word for us today.

Did I say anything about heretics? No. You can't even read my posts correctly... why would I think you can read Scripture correctly?

Says you.

None of the words mean anything if Jesus did not die on the cross for our sin, and rise again from the grave.

I don't understand it either. I guess the rest of the none English speaking world is lost without being able to read the KJV.
It's my personal opinion people are afraid of new better word-for-word translations because they would have to admit they might be wrong. For example, I don't understand how they will stick to "rightly divide" when that Greek word has nothing to do with division.

Again you have presented a common misunderstanding.

1. Until the late 19th century, translations in all other languages were still based upon the TRADITIONAL Greek text. They go all the way back to the 2nd century AD.
2. After modern bible versions began to appear the Trinitarian Bible Society began making all its foreign language translations out the the traditional Receive Text, not the King James Bible.
3. Since all translations based upon the traditional Greek text will resemble each other, no one who does not know English will be compelled to use the KJV.

mm I think English has a lot of compound words that Hebrew doesnt have. It would be very hard to have a word for word translation into English because English is such a polyglot langauge. What its great is word pictures, but the Hebrew idioms can get lost in it.

By rightly divide I guess its meaning 'dont butcher' the words. I am not sure what the Greek would be but English can have many many meanings for one word.

The english speaking world was lost when they didnt have a Bible in their own language that was widely available. It mean they couldnt discover the word for themselves and really had to guess at what God was really saying, or only get snippets at church.

I think we still do that to a certain extent, unless all of us learn Greek and Hebrew, and even those who DO know Greek and Hebrew can squabble about specific words.

Its interesting when learning a langage how specific accents or wrong pronounciation can distort a word. And in english, its the wrong spelling that can throw people.

But notice when you speak in tongues, you are speaking without having ever learned it and it just flows off your tongue flawlessly.

It would be interesting to have a Bible that each book was in a different langauge, sort of like a Gideons has John 3:16 in about twenty different lanagauges. You would have the Biblical rosetta stone then. Really the focus needs to be on translations that are NOT in english, because however well meaning, a NIV will not reach everyone who doesnt know english. Teaching english is hard enough for those who grew up with a different mother tongue and now we are back to comic book Bibles that have words and pictures. Many people can only read pictures, being basically illiterate or grown up with TV as part of their lives.

Most King James Bible believers do not believe that a person has to believe the King James Bible to be saved.
Now, that said, I believe a Modern Bible can lead a person astray in believing false doctrines because that is what they teach.
Textual Critics who make their own Bible translation are in danger with the Lord because they are adding and taking away from God's true words. So if you are creating a Modern Bible, I would say you are in trouble with the Lord. In other words, there has to be a perfect Word in order for God to give us a warning to not add or take away words from the prophecy of this book (Revelation 22:18-19). Even if you wanted this warning to be solely about the book of Revelation, it does not help you because Modern Bible creators have altered the book of Revelation, as well.

If you go back to my post here, you will see 25 changes in Modern Bibles by way of comparison to the King James Bible.
These changes are for the worse and not for the better. These are glaring problems that change doctrine and are big things to swallow (i.e., which would be like swallowing a camel). We are not talking about what may look like a minor supposed error in the KJV (straining at gnats), or a word being archaic in the King James Bible. There are serious problems in the Modern Bibles and thus it disqualifies them as being the true Word of God. God does not make mistakes. His promise to preserve His words perfectly is true (Psalms 12:6-7).

I have come up with 101 Reasons for the KJB in being the Pure Word of God. I also come up with 10 Main Categories that support the King James Bible is the Word for today (See here).

Most Modern Greek Theological Scholars do not even know how to order a pizza in Greek. So why would I trust your Greek?

Here is the difference of why the KJB is superior. A top Greek grammarian Professsor Georgios Babiniotis says there is a solecism in "the Greek grammar" if 1 John 5:7 is removed, as well. This professor lives in Greece, and he speaks the native language and is the former Minister of Education and Religious Affairs of Greece. See this video below to learn more.

The King James Bible has been translated into other languages.
Why not just make a translation of the KJB into a language that needs it instead?
The NIV and or other Modern Bibles teach false doctrines so bad it is sick.
Also, a multi language book would cause confusion. That would be 66 languages for each different book of the Bible.
But they need to hear the gospel. The gospel is best discovered in the gospel of John, 1 Corinthians 15, and the book of Acts.
Without the gospel, a random book of the Bible is not really going to help them.

Um, no, they don't. KJV-only types like to claim that modern translations "teach false doctrines" but in fact the translations don't do anything of the sort. I have never seen such a claim substantiated with a thorough examination of any modern translations; it's usually, "this verse is different therefore this translation removes this doctrine" which is strawman hogwash.

Interlinear Bibles are quite common, and typically help the reader to understand rather than causing confusion.

Where did you get that silly idea?

I agree that there should be no adding or taking away and that warning applies to all scripture. I agree a lot of the really modern translations can and do lead to believing false doctrines and I do not recommend them. I don't trust post KJV translations that are not word-for-word. One can read the KJV only and believe a false doctrine as well. It's been happing since 1611.


As time permits I will check this out.



I really like the KJV but my problem with it is we do not speak the kings English and it can be hard to understand. Like the example I used, "rightly divide" is not a phrase we use or understand. It's not about dividing but there are some who want to believe that and have created a false doctrine using that as one of their "pillar" verses.
That phrase is about accuracy and that is what the newer translations use.

You're right, I don't trust my Greek either and I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer. I don't make a habit of squabbling over words but if necessary I go to BibleHub to get a better understanding.
orthotomeó: to cut straight
Original Word: ὀρθοτομέω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: orthotomeó
Phonetic Spelling: (or-thot-om-eh'-o)
Definition: to cut straight
Usage: I cut straight; met: I handle correctly, teach rightly.

Who do we trust? You pick about any topic and the "experts" cannot agree. We are missing more that a verse here or there. We are missing whole letters. The two I know are to Laodicea and one to the Corinthians. I fully trust God has given us enough of His word to understand the truth. It's my experience people usually find what they're looking for, no matter the translation.

That is hardly the issue. The Jehovah's Witnesses (at one time) and the Mormons use the KJV and are cults. But using a CORRUPT modern translation is all about rejecting the pure Word of God and replacing it with something false.

I have already mentioned that Frank Logsdon -- who was on the translation committee of the NASB -- suddenly realized that he was IN BIG TROUBLE with God (shortly after the NASB was published). So he published a REFUTATION of the NASB and gave excellent reasons for his decision.

Thanks. I'll have to look into Frank.

It’s not a matter if Modern Bibles lead to false doctrines (Which implies it may be a problem with the reader and not Modern Bibles themselves), but it has to do with the fact that Modern Bibles contain false doctrines within them. That’s the real issue or problem here. The King James Bible can be misunderstood because of its archaic wording, but that is why a person is to study to shew themselves approved unto God as 2 Timothy 2:15 says. 2 Timothy 2:15 is altered in Modern Bibles. No longer are they aware that they must STUDY God’s Word to be approved unto God. This truth in 2 Timothy 2:15 is removed in Modern Bibles. For God’s people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Yes, a person who reads the KJV can hold to false doctrines, but it is not the fault of the King James Bible but the individual. The King James Bible does not teach false doctrines like Modern Bibles do.

1. Jesus spoke in parables, and not everyone received the real meaning (before the cross).
2. Jesus spoke of His resurrection before the cross with His disciples and they did not understand what He meant.
3. Jesus spoke words on the cross that his listeners did not understand.
4. Peter says Paul’s writings are hard to understand. This gives rise to others twisting his words as they do other Scriptures to their own destruction.

You employ Greek which is far more impossible to know fully because nobody is alive today from Bible times to teach you Biblical Hebrew, or Aramaic. and Greek. You would only be guessing at best based on recent dictionaries created by the Bible corrupters or the Westcott and Hort movement started in 1881.

I would say it is far easier to understand 1600s English than dead languages like Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek.
You don’t have Moses to correct your Hebrew, or an apostle Paul to correct your Greek.
But we do have older dictionaries and things like a Defined King James Bible to help with understanding the KJV.
Yes, I even use Modern Bibles to help flesh out what the King James Bible says at times, but I do not need to do that for every word if one has to go to the original languages to get the real meaning of all the English words in a Bible.

I don’t have a problem with doing the occasional Hebrew, and Greek word study if God leads me to do so (Which is rare).
But the problem is when we believe we must correct the Bible in English by original languages we do not really know.

The problem in seeing errors in the Bible is that one is falling under the warning as mentioned in Revelation 22:18-19.
The moment we start to see errors in the Bible (When there may not be any), is to chop and butcher God’s Word.

This is a huge problem. Because if there is one word that is an error in the Bible, there might as well be 10,000 of them, or 783,137.
For if one does not have a perfect Bible, then how does one truly know which words are true or false?
The Bible speaks of itself in that its words are perfect, and that they would be preserved.
The Scriptures are actually called holy (2 Timothy 2:15). This means that the Bible is of divine origin.
Meaning, God did not make a mistake when He preserved His word for us today.
Can I prove the Bible is Holy (divine) and not holey (a book full of holes or errors) as many believe today?
Yes, I can. I would check out videos on the mathematical miracles contained within the KJB.
See this video here to start.


We read in the story of Solomon about how he was to DIVIDE a baby to resolve the TRUTH of the matter (1 Kings 3:16-28).
The word of God is like a two-edged sword that DIVIDES soul and spirit (Hebrews 4:12).
The Old and New Testament is divided in our Bible.
We must rightly divide between the Old Covenant and the New Covenant.
We must rightly divide between God’s grace and Sanctification.
We must rightly divide between the milk of the Word vs. the meat of the Word.

God wants us to divide.

Jesus (GOD) said,


God divides the light from the darkness even at the beginning (Genesis 1:4).

Not all NIVs say the same thing.
One earlier NIV says that Jesus healed the leper with kindness.
The current NIV says that Jesus healed the leper with indignation (anger) (Mark 1:41).
This is a change for the worse and not for the better all because they look at the faith by Science (sight).
Not all Modern Bibles say the same thing.
This breeds confusion.
If you were to buy a house, and they gave you ten different conflicting contracts, would you want to buy it?
If somebody wanted you to fly in a plane that was built on conflicting blue prints, would you want to fly in it?
So then why would you want to use multiple conflicting books from God to trust your soul with?
Your soul is far more valuable to the Lord indeed.