King James only question

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Arbo, Dec 8, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Arbo

    Arbo
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2010
    Messages:
    3,942
    Likes Received:
    1
    I'm new here, so bear with my seemingly basic question. What are the reasons to hold to a pro King James only opinion and to have the view that others are invalid? I'd like to understand why this belief held.

    I've not attended seminary, so bear that in mind if you reply.

    I've no desire to start a round of bickering. It seems like there's enough already.

    Thanks.
     
  2. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,166
    Likes Received:
    368
    Have you tried a search on "King James" or "KJVO" or something like that here? There ARE a few members who are KJVO here but not many because the board does not support that position. Have you looked at outside sources? I know there are a TON out there that explain their view.
     
  3. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hello Arbo and welcome

    I am KJBO, but I do not really agree with your description of me.

    I don’t hold other translations as invalid, at all.
    But I do believe that God has preserved a perfect copy of His Word for English speaking people.

    My only complaint, has been with the practice of regularly using more than one English translation: But people can do what they want.
    --------------------------------------------------
    On another part of this forum a preacher said.......
    Now this isn’t saying very much, because it says nothing about today.

    I also believe in the perfect inspiration of Scripture, but I also believe in the perfect preservation of Scripture.
    (What sense does one make, without the other!) None!
    --------------------------------------------------
    For me, being KJBO means a person is respecting God’s Word enough, to give Him credit for being able to perfectly preserve it.
     
  4. Arbo

    Arbo
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2010
    Messages:
    3,942
    Likes Received:
    1
    Annsni- No, I've not. Thanks for the suggestion.
     
  5. Arbo

    Arbo
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2010
    Messages:
    3,942
    Likes Received:
    1
    Please elaborate. I'm interested. Why is the KJV the 'perfect' copy?
     
  6. stilllearning

    stilllearning
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2008
    Messages:
    1,814
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hello again Arbo

    You ask.........
    That is a very interesting question; You didn’t ask “how” it can be perfect, but “why” it is perfect.
    --------------------------------------------------
    The reason we “have to have” a perfect copy of God’s Word, is because God loves us and tells us that we need His Word to grow in Him........
    2 Timothy 3:16-17
    V.16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
    V.17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.


    Plus He told us that He would perfectly preserve His Word for us.

    As for why I choose to accept the KJB as God’s perfect Copy of His Word in English....
    Well as I have said many times, this one English Bible, has been accepted as God’s perfectly preserved Word, by millions more Spirit filled Christians, than any other English Bible.

    But also, it is the only English Bible, that is considered “perfect”, by anybody.

    In all my years as a Christian, I have never met anyone that truly believed that any of the modern versions they used, were “perfect”!
    But I have personally met hundreds of Godly Christian men and women, who would take a stand on the perfection of the KJB.
     
  7. Mexdeaf

    Mexdeaf
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Messages:
    7,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Mulberry bush time again...
     
  8. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    The preserved Scriptures existed before 1611, and they were translated into English before 1611. The 1560 Geneva Bible was the loved, accepted, believed, and read Bible of true English-speaking believers before the KJV ever existed.

    Where is the documentation that supports your above claims? Does the fact that millions have bought copies of the KJV and may have read it prove that all those millions held a man-made KJV-only view? Does the fact that hundreds of people assert something is true prove that it is prove? Does the opinions or experiences of people establish truth?
     
  9. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    How do you know?

    I know of another English Bible that someone claimed was inspired or perfect.
     
  10. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,100
    Likes Received:
    218
    May I come from the opposite side. I am a KJBYT (KJV by tradition) I grew up with the KJV, I've memorized many verses from the KJV - but I do not believe it is a perfect translation.
    Previously it was stated that the KJV has been accepted by more than any other Bible. Could that be in part because the King said it would be the "Authorized" Version. (also using that reasoning - Chinese would be the perfect language)

    Did you know that the Pilgrims choice of Bible was the Geneva Bible? From the link: But there was an earlier version – one not sanctioned by the government – the 1599 Geneva Bible (bold - my emphasis)
    You will find this very interesting - History of the English Bible

    Bible Bap of Sharon, Tn; published this


    IF THE KING JAMES VERSION IS GOOD ENOUGH FOR THE APOSTLE PAUL, ITS GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME.
     
  11. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    Actually, it's NOT, except in the minds of some KJVOs. Valid, yes; perfect, no.
     
  12. BobinKy

    BobinKy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Messages:
    845
    Likes Received:
    0
  13. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,158
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    Yes, the KJV is perfect. Complete, mature, nothing lacking that is necessary to the whole. But the same thing can be said of all English translations, with a few notable exceptions.

    However, with that said I believe the KJV, and other English bibles translated from the same (Byzantine) textform, are slightly superior to the English versions translated from the Alexandrian textform. But that superiority is minor (and usually quite grammatically technical) in nature and with a couple of exceptions does not substantially change the meaning of the text.

    I would rather you live according to the teachings of the worst English version than believe the KJV is best but ignore its teachings as so many KJVOs do. :(
     
  14. BobinKy

    BobinKy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Messages:
    845
    Likes Received:
    0
    Now for my serious post.

    I am not KJBO (King James Bible Only), but I am KJBP (King James Bible Preferred). I use three translations: KJB, NRSV, and NIV 1984, in that order.

    ARBO, despite my earlier funny post, I think you have asked an important question. A question I am seriously researching on another website: www.baptist1611.com, which has lots of KJBO articles and posts.

    Questions about what some KJBOs consider to be the perfect Bible can be researched at www.bibleprotector.com, a website from Australia.

    An innocent question about what all the KJBO and anti-KJBO brouhaha is about often leads to other issues, which I do not have the time to list. Again, despite my previous funny post with the mulberry bush / mulberry tree, this is a very serious question and either lies at the center of one's faith or in left field, depending upon which doctrinal level the issue resides for the believer.

    For me, as I said, I am King James Bible Preferred. I begin my Bible study or devotional time by reading the NIV 1984, then on to the NRSV, and wrapping up with the KJB. I conclude with the KJB because I place the KJB as a higher authority than the other two translations I read. Also, I strongly favor translations that do well with the spoken word since I like to read aloud Bible passages and sing (or chant) the Psalms and other poetical sections of the Bible.

    ARBO, I hope you take the time to research the question. And after you think you know all of the issues, research again--please!

    If for no other reason than the upcoming 400th anniversary of the King James Bible. Check out another thread here on BB: King James Bible on Fox News.

    I know I plan on learning all I can about the King James Bible Only question during the upcoming 400th anniversary.

    Arbo, thank you for asking.

    ...Bob
     
    #14 BobinKy, Dec 8, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 8, 2010
  15. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    There are several valid English translations "out there" I recommend everyone use the one(s) he/she is comfortable with. Any and all "one versionism" doctrines are products of man, & are not found in Scripture by the slightest quark of the slightest implication.

    If you're most comfortable with the KJV, fine. If you're most comfortable with the HCSB, fine, If you're most comfortable with the Geneva Bible, fine. (I use the NKJV the most, but I also use the KJV, Geneva, NASV, & NIV.)
     
  16. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the NASB was good enough for the Apostle Peter, then it's good enough for me!!!


    :thumbs:
     
  17. David Lamb

    David Lamb
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    I heard someone actually say that to me in all seriousness! When I gently tried to remind him that the English language was not even in existence in Paul's time, he said, "It must have been, otherwise we wouldn't have a bible!" :tongue3:
     
  18. glfredrick

    glfredrick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,996
    Likes Received:
    0

    Interesting... If you are going to highlight the words "ALL SCRIPTURE" in 2 Tim 3:16, then you would have to revise your position, for you seem to indicate that just SOME Scripture is actually inspired. :smilewinkgrin:
     
  19. DHK

    DHK
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    134
    The KJVO would have to read:

    (2Ti 3:16) All Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God, & is profitable for doctrine, for reproofe, for correction, for instrution in righteousnesse,
     
  20. BobinKy

    BobinKy
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2010
    Messages:
    845
    Likes Received:
    0
    glfredrick...

    I am not sure what you are talking about here.

    Are you referring to StillLearning's use of bold and italics type?
    If so, then I see this as a format convention for a passage under discussion.

    Are you referring to StillLearning's use of brackets [is]?
    Since he had the whole passage in italics, he had to choose another format convention to reflect the italics in the KJB.

    . . .

    Personally, I try to use the INDENT option at the top of the message window in an attempt to follow the APA Publication Manual, 5th ed. (2004, p. 592, Section 5.13 Quotations), which I cite below.

    Long quotations. Display quotations of 40 or more words in a double-spaced block of typewritten lines with no quotation marks. Do not single-space. Indent five to seven spaces or 1/2 in. from the left margin without the usual opening paragraph indent. If the quotation is more than one paragraph, indent the first line of second and additional paragraphs five to seven spaces or 1/2 in. from the new margin. ​

    Of course, other style manuals may be consulted and used with consistency.

    ...Bob
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...