Why I am KJV only

Have we considered how the doctrine of KJV onlyism affects those who speak a language other than English? Try and translate KJV only into another language and see how much sense it makes.

Gods Word is available to all. To suggest that Gods Word is only available in the English KJV smacks to me of something not very nice.

 

Why I am not KJVO... because no where in the KJV of God's Word or any other version does the Bible say that one, and only one, translation of God's Word in English (the KJV) is to be accepted and used. KJVOnlyism is a man-made doctrine built on experential religion and devilish emotion.

Are you implying that KJVO's are more godly than others? Holiness has little to do with which version you use and everything to do with how God uses that version to impact your life.

...then you truly believe something that is not based in fact but rather your own bias.

Virtually every cult and false teacher says the same thing. They point to experience (the works of the flesh and the Devil) because they cannot point to scripture to legitimize their beliefs and practices... Charasmatic tv preachers do it, Mormons, JW's, SDA's,.... as well as Ruckman, Riplinger, Marres, Gipp, etc.

Anyone who says that a faithfully translated version of God's Word is illegitimate, being willing to twist and distort the truth in an effort to prove their position.

 

Hi swordsman, you said: "I truly believe that the availability of so many "versions" has caused nothing but confusion,
unbelief and a complete lack of respect for God and His Word.
That is why I am KJV only. It seem to be the only one that God has used in a great way."

I just want to let you know that at least one other person here agrees with your conclusions.

God bless,
"he that hath ears to hear, let him hear."

Will

 

I would like to, humbly, suggest that you take the time to read major portions of a good parallel Bible. Ignore the "Living Bible" paraphrase for the moment because we know that it is a paraphrase and not a true translation. Make sure your parallel Bible contains major main-stream translations such as KJV, NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV, etc. Not the new NIV which is gender neutral (etc. I have to agree with anybody who changes translation to make it "politically correct").

After you read many chapters in each version, come back and say that you truly received a different doctrine from all of the translations. Don't take one line or verse out of context--take the entire story and message contained in an entire book, for instance.

I think you will come back with a completely different view of the translations. There is simply not any doctrinal changes even with the weakest translations such as the NIV.

 

I agree with Swordsman and Will and Baptist History and US History go hand in hand... And the KJV has always been the leading beacon that points the way... I don't need to attack any other version when the one I have has never needed changing... then again the tried and true KJV can defend itself... I read it... believe it... And unlike any of the others it has stood the test of time for almost 400 years!... We have run this subject in the ground and those who are KJV will stay KJV those that aren't won't and why should they... It's still going strong brethren and will be here when Christ comes again!... Brother Glen

 

I want to make myself very clear. I did not mean to say that the KJV is not a good translation and I think a lot of KJVO people assume that just because someone is not KJVO they do not like the King James.

BTW you might want to revise your 400 years to about 300 years because as I have always said, I have a 1612 printing of the KJV and my guess is -- is that most people cannot even read it and would be amazed at all the changes made since it was printed. This does not just include the huge number of spelling changes.

You are making quite an assumption by stating the KJV will be here when Christ returns. Although most of us Christians think Christ is coming soon, the Bible is extremely clear that we will not know when. Paul expected Christ while he was alive--he was 2000 years off (so far). We may be 2000 years off too and if we are, the English language, as we know it, may not even exist. God will not allow America to continue to prosper as a nation if we keep slipping into sin the way we are. Therefore, I would not want to limit God and say that he will come in ten or twenty years (look how many evangelists have been wrong to this date). If English continues to change as it has over the last 200 years, then I think we can expect the KJV to become unreadable after another 200 or 300 years. So, if Christ comes back in the next few decades, you very well might be right, if he should wait, then you very well may be wrong.

[ November 25, 2002, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: Phillip ]

 

The KJV has withstood everything thrown against it... And if you don't think so read history... Religious and Secular... If the Lord comes in 100 years or 20,000 years the KJV will still be here... And there will still be those here on earth defending it just like they have done in times past... I'm really not to much concerned about it though I won't be here and neither will anyone else on this board!... Brother Glen

 

I don't need to attack any other version when the one I have has never needed changing...

The one you have still has the spelling and the typeface of the original KJV? example: fonne = "son"

 

KJVO really concerns me.

God inspired the original texts.

I am not saying that the KJV is not good, but it is not perfect and some of the texts were questionable.

Really guys. What is the inspired scripture? I suggest the original texts. Anything that is different is less than inspired, including all translations.

Further, the KJV is difficult to read and is that not the whole point in translating the greek and hebrew to the language of the people?

Charlie

[ November 25, 2002, 04:40 PM: Message edited by: Charlie T ]

 

Language has never been static for that long. One hundred years??? Maybe but doubtful. 20,000 years? Most certainly not. Language changes over time and the English of the KJV is already out of date.

 

Lets examine that shall we!

Genesis 1:[1] In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Ruth 1:[1] Now it came to pass in the days when the judges ruled, that there was a famine in the land. And a certain man of Bethlehemjudah went to sojourn in the country of Moab, he, and his wife, and his two sons.

Job 2:[1] Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD.

Isaiah 9:[6] For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

[7] Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

Jonah 2:[1] Then Jonah prayed unto the LORD his God out of the fish's belly,

[2] And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the LORD, and he heard me; out of the belly of hell cried I, and thou heardest my voice.

Malachi 3:[1] Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.

Matthew 1:[20] But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

[21] And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

I Timothy 4:[1] Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

[2] Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;

[3] Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.

I Peter 4:[1] Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;

[2] That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God.

Revelation 22:[12] And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

[13] I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

[14] Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

Now after all those little sniplets taken from random from the KJV where is the English that is archaic and out of date?... Then again I'll take the stand that a lot of brethren like to throw around here the old strawman!... Brother Glen

[ November 25, 2002, 06:33 PM: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

 

[ November 26, 2002, 03:49 PM: Message edited by: Tiger Fan ]

 

Brother Glen,

Quite frankly my KJV is a little rusty. I could understand all of it, but I had to concentrate. It is not in normal english at all. Do we really want to limit our proclamation of the gospel to archaic english?

I suggest that even in your church, the children have to learn the language of the KJV. Been there, done that. Don't get me wrong, I still have my Scoffield King Jimmy and read it on occassion. But I never witness from it.

What about this? What if I open my Greek New Testament and translated it to the lost? Is that preferable to the KJV or not?

Charlie

 

Why would you when it has already been translated?... The problem I have understanding is why some brethren think God stood in the background and told the translators to go for it... Or read it and then greekify it!... Its like they don't believe what is written and retranslating the translation!... I do not speak greek or hebrew and that is why it is in English!... Go figure?... What does this one say?... Or this one?... Or this one?... Or this one?... Or this one?... Or this one?... Or this one?... Someone said there are over 200 translations?... No wonder there is confusion in the house of God!... Then again I'm KJV!... Not KJVO... Or a Ruckmanite... Just KJV and nothing even comes close!... Brother Glen

[ November 25, 2002, 09:31 PM: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

 

So did God stand in the background when the MV's were translated?

In particular, how about the NASB which is still the only translation whose translators were required to affirm inerrancy? It is also the only Bible I know of translated by a group of conservative evangelicals.

On what grounds do you say that God specially superintended doctrinally unsound Anglicans who persecuted those like us in a way that he did not others?

 

Why would you when it has already been translated?... The problem I have understanding is why some brethren think God stood in the background and told the translators to go for it... Or read it and then greekify it!... Its like they don't believe what is written and retranslating the translation!... I do not speak greek or hebrew and that is why it is in English!... Go figure?... What does this one say?... Or this one?... Or this one?... Or this one?... Or this one?... Or this one?... Or this one?... Someone said there are over 200 translations?... No wonder there is confusion in the house of God!... Then again I'm KJV!... Not KJVO... Or a Ruckmanite... Just KJV and nothing even comes close!... Brother Glen </font>[/QUOTE]Brother Glen:

The point is that no translation fully express the original languages. There are nuances that can be important for which english has no equivelent. To say, "What is the point?" boggles my mind.

Thus the reason why many use several translations. It is not always easy to translate a verse. The simplest word can have huge theological implications.

But to say that God inspired the KJV but not other versions begs the point. What evidence suggests this? Is there anything in scripture referring to translations being inspired like the original texts were inspired?

Frankly, you are suggesting that unity can be found in a single translation. That is a faulty foundation. The original texts are the only God-breathed inspired writings on this planet. Our effort should be in understanding the original texts, and several translations are needed to do this. The KJV, as good as it is, is not sufficient to the task.

Nor did Jesus and the Apostles teach that unity was in a translation of the scripture. Where is unity?

Brother Glen, I pray God's blessings on you and am not trying to attack you, but I really do not understand your statement.

Charlie