Looking for a good book on KJV Only

Hi, Captain. Welcome to the Baptist Board. I hope you find it helpful.

Sorry to inform you that you can't mention this without starting a debate here!

I am not aware of a book that fairly portrays both sides of the argument (actually there are more than two sides). However, The Bible Version Controversy by Glenn Conjurske might offer up some help. He is a conservative who prefers the King James Bible while opposing KJV-Only.

 

James Price's King James Onlyism: A New Sect might also be helpful against some of the more extreme KJVO propaganda writers.

 

"Things that are different are not the same", by Pastor Mickey Carter. You can get it on Amazon or directly from Landmark Baptist Church in Haines City, Florida

 

Mickey Carter's book does not make a sound, scriptural case for a modern KJV-only view. I have a copy of it, and I have read it. His weak arguments have been soundly answered. His book does not present "mostly facts".

 

So far as I know, Glenn Conjurske did not write a book while he was alive. He was a Baptist pastor. In the 1990's, he also published a publication called Old Paths and Ancient Landmarks. In this publication he wrote several articles about English Bibles and about KJV-only. He loved and preferred the KJV, and he was critical of modern English Bible translations. I have read his articles, and he made a strong case against a KJV-only view. We used to correspond with each other and share information. This book was likely compiled from his articles in his publication. If so, it should be a very good book.

 

I learned a lot by reading ‘The King James Only Controversy’ by Dr. James White. Very easy read with great charts and explanations. For the record, White supports the Critical-text underlying most modern translations (NIV, NASB, CSB, ESV, etc.) whereas I support the Byzantine-textform theory. I prefer the texts underlying the KJV and NKJV.

If you were brought up on the KJV, I would recommended the NKJV over the NASB. It keeps the textual basis of the KJV while updating some of the English and sentence structure. However one of it’s goals was to retain the beautiful English found in the KJV (the ESV does a great job of this as well). In my opinion, the NKJV is top-of-the-line.

Blessings.

 

Welcome to the Baptist Board Captain... I'm KJV and don't read study or quote any other and I have two books to recommend... The first one is Crowned With Glory The Bible From Ancient Text To Authorized Version by Dr. Thomas Holland and I highly recommend it... And brethren might be interested in someone who recommended this book also... The first person on the recommendation page is Dr. Thomas Cassidy, President, San Diego Theological Seminary San Diego, California, yeah BB its TC... Another one I would highly recommend is Translating For King James by Ward Allen, on the original notes of John Bois one of the translator of the King James Bible in 1611 and is well worth the read... You can pick up both books at around $50.00... There are a few of us on here who are pure KJV... Never changed since I joined... Brother Glen

 

That is correct. It is a compilation of articles from Olde Paths and Ancient Landmarks -- except there are probably five or six articles he wrote that were never published before being included in this book (don't remember how many exactly).

Captain, one reason I recommended Glenn Conjurske is because he sits sort of in the middle, and I am not aware of a book that presents more than one side of the debate. Conjurske clearly presents his own viewpoint as well, but it is not the same as the views on either end of the spectrum. Also, I found that some (possibly most) of the writings in the book are online, which might save you buying the book if you didn't want to.
Index - Olde Paths

 

I think that Thomas Holland's KJV-only book Crowned With Glory may be the best overall book in favor of a KJV-only view, but it fails to prove a KJV-only view to be true and scriptural. It can still be considered biased, and it does not deal adequately with some important facts and evidence that are serious problems for a KJV-only. Holland's book does not actually answer nor refute the scripturally-based arguments against a KJV-only view.

At the time when Thomas Cassidy recommended this book, he was probably still KJV-only himself. Later Thomas Cassidy abandoned some or most of his KJV-only reasoning/teaching. He no longer considered himself to be KJV-only.

 

One possible such book is written by a former KJV-only advocate, Fred Butler. He presents the arguments for KJV-only that he probably held when he was KJV-only and answers or refutes them.

His 2020 book is entitled Royal Deceptions: Exposing the King James Only Conspiracies Against God's Word. His article "Confessions of a KJV-only Advocate" used to be posted online. This book is available at Amazon.

 

Welcome to our discussion board. I too started my christian life reading the KJV, but then found the NASB was easier for me to understand. Certainly well studied believers are on both sides of this issue (at least on the KJV preferred and some other version preferred) Another version you might consider is the World English Bible (WEB). It also is based on the Majority Text (rather than the Critical Text) but it does not include what many think are corruptions in the TR, the text underlying the KJV and NKJV.

Final thought, as you study and seek the best way to discern God;s word, you might go with the NKJV or NASB as your primary study bible, but use the WEB as a comparison bible to alert you when differing views are presented.

 

I haven’t read the entire NT in the WEB but what I have read has been good. Thanks for adding this.

 

Yes, this book is worth the read. It provides sound evidence that is a serious problem for KJV-only reasoning. This book provides first-hand testimony and evidence from one of the KJV translators which would acknowledge or affirm the use of the 1582 Roman Catholic Rheims New Testament in the making of the KJV.

Ward Allen observed: "At Col. 2:18, he [KJV translator John Bois] explains that the [KJV] translators were relying up on the example of the Rheims Bible" (pp. 10, 62-63). The note of John Bois cited a rendering from the 1582 Rheims [“willing in humility”] and then cited the margin of the Rheims [“willfull, or selfwilled in voluntary religion”] (Translating for King James, p. 63). Was the KJV’s rendering “voluntary” borrowed from the margin of the 1582 Rheims?

Ward Allen maintained that "the Rheims New Testament furnished to the Synoptic Gospels and Epistles in the A. V. as many revised readings as any other version" (Translating the N. T. Epistles, p. xxv). Ward Allen and Edward Jacobs claimed that the KJV translators "in revising the text of the synoptic Gospels in the Bishops' Bible, owe about one-fourth of their revisions, each, to the Genevan and Rheims New Testaments" (Coming of the King James Gospels, p. 29). About 1 Peter 1:20, Ward Allen noted: “The A. V. shows most markedly here the influence of the Rheims Bible, from which it adopts the verb in composition, the reference of the adverbial modifier to the predicate, the verb manifest, and the prepositional phrase for you” (Translating for King James, p. 18). Concerning 1 Peter 4:9, Allen suggested that “this translation in the A. V. joins the first part of the sentence from the Rheims Bible to the final phrase of the Protestant translations” (p. 30).

 

That book is excellent, as he breaks down just what the various views regarding the different Greek texts and translations are!

 

ALL of those will be very helpful to you, to help explain just what are the major differences on the views regarding the various greek texts and bible translations!

 

These are probably three of the top selling books on the subject, at least from the anti-KJVO side. They will not, however, do much for your stated hope of them presenting both sides.

You're welcome, and best wishes with your study. I looked on the straitgate site and noticed that though they do sell some of Conjurske's books, they do not sell the above mentioned one. Just in case it got lost in the shuffle, I'll mention the link again that has a number of his writings, including ones on the KJVO subject:
Index - Olde Paths

 

I found some value in, "Defending the King James Bible" by D.A. Waite:
https://www.amazon.com/Defending-King-James-Bible-Waite/dp/1568480121

I've also read through at least once, James White's book, " The King James Only Controversy" which I thought was well-written, even though I disagreed with some of his conclusions:
https://www.amazon.com/King-James-Only-Controversy-Translations/dp/0764206052/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2IG1KTVG1H9XV&dchild=1&keywords=the+king+james+only+controversy&qid=1613332274&s=books&sprefix=the+king+james+only+,stripbooks,198&sr=1-1

"Revision Revised" by John Burgon:
https://www.amazon.com/Revision-Rev...evision+revised&qid=1613332209&s=books&sr=1-1


But if it were me looking at this for the very first time,
I would steer away from any of the books that try to sensationalize or otherwise depart from a more objective and textual view... from either side.
Those authors include Gail Riplinger, Peter Ruckman, and several others.

In other words,
Having read many of the books from both "KJV-Only" defenders and those who disagree with them ( and even openly attack each other ), I much prefer sticking strictly to the textual and translational investigation, its results and implications and staying out of any books or discussions that purposefully bad-mouth one side or the other....which I've also seen both sides of on many forums and websites.


May God bless you with much wisdom as you look at this very detailed subject.

 

Welcome to the BB, Captain.

The Unbound Scriptures, by Rick Norris, is the best I have seen. If I only had two books to recommend it would be Norris and James Price. (Caveat--Price and Norris are both friends of mine. )

About James White, his book is okay overall, but he is weak on understanding the Byzantine/Majority positions. Also, I'm put off by the fact that his PhD is from what I consider to be a degree mill, though his master's is reputable. So then, he doesn't have quite the rigor that a genuine PhD can train you for. But then, D. A. Waite has genuine doctorates, but not the rigor. So a genuine degree does not ensure rigor, nor does the lack of one.

Rick Norris' website: King James Only Information
James Price's website: The Life and Research of James D. Price