How to talk to a KJV-only Christian?

  • Thread starter Thread starter carson2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not to mention, the Douay Rheims predates the KJV. (There DR’s onlyists too, I am not one of them).
 
I know some KJV-only people in the UK. Their argument is that the Authorized Version, as it’s also called here, is the most reliable because it was made from the Textus Receptus, and the reason why the Textus Receptus was used was because people knew that it was the most reliable form of the text. Clearly this is rather a problematic argument. What they are saying is that whatever was used would have been used because it was the most authentic version of the text, and the proof of its authenticity is the fact that it was used. It’s a very weak argument, but if they are determined to make use their criterion for judging authenticity it’s also impossible to refute. Of course, one could also argue that the text that was used was the most likely to contain errors, as texts tend to be corrupted during the process of transmission. But then they would say that the reason it was transmitted was because people knew that it was authentic.

Of course, one cannot deny the historical and cultural importance of the KJV, both as a landmark work of English literature and for its influence on the subsequent history of England and the British colonies throughout the world.
 
carson2 said:
know Catholics reject the KJV, but how can I explain some errors of the KJV to a KJV-only Christian?
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t say that Catholics reject the KJV per se; it’s just not a translation produced by the Catholic Church. It’s a beautiful translation, though, and I still enjoy reading it more than any of the Catholic translations that I have come across.
 
Sure, people are wrong to
idolize the KJV. But it is no compliment to say nobody, but nobody, is tempted to idolize most modern translations, which look like they came out of a blender.

The KJV, and Shakespeare, make me proud I speak English.
 
Don’t KJV-only Christians accept it as the sole authoritative English translation rather than as the sole acceptable version?
 
Last edited:
No, they consider it to be perfect in every way, even to the point of improving the source material.
 
I have a hard time reading it (Then again, I also have a hard time reading the DR), I actually do agree, the prose in it is quite beautiful. However, given the era it was produced in, some of the anti Catholic bias does bleed through (although, that’s also true of some modern Bibles, NIV, for instance)
 
Have you ever seen the T-shirt “My King James Bible corrects your Greek”? Yep, that’s a real thing.
 
carson2 said:
how can I explain some errors of the KJV to a KJV-only Christian?
Click to expand...
I would suggest you don’t fix your attention on differences and disputes, but rather look for and celebrate the common ground, the faith, hope, and love that you and they have in common.
 
Last edited:
Recognize that everything will be filtered through the KJV for them. A lot of back and forth happens that can be frustrating because you may be making points and/or using Scripture, and it won’t measure up to their standards because you are talking from outside of a KJV only perspective.

My personal view is that KJV only folks found that when they based their beliefs on Sola Scriptura, it got difficult when different translations if the Bible come out, saying sometimes rather different things depending on how a verse is translated. It is hard to base your faith on a book that was written in three other languages and is translated into your own based on several manuscripts. To settle disputes this would cause in faith and doctrine, it is sometimes easier to claim only one translation is truly right.
I think that in many ways, the KJV takes the place of the Pope and the Church in some Protestant circles. It is a way to “ensure” that beliefs are without error. It is a solid, stable guiding authority.

It might be simple, but it may be worth asking “why” to foundational questions about how they came to believe what they do, why they think the KJV has authority, etc. Anything that might help them think a little bit outside the KJV lens.
 
From what I read, there have been several findings that help in translating the Bible. That means one should consider more recent editions.
 
Depends on what you’re more comfy with. I prefer literal translations to dynamic ones, but, if someone can produce a dynamic translation whilst still in line with the original text, I don’t have much of a problem with that. Some of the more literal ones can be kind of hard to read, though. A good compromise is somewhere in the middle, literal, but still readable.
 
I don’t ‘explain’ errors of the KJV bible. Rather I like to highlight the Catholic aspects of that version.
 
Why do you care which English translation they read? Just out of curiosity.
 
That’s not really the issue in this case. It’s not their preferring the KJV; it’s their view that the KJV is the only legitimate Bible, excluding even the original manuscripts.
 
HopkinsReb said:
That’s not really the issue in this case. It’s not their preferring the KJV; it’s their view that the KJV is the only legitimate Bible, excluding even the original manuscripts.
Click to expand...
I agree, I was just curious what was spurring the conversation. I am sure some claim was being made, and you would likely address the claim differently based on their reasoning for assuming a KJV Only position. It also depends on who initiated the conversation. I probably could have worded that differently. Looking at my initial question, I realize that it came off sounding confrontational whereas that wasn’t my intent. Sorry about that.
 
I could see myself using that version to teach the truth of the Catholic Faith.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top