King James Only-ism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Amccordford
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Amccordford

Guest
I have been trying to find more information about how to address people who believe the King James Version of the Bible is the only valid translation. I have been able to find a few sources on their side of the debate, but almost nothing on the other side. Here are a couple links to their arguments:

chick.com/reading/books/158/158cont.asp

jesus-is-lord.com/kjvdefns.htm

I have also found the most prolific author seems to be David Daniels. Any information on him from a Catholic perspective?
 
Amccordford said:
I have been trying to find more information about how to address people who believe the King James Version of the Bible is the only valid translation.
Click to expand...
That must suck for people like me who don’t have English as their first language. All those folks ignorant of the English language, never will they read the* One True Translation™*
 
Amccordford said:
I have been trying to find more information about how to address people who believe the King James Version of the Bible is the only valid translation. I have been able to find a few sources on their side of the debate, but almost nothing on the other side. Here are a couple links to their arguments:

chick.com/reading/books/158/158cont.asp

jesus-is-lord.com/kjvdefns.htm

I have also found the most prolific author seems to be David Daniels. Any information on him from a Catholic perspective?
Click to expand...
I know everyone will groan at this name, but James White (when not arguing with Catholics or Mormons) has spent a lot of time refuting KJV-only arguments. I think most “mainstream” Christians tend to treat this as a position not worth arguing with.

What do you find convincing about their arguments?

What I find interesting (though not convincing as an argument for their actual position) is their commitment to the idea that God would preserve His Word and not just inspire it once for all. I think this is absolutely right, but is best accounted for through the Catholic/Orthodox understanding of Tradition.

Edwin
 
Credo_ergo_sum said:
That must suck for people like me who don’t have English as their first language. All those folks ignorant of the English language, never will they read the* One True Translation™*
Click to expand...
The only valid English translation–the assumption is that other translations are valid insofar as they agree with the KJV (and yes, I think there’s a lot of linguistic naivete here).

In its most extreme form, the KJV-only argument claims that the KJV is the culmination of God’s purposes for evangelizing the world, which God willed to be done by English-speaking people. So it’s essentially an Anglo-centric theology.

The more moderate form focuses on the texts rather than the translation per se, arguing that the only valid translations are those based on the “Textus Receptus.”

Edwin
 
As Contarini pointed out, James White has some very good articles against KJV-Only (I would recommend this site, which includes a power point presentation that is very good).

Hope this helps!

Pax!
 
Contarini said:
What do you find convincing about their arguments?

Edwin
Click to expand...
I don’t find their arguments convincing in the slightest. I find it fascinating that people actually believe this stuff, it’s like watching a theological train wreck to me! And whenever I come across one of these crazy (obviously they don’t think it’s crazy) ideas, I use it as a way to learn more about my faith and what God teaches thru His Church.
Contarini said:
The more moderate form focuses on the texts rather than the translation per se, arguing that the only valid translations are those based on the “Textus Receptus.”

Edwin
Click to expand...
Apparently the Textus Receptus is no longer a valid translation or source or whatever either:

biblebelievers.com/New_Eye_Opener.html

Crazy stuff man. Glad I’m rooted to the Church founded on The Rock!
 
Credo_ergo_sum said:
That must suck for people like me who don’t have English as their first language. All those folks ignorant of the English language, never will they read the* One True Translation™*
Click to expand...
If English is good enough for Jesus Christ, then it ought to be good enough for all Christians.

😛
 
My first response is always - you do know the KJV you have is not the same as the original right? And I can prove it, since I own a copy of the 1611 version (obviously a reprint 🙂 ), which incidentally has ALL the books including the ones that protestants remove. That usually ends the conversation right there. 😉
 
Credo_ergo_sum said:
That’s exactly the reason why I learned English!

😃
Click to expand...
Well of course! Jesus spoke Aramaic (his native tongue), he also new some Greek (for commerce) and he could read and speak English (to worship with his King James Bible). 👍
 
Contarini said:
I think most “mainstream” Christians tend to treat this as a position not worth arguing with.
Click to expand...
I agree. But it is interesting while many Catholics point out the absurdity to their Protestant brothers and sisters, many themselves are adament about the EF Mass.

In my mind, Love is the Language of God, and not just Latin or 17th century English!
 
Neofight said:
I agree. But it is interesting while many Catholics point out the absurdity to their Protestant brothers and sisters, many themselves are adament about the EF Mass.

In my mind, Love is the Language of God, and not just Latin or 17th century English!
Click to expand...
👍
 
My inclusive-lanugage NIV is far superior to the KJV :dts:
It was good enough for St Paul, so it’s good enough for me.
 
To illustrate the level of ignorance in the KJV-O position, when I was in the USAF (Russian linguist), I was stationed in Japan, and while I was there, I acquired a Russian-language “smuggler’s Bible.” When I came home on leave, my visit coincided with a visit by the pastor of the church where I grew up (Church of God, Cleveland, Tenn.). I showed him my Russian Bible, and his first question – “Is it a King James?”
 
I went to a Bible Institute when I was a Baptist, and they were hardcore KJV-only folks. Basically what it is about is authority, since they lack Apostolic authority as we Catholic do, it is their only means of having any final authoritative absolute to fall back on, since there are so many English translations that seem to add on to all the confusion of interpretations. They have no Magisterium, so the KJV is sort of a magisterial figure for them. It is a desperate way to fill in an obvious need for authority.

They are quite rigid and to their credit they want absolutes, they are not wishy washy or willing to compromise their belief system like many non-Catholic groups. Their passion for the KJV is based upon a very weak set of arguments, but their intentions are worthy of some credit because they at least recognize the need of a final authority that is not open to relativism, which has crept into many church organizations. But an English translation of the Bible being your final authority vs Apostolic Succession of the Catholic Church is the argument that we face, and that’s not even worth arguing, just pointing out and moving on.
 
COPLAND_3 said:
I went to a Bible Institute when I was a Baptist, and they were hardcore KJV-only folks. Basically what it is about is authority, since they lack Apostolic authority as we Catholic do, it is their only means of having any final authoritative absolute to fall back on, since there are so many English translations that seem to add on to all the confusion of interpretations. They have no Magisterium, so the KJV is sort of a magisterial figure for them. It is a desperate way to fill in an obvious need for authority.
Click to expand...
I think you hit the nail on the head!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top