KJV Only

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cruxis117
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cruxis117

Guest
Hello. I’ve lately been in a discussion where I have been exposed to a supporter of the “KJV Only” Movement, which only supports the King James Version of the Holy Bible. Things mentioned in the discussion includes “Alexandrian text” and the “Textus Receptus”, so on and so forth. If anyone can give me links or help show me how to give a good refutation of this movement, it would be much appreciated.
 
There is no refutation possible to anyone that truly believes that the King James Version of the Bible is the only authoritative text.

They believe it and they will not listen to anything that attempts to refute it. They know what they know, and nothing you can present to them will mean anything.

The way to bring people around is not to confront them.That will only get their back up, and make them even more resistant.
 
Cruxis117 said:
Hello. I’ve lately been in a discussion where I have been exposed to a supporter of the “KJV Only” Movement, which only supports the King James Version of the Holy Bible. Things mentioned in the discussion includes “Alexandrian text” and the “Textus Receptus”, so on and so forth. If anyone can give me links or help show me how to give a good refutation of this movement, it would be much appreciated.
Click to expand...
this is what you get when you bring the Bible outside of the Catholic Church. The Bible as we know it today is translated from various manuscripts collected from various places; some are fragments, some are large texts. Some of these texts differ in how they translate certain words or phrases, though not substantially. In evangelical circles their sometimes rises up a notion that one of these is better than another for some reason, and in fact people who translate bibles do have to make some decisions about which one to favor.

One of the tools I have is a “Textual Commentary on the Greek New testament” which is kind of like an index. It matches the NT line by line, and if there is a variant between two manuscripts, it tells you what it is and what each manuscript says. Believe me, there is nothing earth-shattering in it. the vast majority are simple idiomatic quirks, or even a connective word or two that is different.

I agree that you cannot argue with this person. swayed by ideology, they will have a very entrenched, passionate view of the matter, and it would take much research on your part to lay out a case for other translations…asuming you also knew biblical greek.

My recommendation is that to make yourself feel comfortable, get a good primer on NT greek, teach yourself, get Kittel’s one volume Theological dictioary of the new testament, a Textual commentary like I mentioned, and an interlinear greek new testament. these basic tools will begin to give you a solid footing at understanding the nuances of the New testament, and also give you access to far more tools than you would have without the greek.
 
Cruxis117 said:
Hello. I’ve lately been in a discussion where I have been exposed to a supporter of the “KJV Only” Movement, which only supports the King James Version of the Holy Bible. Things mentioned in the discussion includes “Alexandrian text” and the “Textus Receptus”, so on and so forth. If anyone can give me links or help show me how to give a good refutation of this movement, it would be much appreciated.
Click to expand...
best way to refute KJV onlyist is use the Douay-Rheims
 
If he was using the Textus Receptus to suggest that the Deuterocanononical books of the Old Testament were not inspired, remind him that the Textus Receptus only covers the New Testament, the contents of which Catholics and Protestants agree.
 
Cruxis117 said:
Hello. I’ve lately been in a discussion where I have been exposed to a supporter of the “KJV Only” Movement, which only supports the King James Version of the Holy Bible. Things mentioned in the discussion includes “Alexandrian text” and the “Textus Receptus”, so on and so forth. If anyone can give me links or help show me how to give a good refutation of this movement, it would be much appreciated.
Click to expand...
I have come across such a mentality, and I wonder how someone can realistically uphold a “KJV only” conviction. After all, what does this say about the translations used by Christians during the many centuries prior to the formulation of the KJV?

The funny thing is that the Anglican Church, through whom the world was given the KJV, is not a “KJV only” denomination.
(See wiki.answers.com/Q/Which_version_of_the_Bible_is_used_by_the_Anglican_Church )

So “KJV only” Christians ascribe a kind of unique prestige to the KJV that its own church of origin does not.
 
Cruxis117;:
If anyone can give me links or help show me how to give a good refutation of this movement,
Click to expand...
There are half a dozen variants within the KJV-Only movement. Understand what their specific position is, and why they hold to that specific position.

Most of the KJV-Only arguments can also be found in the position papers of the DRC-Only and Geneva-Only advocates. All three groups developed as a reaction to either actual, or perceived heresies, that are found within more recent translations.

jonathon
 
As a Lutheran, I have the advantage of being able to thank the person for using a Lutheran-inspired document. About 80% of the translation is taken directly from the Tyndale translation, which is based on the third edition of the Textus Receptus. Luther based his translation on the second edition and Tyndale was a disciple of Luther.

There is no need to refute this position. The arguer is reading the Bible. The KJV agrees with the other major translations about 97% of the time. Instead, it is a chance to celebrate our points of agreement. A friend uses the KJV because he is at ease with the language, which is noted for its poetry and beauty. These are things to be celebrated. The arguments about the deuterocanon and textual backgrounds can be saved for a day when you have a closer relationship.

If this is hard to swallow, think of it this way. His understanding of the world and his place in it could come from reading People magazine instead. Not so bad now, is it?👍
 
Oldtimer_7 said:
As a Lutheran, I have the advantage of being able to thank the person for using a Lutheran-inspired document. About 80% of the translation is taken directly from the Tyndale translation, which is based on the third edition of the Textus Receptus. Luther based his translation on the second edition and Tyndale was a disciple of Luther.

There is no need to refute this position. The arguer is reading the Bible. The KJV agrees with the other major translations about 97% of the time. Instead, it is a chance to celebrate our points of agreement. A friend uses the KJV because he is at ease with the language, which is noted for its poetry and beauty. These are things to be celebrated. The arguments about the deuterocanon and textual backgrounds can be saved for a day when you have a closer relationship.

If this is hard to swallow, think of it this way. His understanding of the world and his place in it could come from reading People magazine instead. Not so bad now, is it?👍
Click to expand...
I completely agree. Likewise, the issue isn’t that they’re reading the KJV, it’s that they consider it to be something which fell out of the heavens, carried by angels, and that they consider everyone else to be evil for reading a modern translation, such as the NRSV. That’s what I don’t like. If this was myself complaining about those who merely have the KJV as a personal preference, then I wouldn’t have anything to really talk about.
 
Cruxis, it does make it hard to argue when there is no disagreement. The path of faith is not always a pretty walk through the Garden. At a certain level, KJV-only, or any other insistence on the total truth of one version to the exclusion of all others becomes a form of idol worship. The understanding of truth is in the head, that of belief is in the heart.

One of my duties as a Christian is to help others along the path. The converse of that is that I must also accept guidance from others rather than rely on my own capacities. I will trust a friend to lead me more than a stranger. The beginning of helping anyone along the path is relationship. To “win” the argument with this KJV-onlyist or any other person for that matter, you have to start with relationship, with Christian brotherhood.

Even God took seven days to create the universe. It may not be fast, and it may not be easy, but what a pay-off in the end. The body of Christ experiences healing and we all win. As St. Teresa said, we cannot do great things, but we can do little things with great love. Amen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top