I’m not sure if any of you have ever come in contact with a King James Onlyist, but in the South this belief seems to be spread out in every community. This sect is small and by no means a dominate force within the church, but it is present and presents a danger nonetheless. This belief that only the King James Bible is the perfectly preserved Word of God is a terrible misunderstanding of the preservation of the Bible as a whole (see here for an example of this error). I will not get into any great detail into the foundation of the belief, but I will inform you that it was started by a Seventh Day Adventist named Benjamin G. Wilkinson in 1930. Refer to The Great Which Bible? Fraud.

Many times I have passed by some local Independent Fundamental Baptist churches and seen a sign that says something like “Bible believing old fashioned AV1611 King James Bible preaching” (Click here for an example). I must admit it is a catchy phrase to read as I’m riding by, but a question comes to mind about this AV1611 King James Bible claim. Do these pastors actually use a 1611 KJV? Are they teaching the whole council of God from the 1611 KJV? The short answer to my questions is no they are not using a 1611 KJV. They are using either a 1762, 1769, or a 1873 revision of the AV1611 King James Bible.

This belief of King James Onlyism has many problems. This doctrine has no Scriptural support, and for people like me who are Sola Scriptura this is a major issue. If God did finalize His Word for us in English as the King James Bible, then where is the prophecy concerning this action by God? Where is the Scriptural support in the KJV that says only the KJV is the perfect English Bible? Where is the Scriptural support that even remotely hints that God would move over a group of English men in circa 1600 to create a perfect English Bible?

Let’s say that King James Onlyists are correct and that God did finalize the 1611 KJB. We will assume the Psalm 12:6-7 King James Only interpretation is correct. The following links will help any King James Onlyist who reads my blog to identify their KJV:

Which KJV? 1611 or 1769

Do we use a 1769 KJV?

Are you using a 1611 KJV?

It’s easy to see the changes made to the AV1611 go far beyond KJVO advocates’ claims of only updating the spelling and grammar of the KJV in latter editions of the 1611 version.

Why were the Books of the Apocrypha found in the AV1611? Did God authorize these extra books as canon in circa 1600? If the AV1611 is the perfect Word of God, then the Books of the Apocrypha must be perfect also. Therefore we need to start teaching out of them along side the OT/NT. Check out The Inspired KJB for some typical King James Only double standards and wishful thinking.

The whole notion of any form of Bible version onlyism is foolishness at best. There are bad translations like the NWT and weak paraphrases like The Message, but there are very accurate translations like the NASB and KJV. To say that one translation in English is the only perfect Bible is an opinion. I prefer the NASB95 as my Bible of choice, but I will not say that it is the only perfect translation and all others are inferior and/or perverted. The message contained in all faithful translations is the perfect Word of God. The way that God preserved His living Word is far superior to what King James Onlyists claim as preservation.

See the following for more information about King James Onlyism:

The King James Only Issue

Alpha and Omega Ministries dealing with King James Onlyism

KJV Only advocates refuted

Advertisements
Comments
  1. […] Spot-on blog article about the KJV-only heresy… Click here to read: “AV1611 only? Do King James Onlyists use a 1611 KJV? « In the hedge with David J“ […]

  2. Jason Elder says:

    I suppose pointing out the difference in font and spelling is a valid argument.

    But what is the dividing line between calling something a “revision” vs. an “edition?” Naturally, I refer to them as ‘editions’ but maybe I should look those words up (in my King James Bible Dictionary lol).

  3. Bret says:

    At age 66, last year, my 40 year old son told me that I should reevaluate the KJV as my only foundation for the true word of God. I had raised him and his siblings based on the KJV. I was at one time, while they were growing up, a southern Baptist Sunday school teacher. No one, including my son, could ever convince me that the KJV may have translation errors. I believed in every word. It was ALL true or nothing could be trusted.

    Well, God is dealing with my self-righteous ways. Last year I began to study the history of the KJV and the more I studied the more disturbed I became. I finally came to the conclusion that I had spent over 50 years believing the words written by men who may not have been inspired by God. I began to seek the true inspired word of God and to this date have only found one potential source. I will tell the source that I am using in a second but first let me point out that the only true source would be the original manuscripts written by those who personally walked with Jesus. That is my opinion. Something happened to those original manuscripts, called autographs. Since I don’t have the originals the best I do is use manuscripts (copies) of the Gospels written over 1600 years ago. Problem is they are written in Keon Greek. These manuscripts are called the Sinaiticus, the Vaticanus and the Alexandrinus. They date back to around 350-400 AD, before the Latin Vulgate. The Sinaiticus can be viewed online. Just Google it. Seems like Jerome (another topic) translated the origial Greek into Latin and this became the Catholic bible. I may be wrong but when researching the history of the KJV it seems like I read that part of the KJV came from the Latin Vulgate (Catholic) bible. I may be wrong.

    The new source of study for me is the “Concordant Literal New Testament” originally published in 1926 by Concordant Publishing Concern. Just Google it. This bible is a translation of the Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and Alexandrinus based on factors that you will have to read for yourself. Too much detail for me to explain here. However, to make it short, the translation is based on word usage, i.e., the way the words were used at the time the original were written. Word meanings often change from one generation to another so it is important to know what a word meant 2000 years ago versus what it means today.

    I also purchased the “Concordant Greek Text” which is the original Greek with English subsets below each word. Both of these books when compared to the KJV are eye openers into how the original words were translated or should I say mistranslated.

    Hope you find the truth.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s