New Book on the Doctrine of Scripture

[Martin Marprelate]

It is Written. John Hooper (ed.). Bible League Trust, 2025, 655 pages.

It Is Written by Bible League Trust - Text and Translation

A book from Bible League Trust that treats the subjects of inspiration, authority, infallibility, preservation, translation, and interpretation of scripture.

www.textandtranslation.org

One for all you KJV fans out there; this time, from Britain. No, I haven't read it and no, I shall not be buying it. But if someone wants to buy me one for Christmas....... It's interesting to read the link.

 

[JesusFan]

It is Written. John Hooper (ed.). Bible League Trust, 2025, 655 pages.

It Is Written by Bible League Trust - Text and Translation

A book from Bible League Trust that treats the subjects of inspiration, authority, infallibility, preservation, translation, and interpretation of scripture.

www.textandtranslation.org

One for all you KJV fans out there; this time, from Britain. No, I haven't read it and no, I shall not be buying it. But if someone wants to buy me one for Christmas....... It's interesting to read the link.

Are they the main group behind the KJVO position then?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Are they the main group behind the KJVO position then?

The two main groups in the UK that are KJV-only are the Bible Society and the Trinitarian Bible Society. I know some of the people involved in both orgnizations, and they don't seem to be quite as extreme as their American counterparts - more Joel Beeke than Gail Riplinger! In fact, some of them, like Beeke, are really fine preachers, writers and pastors. Their position is not so much that the KJV is uniquely inspired, as that it is simply the best translation out there and that the T.R. is the correct text.
KJV-only folk in the UK tend to be mostly Reformed, and there seems to be a view among some that if one is properly Reformed, one will be KJV. So T.R. can stand for Textus Receptus or Truly Reformed.
My main beef with them is that they mostly hate the NKJV.

I was surprised to see that Jeff Riddle is KJV. I have listened to a few podcasts by him and been blessed by them.

 

[JesusFan]

The two main groups in the UK that are KJV-only are the Bible Society and the Trinitarian Bible Society. I know some of the people involved in both orgnizations, and they don't seem to be quite as extreme as their American counterparts - more Joel Beeke than Gail Riplinger! In fact, some of them, like Beeke, are really fine preachers, writers and pastors. Their position is not so much that the KJV is uniquely inspired, as that it is simply the best translation out there and that the T.R. is the correct text.
KJV-only folk in the UK tend to be mostly Reformed, and there seems to be a view among some that if one is properly Reformed, one will be KJV. So T.R. can stand for Textus Receptus or Truly Reformed.
My main beef with them is that they mostly hate the NKJV.

I was surprised to see that Jeff Riddle is KJV. I have listened to a few podcasts by him and been blessed by them.

Think Dr beeke pastors a large Reformed church right here in Michigan, and he is indeed a good writer and scholar, disagree with him on Amil and Infant Baptism, but hey, none of us have perfect theology

 

[Reformed]

My main beef with them is that they mostly hate the NKJV.

I have to confess that I somewhat enjoy ticking off the TR (Truly Reformed) crowd. I really get them going when I insist Reformed Baptists are actually Reformed. They go nuts.

 

[Reformed]

The two main groups in the UK that are KJV-only are the Bible Society and the Trinitarian Bible Society. I know some of the people involved in both orgnizations, and they don't seem to be quite as extreme as their American counterparts - more Joel Beeke than Gail Riplinger! In fact, some of them, like Beeke, are really fine preachers, writers and pastors. Their position is not so much that the KJV is uniquely inspired, as that it is simply the best translation out there and that the T.R. is the correct text.
KJV-only folk in the UK tend to be mostly Reformed, and there seems to be a view among some that if one is properly Reformed, one will be KJV. So T.R. can stand for Textus Receptus or Truly Reformed.
My main beef with them is that they mostly hate the NKJV.

I was surprised to see that Jeff Riddle is KJV. I have listened to a few podcasts by him and been blessed by them.

I have no problem with a person who makes a case for the Bible version they prefer. Personally, I'm a Critical Text, New American Standard guy. However, I have a deep appreciation for TR versions. It's when some KJVO advocates try to tell me theirs is the only inspired translation and all other translations are works of the Devil. Those type of individuals are out there. I shut the conversation down fast and just move along.

 

[John of Japan]

It is Written. John Hooper (ed.). Bible League Trust, 2025, 655 pages.

It Is Written by Bible League Trust - Text and Translation

A book from Bible League Trust that treats the subjects of inspiration, authority, infallibility, preservation, translation, and interpretation of scripture.

www.textandtranslation.org

One for all you KJV fans out there; this time, from Britain. No, I haven't read it and no, I shall not be buying it. But if someone wants to buy me one for Christmas....... It's interesting to read the link.

Actually, this book advocates confessional bibliology, a somewhat different view from the typical KJVO advocate. Many are from non-Baptist traditions. It would be more accurate to consider them TR-Only IMO.

Note the "Bookshop" link. There are some important authors whose books are being sold who were definitely not KJVO: Turretin, Morris, Lloyd Jones, Burgon, Hills, etc.

 

[JesusFan]

I have to confess that I somewhat enjoy ticking off the TR (Truly Reformed) crowd. I really get them going when I insist Reformed Baptists are actually Reformed. They go nuts.

And when we point out to them many in our group actually do use esv and Nas

 

[JesusFan]

I have no problem with a person who makes a case for the Bible version they prefer. Personally, I'm a Critical Text, New American Standard guy. However, I have a deep appreciation for TR versions. It's when some KJVO advocates try to tell me theirs is the only inspired translation and all other translations are works of the Devil. Those type of individuals are out there. I shut the conversation down fast and just move along.

One can be a KJVP, but no way should be used based upon textual criticism and biblical references concerning what inspiration really means

 

[JesusFan]

Actually, this book advocates confessional bibliology, a somewhat different view from the typical KJVO advocate. Many are from non-Baptist traditions. It would be more accurate to consider them TR-Only IMO.

Note the "Bookshop" link. There are some important authors whose books are being sold who were definitely not KJVO: Turretin, Morris, Lloyd Jones, Burgon, Hills, etc.

Good point, but still odd that those holding to TR is only greek text would deny as being legit kjv Nkjv, Kjv 2021, MEV, as all of them used same textual sources as kjv team

 

[Martin Marprelate]

Actually, this book advocates confessional bibliology, a somewhat different view from the typical KJVO advocate. Many are from non-Baptist traditions. It would be more accurate to consider them TR-Only IMO.

Note the "Bookshop" link. There are some important authors whose books are being sold who were definitely not KJVO: Turretin, Morris, Lloyd Jones, Burgon, Hills, etc.

Yes, British KJV-only is a different creature from the American version. However, the fact is that both the Bible League and the T.B.S. denigrate the NKJV, despite it being Textus Receptus. This is what annoys me. I tend to be a Majority Text supporter rather than T.R., but the NKJV suits me fine. If these people don't like the NKJV, they should produce a new translation that is better, but they don't. And support for the KJV is steadily declining as its language becomes more and more strange to young people.

 

[David Lamb]

The two main groups in the UK that are KJV-only are the Bible Society and the Trinitarian Bible Society. I know some of the people involved in both orgnizations, and they don't seem to be quite as extreme as their American counterparts - more Joel Beeke than Gail Riplinger! In fact, some of them, like Beeke, are really fine preachers, writers and pastors. Their position is not so much that the KJV is uniquely inspired, as that it is simply the best translation out there and that the T.R. is the correct text.
KJV-only folk in the UK tend to be mostly Reformed, and there seems to be a view among some that if one is properly Reformed, one will be KJV. So T.R. can stand for Textus Receptus or Truly Reformed.
My main beef with them is that they mostly hate the NKJV.

I was surprised to see that Jeff Riddle is KJV. I have listened to a few podcasts by him and been blessed by them.

I know that the Trinitarian Bible Society is KJVO, but isn't the Bible Society what used to be the British and Foreign Bible Society? If so, they are not KJVO. For example, they produced personal-sized editions of The Good News Bible.

 

[Logos1560]

I have this book IT IS WRITTEN: A BELIEVER'S GUIDE TO THE DOCTRINE OF SCRIPTURE, and I have read it.

Graham Chewter wrote: “This claim of perfection is held by the ‘King James Only’ movement which arose during the 1970s and was spearheaded by the late Peter Ruckman” (Hooper, It Is Written, p. 86).

Murdo Macleod wrote: “Once a translation is viewed as superior to the text it translated, an important line is crossed. Furthermore, it places great power in the hands of the person who has apparently been enlightened, above all others, to the point where he, and it appears he alone, is qualified to make such a momentous decision” (Hooper, It Is Written, p. 58).

Matthew Vogan wrote: "The Authorised Version stands alone as the translation in the English language that follows the providentially preserved text in its entirety" (Hooper, It is Written, p. 171). This statement by Matthew Vogan could be considered KJV-only, and Vogan's statement is not true.

Douglas W. B. Somerset wrote: "The main use of the Vulgate for the Old Testament is in the translation of difficult words and passages. For example, in Psalm 22:16, the Authorised Version and most other English translations follow the Septuagint and Vulgate in translating the Hebrew word as 'they pierced' rather than 'like a lion'" (Hooper, It Is Written, p. 255). This statement by Douglas Somerset would conflict with Matthew Vogan's claim that the KJV "follows the providentially preserved text in its entirety."

 

[John of Japan]

Good point, but still odd that those holding to TR is only greek text would deny as being legit kjv Nkjv, Kjv 2021, MEV, as all of them used same textual sources as kjv team

This is an unproven generalization. I know that some of the essayists in the book would approve of non-KJV TR-based translations. In fact, one of them is a missionary translator currently consulting on 10 versions.

 

[JesusFan]

Yes, British KJV-only is a different creature from the American version. However, the fact is that both the Bible League and the T.B.S. denigrate the NKJV, despite it being Textus Receptus. This is what annoys me. I tend to be a Majority Text supporter rather than T.R., but the NKJV suits me fine. If these people don't like the NKJV, they should produce a new translation that is better, but they don't. And support for the KJV is steadily declining as its language becomes more and more strange to young people.

What is interesting is that the "Baptist translation" the HCSB, was originally to be a new translation made off the Greek Majority text, but think the editor ofthe text passed away, and was then switched to the critical Greek text
Mark ward was for years a staunch KJVO, but not supports various translations, and he has literally beg the Trinitarian society to use their scholars and resources to redo the Kjv for modern times, but they refuse, so shows that KJVO really do not want to upgrade at all Kjv, as see it in some fashion "inspired"

 

[Marooncat79]

Think Dr beeke pastors a large Reformed church right here in Michigan, and he is indeed a good writer and scholar, disagree with him on Amil and Infant Baptism, but hey, none of us have perfect theology

And the Puritans

 

[Martin Marprelate]

What is interesting is that the "Baptist translation" the HCSB, was originally to be a new translation made off the Greek Majority text, but think the editor ofthe text passed away, and was then switched to the critical Greek text
Mark ward was for years a staunch KJVO, but not supports various translations, and he has literally beg the Trinitarian society to use their scholars and resources to redo the Kjv for modern times, but they refuse, so shows that KJVO really do not want to upgrade at all Kjv, as see it in some fashion "inspired"

Good for Mark Ward. There is much to admire about the TBS, and I would support it financially if only it was not so tightly tied to the KJV.

 

[JesusFan]

This is an unproven generalization. I know that some of the essayists in the book would approve of non-KJV TR-based translations. In fact, one of them is a missionary translator currently consulting on 10 versions.

I was applying that towards those who hold to KJVO

 

[JesusFan]

And the Puritans

I do have the book that he co authored about Puritan theology for today, and am interested in getting his brand new essentials of theology book, where he ha=s condensed down his 4 volume systematic theology

 

[JesusFan]

Good for Mark Ward. There is much to admire about the TBS, and I would support it financially if only it was not so tightly tied to the KJV.

I respect their efforts to get the bible out to all people, but just wish they were not so dogmatic KJVO