Are you KJV Only? TR Only? Which versions of these is the ONE?

[michael-acts17:11]

KJVo authors typically state that the KJV is nearly indistinct from the Geneva because they refuse to admit the truth. The Geneva was the perfect, preserved Word of God before King James took it upon himself to retranslate God's Word into English & put his own name on it. His Bible was the an arrogant king's contemporary version to the established Geneva Bible. His Bible was a government publication by a king who believed in the "divine right of kings" to act, without accountability, as a god on earth. It's interesting that some believers worship a man from whom the believers of his day fled.

The Geneva was the Reformers Bible & the KJB was the Bible of the state that was rejected by the baptists & reformers of the day. There was no need for the KJV or any of its versions, since God had already delivered His preserved Word in English. If the KJV is the ONLY preserved Word, then God did not preserve His Word for man throughout the ages. There were REAL believers & martyrs involved in the preservation of His Word LONG before King James came along.

The Church experienced freedom & flourished in areas where the Geneva Bible was used, & she saw great persecution where King James' bible was published. William Shakespeare, John Bunyan, John Milton, the Pilgrims who landed on Plymouth Rock in 1620, and other luminaries of that era used the Geneva Bible exclusively.

 

[franklinmonroe]

I thought the comparison to be ridiculous. I use the Geneva Bible as my primary text & refer to other versions as secondary sources.

Let me explain the parable of automobiles: the modern conveniences and safety features are the 400 years of additional biblical and historical scholarship from archeological finds and additional manuscript discoveries (which lead to increased insight into the ancient languages).

 

[franklinmonroe]

... William Shakespeare, John Bunyan, John Milton, the Pilgrims who landed on Plymouth Rock in 1620, and other luminaries of that era used the Geneva Bible exclusively.

Not so. For example, there is a generous amount of scholarship (if you care enough to search for it) on the biblical citations found in Shakespeare and they are NOT exclusively from the Geneva.

 

[humblethinker]

To Humblethinker,Logos,Oldtimer and any others who have noted my recent posts in this and any other KJV type threads. I am going to bow out of this discussion at this time for several reasons...#1 I am in WAY over my head because it is obvious that I have neither the depth of knowledge or the mental energy required to be relevant to this discussion. I know what I believe in my heart but that does not qualify me to be an apologist or an expert on this topic. I'll stay with my KJV because I feel and believe that I am safe there and that I do have God's Word (as He wants me to have it) in my hand. My #2 reason is that at this time in my life I am going through some trials and difficulties due to being out of work that have raised my current "stress-level" way above normal. I know God will take care of my wife and I but things are nonetheless tense at the moment and it is hard for me to focus on things. I'd appreciate the prayers of each of you that God would lead me and show me the open (or closed) doors that He wants me to go through (or not) and give me the wisdom and discernment to know the difference. I am almost 58 years old and things aren't as easy in the job world as they once were. I want to serve our Lord somehow.
In any case, I will continue reading and following these issues but I simply can't argue the point. It is not for me to do so.The truth is...I simply don't have the time,energy or level of knowledge to be able to do so. I am both impressed (and sometimes frustrated and confused) with the level of knowledge some of you seem to have. I read much but my retention of what I read is questionable. My wife tells me that she is amazed that I can remember as much information as I do about so many different subjects but can't seem to remember things she said to me two days ago. Go figure! I would say that that is frustrating to me as well. Frankly...all that aside...I just wish I could get closer to the Lord,have a better and more consistent prayer life and spend more focused,quality time in His Word,and be a better,more faith and fruitful witness for Him. If those things could EVER be said of me I would be a better man and live a better life. I pray it would and will be so even yet. God Bless All of you.

Bro.Greg

Bro.Greg,
I understand your decision and the sentimate of your comments. My heart and prayers are with you. IMO, this KJV preference should NOT be a matter of separation for Christians or fellow local church members. I do believe that your estimation (your reason #1), that the KJV faithfully represents God's word and is completly sufficient for our instruction and encouragement for living a Godly life and to grow in faith is legitimate and worthy of holding. I still use and refer to the KJV. Our life of relationship to God and others is not worthy of the bickering and discouragement that this issue has brought our churches and our reputation to the world. Your attitude of humbleness and trust in God is an example for us to respect and emulate.

In none of these discussions would I intend that our confidence in God be removed. When I first started to seriously look into this issue it was a fearful endeavor... I felt like I was being disloyal and as though I was making an accusation against God's character. It was hard for me to separate familiarity, tradition, loyalty to others, and the comfort of certainty from God and my relationship to him. That is, to even consider, much less come to the conclusion, that there were other translations that faithfully represented (and some even more) God's word was to admit that I have believed a lie for most of my life and that all the people I cared about had also. If this were true then what did that say about them? In making this 'journey' I knew that all of my relationships were at stake... not because I would cut them off but because 'they' would cut me off. The issue is an emotional issue for me and so I must try to understate my feelings, if you know what I mean. I hope you will follow along in this and other threads on the subject. I would hope that you will stay confident in the KJV, but maybe just in a nuanced way. The reason for my handle, 'humblethinker' is due in large part to this kjvo journey. I have much more to share but I've gotta take it slow.

My prayers are with you in your current struggle.raying:

 

[humblethinker]

Heavenly Father, I lift Humblethinker to you in prayer. You know his heart and what troubles him today. As it be thy will, please touch him and give comfort, guidance, understanding, as his needs may be. Help him walk around any stumbling blocks that may be on his path in this life.

And to help both of us grow in your word and in our faith in Jesus Christ. In His Holy and precious name, I pray. Amen

Humblethinker, I have no desire for you to "eat" your words. That wasn't my intent with my reply nor is it today. Even though it may have come across that way. Probably over reacted as I see similar terms often used in lieu of serious discussion on many blibical positions. As a layman, it grieves me deeply when pastors, for example, resort to calling each other liars, when from appearances, each truly believe what they are saying.

Yes, I'm interested in continuing my 2 year journey. It's probably a journey that will last the rest of my life. Yes, I'd like to hear your story. And, perhaps share more of mine.

Thank you for your prayer! I am genuinely touched. Written sincere prayer is a rare observance on this board and you've blessed me with your words and thoughts and I am in agreement in them for both of us.

I understand that you didn't intend for me to eat my words. It's funny to me how that we all understand each other as much as we do! In most of my posts I try to be irenic and so if my comments can be taken irenically then please know that that is what I am shooting for (hmmm.... but I do appreciate irony and sarcasm!). I recognize that I have at times spoken out of turn though, but I like to think I'd own-up to it if someone were to call me out on it. I share your grief when people in respected positions are slanderous and presumptuous of other people's intent and character.

I hope to share more soon (maybe in a different thread though) and am interested in hearing more of yours.

The following are two videos I first watched when I started looking into the King James Only controversy. Please forgive the 'throwback' to the 1990's but it is still an excellent representation of what I now believe.

Bible Translation Issue #1: Origins & Impact of the "King James Bible Onlyism" Heresy

Bible Translation Issue #2: Does the 1611 King James Correct the Original Greek & Hebrew?

 

[Yeshua1]

KJVo authors typically state that the KJV is nearly indistinct from the Geneva because they refuse to admit the truth. The Geneva was the perfect, preserved Word of God before King James took it upon himself to retranslate God's Word into English & put his own name on it. His Bible was the an arrogant king's contemporary version to the established Geneva Bible. His Bible was a government publication by a king who believed in the "divine right of kings" to act, without accountability, as a god on earth. It's interesting that some believers worship a man from whom the believers of his day fled.

The Geneva was the Reformers Bible & the KJB was the Bible of the state that was rejected by the baptists & reformers of the day. There was no need for the KJV or any of its versions, since God had already delivered His preserved Word in English. If the KJV is the ONLY preserved Word, then God did not preserve His Word for man throughout the ages. There were REAL believers & martyrs involved in the preservation of His Word LONG before King James came along.

The Church experienced freedom & flourished in areas where the Geneva Bible was used, & she saw great persecution where King James' bible was published. William Shakespeare, John Bunyan, John Milton, the Pilgrims who landed on Plymouth Rock in 1620, and other luminaries of that era used the Geneva Bible exclusively.

A KJVO would HAVE to also include the geneva Bible as being seen in same light , based upon the criterias!

For me, the Lord preserved his original texts pretty much today in the greek/hebrew sources that translations rely upon, so would say the KJV/Geneva are both word of God to us today, but so are the NIV/Nasb etc!

 

[glazer1972]

I like the NKJV. I also have a 1611 KJV minus apocrypha, some newer KJV, an ESV, 2 NIV, a Int. Children's Bible. I would like to get a 1560 and 1599 Geneva also

The NKJV is picked up and used about 95% of the time.