Featured How best to deal with KJV Onlyists.

The transition that takes place between those Autographs originally Inspired and a resulting copy or translation, was not accomplished to the same degree of Direct Divine Inspiration the Autographs were, as the Double-Inspiration proponents might think they can, or need to claim.

The very nature of a version being a copy or translation implies some degree of uninspired variation from the original, not withstanding God's very real and Living Superintendence over the Preservation of His Loving Word that He has promised, so that it may be a witness that describes Him and His Goings.

Even an 'exact copy' of a thing, or a masterpiece of art, for example, is still a 'copy' containing some inherent differences which are detectable, simply by virtue of it being a copy, at all, in the first place.

As a copy or translation of sufficient august and venerable 'copies' of the original Autographs, in the original languages that found favor with God's children for many, many centuries, and given a similarly sound and sufficiently devout effort toward the final production of the KJV, I see it, in all it's 'revisions' and versions, as 'an Exact Copy'.

Given that this 'exact copy' can not and should never be claimed to be a flawlessly and directly Inspired production of the original Autographs, to what extent does it contain 'flaws', for which it can not be trusted as God's Supernaturally Preserved Word for all matters of Faith and practice?

I say that the KJV does not contain flaws that would characterise it as having any lack of integrity and that then implies that the KJV carries with it, therefore, the Authority of God.

I believe we have God's Word Preserved that is an exact copy of God's Word He intends for us to have.

I believe it is and it contains God's inspired Word, with a little 'i' meaning there is a Living Inspiration witnessed to, by the Holy Spirit, in God's operations and use of The Bible, as we know it in English as the KJV, that attests to this version being the Supernatural Masterpiece of Literature that it has proven to be, over centuries of the Activity of God, in it's employment, as His 'copy' of His flawlessly perfect original Autographs which were absolutely Inspired.

The inspiration I claim for the copy of God's Word I hold in my hand or that is in the computer is 'derived' not by Direct Divine Inspiration, but by it's Source and Author having promised to preserve for us a copy of His Word, which contains Divine content.

The Divine content of the KJV being preserved by and from a Divine Source give this copy of what is called 'God's Holy World' the designation of being currently an inspired book, according to me, or of any reasonable facsimile in any language being likewise, 'inspired', of God Who has provided them.

I have in the sense qualified as it not being absolutely perfect beyond finding out some incidental and insignificant idiosyncrasies, said that I believe I have an exact copy of God's inspired Word that I know that God knows, He knows He is talking to me, in so many words, and that He knows He has gotten His Message over to me, in His Own Words.

Whether or not anyone knows it that uses a modern translation, they still have to go back to the KJV and sound original language texts 'to see what God says', because, although they act like they don't know it, or care, the underlying original texts used to create them, were nefariously
CHANGED.

 

I say......
How best to deal with KJV Onlyists........is to just leave them alone and quit worrying about it.

 

But they are deceived. Shouldn't we try to help? Before they deceive others in telling lies.

 

The same happened to the KJV. CHANGED.

Changes in the King James version

 

You must see these occurrences as an impeachment of the KJV's integrity.

What about that? I've seen hundreds of dismissals and disparaging swipes taken of irrelevant idiosyncrasies at what for centuries was The Holy Word of God and in the most resent times they seem to accompany any mention of the KJV by default, as if it were some God-given command for everyone to denounce it as a entirely flawed production with its origin in human beings.

I'm not on that bandwagon.

If you don't have a version of the Bible that has impeccable integrity and, therefore, the Authority of God, that is of Divine Origin, what do you have to recommend to anyone for them to get to know your God that the Word of God is supposed to depict?

I'm just asking.

 

God never promised you a single, lone perfect English Translation of the Bible. Quit acting like he has. KJVOnlyism is a false teaching. It is certainly a very accurate Bible. But it is not without error. It is not, nor has ever been a perfect translation. It is among the very best, yet not perfect.

 

37 has challenged us as to how to deal with KJVONLY folks.

Nine Tennant's of the Ruckmanite KJVONLYISM are here:

(1) the KJV is doubly inspired;
(2) the KJV is advanced revelation;
(3) the English KJV is as or more inspired than the original language Scriptures;
(4) the KJV can be used to correct the original language Scriptures;
(5) there is no need whatsoever to study the Biblical languages of Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek due to an “inspired” English translation;
(6) the KJV cannot be improved on (The Defined King James Bible edited by D A Waite and S H Tow and published by Bible For Today is certainly an improvement on the KJV);
(7) the KJV is the only Bible that has gospel or salvific content;
(8) those who do not use the KJV are condemned to hell; and
(9) all non-English speaking believers must learn English to know the Truth.

While I have found similar statements straight out of the Babylonian Talmud and other non-Bible sources, I would like to say for my part that these nine assertions above are possibly not of God, at all, unless I could find some inkling of their wording in any of the dozens upon dozens of Baptist catechisms, creeds, or Statements or Confessions of Faith, spread out over 800 years, or so, under the subject of The Scriptures and for some reason, I did not.

Historic Baptist Documents - Confessions, Catechisms, Creeds | The Reformed Reader

Then. I thought, since at first blush they seem to not be of God, at all, that I would search the extensive Forward by the translators to the KJV, itself, of all places, and found nothing resembling any indications of their awareness of such principles, although they should have been intimately involved in their own handiwork being directly Inspired by God Almighty.

Third, I considered if those nine assertions might not be of God, at all, and thought of them against my knowledge of the scriptures and where they are taught, or not, and whether I thought any of the nine assertions could find scripture support, from any verses I know of, off hand. No, although I would hope to think they have at least tried some kind of way, but I can't see me buying anything they say.

Thus, I don't believe these nine assertions are of God, at all, and are in fact nine unsubstantiated, indefensible, outlandish lies.

The nine gratuitous assertions may be met in kind by another gratuitous assertion that I don't know of any evidence of them being of God, at all, and I don't believe any evidence exists that they are of God, at all, in any way or that God had or has anything to do with them.

That's my take on how to deal with KJVONLY folks, to start with.

Unless Peter Ruckman was smarter than God, Who you think would have clued someone else in on what He was doing, over time, if He had anything to do with them, at all, before informing Mr. Ruckman, alone(?), in the mid-twentieth century, of such far reaching and monumental principles God supposedly employed in His Inspired writing of the KJV.