What's the AUTHORITY for "King-James-Version-Only"?

[tyndale1946]

Thus you are more of KJ Prefered as opposed to King James Only

I'm not Pastor Bob, Salty but I can see this applies to me also!... I am not in the Only camp... That being said the KJV was the trailblazer for the English language... If you have an English Translation the KJV laid the foundation... I like robycop3's comparison to the Model-T and the car he is now driving... But what he fails to realize, if not for the Model-T, he wouldn't be driving the car he now has... To put it bluntly he would be walking or riding a horse... Brother Glen

 

[Salty]

I call myself KJT - King James (by) Tradition
As I grew up - (eons ago) we only had the KJV - That's what we read, and memorized out of.
In fact, that is the only version I have ever memorized verses from.

 

[tyndale1946]

I call myself KJT - King James (by) Tradition
As I grew up - (eons ago) we only had the KJV - That's what we read, and memorized out of.
In fact, that is the only version I have ever memorized verses from.

Salty!... That applies to me also... I had no reason for another version, the KJV was in our Christian homes, it was in our church and it is was the Bible everyone brought to church... I grew up with it and it is in my blood... There are brethren who it is there Preference and others who it is Tradition... You other brethren want to fight the KJVO's have at it... Just leave Salty, Pastor Bob and me alone... As long as I have been on this board we always get caught in the crossfire... We didn't start this fire!... Brother Glen

 

[Salty]

I should add that I do use the MV's - Now, If I am asked to preach in a church - and I dont know their stand, I will always use my KJV -(cant go wrong there) But I have been know to use MV while I preach.

I have no problem for those who prefer to use the KJV- But I do object to those who are KJO - as opposed to KJV -P/T

 

[Rippon]

But I have been known to use MV while I preach.

Which modern version?

 

[Salty]

Which modern version?

HCSB, NASB,

 

[robycop3]

I'm not Pastor Bob, Salty but I can see this applies to me also!... I am not in the Only camp... That being said the KJV was the trailblazer for the English language... If you have an English Translation the KJV laid the foundation... I like robycop3's comparison to the Model-T and the car he is now driving... But what he fails to realize, if not for the Model-T, he wouldn't be driving the car he now has... To put it bluntly he would be walking or riding a horse... Brother Glen

While I appreciate your view, we could go further & say there'da been no Model T except for earlier steam-driven vehicles, & they wouldn'ta existed except for the horse-drawn chariot. Today, there are still some chariots & other animal-drawn vehicles (Ask the Amish) and thepre-KJV English Bible versions still exist.

No one denies the KJV's place in history, but like the Model T, it's been replaced by better versions in CURRENT language & spelling. And we still see no AUTHORITY for believing the KJV is the ONLY valid English Bible translation out there.

 

[thatbrian]

I should add that I do use the MV's - Now, If I am asked to preach in a church - and I dont know their stand, I will always use my KJV -(cant go wrong there)

I disagree. Using the KJV says a lot to your audience.

 

[Pastor_Bob]

No one denies the KJV's place in history, but like the Model T, it's been replaced by better versions in CURRENT language & spelling.

It certainly has not been replaced. The KJV is alive and well.

 

[thatbrian]

It certainly has not been replaced. The KJV is alive and well.

Unfortunately.

 

[Yeshua1]

I apologize, brother. I thought I answered that exact question. No one in our church, from the pastor on down, would question any visitor on their version of choice.

Do you feel that the TR and the Kjv are the best Greek/English versions for use, or that the Kjv translators were somehow inspired to do their work in a way beyond other translators?
That inspiration dervives to them because God preserved just them to us?

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Unfortunately.

Sadly, this one response tells me everything I need to know.

 

[Yeshua1]

Sadly, this one response tells me everything I need to know.

The Kjv is the greatest Englsh translation ever done, based upon its influence and use by the Lord, but does not mean is the only version God uses, nor the best one!

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Do you feel that the TR and the Kjv are the best Greek/English versions for use

I do.

or that the Kjv translators were somehow inspired to do their work in a way beyond other translators?

I wouldn't say inspired in the way that the human authors of scripture were inspired. I believe they were far superior in their ability to translate the manuscript evidence than anyone since then. I believe in providential preservation; therefore, I believe God was indeed involved.

That inspiration dervives to them because God preserved just them to us?

I'm sorry, my friend. I 'm not sure what you're asking here.

 

[Yeshua1]

I do.


I wouldn't say inspired in the way that the human authors of scripture were inspired. I believe they were far superior in their ability to translate the manuscript evidence than anyone since then. I believe in providential preservation; therefore, I believe God was indeed involved.


I'm sorry, my friend. I 'm not sure what you're asking here.

Kjvo holds that since the TR was preserved as the "right and only" Greek text, the Kjv translator product also got secondary inspiration. Do you hold that the Kjv is without any mistakes in it>

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Kjvo holds that since the TR was preserved as the "right and only" Greek text, the Kjv translator product also got secondary inspiration.

I do not believe in "double inspiration." I do not believe that the KJV was given by "direct inspiration" as were the originals. I do, however, believe in "derivative inspiration" and that God providentially preserved His Word and that we have it available to us today in English.

Do you hold that the Kjv is without any mistakes in it>

Absolutely. The KJV is without any error of fact.

 

[Rippon]

The KJV is without any error of fact.

Your comment is evidence of KJVOism.

Why qualify your statement with the terminology of error of fact?

Your bottom line is that the KJV (of whatever stripe) has absolutely no errors --right? If so, you believe it is perfect.
If mistakes were shown in the KJV you would have to renounce KJVOism.

 

[Rippon]

D. A. Carson : The King James Version Debate : A Plea for Realism

Carson says that non-Byzantine based versions are read by many more folks than have ever read Byzantine-based versions."Will those who appeal to the argument from providence then concede that divine providence is justifying this development? If they do not and instead write the development of as apostasy, they are guilty of gross inconsistency, and so the argument cannot be trusted. If they do concede it, then their present defense of the Byzantine text will have been shown to be erroneous, and so again one will have to conclude that something is wrong with the argument." (p.57)

 

[robycop3]

It certainly has not been replaced. The KJV is alive and well.

So's the Model T. Been to a car show lately?

BUT....

Is Elizabethan English taught in our schools?

I do not believe in "double inspiration." I do not believe that the KJV was given by "direct inspiration" as were the originals. I do, however, believe in "derivative inspiration" and that God providentially preserved His Word and that we have it available to us today in English.

Every English-using Christian believes likewise.

Absolutely. The KJV is without any error of fact.

Actually, there are SEVERAL. There's the glaring "Easter" goof in Acts 12:4 & "the love of money is THE root of ALL evil" in 1 Tim. 6:10. These two booboos have been discussed ad nauseam in other threads, and no one has begun to prove they are not errors. There are others, but these are all we Freedom Readers need to prove the KJVOs wrong.

 

[robycop3]

I wouldn't say inspired in the way that the human authors of scripture were inspired. I believe they were far superior in their ability to translate the manuscript evidence than anyone since then. I believe in providential preservation; therefore, I believe God was indeed involved.

Well, actually, many of those men also believed that the "cure" for migraine & other severe headaches was trepanning, that is, cutting a hole in the skull to let the "had humours" escape, & that unicorns & satyrs existed. (Not out of stupidity, but from lack of knowledge.) We have far-better tools for translation and many more manuscripts available than the AV men had.

But I agree that GOD was involved in the AV's making, same as He was in the making of every English Bible translation from those of Aelfric of Eynsham (C.955 AD - C.1010) to the ESV.

I DO NOT agree He is limited to but one English translation of His word.

Given the multiple English meanings of many Hebrew, Aramaic, & Koine Greek words & phrases, I believe reading multiple translations gives us a better overview of all Scripture, as God gives different "nuggets" of intel to each individual translator.