King James Onlyism: A New Sect - A Bible Believer's Response

[kevinmiller]

Kevin, to say that "the Greek and Hebrew texts still exist" is like saying "God's words are all found in Webster's unabridged dictionary". They're all in there somewhere, mixed up and out of order, and found also among many others that are not part of God's word, but Hey, there in there somewhere.

Most modern versionists believe the Hebrew texts have been corrupted in numerous places or even lost. Your position isn't really all that different. You still can't point us to a specific Hebrew or Greek text and say "These are the true words of God". Or can you?

Will

This sounds more like your position than mine.

But I would like to know where the KJV came from since it doesn't derive its authority from the manuscripts it was translated from. Just faith? Sorry, but that's not good enough for me.

[John the Baptist]

Hi John. First off, you should know that there is no consensus or agreement as to what the so called "Majority text" really is, since it hasn't been thoroughly collated, and there is also considerable variety among the Byzantine tradition. Your problem is that you cannot produce for us a single text in any language that you would call the complete and inerrant Bible. You simply do not believe The Bible or any Bible in any language is the infallible word of God. You have no such Book.

If you think you do, then please tell us what it is called and where we can get a copy of it, so we can compare it to our King James Bible.

Thanks,

Will K

Again you show your lack of understanding of the manuscripts and textual criticism. No manuscript has the complete Bible, Byzantine or Alexanderian. But by comparing the manuscripts we have we have all of the writings of Scripture and we can over 98% know the orginal wording of Scripture. God has preserved His Word not like you would have it.What do you think the KJV was translated from? It was Basically translated from the text Erasmas used. (Greek and Hebrew) To say that their is no Greek or Hebrew text is ludicrous.

God Bless
John

[Chelle]

I have no desire to get involved in this debate, only to ask one question, sparked by the following statement by Will:

I do believe that the King James Bible and ONLY the King James Bible is the Final Written Authority, and is the only pure Bible on earth today. I am not a TR man, nor a Masoretic text man, but a King James Bible believer.

I understand that you are a KJ Bible believer -- because English is your first language -- but am I to understand that you do not believe that anyone who speaks a different language has access to the pure words of God -- unless of course they learn English?

[brandplucked]

I have no desire to get involved in this debate, only to ask one question, sparked by the following statement by Will:



I understand that you are a KJ Bible believer -- because English is your first language -- but am I to understand that you do not believe that anyone who speaks a different language has access to the pure words of God -- unless of course they learn English?

Hi Chelle, thanks for the questions. You ask: " am I to understand that you do not believe that anyone who speaks a different language has access to the pure words of God -- unless of course they learn English?"

That's right. This is what I believe. However you don't need to have a perfect Bible to get saved. We are only responsible for the light God has been pleased to give us.

Also, regarding your question. What is the position of most "bible scholars" today? Is it not that we need to "go to the Hebrew and the Greek" to find out what God really said? So what do you think the ratio is of English reading people in the world versus Hebrew/Greek reading people? Not even close. English is the modern day universal language, and God has shown His wisdom in giving us His Book now in the English language.

If you have another theory, please let us know what it is. Thanks,

Will K

[kevinmiller]

I have another theory!

We take the Greek and Hebrew and translate those manuscripts(the same manuscripts that gave us the KJV) into Korean or Chinese or German or French. :java:

And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
(Revelation of John 14:6)

[brandplucked]

I have another theory!

We take the Greek and Hebrew and translate those manuscripts(the same manuscripts that gave us the KJV) into Korean or Chinese or German or French. :java:

And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,
(Revelation of John 14:6)

Hey Kevin. I finally agree with you on something!

Will K

[kevinmiller]

I thought you just said that if you don't speak English, then you don't have a perfect Bible?

But if we do, in fact, agree, then great! :wink

[brandplucked]

I thought you just said that if you don't speak English, then you don't have a perfect Bible?

But if we do, in fact, agree, then great!

Hi Kevin, the problem is that as far as I know there is no such Bible yet in a foreign language. Not only must another foreign language Bible follow the same Hebrew and the same Greek texts, but it must come up with the same meanings as those found in the English of the King James Bible.

If for instance a foreign language edition comes out that changes Lucifer to "morning star" or "whale" in Matthew 12:40 to something like "sea monster" or "fish", then it is not a perfect Bible.

If God guided the KJB translators to exactly the right Hebrew and Greek texts, then He also guided them as to the correct meanings of those texts.

Something to consider,

Will K

[John the Baptist]

Hi Kevin, the problem is that as far as I know there is no such Bible yet in a foreign language. Not only must another foreign language Bible follow the same Hebrew and the same Greek texts, but it must come up with the same meanings as those found in the English of the King James Bible.

If for instance a foreign language edition comes out that changes Lucifer to "morning star" or "whale" in Matthew 12:40 to something like "sea monster" or "fish", then it is not a perfect Bible.

If God guided the KJB translators to exactly the right Hebrew and Greek texts, then He also guided them as to the correct meanings of those texts.

Something to consider,

Will K

As I said KJV Only put the English over the Greek and Hebrew text.
So really why even have a Greek Text, if this is the case. The Greek has to agree with the English? which came first the horse or the buggy?

[brandplucked]

As I said KJV Only put the English over the Greek and Hebrew text.
So really why even have a Greek Text, if this is the case. The Greek has to agree with the English? which came first the horse or the buggy?

Hi John. You are right. If the KJB IS God's true Bible ( and I fully believe it is) , then the underlying Hebrew and Greek is of little or at least secondary importance. I freely admit this. This is what I believe. It is simply connecting the dots to the only logical conclusion the KJB believer can come to.

But let's take a look at your view. You do not believe that ANY Bible or any Greek or Hebrew text is now the pure word of God. Not one of your modern multiple-choice versions agrees with any of the others, nor with any single Greek or Hebrew text in existence on this earth. So what is your Final Written Authority then? You don't have one and you all know it.

Will K

[John the Baptist]

Hi John. You are right. If the KJB IS God's true Bible ( and I fully believe it is) , then the underlying Hebrew and Greek is of little or at least secondary importance. I freely admit this. This is what I believe. It is simply connecting the dots to the only logical conclusion the KJB believer can come to.

But let's take a look at your view. You do not believe that ANY Bible or any Greek or Hebrew text is now the pure word of God. Not one of your modern multiple-choice versions agrees with any of the others, nor with any single Greek or Hebrew text in existence on this earth. So what is your Final Written Authority then? You don't have one and you all know it.

Will K

Do you realize how illogical your viewof inspiration is? You have a knack for distorting the truth. This is your veiw of the Critical text. The manuscripts are very accurate and there are some totally reliable trustworthy translations. The KJV is not perfect either, but you have to deny alot of truth to maintain that it is perfect. The only completely perfect text were the originals, the manuscripts both Majority text and critical text bear this out. You cannot see the forest for the trees.

[Jerry]

The only completely perfect text were the originals, the manuscripts both Majority text and critical text bear this out. You cannot see the forest for the trees.

Then what good is your position? It is worthless! According to you and your view, there is no true Bible today...

[pneu-engine]

Then what good is your position? It is worthless! According to you and your view, there is no true Bible today...

I agree.

I certainly would not want to be in a church wherein someone with a fool-osophy like that was in any leadership position.

JTB,

You are implying that God did not preserve HIs Word(s) as He promised He would do. Are you aware that that is blasphemy of the very first order. :eek

[brandplucked]

Then what good is your position? It is worthless! According to you and your view, there is no true Bible today...

Hi Jerry. You are absolutely right. John and all the modern versionists do not have nor do they believe "The Bible" (any bible in any language) IS NOW the inspired and infallible word of God. That is without shadow of doubt the only position left to them. To hear men like John make statements like: "The only completely perfect text were the originals, the manuscripts both Majority text and critical text bear this out" is the height of absurdity. The so called Majority text and the Critical texts testify abundantly to the vast confusion of literally thousands of huge textual variants.

At least men like Bart Ehrman are being consistent with their critical text views when they affirm that not even the originals were inspired.

Listen to what they have to say.

The neutral method of Bible study leads to skepticism concerning the New Testament text. This was true long before the days of Westcott and Hort. As early is 1771 Griesbach wrote, "The New Testament abounds in more losses, additions, and interpolations, purposely introduced then any other book." Griesbach's outlook was shared by J. L. Hug, who in 1808 advanced the theory that in the second century the New Testament text had become deeply degenerate and corrupt and that all extant New Testament texts were but editorial revisions of this corrupted text.

As early as 1908 Rendel Harris declared that the New Testament text had not at all been settled but was "more than ever, and perhaps finally, unsettled." Two years later Conybeare gave it as his opinion that "the ultimate (New Testament) text, if there ever was one that deserves to be so called, is for ever irrecoverable."

H. Greeven (1960) also has acknowledged the uncertainty of the neutral method of New Testament textual criticism. "In general," he says, "the whole thing is limited to probability judgments; the original text of the New Testament, according to its; nature, must be and remains a hypothesis."

Robert M. Grant (1963) adopts a still more despairing attitude. "The primary goal of New Testament textual study," he tells us, "remains the recovery of what the New Testament writers wrote. We have already suggested that to achieve this goal is well-nigh impossible." Grant also says: "It is generally recognized that the original text of the Bible cannot be recovered."

George Barna, president of Barna Research Group, reported that a study exploring the religious beliefs of the 12 largest denominations in America highlights the downward theological drift that has taken place in Christian churches in recent years. The study found that an alarmingly high number of church members have beliefs that fall far short of orthodox Christianity. ONLY 41 PERCENT OF ALL ADULTS SURVEYED BELIEVED IN THE TOTAL ACCURACY OF THE BIBLE. Only 40 percent believed Christ was sinless, and only 27 percent believed Satan to be real.

Of the Baptists surveyed 57 percent said they believed that works are necessary in order to be saved, 45 percent believed Jesus was not sinless, 44 percent did not believe that the Bible is totally accurate, and 66 percent did not believe Satan to be a real being. Barna said, "The Christian body in America is immersed in a crisis of biblical illiteracy."

Will

[IM4given]

Of the Baptists surveyed 57 percent said they believed that works are necessary in order to be saved, 45 percent believed Jesus was not sinless, 44 percent did not believe that the Bible is totally accurate, and 66 percent did not believe Satan to be a real being. Barna said, "The Christian body in America is immersed in a crisis of biblical illiteracy."

Will

I am part of the 43 percent that believe works are NOT necessary in order to be saved, part of the 55 percent that DO believe Jesus was sinless, the 66 percent that believes that the Bible is totally accurate, and the 44 percent that believe Satan is ALIVE and WELL and still doing his dirty work on this planet.

As the end times grow nearer and I believe they are, I think we will continue to be a shrinking minority of us who believe that way. That does not make our beliefs wrong, it just means that Satan continues to blind, mislead, and decieve more and more people from the truth!