What is your take on KJV onlyism?

Question

I would like to know what is your feelings about people demanding to read KJV Bible and says its' the only true word of God. Saying that children and young adults today should know how to read it but, how can we understand it? It was written in the 1600's. I perfer a new Christian or child learn NKJV or NIV.

Answer 1

The KJV was meticulously translated. By man. And, no surprise, it isn't perfect.
There IS no perfect translation because, even if you have a Hebrew, Greek or Chaldean lexicon, you don't have the meaning of the words from 2,000 years ago. Meanings change. Take the word "gay" for example - means something VERY different today than it did 20 years ago.
Without taking the time to learn the original languages, then do have the lexicons as well as a Strongs (or other) Concordance. Read the same passages in different versions for richer comprehension. A passage read from the KJV, the NIV and The Message takes on new dimension.
Read it - and read it sloooowly and patiently! Read it reguarly. And read it again and again. What had no relevance (seemingly) last month can suddenly leap out at you today.

Answer 2

Some times it is what you become familiar with from circumstances.
My grandfather died in 1963 and left me 4 KJV Bibles, since published 1611 + 303 years and in 1914 CE [ WW1 of 1260 days, 42 months or 3 1/2 years ], it is an excepted translation, to late for me not to like it as we have got to be in the last days.

WHAT DOES IN MEAN LAST DAYS?

Jesus was in world Empire Rome #6, world get the bible in world Empire #7 2520 years after World Empire Babylon #3 as Daniel's prophecy says, Daniel was 606 BCE and that is also 1914 CE to end the #7 Empire, Jesus comes again the second time to end the 8th and Satan has a short time in the 8th Rev.17:10-14 the 8th that is of the #7.

The truth can be found just as much in the KJV Bible 1611 as it can in any other, we do not have to have the best language translation. Translations and interpretations can cause loss of the meanings of words, besides nothing can stop the fact that this is old and no matter the translation, some loss will result if extreme care is not taken to find the right meaning is not done with all seriousness.
SUBJECTS as hell, hell fire, soul, spirit, life, death, resurrection, angels, Satan and devil, sin, the people and their stories, the priest, the prophets, the Judges, the king line and the genealogy of Jesus, the time involved in the events, the age of Jesus and the time of the world Empires, what was LOST that must be SAVED, BIBLE BOOK AND WHEN THEY WERE WRITTEN, and who wrote what, God the Father that Jesus spoke of and why Jesus qualifies to be savior the world, as 2Tim.2:15; 3:15-17; We are told how to study it, and what it is for.
HOW MANY YEARS DOES ANY ONE HAVE TO READ THE TRANSLATION THEY HAVE CHOSEN, BEFORE THEY CAN SAY, THEY TRUELY DO KNOW THE BIBLE?

Answer 3

you hit my hot button on this one. I hate it when people for some rediculous reason insist that this old translation is the ONLY translation that is accurate. If you like, read it. I don't like it because I want to read in the langauge I think in. KJV is a foreign langauge, I don't speak spanish so why would I use a spanish bible, and I don't speak in king james english so why would I want to read the kjv?

Many scholars believe that the NIV is a much more accurate translation and should be used. I agree with others who say the New American Standard is the most accuarte.

I suggest you read the version you are learning and growing from. There are some not so good verisons out there. Stay away from that new world translation (the one the jw's use) it is bad news, as well as the catholic version which adds books to the Bible.

Study the Word and don't let these legalist convince you that your version is bad.

Answer 4

I can't for the life of me understand where these KJV-only people are coming from. The KJV is simply not the most accurate translation of the Bible. If you want an accurate translation, I advise the New Revised Standard Version. But even better is to learn the original languages.

I've actually heard some people trying to claim that the KJV is better than the original Hebrew and Greek versions! This absolutely blows my mind. What about Spanish-speaking people? Or Chinese? Or any other language but English. Should they learn KJV English so they can read the word of God? That's just ridiculous.

Answer 5

The argument is usually, "the Bible hasn't changed". That may be true, but scholars have more reliable texts to translate from than were available at the time. Further, our language HAS changed (in fact, the KJV is in "Early Modern English", not "Modern English" - the word "thou" still meant "you" (singular) at the time, we don't use it anymore).
When I studied religion in college, the professor would not allow the King James Version in the classroom, unless you had a letter from a minister stating it was against your religion to use any other version.
Personally, I think the best bet would be to learn Hebrew and Greek if you're concerned about the translation issue and read the original languages. A serious Muslim will learn Arabic so they can read the Qur'an in the original and not have to rely on a translator's interpretation of it, something very positive I find in their religion. If Greek and Hebrew are out, use two different translations to interpret the Bible as you think is best.
My personal favorite is the New Revised Standard Version (preferable the Oxford Annotated Bible's printing of it - wonderful notations).

Answer 6

Any good translation will give you the knowledge of God needed or salvation. Which translation to use is personal preference. I have found for my own study that the KJV expresses thing more completely, and there have been changes made in other translations that make certain passages not as clear to me. For this reason, although I own several versions of the Bible, I use the KJV almost exclusively. I will give two examples of what I am talking about. Compare the NIV and KJV on these two texts.
Romans 9:28 and 1 John 5:14

In Romans 9:28 we read:

For the Lord will carry out his sentence on earth with speed and finality." (NIV)

For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth (KJV)

The KJV means something entirely different than the NIV. While the NIV talks about God carrying out a sentence as in judgment, The KJV declares that for the sake of righteousness, God will not allow the world to go on for ever and will even finish the work of spreading the gospel to the world because mankind apparently is not finishing the work.

In 1 John 5:14 we read:

This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us (NIV)

And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us (KJV)

Although the difference is more subtle, the meaning is huge. In the NIV we have confidence in approaching God. The KJV speaks of confidence in a person, Jesus Christ. It is because of who Jesus is, our Creator, and what He has done for us, redeemed us, and what He continues to do for us as our High Priest and Advocate before the Father, that we can have confidence in Him. While it is true that no man comes to the Father except through Jesus, the NIV does not express this nearly as well. We have faith and confidence in a person, Jesus, not in our ability to approach God.

Answer 7

I have always used the KJV, that is all I can understand
If I read other versions, This on this site, I don't know what it actually means.
I have to compare one with the other, so I go look it up.
I guess some think other translations.
But I have found that they changed the words.
I don't think it is wrong, Some use The Amplified Bible and also the KJV
It's a matter of choice.
It's hard for me to translated what they rewrote.
It' all the word of God
I think the only difference is thee , thou, shall, wilt
I can understand, that is me, you, will, or you will do it.....
To each his own, I read what I believe is the inspired word of god.
Not what someone, a man or group thinks it should be

Answer 8

Onlyism is that a new word lol
these other bible are fin they are modern they say the same thing just in today's language like you know what mean its all good its still Gods word because the King James isn't the original either it was translated from the Hebrew and the Greek and Aramaic and other Languages into Old English these other version are still the same but in New English

Answer 9

I think there are less and less of those, but they still exist I see.
The KJV is based on documents known as the Textus Receptus, or Received Text, produced by Erasmus. Now Erasmus did not have all of the greek manuscripts available, In fact, in part of Revelation, he had to translate from the Latin Vulgate back into Greek to have a complete text!
The KJV only people are all firmly Protestant. Erasmus, in spite of being at the time of the Reformation, remained Catholic.
The English translation now called the KJV? How did it come about?
There was a translation done by the Puritans called the Geneva Bible. King James, who did not like the Puritans (today's Evangelicals) because he had been brought up by them in Scotland, decided he should commission a group of scholars to produce a Bible that all could agree on. (a compromise translation?). Character of King James? In order to be a minister in his government you had to be one of his "favourites". That meant being in bed with him, He was apparently a pervert.
Back to the translation. The scholars that did the job actually produced an excellent translation, with the material they had. They also produced the greatest peice of English literature ever written, which actually contributed a great deal to normalizing the English language.
Why ami I saying all this? Because the KJV pushers today claim that the modern translations are from inferior Greek manuscripts (in the case of the New Testament) - when they don't realize the quality of Greek manuscripts used for the KJV! They claim people like Westcott and Hort were compromisers with liberal protestantism, while the whole purpose of the KJV was a compromise Bible. They say that the KJV should be used today because it is more identified to Conservative Christianity. It was produced to get away from the Genev Bible which was identified with Conservative Puritan Protestantism.
I don't know if that helps. In other words those who insist on using the KJV only don't have a leg to stand on.

Answer 10

Without getting to compllicated.....there's one major translation of the Bible (which was written in 3 languages) into English.

The KJV is the closest translation into English. IT is the only one translation that has been properly preserved since it was originally translated.
Many other translations leave out very important parts of the Word, by skipping or changing a word here or there. Some take the "blood" out completely!!! But it's through the blood of Jesus that we are saved.
I've read some of the other versions, and the KJV is the best.

*** As far as it being too hard to understand....20 years ago a survey showed that it was written on a 6th grade level. Now a survery shows a 10th grade level. Unfortunatley we're being dummied down through our lower standard education, so we "can't understand" it as well.....

And lastly.....we can't rely on ourselves to figure out the Bible. Spending time with our Savior, asking Him to guide and direct our thoughts before we read His Word helps. His Holy Spirit living inside of us gives us clarity of mind and understanding in many areas...including what His Word means.