Why do KJV only cultists argue that the KJV we read TODAY is the only inspired version when it is altered?

Question

I was talking with a KJV cultists who said that ONLY the KJV we read today is the ONLY authorized version. He insisted that G-d only blessed this translation, in fact that G-d had inspired the English KJV of today. What I didn't know at the time was that the original KJV has gone through many revisions, each correcting mistakes of the last, or introducing new mistakes, and that the Apocrypha was part of the FIRST KJV. If G-d inspired it does that mean he made a mistake?

Answer 1

To the surprise of many people the King James Bible has already been changed; today no one reads the King James Version in its original form. Explaining why this is so the book The Bible in Its Ancient and English Versions says: “Almost every edition, from the very beginning, introduced corrections and unauthorized changes and additions, often adding new errors in the process. The edition of 1613 shows over three hundred differences from 1611. . . . It was in the eighteenth century, however, that the main changes were made. . . . The marginal references were checked and verified, over 30,000 new marginal references were added, the chapter summaries and running headnotes were thoroughly revised, the punctuation was altered and made uniform in accordance with modern practice, textual errors were removed, the use of capitals was considerably modified and reduced, and a thorough revision made in the form of certain kinds of words.”

So many changes have been made, many of them in the readings of passages, that the Committee on Versions (1851-56) of the American Bible Society found 24,000 variations in six different editions of the King James Version!

So the King James Bible of today is much different than the one of 1611.

Answer 2

Zondervan, which publishes the NIV, is a Christian publishing company. The Satanic bible is published by Avon, not Zondervan. I don't know where you read that the company that publishes the NIV also publishes the Satanic bible, but it's not true. I don't discriminate when it comes to Bibles, though I don't use the NWT. I usually use the NIV, RSV, NKJV, or the Holman CSB. I also sometimes use the NASB. I have a question for KJV-only Christians: What did people read before the KJV? And what do people who speak other languages read? I can tell you this: It's not the KJV. Did the Apostles read the KJV? No? They didn't even read from the same manuscripts the KJV was translated from. Why would it be dangerous to use any other version of the Bible? Is God so weak that He can only speak to us through one version, which didn't even exist for the first nearly 1600 years of Christianity's existence? Heaven forbid.

Answer 3

If you study the history behind the KJV, you will find that the revisions that were made were only to correct mistakes that the translators or printers made, and to update the spelling and font, not mistakes in the Scripture it's self. You will also find that the KJV was translated from the Textus Receptus (Received Text, or TR). The TR was preserved by Jewish scribes who copied the Scriptures by hand. They had very meticulous and strict rules they followed when translating to ensure that there were no changes made. Every other version, or perversion, of the Bible was translated from the Alexandrian Text, a text that was corrupted by religious scholars in Alexandria, Egypt. In the early 1600's King James of England commisioned 54 men to translate a pure version of the Scriptures into the English language. These 54 men were fluent in the languages of the Scriptures, namely, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. In 1611, the translation was complete. Since then, the changes made were only to correct the few mistakes that were made by the translators, misprints made by Johann Gutenburg's newly invented printing press. The font underwent a change also, and the way we spell words today is different than the way they were spelled in 1611, so that was canged also. Other than the Alexandrian Text having been corrupted, the actual content of the Scriptures has never changed. God made no mistake, and never will. The Apocrypha was written by men outside of the inspiration of God, and it was never accepted into the cannon of Scripture by either Jewish, or Christian scholars. It was translated and included WITH the original KJV 1611 version, but was not included IN the KJV1611, and it was never intended to be accepted as Scripture.

Answer 4

The Bible is the word of God as far as it's translated correctly. Only a Prophet of God, can restore the mis-translations of the Bible. An attempt was made at doing just that by Joseph Smith, a modern day Prophet. But, he didn't finish the restoration of the Bible before he was murdered in cold blood. What we have is called the Joseph Smith translation. So, for now, wether you are reading the Bible or the Apocrypha, you will need to rely on the Spirit of God, to tell you what is right.

Answer 5

What are the mistakes? When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found there was part of the book of Isiah. They compared it to the translations at the time. Only the King James was spot on.
I believe the KJV is as close to God's word as we can get. It hasn't let me down yet.

Answer 6

No Bible is an authorized work of God. The Bible is the product of man, in an attempt to collect the testimonies of authorized servants of God (the prophets and disciples quoted in the Bibles), but none of that work has ever been authorized by God himself. And so there are errors in every work that claims to be a Bible.

The original records of which the Bibles of the world quote, do not exist. Only copies of what men think are the original writings of those people.

As to whether or not an authorized man lives on the earth today that has the forwithall to determine what is and is not the original teachings of God and his servants, I have my opinions. But I do not need to push them on anyone here. The fact remains, however, that no Bible in existence today is an authorized work, for every Bible that has come to us has come through the unauthorized works of unauthorized men of God, starting from the Dark Ages.

And that should be able to stand on it's own for support. What came out of the Dark Age, after the Christ was murdered and his church organization was destroyed, and his authority was no longer practiced appropriately on the earth, and therefore was not preserved -- what came out of the Dark Age, could not possibly be considered true after those things had happened.

The Age of Reformation drove men to search once again for the true God, but without the appropriate means available, that movement could only go so far, and so now today is exists in the form of the stagnant doctrines of the Christians.

Only a Restoration of keys, priesthood authority, and divine guidance from the Gods themselves could bring the truth back to us in its fulness. A restoration is the key. Not a reformation of what is already false.

And this why the story of Joseph Smith and the Latter-day Saints is such a powerful and critical topic among religionists today. For Joseph Smith claimed to have been the chosen prophet, which the Gods visited and commanded to restore many great and wonderful things pertaining to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, to their fulness.

But I will not go on, for fear of being accused of pushing my religion on others. I'm just a man trying to find the truth, but one thing is for sure, and that is that the Christians and their Bibles are in a pond of stagnant water of superstition and false traditions originating from the Dark Age, when very little light was upon the earth.

And that must count for something, for a person that is looking for truth. And without the authorized priesthood among its members, how could any organization or man claim to have a fulness of the gospel available to it? How could any claim to be free from the influences of the false traditions that have existed since the Dark Age??? What could they possible possess that would qualify them as being free from those influences? Honestly?

Can a man claim to have the Holy Ghost working in his life, when he reads from a corrupt Bible? Of course not. They are only kidding themselves -- the Christians of the world. You cannot grow good fruit from a bad tree. It doesn't work that way. The source of your tradition must be pure.

This is one reason why Christians have such a problem with the Saints, the Latter-day Saints. The doctrines appear to be similar to the Christians' doctrines, but always have a slight difference that testifies of purity and authority that the Christians simply do not have any way of claiming, since they are always going back to their Bibles, which are their only source of truth and authority. Take them away, and what do the Christians have? Confusion and chaos. But take the scriptures away from the Saints (also called Mormons), and what do they have? They still have their prophets and apostles, and their priesthood is in tact, which means their authority remains regardless of the existence of a book or any number of books!

Do you see a pattern here? Are you capable of understanding the underpinnings of what I'm suggesting, here?

Answer 7

I think that the church just wants you to think it is divinely inspired, sort of like self-glamorizing the truth.

Answer 8

Have you heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls?? The KJV has not changed........

Answer 9

please tell me what is KJV and G-d, Am curious, i dunno bout these things