There has been a controversy raging in our “corner of the world” that is barely a blip on the screen in most places across the country. It has to do with whether God has preserved His Word in only one translation of the Bible (KJV) or whether there are other translations that are equally viable for Christians to use. Sadly, this controversy has brought division among Christians that otherwise agree on core doctrines of the faith, but disagree on this matter. I have read extensively on both sides of the debate as I believe nothing is more important than knowing that the Bible in my hand is the Word of God. And, of the many books I have read, “One Bible Only?” represents accurately what I think is the right view on this issue and is easily accessible to most Christians. (A brief rebuttal to this book has been written by KJV only proponents, which I have also read.)
Too much of what I hear bandied about among KJV only advocates is, in my estimation, unsupported by the historical/biblical data. I believe that those who espouse the KJV only position are genuinely concerned that if they explain the history of the Bible accurately and the variants that exist in the manuscript evidence, that they will somehow undermine the faith of believers. However, failing to accurately represent the facts, as well as being illogical in your reasoning about those facts, is not only misguided, it impugns the character of God’s church. For many people the details of manuscript transmission, textual criticism, translation methods, etc., etc., is too complex to pursue personally. Consequently, they trust others to think through the issue for them and then parrot what they’ve been told by those individuals. Unfortunately, some of the “experts” are basically doing the same thing and haven’t thoroughly investigated the matter for themselves. Still others have apparently studied the evidence and dismissed it as inconsequential, since it does not support their position. In its place they have embraced a “faith” position that does not rest on the revelation of God (the Bible), historical data, manuscript evidence, or a sense of logic. The fact is, you can repeat unfounded arguments as many times as you like, but repetition of those arguments does not make them true. And, it is not genuine scholarship or honest investigation to merely read the writings of those that agree with your position. You must be willing to study the thoughts of those that differ with you in order to understand both sides. Actually, we should follow the evidence where-ever it leads us, which I think leads you away from the KJV only position.
The historical position of the church has long been that inspiration rests in the original manuscripts of the Bible and that God has preserved His Word in the vast number of copies that have been handed down (copied) through the ages (nearly 6000 of the NT alone). Since no two extant manuscripts match any other manuscript exactly, the need for careful textual analysis (i.e., textual criticism) has enabled us to discover with a high degree of accuracy what God said in the originals. The relatively small amount of uncertainty (less than 2% of the total text) does not affect any doctrine or core belief of the Christian faith. Even the highly revered (by KJV only advocates) Textus Receptus was derived using textual criticism employed by Erasmus, Stephanus, and Beza. Further, it is illogical to compare other translations to the KJV (as if it is the final authority) to determine if they are correct in their wording of the Bible. The Bible was not written in Elizabethan English, but in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. It is to the original languages and manuscripts that appeal must be made when clarifying a passage or word. In addition, there is no translation of the Bible so perfect that there is no need to consult the original languages. Nor can it be proven by KJV advocates that God has preserved His Word in a single, identifiable, and publicly accessible ancient manuscript that perfectly represents the originals. Without this singular manuscript the “KJV only” position falls apart. Instead, the historical data shows that God’s Word has been preserved in several thousand manuscripts that have been meticulously compared by textual scholars to determine the original readings. I agree that the quality of some translations of those manuscripts is better than others. However, teaching that the only acceptable Bible in the English language for the English speaking people is the KJV is an irreparably flawed position. It is simply illogical and unsustainable from the evidence, as well as being unnecessary in order to prove that we have God’s authoritative Word.
If you want to read an excellent book from the faculty of Central Baptist Seminary about how we got the Biblical text and why we can trust it to be an accurate rendering of the original manuscripts, then by all means read this book.
The historical position of the church has long been that inspiration rests in the original manuscripts of the Bible and that God has preserved His Word in the vast number of copies that have been handed down (copied) through the ages (nearly 6000 of the NT alone). Since no two extant manuscripts match any other manuscript exactly, the need for careful textual analysis (i.e., textual criticism) has enabled us to discover with a high degree of accuracy what God said in the originals. The relatively small amount of uncertainty (less than 2% of the total text) does not affect any doctrine or core belief of the Christian faith. Even the highly revered (by KJV only advocates) Textus Receptus was derived using textual criticism employed by Erasmus, Stephanus, and Beza. Further, it is illogical to compare other translations to the KJV (as if it is the final authority) to determine if they are correct in their wording of the Bible. The Bible was not written in Elizabethan English, but in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. It is to the original languages and manuscripts that appeal must be made when clarifying a passage or word. In addition, there is no translation of the Bible so perfect that there is no need to consult the original languages. Nor can it be proven by KJV advocates that God has preserved His Word in a single, identifiable, and publicly accessible ancient manuscript that perfectly represents the originals. Without this singular manuscript the “KJV only” position falls apart. Instead, the historical data shows that God’s Word has been preserved in several thousand manuscripts that have been meticulously compared by textual scholars to determine the original readings. I agree that the quality of some translations of those manuscripts is better than others. However, teaching that the only acceptable Bible in the English language for the English speaking people is the KJV is an irreparably flawed position. It is simply illogical and unsustainable from the evidence, as well as being unnecessary in order to prove that we have God’s authoritative Word.
If you want to read an excellent book from the faculty of Central Baptist Seminary about how we got the Biblical text and why we can trust it to be an accurate rendering of the original manuscripts, then by all means read this book.
This is another excellent book concerning the "KJV Only" controversy. It is gracious in tone and avoids the vitriolic language that seems prevalent in some books on the subject. Included is a complete history of how we got the Bible with a thorough section dealing with the textual issues that underlie the erroneous arguments of the "KJV Only" advocates. This book will enlighten you with biblical/historical evidence supporting what has long been the position of the NT church. If you can still find a copy of “King James Onlyism: A New Sect,” it is worth every penny you pay to purchase it.
Dr. James D. Price was professor of Hebrew and Old Testament at Temple Baptist Seminary in Chattanooga, TN, from 1972 to 2005 and Academic Dean from 2000 to 2005. He has a B.S. Degree in Engineering from Purdue University, a Master of Divinity degree from Northwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and a Ph.D. in Hebrew and Biblical Literature from Dropsie College for Hebrew and Cognate Languages. He is a trusted scholar that holds dear the fundamentals of the Christian faith.
