King James Only-ism: Is the KJV King?
Spring Forward Sale! Get 70% off NordPass at http://nordpass.com/religionforbreakfast or use code religionforbreakfast. Plus, you get an additional month for free!
Thanks to NordPass for sponsoring this video.
Join my online seminars on ancient religion: https://www.speakeasy.com/speaker/andrew-henry
Or, join our Patreon community!: https://patreon.com/religionforbreakfast
One-time donations here!: https://www.paypal.me/religionforbreakfast
Check out my favorite religious studies books by following this affiliate link to my Amazon page: https://www.amazon.com/shop/religionforbreakfast
Dr. Ehrman’s analysis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehnEZtqj2Mo&t=3676s
0:00 Introduction
3:14 History of the KJV
7:11 Origins of KJV Onlyism
11:00 Sponsorship break
12:01 KJV Translation: Is it good?
20:15 Analysis: Fundamentalism
Bibliography:
Bill Combs, “Beginning of KJV-Only Movement,” https://dbts.edu/2012/03/09/beginning-of-kjv-only-movement/
Daniel B. Wallace, “Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible is the Best Translation Available Today,” bible.org.
David Anderson, “The Perfection of English and the Making of the KJB,” PBS Religion and Ethics Newsweekly, September 20, 2011.
J.K. Elliott, “Patristic Evidence in the Apparatus Criticus of a Greek New Testament,” in Studies on the Text of the New Testament and Early Christianity, 55-70.
Mark Heuer, “An Evaluation of John W. Burgon’s Use of Patristic Evidence,” JETS 38/4 (December 1995), 519-530.
Margaret Bendroth, “Christian Fundamentalism in America,” 2017.
David Norton, The King James Bible: A Short History from Tyndale to Today, 2011.
Brenda Brasher, Encyclopedia of Fundamentalism, (New York: Routledge, 2001).
Jon Nielson and Royal Skousen, “How Much of the King James Bible is William Tyndale’s?: An Estimation Based on Sampling,” Reformation, Volume 3, 1998.
**Explorando o Universo da Bíblia Online: Uma Viagem Pelas Suas Versões e Recursos**
A Bíblia Sagrada é mais do que um livro; é uma fonte de sabedoria espiritual e orientação para milhões de pessoas em todo o mundo. Com o avanço da tecnologia, a Bíblia online tornou-se uma ferramenta valiosa para aqueles que desejam estudar, meditar e aplicar os ensinamentos contidos nela em suas vidas diárias.
**A Diversidade das Versões:**
Uma das características mais notáveis da Bíblia online é a variedade de versões disponíveis para os leitores. Desde a tradicional Bíblia Sagrada até versões mais contemporâneas, como a King James e a NVI, cada uma oferece uma perspectiva única dos ensinamentos bíblicos. A Bíblia online NVI, por exemplo, é conhecida por sua linguagem acessível e clara, tornando-a uma escolha popular para estudos individuais e em grupos.
**Recursos para o Estudo Profundo:**
Para aqueles que desejam aprofundar seu entendimento da Bíblia, as Bíblias de estudo são uma ferramenta indispensável. Equipadas com notas explicativas, mapas, cronogramas e referências cruzadas, essas versões facilitam a compreensão dos contextos históricos, culturais e teológicos dos versículos. A Bíblia de Estudo Thomas Nelson, por exemplo, é amplamente reconhecida por sua abordagem abrangente e informativa.
**Atendendo a Diferentes Públicos:**
A diversidade não se limita apenas às versões da Bíblia, mas também aos públicos que elas atendem. A Bíblia Infantil, com suas ilustrações coloridas e linguagem simples, cativa os corações das crianças desde tenra idade, introduzindo-as aos ensinamentos sagrados de uma maneira acessível e envolvente. Enquanto isso, a Bíblia Feminina oferece reflexões e estudos voltados especificamente para as necessidades espirituais das mulheres, abordando temas relevantes para suas vidas.
**Explorando a Bíblia Online:**
A busca por conhecimento na biblioteca sagrada online é uma jornada enriquecedora e edificante. Através de simples buscas por palavras-chave como “Bíblia online” ou “Bíblia de estudo”, os estudiosos podem acessar uma vasta gama de recursos, incluindo versículos específicos, comentários, e até mesmo versões em áudio para aqueles que preferem ouvir a palavra de Deus.
**Além das Fronteiras Religiosas:**
Embora a Bíblia seja frequentemente associada ao Cristianismo, suas mensagens transcendem fronteiras religiosas e culturais. A Bíblia Hebraica, por exemplo, é reverenciada pelos judeus como a palavra de Deus, enquanto a Bíblia Sagrada Católica inclui livros adicionais que não estão presentes em outras versões. Essa diversidade reflete a riqueza e a profundidade dos ensinamentos contidos na Bíblia, que continuam a inspirar e transformar vidas em todo o mundo.
**Conclusão:**
Em suma, a Bíblia online é muito mais do que uma simples ferramenta de leitura; é um tesouro de sabedoria espiritual que está ao alcance de todos. Com suas diversas versões e recursos de estudo, ela oferece uma jornada de descoberta e crescimento para aqueles que buscam uma conexão mais profunda com a palavra de Deus.
TAGS
King James Only-ism: Is the KJV King?
bíblia online
bíblia sagrada
bíblia versículo
biblioteca
biblia de estudo
bíblia de estudo
biblia livros
Buscas
biblia online nvi
bíblia católica
bíblia infantil
biblia sagrada online
biblia nvi
biblia king james
biblia ave maria
biblia estudo
biblia on
biblia católica
bíblia feminina
biblia a mensagem
biblia ntlh
biblia png
biblia nvt
biblia aberta
bíblia de jerusalém
bíblia king james 1611
bíblia linguagem de hoje
bíblia online ntlh
bíblia de estudo thomas nelson
bíblia evangélica
bíblia em ordem cronológica
bíblia hebraica
biblia jesuscopy
biblia naa
bíblia sagrada católica
Spring Forward Sale! Get 70% off NordPass at http://nordpass.com/religionforbreakfast or use code religionforbreakfast. Plus, you get an additional month for free!
As someone who doesn't speak english natively
I think I will never get why translations of old texts in english are obsessed with keeping the "Thous" "Thees" and "Shalt not", like I saw latin or ancient greek texts kept in this language for… new reason
This outdated form of english obviously isn't the more accurate language for these texts, because these are translated from another language anyways.
Yes it was what was considered "former" speak when the first translations were written, but so many consider this language to be a given for old texts no matter which language it was originally written in and that's weird.
I think translations should be readable first
@Religion for Breakfast:
Dear Sir, this is such a driving up the wall thing to experience that your entire Lecture commences with "a swing and a miss"! Regretfuly for a startup like this,, Shakespeare NEVER mentioned this brainchild of King James! His Cup of Tea he used to shape his artpieces from, as well as quotations he used to quote from, both, of them had been from The Geneva Bible alone!
Neither did the contemproraries of King James ever utilise and help themselves to this sickening insipid kjv AV Project. For instance, Hugh Willoughby, a renowned Hebraist scholar and translator, a contemprorary of King James, thus said about this AV Project, quote: "Iwould better be tied and torn by wild horses that allow such horrible translation to be hoisted on English people". The Bible that made the Day for such highlighted characters, as: George Washington, Andrew Jackson as well as US Foundinf Fathers aligned with outspoken REformers and writers like, John Knox, Geoge Fox, William Bradford (The Plymouth Colony), William Penn Senior, Penn Junior (The First Governor of Pennsylvania), John Milton, John Bunyan, The Massachussetes Bay colonists and a range of diverse renowned folks, all of them used and exercised, was The Geneva Bible, but NEVER the King James per-Version! The Geneva Bible was also the part and parcel Book of the very existence of folks located in Britain, US, resounding a mind-blasting impact upon their cultures and substances, shaping their very existence, lifestyle and culture, and afterwards shaping the face and depth of the British Empire, pervasively penetrating into its core foundation. It"s so sad you haven"t mentioned these details but instead, you have been so fervently and meticulously elaborating on your fable bubbles instead.
First and foremost, there wouldn't be ANY so-called "King James Bible" had it not been for one avid and thirsty for power tyrant who couldn't part with, but rather clutched to this power-insane desire to retain his one single bottom on the two whole thrones of England and Scotland. And who was also obsessed by the concept of "The Divine Right of Kings" , a teddybear surrealistic fabulous theory of his own fancy which, from his point of view, gave him a license to act like a vicar of God on Planet Earth. However, The Geneva Bible being in predominant circulation of the folks of England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland didn't agree with this surrealistic theory of his and called a spade a spade in every aspect of the English, Scottish and Irish (and, later, American) life. So he made up his mind to burk it completely by inventing his own brainchild that would comfortably sit well with his political and social aspirations as well as his manipulative and folks-suppressing Anglican and Freemasonry cronies and suit his and their power-thirsty, manipulative and tyranic notions likewise.
Here are specific facts and figures which go the whole hog and depict this KJV version together with its pompously tough sponsor James all nine yards.
1.. Genesis 22;1 the KJV says: "And after these things God did tempt Abraham". Now, does God really tempt a person? Is God involved in the business of temptation? When even in KJV in The Epistle of James in the N.T. it is explicitly indicated: "for God tempts no one, neither is tempted by evil…" So how come, then, the KJV translators depict God as the tempter in the O.T. and speak well of God Almighty the way it duly becomes of Him in the New one? Does God change????????????????????? WHO, what creature is in the business of tempting people? Is it not satan?
In contrast, The Geneva Bible reads: "And after these things God did PROVE Abraham" which I believe is the TRUE and correct conveyance from the Hebrew original. The terms "TEMPT" and "PROVE" are never synonyms! I hope you would kindly agree with it . God NEVER tempts anyone, God TESTS us, but NEVER tempts – the business of tempting belongs to satan and his demons (Luke 4:1-4)
.2. Genesis 15:6 "And Abraham believed in God and God credited it to him as righteousness". Good grief… didn't Abraham commence to believing IN God since the very inception when God called out to him in Genesis chapter 12 to "leave his country and his people and go to the land God was about to show Abraham"? Did not Abraham believe in God's existence back then? According to the Book of Jasher, Abraham was considered to be the disciple of Noah. And, using Noah, God had been in the thorough process of teaching and guiding Abraham in all things. Therefore, before Abraham had ever reached Genesis chapter 15, he already was in cognition of God, doubtlessly being aware of His entire existence!
In contrast The Geneva Bible signifies lucidly in Genesis 15:6 that. "Abraham BELIEVED The Lord" (not IN the Lord)! And there is also a reference to this verse in Hebrews quoting this verse without "IN"!
3. Psalm 24:6 the KJV says: "of those who seek your face, O Jacob". Now a question, WHOSE face it's deemed for everyone to seek? The face of God, or the face of Jacob, who himself was the one who sought God and prayed to Him?
In contrast, The Geneva Bible says in this verse: "of those who seek your face, this is Jacob" which appears t be the paramount pertinent, intrinsic and lucid one due to its palpable logically reasonable consistence.
4. In N.T. in The Book of Acts chapter 14 it is being narrated about the Passover taking place in the days of Unleavened Bread with king Herod killing Apostle James with the sword and "because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also". The KJV names this period as "The Easter" which can by no means be attributed to this Glorious Event ! But much rather, easter is a revelry-boozing,impurity-cracking pagan feast which was totally illegal in Israel under the penalty of the participants being stoned to death! In contrast, The Geneva Bible you made yourself at liberty to hurl pointless affronts at, this Holy Book , in spite of your super boffin remarks, puts THE CORRECT TERM to this Event: "The Passover" instead of this negligibly obscure term "ester".
5. 1 Samuel chapter 16 verse 14, where the KJV puts it, that "The Spirit of The Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit of The Lord vexed him". A grievous insult upon The Lord again! Do evil spirits co-exist in the Lord"s Kingdom?
In contrast, the Geneva Bible translated it this way: "and an evil spirit SENT of The Lord, vexed him "(emphasis mine). THIS word SENT makes a bombastic, mind-blowing difference indeed. It clearly points out, that The Lord is Sovereign in the Universe, commanding everyone and everything He deems necessary to, for the purpose of carrying out His Sovereign Will!
6. Isaiah 60:1, KJV "Arise, shine. For thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee."
Can anyone perspiciously explicate WHO is being addressed here? WHOM is all this speech conveyed to?
The Geneva Bible says it clearly: "Arise, O Jrusalem, be bright. For thy light is come. And the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee". Here the subject is at face salience. It is Jerusalem that the emphasis is focused upon.
7. Mark 16:18 " They shall take up serpents (KJV). Sorry… what is the point for the disciples to take up serpents? Were they disciples meant to caress the serpents like babies in their arms? Does it make any sense?
In contrast, the Geneva Bible is crystal clear about it: "And they shall take away serpents".
"Take up" and "Take away' are not one and same peas in a pod! It is a different story altigether. And it is paramount evident that the "Take away" option is more relevant here, because it emphatically and robustly corroborates what The Lord told the disciples: "I give you power to tread on serpents and scorpions and nothing shall, by any means hurt you". .
8. John 3:36, KJV: "He that believeth the Son hath everlasting life, and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath abideth on him
John 3:36 )Geneva) "He that believeth the Son hath everlasting life, and he that obeyeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath abideth on him" .
So these are just a few facts of distorted translation which are clear and evident to making a point and difference as to what Bible version is worthy of trust and reliance on.
Reaching the final srorke of a pen in this layout, it is paramount relevant to note, that it is The GenevaBbible, and not the AV brainchild of James that has shaped US, The United Kingdom and have produced a solid impact upon the entire Anglosphere World.
I do sincerely hope and pray that your success and The Lord"s grace keep you enlightened, blessed and au par.
God Bless!
How ironic that if these KJV onlyists peeps agrees with what Mr. Ruckman says that “the word of the King has power” then they should submit to the authority of the King/Queen of England and be an Anglican. Hahahaha! 😆
Protestant christians he says, like there is any other kind …. It's not just that the king James is king.. The other translations are corrupt and the king James is the authentic one
That's the war in 1611mlk rip van Winkle speech. North vs South
You had me until you started relying on Bart Ehrman…
I am definitely against paraphrased translations, as you are no longer reading the Bible, but a sermon, aka someone ELSE'S interpreted meaning of scripture.
THAT being said, the KJV is hardly THE most accurate. There are far more literal translations than the KJV. For one, they translate sheol, hades, Gehena and Tartarus as hell, when they are NOT all the same place. This is NOT only inaccurate, it's not a distinction without a difference. It actually leads to error and confusion about those actual places.
Then there is the ridiculously archaic and cumbersome Old English usage that is a HUGE barrier to understanding. People have enough issues understanding the Bible as it is, without having to read it through some dead archaic dialect that NOBODY uses today. There is NOTHING spiritual about King James English.
If someone wants to read the KJV because they honestly like it better, that's fine, as long as they understand it is NOT the most accurate and they are NOT doing it, because they think THAT'S the language God speaks.
It's really discouraging to see how many people in the Christian community are so dogmatic, cultish and illogical about things, and even worse, when they become a stumbling block for others.
Oh stop crying. Use what ever version you want and forget those who disagree. Grow up. It will be ok little baby. Stop making it a issue by listening to those who make it a issue.
Example: The first half of the first sentence in Genesis 1:1 is an ancient Hebrew idiom. The KJ translation team tried to translate it word-for-word rather than actual-meaning because they had a maximum of 4 years of education in their languages, and idioms aren't covered until after 4 years. The final phrase they came up with made no sense – "in the beginning which was not the beginning" so they chopped off the last half of it to make it fit. "In the beginning" should read "In the time before human history". And that's just the beginning, the KJV gets even worse MANY times after that, including many, many more idioms. Thank God we have some fully-trained pastors who teach ONLY from the original languages.
I'm completely against KJV-onlyism; however, I would not evoke the research of Bart Ehrman to refute it as he is a self-proclaimed apostate.
Listen to the the KJV of the Bible as narrated by Ronald Reagan. There is a video here on Youtube about it.
KJV is my choice of Bible translation. Problem is, the more times the Bile is translated the more diluted it becomes. And now days, with all the "WOKE" people out there, any new translations are going to be twisted / tweaked to meet worldly values and not the values it was intended to, the Word of God.
Aramaic
When I was a catholic, I never liked the KJV bible. I found it strange and too flowery. Now that I am no longer religious, I find it down right silly.
King James Onlyism is a doctrine by a bunch of old coots…
That one Bible, which they have never read;
Is better than another Bible, which they have never read.
I think ignoring all of the signs that the KJV is divinely inspired is strange, although I do not hate on anyone for reading whatever version they would like. As a pure statistical analysis type of individual, I find it beyond fascinating the amount of 'coincidence' that the KJV holds, particularly in numerical representation that even aligns with Hebrew at times. Very, very interesting stuff that I couldn't ignore while considering myself 'logical'.
I didn’t expect to hear my hometown referenced in the first 20 seconds of this video. But when I think about my experience growing up there, it’s actually not that surprising.
That is so much BS against the KJV here.
Ehrman is not even a believer.
Our conversation is in heaven? What do you think that means after paul said to forget the things of the world?
I have an appreciation for the project
The kjv is the perfect preserved word, if u don't believe it is a supernatural inspired word of God , when I hear people say there's no perfect word then u don't believe God at all for he said he would preserve his word from generation to generation and he said the words of the lord are pure words. Those who say there are errors, show me where they are . Uhave to have a final authority and it can't be you.
413 years and it is still in use. For clarity, I do look at older English texts: Tynedale, Coverdale, Matthew, the Great bible, Geneva. I avoid anything after 1611
I like the CJB translation. I bet you never heard of it.
Dr. Strouse gives a quadripartite argument which deals with: philology, prophets, pedagogues and philosophy. Sloppy of you dude.
AND you my friend having stated in your video.. you favor the RSV translation… already come into this video with your own anti KJV bias… which disqualifies YOU as well to be talking about the KJV..
I actually thought there would be an honest assessment of the KJV.. and it's practical usage… and why there are KJV onlyists in the first place… until they brought on board.. Bart Erhman as a source.. to discuss the KJV.. I look at Bart Erhman as I do James White..
I do not feel either one.. are spiritual enough to be deciphering for others… let alone me.. which bible translation I should use and why… I feel both are too academic in their approach.. basing their "so called"… superior knowledge.. on what they have learned by secular studies…
things of God are spiritual.. and MUST be interpreted… by those with some level of spirituality.. ..sadly either one of these do not fit the bill..
Point 1 – changes in the english language – is obvious. Im not sure how anyone even tries to defend using 1611 English for a 2024 audience…
but the other two points are pretty weak…or at least the arguments you make are.
For point 2 – Every Bible translation is biased in some way. You would have to demonstrate that the KJV had more bias than other bibles to make this argument work.
For point 3 – you don't make much of an argument for the superiority of the manuscripts used for KJV vs. others. The older manuscripts might be better…or maybe they aren't. What if the newer ones used even older manuacripts as their sources? There are plenty of reasons to prefer the masoretic text to the LXX or other manuscripts…there are reasons to prefer LXX to masoretic.
why do all pf these videos start off the same way… talking about the KJV origins… where it came from… blah blah blah… that's all people who want to harp about KJV onlyists wish to do.. is try to make the belief that the KJV translation of the bib le.. is silly and antiquated and without merit… Why not just show several verses side by side comparing to what is stated across multiple translations.. and allow the KJV to stand for itself?..
that is what I have done over the years… compared verses .. verse by verse.. and seen for myself ..how the KJV tops all other translations.. in the way the intended meaning of the verse was related… without contradictions…
let others do the same thing… anyone with half a brain… will see why there are KJV onlyists in the first place… and the reasons are NOT… because that is what our pastor uses.. or I love the archaic language… or a simple I just trust it… they will get verse by verse descriptions of why.. the KJV bests all the other translations…
Excellent presentation overall. Would not necessarily agree with 100% of the lecture, but perhaps 99%? I'm a huge fan of Dr Daniel wallace, but not so much of Bart Ehrman who I understand is a full-blown atheist? I have difficulty in trusting some of his lectures and commentary, due in part to his personal beliefs. That being said, I am generally a proponent of the majority text, but I am not a King James only fanatic, and my favorite General translation is the NKJV. I have a good friend who is a reasonably competent in the Greek and Hebrew and he has found more than 150 significant mistranslations in the 1611 KJV. I am a believer that the original autographs we're inspired, but I don't believe any translations were inspired. I am of the opinion that there is no substitute for in-depth study of the original languages with competent Hebrew and Greek lexicons.
Sad 😢
Always learning and never coming to the Truth
Back when I was an evangelical, I regarded KJV-only Christians as the dumbest of the dumb, thr most ignorant of the most ignorant. As a post-Christian now, I still regard such people as laughably ignorant.
21:10 belief in the fallibility of the bible is definitely the first step to freedom from fundamentalism
KJV is the best English translation IMHO. However, I would consider myself "KJV-preferred" and not "KJV-only." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_Efuk9hAGk
Regarding the KJV-only stance—which is often bundled with hardline legalism—I highly recommend the novel Wisdom Hunter by Randall Arthur. It seems to be the premiere novel illustrating the destructiveness of the legalistic mindset. It's an international bestseller. Many call it a “classic.” I understand that the author was even fired from his Independent Baptist mission agency because of the novel. I think the book was even banned at Bob Jones University.
What I've heard tyndale bible is heretic his writings were heretical that's why he was burned to the steak by the king.
English is my thrid language but I am still learning KJV. The speech style and word use is much better than NIV.
This video proves that the 1611 KJV is perfect in every way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccEGiVbujt4
15:39–16:29 Just wanted to take note of when you talked about the Trinity.
Modern bibles took God out of the bible.
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
-God-was (he was) manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.Omitted verses from modern-day corrupted bibles.
(As to think to have a works based gospel.)
• Matthew 17:21
• Matthew 18:11
• Matthew 23:14
• Mark 7:16
• Mark 9:44 and 9:46
• Mark 11:26
• Mark 15:28
• Mark 16:9-20
• Luke 17:36
• John 5:3-4
• Acts 8:37
• Acts 15:44
• Acts 24:6-8
• Acts 28:29
• Romans 16:24
• 1 John 5:7-8
Partially, and other omitted verses
• Matthew 20:16b
• Mark 6:11b
• Luke 4:8b
• Luke 9:55-56
• Luke 23:17 (preserved in Matthew 27:15 and as Mark 15:6)
• Acts 9:5-6
• Acts 13:42
• Acts 23:9b
• Titus 2:13b
King James Bible is Amazing 😇 https://youtu.be/R9flrGw8294
0:52 "We call this Holy Bible the King James Authorized Version because it was translated under a king and the Bible says where the word of a king is there is power"
Remember "power" isn't always a good thing, though. Furthermore, do you forget that God also told them he didn't want them to have a "king"? And when Samuel tried to warn the people and they wouldn't listen, God told Samuel, …Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. (1 Sam 8:7).
Lastly, but certainly not least: If the KJV is supposed to be the all-inspired Word of God, why have ANYONE'S name on the front of it?
And may Jesus have mercy on anyone who worships ANY version of ANY Bible. For ONLY JESUS is the inerrant, infallible Word of God. His Holy Spirit is 100% sufficient!
I think Ill stick with the only Bible that claims to be inerrant. God promised he would preserve his word . Why call God a liar. So many people that think they are intelligent sit in judgment over Gods word. It will be interesting to see at the judgment seat of Christ how that works out for you.
I have torah at home and my a few bibles.