Firstly let me be clear, Scripture, I mean the Bible is the complete word from God that has no error. However, I must make a difference between the Bible and Bible versions. Bible versions is when Scripture was translated from the originals into other languages e.g. Zulu Bible, or the popular English ones (NIV, NET, KJV). Therefore, as much as the Bible is the perfect word of God, it has however, been translated into other versions which are not perfect.
If you want to fully understand how our Bible was translated, I suggest you read this Article or perhaps checkout our YouTube Teaching on this. Regardless, what I want to tackle today is the popular – and in my opinion, dangerous teaching – that the King James is the only perfect version of the Bible that believers must use exclusively, and reject other “perversions.” I have listed a few problems about this mindset below.
The KJV is not the first Bible!
The year 1611, (about a 100 years after the Reformation) is when the KJV Bible was authorized for public use by King James I of England. Therefore, those who say it is the first Bible, are they implying that believers had no Bible at all before that; I mean, about a thousand years after the death of the Apostles? So what were those pitiful Christians reading all that time? Perhaps you don’t know, but before the KJV was the Geneva Bible, the Bishop’s Bible, the Great Bible, the Matthew Bible, the Tyndale Bible and the Latin Vulgate, going further down church history. Which means the King James itself was once a modern version, just as there are modern versions of the Bible today. Therefore, those who make the KJV the standard of perfection are somewhat ignorant of the fact that the Christian Faith and the Bible did not come into existence in 1611.
The 1611 KJV is no longer used today
Again, no one will tell you this, but the 1611 Authorized Version has been updated many times already: in 1629, 1638, 1762 and 1969. Hence the King James Bible that you probably use now is the 1969 Oxford Version. Which was also revised into the modern NKJV. Hence those who claim that the 1611 was a perfect translation must also explain why it was revised again and again until it was replaced by a modern version of its kind.
The KJV is not closer to the original
The Greek manuscripts that the KJV is translated from are called the Byzantine type or the Majority Text manuscripts. These were the only available manuscripts during that time. However, in 1947, another group of manuscript called the Eclectic Text were discovered and guess what? These were observed and found to have been older than the Majority text, hence closer to the original. These are what other Bible versions i.e. NIV are translated from. That is the reason why some versions have missing verses in them (Joh 5:4, Act 8:37, Mat 17:21), it’s not because they willingly omitted those verses (actually there was no verse divisions) but because older manuscripts do not contain such. Therefore, such verses appear in the KJV because they have been added into the text, not removed. Which means the NIV is actually more accurate than the KJV – I didn’t know that!
Other versions removed the deity of Christ?
My problem with my KJV-only friends is their bias when it comes to this issue. They are able to select a few verses that read differently from the KJV (textual variation), for example, 1 Timothy 3:16 and then somehow conclude that there are people who deliberately changed those verses to remove the deity of Jesus. Yet if they were to honestly read the whole of the modern versions such as the ESV, they will not miss that the God nature of our Lord is as clear as day. For example, you can read about the Deity of Jesus from the NIV in these verses: Hebrews 1:8, John 1:1 & 1 John 5:20 just to note a few.
If I were to use the same principle and bias against the King James Bible, I would tell you that the KJV also removes the deity of Christ in John 1:18, 1 Peter 3:15 and Jude 1:4? How about Acts 12:4 where the KJV uses the pagan word “Easter” instead of the original word “Passover”? Oh, by the way, do you know that the 1 John 5:7-8 reading of the King James is found nowhere in any Greek manuscript? Which means somebody deliberately changed that. And why did they choose to use “Holy Ghost” instead of “Holy Spirit” because some people know a “ghost” as something else? Now I ask, is it fair for me to now condemn the KJV because of these issues? No, it’s not fair at all because we are dealing with an imperfect translation, just like the others.
The KJV-Only movement forgets other languages
Like I said, Scripture has been translated into different languages already. Therefore, those who say the KJV is the only true Bible, what are they saying about the Spanish Bible, Ndebele Bible, Chinese Bible? Are they saying that God is so narrow such that He only chose to communicate accurate truth to English people only? While there are thousands of other language groups that don’t know one English word. And those people have Scripture in their languages and they rejoice in the same doctrines of the Christian faith that all of us have. Do you see how lost this whole thought process is?
What about difficult words
Since English is not an African language, it makes it even harder for us to understand that Shakespeare's English from the King James. These are some of the words you will find in your Authorized Version: unicorn, ague, anon, ensample, harrow, offscuity, twain, surfeiting, sodden…. Such words makes it impossible for us Africans to correctly interpret Scripture. Is it not better to read something that you can easily comprehend its meaning?
Brethren, my goal is not to run down the KJV Bible. If I had time, I would list the beautiful things about that Bible. In fact, I think it is one of the best Bible versions for English-speaking people. I actually prefer the KJV in my preaching because of its formal (word-for-word) approach to Biblical context. I also like its poetic layout which allows for easy memorization of the Word of God. However, I wanted to warn about the KJV-Only extremism which has developed into a cultic mindset that thinks you are a bad Christian if you disagree with them and are not reading the King James Bible. Such things create unnecessary fights among believers. If the KJV happens to be your standard of truth, fine, but please don’t abuse people to conform to your standard. There are other versions that we can use that are actually more helpful than the KJV, for example, the NASB. Each of us must be allowed to carry a Bible version that best helps us in our individual walk with God. That is all I had to say.
Sinothi Ncube
Related Content
Comments
Post a Comment