KJV-Only

The Latin Vulgate as Background to the Version Debate

In light of Bill Combs’s recent posts on the King James Version, I thought it might be helpful to look briefly at another Bible translation that dominated Western Christendom for even longer than the King James. From time to time, KJV-only advocates have argued for...

read more
Reasons vs. Rationalizations

Reasons vs. Rationalizations

I’ve found it helpful to distinguish between reasons and rationalizations. Reasons are facts, arguments, principles, etc., that lead you to a particular conclusion. Reasons are the explanation for why you started holding a position or taking an action. It is what a...

read more

The KJV-Only Movement Comes to America

In previous posts (here, here, and here), I have argued that the beginning of the KJV-only movement can be traced to the publication of the 1881 revision of the KJV, the Revised Version (RV), and the opposition to it by Dean Burgon, which was set forth in his 1883...

read more

Dean Burgon and the Revised Version

The King James-only movement believes that only the KJV is the Word of God. All other English versions are corrupt since no modern Bible version (except the New King James Version) is translated from the Textus Receptus (TR) Greek NT, which is considered to be without...

read more

Dean Burgon: Father of the KJV-Only Movement

In a recent post, I suggested that the beginning of the King James-only movement can be traced to the publication of the Revised Version NT in 1881. The KJV had been the standard English version of the Bible for over 200 years, when the Church of England decided that...

read more

Marginal Notes in the King James Version

The King James-only view argues that only the 1611 KJV is the Word of God in English. All other versions or translations are so corrupt that they are not to be used, nor be appealed to as the Word of God. Most KJV-only advocates contend that the printed Greek text...

read more

The Preface and Opposition to New Translations

In a previous post I noted that the Preface to the 1611 King James Version is an embarrassment to KJV-only advocates because in it the translators of the KJV make a series of statements that argue against the KJV-only position. Since KJV-only proponents insist that...

read more

The Embarrassing Preface to the King James Version

When the King James Version of the Bible came off the press of Robert Barker in 1611, it contained an eleven-page preface titled “The Translators to the Reader.” This preface is primarily a defense of the new translation, but it also provides important information...

read more

The Modern KJV-Only Movement

In my first post on this subject, I argued that the KJV-only position believes that only the KJV of the Bible is the Word of God, and I suggested that the somewhat official beginning of this movement should be traced to the publication of the 1881 revision of the KJV,...

read more

Beginning of KJV-Only Movement

One of the issues that still troubles many churches today is the King James-only error. By KJV-only, I am specifically referencing the belief that only the KJV of the Bible is the Word of God. All other versions or translations are so corrupt that they are not to be...

read more

Is the King James Version the Final Authority?

The King James-only movement suggests that with the coming of the KJV there was no need for further translation work and that the pro­liferation of modern versions is harmful to the church. Yet the transla­tors of the KJV faced the same objection. They note in their...

read more

Is Only the King James Version the Word of God?

The King James-only movement refuses to recognize any other translation in English as the Word of God. As I noted in previous posts (here and here), the Preface to the 1611 KJV is an embarrassment to the KJV-only position because in the Preface the translators...

read more