|
|
|
|
King-James-Only Movement
|
| |
|
| |
The King James Only movement is a label applied to a wide variety of beliefs concerning the superiority of the Authorized King James Version (KJV) of the Christian Bible, and often to the Textus Receptus version of the New Testament and the Masoretic Text of the Old Testament, from which the KJV was translated.
The origin of the label "King James Only" is unclear, though as early as 1987, it was being used to refer to claims of exclusivity for the King James Version and the controversy which had been brewing over these claims for almost a decade.
Discussion
Ask a question about 'King-James-Only Movement' Start a new discussion about 'King-James-Only Movement' Answer questions from other users |
Recent Posts
Encyclopedia
The King James Only movement is a label applied to a wide variety of beliefs concerning the superiority of the Authorized King James Version (KJV) of the Christian Bible, and often to the Textus Receptus version of the New Testament and the Masoretic Text of the Old Testament, from which the KJV was translated.
The origin of the label "King James Only" is unclear, though as early as 1987, it was being used to refer to claims of exclusivity for the King James Version and the controversy which had been brewing over these claims for almost a decade. American church historian and apologist James R. White states that the phrases "KJV Only" and "KJV Onlyism" are not "insulting" or "inaccurate." However, KJV proponent D. A. Waite states the term is a "smear word".
Variations
James White has divided the King James Only movement into 5 main types:
- "I Like the KJV Best" Though White lists this group as a division of the King James Only group, this division does not believe that the KJV is the only acceptable version. Individuals in this category simply prefer the KJV over other translations because their church uses it, because they have always used it, or because they like its style.
- "The Textual Argument" - Individuals here believe the KJV's Hebrew and Greek textual basis are the most accurate. These conclude that the KJV is based on better manuscripts. Many in this group may accept a modern version based on the same manuscripts as the KJV. White claims Zane C. Hodges is a good example of this group. The Trinitarian Bible Society would fit in this division; though "the Trinitarian Bible Society does not believe the Authorised Version to be a perfect translation, only that it is the best available translation in the English language",, "the Society believes this text is superior to the texts used by the United Bible Societies and other Bible publishers, which texts have as their basis a relatively few seriously defective manuscripts from the 4th century and which have been compiled using 20th century rationalistic principles of scholarship."
- "Received Text Only" - Here, the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts are believed to be supernaturally preserved. The KJV is believed to be a translation exemplar, but it is also believed that other translations based on these texts have the potential to be equally good. Donald Waite would fall into this category.
- "The Inspired KJV Group" - Individuals in this group believe that the KJV itself was divinely inspired. They see the translation to be preserved by God and as accurate as the original Greek and Hebrew Manuscripts found in its underlying texts. Sometimes this group will even exclude foreign versions based on the same manuscripts claiming the KJV to be the only Bible.
- "The KJV As New Revelation" - This group of individuals would believe that the KJV is a "new revelation" from God, and can and should be the standard from which all other translations originate. Adherents to this belief may also believe that the original-language Hebrew and Greek can be corrected by the KJV. This view is often called "Ruckmanism" after Peter Ruckman, a staunch KJV supporter.
These latter two views have also been referred to as "Double Inspiration."
These types are not all mutually exclusive, nor a comprehensive summary of those who prefer the KJV. Douglas Wilson, for instance, argues that the KJV (or, in his preferred terminology, the Authorized Version) is superior because of its manuscript tradition, its translational philosophy (with updates to the language being regularly necessary), and its ecclesiastical authority, having been created by the church and authorized for use in the church.
See also
Further reading
}}
|
| |
|
|
