{"id":1567,"date":"2018-04-14T21:19:36","date_gmt":"2018-04-14T21:19:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/leadinghorsestowater.net\/?p=1567"},"modified":"2020-02-08T03:11:00","modified_gmt":"2020-02-08T03:11:00","slug":"king-james-only","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/leadinghorsestowater.net\/?p=1567","title":{"rendered":"King James Only?"},"content":{"rendered":"

KJV or King James Authorized Version of the Bible refers to the 1611 English translation of the Bible. This translation was commissioned by King James of England, head of the Church of England.<\/strong><\/p>\n

There are a couple of\u00a0legitimate reasons that a Christian may claim to be King James only, in reference to good Bible translations:<\/strong><\/p>\n

There are pastors that prefer that their congregation all use the same translation.\u00a0 A pastor may preach only from the KJV.\u00a0 In order to avoid confusion,\u00a0particularly for new believers, that pastor may encourage his congregation to use the same KJV translation that he does. \u00a0He may be referred to as KJV only and this is well and good.<\/strong><\/p>\n

There may be pastors who believe, out of personal conviction, the KJV is the best translation available. \u00a0These pastors would encourage their congregation to use what they consider the best translation. They could therefore be referred to as KJV only. \u00a0 This is also well and good.<\/strong><\/p>\n

There are also some that believe that the KJV translation itself is inspired or God breathed per II Timothy 3:16.\u00a0 This would mean that the KJV is a perfect translation with no mistakes and no inadequacies of any kind.\u00a0 The logic of this thinking leads to the faulty conclusion that the original languages can be corrected by the KJV and that all other translations of the Bible should be checked by the KJV translation.\u00a0 The individuals that hold to this teaching are also known as KJV only, but this is not well and good. \u00a0As good as the KJV translation is, it is not a perfect translation.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The KJV translators were Anglicans. \u00a0The Anglican Church or the Church of England was a state church closely akin to the Roman Catholic Church. \u00a0King Henry the VIII of England requested that the Roman Catholic church annul his marriage to Catherine of Aragon who was unable to give him a male heir. \u00a0The Pope declined.\u00a0 The breach with Rome came to a conclusion when King Henry\u00a0replaced the Archbishop of Canterbury in order to have his marriage annulled.\u00a0 As a result of the breach with the Roman Catholic Church, King Henry the VIII became head of the church in England.\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

King Henry\u00a0VIII, as head of the Church of England and head of state subsequently used his power to dispose of other wives, either through annulment of their marriage or by execution.\u00a0 If a wife of Henry’s was dead\u00a0or their marriage was annulled, the King\u00a0would be free to remarry.<\/strong><\/p>\n

What does this have to do with the KJV?\u00a0 Barely 70 years after Henry VIII died, King James used his authority, as head of the church and head of state, to commission the 1611 translation of the Bible. \u00a0The translators were conscientious and scholarly men, but they were also under the influence of a monarch with absolute power. \u00a0Would the king’s absolute power influence the way the KJV\u00a0was translated?<\/strong><\/p>\n

I believe the king’s absolute power influenced the translators in a subtle way. \u00a0Keep in mind that if the KJV translation was inspired of God as per II Timothy 3:16, the KJV translation would be perfect and unblemished, without even a scribal error.\u00a0 I believe there is adequate evidence in the KJV text to show the influence of the King’s absolute power. \u00a0The following is one example of a weak translation.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Christ speaking to Peter – King James Translation:<\/strong><\/p>\n

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.\u00a0<\/em>\u00a0Matthew 16:19 KJV<\/strong><\/p>\n

The \u201cfuture perfect periphrastic\u201d structure in the Greek shows us that instead of giving Peter unlimited authority in the church, the Lord Jesus has limited his authority to what has already been decided in heaven.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The most understandable translation of this passage would be as follows: \u00a0<\/strong><\/em>And I will give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatever you forbid on earth must be what is already forbidden in heaven: and whatever you permit on earth must be what is already permitted in heaven. (Williams)*<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Rather than a blank check to the church over which the King has become head, the Matthew 16:19 passage correctly translated is actually a warning and a restraint upon the church and it’s power. \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

The blank check translation of this passage in the KJV reveals, in my opinion, the political influence of the state church upon the translators.\u00a0 If the KJV translation is inspired\u00a0(God breathed) this passage would have been accurately translated. \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

If the KJV English translation is not inspired, what does II Timothy 3:16 mean when it says;\u00a0All scripture\u00a0is\u00a0given by inspiration of God,…? <\/em>\u00a0It means \u00a0that when the Scripture was given, the Scriptures were God breathed<\/em> as to source. \u00a0As such the initial \u00a0writings were a perfect rendering of God’s word to mankind when uttered and recorded in the prophet’s\u00a0and apostle’s manuscripts.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but\u00a0holy\u00a0men\u00a0of\u00a0God spake as they were moved by the\u00a0Holy\u00a0Ghost<\/strong><\/em>\u00a0(II Peter 1:21).\u00a0 The verses\u00a0above were written by Paul and Peter in the first century during the time the NT Scriptures were being given to the church.\u00a0 The biblical doctrine of inspiration applies to the original manuscripts as the perfect revelation of God.\u00a0 Their being God breathed<\/em> refers to how they were given, when they were given and what we were given in the first place (originally).<\/strong><\/p>\n

If we no longer have the original manuscripts of the prophets and apostles, how do we know that we have the infallible Word of God? \u00a0Do not those things that are handed down from generation to generation get distorted and muddled by oral tradition?\u00a0 The answer is yes, things are muddled by oral tradition, but the Bible is an exception to that and here are reasons why:<\/strong><\/p>\n