The Anchor Gospel Ministry

Here are some of my thoughts on King James Onlyism. Before I begin, I would just like to say I think the Authorised (King James) Version is a fine translation of Scripture and is a trustworthy rendering of both the Old and New Testaments. I have investigated the subject deeply and carefully considered all points and views on both sides of the debate. I have reached the conclusion that King James Onlyism is not in keeping with Church history and is not something that the Christian Church should embrace. I have been to KJV-only churches in the past and did once agree with some of the points that the KJV-only crowd makes. For example, one such view held among some is that the modern versions omit passages of Scripture and change key doctrine. One view held in some KJV-only circles is that the KJV corrects the Hebrew and the Greek and is divinely inspired. This view is one that I have never held to but is one of the extremes that some do hold.

I do read and use the KJV but do not hold to the view that the KJV is the only Bible for the English-speaking world. The other versions I read and use are the New American Standard Bible (NASB) and the Darby Translation. I do not believe that the KJV translation is divinely inspired like the original manuscripts are. I do believe that God used the KJV translators greatly for His honour and glory. Indeed, God has used the KJV mightily over the past 400 years and the KJV was the standard text for the English-speaking church. However, the KJV does contain minor human errors. There are some passages in the NASB, for example, that are translated better in KJV and vice versa. The NASB translates the Hebrew and the Greek better than the KJV for the modern reader. There are some words in the KJV that we do not use today, which makes the understanding of the text difficult for some people. Also, there are some examples where the NASB, for example, translates the text better than the KJV. One such verse is found in 1 Timothy 3:1, the KJV uses the word “Bishop” as the NASB says, “overseer” which is a much better translation. The NASB defines the office of a Bishop as an overseer of the local church. Another example is found in Isaiah 7:14. The KJV says, “a virgin” whereas the original NASB says, “the virgin”. Later editions of the NASB such as the 1995 and 1977 revisions agreed with the KJV rendering of “a virgin”.

Another example is found in Matthew 19:14, the KJV says, “Suffer little children, and forbid them not.” In the NASB the verse says, “Let the children alone, and do not hinder them from coming to Me; for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” The NASB reads and sounds much better and is understandable to the modern reader. The final example I would like to show you is found in Matthew 23:24 where the KJV translators got it wrong. The KJV says, “ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat.” This is a human error in the KJV which the NASB corrects, “You blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!”

Since 1611 the KJV has undergone revisions, so if you hold to the view that the KJV is the only Bible for English-speaking people which revision is the right one? Not many people are aware of this fact. The KJV we read and use today is not the original 1611 version. The one we have today dates from 1769. The KJV itself was a revision and has been updated and changed over the years. Which KJV is the right one; the Oxford or Cambridge and which revision of the KJV is the right one, the 1611, 1615, 1629, 1638, 1762 or 1769?

A key point to make is that there are two versions of the KJV; the Oxford Edition and the Cambridge Edition. Although they are almost the same they do not read exactly the same.

The Oxford vs the Cambridge Edition of the King James Version
Verse	Oxford Edition	Cambridge Edition
Josh. 19:2	and Sheba	or Sheba
2 Kings 19:23	the Lord	the LORD
2 Chron. 33:19	sins	sin
Neh. 1:11	O Lord	O LORD
Ps. 148:8	vapours	vapour
Jer. 34:16	whom he	whom ye
Nah. 3:16	fleeth	flieth

Another difference is in the use of the apostrophe. Oxford has an apostrophe in some words such as “their’s” (Matt. 5:3) and “your’s” (Luke 6:20) while the Cambridge does not.

Let us apply a little logic to this argument of KJV onlyism. If you are KJV only this is for you. Which KJV do you use; the official 1611 or the 1769 Benjamin Blayney edition? Furthermore, do you use the Cambridge edition or the Oxford edition?

If the Cambridge edition, which one?

1629: Cambridge KJB

1638: Cambridge KJB

1760: Cambridge KJB

1769: Oxford KJB (This is the Benjamin Blayney edition)

1873: Cambridge Paragraph KJB

1900: Cambridge KJB (Pure Cambridge Edition)

One advantage that the KJV has is the use of words such as “thee”, “thou”, “thy”, and “ye”. This is very helpful to the reader because you can see the difference between the plural and singular context. There are other translations that use these words, but not as much as the KJV. Although they are helpful they can be difficult to the modern reader as we do not use this kind of language in every day speech today.

The 1611 version of the KJV omitted words that were later added in the updated 1769 version/update. For example, in the 1611 translation, 1 John 5:12 reads, “Hee that hath the Sonne, hath life; and hee that hath not the Sonne, hath not life.” In today’s updated version we read, “He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.” Did you notice that the words “of God” are missing in the 1611 version? This is a minor human error. However, this point shows that the 1611 is not the perfect version that some will have you believe as it did contain some human errors in the printing.

If those who hold strongly to the view of KJV-onlyism were consistent in their criticism, they would say that the 1611 is attacking the deity of Christ. If so-called “modern versions” of Scripture contain human errors and “falsehood” as many claim then so does the 1611, by the reasoning of the KJV onlyists. The KJV-only folks are quick to attack what they view as “corrupt versions” but not so fast when mistakes in the AV/KJV are brought up.

Another example of this is the so-called Wicked Bible of 1631. Sometimes called the “Adulterous Bible” or “Sinners Bible” due to the fact that in Exodus 20:14, the word “not” in “Thou shalt not commit adultery” was omitted, thus changing the verse to read, “Thou shalt commit adultery”. So does this 1631 reprint support the sin of adultery?

It is worth noting that the 1611 KJV contained the Apocrypha. In the 1611 King James Bible, the Apocrypha is placed between the end of the Old Testament and the start of the New Testament. What does this suggest to the reader? I have already stated that the KJV is a fine translation, but it is by no means perfect and without error. The KJV is an English translation of the Hebrew and Greek. The original manuscripts of the Hebrew and the Greek alone are divinely inspired and without error. When you translate from one language to another it is very hard to have a perfect and exact translation. For example, try to translate a verse from the Latin Vulgate into English. That is a challenge even for the Latin expert. Any scholar of Latin will tell you that for an English rending to make sense and understandable one would have to add English words to the sentence.

When King James I of England commissioned the King James Version, he approved 15 principles of translation which were instituted by Richard Bancroft, Bishop of London in 1604. These translation principles are as follows:

1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the Truth of the original will permit.
2. The names of the Prophets, and the Holy Writers, with the other Names of the Text, to be retained, as nigh as may be, accordingly as they were vulgarly used.
3. The Old Ecclesiastical Words to be kept, viz. the Word Church not to be translated Congregation etc.
4. When a Word hath divers Significations, that to be kept which hath been most commonly used by the most of the Ancient Fathers, being agreeable to the Propriety of the Place, and the Analogy of the Faith.
5. The Division of the Chapters to be altered, either not at all, or as little as may be, if Necessity so require.
6. No Marginal Notes at all to be affixed, but only for the explanation of the Hebrew or Greek Words, which cannot without some circumlocution, so briefly and fitly be expressed in the Text.
7. Such Quotations of Places to be marginally set down as shall serve for the fit Reference of one Scripture to another.
8. Every particular Man of each Company, to take the same Chapter or Chapters, and having translated or amended them severally by himself, where he thinketh good, all to meet together, confer what they have done, and agree for their Parts what shall stand.
9. As any one Company hath dispatched any one Book in this Manner they shall send it to the rest, to be considered of seriously and judiciously, for His Majesty is very careful in this Point.
10. If any Company, upon the Review of the Book so sent, doubt or differ upon any Place, to send them Word thereof; note the Place, and withal send the Reasons, to which if they consent not, the Difference to be compounded at the general Meeting, which is to be of the chief Persons of each Company, at the end of the Work.
11. When any Place of special Obscurity is doubted of, Letters to be directed by Authority, to send to any Learned Man in the Land, for his Judgement of such a Place.
12. Letters to be sent from every Bishop to the rest of his Clergy, admonishing them of this Translation in hand; and to move and charge as many skilful in the Tongues; and having taken pains in that kind, to send his particular Observations to the Company, either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford.
13. The Directors in each Company, to be the Deans of Westminster, and Chester for that Place; and the King’s Professors in the Hebrew or Greek in either University.
14. These translations to be used when they agree better with the Text than the Bishops Bible: Tyndale’s, Matthew’s, Coverdale’s, Whitchurch’s, Geneva.
15. Besides the said Directors before mentioned, three or four of the most Ancient and Grave Divines, in either of the Universities, not employed in Translating, to be assigned by the vice-Chancellor, upon Conference with the rest of the Heads, to be Overseers of the Translations as well Hebrew as Greek, for the better observation of the 4th Rule above specified.

Here are some examples of how the 1611 KJV is different to the modern KJV.

Text	1611 KJV	Modern KJV
Jer. 38:16	So the king sware secretly	So Zedekiah the king sware secretly
Jer. 49:1	why then doth their king inhereit God	why then doth their king inherit Gad
Joel 1:16	Is not the meat cut off before your eyes	Is not the meat cutt off before our eyes
Rom 3:24	through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ	through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus
1 Cor 15:41	another of the moon	and another glory of the moon
1 Tim 1:4	rather than edifying	rather than godly edifying
1 John 5:12	he that hath not the Son hath not life	he that hath not the Son of God hath not life

In closing, my preferred versions of Scripture are the New American Standard Bible 1995 and the Authorised (King James) Version. I also use the Darby Translation.

I have already addressed the use of the word “Bishop” in the KJV. The English Puritans viewed the use of the word, “bishop” as giving too much credence to the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic system. William Tyndale’s New Testament translation is very similar to the KJV translation which viewed the church as a redeemed people of God which is not the view of the Roman Catholics. It is worth noting that the English Puritans rejected the KJV as they saw it as a compromised Bible.

I share the view of the Puritans that the KJV uses words and terms that are in keeping with some of the views of the Church of England. The word “Bishop” is one word that presents some issues, especially to those who do not understand the Roman Catholic and Anglican view of the word. A Bishop in the Anglican and Catholic tradition is one who rules over a number of churches in a diocese or small area. The biblical understanding of a Bishop is a man who is an overseer of a local body of believers and is the shepherd of the local church that he is appointed to.

When choosing a Bible version to use make sure that it is a literal and word-for-word translation. I would suggest you avoid paraphrases such as the “The Message” and “The Living Bible” for your main Bible study and reading. I suggest you choose a version that you can understand and learn from. Paraphrases have their place, but not as a main Bible version.

Buy a version that you will use. I suggest you read a few chapters of the version online or borrow a copy before you spend money on a Bible. Buying a Bible version and not using it is not a good idea. The versions I suggest you choose from are the New American Standard Bible (NASB), English Standard Version (ESV), New King James Version (NKJV), Authorised (King James) Version (AV/KJV), and the Legacy Standard Bible (LSB). The J. N. Darby translation of the Holy Scriptures is also a useful and good translation. This article acts as an introduction to King James Onlyism. Anyone can prefer the KJV, but it is seriously incorrect to say that the King James Version is the only Bible that should be used by the English-speaking world.

For Further Study

What is the KJV Only movement?

The Haters: The KJV Only Movement

Book: “The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations? ” By James R. White

Video – King James Only-ism: Is the KJV King?