Monday, 11 May 2009

Ye oŋe and oŋley wordde of God

A particular brand of wingnuttery I've come across lately is the belief that the King James version of the Bible is the one and only Word of God and all other translations are at least substandard, and at worst, works of the devil.
It is called the King James Only movement and is yet another source of schism amongst the myriad Christian sects.

Try this web page for example: Why Do We Only Support The King James Version Of The Holy Bible?

FABLE: The King James Bible was revised several times before 1800, so modern translations are just additional revisions of the original King James Bible of 1611.

FACT: The so-called "revisions" of the King James Bible prior to 1800 were to correct typographical errors, add notes, and omit the Apocrypha from between the Testaments. There were no changes in the actual TEXT of the King James Bible. The REAL changes (over 36,000 of them) didn't start until the modern revisionists came on the scene.

Well that's OK then. The whole thing was God inspired and controlled except for the typos. God can't proof read.

FABLE: The modern translations are more accurate because they have been translated from older and better manuscripts.

FACT: It is truly amazing how so many Christians have bought into this lie without ever checking to see WHAT these manuscripts are, WHERE they came from, and WHO wrote them. Its also strange that no one seems to be asking the question, "Has God honored these 'older' and 'better' manuscripts throughout Church History?"

Older doesn't mean better. Unless it's the KJV in which case older is better.

FABLE: New translations are needed to correct the errors and contradictions in the King James Bible.

FACT: No one has ever proven that there are errors and contradictions in the KJV. Many "Christian" colleges and preachers have a nasty habit of pointing out APPARENT contradictions to their people, but these arguments have been disproven so many times that it is nothing less than disgusting to hear them still being used.

Well there's a few problems here, not least of which is that all the newer translations are full of contradictions too.

FABLE: New Translations are needed to bring the archaic Old English language up to date. People have trouble understanding the language of the King James Bible.

FACT: The King James language is NOT hard to understand. Most of the so-called "archaic" words are explained by the context of the passage or by comparing the passage with other passages in the Bible where the same word is used. Heady and high-minded people resent the King James language because it is plain and simple, and it isn't in tune with their high-minded vocabulary. In fact, the Grade Level Indicator of the Flesch-Kincaid research company says the King James language is EASIER to understand than the new versions.
We certainly agree that the language of the King James Bible is a unique language, but why shouldn't it be? It's the WORD OF GOD!

Can't argue with that. If English was good enough for Jesus, then it's good enough for me too.

FABLE: The King James Bible cannot be infallible because the translators were only men, and all men are sinners. The human element prevents the KJV from being infallible.

FACT: If this is true, then even the ORIGINAL AUTOGRAPHS in Hebrew and Greek were not infallible, because they too were penned by men!

Exactly. Do these people have no sense of irony?

FABLE: The King James translators added to the word of God, because the italicized words in the KJV were not in the originals.

FACT: The Italics in the KJV prove that the translators were HONEST in their work. They set the words in italics so we'd know they were not in the manuscripts they were using.
Besides, no one has a copy of the original manuscripts today, so no one knows for certain that the italicized words aren't in them. In fact, there are many cases where we know that the italicized words are justified. For example, notice in Deuteronomy 8:3 that the word "word" is in Italics. However, when Jesus quotes this verse in Matthew 4:4 he INCLUDES the italicized word! If the italicized word does not belong in the Bible, why did the Lord Jesus quote it?

Because the guys who wrote the gospels were making shit up?

FABLE: The original King James Bible included the Apocrypha in the Old Testament.

FACT: The King James translators knew the Apocrypha was not scripture, so they placed it BETWEEN the Old and New Testament as a HISTORICAL DOCUMENT, not as scripture.

Ohhh, OK. So why have the Apocrypha been dropped from the KJV again?

Here we have the crazy Faithful Word Baptist church burning the Satanic NIV. A bit of web research will show that the wife of pastor Steven L. Anderson, Zsuzsanna has a particularly hateful blog, and do yourself a big favour and watch the YouTube vid of pastor Anderson very upset after a border cop beat him up. They are also Quiverful crazies and antivaccine crazies


PersonalFailure said...

If English was good enough for Jesus, then it's good enough for me too.somebody actually said that to me once. i had no response.

Stew said...

PF - of course it seems slightly more bizarre that God would talk Shakespearean English

Anonymous said...

Ok for starters ur right the translations have been changed minoraly, just the wording, not the meaning, what is so wrong with having different wording to make things shorter and the point as compared to having uneeded thou's thee's and arts and other stuff.
Second its a crock of crap u that the original manuscripts aren't real, ur right the bible itself was not one whole manuscript but it was put together chronologically from over 5,000 different ones all telling the same stories, from different views on the same topic, this makes it THEE most reputible book of all the closest book to having that many manuscripts back it up is the Ilithid which dosen't even break 750 mauscripts. hmmm sounds pretty suspicious that over 5,000 guys from diffrent time periods, diffrent parts of the world, and from different languages ALL have the same view on different events proven to have happened through out history. and to end the major changes arguement, back then the manuscripts were held in the hightest regaurds by the people who held them because as u said it is the word of god, the simple fact of makin one single error in the translation from language to language bore the penalty of death, then the error would be destroyed and the next person would get the chance to VERBATIM translate it. ok now ur sayin well later in the now days they made changes, hmm yep i agree but as i said they cut out the thou's, thee's, and arts that are not needed, when u could cut them out and make it a whole heck of alot easier to read. mmmm....someone has a very closed mindedo opinion for needing to have and open mind to the intelectual decisions which they have devoted their lives to. Also someone didn't do their homework to well. so the title the one and only word of god is totally and utterly true.

Southern Comfort said...

Actually that very thing happened to me one time. I had started using the New American Standard version of the Bible and the preacher came to my house, prayed over me (this was after I left the ministry and started having doubts about the church) and then saw my ASV of the Bible and took it and burned it on the BBQ grill. The neighbors saw it and called the police. I guess they thought we were satanists. It was really funny seeing the preacher trying to explain to the police why he burned the Bible. I left the church for good shortly thereafter.

Jean said...
This comment has been removed by the author.