Customer Reviews

King James Only Controversy, The: Can You Trust Modern Translations?

5 star:		(81)
4 star:		(21)
3 star:		(10)
2 star:		(7)
1 star:		(31)

 

 

Every Christian who believes that the Bible is God's Word should read the first part of this book, whether they agree with the author's stance or not, or whether they are interested in the controversy or not, since it covers quite a bit of background information relating to the history and nature of New Testament translation, including its history, major translations, translators, and other key figures, information about the nature of the greek manuscripts, and so on.

Most of what I would comment about on this book has already been said, so I won't push the point much further.

However, I would like to add another point which James White seems to have overlooked in his book, I assume because of his lack of international/missionary experience:

I come from Singapore where not everyone is fluent in English, or even knows English, much less read English. For the ethnic Chinese who only reads and understands the Chinese language, the only Bible they can read would obviously be on that is translated to Chinese. Unfortunately (or fortunately?), none of the Chinese Bibles, as far as I know, are translated from the TR, and you cannot find a Chinese Bible translated from the King James version.

Now that's just the Bible in Chinese, where there are a few versions/translations. How about those other Bibles in languages where there's only ONE translation (mostly translated by UBS, and not translated from TR/KJV)?

Those who insist on KJV Only should perhaps remember that there's a whole world out there that does not and cannot understand English, much less KJV English. I supposed they are doomed, unless they learn English, KJV English.

That said, my opinion is that this is probably the best book on the subject. Read it, unless your mind is already made up (see those 1 star reviews).

This book is as thorough as could be possible in presenting its case. Since some have overtly slandered the author (James White), let me tell you what this book does NOT do. It does not tell people that the King James Version (KJV) is evil or that it should not be used. There are numerous places where Mr. White recommends using various translations (including KJV) to ascertain the exact meaning of a particular Biblical passage. The purpose of this book is to refute those people who would claim that the KJV is the only true word of God. Let me say Mr. White goes above and beyond in proving his case. Unfortunately, most of those who disagree will not read this book with an open heart and mind.

White covers basic manuscript and textual issues. He then gives some excellent background info regarding the making of the KJV. He also covers the numerous passages that "KJV only" advocates use in their arguments. After reading this book, I can not fathom how anyone could believe that the KJV is the only valid Bible translation.

Book Summary Report: The King James Controversy

Theologian and apologist, James R. White, tackles the King James Only controversy with clarity and sobriety in his book The King James Controversy. With the heart of a pastor he addresses what has become a highly emotional issue for many people. As such, his tone and purpose are immediately evident. He strives for peace in the church. He tactfully dispels ignorance, and he responds to the often bombastic and vitriolic statements common to KJV Only advocates. James White is concerned to show that his readers can trust many of the modern translations, and while the KJV is a good translation it is far from being a perfect translation. Moreover, he seeks to demonstrate that charges of grand conspiracy on the part of modern translators are misguided and quite false. All of these points are developed with an eye on the novice. Therefore, the flow of his book is structured in such a way as to introduce the reader to some history and to textual concepts before moving into more detailed and theme specific areas of the KJV Only debate.

There is a logical construction to the book. Chapters one through three are more preparatory in character, in that they establish some rudimentary concepts before delving into the specifics of the debate. Chapters four through ten then dig into the details of the debate. The nature of these initiatory chapters will now be explored.

Chapter one delineates five basic KJV perspectives. The spectrum ranges from those who simply prefer the KJV as a translation to those who actually believe the KJV is a new revelation from God. White notes that most KJV Only advocates fall into group 4, which teaches that the KJV, as an English translation, is inspired.

Chapter two delves into history. The author intends to show that the KJV Only perspective, or mentality, isn't new to history. The great fifth century scholar, Jerome, provided a new translation of the Old Testament in Latin. The esteemed translation of that day was the Septuagint; it was the standard, the norm. When the people were confronted with the Vulgate they were very suspicious and many considered the new translation a threat. As time went on the Vulgate, ironically, became the accepted norm. Centuries later, when Erasmus sought to improve upon the Vulgate by consulting the original languages, a similar reluctance, and even disdain, erupted from the people. White draws parallels to the current debate. Like the Vulgate and the TR, people today murmur at new translations that seek to be more faithful to the original languages and more accurate in their textual choices. White stresses that the resistance from KJV Only adherents is not a historical novelty.

Chapter three educates the reader in foundational textual concepts. Subjects such as "manuscripts," "text-types," and "textual variants" are explored and defined by the author. White provides the reader with a broad sense of how we have come to possess the New Testament as we have it today. He wants the reader to understand that differences in Bible versions stem from translational differences, text-type differences (and therefore, different sources to be translated), and/or textual variants. He also introduces the reader to the different text-type families, with an emphasis upon the validity of the Alexandrian text.

Having laid some foundational groundwork in translational and textual issues, White begins to dismantle the KJV Only position in the remaining chapters of the book. The thrust of his polemic revolves roughly around five major thoughts. They are as follows:

(1) Erasmus and the original AV translators adhered, in substance, to the same translational and textual methodologies as practiced by modern translators.
(2) The charge of "grand conspiracy" leveled against modern translations, whether it is the "covering up of sins," undermining the deity of Christ Jesus, etc., is not only untrue, but hypocritically asserted by KJV Only advocates.
(3) The KJV Only position engages in slander, mischaracterization, and presents misleading data regarding alleged Scriptural deletions.
(4) The KJV doesn't always translate the Greek satisfactorily.
(5) The TR text harbors some poor textual choices.

In the case of the first point, the author surveys Erasmus' methodology noting that he recognized copyist errors, found examples of harmonization, perceived instances of transferred material in the Gospels, was extremely hesitant to include the Comma Johanneum, and other such points that agree with the approach of modern translators. The same is true of the KJV committee. They didn't conceive of themselves as being infallible. This point is made manifestly evident by White's citing excerpts from The Translators to the Reader. The translators explicitly state that they are attempting to improve upon older translations by examining textual data and pondering afresh the original languages. White challenges KJV Only adherents to be consistent in their assessment of Erasmus. Indeed, he calls them to reject Erasmus' work on the same grounds that they reject the modern translations.

Regarding the second point, White deals with the KJV Only allegation that the modern translations, and their "corrupted texts," deny the deity of Jesus Christ and undermine His Person by arguing several key points. He argues that the Byzantine text is "fuller" due the expansion of piety principle and that earlier manuscripts are simply more compact in their titles surrounding Jesus. He also compares passages on the deity of Christ in the NIV and NASB with the KJV and proves that the modern translations are in no way inferior in their affirmation of Christ's deity; if anything, they are clearer.

Point three is the focus of chapter five. In this chapter the author examines the writings of leading KJV Only advocates, Dr. Peter Ruchman, Dr. Edward Hills, and Gail Riplinger. White points out Riplinger's poor handling of the data (one might dare say deceitful). In the case of Dr. Hills, White sheds light on his fundamentally circular argumentation, but praises his honesty and irenic tone. Dr. Ruchman is shown to be a man of bombastic and caustic irritancy who, while exhibiting the sarcasm of a Luther, should prove to be more logical and scholarly in his handling of the data. After debunking Dr. Ruchman's "Creed of the Alexandrian Cult," White says that the term "misrepresentation" seems, at times, simply too mild for Dr. Ruchman's writings. KJV Only advocates can charge the modern translations with Scriptural deletion, but the facts will not substantiate these claims.

When James White turns to translational differences he catalogs a series of examples whereby the NIV and NASB are shown to be more accurate, or at least valid and clearer in their choice of translation. The same type of "example and respond" argumentation is utilized in his discussion on textual differences. But he begins the discussion by first outlining the means by which modern Christians go about studying and gathering and analyzing ancient manuscripts. He points out that one cannot simply count the number of extant manuscripts in a given text-type; rather, we must weigh them. For although the Majority Text greatly outnumbers Alexandrian manuscripts it must be carefully observed that Alexandrian manuscripts are the earliest and outnumber Byzantine manuscripts up until the eighth century. Upon examining the evidence White presents a compelling case that there are a significant number of displacements, examples of parallel influence, expansions of piety, and balancing within the Byzantine family. All of this is done in the context of specific passages that serve as concrete examples. And all of this done to demonstrate that the NIV and NASB are justified in their textual choices, and that the accusations of KJV Only advocates are unwarranted. Such discussions are written in a semi-detailed manner, with Part II serving as a detailed and scholarly defense of key textual choices within modern translations.

In conclusion, the book is written as a plea for understanding. He wants to help people understand why our English Bibles read the way they do. He seeks to demonstrate that KJV Only arguments are viciously circular and blatantly use double standards as they attack modern translations. Moreover, he seeks to show us that the movement is a human tradition without a basis in history. I think he has succeeded, and he has done so with tact and tough love. I would heartily recommend the book to anyone interested in the topic.

I grew up in a KJV ONLY home. Went to KJV ONLY Curches and recently graduated from a KJV ONLY Bible College. I knew all along that somehting did not make sense about this position. The more research I did on my own the more and more I realized that the books used to back up the KJV ONLY position, were full of flat out lies. "New Age Versions" from G.A. Riplinger is a prime example. As I studied the Bible and began to hear more and more preachers using this version called the NASB (The MOST literal englsih translation by the way) I decided to buy one and compare it to Riplingers quotes of it in her book. I'm not sure what she quoted, but it definetly was NOT the NASB. NONE of her quotations matched...AT ALL!! This led me to start checking other primary sources including the writings of supposed "ALEXANDRIAN CULTISTS" Wescott and Hort, only to find they werequoted horribly out of context. To make a long story short, after doing MY OWN research I found that theKJV ONLY position could ONLY be backed up by lies, misleadings, misquotations, misinformation, and out right bias.

I say ALL THIS assomeone who grew up ONLY reading the KJV, and DEARLY loving it to this day! However, the fact is I desire accuracy over tradition, and that is why I read the NASB.

When I first looked into this book it BLEW ME AWAY with the amount of incredible info stored in such a short volume. All the research that took me LONG periods of time to accomplish was done, and categorized in this paperback. It was dead on correct too. If you want the kindest, fairest, and easiest to understand assesment of this great debate over Bible translations pick this book up. It DOES not bash the KJV, in fact the author actually PRAISES the KJV. So please, before barking out your opinion on this issue, from either side. KNOW YOUR FACTS!!! Pick this book up TODAY!!!

Let's face it, the KJVO debate is deeply intertwined with the history and making of the English Bible. When you begin to talk about the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, the Textus Receptus, and etc., it get's complicated in a hurry. White does a very thorough job of explaining the manuscript families, what textual criticism actually is, and other translational issues. While textual criticism is criticized by the KJVO camp, many people do not know that Erasmus, who is responsible for the TR, engaged in textual criticism, as did the KJV translators. Once you've been exposed to this and other information contained in "The King James Only Controversy," you can sort out many of the KJVO arguments with relative ease.

White does a service to the body of Christ by staying professional and calm throughout this book. Many pro KJVO arguments are examined in a fair and Christian way. The question about whether the newer versions water down the deity of Christ is really covered well. He also gives a pretty in depth look at just about any disputed verse that you would be likely to have a question about. Once you have read this book, you will be well equipped to carry on a dialogue about this sometimes emotional topic. If you want to buy only one book on this topic, this is the one!

As a biblical scholar, I commend James White for his careful and accurate scholarship. Don't be misled by some of the negative reviews, as well-intended as they may be. James has done his homework well, and he has NOT retaliated against those who differ with him.

Many of my ministry colleagues use the King James Version as their primary Bible, and I memorized more than 4,000 verses from the KJV within the first two years of being saved. Hence, my argument is not with the use of the King James but with what James rightly calls King James Onlyism. Living in Pensacola, close to the headquarters of Peter Ruckman, I can testify to two things: 1) His church members are zealous and outspoken about Jesus, completely unashamed. They should be commended for this! 2) They can be downright nasty to the point of using foul language if you challenge them on King James issues -- even with a gentle spirit.

The record needed to be set right, and the pseudo-scholarship of the Gail Riplinger's exposed. I have seen many churches deeply hurt by these errors, and James White is to be thanked for taking the issues on in a forthright, irenic, and scholarly fashion.

First of all, to my utter shame, I must admit that several years ago, I myself was an avid KJV Only person. I purchased Gail Riplinger's book: "New Age Translations" and was totally convinced that Satan was the author of a grand conspiracy to undermine and eradicate God's Word from the face of the earth. I meticulously went through the book and highlighted changes, deletions and additions as well as supposed testimonies by those who worked on the NASB and NIV translations. I then gave this book to my associate pastor and then to several of my friends in an emotionally charged attempt to "open their eyes" to the "evils" of the modern translations. I made snide remarks directed toward people who did not carry a KJV as I taught my adult Sunday school class. I told people that the letters "NIV" really should be understood as an acronym for "Non - Inspired - Version." I only wish that my associate pastor had been more straightforward with me about the depth of foolishness into which I had descended. I pray continually that God will forgive him for allowing me to wallow in such abject ignorance and I have asked God to forgive me for participating is such flagrant idolatry. On the other hand I thank God from the very depths of my soul that He has seen fit to liberate me from this ridiculous and baseless tradition. Interestingly, it was not James White's book that set me free; it was God Himself. Allow me explain.
I had long been aware that the original autographs were written in Hebrew and Greek, but I was totally ignorant about the process of textual transmission. Nevertheless, I asked myself the question, why should the KJV be the standard by which all others are judged when it itself is a translation? My conclusion was that this was absolutely illogical and foolish. Shouldn't the KJV be measured against the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts from which they were taken? After all isn't the goal of any translation to render the original text into another language as accurately as possible? And how do we determine if a particular translation is as accurate as possible? By comparing it to back to the manuscripts from which it was taken! However, I was so staunchly KJV Only, that I pushed this problem to the back of my mind. But God would not allow me forget it altogether. Time and time again, He brought it to my mind and finally, I could push it to the back no longer. I had to deal with it. I was, however, still unwilling to give up my beloved KJV Only position and I tried desperately to find a way around this problem. The only way I could come up with was to say that God had "re-inspired" His Word through the translation process of the KJV of 1611 and therefore that the original manuscripts were no longer necessary. But I realized that this was purely a baseless fabrication that I had created in a desperate attempt to cling to my beloved KJV Only position. However, more and more, God was convincing me of the utter folly of this fabricated ideology until finally I had to admit that I had been wrong. It wasn't until later through other studies that I realized to my utter amazement that I was not the first to come up with this "re-inspiration" excuse to hold on to my KJV Only position. In fact it was already being believed and taught by those in the KJV Only camp!! I immediately recognized it for the fabrication that it was and I even knew why they had invented it: in order to vindicate and justify what only amounts to the flagrant, idolatrous worship of a seventeenth century translation of the Bible.
In closing, let me just say that I am a conservative among conservatives. I hold staunchly to the full plenary-verbal inspiration of the Holy Scriptures and will tolerate nothing less from others who call themselves Christians. The Bible, as it was given by God in the original autographs, is to be the sole authority upon which we base our faith and practice. Any translation of the Bible also carries this same authority, insofar as it represents the original manuscripts. If it is asked: how can we know that we really have the word of God seeing that we do not posses the original autographs? I answer: we have faith in the providence of God. Through faithful men on fire with zeal for the preservation of the Scriptures, God has ensured that His Word has been preserved. I fully recognize that there are some translations out there that are far from representing the original manuscripts and I do not recognize them as authoritative. But I give full sanction to those translations that seek to reproduce a word for word rendering of the Hebrew and Greek into English (i.e. the NASB, NKJV, KJV and on a lower level, the NIV). Notice that I included the KJV in my list of authoritative translations. That is because, like James White, I am not against the KJV. I like it and I use it. I am, however, against the foolish and divisive idolatry of KJV Onlyism. To those who have not yet encountered the KJV Only position, BE CAREFUL!! This idolatry has a false piety that is very romantic and captivating. I wholeheartedly urge you to read this book because it clearly presents the facts of the issue while at the same time exposing to what desperate lengths KJV Only people will go in order to hold on to their idolatrous KJV Only position, even to the point of employing hate speech and mean-spirited invective against other Christians. I pray that all Christians will read this book. It will prevent many poor souls from being sucked into this cultish idolatry; and it will liberate others from the prison they do not even know they are locked up in.

I honestly didn't pick this book up for a long time because up here in Seattle we just don't see that much importance placed on this position. We struggle for people to just take interest in any Bible, so to have a controversy over the KJO position is just not seen all that often up here.

The reason I decided to finally pick it up was because I wanted some better background of the translation process that our contemporary Bibles use and also the reasoning for all those annoying brackets around verses like Acts 8:37.

What I found was a wealth of knowledge of understanding in the translation process and also it taught me what I thought was already laughable and that is the thought that God has inspired and preserved an English translation of the original Greek and Hebrew.

Dr. White, like usual, handles this work in a very easy and readable format. He goes through the background of simply the translation process that happen (ed/s) with every translation, the manuscripts used and also their differences and the reasons why.

If you are not immersed into the difficulty, as I am not, it becomes quite repetitive in a lot of aspects as Dr. White goes through and breaks down MANY verses and compares different versions with each other, allowing the reader to better understand not only the differences but the reasons why the differences exist.

If you are in this controversy and having to fight against it, you will not find it to be repetitive but really an encyclopedia of knowledge and defense against the KJO position.

I really commend Dr. White for this work because he made it very interesting even to us who don't have to communicate with such a strange position. I believe he handles this very fairly and gives extensive footnotes to the reader for fuller explanation and directives if needed. I am sure that those who are in the movement will feel attacked but Dr. White continues to give praise for the KJV when needed but also points out its fallacies to just make the point that it is not the KJV that is infallible but the original words of our great and glorious God.

I would definitely recommend this book for any who are looking for a deeper explanation of how the Bible they hold in their hand was put together. I highly recommend.

To me, there is no substance to the KJV Only debate. It's ridiculous because, let's face it, the KJV is merely a translation just as the other versions are. Every translation is going to naturally have holes in its rendering because every language is unique and has its own nuances. This is true for all translation, such as when you translate a German song into French or a Spanish poem into English. If you want to get as close as possible to the original, learn Hebrew and Koine Greek.

Truly I have no problems with those who want to personally use the KJV alone, but why force your personal preference on others and use such harsh language to critically undress those who disagree? It makes no sense. James does a scholarly job in showing how the criticism against the "bloodless" translations are unjustified. The proof is in the pudding, and James brings it all out in this rather lengthy, complete work. Be forewarned that this is not a book you'd read on a flight from Boston to Atlanta. No, it's not easy reading, and you will probably want to have your modern translation (NIV? NASB?) next to a King James so you can personally look at the context of the passages exegeted in the book.

I know this book is very controversial in King James Only circles, but I would hope that they would honestly reevaluate their position. Even if they disagree, my prayer is that the name-calling and other loaded language techniques would stop. Be professional. James was. With a Christless world needing the Gospel, we can so much better use our time than to bicker with each other about which translation is the best.

A long time ago I was a KJV-only person. I'd read all the books on that side of things and one day decided that since I knew the truth, it wouldn't hurt to read a book from "the other side", and that I was such an intellectually magnaminous person that I owed it to the other side to at least read one of their books. Well, this one was the most recommended, so I got it.

I read it quickly, marking up all the "mistakes" in my copy. It was easy to disagree with Mr.-- er, Dr.--White because he's so freaking condescending. Honestly I don't blame all the people giving this book the one star-- it's that hard to read if you don't agree with him. In my case, I was getting a perverse delight out of being better than the author and I kept reading. Perhaps you could say I was too open-minded for my own good.

At any rate, I got about 2/3rds through the book and it dawned on me. This obnoxious guy was RIGHT. That really burned me up. I didn't even finish it, I found it too unbareable. My whole world changed. Well, not really-- but you get the point. (Note: I still disagree with him on several points, but the main jist of the book I am forced to agree with)

Sadly, I doubt this book will convert many from my former view because the condescention displayed in it makes it almost impossible to rationally evaluate his arguments. (Hence the 3 stars)

Nowadays, I'm more open-minded, more well-read, and much more forgiving of those I disagree with. I also hope that a little bit of the false humility that caused me to read this book in the first place has become real humility. I use the ESV. And you know what? The world is a better place when there's not a Vast Satanic Conspiracy to destroy your Bible.