Customer Reviews

One Bible Only?: Examining Exclusive Claims for the King James Bible

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This book is written by fundamentalists to fundamentalists. It is well-written and gives an excellent defence of the eclectic approach to textual criticism. It shows clearly that the idea that the King James Version is the only inspired one is unbiblical and illogical.

The authors of the various articles show that all of the arguments for KJV-Onlyism are based on false information.

But the book also contains insights into bible translation and lots of useful information about the manuscripts from which we got our bible, both Old and New Testaments.

The writers write respectfully, with due praise for the King James Version and with courtesy to those who hold different points of view to them.

I have learnt quite a bit from this book, despite having previously read books such as Carson's The King James Version Debate: a plea for realism [which I also recommend, despite its age.]

Warmly recommended.

Where did Jesus say in Matthew 24:35 that the AV 1611 (a.k.a. the King James version) is the only word of God? Where in His wonderful words: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away" does he say anything about His word ending up ONLY in a book in 1611 and then a little later with King James of England's name on it?

What Jesus Christ is saying is "His words" which are everything He spoke, because He is God, shall never pass away, they will always stand, even long after the temporary things such as the heaven and earth pass away. It's sad that some people actually believe the absurdity of Gipp, Waite, Ruckman, and Riplinger that by "His words" he spoke them in KJV English. He spoke Aramaic, and being God He most likely knew Greek as well.

What He is essentially saying in Matthew 24:35 is that everything He says stands and cannot, will not change. In other words, we can trust Him to not recant, not reneg, not go back on any one of His many promises. We also can trust that every command He gave will also stand forever. His word exists in the KJV, as well as the updated English versions (put into our modern language, just as the KJV was in their day) such as NKJV and NASB. God never said He would one day translate His word into one version ultimately and then that would be it. He said He would preserve it forever, which means He will continue to preserve it for eternity, and this includes the decent English language updates that are done every couple of decades to keep the language clear for the reader as language adapts. There have been many changes in the modern English since 1611.

His word was spoken and existed long, long before He even created the earth and universe. It is as eternal as He is, since He is not limited nor controlled by time. His spoken word transcends even the pages of a writtetn text which is limited by language translation in every language of the earth. The Holy Spirit is the One who helps us understand what His written word is saying. His spoken word existed for eternity before He wrote it down for mankind.

Matthew 24:35, along with Psalm 12:6-7, has been twisted way out of context and misused by those who wish to conform them to their KJV onlyist stance. This is taking license with God's word in creating new doctrine not literally and implicitly stated forth in what He said. We must take all his words, in all the verses, in context with one another in the passage in which they belong.

To take the KJVO stance so strongly, as most of the extremists do, is to revert back to the persecution and control which the Roman Catholic church forced upon anyone who was caught with any bible that was not the Latin Vulgate. Men like Tyndale and others were martyred by the RCC for translating the English bible into the language of the common man so they could read it in their own words and understand God's word. The KJVO extremists hold the same mindset as the RCC with its Latin Vulgate version. This needs some serious thought.

This book is an excellent book that explains more of the above and the many KJVO distortions which have caused contentions and confusion and deception inside many wonderful and well-meaning fundamental churches. We need to listen to the voice of reason and what God is actually saying in His word and not twist it to what we want it to say, as if twisting His arm to back up our own faulty arguments. The KJVO argument is extremely faulty. Anyone can see this if they have eyes to see and ears to hear.

This book's consise format takes the reader through the history of the KJV-only issue and delves into all the hot spots without resorting to name calling as most Pro-KJV authors do (ie. Riplinger, Ruckman, Grady). The truth of God's inerrant Word shines brightly through the pages as we see clearly the translational process and preservation of our bibles today. Another plus is that the language is formidable-- what you would expect from educated, Godly authors! Carson and White's books were good, but this is the best yet.

This book was excellent, written from a fundamental Christian perspective, written in a clear testimony of Christlikeness and brotherly charity. The authors do not go to the extreme of ridiculing the wonderful KJV as some do when they feel defensive. Instead, on a scriptural, logical, even keel they examine the evidence available to us all and the logic of statements made by the KJV-is-inspired claimants. Whether you consider yourself new to all of this discussion regarding texts and manuscripts, etc. or not, you could profit from this book.

I understand the perspective of some folks, who vigorously defend the biblical doctrine of verbal plenary inspiration and authority against modern and postmodern claims that the Bible is man's book. I do too, and so do these authors. But we need not go to the extreme of misunderstanding that not ascribing the work of transcription and translation to divine immediate intervention does not endanger these core, fundamental doctrines. "KJV-only" and "KJV-preferred" should not be a test of orthodoxy.

If only the KJV-only believers would buy and read this book open mindedly! However, I am afraid it will be just one more book placed in "file 13" by them, and condemned by their pastors and leaders.
I enjoyed the book and learned from it. Most admired is the sense that the writers of this book are pleading for common sense in this issue. I fully empathise with them.
I don't give it 5 stars because it lacks alot of facts and figures(manuscript evidence,text comparisons,etc.) which would have made it much more potent in it's objective.

This work forms one of the most articulate Fundamentalist responses to the KJV-Only advocates. The book is a collection of articles written by members of the faculty of Central Baptist Theological Seminary and form a cohesive and helpful guide for dealing with the challenge of the KJV-Only proponents. Some of the unique aspects of this book is its look to Old Testament textual criticism and to the history of Fundamentalism in respect to this argument. In these particular areas, the writers demonstrate that the KJV-Only advocates have faulty views of inspiration and preservation. Overall, the work is balanced and refrains from attacking the KJV or the Majority Text. My only contention with the work is found in the introduction. The reader is left with more questions than answers. For example, at points the writer seems to be denying that God actually promised to preserve His Word. Also, the writer does a poor job at presenting how the reader can have confidence that the text of Scripture (regardless of the version) is, in fact, the Word of God. Although some of these points are dealt with in more detail throughout the work, the introduction seems to me to be the weakest point of the book.

Despite the fact that I had to get help from my son, the Bible Major, on some of the background issues, this book gave a clear, balanced view on the KJV Only issue. The authors, Independent Fundamental Baptists, gave a summary, neat and fair, as to the purposes for each of the major translations.

A well written, honest analysis of the issue. A great book for anyone on either side.

Though it is true that Gods words will not "pass away" that does not mean that one should simply trust perverted versions of His Word like that found in modern Bibles like the NIV. I mean, if God is carrying His Word (keeping His Word) throughout History then asking the question "Were is it?" is a legitimate endeavor. If you answer that Gods Word is some wishy washy fuzziness that we are trying to discover, but never really will discover, then what good is that to any of us? When you and I disagree on some issue of discernment of such a moving target then how do we as brothers resolve our differences of opinion. One or both of us must be wrong if we disagree since it is only God's Word that is correct in these matters and He is not the author of confusion. How do we discern who is right and who is wrong if one of us is going to pick and choose from different Bibles.

In any case, when someone asks me what I believe about God it is good to be able to point at the KJV. Many Christians of today can't point at anything and when you point out that they might be encouraging sinful behavior they get all high and mighty and say "I can discern Gods Word", when what they really mean is "Listen to me because I am correct and it doesn't really matter what God says".

The point is that YOU MUST hear Gods Word before you can discern it. You can't even talk about discernment if you are not starting with Gods Word. If you can't point at something and say "That is God's Word", then you are just making things up in your own head. And don't you dare point at something that you believe has doctrinal error and claim that it is God's Word. God does not make such doctrinal errors.

Although what I am saying above clearly is contrary to the premise of this book, I can still recommend this book. It is an honest attempt to debate the issues even if it is clearly anti-KJV. However, I can only recommend it for those that are actually willing to follow through on the reasoning of this issue.

It does not hurt for someone to strengthen their arguments through the understanding of others opinion. In this case the arguments of this book are a bit juvenile. It misses the big picture, and as such it is a good point to start for those that support the KJV as Gods Word who might want to understand the weak positions of the anti-KJV crowd.

Additionally, this book has a bit of historical information that is worth reading. Even if the authors attempt to fit the history to their argument and ignore those parts that are contrary to their argument, it still offers some historical information that is useful.

Ultimately, I don't understand how anyone could claim that they believe in Gods Word, and yet not be able to actually tell me exactly what His Word is (that is, to point at it and say that is what I believe--that is what is true--that is without error). So, as far as I can tell, there are only two types of people that will appreciate this book. Those that are unwilling to reason through their choice to use such books as the NIV (the authors of this book?), and those that oppose Christ and wish to belittle Gods Word. Both of which might read this book looking for some justification for their personal views.

If you read the NIV and you do NOT believe that it is inerrant then my question to you is "What parts have error?". How about the parts about salvation? It seems important to know how God gets you into Heaven. What if those parts of the Bible are the wrong parts? How about the parts about Christ? I mean, maybe Christ was Satan's son and those old scribes just got it wrong. Here you are praying to Christ to make intersession for you. You probably shouldn't be doing that if Christ is Satan's son. The point is that unless you believe that what you are reading is inerrant then you can't say one way or the other which parts are truthful (if any) and which are lies. Oh, sure you might claim that you have the Holy Spirit to help you make such discernment, but that is a self defeating argument. How do you know that you have the Holy Spirit to help you discern? Well, because the Bible tells you so. But then, how do you know that that part of the Bible is correct? If you already admit that your Bible has such error then why not that part of the Bible? Maybe the Holy Spirit is Satan himself and again those silly old scribes just got it wrong. I guess you can say that you know about the Holy Spirit because you get a little happy feeling in your heart, but then Muslims and Hindi's and even atheists can have happy feelings in their hearts. That is hardly a reasonable argument. I mean, it is probably more likely that you just had a good curry for lunch and not that it's the Holy Spirit. The point is that either God has carried his Word intact throughout history or there is no reason for us to believe in Christ. There is no middle ground. You need to start with the premise that Gods Word is something that God has carried throughout history and has delivered to us. We must be able to have it now; without having to wait for some researcher to find it for us some years in the future after we are long since dead. Yes, such may be false premise. I mean, maybe there is no God. But that is not my point.

You cannot be Christian unless you have Gods Word, and you cannot have Gods Word if you claim, as this book does, that you are on an endless search into the future to discover God's Word all the while knowing that you will never ever completely find it. Hoping only that your progress takes you ever closer to what it actually is instead of away from what it is, but also knowing that you have no real test to measure whether you are going in the right direction or the wrong direction. Good luck with that. You will need it.

By the way, this is not just an argument for Christians. Its the same for any faith. It is just as silly for a Muslim to believe they are Muslim unless they start with the premise that the Qur'an is inspired by god. If they cannot point at the Qur'an and say, that is the word of god then what good is it to them. Not only is it of no use it is also completely illogical. You can't say you believe in something without believing it to be true, but also you must be able to define by what Authority you can make such a claim towards understanding. To the Authors of this book, the most they can say is that they believe in Christ, but that they have no authority whatsoever (other then their own gut fuzzy nice feeling) that such a belief is true. Whereas, I simply say that Christ is real because God says he is real in the Bible (in English such is what God put into the KJV). I can say that only because I believe the KJV to be Gods Word. If I did not believe such then I could not say it. Mind you, such does not make me right, it only means that I have an Authority beyond myself that I believe demonstrate such to be truth. Someone can simply question that Authority, as this book is doing, but what is the alternative? The alternative is that we cannot know anything about God other then what we want to guess at. In other words, it all collapses into a subjective view. Such a subjective perspective is clearly not a Christian perspective. We are after Gods specific perspective and not our subjective one. So, again, the direction of this book is away from Christian thinking any way you look at it.

I personnal perfer the KJV but I do use modern Bible versions. There are a lot of verses in the KJV that are hard to understand and I use a modern version to understand what the verse is saying.

The KJV is not a perfect translation. No translation can be perfect. For a start the punctuation is not inspired. The original Hebrew and Greek don't have any punctuation and the Hebrew doesn't have any vowels. It is only to be expected that a translation would have mistakes. Here is an example of what I mean. Take a look at Luke 23:43 -

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

Now take out the punctuation and vowels:

ndjsssdnthmvrlyisyntthtdyshltthbwthmnprds

Can you make any sense out of it now?

The punctuation in the KJV is good in most places except for a few places. It is amazing what difference the placing of one comma can make to what a sentance is saying:

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee to day, shalt thou be with me in paradise.