King-James-Only Movement
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "King-James-Only_Movement".

Christianity portal

The First Page of the Book of Genesis in the 1611 printing of the KJV

The King James Only movement is a label applied to a wide variety of beliefs concerning the superiority of the Authorized King James Version, the Textus Receptus and the Masoretic Text.

The origin of the label "King James Only" is unclear, though as early as 1987,^[1] it was being used to refer to claims of exclusivity for the King James Version and the controversy which had been brewing over these claims for almost a decade.^[2][3][4][5] American church historian and apologist James R. White claims that the phrases "KJV Only" and "KJV Onlyism" are not "insulting" or "inaccurate."^[6] However, KJV proponent D. A. Waite alleges the term is a "smear word".^[7][8]

Variations

James White has divided the King James Only movement into 5 main types:^[9]

• "I Like the KJV Best" This division is represented by individuals who simply prefer the KJV over other translations. These are people who like the version because their church uses it, they have always used it, or because they like its style.^[10] The Trinitarian Bible Society would fit in this division. They have said, "The Trinitarian Bible Society does not believe the Authorised Version to be a perfect translation, only that it is the best available translation in the English language."^[11]
• "The Textual Argument" - Individuals here believe the KJV's Hebrew and Greek textual basis are the most accurate. These conclude that the KJV is based on better manuscripts. Many in this group may accept a modern version based on the same manuscripts as the KJV. White claims Zane C. Hodges is a good example of this group.^[12]
• "Received Text Only" - Here, the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts are believed to be supernaturally preserved. The KJV is believed to be a translation exemplar, but it is also believed that other translations based on these texts have the potential to be equally good.
• "The Inspired KJV Group" - Individuals in this group believe that the KJV itself was supernaturally inspired. They see the translation to be preserved supernaturally by God and as accurate as the original Greek and Hebrew Manuscripts found in its underlying texts. Sometimes this group will even exclude foreign versions based on the same manuscripts claiming the KJV to be the only Bible.
• "The KJV As New Revelation" - This group of individuals would believe that the KJV is a "new revelation" from God, and can and should be the standard from which all other translations originate. Adherents to this belief may also believe that the original-language Hebrew and Greek can be corrected by the KJV. This view is often called "Ruckmanism" after Peter Ruckman, a staunch KJV supporter.

These latter two views have also been referred to as, "Double Inspiration."^{citation needed}

These types are not all mutually exclusive, nor a comprehensive summary of those who prefer the KJV. Douglas Wilson, for instance, argues that the KJV (or, in his preferred terminology, the Authorized Version) is superior because of its manuscript tradition, its translational philosophy (with updates to the language being regularly necessary), and its ecclesiastical authority, having been created by the church and authorized for use in the church.^[13]

See also

• Bible version debate

Notes

Further reading

• Anderson, Robert (1903). The Bible and modern criticism. ASIN B00069Y39O. 
• Ankerberg, John; John Weldon (2003). The Facts on the King James Only Debate. ISBN 0736911111. 
• Beacham, Roy E.; Kevin T. Bauder (2001). One Bible Only? Examining Exclusive Claims for the King James Bible. ISBN 0825420482. 
• Branderburg, Kent (2003). Thou Shalt Keep Them: A Biblical Theology of the Perfect Preservation of Scripture. ISBN 0974381705. 
• Burgon, John William (2000). The Last Twelve Verses of the Gospel of Mark. ISBN 1589600142. 
• Burgon, John William (2008). The Revision Revised. ISBN 1888328010. 
• Carson, D.A. (1978). The King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism. ISBN 0801024277. 
• Comfort, Phillip W. (2000). Essential Guide to Bible Versions. ISBN 084233484X. 
• Daniels, David (2005). Did the Catholic Church Give us the Bible?. Chick Publications Inc.. ISBN 0758905793. 
• Dewey, David (2005). A User's Guide To Bible Translations: Making The Most Of Different Versions. ISBN 0830832734. 
• Fuller, David Otis (1997). Counterfeit or Genuine?. ISBN 0825426154. 
• Fuller, David Otis (1997). True or False?. ISBN 0944355129. 
• Fuller, David Otis (1975). Which Bible?. ISBN 082542612X. 
• Holland, Thomas (2000). Crowned With Glory: The Bible from Ancient Text to Authorized Version. ISBN 0595146171. 
• Macgregor, Alan J (2004). Three Modern Versions: A Critical Assessment of the NIV, ESV and NKJV. ISBN 0904435873. 
• Mauro, Philip (1924). Which version?: Authorized or revised?. Boston: Hamilton Brothers. Retrieved on 2008-07-23. 
• Paisley, Ian R. K (1997). My Plea for the Old Sword. Emerald House Group. ISBN 1840300159. 
• Riplinger, Gail (2004). In Awe of Thy Word: Understanding the King James Bible Its Mystery and History Letter by Letter. ISBN 0963584529. 
• Riplinger, Gail (1993). New Age Bible Versions: An Exhaustive Documentation of the Message, Men & Manuscripts Moving Mankind to the Antichrist's One World Religion. ISBN 0963584502. 
• Ryken, Leland (2002). The Word of God in English: Criteria for Excellence in Bible Translation. ISBN 1581344643.