KJV ONLY ?

#KJV only argument: other versions/translations are evil because of omitted texts.

But: The KJV was translated based on texts available at the time. Since then earlier writings have been discovered (hundreds) which do not contain various passages, inferring that the texts used by the KJ translators were skewed with notes or comments made by them or other prior scribes. Thus newer versions/translations find it more faithful to exclude or marginalize the verses that are not present in the earliest copies. This keeps in line with the Bible mandate that nothing shall be “added” to the Bible (Rev. 22:18-19).

In simple terms, if you play the telephone game, the message you get at the end can be different than the original (that’s the intent of the game). Not that the end message is a lie or completely skewed, but which message is more like the original? If a sentence was found in the 2000 relay range that was not in the 100 range, how likely is it that it was part of the original?

So the KJV suffers from its own argument – if they can point the finger and accuse others of deletions and marginalized texts, four fingers point back that they have texts added.

Thus the argument is juvenile at best, whereas the modern day scholars, translators, and historians understand how the process works. They allow for the differences in ages and texts available, and attempt to be just as faithful to translations as possible (based on the intent of their translations angle/focus).

It is noteworthy to add that with the marginalization/omission of the texts KJV proponents have cataloged, none of them jeopardize or omit Christian teaching that does not exist in neighboring or other areas of scripture.

In another vain of textual criticism: the apocrypha books are not considered holy scripture, but as historical writings, such as the works of Josephus. This is because they are not cited/quoted by other Bible writers, and their themes and sometimes teachings conflict with the accepted texts. Roughly the same with omitted “gospels” and other writings beyond the NT age, which are considered gnostic writings, penned a good 300 years beyond the 1st century church, and yet attributed to those of the same age as if secretly passed down (gospel of Mary and such).

2 Comments

Filed under New Testament, Old Testament, Theology