I am looking for a thoughtful discussion of the KJV only debate.
Williams, James B., and Randolph Shaylor, eds. God’s Word in Our Hands: The Bible Preserved for Us. Greenville, SC; Belfast, Northern Ireland: Ambassador Emerald International, 2003.
Williams, James B., and Randolph Shaylor, eds. From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man: A Layman’s Guide to How We Got Our Bible. Greenville, SC; Belfast, Northern Ireland: Ambassador-Emerald International, 1999.
These are both in Logos and seem reasonably balanced.
How about this:
https://www.logos.com/product/144705/authorized-the-use-and-misuse-of-the-king-james-bible
Here is another good resource -
How about this: https://www.logos.com/product/144705/authorized-the-use-and-misuse-of-the-king-james-bible
I see Todd just beat me to it by a minute. [:)]
There are many who offer thoughtful refutations of KJV only, but if you are looking for a sane, well stated case for preservation and the TR, I suggest "Touch Not the Unclean Thing" by David Sorenson.
https://www.amazon.com/Touch-Not-Unclean-Thing-Separation/dp/0971138400
It is required reading for every graduate of Pensacola Christian College... it is not the re inspiration position espoused by some KJV folks... if you truly want exposure to a pro kjv side without hunting straw men, this is a good start.
Outside of Logos, last time I looked there were some well written Thesis on the topic from both sides of the debate, can't honestly say that I have ever read anything truly neutral on this though. Quite a few quote an Ian Paisley book that from memory has "Old Sword" in the title which is out of print.
For those advocating the KJV, or more accurately in many case Textus Receptus, the best of the Thesis available, in my opinion, are the ones that don't rely on a character assassination of Westcott and Hort but focus on the methodology of textual criticism i.e. they discuss theory rather than attack the person.
On the other side the best ones avoid the obvious personality debates and again focus on textual theory usually the external support i.e. the Church Fathers.
I found that this was a good debate:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHR8wJAjNFo
I also profited from James White's book: The King James Only Controversy
https://www.logos.com/product/43390/the-king-james-only-controversy-can-you-trust-modern-translations
I appreciated White's discussion of the spectrum of positions of people that would hold to some form of KJV Only-ism
Group #1: “I Like the KJV Best”
Group #2: “The Textual Argument”
Group #3: “Received Text Only”
Group #4: The Inspired KJV Group
Group #5: “The KJV as New Revelation”
... Quite a few quote an Ian Paisley book that from memory has "Old Sword" in the title which is out of print.
I believe the Ian Paisley book you're thinking of may be My Plea for the Old Sword.
I also profited from James White's book: The King James Only Controversy https://www.logos.com/product/43390/the-king-james-only-controversy-can-you-trust-modern-translations I appreciated White's discussion of the spectrum of positions of people that would hold to some form of KJV Only-ism Group #1: “I Like the KJV Best” Group #2: “The Textual Argument” Group #3: “Received Text Only” Group #4: The Inspired KJV Group Group #5: “The KJV as New Revelation”
[y][y]
This book is short and, in my estimation, helpful.
https://www.logos.com/product/30964/the-king-james-version-debate-a-plea-for-realism
+1 I really appreciated White's logic and emphasis on consistency. Do note, that James White now says that the book should be updated in light of the latest research.
"The King James Only Controversy" by James White is an excellent resource and is available in Logos.
There are many who offer thoughtful refutations of KJV only, but if you are looking for a sane, well stated case for preservation and the TR, I suggest "Touch Not the Unclean Thing" by David Sorenson. https://www.amazon.com/Touch-Not-Unclean-Thing-Separation/dp/0971138400 It is required reading for every graduate of Pensacola Christian College... it is not the re inspiration position espoused by some KJV folks... if you truly want exposure to a pro kjv side without hunting straw men, this is a good start.
Would be nice to have this in Logos
It seems to me that the greatest motivating factor in the KJV only debate is the desire to circumvent the entire need for textual criticism. There are all kinds of assumptions and presumptions that undergird people's perception of the Bible, and part of why these generally anchorless starting points are so crucial and imperative for so many is because they believe that 1) exercising more than a handful of brain cells at any given moment is a work of the flesh (i.e. deep thinking is bad, as are situations that require it), and they are 2) subject to extreme fear of anything that calls their "belief" and "faith" into question. Christians, in general, succor reams of unsubstantiated platitudes that they confuse with legitimate Biblical perspective. Thoughts like "the Bible's message is so simple that a child can understand it" and "God is not the author of confusion" become "anchors"...but they are free-floating anchors unconnected to Biblical truth. If you believe that "God provides certainty", whatever that means, then you can interpret that to mean that any suggestion that a person may need to weed through the difficult task of becoming familiar with issues of textual criticism, a phenomenon that is the antithesis of certainty, is a work of the devil. If you believe that "God wants us to have peace of mind", peace of mind is most quickly reasserted by just declaring that the "old, old book" (KJV) is the only one people need bother their little heads over. Ironically, to "support and prove" this position, a handful of apologists develop elaborate arguments that are themselves something other than simple. C'est la vie.
Of course, one way to circumvent the issue of "which English Bible is best and/or acceptable" is to just learn to study and read the original languages. But that requires more than just a handful of brain cells and so making such a suggestion is a work of the devil...besides "God would never require anyone to learn an unfamiliar language in order to know Him." Speak Your Platitude With Attitude!!
The historian in me wants to recommend that you go back to where it all started. The entire KJV-Only movement began with an old Seventh-day Adventist college president named Benjamin G. Wilkinson in 1930 when he published his book “Our Authorized Version Vindicated” which is readily available online. Even though this happened during the years when SDA theology was at its most legalistic as its leaders were trying to impress the fundamentalists of the day with their own rigidity and extremism, the majority of SDA scholars and leaders at the time felt his book was just too extreme and problematic so they almost immediately published a rebuttal (I believe it’s called “Objections to Our Authorized Version Vindicated”). Wilkinson later published his reply to their objections (I think it was called “Answers to Objections to Our Authorized Version Vindicated”) and that was it. All other KJV-Only teachings are built on the foundation that Wilkinson created. (I own facsimile reprints of all three volumes but do not know if the second two are as readily available as the original as the publisher of my copies died around 5-6 years ago.) I’ve been told more than once that Wilkinson was so extreme in his views that none of his children had any desire to remain in the SDA denomination after becoming adults but that he eventually had a deathbed conversion where he repented of his legalism and found Christ in his final hours. He is still extremely popular among some of the far-right fringe Adventist members who want to hold on to the extremes of the 1920-1950 era of SDA theology, while most mainstream Adventists who understand the gospel of grace have little-to-no use for him or his materials today.
I have been following this thread a bit because my background is KJV-Only. (I will bring this to Logos eventually) I was raised in an IFB KJVO church that was in Group 4 and may have at times slipped into Group 5. I went off to a KJVO bible college and began to wonder about some of the things but by and large accepted it.
I got out of college, planted a church and eventually by God's grace felt the need to dig deeper into the word (I was out of gas in my preaching) I got some various books, but somehow came across Logos and bought a package and began studying Greek. (Really Louw-Nida)
The flashpoint was evangelism, I had serious doubts about the easy-believism that I had been taught now that I was in the ministry. All my life I had seen reports of 100's saved in a weekend but never anything come of it. Using Logos I began to see that the KJV did not teach easy-believism nor did many of the well known teachers that I now had access too. (Spurgeon's sermons etc)
The problem with KJVO in my world was the version was a "badge of orthodoxy" but it was not opened and exegeted. This is what supported a lot of the crazy beliefs, I still have family in the movement, I honestly don't think they grasp what the KJV says. They swoop in to get their proof texts but don't really follow the logic of a text etc. Topical preaching supported by strong personalites is what provided the authority in this world.
Once I started trying to expound the text I continually found myself translating the KJV to the same type of language the ESV used. I remember when I went to the Christian bookstore and bought an ESV, I came home and read the entire NT through in one sitting. I told my wife, it felt like I had been slurping water off a rock all my life and now I could wade in and dunk my head under the water and drink till my heart was content! I get emotional just thinking of how this first felt.
Logos Bible Software played (and still plays) a huge role in my life & ministry. It was a window to good resources and teaching at a time when I was drowning and did not know what to do. Praise God!
I do find the whole debate tedious now, I rarely wade in and engage KJVO people. I rather eat the fresh bread than argue over which one is more fresh!
here is the video done as a result of my stud into this. https://www.joshhunt.com/2018/12/07/niv-vs-kjv/
I told my wife, it felt like I had been slurping water off a rock all my life and now I could wade in and dunk my head under the water and drink till my heart was content! I get emotional just thinking of how this first felt.
Thanks for sharing. I too have many KJVO family members.
Much on YouTube. As far as Logos- much has already been mentioned (though not "discussions") such as Mark Ward's book, James White's book, and D.A. Carson's. Also, the Mobile Ed course by Dr. Heiser, NT281 "How we got the New Testament" is good at addressing these matters too.
https://www.logos.com/product/54352/mobile-ed-nt281-how-we-got-the-new-testament
I've seen several suggestions of materials for TR only, but none really for KJV only.
I am KJV only. I'd suggest that the best work today still comes from Peter Ruckman, despite his many detractors. I'd recommend reading a few of his books if you'd like to know the KJV only position, instead of reading what people say ABOUT his books.
I watched your video also. I'll suggest a few books based on what I heard from your position.
First, you point out that we have lots of manuscripts and we can see the textual variants in Logos. Dr. Ruckman discusses those various extant manuscripts from a KJV only position in "Manuscript Evidence": http://a.co/d/d76u0nE
Tius, thank you for your explanation. It was very informative.
Let me add that Dr. Ruckman has some problematic stuff, but I hope everyone can read for his points on the above topics, and skip over the material that is not pertinent to the KJV only topic. His off-topic materials and comments can be distracting and have deterred many from reading his good points on the larger issue; please separate the meat from the bones and you'll find some very compelling arguments.
Speak of Mobile Ed courses, a Mobile Ed course that's not related to the KJVO debate itself but more related to the question of bible translations in general is BI181 - Introducing Bible Translations. I picked this up when they were offering it as part of the free book (course) of the month resources (I think it was one of the add-ons).
It doesn't deal with textual issues as I recall but more so focuses on the differences in translations and on translation methodology. I thought it was really helpful even as someone who's been to seminary, since there are nuggets/tidbits of info that I hadn't come across in school.
https://www.logos.com/product/54353/mobile-ed-bi181-introducing-bible-translations
Speak of Mobile Ed courses, a Mobile Ed course that's not related to the KJVO debate itself but more related to the question of bible translations in general is BI181 - Introducing Bible Translations. I picked this up when they were offering it as part of the free book (course) of the month resources (I think it was one of the add-ons). It doesn't deal with textual issues as I recall but more so focuses on the differences in translations and on translation methodology. I thought it was really helpful even as someone who's been to seminary, since there are nuggets/tidbits of info that I hadn't come across in school. https://www.logos.com/product/54353/mobile-ed-bi181-introducing-bible-translations
This is a great course. One of the best i have seen.
Hi,
I’m a little puzzled. Are you saying that somebody who cannot speak English will have to learn it to read God’s Word? Also, what about Christians who read it in the original languages? I’ve never really understood this fully.
Anthony,
This debate can be confusing to anyone who hasn't been exposed to it before. First of all, no one is saying that you must learn English to read God's Word, or that you cannot read it in the original languages.
At the risk of going a bit beyond what the forum guidelines allow, I believe there are basically three broad issues involved.
None of that has anything to do with, for example, the Luther translation into German. Or with the traditional Greek text used by the Eastern Orthodox churches, or the traditional Masoretic text used in synagogues. It's really a debate about what to do with modern textual criticism, and whether we have an authoritative English version that we can fully and completely rely on as God's Word - down to the very last word and comma.
Or more fundamentally, can we rely on God's providence to have made sure that the English Bible my grandparents lived by, and that many still study today, is without error. As you might imagine, that can become incredibly important if you have a very high view of Scripture and English is your only language.
Hi, I’m a little puzzled. Are you saying that somebody who cannot speak English will have to learn it to read God’s Word? Also, what about Christians who read it in the original languages? I’ve never really understood this fully.
The whole debate comes to two resources:
Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus.
Do we accept them as the true word of God or burn them as garbage?
I'd suggest that the best work today still comes from Peter Ruckman, despite his many detractors.
There you go...that's his name.
Fwiw, I've also seen some captivating KJVO material on Youtube. There's this guy that draws elaborate pictures while he preaches. Quite a specimen.
Ruckman has a ton of his "chalk talks" on Youtube. They're not all about KJVO topics.
