Response
Many individuals hold strong and significant objections to the translation methods and textual foundation of recent translations. Consequently, they advocate strongly for the King James Version. Conversely, others firmly believe that the newer translations represent an enhancement over the KJV in terms of their textual basis and translation approach. GotQuestions.org aims not to restrict its outreach solely to those who exclusively endorse the KJV. Similarly, we do not seek to limit ourselves to individuals who favor versions like the NIV, NAS, or NKJV. It is important to note that the intent of this article is not to dispute the use of the King James Version. Instead, the focus is on challenging the notion that the King James Version should be the exclusive choice for English-speaking individuals.
The KJV Only movement professes allegiance to the Textus Receptus, a compilation of Greek New Testament manuscripts finalized in the 1500s. Advocates of KJV Only, to varying extents, assert that God directed Erasmus (the compiler of the Textus Receptus) to produce a Greek text that perfectly mirrors the original writings of the biblical authors. However, upon closer inspection, it becomes evident that KJV Only proponents are not devoted to the Textus Receptus but rather exclusively to the KJV itself. The New Testament of the New King James Version is grounded in the Textus Receptus, just like the KJV. Nevertheless, KJV Only proponents condemn the NKJV as heretical, similar to their stance on the NIV, NAS, and others.
Besides the NKJV, other endeavors (such as the KJ21 and MEV) have aimed to offer minimal updates to the KJV by modernizing the antiquated language while utilizing the same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. These efforts are rejected with nearly the same intensity as the NKJV and other recent Bible translations.
It is evident that supporters of the King James Version (KJV) are devoted to the KJV itself, rather than the Textus Receptus. They have no intention of modernizing the KJV in any manner. While the KJV includes English that is antiquated, outdated, and occasionally perplexing to contemporary English speakers and readers, it would be relatively straightforward to release an updated version of the KJV with archaic terms and expressions transformed into modern English of the 21st century. Nevertheless, any effort to revise the KJV in any way is met with allegations of heresy and distortion of the Word of God by KJV proponents.
When the Bible is initially translated into a new language today, it is translated into the language spoken and written by that culture presently, not as it was spoken and written 400 years ago. The same principle should apply to English. The Bible was penned in the everyday language of the people at that period. Bible translations today should follow suit. This is why Bible translations need to be updated and revised as languages evolve and change. The KJV Only movement predominantly focuses on English. Why should English readers be compelled to read the Bible in outdated or archaic English, while speakers of other languages can access the Bible in contemporary versions of their languages?
Our allegiance lies with the original manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments, inscribed in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Only the original languages represent the Word of God as divinely inspired. A translation is merely an effort to convey what is expressed in one language into another. Modern translations excel in capturing the essence of the original languages and conveying it in a manner that we can comprehend in English. Nonetheless, no modern translation is flawless. Each one contains verses that are at least somewhat inaccurately translated. By comparing various translations, it is often easier to grasp the meaning of a verse than by relying solely on one translation. Our allegiance should not be to any specific translation, but to the accurate representation of God’s Word.
To not just any single English translation, but to the inspired, inerrant Word of God that is conveyed by the Holy Spirit through the translations (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Response The Bible provides an illustration of silent prayer in Hannah’s quiet plea «And she…
Answer In the period before the monarchy, Israel had no king; everyone did as they…
Response Hoshea, the son of Elah, ascended to the throne of the northern kingdom of…
Answer What can a married couple do to ensure that their marriage will last? The…
Response Deciding whether or not to wear a bikini is a dilemma many women face.…
Answer Revelation 4:1 introduces a section of Scripture that details "things which must be hereafter."…