What Is KJV ONLY? What’s Wrong With It?

Christians who are “KJV Only” are people who view the King James Version of the Bible as the only legitimate English translation. It should be stressed that KJV Only people can live and die as genuine believers, loved of the Lord. The principle of Romans 14:3 applies here so we need to be careful not to be contemptuous of our fellow brothers & sisters regardless of what their position is on this matter (it goes both ways).

It should also be stressed that there’s absolutely nothing wrong with using the King James Version (KJV) in your studies. We quote it here at Fountain of Life from time to time and I’ve used it as my daily reading Bible.

The Main Drawback of KJV Only

This main issue with being KJV Only is that it can hinder people’s acquisition of truth because it limits their studies to a human translation of the God-breathed Scriptures (2 Timothy 3:16). Truth is alétheia (ah-LAY-thee-ah) in the Greek, which means “reality,” aka the way it really is. Since Christ stressed how “the truth will set you free” (John 8:31-32) it’s not wise for a person to limit their access to scriptural truth due to misguided allegiance to a translation of the original God-breathed Scriptures.

Speaking of which…

Only the Original Hebrew & Greek Scriptures Are “God-Breathed,” Not Translations of Them

Only the original Hebrew & Greek Scriptures are “God-breathed,” not a particular translation of them into another language by a person or a group of people. For anyone to argue that the KJV is also “God-breathed” in the sense that every word in it was inspired by God as the translators were carried along by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21), this simply isn’t true. There’s no verse in Scripture that says something like “Yay, in many centuries to come I will raise up a band of men who will translate the God-breathed Scriptures perfectly into the lingua franca of those times. Let not anyone else translate the Scriptures into this same language or update it, for that is an abomination.”

Let’s face it, any human translation of the original Hebrew/Greek Scriptures into another language is going to have its issues, no matter how great it is. And the KJV was indeed great for its time. This is augmented if the translators are all from one sect, which was the case with the KJV wherein the 47 scholars who translated it were of the Church of England and under the oversight of King James. The Church of England, if you’re not aware, broke away from the Roman Church in the mid-1500s and at the time was basically the English version of the Catholic Church.

The obvious issue with these translators of the KJV being from the same sect is the potential bias of sectarianism. Interestingly, it’s estimated that about 80% of the KJV stems from William Tyndale’s translation from 1528. Tyndale was ordained as a Catholic priest in 1515, but turned Protestant with the Reformation, which officially began two years later. You can read about Tyndale’s great contributions to Christianity here.

Since any translation of the original God-breathed Scriptures is going to have its issues, it’s best for those wanting to find the truth on any given subject to use several translations in their studies and look up the key Hebrew & Greek terms when pertinent, plus see how these words are used in different contexts in the Scriptures. Doing so reflects the “Berean spirit” (Acts 17:10-12).

We have to be careful here to distinguish between those who simply favor the KJV and those who are staunchly KJV Only. The latter argue that the Scripture texts available at the time to write the KJV (also used by Tyndale in his version) are the only reliable sources for the Holy Scriptures, but most KJV Only folk reject other translations based on these same texts, like the NKJV, KJ21 and MEV, all of which they curiously deem as sacrilegious as the NAS, NIV and other relatively recent translations.

KJV Only people evidently think the LORD only ordains one translation of the Hebrew, Aramaic & Greek Scriptures per language group which, frankly, is absurd. Such a position naturally suggests that English-speaking Christians are in bondage to this translation even though it’s over 400 years old and contains archaic verbiage that modern English-speakers can barely understand.

Tips for Getting the Most Out of Your Studies of the Scriptures

My humble advice to believers is to continue in God’s Word and put it into practice (John 8:31-32). Don’t use just one translation; compare the translations and look up the Hebrew & Greek words when questions arise concerning the meaning of a particular word or phrase.

Everyone naturally has a favorite translation, but I encourage switching translations from time to time as far as regular reading goes. For instance, I’m currently using the NKJV for daily reading (for studies, however, I use several translations). This keeps things fresh and prevents any one translation from becoming a veritable idol. It also provides a more balanced view of what God’s Word says. KJV Only people, by contrast, put themselves in a confining box of explicitly trusting the translation work of 47 scholars from the Church of England from over 400 years ago.

As far as looking up the original Hebrew & Greek goes, lexicons and interlinear texts are readily available. I encourage the use of Bible Hub on the internet and other such sites, which provide free and easy access to these study helps. For instance, here is John 3:16 according to 28 prominent English versions on Bible Hub. From there you can conveniently click to any of the 28 versions offered and also access lexicons (e.g. the Strong’s) and interlinear texts via the tool bar at the top. For those not familiar with interlinear Scriptures, they parallel the original Hebrew/Greek text with another language in alternate lines. Here is an example of John 3:13.

Criticizing Translations

Every single translation of the original God-breathed Scriptures can be nitpicked, including the KJV. I could cite clear evidence of problematic translating in the KJV based on sectarian bias, but I’m not going to do so. Instead, I humbly encourage believers to grow in God’s Word and put it into practice, year after year. Improve your studies — and your spiritual growth — by implementing the pointers noted above. You’ll be blessed.

When comparing some modern versions of the Bible with the KJV, there are some “missing” verses, such as in the NIV. Yet these “missing verses” are always cited in the footnotes; so these verses are not actually missing (since they’re in the footnotes). But why were they omitted from the main text in the first place? Here’s why:

The KJV was originally published in 1611 and it was a great achievement for that period as the translators used the best sources accessible at the time. Yet one of the KJV’s weaknesses is that the translation committee of 47 scholars drew heavily from William Tyndale’s Bible, which explains why 80% of Tyndale’s verbiage was transferred to the KJV (76% of the Old Testament and 83% of the New Testament). Tyndale utilized several sources in his translation. For the New Testament, he used Desiderius Erasmus’s Greek New Testament, aka the Textus Receptus (“received text” in Latin), specifically the third edition from 1522.

In the centuries since 1611 myriad older scriptural texts have surfaced and were painstakingly examined by scholars. They concluded that these earlier manuscripts are naturally more trustworthy. So contemporary translators have access to scriptural documents much nearer in time to the original manuscripts. As such, modern translations like the original NIV actually offer superior biblical scholarship than was available in the early 1600s when the KJV was produced. You can read details here.

Staunch KJV Only folks curiously object to revisions. Yet it is necessary to periodically revise works in order to fix issues from previous renditions, not to mention keep relevant. Should they not correct issues? Should they not update to stay relevant while maintaining faithfulness to the original Scriptures?

The KJV itself has had myriad corrections since 1611. In its original form, it’s virtually unreadable to modern English speakers. Go here for details.

Conclusion

The KJV was fine for its time, but its day is long over. While it’s serviceable for reference in one’s studies — and I often use it in this regard — it’s no longer effective as far as public ministry goes, unless of course you’re exclusively serving people already familiar with the KJV. The archaic lingo and phasing is simply too alien to modern English-speakers. It should have been retired from public service in the early 1800s (or, at least, the early 1900s) let alone the early 2000s.

Related Topics:

The NIV Bible — Answering the Critics

Hermeneutics — Proper Bible Interpretation

Berean Spirit — What is it? How Do You Cultivate It?

Who Wrote the New Testament Books? Who Authorized them as Scripture Canon?

Bible—Is it Full of Contradictions? Does it Promote Slavery, Tyranny and Discrimination?

What Does “Do Not Go Beyond What is Written” Mean in 1 Corinthians 4:6?

Bible — You Own One at a Huge Price!

Your Belief Window (video)