KJV Only? We asked a pastor

There are a handful of Christians that, truly, believe the King James Version (KJV) is the only authorized version of the Bible. Slightly confused, we took it upon ourselves to just ask a pastor. Our good friend, Pastor Dave, had quite a bit to say on the issue. Here is our interview with Pastor Dave concerning the KJV only movement**

Kristin of Christians in Motion: Hey Pastor Dave, I was wondering if I could pick your brain about something. King James Onlyism. Where does this idea come from? Christians that believe the KJV is the only authorized translation of the Bible, why do they believe that? I’m legitimately confused

Pastor Dave: You and me both. Their reasoning is that it is called the “authorized” version, which they think implies God’s authorization, I suppose. They argue that it has withstood the test of time, and they argue that it was not written by the biblical liberals of today, so we know the translator were sincere in their faith. All of those reasons are demonstrably false.

In addition, the texts used by the KJV translator were inferior to those used in contemporary translations. I can go into more detail if you would like about why their assertions about KJV authority is wrong, if you would like…

Kristin: Fire away! Because I don’t understand. I have several translations of the Bible (NIV, NLT, KJV, ESV, NASB) and I don’t see much difference between them. To be fair, I am no theologian or Biblical scholar but the differences seem to be minor.

PD: First, the authorization for KJV came from King James. The KJV only crowd have this naive view that the translation was written by people sincere in their faith. However, nothing could be more politcally motivated and liberal in its intention than King James and his translator. King James was the only one making the final break from Catholicism, and the only way to establish himself, as opposed to the pope, as the head this new church was to authorize an English translation of the Bible. There could be no more cynical and self-serving reason to order a translation than that.

Second, they had inferior Greek texts from which to work. The oldest texts were copies dating back only to 1000 A.D. We now have access to texts dating to 120 A.D., MUCH closer to the original manuscripts. There are glaring differences between the inferior texts that KJV used to translate the Bible.

Third, they did not have the Greek scholarship and the archeological understand that we have today. This significantly hampered their translation.

Fourth, just because something stands the test of time, does not mean it is great. Under that reasoning, we would still be using the Latin Vulgate, which is significantly older and still used by more people than the KJV. That argument also means we should consider going back to the Roman Catholic church. they have withstood the test of time, haven’t they?

Fifth, we can know about the qualities and character of those who make contemporary translations, contrary to the argument of the KJV only crowd. We can actually know their names and interview them. There are liberal translators and conservative translators. We can’t really know the character of the scholars working on the KJV.

Lastly, there are significant differences between some translations, but that is more time consuming. I am a HUGE fan of the NLT, which I think takes into considerations many of my concerns.

Kristin: This helps to clarify. I was so confused by the KJV only movement.

PD: I rank them up there with the flat earth people.

**This interview is published with permission from Pastor Dave Jones. Intro is written by Kristin Geckle of Christians in Motion.

25 thoughts on “KJV Only? We asked a pastor

  1. Good to hear the why of the KJV onliers. I wish we had simple access to the most original manuscripts. One problematic example of the various translations is in Revelation 5; 7-9. “And he (the Lamb) came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne. 8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints. 9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed US to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; 10 And hast made US unto our God kings and priests: and WE shall reign on the earth.”

    Meanwhile, other versions, such as NLT, NIV, ESV, and NASB, have THEM and THEY in the place of US and WE. It’s clear to see this is no minor difference. The KJV implies the four beasts and twenty-four elders are redeemed and made kings and priests to reign on the earth – which is utterly false. And this passage is one of the most prominent ones that the pre-tribulation rapture is based upon. We can see how false teachings and doctrines have a great deal to do with false translations. KJV isn’t the only one to do such things, either. I’ve seen discrepancies in every translation.

    That’s why I wish we could reference the original… only.


  2. I had wanted to comment on this post when I first read it because it made me think about this other post…but I couldn’t find it until now. For me, it answers the question, “Which Bible version is best?” in a wonderfully different and practical way. (“The one that God can use to speak to you” is the answer in my heart after reading about this very special version of the Bible.



  3. It was obviously a mistake asking a so-called pastor.
    Why didn’t you research the matter for yourself?
    There is no real need for confusion on the issue.

    So-called pastors these days cannot be trusted.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. Well, your a catholic aren’t you, & that would explain it.

        Where did you look exactly?
        In a catholic library, I presume?

        Liked by 1 person

      1. For me, there is only one translation to be used by any Christian.
        All the rest are corrupted or tainted by the Vatican.
        Anything from the Alexandrian line of MSS is certainly corrupt.
        If it’s from the Antiocahn MSS, its pretty certain that it is fine.

        KJV Only.



  4. I have seen UCB use about 15+ different so-called Bibles, and I would not touch their so-called ministry with a barge pole.


    1. For what it’s worth, I have no issue with the KJV. I know many people really like it and I’m not going to try and police which version people read. However, when we say that one version of the Bible is the ONLY version to read, I think we’re playing with fire. Ya know?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Amen!
        When speaking with non-believers, the topic generally comes up. A lot of them have read various versions, including Septuagint & Torah, etc. So many versions appear to be one of their reasons for not believing. When ones objective is to lead them to the Lord, that can be quite a challenge when Rev.22 becomes the focus of discussion. Do people ever ask you about Rev.22:18? If so, how do you explain it? “For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:”
        Have a wonderful Sunday! God bless you!

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s