Debunking 'KJV Only' In Under 2 Minutes

Many people will die on the hill of "KJV-onlyism." This short video is a resource you can use to hopefully destabilize the theological and cultural echo-chambers of those who hold the KJV translation of the Bible to too high a standard.
#kjvonly #kjvbible #theology

Support the making of the next video:

Music:

[itscoleperkins]

Support the making of the next video👇🏻

Join the community!👇🏻

[andreascovano]

I think it's the old timey language and the medium of that language which is why king James Bible is so revered. You can't get better cinema or better quotes and than KJV in this regard

[JoshP-ev]

I know there is a lot of debate on translations, I'll just comment on the (English Standard Version) when compared to the King James:
• Acts 8:37 is missing, So the ESV reads that you can be saved through being baptized. It removes the need to believe in Christ's sacrifice.

• Daniel 3:25 changes Son of God (KJV) to son of the gods (ESV) sounds like something from greek mythology

• Colossians 1:14 Blood is removed

• 1 John 5:7 the Godhead is removed

This is why I read the King James among other reasons. These omissions are also in the NIV and ASV. This is just an observation and my personal choice.I believe these changes are intentional and water down the deity of Christ.I dont write this to attack or put down, but to bring to attention things I've learned over time. I encourage everyone to do there own research and allow the Holy Spirit to direct you.

I would like to hear your explanations on these omissions? Maybe you could do a video so we can all understand.

[IronSharpensIron]

So dont use the text that was received from the actual Christians, instead use the text that the gnostics wrote. Listen to heritics who are not Christian and dont believe the Bible is the word of God.. listen to Michael Heiser who denies that the Bible is factual in it's history. Finally call it "archaic" language that noone can My daughter's have been reading and understanding the KJB since they could read. Im really trying to gove these people a chance but their arguments are extremely weak.

[TrueLight]

Would you be willing to defend this position on a discussion streamed to youtube?

[TheDoctor]

I'm all for fighting KJV Onlyism, but just to point out the KJV translators did not rely solely on the Textus Receptus. To start with, there wasn't one TR at that time. That was produced later. What they did use primarily was Beza's Greek edition of what Erasmus started and what would eventually become the TR (and we're only talking about the New Testament here), but they were also influenced by such things as the Latin Vulgate and Complutensian Polyglot, even if indirectly at times. And the KJV was essentially a revision of the Bishops Bible.

[RabbiKolakowski]

It is a better translation than the NIV, but I just use the Hebrew directly.

[nazorean]

Here is one sentence why you should NOT trust this video: the author does not know that all other texts were simply found in the garbage in Egypt.

[joshuacalabro]

Isn’t Php 2:6 ESV and KJV are saying the same thing? The problem is, we don’t speak that version of English anymore, so that dialect has to be retaught if it’s to be understood in the context of KJV

[joelrobertsonmusic]

Which translation would you say is most faithful to the oldest texts?

[TheGreatLlamaJockey]

I went to a Christian school till about 3rd grade and the standard issue Bible there was the KJV. I didn’t get a NASB till about 5th grade. The NASB was easier to understand but I was just used to KJV by then and I thought that was the norm.

[magatama]

The KJV is an outstanding version of the Bible, not because of the translation itself, but because the text (Textus Receptus) it was based upon is indeed superior to the text basis (Alexandrian text type) used by the majority of modern translations. Any good translations based on Textus Receptus including the KJV and NKJV should be held with high esteem.

[cornelkittell]

Older doesn't necessarily mean better. But that is not the most important reason for using the KJV, God just talks like that.

[darz]

Sadly, hard-core believers don't even acknowledge the Word of God can have mistakes.

However, just concentrating on the nuts and bolts ignores the real value (?) of a religious textbook. That is, it is used as the only source for supernatural and paranormal events. As such, it is basically hearsay (not being corroborated - except for historical, geologic, location, and archeological writings. But people don't want a history lesson - they want the magical.

[justinjustin]

You’re using an atheist to defend changing and taking out verses from the word of God. Good job youre really making God happy with that one.

[NOITCHYEARZ]

I n my opionin i have abgoid time reading all translations the message does not change

[AdVeritatemEamus]

KJV is good, but not perfect. More than once Young's Literal Translation, which is also from the Textus Receptus, is clearer in presenting the deity of Christ. See below.

2 Thessalonians 1:12

YLT- that the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you, and ye in him, according to the grace of our God and Lord Jesus Christ.
KJV- That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you, and ye in him, according to the grace of our God and the Lord Jesus Christ.

KJV adds "the", separated "our God" from "Lord Jesus Christ".

Titus 2:13

YLT- waiting for the blessed hope and manifestation of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ,
KJV- Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ

KJV is unclear, but Young's is unmistakable: Jesus is here called "great God".

2 Peter 1:1

YLT- Simeon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who did obtain a like precious faith with us in the righteousness of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ
KJV- Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ

Once again, Young's is clear, but KJV is clouding a clear sound-off for the deity of Jesus. Christ is here called "our God and Saviour".

Jude 4

YLT- for there did come in unobserved certain men, long ago having been written beforehand to this judgment, impious, the grace of our God perverting to lasciviousness, and our only Master, God, and Lord -- Jesus Christ -- denying
KJV- For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ

Young's, for a fourth time, rightly translated the passage so as to reflect the Godhood of our Lord Jesus. KJV is obsolete. If ya have to have the TR, that's ok. But there's better out there than KJV.

[Jupiter]

I agree that KJV is not the best translation option out there for English readers…but I may be missing your point with Bart Ehrman? What are you getting at?

[DARRELX-ic]

Here is why you shouldn't study the KJV Bible? So for over 400 years God gave us a Bible that we shouldn't study? Then He gave us 100 different English versions for financial profit? The King James by Providence alone shows the KJV reliable if anything. Spurgeon used it. There has nothing that has been achieved in modern times that compares to the preachers of old. I don't follow the kjv only cult nonsense, but we cannot dismiss the tried and true kjv. Come on.

[Dagfari]

I have a major disagreement with your video. You say that we have to deal with archaic, impenetrable language - but "naught" and "jangling"? Are those REALLY archaic?

(Well done. Good video.)