King James Version Onlyism – The Paper what will Change the Course of History

So this post was originally the paper – but now it is in this book:

Author: Joel Watts

Joel L. Watts holds a MA in Theological Studies from United Theological Seminary. and MA in Clinical Mental Health at Adams State University. He is the author of Mimetic Criticism of the Gospel of Mark: Introduction and Commentary (Wipf and Stock, 2013), a co-editor and contributor to From Fear to Faith: Stories of Hitting Spiritual Walls (Energion, 2013), and Praying in God's Theater, Meditations on the Book of Revelation (Wipf and Stock, 2014). his latest, Jesus as Divine Suicide, is forthcoming.

9 thoughts on “King James Version Onlyism – The Paper what will Change the Course of History”

    1. thanks. i didn’t get to everything. I mean, there is still the entire issue of the Septuagint and their hypocritical use of other translations, but…

  1. Hi,

    “There is no turning to the Greek and making use of lexical tools in his argument; he suggests only that higher critics have turned against miracles and thus the Revised Version renders passages without miracles (Wilkinson, 4-5).”

    Actually the Revised Version does not literally follow the corrupted Greek text here and has “the sun’s light failing” … a mediocre translation but not the literal eclipse blunder of Moffat and others.

    Benjamin Wilkinson explains that there is a textual corruption and that an eclipse is a physical impossibility during the full moon period of Passover. It is a well-balanced presentation, without going into huge detail.

    And this is not original to Wilkinson. e.g. John William Burgon explains this well in 1883 in :

    Revision Revised.
    http://books.google.com/books?id=nXkw1TAatV8C&pg=PA65

    Shalom,
    Steven

  2. Hi,

    Actually my history was not one of assumption. I used the NIV and NAS for many, many years, and then studied the textual issues behind the modern versions (“The Search for the word of God by Daniel Segraves”) . Even then, I preferred to avoid the AV, seeing all the agitprop about supposed errors and coming from backgrounds where the AV was generally dissed.

    And note, I simply wanted to correct one error in your presentation, I did not ask you to change your position on this or that. And there are a few additional corrections that would be appropriate, some minor some major.

    Shalom,
    Steven Avery
    Bayside, NY

    1. HAHAHHA. actually, that is just the title of the post ;0

      I wanted to title the paper something along the lines of “White Supremacists who believe that God is White and Speaks only 16th Century English that He ripped off from Tyndale”

Leave a Reply, Please!

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.