Using the King James Version Bible Only
The practice of using only the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible, often referred to as "King James Onlyism," is a position held by some Christians who believe the KJV is the only acceptable English translation of the Bible [2, 3]. This stance typically involves the belief that the KJV is superior to all other translations, often to the point of asserting its divine preservation or inspiration [4].
Historically, the KJV, first published in 1611, became a dominant English translation. Before its widespread adoption, the Latin Vulgate held significant influence in Western Christianity for many centuries, serving as the primary Bible for general use and directly or indirectly influencing many vernacular versions in Western Europe [1].
Arguments for KJV-only positions vary in intensity. Some adherents believe the KJV is the most accurate translation because it was produced by a divinely guided process, or that it is the only English translation free from textual corruption or theological bias [4]. Others may simply prefer the KJV for its historical significance, literary beauty, or familiarity, without necessarily condemning other translations as illegitimate.
The broader Christian scholarly community, however, generally recognizes the value of multiple translations, acknowledging that each translation involves interpretive choices and that comparing different versions can enrich understanding [4]. For instance, various modern translations are used in academic and confessional contexts, such as the American Standard Version and World English Bible [2, 3]. Scholars often refer to original Greek and Hebrew texts, as well as ancient versions like the Septuagint and the Vulgate, to understand the nuances of biblical language [1]. The development of biblical scholarship has also led to a greater understanding of textual criticism, which examines ancient manuscripts to reconstruct the most probable original texts [5].
While some confessions, like the 1689 London Baptist Confession and the Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, are available in KJV format, this does not inherently endorse a KJV-only position but rather reflects its historical prominence as an English translation [2, 3]. The emphasis in mainstream biblical studies is on the careful exegesis of the text, regardless of the specific translation used, provided it is a faithful rendering of the original languages [4].
Sources
- Smith's Bible Dictionary “Smith's Bible Dictionary: Vulgate, The — the Latin version of the Bible. The influence which it exercised upon western Christianity is scarcely less than that of the LXX. upon the Greek churches. Both the Greek and the latin Vulgate have been long neglected; yet the Vulgate should have a very deep interest for all the western churches, many centuries it was the only Bible generally used; and, directly or indirectly is the real parent of all the vernacular versions of western Europe. The Gothic version of Ulphilas alone is independent of it. The name is equivalent to Vulgata editio (the current”
- Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent on Justification (Catholic) “Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent on Justification (Catholic, 1547), Bible Version: Bible Version Disable scripture popups King James Version American Standard Version World English Bible Show footnotes When clicked On the bottom On the side Reader Width Tags:”
- 1689 London Baptist Confession (Baptist/Reformed) “1689 London Baptist Confession (Baptist/Reformed, 1689), Bible Version: Bible Version Disable scripture popups King James Version American Standard Version World English Bible Show footnotes When clicked On the bottom On the side Reader Width Tags:”
- CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 104: § 7 . Objections. The only legitimate method of controverting a doctrine which purports to be founded on the Scriptures is the exegetical. If its advocates undertake to show that it is taught in the Bible, its opponents are bound to prove that the Bible, understood agreeably to the recognized laws of interpretation, does not teach it. This method, comparatively speaking, is little relied upon, or resorted to by the adversaries of the Church doctrine concerning the satisfaction of Christ. Their main reliance is on objections of two classe”
- Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 3: Tertullian — ELUCIDATIONS. (part 6): (2) that I consider it as practically Apocryphal, and hence as coming under St. Jerome's law, and being useless to establish doctrine; and (3) that I feel no need of it, owing to the wealth of Scripture on the same subject. Tertullian, himself says that he cites "only a few out of many texts--not pretending to bring up all the passages of Scripture. ... having produced an accumulation of witnesses in the fulness of their dignity and authority." To those interested in the question let me commend the learned dissertation of Grabe on the textual cas”