My Recent Interview on KJV Onlyism

I was recently interviewed for the Echo Zoe radio and podcast program on the subject of KJV onlyism.

Fred Butler: KJV Onlyism

An internet acquaintance of mine, Andy Olson, who runs Echo Zoe, contacted me a few weeks ago when we did the interview. Along with our discussion on the subject of the King James and my testimony of being an advocate for KJV Onlyism, Andy has compiled some additional resources for anyone who would like to do some further research.

Andy puts together a podcast every month on a variety of topics. The one for this past April on the subject of the religious worldview of Marxism was exceptionally insightful. I would encourage folks to check out all the archives.


12 thoughts on “My Recent Interview on KJV Onlyism

  1. I just found you this morning from an interview you did with No Compromise Radio that I will listed to later today. On the subject of KJV Only I have an question if you don’t mind. Language is the only thing proven to evolve, or change over time. In Linguistics Class the Professor showed us The Lord’s Prayer in the various English Languages going back to the 9th century if memory serves. The ones from before the 1600s were unreadable without further study in ancient languages. I know I saw a Bible from the early 1500s and it might as well have been in Greek. Knowing that the farther we get from the 1600s the more unreadable the KJV will become how can you justify using it as a Bible? Besides, when the books of the Bible were written English did not exist.

  2. Here are my questions, Fred. This is the first post….I’ll try to break it up so they’re manageable.

    Fred says it’s a myth that “heretics, corrupted men and ungodly people” came in and introduced error and theological heresy. However God warns us that this will happen in passages like Jude 4 and 2 Peter 2:1. Why is it hard to believe and why would a Biblically literate person say it’s a “myth”?

    Fred later says there was “no heretical cabal” that attempted to corrupt the Bible. However, based on what we see very early on, as recorded in Genesis 3, why is it so hard to believe that Satan would attack the Word of God? The very first words we see from Satan are an attack on God’s Word! When did Satan stop?

    Fred says the best way to bring someone else out of King James “onlyism” is to prove to them that there was “no conspiracy” to change the Bible. How can one “prove” that?

    Fred says that the critical text is actually made up of the majority texts and NOT the Textus Receptus. However, the critical text wasn’t created until the “discovery” of Sinaiticus. The critical text was created from two manuscripts, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. Is that a majority? Where were the “textual scholars” before the discovery of Sinaiticus?

    Fred believes the KJV translators “used manuscripts that came 900 years after the few that came 200 years after the apostles wrote.” How old are the manuscripts that make up the critical text, such as Sinaiticus? Have these manuscripts been scientifically tested and where can one obtain those results?

  3. Fred says the KJV went through “many revisions”. What changed, in the KJV, through the process of those revisions?

    What’s wrong with having a “high view” of God’s Word? The opposite of that would be a “low view”. Correct? Is that preferable?

    I can find many Scriptures validating and verifying the purity and perfection of God’s Word. However, I cannot find a single Scripture that warns me of possible errors and inaccuracies or that any will be found in the future. Can you give me a Scripture like that?

    Fred talks a lot about “critical scholars”. When I look up words related to that, I find that “criticize” means “to pass judgment”. I also find that the word “critic” means “a person who judges merit”. How can one judge the “merit” of God’s Word?

    Fred also said “scholars have to determine” what the author “originally” wrote. And that “a good textual critic” determines the writing “may not be exactly what was originally intended or originally written”. How can we KNOW what was in the author’s mind? How can we KNOW their intentions? And, how can we KNOW their intentions were some other than what they put on paper?

    Fred said the job of critical text scholars is basically to make the text “sound good to the ear or to the person reading the text”. Wouldn’t that be merely scratching “itching ears”? Where does the job of the Holy Spirit to teach come into play?

  4. Last one. Thank you, in advance, for your time. :)

    Fred says KJV “onlyists” believe people of other language need to learn 17th Century English. I say critical “scholars” believe people either need to learn Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic OR listen to, or read a book by, someone who does. That seems to be a very popish idea!

    When Fred was talking about what “brought him out of King James Onlyism”, he mentioned several men’s names, one woman’s name, his seminary teaching and his newfound (at the time) appreciation for Calvinism. If you were to ask me what “brought me out” of believing that eclectic textual criticism was the correct way to understand the Bible, I would tell you, “I read the Bible”. The Holy Spirit was my Teacher….not a man, woman, a course, or some “ism”.

    Fred said Calvinists have a “high view of God”. I guess the assumption is that non-Calvinists have a low view of God. Would that be correct? Since Fred likes Calvinism and states that King James “onlyists” DON’T like Calvinism, how much of that belief, in itself, is responsible for Fred’s current view of the King James Bible?

    Regarding Westcott and Hort….I have researched their own writings and have information, from their very own words, which tie them to the occult. I will be happy to share links on accurate info regarding W&H with you. And Gail Riplinger didn’t even come across my radar while doing my research.

    Fred believes we DO have “all the words of God”. Obviously, the King James Bible is not a good enough source for these words. So, where can I, a normal, non-seminarian, find a perfect, error-free, accurate source of God’s Words? Also, along those lines, if nothing has been lost, then where can I find it?

  5. Here’s another unanswerable question…as ALL mine seem to be. LOL :) If the Bible was hand-copied for hundreds and hundreds of years, why was it not until the 1800s that all sorts of mistakes were discovered? Just listened to a message by Phil Stringer, titled, Oddball Texts…that brought the question to my mind. That’s an “unanswerable” message, by the way. I’ve NEVER heard anything, at all, that refutes what he says.

    We’re all looking forward to your “future” posts on my questions, with much anticipation! :)

  6. Pingback: Questions and Answers with the KJV Onlyists | hipandthigh

  7. Only God knows how many versions or translations there are of the Bible, but there is one thing we humans can be sure of—there is one more, at least: When a person using the King James Version uses a dictionary or other versions to define old KJV words then he is making a modern version or translation of the KJV.
    Therefore, I know of no preacher that uses a pure KJV.

Leave me a Comment

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s