New book I am reading. The King James only controversy

[ChosenbyHim]

You know. I was looking at the cover and it seems to be a spoof and attack of James Whites book. I would not read any slanderizing gibberish. If they have true points and can back up their claims, why do the ad hominun attack? Sounds like trash to me.

Well Jason, Peter's Ruckman's book: The Scholarship Only Controversy, is a direct response and refutation of James White's book.

James White's fickle scholarship is exposed by Bible believing men such as Peter S. Ruckman, Ed Pfenninger, Will Kinney, and others.

So again, if you are going to read James White's book, then I suggest you also read some books on the right side of the issue, that defend the King James Bible Only position.



Along with Peter Ruckman's book (The Scholarship Only Controversy), another good book on the Bible Version Issue would be Doug Stauffer's book:

One Book Stands Alone

​

 

[Reformedjason]

I will admit. I have listened and read mainly information FOR the modern translations. I have listened and read some FOR the Kjv only. I just have found that there is much information in the pro modern translation camp and mostly just accusations on the Kjv only side. Example. When a kjv onlyist is cross examined they almost always say. " God promised to peserve his word and that is the Kjv. " my question is who said it is the Kjv ? God did peserve his word but prove it is only the king james that did that. There is no proof.

 

[Nick01]

The redeeming quality about 'thou' and 'ye' is you immediately know if it's 2nd person singular or plural unlike 'you' or 'you'.

Aww, arrrgh, Praus beat me to the punch.

That's true, although you can usually work the difference between plural you and singular you through context anyway.

The interesting thing about 'you' at the time of the KJV is that it was commonly used as a polite singular form (kind of like how in French today 'vous' is 2nd person plural but also 2nd person singular polite). You can actually see this quite vividly in Shakespeare, where both thou and you are used, but you is frequently used towards individual characters who have status. Thou often gets used when one character is insulting another (counter to how we see it today, in that time, thou could carry the connotation of derision or lack of respect!). So the use of thee and thou in the KJV may have been some help in terms of a slightly clearer textual translation, but it didn't even reflect the actual use of English at the time of King James.

 

[Nick01]

Well Jason, Peter's Ruckman's book: The Scholarship Only Controversy, is a direct response and refutation of James White's book.

I have very little time for Ruckman. Ignoring his exceptionally rude and ad hominem manner, his logic is often suspect, and the textual and evidentiary basis for his position is limited. He often asks his reader to assume things he says as fact, when often at best it is a very particular reading of the evidence. The fact that he has said the value of the KJV itself is in the actual inspiration and revelation of the 1611 English text (!), and not in the manuscript tradition that it relies upon, is simply amazing, and actually makes him not representative of many KJV onlyists (who at least base their defence on the merits of its translation and MSS tradition).

I'd recommend reading through both White and Ruckman's books, and the arguments and their respective merits will clearly present themselves, but there's actually plenty of correspondence and back and forth critiques available here. The specific page I link to contains responses from White on many of Ruckman's accusations contemporary to the publication of the KJV-Only Controversy, which is more relevant to the present discussion.

 

[Praus]

Along with Peter Ruckman's book (The Scholarship Only Controversy), another good book on the Bible Version Issue would be Doug Stauffer's book:

Stauffer stole Ruckman's ideas for himself...

Beware of Hyper Dispensationalism | Doctrine, Warning

A more recent form of hyper-dispensationalism is presented in ONE BOOK RIGHTLY DIVIDED: THE KEY TO UNDERSTANDING THE BIBLE BY DR. DOUGLAS STAUFFER (second edition 1999, McCowen Mills Publishers). Stauffer’s teaching is largely the same as that which has been promoted by Dr. Peter Ruckman for many years, though Stauffer gives Ruckman no credit. He does mention that he received “the principles of right division” from Dave Reese. I sat under Reese’s hyper-dispensational teaching in a course on prophecy at Tennessee Temple Bible School in the mid-1970s. It was a blessing when Reese left part way through the course, and we had the joy of finishing the rest of the course under the sound and profitable teaching of Dr. Bruce Lackey.

 

[Kerry]

Why all the animosity against the KJ, one would have to ask. Jesus said its not you they hate but ME. Read what you want, then pray and ask God to lead.

 

[jimmydiggs]

Thanks Jimmy! I just ordered it.

You probably won't enjoy him as much as I do, being as you're rather theologically liberal.

 

[Reformedjason]

Why all the animosity against the KJ, one would have to ask. Jesus said its not you they hate but ME. Read what you want, then pray and ask God to lead.

I have nothing against the Kjv. I do have something against kjvonlyism