The Error of KJV-Onlyism

I expected this kind of propaganda from Bible Highlighter, so I did my own research (on BibleGateway). Here are the results...

NIV: Lord Jesus => 179 times <=
Jesus Christ => 219 times <=
Lord Jesus Christ => 183 times <=

KJV: Lord Jesus => 181 times <=
Jesus Christ => 258 times <=
Lord Jesus Christ => 106 times <=

If you total these figures, you will find that the NIV mentions these terms 581 times; the KJV mentions them 539 times. Therefore (according to Highlighter's absurd logic), the NIV is "holier" by 42!

on that note it's the Geneva translation, not the kjv, that was the Bible of the reformation, and the pilgrims.

but this doesn't mean anything. it is the Spirit of God who revives. no one can "plan a revival for next wednesday" - - that's deception!

Unfortunately, it is not a joke to some people. They are actually dead serious!

Take a look at the post immediately above this one that demonstrates that KJV kind of madness.

You state directly that "The KJB exalts Jesus Christ, unlike most Modern Bibles."

So by your logic, naming "Jesus Christ" between 103 and 105 times (but not 119 times) is NOT "exalting Jesus Christ"...

and naming "Lord Jesus" between 132 and 141 times (but not 196 times) is NOT "exalting Jesus Christ"...

and naming "Lord Jesus Christ" between 60 and 63 times (but not 84 times) is NOT "exalting Jesus Christ".


...


Think carefully on what you are claiming.

You are either being deceptive or you did not understand what was written.

I also did a search at BibleGateWay for “Lord Jesus” and the number for 179 is not an exact match to those precise words (“Lord Jesus”). Meaning, it is counting “Lord” separately and “Jesus” separately. BlueLetterBible gives you the exact phrase “Lord Jesus” and its proper number and you can count it out. The number is accurate to the NIV they have on record.

The claim is stating that the Modern Translations do not exalt Jesus on the same level as the KJV. That is what is being stated. You have fallen into the trap before of playing the game of wooden literalism when it comes to the English language.

Is 103 to 105 “not on the same level” as 119? Is there any other ridiculous sidestepping you want to offer before you are labelled a hypocrite?

Listen, it is impossible to reason with someone such as Bible_Highlighter. He is so set in his ways that no amount of reasoning will get him to see the truth. Before I put him on "ignore" (which has given me considerable peace) I tried to explain things to him but he refused to consider any ideas but his own. This counting of certain English phrases in translation is idiotic! Is there really any sane person who thinks that one Bible has "Jesus Christ" and another has "Jesus the Christ" or "Lord Jesus" or some other variation of His name, that proves they are distorting the truth??? That is insanity!!!

Anyone who knows the smallest amount about translation of ancient languages (from differing manuscript sources) into English realizes that this argument is clearly an attempt to make the conclusion fit the premise. I feel sorry for Bible_Highlighter and other people like him who have obviously fixed on an idea to make themselves look like some kind of authority. That is exactly the attitude of the Pharisees, who were so knowledgeable about the Bible that they missed Jesus Christ!

search just for "Jesus" and you get...

• kjv - 942
• niv - 1,310
• esv - 1,058
• nasb - 1,000
• nlt - 1,477
• amp - 1,239
• gnv - 967
• nkjv - 1,043
• wyc - 1,031

hmmmm...... 🤔

draw your own conclusions.

Correction. "Jesus" occurs 983 times in 942 verses in the KJV. It is not simply the occurrence of the name that is critical. There are other factors.

But… but … but …

“983 just isn’t on the same level as 1,000!”

didn't i say from. the beginning i had learned to consider it more fruitful to make lighthearted jokes than throw all my energy tearing down kjv-onlyism-arguments?

i do think there are fruitful conversations to be had about Pascha vs easter tho. seeing the circumstances under which the word originated, how narrowly confined its use is, how it is unrelated to the actual feast on which Christ rose, the probabilities of its etymology... this path leads one (or at least led me) to a much greater appreciation of the actual testimony of Christ all over scripture, how that there is no 'Jewish scripture vs Christian scripture' but one scripture, how valuable Leviticus is even tho we aren't under the Law...

of course to appreciate how Christ is magnified in Pesach and diminished by easter, one has to set aside doggedly defending the word 'because it appears in kjv' so there is the thread-relevant, ulterior motive...
but my suggestion bro, going forward, is try to focus on glorifying God rather than focus on 'defeating' someone. not saying i am good at that or that i always remember to, but, it's good advice, and also good advice our brother Paul gave - if at all possible, be at peace with all men. Mssr Highlighter isn't our enemy, he's our brother.

thanks!

i should search better.

Oh. So now you do count words? Weird. I thought you said that was for morons.

for myself i think the most critical factor is, "is this literally what the best manuscript evidence known to us says?"
i want to avoid interpretation in translation, and be able to read the closest thing to the original in the original language i can, without being myself able to actually read Greek and Hebrew. so i abhor versions like the nlt that take liberties with the text instead of being as close to the original words as possible.
the Bible calls it equally evil to add to the word as to take away from it.

i'll repeat what J. Vernon Mcgee used to say about the topic - the kjv isn't the best translation, but it's the best translation we've got.

No. I do not count words. I made a correction to another post counting words. So it was moronic for you to post this.

And you are ignoring the other ones. We see a consistent theme. 119 to 105 is a big deal when you look at the other occurrences that are worse (196 KJV vs. 141) (84 vs. 64). The point here is that if there was corruption in your Bible line (which I believe there is because Vaticanus and Sinaiticus have corrections on them and they disagree with each other in 3,000 places), then this demonstrates that you're on the wrong side. Again, there are corrupt doctrines in Modern Bibles, and the removal of 1 John 5:7 (Which is hidden in Modern Bibles with the moving of words from 1 John 5:8), and so obviously the number count is not obviously the only reason here. We look at all the reasons as a whole and not just one reason alone as you guys are trying to make it out to be. In a murder case, they don't look at one piece of evidence alone if they have other evidences. I was also replying to Jamessb‘s point in that he did not think the Jesus’ name was removed by way of comparison between the KJV vs. the Modern Bibles.

Again, if this was the only reason, I would be out having fun with some kind of hobbie, but the point here is that we see a theme in the various reasons when we compare the KJV vs. the Modern Bibles. It's always bad news when we look at the Modern Bibles via by comparison to the KJV. This point is only one small link in a larger chain of evidences.

post gladly welcomes corrections to his math