KING JAMES ONLY POSITION IS VERY OLD
By Bobby Mitchell
Editor: Thanks to a reader for this contribution.Dr. Otis Fuller certainly must have been there in 1875 telling these men what to believe. Ah, I know, Theodore Letis did it-- that old Lutheran sneak.
* * * * *
Feel free to pass this along if you wish, but I ask that you only forpiano coversd this entire email or print this entire article (including this first paragraph) if you choose to distribute it. I would appreciate hearing any reaction concerning what these men wrote.
My name is Bobby Mitchell,
my email is firstname.lastname@example.org
and my address is
P.O. Box 6065
Brunswick, ME 04011
The following quotes are from the introduction of a family Bible (AV) that my dad owns. It was originally owned by James Garrison, my great-great-great-great grandfather. It was printed sometime between 1873 and 1877 as The New Devotional and Explanatory Pictorial Family Bible published by The National Publishing Company, Philadelphia, PA; Chicago, IL; St. Louis, MO, and Atlanta, GA. The quotes concerning the Authorized Version (KJV) from pages 10 and 11 of the aforementioned family Bible are as follows:
"We are very sure that the results of all such investigations will be to heighten confidence in the present version, and fill the heart with unfeigned gratitude to God, for that blessed book which we now enjoy, and which, for nearly two centuries and a half, has been pouring its light and consolation wherever the English tongue is spoken. Let science toil, and diligence labor . . . let literature hold up her torch, and cast all possible light upon the sacred text, but we must and ever shall deprecate any wanton piano helps upon our received version-- any gratuitous attempts to supersede it by a new and different translation.
"It is the Bible which our godly fathers have read, and over which they have wept and prayed. It is the good old English Bible, with which are associated all our earliest recollections of religion. As such let it go down unchanged to the latest posterity. Let us give it in charge to coming generations, and bid them welcome to all the blessings it has conveyed to us. Let it be our fervent prayer, that the light of the resurrection morning may shine on the very book which we now read,-- that we may then behold again the familiar face of our own Bible, the very same which we read in our childhood."
"There is no book, says the illustrious Seldon, so translated as the Bible for the purpose. If I translate a French book into English, I turn it into English phrase, not French English . . . But the Bible is rather translated into English words than into English phrase. The Hebraisms are kept, and the phrase of that language is kept. The style of our present version, says Bishop Middleton, is incomparably superior to anything which might be expected from the finical and perverted taste of our own age."
*Note-- Any indentation or underlining in the above quotes was done by Bobby Mitchell
Summary by Bobby Mitchell: Without a doubt the King James Only position (for English- speaking people) was in existence among Bible-believing Christians before 1900. To say that the King James Only position is a new or modern idea that has its roots in Seventh-Day Adventism, or to assert that it began with the ministry of a modern Bible defender, is to ignore documented, historical facts.
BACK TO ENTRY PAGE OF THE JOURNAL