Imperialist Influence on the Rise of KJV Onlyism?
Erik over at Fundamentally Changed recently raised the question of the possibility that KJV onlyism is rooted in an imperialist mindset. Many people who prefer the KJV have a high view of the importance of America and Britain in world history. They believe that God chose English as a special language that he knew would become universal, and so God codified His Word in that language.
Many have claimed in the comments at Sharper Iron’s filing post on this, as well as on Erik’s original post, that they’ve seen no evidence of such imperialism as an argument in KJV Only literature. I beg to differ.
Benjamin Wilkinson’s book Our Authorized Bible Vindicated (1930) was certainly influential in the rise of the modern KJV Only position. His work was leaned on heavily (some would say plaegarized) in J.J. Ray’s God Only Wrote One Bible (1955). And Wilkinson’s work was quoted (with some revisions and deletions) in David Otis Fuller’s book Which Bible? (1970). Those two books were very instrumental in the rise of the modern KJV Only movement. Ray’s work influenced Peter Ruckman and Fuller, and Fuller’s work influenced leaders of the other wing of KJV-onlyism. Doug Kutilek documents this in a post on the rise of the KJV-only movement here.
Before providing this quote, some of which is reproduced in a 1999 work by Jack Moorman published by The Dean Burgon Society called Forever Settled, I should stress that Wilkinson’s work is certainly only one influence among many for the birth of KJV-onlyism. And the imperialist claims are just one idea among many that he trumpeted. KJV-onlyism probably does have ties to Burgon’s and others argument against the RV in the late 1800s. And it also probably has some connection with older Reformation-era views of the perfect-ness of the printed Greek and Hebrew texts the church had in their possession. But many observors of KJV onlyism have seen that in fundamentalist circles, the older leaders were not KJV-only, men like John R. Rice. And the leaders in the generation after them were converted to KJV onlyism later in their ministries, men like Jack Hyles. Several influential KJV authors also were converted later in their ministries to KJV Onlyism, men like David Cloud and D.A. Waite.
Now, enough about this. Let me provide the quotes from Wilkinson which I shared on Erik’s post. I think it proves at the least an imperialist influence on the rise of KJV-onlyism. The following comes from Wilkinson’s work published in 1930, available online here.
God who foresaw the coming greatness of the English-speaking world, prepared in advance the agent who early would give direction to the course of its thinking. One man stands out silhouetted against the horizon above all others, as having stamped his genius upon English thought and upon the English language. That man was William Tyndale. (pg. 33)
The hour had arrived, and from the human point of view, conditions were perfect, for God to bring forth a translation of the Bible which would sum up in itself the best of the ages. The heavenly Father foresaw the opportunity of giving His Word to the inhabitants of earth by the coming of the British Empire with its dominions scattered throughout the world, and by the great American Republic, both speaking the English language. Not only was the English language by 1611 in a more opportune condition than it had ever been before or ever would be again, but the Hebrew and the Greek likewise had been brought up with the accumulated treasures of their materials to a splendid working point. The age was not distracted by the rush of mechanical and industrial achievements. Moreover linguistic scholarship was at its peak. Men of giant minds, supported by excellent physical health, had possessed in a splendid state of perfection a knowledge of the languages and literature necessary for the ripest Biblical scholarship. (pg. 42)
The birth of the King James Bible was a death stroke to the supremacy of Roman Catholicism. The translators little foresaw the wide extent of circulation and the tremendous influence to be won by their book. They little dreamed that for three hundred years it would form the bond of English Protestantism in all parts of the world. One of the brilliant minds of the last generation, Faber, who as a clergyman in the Church of England, labored to Romanize that body, and finally abandoned it for the Church of Rome, cried out, — “Who will say that the uncommon beauty and marvelous English of the Protestant Bible is not one of the great strongholds of heresy in this country?”
Yes, more, it has not only been the stronghold of Protestantism in Great Britain, but it has built a gigantic wall as a barrier against the spread of Romanism.
“The printing of the English Bible has proved to be by far the mightiest barrier ever reared to repel the advance of Popery, and to damage all the resources of the Papacy.”
Small wonder then that for three hundred years incessant warfare has been waged upon this instrument created by God to mold all constitutions and laws of the British Empire, and of the great American Republic, while at the same time comforting, blessing, and instructing the lives of the millions who inhabit these territories. Behold what it has given to the world! The machinery of the Catholic Church can never begin to compare with the splendid machinery of Protestantism. The Sabbath School, the Bible printing houses, the foreign missionary societies, the Y.M.C.A., the Y.W.C.A., the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, the Protestant denominational organizations, — these all were the offspring of Protestantism. Their benefits have gone to all lands and been adopted by practically all nations. Shall we throw away the Bible from which such splendid organizations have sprung? (51-52)
Tags: America, Benjamin Wilkinson, birth, Britain, British, David Fuller, David O. Fuller, David Otis Fuller, Doug Kutilek, empire, fundamentalism, history, imperialism, KJV, KJV Only, KJV-onlyism, KJVO, movement, Peter Ruckman, rise
Yes! And yes again!
Thanks Rod for the comment and the link.
Blessings to you in Christ,
Bob
[...] Imperialist Influence on the Rise of KJV Onlyism? « King James Only?. [...]
And I agree with those thoughts about how God would use the English language and put His perfect words into this tongue.
And Doug Kutilek and you fellas are still bible agnostics who are “working on it”. Good luck with all that.
I believe in the sovereignty of God in history. “For the kingdom is the LORD’S; and He is the governor among the nations.” Psalm 22:28. God has set His mark upon many things in this world that reveal His Divine hand at work in history. Why do we use the 7 day week instead of the 10 day week? Why are dates either B.C. (Before Christ) or A.D. (Anno Domini – year of our Lord)? (although the secular world is now trying in vain to change this too to BCE and CE.) England just “happens to be” the one nation from which we measure the true Time (Greenwich time, zero hour) and from which we measure true Position, zero longitude.
In 1611 the English language was spoken by a mere 3% of the world’s population, but today English has become the closest thing to a universal language in history. He used the King James Bible to carry His words to the far ends of the earth, where it was translated into hundreds of languages by English and American missionaries for over 300 years. The sun never set on the British empire. It was even taken to space by American astronauts and read from there. God knew He would use England, its language and the King James Bible to accomplish all these things long before they happened. It is the only Bible God has providentially used in this way. It is the only Bible believed by thousands upon thousands of believers to be the inspired, infallible and 100% true words of God.
Will Kinney
Thanks for your thoughts, Will. This shows that many KJV Only proponents do see the success of the British Empire and America’s rise as related to the KJV and God aiming to spread it around the world.
I read and replied to Erik’s original post. However, it didn’t occur to me at the time that one way to test this is to look at what is said by those who actually hold to the heresy of British Israelism, i.e., the doctrine that the Anglo-Saxons were descended from the ten lost tribes of Israel, and that thus the English-speaking nations are the inheritors of the Old Testament promises to Israel. I think especially of the late Herbert W. Armstrong and his followers. According to this website (http://www.herbert-armstrong.org/indexRef.html), Armstrong maintained the supremacy of the KJV. By no means would I suggest painting KJV-Only folks with guilt by association. I merely suggest this as a profitable element for this discussion.
Thanks Chris. Good thoughts. Elsewhere someone told me I should have called this British-Israelism Influence… rather than Imperialist influence. I think there’s truth to both ideas.
But to be fair, it’s an influence, just one of many. And the flip side of the coin is Will Kinney’s thoughts here and Kent Brandenburg’s thoughts on Erik’s post, that this all falls under God’s providence, and when we see England and America being blessed, we can conclude God chose that and the KJV was part of that or was provided in foresight of that.
Brother Will,
Please stop calling us Bible agnostics. As you well know agnostic literally means “no knowledge” or “one who doesn’t know.” We’ve not given any credence to that idea in this blog. I believe that the same means by which I can determine if a textual variant was not original are the means by which I can determine its authenticity. The majority of textual variants deal with spelling, grammar, moveable nu, etc. We’re left with an extremely small percentage of things that carry more weight, and there is a high level of certainty concerning those as well. Yes, that leaves us with a bit of uncertainty, but it doesn’t make me an agnostic any more than saying “Lord I believe help my unbelief” makes me an agnostic when it comes to the Theistic question. I know you don’t like that explanation, but I’d appreciate it, brother to brother, for you to stop using that term.
As far as this post is concerned, here’s my question for you. I agree that God is sovereign, and He uses means to carry out His will. No doubt the rise of English speaking people both in Britain and America was used by God to spread the gospel around the earth in the greatest way since the first century. To whom or what do attribute the popularity of modern versions today? Is God sovereignly behind the widespread, growing abandonment of the KJV for modern versions or do you attribute that to Satan? How about missionaries equipped with modern versions? Churches being started with modern versions? Is God sovereignly doing these things today or are all this against His will and/or the work of Satan? And what is the determining factor?
It’s definitely true. I’ve personally read at least one sermon in which J. Frank Norris appealed to the Revised Version’s translation of a text. Another case is a book published by the Baptist Bible Tribune (the official organ of the Baptist Bible Fellowship and Baptist Bible College), which compiled a selection of the writings of the Tribune’s founding editor, Noel Smith. In one of his articles/essays, he writes that his favorite writer of all time is “Bishop Westcott.” Now that’s a striking contrast with today’s IFBx believers. Those, like the IBF who ratchet up the onlyism in the name of getting back to their roots, are seriously misguided.
[...] Iron linked to the post, KJVO Debate Blog and Fundamentally Reformed have linked to it as well, and it has received scores of comments. [...]
There isn’t one “English” language anymore, so the imperialism (and I do agree that it is at least implicit for any KVJO proponent) fails. Interestingly, imperialism is exactly what we would expect of those who have been infected with Modernity’s arrogant, rationalistic mindset. The Scottish Enlightenment (ref. Noll) comes home to roost.
Moving slightly farther back into history, I suggest that the KJVO position is an Anglicized redux of the old Latin imperialism. Latin was the language of the civilized Western world, and the Vulgate was the pure, word-for-word translation of the word of God in the universal language of the day. In this case, the KJVO partisan sounds like a bad version of Francis de Sales. The Vulgate at least lasted 1000 or so years; the KJV will scarcely have half that career.
Back to linguistics, to repeat myself, there is no one “English” language anymore, and in fact the English language will continue to change in the future. Elizabethan English is a dead language, or at least a “mostly dead” one. The average person cannot properly grasp its nuances without either several years of immersion or a 200+ year-old dictionary for reference. The KJV is on the road to being just as dead as Koine Greek and Latin. Unless someone wants to demonstrate that a native Hindi speaker (or Mandarin or any other language) who gains fluency in contemporary English is really capable of grasping the nuances of a form of English they don’t speak or use, I’ll chalk the idea up to imperialist delusions.
Tying together the linguistic and cultural elements, what I see is essentially cultural imperialism: seeing English-speaking culture as superior to all others. On my understanding, language and culture cannot properly be separated, as each informs and transforms the other. Therefore, an argument for linguistic superiority is also an argument for cultural superiority. I think this is borne out historically at least for the cases of Greek, Latin (who initially recognized the superiority of Greek, by the way), German (think WWII) and English (on whose empire the sun once never sat).
[...] Bob followed up on the post here. [...]
I am KJV only, but I also use the Greek and Hebrew.
Kjv onlyism appears to be making a comeback. I really thought it had gone out on its last leg. But just when you think this heresy is over , it pops up again.
I hate to say it , but I really wish the king james bible would go away. Then these nutjobs , who do nothing but cause anger and discdnsion in the christian community , would go away.
The kjv is basically obselete now anyway , and is actually one of the least accurate bibles on the market today.
Its run its course and should be laid to rest. No young person or new convert wants to read that language and will not stick with christianity if forced to read it.
Joshman,
Thanks for stopping by and commenting.
Such statements as this:
Are nothing but ammunition for the guns of the radical KJVO believers.
Here, we love the KJV. We respect it, and several of us still use it.
It’s also somewhat hard for the Word of God to be obsolete.
Though I agree with your general sentiment, I believe we would all do well to be moderate in our approach to this issue. We are against KJVO’ism, but not the KJV.
Thank you Jason. Maybe I came off harsh. Let me clarify.
What I meant by “the kjv is obselete” is that it will do very little in keeping a new convert in the word of God. People will not continue to read something they have to stretch to understand. That’s what I meant and I did not mean the king james bible is obselete in that it is “no good”.
Its done a great job saving people over the years.but more people today are saved by the NIV , HCSB , or NASB than the KJV.
I just think it should be one of those bibles people get inti if they really wanna get scholorly about the bible , such as one who sets out to read the geneva bible or any other bible from that era.
So let me again apologize. I however , do not apologize for saying that most bibles today are more accurate than the KJV. That is a simple , verifiable fact.
But thank you for your input and I will use caution in the future
Its so hard not to end up being like these guys when you have to refute them all the time so I heart rate rises when I run into this beast known as onlyism
Joshman,
I appreciate your tone. I understand your feelings. The KJVO’ists can work on you and anger you. It is hard not to stoop to their level at times.
I do think the KJV is a very accurate translation.
I’m thinking that, instead of using the term “obsolete”, we should use the term “archaic”.
Thanks for commenting. I hope you return and contribute to the conversation.
I’m back lol. But if you want some great info on refuting kjv onlyism , go to youtube and type in “king james follies” .
There are 5 short videos , all done in this weird cartoon format , but has some infredible info on kjv onlyism.
Its a story this guy made up , but is based on real life expirences with kjv onlyists.
The story is a guy leaves his church to join a new church because some pastor convinced him to become a kjv onlyist.
So he comes back and tried to convince his old pastor to be kjv only as well. His old pastor , seeing the spiritual danger , begins to engage his old friend in a series of very informative talks.
In video 4 , he goes to see his friends new pastor , and that’s when things get really funny. But these videos will arm anyone who wants to refute kjv onlyism with a lot of knowledge
No. video 4 was not funny, and if its going to be this inane and inaccurate, it should at least be funny.
Examples -
Life of Brian: funny.
“Friends”: not funny.
Three Stooges: funny.
American Pie: not funny.
hope this helps.
peace
Nazaroo
Inaccurate? Brother you need to do some fact checking. And btw , you may wanna see if you can verify your so called facts outside of kjv only websites
If English is superior, then the Brits, clearly are no longer a superior culture. They most certainly have no empire, and the tiny island they have is infested with multiculturalist beetles who are eating away the rest of the garment that will have been Great about Britain. Such a pity.
On the other hand, the word of God is going forth in many languages. And that is a reason to rejoice.