Response #1

 

John Wolf has written an article entitled “King James Onlyism” which can be read on his website at http://www.cerm.info/bible_studies/Exegetical/king_james_onlyism.htm . What follows will be my rebuttal of John’s article along with some questions for Mr. John Wolf.

 

Mr. Wolf opens his article with the following words,

 

“Before I start this article on this heavily controversial subject within Christian Fundamentalism I want to say that I am not anti KJV. I know that I am going to be misunderstood by KJV Only Christians whom will misinterpret me as anti KJV. I am not anti KJV and personally have a copy of the KJV on all my computers and own the Zondervan KJV print edition. I have included some screen shots below of my KJV Bible. The KJV is a very good and well written translation. But by no means is it the easiest to read translation, nor is it the most accurate translation that we have today.” (emphasis and underline Mr. Wolf’s)

 

How refreshing it is to know that Mr. Wolf is not “anti KJV”. This phrase has been repeated ad nauseam by individuals like Wolf. James White writes in his book, “The King James Only Controversy”, “This book is not against the King James Version…I oppose KJV Onlyism, not the King James Version” (p. vi).  Mr. White, much like John Wolf, then proceeds to fill 271 pages full of words aimed squarely at attacking our King James Bible. Guys like Wolf claim that they are “not anti KJV” but only against King James Onlyism; however, when you read their comments or books you learn that they are in fact “anti KJV”. Just look at Wolf’s article. It is filled with attacks against the text of our King James Bible. He is not discussing “King James Onlyism” as his title falsely insinuates. His whole article is aimed (just as Mr. White’s book is) squarely at the King James Bible. At every turn you find such phrases as “nor is it the most accurate translation”, “incorrectly translated in the KJV”, “incorrect translation”, “archaic language in the KJV Translation” and other such attacks against the actual text of our KJB. These are not attacks against a group known as “King James Onlyists” but is an attack against the Bible God has used for nearly 400 years. Just like Mr. White, John Wolf’s claim that he is not “anti KJV” is a farce.

 

I would ask Mr. Wolf if he is genuinely “not anti KJV” then where are the articles on his site condemning the NIV? the NASV? the NRSV? the ESV? Does Mr. Wolf believe that these translations are perfect? If not, then why single out our KJB and not one of the others? I mean if he is honestly “not anti KJV” then why take the time to seek out supposed ‘errors’ in our KJB and further, why take the time to write a whole article condemning our KJB? I couldn’t even find an article on his site exposing the New World Translation for the fraud that it is. It seems that Mr. Wolf has singled out one translation and that it our King James Bible. However, we are expected to believe that John Wolf is “not anti KJV”. We read and marvel!

 

I was thinking as I sat down to write this rebuttal what would happen if we applied Mr. Wolf’s statement to other aspects of our Christian life and even life in general. For instance, I wonder what God would have to say to Mr. Wolf if he treated Him in the same manner that he has treated His word. Would God believe that Wolf was “not anti God” if he wrote an article about God similar to the one he has written about our KJB? What would Jesus have to say to John if he received the same treatment? Would Jesus believe that John was “not anti Jesus” if he wrote an article outlining what he thought were flaws in Jesus’ character? Would Jesus mind if John stated that he believed that Jesus was not ‘the easiest’ teacher to understand and on many points He was just plainly “incorrect”? If it is not acceptable to treat God and/or Jesus this way why do men such as John Wolf imagine that it is all right to treat our Bible this way?

 

What if those that are married would extend this same courtesy to their spouses? Would our spouses believe that we actually loved them if all we ever did was point out their faults? I don’t recommend trying this men but what would happen if you told your wife that you loved her and thought she was “very good” but then proceeded to put up a website listing what you thought were all her faults. Would she believe you if you told her that you loved her but all you ever did was criticize her actions? I can assure you it wouldn’t take too many days until she would not believe that you meant what you said. Once again, if we wouldn’t do our spouse this way why do some people think it is okay to treat our Bible this way?

 

In an attempt to prove that he is “not anti KJV” Mr. Wolf states, “I am not anti KJV and personally have a copy of the KJV on all my computers and own the Zondervan KJV print edition.” I have a copy of about 15 different translations on all my computers but that means absolutely nothing. I do not promote these translations as God’s word and I only ‘use’ them for research purposes. I also have my very own Watch Tower edition of the New World Translation. I can send out photos for those that would like to see it! Does it mean that I am “not anti NWT” just because I have a copy of it? Of course not! Likewise, it means absolutely nothing that Mr. Wolf has electronic copies of our KJB on all his computers and it means nothing that he has a printed edition of our KJB. I’m delighted to hear that he does but that doesn’t mean he is “not anti KJV”. All it proves is that he at least has a copy of the perfectly preserved words of the Living God and will be without excuse at the judgment seat of Christ.

 

Mr. Wolf closes his opening remarks with these words, “But by no means is it the easiest to read translation, nor is it the most accurate translation that we have today”. The first question that must be asked is, “Who determined that ease of reading was a criterion for ANY Bible?” Since when does ease of reading take priority over the actual words of God? And besides this, who determines what is ‘easy to read’? What is easy for me to read might not be easy for John Wolf to read. What is easy for Teno to read might not be easy for Steven Avery to read. Just who determines what ‘easy to read’ means? I will have more to say on this matter later. I plan to draw upon Leland Ryken’s book to prove that this is a sham foisted upon Christianity by men whose sole intentions it is to tamper with the words of God. They only use the pretense of making it “easier to read”.