Listen to it here:
KJVO. Those letters, in that order, have a lot of power. They communicate a message. They tell people who read them that, “at this church, we read the REAL Bible.” People who are KJVO are the kinds of people who have found absolute certainty on an issue that everyone else struggles with. They’re right with a kind of absolutist rightness that, like Donald McGillavry, “brooks nae tangleness…prigging and a'newfangleness”[1]! Many Christians, especially, Christians who have spent considerable amounts of time learning, studying, and working with the original languages and seeking how to best understand the textual history of the Bible, these people are invariably frustrated with the simplistic and often absurd reasoning for using the King James Version ONLY! If you’re curious just how ludicrous the arguments of King James Onlyists are, check out the John Ankerberg debate; it’s probably the best entre into the subject there is.
The impulse of KJV Onlyists is to have certainty where there cannot be certainty. Let me clarify. The Bible you have is the Word of God. I believe that with every fiber of my being. Your English Bible is the Word of God; the differences in the ancient manuscripts have no bearing on any essential doctrine of the Christian faith whatsoever. Permit me to repeat, the differences in the ancient manuscripts do not affect any key doctrine of the faith! And that’s not just according to some crackpot fundie like me saying that; that’s the position of Dr. Bart Ehrman, the de rigueur guest whenever secular TV talks about the early texts of the Bible. The English Bible you have, regardless of whether it’s an NIV, ESV, NET, NRSV, HCSB, or whatever, it IS the Word of God. Yes, there are textual variants. No, we do not possess the original manuscripts. But we can have confidence that we know what the original said 99.9% of the time – and most of the time when we don’t know, it makes no theological difference at all…end even when it does matter, it does not affect any crucial doctrine of the faith.
The reality is that we have to live in that tension, the tension of knowing that what we have is both the God-breathed Word of God and that it also there are a lot of unanswered questions about what the underlying Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts were.
And beyond that there is the tension of knowing what the “right” translation is of those words. Having the right words is only the first step in creating a good translation. I say “good” translation and not “right” translation on purpose. Serious people who have dedicated their lives to translation humbly admit that there is no “right” translation. There is not and cannot be a perfect translation – language doesn’t work that way, there is always something lost in translation, and as the receptor language and receptor culture drift further from the transmitter language and culture the bigger a gap which must be bridged by a translator. It is a never-ending battle trying to balance all the needs of readers and the integrity of the A(a)uthors’ message. It’s hard work and the people engaged in it deserve our respect and our gratitude and our prayers.
But the problem with what I’ve described in the previous 3 ¶s is that there is no certainty other than the certainty that comes through faith that the Holy Spirit can use the Word of God. And for many people that’s no certainty at all – that’s worse than uncertainty; it’s an attack on the Bible. So, what do you do when you need certainty but certitude is lacking? You fashion an idol!
The King James Version of the Bible has a lot going for it. It’s beautiful. It’s traditional. It’s universal to the Anglophone world. It’s also at least a century out of date language-wise, and it is increasingly found to have an inferior textual tradition. That doesn’t mean it isn’t still a useful text that can be appreciated. It does mean that there are more up-to-date versions that take advantage of the ocean of learning that has happened in the worlds of translation and textual criticism and the availability of ancient manuscripts. But KJVO people are authority-seekers to their cores – which incidentally is not the same thing as authority-obeyers, but that’s another essay for another day. KJV Onlyists want certainty and this worldview arose in times of social and political upheaval. The KJV (rarely, if ever, the actual 1611, btw, typically the 1769) provided a litmus test against Modernism and Liberalism. It was something that a branch of Fundamentalists could use to discern the innies from the outies.
Unfortunately, when you build on sinking sand you’re gonna have a collapse sooner-or-later. Eventually bad theology, such as KJV Onlyism, is going to be pushed to its logical conclusions and it will be made ridiculous. And, sadly, those who hold to KJVO rarely see the ridicule as a reason to change their minds. They just entrench themselves, ever more embittered against the brethren, ever more certain that they and they alone are wise, have the Spirit, and the REAL Word of God.
The CDC, and other Government Health and Safety bureaucracies have consistently been inconsistent throughout the “pandemic”. First you’re a dummy if you wear a mask, then you should, then cloth masks don’t do much at all, and you know because you can smell smoke through them! Also, lab-leak in Wuhan? How dare you! No public square for you! You are exiled from the body politic and…well, ya know, nvm, it prolly DID come from a lab, but those in America who were funding gain-of-function research carried out in China aren’t to blame…shut up and stop asking questions! Also, the vaccine can’t come out before the electi…OK, the vaccine will let you get back to life as norma…nevermind, you need to double mask, cause Delta…and the vaccine isn’t as good as natural immunity…and stop asking questions about side effects, why are you asking questions? Just do as you’re told!
And here’s the thing. Every sensible person knows that science changes. Everyone knows that. And because every sensible person knows that science changes, sensible people are unwilling to put all their eggs in the “science” basket – for a host of reasons. Shall I enumerate? I shall.
First, science changes and so blindly following guidance based on limited or non-existent peer reviewed, controlled, and tested, retested, and replicated research is not wise.
Second, scientists who go into the public sphere are, by definition, politicians. Any scientist who takes on the role of creating public health mandates is, necessarily, a politician. And they may be good politicians or bad politicians, just as they may be good or bad scientists. But they ARE politicians. And, because they are, that means that they make political decisions based upon their political preferences. And you may agree or disagree with their political preferences. But there is NO SUCH THING as a public health official who is not political. They are tasked with using their scientific expertise to craft laws and mandates that will help the polis flourish. That is political. And in America, at least putatively, we have the right to disagree with our politicians. We have a right to redress grievances. We are not supposed to be dictated to and bullied by politicians against whose governance we have no recourse. This is a fundamental danger both to politics and science.
Third, many who go into public health do so primarily because of their Progressive political views, not because of some altruistic love of the public good. This makes following “the science” a suspect bet when the only science permitted in the public square is the science that comes from the public actors because the public health officials are predominantly political Progressives.
Fourth, scientific hypotheses and theories are constantly being revised and rethought. One of the most philosophically incoherent terms is “settled science”. Anyone who tells you that “the science” is settled either doesn’t understand what “science” means or what “settled” means. Or they’re liars. Or all three. Nothing that comes from Inductive Reasoning (as the Modern Scientific Method utilizes) can ever be settled. We have hypotheses that are useful for making predictions and those that are un-useful or less useful. People who are claiming certainty in the realm of science are overstating their case.
Fifth, never trust anyone who tells you to stop asking questions and just obey. In any other area of life, we’d recognize such posturing as abuse! so why do we let these petty public health tyrants get away with it?
Well, we let them get away with it for the same reason the KJV Onlyist will tell me that the NIV is a Satanic/ Papal invention to lead people to Hell. We let them get away with it because we live in uncertain times and people would rather live in denial, and the hope and security that comes through that denial, than live in the uncertain fear of thinking for yourself.
I’m not a scientist. But I am a person with a functioning brain. And I know that Covid lock-downs, public and private masking orders, and vax-mandating measures are scientifically dubious, politically onerous, and constitutionally obnoxious. Politics is the discipline of seeking the good of the polis. There is never a single-variant factor that rules out all others in the search for the public good. It requires sacrifices and giving up some things to get other things – politics is compromising good for better. And there is no certain path to flourishing.
Perhaps, and I would argue vociferously against this position, but perhaps the CDC and other public health officials are telling us the right things right now. I think they aren’t, but maybe they are. Maybe what they are recommending is truly for the public good. Why then are these decisions being made by unelected, unaccountable, political hacks? Why are governors refusing to surrender emergency powers? Why is a robust public debate about the pros and cons not happening? Why is my government suggesting that I’m a terrorist for bringing this up?
People who say, “shut up” and “you’re a terrorist if you disagree” are rarely coming from a position of philosophical rigor or intellectual strength. But the impulse that causes KJV Onlyism is the same impulse that leads to CDC Onlyism. It’s the incoherent, and self-destructive reliance upon a demonstrably unreliable authority, in exchange for security and ideological certainty. “I have the KJV so I have God’s word” is the same kind of dogmatism that’s behind “I trust the science”.
Moreover, it comes with a certain kind of hubristic condescension towards others that makes one feel virtuous about being closed-minded and smug. KJV and CDC Onlyism both thrive on insulting and mocking anyone who doesn’t share your fundamentalistical obedience to “the authorities”.
Should there be mask mandates, mandatory vaxxing, and lock-downs? No matter what I believe about these issues, I will responsively reject them when they come from people telling me that sweeping political decisions aren’t political and that the experts and the experts alone, these unaccountable (probably unconstitutional) authorities, know best and we need to simply obey.
No.
Just no.
Even if they’re right, no.
Because KJV and CDC Onlyism are the same song in a different key. It’s one we’ve heard before. CDC Onlyism is KJV Onlyism.
Second verse,
Same as the first,
A little bit louder
And a whole lot worse!
A Footnote:
[1] “Will not tolerate scheming…pretension or destructive new ideas”.