I would encourage everyone to have a degree of tolerance when defining the KJBO position. As we can all see, there is not a clear dividing line. In my own life, I have never had the slightest sense that there was any Bible but the KJB. In practice and belief I have always rejected any other English version as useful for reading or study. However, in the past, I had some thought that the knowledge of the original languages would help me to better understand the meaning. At that time I would have considered myself King James Only in the simplest meaning or the phrase.
The issue grew through the 80's and 90's, when many new versions were being produced, and I began to look at the question of the translation being equal to the original more. More questions then began to surface. With each new question, the decision I made redefined my understanding of KJBO. At this time, the identification has taken on a wide range of meanings, as has been acknowledged by others here.
What I have now found to be best in my determination of who is and who is not KJBO (in my opinion) deals more with the boundaries than with the listing of what one believes. What does one NOT believe about the KJB is to me more definitive than what one believes. An example would be: A person says that he believes that the KJB is completely accurate. Another says that the KJB does not have any errors or mistakes. Are these two making the identical statement?
|