A Letter from a Protestant Gets Me Engaged with Biblical Criticism (A follow up)
Is the King James Version of 1611 uniquely stamped with God's Imprimatur?
Recently, I received a message from a Protestant believer who was deeply concerned for my understanding of Scripture and, ultimately, for my salvation. I genuinely appreciate her sincerity and willingness to engage in a discussion about God’s Word.
In her letter, this individual raised up the King James Version of 1611 as the only Bible we should read, and that led to my recent article about Bible translations in general, with special attention given to the KJV. However, this individual responded to my general reply with another message that elevated the KJV of 1611 again, with even greater emphasis and quoted two “proof texts” as evidence. Instead of taking up room with her word-for-word letter, I will summarize it below since sharing the entire thing does not seem necessary, as her support for the KJV-1611 is quite clear. What’s not clear, however, is why she or anyone else believes that this particular translation is the “only” translation that should ever be found in hotel room drawers!
Her message reflected a common belief among certain Protestant groups: that the King James Version (KJV) 1611 is the only truly "authorized" Bible. This belief is often referred to as KJV-Onlyism, and it is based on the assumption that God has divinely preserved His Word only through the KJV 1611, while all other translations are either corrupt or unreliable.
In making her case, she cited Proverbs 29:2 and Ecclesiastes 8:4 as "proof texts" to support the idea that the King James Bible is divinely approved. However, upon closer examination, these passages do not say what she claims. Let’s take a look.
Proverbs 29:2 – Does It Refer to King James?
KJV 1611: "When the righteous are in authority, the people reioyce: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourne."
This passage is a general principle about the impact of good and bad rulers on a society. It does not specify any one king—let alone King James of England. While all human rulers are flawed, this passage serves as a wisdom teaching, showing that when just and righteous leaders govern, people thrive. Some KJV-Only advocates attempt to link this verse to King James as though it grants him divine authority over Bible translation. However, Scripture itself does not make this connection.
If we interpret this verse in a deeper Christian sense, we see that the only perfectly righteous King is Jesus Christ (Revelation 19:16), who rules with justice and truth. Applying this verse to King James or the KJV translation itself stretches beyond the actual biblical text and is an example of eisegesis—reading an external idea into Scripture rather than drawing meaning from it.
Ecclesiastes 8:4 – "Where the Word of a King Is, There Is Power"?
KJV 1611: "Where the word of a King is, there is power: and who may say vnto him, What doest thou?"
This passage is sometimes used by KJV-Only advocates to suggest that King James’ authorization of the Bible translation gives it divine authority. However, the actual meaning of this verse is much simpler. Ecclesiastes 8:4 is part of a discussion on earthly rulers and their authority. It teaches that a king’s decree carries power in a worldly sense, and that subjects should act wisely in the presence of a ruler.
To claim that this passage refers specifically to King James and the KJV translation is to impose a modern interpretation onto an ancient wisdom text. Furthermore, if we were to apply it to any king, we must recognize that Jesus Christ is the true King whose Word carries ultimate power (John 1:1). Using Ecclesiastes 8:4 as a defense of the KJV translation is not based on Scripture itself but on an assumption that cannot be found anywhere in God’s Word.
Sola Scriptura… or Personal Assumptions?
What stands out in this discussion is that while my Protestant friend claims to uphold the Bible alone (Sola Scriptura) as the sole authority, she actually relies on external assumptions that are not stated in Scripture.
Where does Sacred Scripture say that the KJV 1611 is the only valid translation? It doesn’t.
Where does Sacred Scripture declare that a single English version must be used worldwide? Nowhere.
Where does Sacred Scripture state that Proverbs 29:2 or Ecclesiastes 8:4 refer to King James or his translation? It does not.
Instead, these claims originate from human traditions and interpretations—not from God’s written Word. Ironically, those who argue for Sola Scriptura while holding to KJV-Onlyism are engaging in the very thing they criticize: elevating a man-made tradition above what Scripture actually teaches.
The Reality: God’s Word Was Not Written in English
Another issue with KJV-Onlyism is that it assumes that an English translation holds divine authority over all others. But what does that mean for Christians who read the Bible in Spanish, French, Chinese, or any other language? Does God only speak to English readers? Of course not.
Furthermore, while the KJV is based on the Masoretic Texts, much earlier manuscripts—including the Dead Sea Scrolls, Codex Vaticanus, and Codex Sinaiticus—show remarkable consistency with even older texts. These manuscripts predate the Masoretic tradition by centuries, challenging the idea that the KJV alone preserves the "true" Word of God.
Conclusion: Truth, Not Assumptions
If you are someone who holds to the idea that the KJV 1611 is the only true Bible, I invite you to reflect on the following questions:
Where does Scripture itself say this?
Are there areas where you might be relying on human assumptions rather than God’s Word?
If God’s Word is meant for all people, does it make sense that only one English translation would hold divine authority?
As Catholics, we are called to seek the fullness of truth, and that means engaging with Scripture in its historical and theological context. Understanding the origins of the biblical text and the Church’s role in preserving it helps us to navigate the claims made by those who insist on a single, exclusive translation. While the KJV is a significant and beautiful translation, it is not the only valid one, nor does Scripture itself mandate that it should be.
Let us seek the truth together. I welcome your thoughts, questions, and insights. What do you think? Do you have any experiences with this topic or related discussions? Share your thoughts and comments below. I would love to hear from you and continue exploring this or any other topic that weighs on your heart.
Let’s continue the conversation … always toward the Light.
In Christ,
John Henry
Always Toward the Light