King James version of the Bible is the king’s version, not God’s

I am trying to understand the burning of Bibles in Waynesville on Halloween Night. The preacher of that Baptist church claims that the King James Version of the Bible is the only true, authorized Holy Bible, and all other Bibles and other religious writings should be burned. By his actions and his speech, this man is not representative of the Christian faith.

This Bible was authorized to be written by a King, to control his subjects. It was not authorized by God in any way, shape or form. The word "authorized" only indicates that it was authorized by the King. In addition, Christians have ostensibly felt that homosexuality or sex with members of the same sex is not in accord with God's laws. That same King James had numerous affairs with men, and the two knights buried beside him in Westminster Abbey were actually two of his lovers.

In that Bible, as well as others, Romans 13 has always been interpreted as demanding the people's unconditional submission to the state. However, the one word exousia can be translated a couple different ways. Briefly, if we insert the word "liberty" in place of exousia in Romans 13, then we have an entirely different meaning than what is commonly interpreted. Paul is actually saying that we should be at liberty to obey God, rather than be subject to the will of men, which goes against what modern Christians have been taught.

According to KSLA-TV of Shreveport, La., FEMA is training clergy response teams to use Romans 13 to control and subjugate their congregations to follow governmental laws and submit to government authority, however tyrannical it may be.

— Kern Stafford

About Webmaster
Mountain Xpress Webmaster Follow me @MXWebTeam

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

3 thoughts on “King James version of the Bible is the king’s version, not God’s

  1. billd1

    While I have not limited myself to strictly the KJV of the Bible, all versions I grew up with portrayed homosexuality as a sin. As a result, I have ruined my life, the woman I married and two children before I “saw the light”. I have recently read several books on Homosexuality and Christianity as well as interpretations of key/mistranslated words. It is difficult to expand one’s concept of what Christianity is meant to be – a relationship. God sent His son to have a relationship with us; not religion. To the majority, this may take a while but hopefully this will become accepted as did womens rights and racial discrimination – we are all God’s children and He wants a relationship with each and every one of us.

  2. Rob Close

    If anyone reading this believes that their church has the only correct version of the bible – have you compared it to the new oxford annotated version?

    That’s the only bible that scholars can respect, and for good reason – it shows all the different ways each phrase has been translated – we used it throughout UNCA’s “History of Early Christianity”.

  3. travelah

    The notion that an anotated bible is the only bible scholars can respect is a pretty far fetched comment. I don’t believe you would ever gain a scholarly consensus on that. Textual Criticism is a well researched field with theologians on all sides of the translation issue. An annotated bible merely compares translations and doesn’t give weight to how the text should be translated.
    The King James Only controversy has been an issue for some time and most theologians and elders consider it’s advocates to be schismatics.

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.