Customer Reviews


26 Reviews
5 star:
 (16)
4 star:
 (1)
3 star:    (0)
2 star:
 (1)
1 star:
 (8)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favourable review
The most helpful critical review


10 of 11 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars An excellent, in-depth, study of a controversial issue.
D.A. Carson made the first popular venture into this unpopular
and controversial area with his brief but excellent book, The
King James Only Debate. White, however, surpasses Carson with
the depth of his research and breadth of his survey. This book
is, currently, THE book on the subject. I know of no other that
deals with the topic so...
Published on 14 Oct 1996

versus
1 of 3 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars King James Only Controversy, by James R. White.
Not a very accurate account, by James R. White, a very 'biassed' view of the 'King James Version' of the ' Bible.' This is an 'apologist' book, very much in favour of 'Counterfeit' modern translations.
Published on 7 Mar 2011 by L M H.


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

10 of 11 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars An excellent, in-depth, study of a controversial issue., 14 Oct 1996
By A Customer
D.A. Carson made the first popular venture into this unpopular
and controversial area with his brief but excellent book, The
King James Only Debate. White, however, surpasses Carson with
the depth of his research and breadth of his survey. This book
is, currently, THE book on the subject. I know of no other that
deals with the topic so thoroughly, exploring the textual history
of the Bible, particularly the NT, and the various underlying
manuscripts with reference to Hebrew, Greek and Latin where appropriate.
He offers penetrating critiques of the popular KJV Only positions
that are honest and fair.

With recommendations from such lumiaries as Bruce Metzger,
Norman Geisler, R.C. Sproul, as well as D.A. Carson, this
book cannot be ignored by anyone involved in or studying this
debate.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Really Important Book..., 15 Feb 2011
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations?: Can You Trust the Modern Translations? (Paperback)
James White is a scholar/author that I trust. This subject is a very emotional one, as you will be able to tell by reading some of the other reviews. If you've ever been troubled by KJV only advocates, and feel that you can't trust your Bible (NKJV, NASB, ESV, HCSB, NIV, etc.) you REALLY need to read this book. It will set you free.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


7 of 8 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A brief but informative history book of the NT text., 28 May 1999
By A Customer
I am surprised that Amazon.com allowed rdaneman and bstaggs to review a book they did not read. "Tobit" and "Bel"? Come now, nobody claims that S and V are the oldest manuscripts of OT-era books. The point is irresponsibly argumentative and is simply a rehashing of diatribes that others make. It does not touch the subject of the book at all. And to claim that the book is filled with outright lies -- without giving certifiably accurate documentation to support such a claim -- exposes a certain insincerity on the part of these two reviewers toward the readers of their reviews, because they want to shoo the rest of us away from a book whose message they personally fear for reasons that they refused to logically share in their reviews. In all, ignorant blasts of heat with zero light. Be original and read this book.
As emotionally charged the arguments can become, White does keep his book calm. He does respond to personal attacks, and he does use a little irony when discussing the position of a few of the KJV fringe, but the book remains calm and level-headed. It is quite helpful in detailing the history of the NT, in describing modern critical analysis, and in calming fears.
No one is in sin by simply desiring to determine the message of the original NT manuscripts. Very generally speaking, whether the method employed is to remove later textual variants by emphasizing older manuscripts such as S and V (the "Critical" method), or whether it is to include all the later variants if they are found in a majority of the manuscripts (the "Majority" method), both ways are merely modern attempts to get closer to the original autographs. I commend the efforts of both sides. The "Critical" and "Majority" texts are both very useful. Pick your favorite method, then please leave everybody else alone. In the meantime, I highly recommend this book. It is one of White's best reads. If our two reviewers (or even a new reviewer) comes along and recommends one of their conspiracy books to you, fine. But read it simultaneously with James White's "The King James Only Controversy." Seven Stars.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars The best book i've read on the 'King James Only' subject, 17 May 2013
By 
Amazon Customer (Glasgow, Scotland) - See all my reviews
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations?: Can You Trust the Modern Translations? (Paperback)
If 'King James Onlyism' is a subject you need information on. Then this book is well worth reading. The book takes you through all the various issues involved in the subject in detail, in a way that is accessible to any one. Even though some of the subjects can be daunting at first look. The book takes you through them in such a well written way, that issues on Manuscript types, History, Greek language and many more . James White has written in a way that you never feel out your depth, and is in fact a great read. The book presents the facts. Exactly what is needed in this issue.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


5.0 out of 5 stars A great recourse to have!, 2 Sep 2014
By 
P. M. Trivett (Berkshire, England) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations?: Can You Trust the Modern Translations? (Paperback)
This is perhaps the clearest and most straight forward books on, not only the KJVOnly issue but on textual criticism full stop. Having discussed the reliability of The Bible with followers of Mohammed, Budda, Joseph Smith and The Watchtower among others, I found this book to be very helpful, with factual information that can be traced and followed up as any scholarly work should be. I also found it quite interesting as to how James White uses a consistent measure all through The Bible versions, not messing around with historical facts to prove his case and not using intimidation or mockery of those who might still want to read The KJV., doing his best to distinguish in his writing between the people like myself who read the KJV out of personal preference and love for the poetic language etc, and the one who uses double standards in applying rules to modern bibles they would not apply to the KJV and will openly interpret scripture to say that the point of the NT is to prophesy the coming of The KJV! James White's book is not the be all and end all of study into the Bible and it's history. But it is an introduction and an introduction that KJVO people would not want you to know about or objectively discuss. Incidently the negative reviews on Amazon are a perfect example of people who have the pre-conceived biases which people approach the KJV with and the responses within Dr White's book. So please don't take this book as an attack on the KJV. It isn't! Nor does it mock those whom disagree and seek consistancy, truth and free thinking in their bible reading, (unlike certain KJV Onlyists I have encountered, even denying The Lord who brought them in order to defend the KJVO posistion. So get this book if you want to defend the bible in history, and defend the King James Bible from those who would make it an Idol!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


9 of 11 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars White takes an honest look at the KJV only controversy., 20 Jan 1999
By A Customer
White's book performs a service by providing a scholarly review of the problems associated with the KJV Only Debate currently dividing many churches. He clearly reminds the reader that where you begin can determine whether or not something was left out or added in. Nowhere does White condemn the use of the KJV, rather he encourages intelligent reading in a variety of translations. This book will probably not help those who have bought into dogmatic presuppositions, but is insightful for the serious student of the Bible. White presents a well informed picture of textual critical (the word means to read carefully, not negatively) studies and reminds the reader that the Bible in English is a recent innovation that was considered heresy in its own day. 50 million Chinese Christians would be the first to ask the question, "do I have to read KJV English in order to be saved?" White's answer would be a resounding "NO!" Serious Bible scholarship involves addressing such issues only because enough people run around mouthing things about a translation they do not even read but would die defending. White's book provides both answers and questions. Examine this book, pray about the material, asking God to enlighten you. At any rate, read it to be informed, no matter what side of the debate you may take. "Come let us reason together." Points to consider: The KJV 1611 included alternative wordings in the margins. It had over 35,000 spelling, grammar, printing errors and was revised six times before the 1769 edition which is the one most folks carry. Also, the 1611 edition was printed in two editions. Edition one was recalled and destroyed after leaving "not" out of the commandment "Thou shalt [not] commit adultery". And, why not claim sole inspiration for any of the prior English translations like the Tyndale, Bishop's, etc. which all predated the KJV 1611 by 50 to 300 years (six translations in all appeared prior to the 1611). And, finally, if we translate the scriptures into foreign languages, why should we not translate the Bible into the "foreign" [American] English of our receptor audience? [By the way, I use the KJV and love it, but I read it intelligently not blindly]. With the average high school graduate only reading at a 5th grade reading level, it seems silly to put a Bible translation in their hands if they cannot read it. Most modern translations have worked diligently to keep up with the gradual loss in literacy in this country and generally follow reading levels as one of their primary guidelines for the vocabulary levels used in simplified translations, i.e. NCV - 3rd grade; NLT 5th - 8th; NIV 8th - 10th; NKJV 10th - 12th; KJV, NASB, NRSV, Young's Literals, etc. are all around 12th - college reading levels. Since faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, how will they have faith if they cannot read what is placed in their hands?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


3 of 4 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars A Thoughtful, well-researched book, 20 Aug 2009
By 
Mr. G. N. Charmley "bluebase23" (Norfolk, England) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
This review is from: King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations?: Can You Trust the Modern Translations? (Paperback)
Dr. James White is a gracious, learned man, who has taken another difficult topic in hand well and produced a book that is the best popular-level introduction to the textual criticism of the New Testament on the market. In this new edition he has taken a good book and updated it into by far the best treatment of this emotive issue that is on the market today. Sidestepping hostile rhetoric, he goes to the heart of the issue and gives confused Christians hope that they do in fact have access to what the Bible originally said. Unlike those criticised in the book, Dr. White gives fair quotations and does not engage in personalities. I have personally found this an extremely helpful book in cutting through the smokescreen of bad arguments surrounding the question of Bible versions.

This is also a well-written and well laid-out book, with a good index - always a welcome feature!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


6 of 8 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars More questions, 18 Mar 2010
By 
A. McGuire "Alec McGuire" (Leeds, England) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   
I find myself wondering how many people who have written reviews of this book can actually read Greek, and are able to understand for themselves whether a translation is of any use or not in terms of fidelity to the Greek, and how far they want a word for word translation and how far they want one that tries to give the sense.

For the Old Testament, ask the same questions, but substitute Hebrew & Aramaic for Greek.

After thirty years of reading the NT texts in Greek, I have to say that the KJV isn't at all bad when it comes to the gospels, but doesn't exactly make Paul straightforward. The only modern NT translation that satisfies me is by Richmond Lattimore - he is a Professor of Greek famed for his translations of the Greek classics, and has no theological axes to grind. I can find very few errors in it: he translates malakoi twice as "effeminate" which is a possible meaning, but excludes another possibility that it implies cowardice, and where giving its literal meaning of "soft" keeps the ambiguity of the Greek word; and in James he translates "sarx heteros" in terms of sexual perversion rather than just as "strange flesh" because he hasn't caught the reference back to the OT, and there are other things I'd question, though very few where it would be possible to say he's actually outright wrong. Those limited errors are, overall, outshone by his translations of Paul which are generally outstanding. The character and mood of Paul shine through, as does the logic of Pauline thought. He makes Romans both compelling and easy to understand. But even though I think it's far better than any other modern translation, I'd never think of calling it flawless for the reasons set out below.

None of the other modern translations comes near it in my opinion, and some, such as the NEB and the JB are positively misleading. The latter says the Prodigal Son "began to feel the pinch" which bears no relation to the Greek.

For the OT, I cannot claim the same competence as I can in Greek, but it seems to me that the most reliable translation is that used by most Jews readers: the Jewish Study Bible based on the Jewish Publication Society's translation of the Tanakh. At the very least, one might suppose that looking at how the Jews translate their own scriptures was a useful exercise. The translations of the Pentateuch and Psalms by Alter are useful, and the Everett Fox translation of the Pentateuch, while not to be used on its own, brings out the dynamic quality of how Hebrew is written.

What is a fundamental mistake is to suppose that any single translation into English, no matter how good, is going to be without flaws. That is simply because they are translations. Some things never come out in translation - like the fact that there are jokes in each of the Gospels (even Lattimore can't convey that). Think about someone translating Shakespeare or Mark Twain into French or German and ask whether you'd expect a translation to bring out Huck Finn's character or the way you never know whether Hamlet's mind is really deranged or not. Then you'll recognise that claiming that any translation of the Bible is perfect is nonsensical - whether the translation is old or modern.

White's discussion of the issues is pretty good. Certainly it's jejune to claim the KJV is the only possible version, but it's the same with any other. A sensible reader coming away from this book will, I think, realise the sense of having a number of translations, and using them all, with good commentaries, to gain a continually growing understanding as we go through the process of engaging with the scriptures.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


6 of 8 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Awesome, detailed Book! Should be titled Canonicty 401!, 14 May 1999
By A Customer
Not only does James White describe in detail the unrealistic logic of the KJV-only movement, but goes into ultra detail on how we got our Bible. The King James Only Controversy exposes the many fallacies, lies, mis-quotes, mis-representations of KJV-only authors: Gail Riplinger's book, New Age Bible Versions; William Grady's, King James The Fianl Authority; and many of Peter Ruckman's bombastic articles. The book is priceless as it opens up explaining the five(5) KJVO camps and positions they take. James White points out one of the biggest problems today in the KJVO camp is that they have no clue as to where the Bible came from and little if no knowledge of the original languages. James White vast research gets detailed into the many different Greek manuscripts and how they ended up with textual variants. He shows how variants came to be and how this relatesto the heart of the KJV-only moment. Another area where James White points out is how the KJV actually came into being, which is detailed in itself. He points out the many probelms that the translators had with the first edition of the 1611. The many revisions the AV went through and how the AV ended being the 1769 edition and not the 1611! Mr. White's detailed explanation behind the process of "Textual Criticism", one can see the value of importance of knowing the Biblical languages as a pastor. While reading this bok, one could not help but notice the pain-staking process of creating manuscripts copies, and how this process falls into the "Laws of Linguistics", which James White points out the KJV-only camp ignore. Finally, the crescendo of The King James Only Controvery is when Mr. White actually compared the Translational Diferences from the KJV to the two main English versions: the NASB; and the NIV. In detail one sees that in many instantances the NASB or the NIV were superior in translation, where as in other verses the KJV was.Bottom line, there really was no big difference in Textual differences and a so-called corruption of the English texts". As you read this book, one thing becomes evidently clear; the bottom falls out of the KJV-only movement and are looked upon by the following: purely unwilling to learn or wanting to know the facts, totally beside itself as a whole, do not base things on fact but on fiction eg..Gail Riplinger's book, New Age Bible Versions; refuse to hear the facts, way the evidence and they cling to their naked appeals of emotion! It is without note that James White goes into great detail explaining how we got our Bible and did it from a very objective standpoint without any bias or prejudice leaning from one English Translation to another. If one wants to really learn how we got our Bible into the English language and the pain staking process that it took, then I beyond highly recommend this book which is actually not about the KJV-only movement but "How we got our Bible Canonicty 401."
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


5.0 out of 5 stars The White Stuff, 11 April 2014
Verified Purchase(What is this?)
This review is from: King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations?: Can You Trust the Modern Translations? (Paperback)
This book is a thorough treatment of the subject, well written and referenced as per usual for James White.

Every relevant issue is covered, from how the New Testament manuscripts were copied and passed down through the centuries, to the problems arising from this process (i.e. copying mistakes), to the formulation of the Textus Receptus, to the various 'KJV Only' positions around today. Key players who propound KJV Onlyism (Riplinger, Ruckman, Waite, etc) are incisively critiqued and shown to come up short.

Bear in mind this is not a book against the KJV - it is against KJV Onlyism.

Nonetheless, this book educated me as to the shortcomings of the KJV, both in terms of translation and textual basis (the Textus Receptus). White doesn't use inflammatory arguments, though - he lets facts speak for themselves, often reproducing the underlying Greek words and letting the reader him/herself see the discrepancies.

A useful feature of the book is the tables which White uses to layout comparisons between the KJV and more modern versions (particularly the NIV and NASB). The book is also well-indexed and easy to use to look up particular verses which relate to this controversial topic.

I am a complete layman when it comes to the underlying languages involved in translation, but I still found this book easy to read and digest.

All-in-all, a good buy.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

This product

Only search this product's reviews