Buy Used
CDN$ 1.05
Used: Very Good | Details
Condition: Used: Very Good
Comment: Excellent Condition! FREE TRACKING/DELIVERY CONFIRMATION ON ALL ORDERS!! Ships Safe, Secure, & Fast! 100% MONEY BACK GUARANTEE!
Have one to sell?
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

KING JAMES ONLY CONTROVERSY, THE Paperback – Apr 1 1995


See all 2 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
Paperback, Apr 1 1995
CDN$ 28.91 CDN$ 1.05

Best Books of 2014
Unruly Places is our #1 pick for 2014. See all

Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought



Product Details

  • Paperback: 304 pages
  • Publisher: Baker Publishing (April 1 1995)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 1556615752
  • ISBN-13: 978-1556615757
  • Product Dimensions: 21.5 x 13.9 x 2.1 cm
  • Shipping Weight: 295 g
  • Average Customer Review: 3.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (76 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Bestsellers Rank: #1,371,013 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Product Description

About the Author

James R. White is the author of several acclaimed books, including The King James Only Controversy and The Forgetten Trinity. He is an elder of the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church, director of Alpha and Omega Ministries—a Christian apologetics organization, an adjunct professor with Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary, and a professor of apologetics with Columbia Evangelical Seminary. He and his family live in Phoenix.

Inside This Book (Learn More)
Browse and search another edition of this book.
Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
Search inside this book:

What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?

Customer Reviews

3.7 out of 5 stars

Most helpful customer reviews

4 of 4 people found the following review helpful By robert on March 25 2004
Format: Paperback
If you want the other side of the issue, "Which Version Is The Bible?" by Floyd Nolen Jones is an excellent resource.
This book documents maticulously how the traditional Greek New Testament text (which is the basis of the historic versions by Tyndale, Luther, Coverdale, KJV, and others) was cast aside by revisionist in 1881.
Also carefully documented is the process which produced the radically different Greek text of the modern versions including an analysis of textual criticism. The completely unscientific basis of the methods of textual criticism are also exposed, and evidence that the traditional Greek text is actually much older than the newer critical text of the modern versions is presented.
The work is carefully footnoted and includes a complete and comprehensive bibliography and index.
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful By A Customer on July 7 1999
Format: Paperback
Correcting error with error is never wise. While individuals are free to differ on the topic of translations, we are not free to violate truth with inaccuracy. Dr. White, in his attempt to correct the KJV movement, offers several blunders of his own. Here are just a few:
1) White sites Dr. Kurt Aland's statement regarding the tenacity of a textual variant as evidence of his (White's) view of preservation (p. 48). The fact that Dr. Aland was not referring to preservation does not seem to bother Dr. White. Nor does the fact that textual scholars believe some readings have been lost through the process of transmission.
2) White sites that Dr. G. S. Paine as evidence that the KJV translators undertook the task in order to receive favor from the Crown (p. 70). However, Paine (who is a better writer and scholar) says nothing of the kind.
3) White claims that no one printed the KJV for the first 100 years of its existence except for the Royal Printer (p. 244). The fact that both Oxford and Cambridge Universities printed the KJV within that time frame seems to have escaped White's knowledge. As does the fact that the KJV was printed in other countries long before 1711.
4) White claims there were no homosexuals on the NIV translating committee (p. 245) and then notes that Dr. Virginia Mollenkott (a practicing lesbian) served as English stylist for the NIV. Are we splitting hairs here?
5) White claims the KJV translators were inconsistent in their translation of 2 Peter 1:1 and 1:11 (p. 268). However, he never notes that the Greek text used by the KJV translators was Beza's text and does not read as he presents.
6). White claims the KJV translators would have translated 2 Corinthians 2:17 as "peddle" and not as "corrupt" if they were alive today (p.
Read more ›
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful By William Heym on Feb. 4 2003
Format: Paperback
I found this book very interesting, as Mr. White did a good job explaining "manuscripts," "text types," and "textual variants." I believe the KJV is the best version, not only for accuracy but for its poetic beauty; KJV verses are easier to memorize (they 'sound Biblical'), and church members using many versions make it more difficult to read along with the minister. I do agree with Mr. White that the Johannine Comma does not belong in 1John5, "Easter" is a clear mistranslation in Acts12:4, and that the arguments put forth by the extreme KJV Only people are kind of bizarre. However, while Mr. White does an effective job addressing the extreme KJV Only people, he does not adequately deal with 'normal' pro-KJV people. For example, the two times he mentions Dean Burgon (who he admits is one of the "true scholars of the first rank"-p.91), he agrees with him both times (once where Burgon said the Textus Receptus needed revision, and the other where he grants Burgon's support of the KJV in 1Tim3:16). I realize his purpose is mainly to address the extremists, but he should not put forth argument after argument in favor of the texts underlying modern versions without presenting and dealing with 'normal' contrary views. There are many intelligent pro-KJV arguments from people besides Ruckman and Riplinger-why not present them?
Every textual variant, according to Mr. White, is the result of an expansion of piety, harmonization or parallel influence; furthermore, "Whenever one finds a number of different variants, one can be sure that the shorter reading (that of the modern texts) is the best, as it gave rise to all the others that are found in the manuscripts"(p.185).
Read more ›
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful By A Customer on July 5 1999
Format: Paperback
Although I agree with James White in principle -- that the KJV is simply one of many good translations -- his book displays a lack of understanding of the depth of this issue. His statements lapse far too freqently into emotionally-charged harangues belittling his opponents (attacks on their intelligence, guilt by association, etc.). Very infreqently did he seem to endeavor to comprehend their viewpoint. Regardless of whether I agree with his view, this alone is enough to render his conclusions suspect. In failing to crawl outside of his own paradigm -- even for a moment -- White has created not a text which refutes KJV-Onlyism but a slim justification for his own opinions (which are sometimes unfounded). Better books already exist on the topic, so don't purchase this one.
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again.

Most recent customer reviews



Feedback