How should a church respond pastorally to a KJV-Only member?
Question 01165
KJV-Onlyism is the conviction that the King James Version of the Bible, published in 1611, is the uniquely preserved and authoritative Word of God in English, and that all modern translations represent corrupt departures from it. It is held with genuine sincerity and a real concern for biblical authority. It is also, on careful examination, a position that does not stand up to scrutiny. When someone in a congregation holds this view strongly, the question of how to respond is as much pastoral as it is theological, and getting the balance wrong in either direction causes its own kind of damage.
Understanding Why the Position Is Held
KJV-Onlyism rarely arises from a dispassionate evaluation of manuscript evidence. It typically grows from a combination of factors: a genuine and commendable concern for the authority of Scripture, a community in which the position is reinforced as a mark of true faithfulness, exposure to polemical literature that presents modern translations as deliberately corrupted, and often a personal and devotional attachment to the language of the King James Version that is entirely understandable given its four centuries of history in English-speaking Christianity.
The pastor who approaches this conversation without recognising these deeper motivations will be less effective than one who does. The person holding the KJV-Only position is not being awkward for its own sake. They are trying, in the terms available to them, to guard what they believe is genuinely at stake: the integrity of God’s word. That motivation deserves to be honoured even while the conclusion is gently but clearly addressed.
What the Evidence Actually Shows
The King James Version was translated from the Textus Receptus, a Greek text compiled by Erasmus in 1516 from a small number of relatively late manuscripts, the most complete of which dated from the twelfth century. The Textus Receptus was a significant achievement for its time and served the church faithfully for centuries. It is not, however, the most reliable representation of the original Greek New Testament available to us today. Since Erasmus’s day, over 5,800 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament have been catalogued, including manuscripts considerably older than those available to him. The NA28, which underlies most modern translations, represents the considered judgement of scholars working across the full range of available evidence.
One practical question that cuts through the KJV-Only position fairly cleanly is this: what did English Christians read before 1611? The Great Bible (1539), the Geneva Bible (1560), and the Bishops’ Bible (1568) all preceded the King James Version and were used by faithful Christians who knew nothing of it. If the KJV is uniquely preserved and all departures from it are corrupt, it is difficult to account for these earlier translations and for the believers who read them. The KJV-Only framework has no satisfactory answer to that question.
How to Respond Pastorally
This is not a primary doctrine. The mode of biblical translation is not on the same level as the Trinity, the atonement, or the resurrection. Fellowship should not be broken over it, and the person who holds a KJV-Only position while trusting Christ, loving the Scriptures, and living faithfully is a brother or sister in Christ. The pastoral response should reflect that clearly.
At the same time, the position cannot simply be left unchallenged in a teaching context. Teaching that the Textus Receptus is uniquely preserved, or that modern translations have removed references to the deity of Christ, or that the scholarship underlying the NA28 is motivated by a desire to undermine Scripture, is not accurate, and a congregation cannot be left with a false picture of how the Bible reached us. The pastor’s responsibility is to teach the textual history clearly, warmly, and without personal targeting, making clear that the underlying conviction, that God has preserved His word and that the Scriptures we possess are reliable, is entirely shared, even where the specific claims of KJV-Onlyism are not.
Private conversation, when the opportunity arises, should be gentle and focused on the history rather than the argument. Walking someone through when the great uncial manuscripts were copied, what the manuscript tradition looks like, and how the textual scholars who produced the NA28 actually work is often more effective than abstract argumentation. The goal is not to win a debate but to help a fellow believer have a more accurate picture of how God has preserved His word.
So, now what?
The congregation member who holds a KJV-Only position needs accurate teaching about textual history, patient pastoral engagement, and the security of knowing that their underlying concern for Scripture’s authority is genuinely shared. The worst possible responses are dismissiveness on one side and quiet accommodation on the other, pretending the position does not matter because it is easier to leave it alone. The truth about God’s preserved word is worth teaching carefully, and the person who is willing to receive it will be better equipped for it.
“Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth.” 2 Timothy 2:15
