Is King James Only-ism Heresy? Part 3

Heresy Review

In order to biblically define heresy, we have been looking at every occurrence in the New Testament of the word translated as "sect" or "heresy" (Strong's # G139, αἵρεσις, haíresis). We have now looked at eight of the New Testament's ten uses of the root word.

To summarize what we have gathered so far, heresy identifies an error or errors in fundamental doctrines only, which are contrary to the Scriptures. Because these views stand in opposition to the standard of faith, and the written authority for believers, heresies cause unnecessary divisions and are listed in Galatians 5 as works of the flesh as opposed to the fruit of the Spirit.

Rounding out the Definition

The last verse in our list that contributes to and completes our biblical search for a definition of 'heresy' is 2 Peter 2:1.

“But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.” (2 Peter 2:1).

In this verse, we find the clearest example of abject heresy, namely, "...denying the Lord that bought them..." Peter describes this false teaching as one of the "...damnable heresies..." which is justly suited to, "...swift destruction."

The following verses in 2 Peter 2 continue to describe false teachers and their means of deceiving others.

“And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.” (2 Peter 2:2).

“And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.”  (2 Peter 2:3).

Beware the "feigned words" that "bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them..."!

The Defining Characteristic

Thus, having abandoned the legitimate authority of the proper Scriptures, cults and hereticks alike replace the true Bible with some illegitimate authority instead.

• Catholics add Church Tradition and papal decisions,
• Mormons add the Book of Mormon, Doctrines and Covenants & the Pearl of Great Price.
• Jehovah Witnesses add the teachings of the Watchtower Society and they change the Bible to their corrupt New World Translation. etc.

Our worldview is shaped by our authority. In light of this, which side of the Bible version debate can lay claim to legitimate authority, keeping in mind from a previous post, that the Textus Receptus was the gathering of the received texts from the faithful throughout the centuries?

Lord and Christ

It was Peter, who stood up on the Day of Pentecost and declared, by the Holy Ghost, "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." (Acts 2:36).

It is intriguing, then, that modern versions (and the Greek manuscripts from which they are derived) often omit the titles of 'Lord' and 'Christ' in relation to Jesus, and against the witness of multitudes of manuscripts to the contrary.

Some striking examples of these omissions demonstrate the stark contrast that exists between the King James Bible and modern versions. In each of the following verses, the New International Version (1984), New American Standard Bible (1977), and the Jehovah Witness' New World Translation (1984) are representative of the modern version omissions.

In Mark 11:10, upon the occasion of Jesus' Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem, the King James Bible has, "...that cometh in the name of the Lord..." where the other three simply have "coming."

In Acts 16:31, in reply to the Philippian Jailer's question, "...Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" Paul and Silas answer in the King James, "...Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."  (Acts 16:31), whereas the modern versions only have "Lord Jesus." The title, "Christ," being absent.

Another familiar verse is Paul's statement in Romans 1:16, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth..."  (Romans 1:16). Here, the essential words, "of Christ" are absent from the three modern versions, with theirs either saying the solitary word, "gospel," or else in the NWT, "good news." Bearing in mind that Paul warns the Galatian churches not to follow, "another gospel," the possessive words, "of Christ" are needed.

A couple more examples should bring home the point.

In Ephesians 3:14 in the KJV Paul writes, "For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ," (Ephesians 3:14). The other versions just have "Father."

Finally (although not exhaustively), in Colossians 1:2, the King James ends the verse with the words, "...the Lord Jesus Christ."  (Colossians 1:2); but these God-honoring words are missing from the new versions.

According to these verses, on which side does the question of heresy lay?

How to Handle Heresy

The final mention of a form of the word, 'heresy' occurs in Titus 3:10-11, where Paul instructs Titus, and the church after him, how to deal with those who are identified with heresy.

“A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.” (Titus 3:10-11).

Paul's advice for dealing with hereticks follows Jesus' teaching in Matthew 18:15-17 regarding a sinning brother but only provides two chances for the errant individual to change their ways, rather than three as in Matthew's Gospel. This no doubt is due to the leavening effect such false teaching can have in the church.

It should be emphasized here that heresy involves false ideas or beliefs about doctrines of the Scriptures, not merely divisive behavior, as it is commonly defined. Consider the following verses:

“Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.” (Romans 16:17-18).

It is not simply those, "...which cause divisions and offences..." Otherwise Jesus himself would be a heretic (Lk. 12:51; Jn. 7:43; and 1 Pet. 2:8) and the cross of Christ deemed heresy (Gal. 5:11).

Rather, Romans 16:17-18 clearly states that it is only those which cause divisions and offences which are, "...contrary to the doctrine..." who are to be marked and avoided.

Conclusion

From our detailed look at every occurrence of the word translated as 'sect, heresy, heresies, or heretick' in the New Testament, it should be obvious that the accusation, as applied to every supporter of the exclusive use of the King James Bible, is without biblical warrant. To the contrary, King James Bible Only adherents are often on the front lines of the battle being waged incessantly against Bible orthodoxy, or what the Bible itself calls 'sound doctrine.' 

It is certainly not heresy to proclaim that we have a Bible we can hold in our hands, believe every word, and trust to the saving of our souls.

“Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.”— John 17:17