Translation Should You Trust?
Defense Of The Authorized King James Version Of 1611
THE PREEMINENT PLACE IT GIVES TO THE LORD JESUS CHRIST
The Deity Of Christ
1 TIMOTHY 3:16 1 JOHN 5:7 PHILLIPIANS 2:6 LUKE 2:33 MATTHEW 19:16-17 JOHN 1:18 An Objection Considered Other Attacks Omissions Weakened Translations Final Considerations
The most powerful indication that the King James Version
is the pure, inerrant word of God is how it speaks of the Lord Jesus
Christ. In this area, even more than in the others, it blows the new
"Bibles" to pieces. The King James Version
exalts the Lord Jesus Christ to the highest level at every opportunity;
it consistently exalts Him as much as the Greek text will allow while
the new versions practice just the opposite. These "perversions" do not
hesitate to question Christ's deity, virgin birth, blood atonement, bodily resurrection, and ascension
in a number of places yet their publishers insist they are better
Bibles. For a true Christian, who should love and exalt his Savior with
all his being (Mark 12:30), these facts alone should cause him to
question the integrity of these versions. Whenever his Savior's
character or virtue is attacked in any form, every believer should
realize that Satan must be in it somewhere (Genesis 3:15); and since
ALL the new "Bibles" attack Christ's integrity in some manner, the
saint should have no doubt about him being involved. One of the
characteristics of the coming "antichrist" is he denies that Jesus Christ has "come in the flesh" (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 7). That is, he openly denies His DEITY.
And to prepare the way for his arrival, Satan has used his influence to
weaken this essential doctrine in ALL of the English translations
published since 1885, making the antichrist's job much easier.
If this is mentioned to a
promoter of one of the new "Bibles," he will usually go into a spasm
and reply, "Our Bible does teach the deity of Christ, and furthermore,
every one of the fundamentals of the faith can be found in it." It is true Christ's deity can be found in the new translations in some places, but in many of the most clear and important places it is absent. Satan knows he cannot yet
destroy every reference to Christ's deity in these versions because
they would then no longer resemble (imitate) a true Bible. He knows
they must, at least, read something like a true Bible to sell. So, for
the time being, he allows a few of the less obvious references to
Concerning the above statement that all the fundamentals can be found in these "perversions," we answer, so what? Is all it takes for a book to be a Bible is that it contain the fundamentals in it somewhere?
Why even a one page tract could qualify under this definition. No, dear
believer, there is much more to the Bible than just five (or more)
fundamentals. It contains ALL the WORDS God wants man to have, not just
the fundamentals. The men who make such thoughtless statements really
do not believe what they are saying anyway. It is just a pat answer
designed to throw up a diversion so they can get away from the Bible
believer without their ego being harmed. They very well know that the
deity of Christ and the other fundamentals can be found in practically
every English version, even those they do not approve. The Jehovah's
Witnesses' "Bible" (The New World Translation)
has ALL of them in it, but no fundamentalist would recommend it to
anybody. The same is true concerning the "Bibles" promoted by the Roman
Catholics. Many "conservatives" rejected the Revised Standard Version
when it came out because they considered it to be modernistic and
unreliable, yet it contains all the fundamentals in it, too. Again, we
see that personal opinion is the final authority of these scholars
regardless of what they say.
In this chapter, primarily
under the topic of the person and work of Christ, we are going to
compare some of the readings of the new versions with the King James Version. This way the reader can see for himself the extent these versions have been corrupted and how the Authorized Version gives Christ the highest honor. Of the new translations we will mainly use the NASV, NIV, and NKJV in these comparisons because they are the most popular, and the readings in them are typical of the others.
The Deity Of Christ
That Satan would attack the deity of Christ should come as no surprise
to a Christian. With the great number of cults that have emerged in the
last 125 years, most vehemently denying Christ's deity, every believer
should be fully aware of Satan's tactics of deception (2 Corinthians
2:11). One tactic every Christian should particularly note is that
before any cult (that claims to be Christian) can teach its peculiar
"doctrine," its members must have an authority to appeal to, and almost
without exception this authority is a new Bible translation (often
their own) or the true Bible (KJV)
interpreted by a "prophetic" group or founder. If these false prophets
want to "teach" that Christ is not God and other lies, they know the King James Bible
unaltered will not support them; so to "legitimize" their doctrine,
they are forced to either go to "the Greek" and change the English
words to suit them, or translate an entirely new version. The Jehovah's
Witnesses and Mormons have done this as well as the Unitarians and
Christian Scientists. That is, they must one way or another get rid of
the hated King James Version
because instead of aiding them, it is a hindrance. Many times, though,
these cults will use one of the new Fundamentalist approved "Bibles"
instead of the King James,
to advance their heresies because these versions better support their
doctrines (this will be documented later in this chapter).
(Furthermore, the same Devil who deceives lost people into joining cults such as these also deceives born again Christians into unknowingly joining another. Not a cult that denies the deity of Christ, but one that denies the existence of an infallible Bible.
Like the members of the deity-denying cults, these believers were
deceived by following the opinions of men they felt had advanced
knowledge or superior education instead of following the Bible.
Christian, again, beware.)
Here you may ask, "What does
this have to do with me? I believe in the deity of Christ." Very well,
but where did you first learn this truth? From a new translation, or
from a person preaching or teaching from the King James Version?
If in the unlikely event it was from the preaching of a new version,
where did the preacher first learn it? Almost certainly it was from the
Authorized Version, either directly or indirectly.
The King James Version
is the only English Bible still published that contains every true
biblical reference to the deity of Jesus Christ (as well as every other
truth God has for man). Partially because of this bold position, God
"authorized" it over the years to become the standard, final authority
for all Christian doctrine. During much of the last four centuries it
was the only Bible most people knew; therefore, we believe it would be
safe to say that the vast majority of Christians alive today first
learned of Christ's deity by reading and believing it personally or by
being taught by someone else who did. However, contrary to nature, many
of these same people will abandon the Bible that taught them this
precious truth for one that in many places denies it! This would be a
great mystery if we did not know Satan was involved.
When confronted with this
irrational behavior, many of these "defectors" may attempt to defend
themselves by again insisting that they can find Christ's deity in
their favorite modern version. Granted they can, but the reason they
can is because they are LOOKING FOR IT! They learned from the
Authorized Version that Christ is God, so they need to be able to find
this stated in some way in their new "Bible." That is, they had the
advantage of having this truth clearly presented to them from the King James Version
and were convinced of its validity, but then, after being indoctrinated
by modern "scholarship," they forsook it for a version that expresses
the doctrine much weaker. If a person was completely isolated from any
influence of the Authorized Version
(to the delight of Satan and his cohorts), and all he had for a Bible
was one of these new versions, it would become difficult for him to
learn of Christ's deity. And with only a few more changes made, it
would be impossible for him to learn it!
See the direction Satan is headed? If he can get rid of the Authorized Version
by destroying the public's confidence in it with "scholarship" and
replace it with versions that subtilty corrupt Christianity's most
fundamental doctrines, he will clear the way for his "new age" religion
and the worship of himself in the person of the "beast" (Revelation 13)! It is only because God has preserved his pure word in the Authorized Version,
and that the Holy Spirit has bore witness to it through the centuries,
that Satan has been held off as long as he has. Sadly to say, though,
through the apathy, neglect, and lack of discernment of many Christians
today, Satan is rapidly approaching his goal. Before he could succeed,
he knew he had to destroy the confidence many Christians have in the King James Version
and get them to abandon it as the Holy Bible. Under the guise of "older
and better texts," he has convinced millions of believers to do just
that, tricking them into accepting "Bibles" which remove Christ's deity
from the following passages:
1 TIMOTHY 3:16
This passage declares the deity of Christ so plainly that Satan had to
try to weaken it in some manner, and in all the new "Bibles" he has
succeeded. The ASV, NASV, NIV, and all the other versions based on the Alexandrian Text will not allow "God" to be manifest in the flesh. They insist the word "God"
is not in the "original" because it is not in the "oldest and best
texts" and that the word should be "who" or "which." But we have heard
this song before. How do they KNOW it is not in the original? They do
not know because there is no original. Of the hundreds of Greek
manuscripts that have this passage in them, no more than SIX say "who."
The vast majority of them, some very ancient, read "God" as the Authorized Version. The NKJV also says "God"
but not without casting doubt on it by stating "who" in a footnote. The
corrupt texts which say "who" or "which" were obviously altered over
fifteen centuries ago by people who hated the true reading (Origen,
etc.). Inspired by their father Satan (John 8:44), they altered the
correct word ("God") to an incorrect word ("who") in an attempt to destroy one of the plainest and most direct verses
in the Bible which declares Christ's deity. And because a few of these
old texts remain, most of today's "textual authorities" will not
hesitate at the expense of Christ to use them and continue this lie.
"God was manifest in the flesh"
Furthermore, with "God"
removed and "who" in its place, the verse does not make sense. Look at
it in a new version. Who is "who"? The verse is vague and left open for
anyone to insert his own idea of who "who" is. This is the way Satan
likes it—personal opinion the final authority.
Fundamentalists will insist the passage refers to Christ, which it
does, but all it says then is Christ came in a body. With "God"
removed, Christ does not have to be God. He could be an "angel" as some
cults insist, or a lesser, created "god" as others claim. With the King James Version reading, however, there is no doubt, "GOD was manifest in the flesh."
Christian, who are you going to believe? Are you going to believe the testimony of the Authorized Version"By their fruits ye shall know them."
which God has honored and used for the last two thousand years and
which exalts our Lord Jesus Christ to His proper position? Or are you
going to believe so-called scholars who will not allow the verse to
exalt Him at all and whose "Bibles" God has practically ignored?
1 JOHN 5:7
Since this verse not only speaks of the deity of Christ but also
plainly declares the doctrine of the Trinity, the Devil is twice as
determined to get rid of it. His strategy in this case is to completely
eliminate the whole verse from the text as "not original." All of the
modern versions, except the NKJV
(which again casts doubt in a footnote), have followed his lead and
omitted it. Some of them even change the numbering of the verses around
it so the reader cannot tell this precious verse is gone!
"For there are three that bear record in heaven"
The excuse given for omitting
it sounds plausible on the surface, but under examination it becomes
apparent that it is not the reasoning of faith but of humanism. These
"authorities" insist that because this verse has few Greek manuscripts
to support it, it was not in the original text, but they have no proof
for this. Some will even say it was not originally in any text and
assert the reading was "invented" in the sixteenth century, but this is
not true. It has been cited by several writers of the past, the
earliest in 255 A.D. It is also found in nearly all the ancient Latin
translations including the "Old Latin," which was translated no later
than the second century.
Again, that this verse is rare
in the Greek manuscripts does not PROVE it was not in the original
autographs. You say, "Yes, but you cannot prove it was in them." True,
I cannot, but neither can I or anyone else PROVE that John 3:16 (or any
other verse) WAS in the original! This brings us back to the disease we
These "scholars" are fanatically obsessed with manuscripts God has
completely abandoned; manuscripts He clearly did NOT want preserved
through the centuries. Again, a true Bible believer has the same
attitude towards them as God does; hence he does not trust
"scholarship" to provide him with a Bible, he trusts God! No, I cannot
prove 1 John 5:7 WAS in the original autograph, but I can PROVE it IS in the BIBLE!
I have a copy of it in my lap right now. Why is this verse in there?
Because God WANTS it in there! And as we have said repeatedly before,
this is the Bible God has used, is still using, and will continue to
use by choice. If the God of Heaven cannot give man the very words He
wants him to have, and preserve these words the way He wants to
preserve them after He has promised to do so, then we have no sure
basis to believe anything else He says! So what if this verse is not in
the "Majority Text," it is in the BIBLE, and this should be enough for any Christian who walks by faith and NOT by sight.
The perversions say, "did not consider equality with God something to be grasped" (NKJV) or something similar in this verse. Any careful reader can see that the Authorized Version magnifies Christ's deity while the imitators demean it. "Thought it not robbery to be EQUAL with God"
shows that Christ did not consider He being God as taking anything away
from God. The verse declares Him EQUAL with the Father! The NKJV
and the others, however, greatly weaken this statement by saying that
equality was not something worth grasping or striving for, like He is a
"thought it not robbery to be equal with God"
The reader should now be
beginning to see a trend. Why is it that the translators of these new
versions, almost without exception, chose a reading that demeans Christ
over one that exalts Him. When they are confronted with more than one
possible textual reading, or with various ways a word or passage can be
translated, they nearly always choose the rendering that lessens
Christ. This is amazing. All of these translators claim to be
Christians, yet when they translate a "Bible" they behave like they are
not. One would think they would honor the One who saved them (if they
are saved) by choosing the readings that exalt Him, but this is not the
case. Even if the readings are found in the vast majority of Greek
Texts (and nearly all are), they will abandon them for what they
consider to be the "oldest and best texts" (the corrupt Vaticanus and Sinaiticus which contain the Apocrypha
within the canon, see chapter 4). These men do not practice biblical
principles in producing these versions, they follow the principles and
mentality of worldly textual criticism. That is, they treat the Bible
like it is just another historical book, attempting to recover it from
the "sea of time." See how Satan has invaded the Seminaries and "Bible"
schools with his natural reasoning? See how he has affected the
thinking of the country's "most prominent scholars"? These "experts" go
about their business of translating like God does not exist, or at
least like He is unconcerned about His Son and His word. It appears
they are motivated by purely human reasoning. Below are some more
verses which show their bias against Christ.
Here, nearly all of the "perversions" state that Joseph was Jesus's father. They read, "the child's father and mother" (NIV) in place of "Joseph and his mother."
The change is very subtile (Genesis 3:1), but also very destructive.
Satan knows that if he can weaken the verses which prove Christ's
virgin birth it will make it easier for him to deceive people into
thinking it is not true. And once he gets them to doubt this
fundamental, he knows the others (deity, blood atonement, resurrection,
etc.) will not be far behind. In some of the new versions Satan is much
more blatant in his attack of this precious doctrine. The RSV says in Isaiah 7:14 that a "young woman" will give birth to a son, not a virgin, and theGood News Version (Todays English Version) removes "virgin" from eleven of the fourteen places it is found in the New Testament of the King James Version. See Luke 1:27 for an example. Again, it is obvious these changes are all for the worse.
"Joseph and his mother"
Concerning Luke 2:33, the Bible
correctors often try to defend their versions by saying, "Mary called
Joseph Jesus' father in verse 48." Yes she did, but how could anyone
miss how Jesus corrected her in the next verse! In verse 49 He says He
was about His "FATHER'S business"
in the temple! Joseph did not dwell in the temple, God did. Another
difference between verse 33 and verse 48 is in who is speaking. Luke,
the writer of this Gospel, who is also a medical doctor, says under the
inspiration of the Holy Spirit in verse 33 that Joseph is NOT Christ's
father (if you have an Authorized Version) because he knows it to be a fact (Luke 1:1-4). Verse 48, however, contains an account of what Mary
said at that time. She, of all people, knew that Joseph was NOT Jesus'
real father, she likely referred to him as such publicly to protect
them all from rumors (John 8:41). The majority of Greek texts again
read with the King James.
This passage is the victim of another vicious attack on Christ's deity. In the Authorized Version the rich young ruler calls Jesus "Good Master" and wants to know how to get eternal life. Jesus replies with, "Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God."
The implications are clear. If Christ is good He is God because only
God is good. The Lord wants the young man to see Him for who He really
is—"God manifest in the flesh." This is much too plain for the new versions, they all butcher the passage up until His deity cannot be found. We will use the NIV as an example.
"Why callest thou me good?"
First, in verse 16, this "corruption" removes "Good" from "Good Master" and then makes "Master,""God"
from the verse also, making it say "there is only One who is good."
These changes take the attention away from who Jesus Christ is and put
it on a young man's philosophical question about good works. Jesus
said, "Why callest thou ME good"
in the real Bible; the imitators say He was only referring to good
works. A typical Satanic approach. The Devil would much rather someone
look at themselves and their "good works"
than look at Jesus Christ and their sins. There are scores of other
places in the new versions like this. They make changes that appear
slight on the surface, but when one looks at them a little closer, he
finds that they either question, corrupt, or destroy some truth God
wants His people to have. Let the reader beware.
"teacher". In verse 17 it makes the question read "Why do you ask me
about what is good?" And as if this were not enough, it removes
Though there are many more changes in the new translations which cast doubt on Christ's deity (such as removing "Lord" out of many verses in reference to Him, Mark 9:24; Luke 23:42 etc.; changing "Son of God" to "Son of man," John 9:35; calling the "judgment seat of Christ"
the "judgment seat of God," Romans 14:10-12; destroying a key reference
to His omnipresence, John 3:13; not allowing His blood to be God's
blood, Acts 20:28; etc.), we will only look at one more in detail. The NASV
(which is recommended by all the leading Christian schools) says in
John 1:18 that Christ is "the only begotten God." Some claim that since
Christ is called a "begotten God" in this verse it exalts Him, but they
are deceived. There is only one other major version which has this
reading in the text (many others have it in the footnotes); the NWT of
the Jehovah's Witnesses. The NASV is recommended by ALL the leading Christian schools as a "thoroughly reliable text," and NWT
is recommended by none of them, but both insist Jesus is a "begotten
God." This is one of the most blatant lies Satan ever hatched.
"only begotten Son"
If Christ is "the only begotten God, then the other "God" in the verse must NOT be "begotten." This makes TWO gods.
There is no way around it. If one believes either of these two
corruptions, the "begotten God" has explained the unbegotten God! This
fits the Jehovah's Witnesses (and others) official doctrine perfectly.
They do not believe Jesus Christ is the one true God manifest in the
flesh, and they use this verse as a "proof-text" to promote this lie.
The author has had them use this very verse in their "Bible" to try to
convince him His Savior is a lesser, created "god." Thank God the real
Bible says that Jesus is "the only begotten SON," which eliminates the problem, but the tragedy is this cult could have just as easily used the fundamentalist approved NASV
to teach this fallacy, and sometimes they do! They will use it in an
attempt to confuse a loyal "fundamentalist" who trusts "scholarship" as
his final authority.
The Bible believer knows that
there is only ONE true God and that He is manifest in three persons (1
John 5:7). The second person (the Word) came to earth as the only
begotten Son (Psalm 2) of the first person (the Father) through the
third person (the Holy Ghost, Luke 1:35). This preserves the integrity
and unity of the scripture and allows Christ to retain his proper
position as Jehovah.
The author has found that after being confronted with this two Gods heresy, some of the NASV
promoters will take exception with this verse and say something like,
"With all due respect to the great scholars who made this valuable
translation, I choose to retain the reading "only begotten Son"
in John 1:18...." Statements like this further prove what we have
mentioned repeatedly before, there is no book or collection of books in
any language anywhere on earth that these men will allow to be their
final authority. When "push comes to shove," they will always resort to
the only authority they fully trust—their own MIND.
For a fresh breath of relief from the corruptions we have just waded through, the reader is encouraged to read Acts 7:59 in the King James Version.
There he will find an instance where the translators showed their true
motives and their love for Christ and His deity. The word "God"
in this verse is in italics, and since this means it is not in the
Greek, it shows they added it so the verse would make sense. They could
have chosen another, less emphatic word (as nearly all of the new
versions have done), but they chose "God" to leave the reader in no doubt that they believed when Stephen was calling upon the "Lord Jesus," he was calling upon God.
We have only looked (and
briefly at that) at six verses in the modern versions that attack the
deity of Christ. And though there are several more, these should be
enough to show the reader the attitude these new "Bibles" have towards
the Lord and the direction "scholarship" is going. The King James
scholars preserved the correct readings in their Bible, exalting Christ
to His proper place, but every major version published since has tried
to bring Him down. This fact alone should be enough to convince any
Christian of the superiority of the Authorized Version.
An Objection Considered
After hearing a Bible believer claim that the King James Version
exalts the Lord Jesus Christ more than any modern version, some of the
promoters of these new versions may insist that their "Bibles" express
Christ's deity more clearly in two or three passages. They contend in
these verses the Authorized Version is obscure.
One of the verses they like to
produce as "proof" is 2 Peter 1:1 (the others are usually 2
Thessalonians 1:12 and Titus 2:13). In this verse the NKJV and NIV change the placement of the word "our" to make the verse read "...of our God and Savior Jesus Christ" where the Authorized Version says "...of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ." Contrary to their charge the King James
is not obscure here at all. The deity of Christ is found here as it is
found in many other passages which link God and Christ in such manner.
Take 1 Timothy 1:1 for instance, here we find "...of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ." Does this verse refuse to allow the "Lord Jesus Christ" to be "our Saviour"? Of course not. Does the way it is worded not permit "God" to be "Lord"? Again, no. Does the verse refuse to allow Christ to be "God"? For the third time, no.
This verse, as 2 Peter 1:1, contains a figure of speech known as a "hendiady." It is a common occurrence in the scriptures. It is defined (by Bullinger, Companion Bible)
as "two for one" or "two words used, but one thing meant." That is, the
Holy Spirit uses two words or statements to refer to one thing or
person. The second statement (often connected to the first with "and")
does NOT add another person or object but only adds information to, or states in another way, the first. Zechariah 9:9 gives two examples of this. The "daughter of Zion" and "daughter of Jerusalem"
in this verse is NOT two different daughters, the second statement is
just another way of stating the first. This verse ends with another
hendiady, "...and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass"
(see Matthew 21:5). Does this mean Christ rode upon TWO asses at once?
Don't be silly (Luke 19:35). The two statements speak of one object,
the "foal of an ass" (second statement) is "an ass" (first statement) also!
One reason 1 Peter 1:1 is worded the way it is in the King James Bible is because of this figure of speech. The second statement "...and our Lord Jesus Christ" simply adds more information to the first, "the righteousness of God." It declares Jesus Christ "God" and also speaks of Him as "the righteousness of God" (Romans 10:1-4)! As for the placement of the word "our," the King James translators were merely following the writing style of Peter (and the Holy Spirit) as found in the rest of the epistle. "Our" is not once found before "God," but it is often found before "Lord," "Christ," or "Jesus" (see 1:2,8,11,16, etc.).
The Authorized Version remains vindicated. It clearly elevates the Lord Jesus Christ more than any new translation.
Other Attacks upon Christ and His Work
Not being content with only attacking His deity, the new versions insist upon attacking Christ in other areas also, His blood atonement
being one. The Lord's blood atonement for sin is one of the most
precious and fundamental truths in the scriptures. His blood (which is
God's blood, Acts 20:28) was the actual ransom paid for the believer's
redemption from sin and Satan's kingdom (Romans 3:24-25; Hebrews 9:12).
No wonder the Devil wants to remove this vital doctrine from the Bible,
it is the means of escape from his captivity. Nearly all of the new
translations reflect Satan's "anemia" because in Colossians 1:14 they
completely remove "through his blood"
from the verse. The fact that the reading is in the majority of
manuscripts and has been honored by God for centuries in the Authorized
Version evidently means nothing to the translators. They must cling to
their "oldest and best" corruptions no matter what the cost.
The vile Good News Bible (TEV) removes "blood"
from FOURTEEN verses (most of them dealing with Christ) and replaces it
with "death," (Matthew 27:4; Acts 20:28; Romans 3:25, 5:9; Ephesians
1:7, 2:13; Colossians 1:20; Revelation 1:5, 5:9). These substitutions
are a gross perversion of the scriptures. Instead of translating the
Greek word for blood correctly, the translators slyly (and unethically)
insert their "private interpretation"
(2 Peter 1:20)—death. As anyone knows the words blood and
death are not synonymous, they do not convey the same meaning. The
Lord's supper in Matthew 26:26-28 clearly shows they are different. The
"bread" represents Christ's body which died, and the "fruit of the vine""for the remission of sins."
A person needs more than just Christ's death to save him, he also needs
His blood. Satan is trying his best to keep this vital information from
believers and also unbelievers. represents His blood which was shed
Another doctrine the new versions attack is Christ's ascension. The NASV and some others will not allow the Lord to ascend into Heaven in Luke 24:51. The words "carried up into heaven" are omitted from the verse. This forces Luke to contradict himself. Luke said in Acts chapter one that the "former treatise" (gospel of Luke) he wrote was of "all that Jesus began both to do and teach. Until the day in which he was taken up"
(vrs. 1-2), but the NASV will not allow Him to be taken up. It just
says He departed. You may think that this is insignificant since the
ascension can be found in other passages, but it is not. No portion of the Bible is insignificant. If a person allows only one word to be removed or changed in it he does not have all the words God has for him.
In the very next verse (Luke 24:52) many of these versions refuse to let the Lord be worshiped. The King James correctly says, "and they worshiped him,"
but the perversions say, "they bowed down" or the like. That there is a
difference between the readings is obvious, one can bow down to a
person without worshiping him (see also Matthew 20:20 in the NKJV). Again, notice how all of these changes are negative towards Christ. Every change is at His expense.
The Authorized Version
expresses every fundamental Christian doctrine more often or more
clearly than ANY of the modern versions; this fact alone should speak
volumes to any Christian seeking the truth. While the new "Bibles"
demean Christ in many key passages, the King James exalts Him at every opportunity. How much more evidence do you need (Matthew 3:17)?
Do you know what Matthew 17:21, 18:11, 23:14; Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46,
11:26, 15:28; Luke 17:36, 23:17, John 5:3-4, Acts 8:37, 15:34, 24:7,
28:29; and Romans 16:24 have in common in the NIV? THEY ARE NOT IN IT!
All of the "Bibles" based on the Alexandrian text omit most or all of
these verses under the guise they are "not in the originals." "Yea hath God said."
Remember how the serpent tricked Eve in the garden? His questioning of
whether God really said what He said led Eve to SUBTRACT from what He
did say! She subtracted the word "freely"
(Genesis 3:2). Today Satan is still influencing people to do the same,
though now they subtract hundreds of words. Every one of these
omissions is a tragedy. For instance, read the account of the salvation
of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts chapter eight while omitting verse 37.
With this verse removed the passage becomes somewhat vague because his
salvation appears to be based on baptism (works) instead of belief on
There are many other omissions in these "Bibles." Compare any new translation with the King James Version
in the following verses for some examples, Matthew 6:13, 9:14, 11:23,
15:8, 16:3, 19:9, 20:7, 20:16, 20:22, 25:13, 27:35; Mark 6:11, 10:21,
13:14; Luke 1:28, 4:4, 4:8, 7:31, 8:43, 11:2-4, 22:31, 22:64, 23:38;
John 1:27, 3:13, 3:15, 11:41, 16:16; etc. These verses contain only
some of the omissions in the gospels alone, there are many more in the
rest of the Bible! How could anyone think a "Bible" that took out so
much of the Bible was a real Bible? Satan has a lot of people fooled.
This is not all. The last twelve verses of Mark and a large portion of John chapter eight are strongly questioned in these corruptions. The NIV
separates Mark 16:9-20 from the rest of the chapter as not "reliable"
and does the same with John 7:53-8:11. I suppose God must have been
unable to keep His word pure from the intrusion of these passages for
nearly eighteen centuries and had to wait for some "scholars" to come
along who were able correct this "unfortunate error." Nonsense! We know
the readings are genuine because they are in the Bible! God has
promised to preserve His word for every generation, so why would any
Christian doubt that He has? So what if the "doctors" SAY these
passages were not in the "original," they cannot PROVE it, and the fact
they are in the Bible God has chosen to use for the last 380 years is
evidence against them.
If people want to cheat
themselves out of having all the words God wants them to have by
believing these new translations, that is their business, but a true
Bible believer wants EVERY WORD God has for him. That these modern
corruptions sell for Bibles shows the sad state of Christianity today.
You could not have fooled a New Testament Christian or even one in the
early nineteenth century with this garbage for a minute. As soon as he
saw all the changes, attacks against his Savior, and omissions, he
would have rejected them as trash. But today this trash is the
"preference" of millions.
A large book could be written showing how the new versions attack
doctrines, confuse passages, and destroy cross-references by choosing
weak or vague English words to translate the Hebrew and Greek words.
This is not always the result of their using a corrupt text, many times
the Hebrew or Greek word translated is the same word the King James
translators translated. The new versions are just afraid to be as bold
For instance, nearly all of
the new "highly reliable" versions would have us believe that NO ONE in
the Old Testament had to worry about going to Hell. Why? Because they do not mention Hell ANYWHERE in the Old Testament!
In them all who died, whether they were "righteous" or "wicked," went
to "sheol" or the "grave." No wicked person was in danger of Hell. How
convenient this would be for an evil person if it was true. No matter
what his behavior is, he would go at death to the same place as the
righteous. These versions are more like the Jehovah's Witnesses' NWT
than they are like the King James. The world "hell"
cannot be found anywhere in the NWT. It transliterates all of the
Hebrew and Greek words instead of translating them. Though the
"fundamentalist" approved versions do mention Hell a few times in the
New Testament, (they have to, to appear as Bibles) they join with the
Hell-denying (and Christ-denying) Jehovah's Witnesses in the Old.
For an example of this look at Psalm 9:17 in the NASV and NIV. In the Authorized Version the "wicked are turned into HELL," but in these "perversions" the wicked need not fear about Hell, they need only be concerned about "sheol" in one (NASV) and the "grave" in the other (NIV). See how the verse has been watered down? "Sheol" sounds like a much more pleasant place to go to than "hell" does. Every English-speaking person knows what the word "hell"
means, but how many could define "sheol"? This is a very clever trick
of Satan. Take an uncommon word, "sheol" (sheol is NOT an English word,
it is a Hebrew word transliterated into English), and use it to replace
a very familiar and well established word (Hell) under the pretense it
is a more accurate rendering. "Sheol" is generally defined as "the
unseen state" or "the unseen world of the dead," but ALL are in this
state at death whether they are wicked or not, Likewise, ALL go to the grave whether they are wicked or not.
These two corruptions (along with many others) have essentially
destroyed this verse by eliminating a Hell for the wicked and those who
ignore God. See also Psalm 16:10, 18:5, 55:15, 86:13, 116:3, 139:8;
Proverbs 23:14; Isaiah 5:14, 14:9,15, etc.
The King James correctly shows the difference between the destination of the lost and saved by mentioning "hell" 31 times in the Old Testament, each occurrence a translation of "sheol." "Sheol" is also translated as "grave" and "pit" in the Authorized Version.
This indicates that the translators carefully examined the context of
each occurrence of the word and translated it accordingly. The new
"Bibles" have both the saved and lost going to the same place, but the Authorized Version correctly sends the wicked to Hell.
As for the New Testament, most of the new versions only have the word "hell" in them from 13 to 15 times. The King James,
however, has it 22 times. Obviously, someone is interested in removing
this word from the Bible. If you do not know by now who it is you will
never know. The King James Version"hell"
a total of 53 times, each occurrence giving the Bible believer
information about the destination or dwelling place of the lost. The NIV
mentions it a mere 14 times, cheating the believer (and the lost) out
of 39 other occurrences which provide vital information. I am sure this
pleases the "serpent" greatly. mentions
For the sake of brevity, we
will only look at a couple more of the numerous mistranslations found
in the modern versions, both dealing with the word of God. Look at 2
Timothy 2:15 in the NKJV (or any of the others). The Authorized Version clearly says that a believer is to "study...rightly dividing the word of truth" to show himself "approved unto God." The NKJV, however, knocks "study"
right out of the verse and replaces it with "be diligent." It has
removed the ONLY verse in the New Testament that commands a Christian
to study the scriptures. Is there any doubt who is behind this?
According to this version (and the others) a saint does not have to
study the Bible to show himself approved, he only has to "be diligent"
doing something. The NIV
also destroys the latter part of the verse by replacing "rightly
dividing the word of truth" with "who correctly handles the truth,"
completely eliminating a reference stating the Bible has divisions. Two
of the most essential practices a believer should be engaged in, studying the scriptures and learning how to rightly divide them cannot be found in any modern translation. No wonder many of today's churches are filled with ignorant Christians.
Again, take the NKJV
and read 2 Corinthians 2:17. The translators had to change this verse
because it exposes the very activity they are engaged in! The
Authorized Version says, "For we are not as many which CORRUPT the word of God...," but the NKJV (and the others) replaces"corrupt" with "peddle" (or something similar). No edition of the trueKing James Version
says "peddle." The result of this change is clear. One can peddle
something for profit without corrupting it, but once it is corrupted it
becomes impure. How well this describes the dozens of new translations
Christians have had to wade through for decades—impure. They
are corrupt "Bibles" that are peddled by "Bible" publishers.
Apparently, today's "Bible"
publishers are more concerned with making money than they are with
getting God's word out. How else can one explain a "new, more accurate,
clearer," version coming on the market an average of one every two or
three years? Does the English language change that drastically so
quickly? Of course not, it all boils down to "filthy lucre."
If they were primarily concerned about getting the word out, they could
print an edition of the Authorized Version with notes in the margin
that explained any difficult word and not spend thousands of dollars
publishing other translations. This edition could be sold for a very
reasonable price because there would be no committees to form,
translators to pay, or huge advertising campaigns to fund. But,
believer, we are being unrealistic. What motivates "Bible" publishers
is seemingly the same thing that motivates worldly publishers: competition, sales, reputation, and PROFIT. And if they have to "revise" (corrupt) the Bible to be "successful" and get ahead of the competition, then revise it they will.
Furthermore, since 1880 over
one hundred new translations have been published, each claiming to
"correct," "revise," "clear up," etc., all the "deficiencies" of one
yet NONE of these "improved" versions is considered inerrant by anyone.
Their translators claim to be able to find ALL the "errors" in the King James, but they can't produce a "Bible" that is error free! With over one hundred attempts to their credit they still don't have a PURE Bible.
What does this have to say about "scholarship"? Why would anyone follow
such an inconsistent crowd? All of the evidence we have presented above
should be proof enough that Bible corrupters are just as prevalent
today as they were in Paul's day.
For some more examples of corruption in translating look at the following verses in the NKJV comparing them with the Authorized Version:
Matthew 20:20; Romans 1:18,25; 1 Corinthians 1:22; Galatians 5:4;
Philippians 3:8,21; 1 Thessalonians 5:22,23; 1 Timothy 6:5,10,20; James
5:16; Jude 24; etc. For some Old Testament examples examine the
following verses in the NIV:
Genesis 1:28, 6:4, 22:8, 24:22, 43:34, 49:1,4,10,18; Exodus 3:14,
12:1-5, 34:7; Numbers 14:29, 21:5, 33:52; Job 41:1; Psalm 9:17, 12:6-7,
19:1, 22:20,30; etc.
Our purpose in this short book was to give the average Christian non-technical reasons to believe the King James Version
is the pure, inerrant word of God. Whether the reader is a young
believer trying to find the truth among all the different translations,
or an older saint who just wants to examine our position, we hope this
information will aid him in his endeavor.
Though there are more arguments we could present showing the nature and integrity of the Authorized Version,
the information we have presented above should be enough to cause any
Christian who has fallen for the "original autographs" and "oldest and
best texts" pitch to reconsider his position. Most believers when they
first get saved are inclined to trust the "experts" on issues they are
ignorant about, and this is understandable, but just because someone is
considered an expert does not mean he is one. Every Christian is
instructed to "search the scriptures" and "study"
to shew HIMSELF approved. This is so he can KNOW for himself what is
truth and what is error. These matters are much too important to be
left to the opinions of experts, especially when the experts contradict
As we mentioned earlier, one
does not have to be a Greek or Hebrew scholar to be able to determine
the truth. God never intended for a "priest class" of elite scholars to
have a lock on the words of life. He wants all of His children to have
access to His pure word so they can learn about Him, love Him, obey
Him, and grow in Him. Any saint who can read grade school English can
do just that.
From an objective viewpoint, the position we hold concerning the King James Version is really the safest position a Christian could take. Suppose we are wrong in believing the Authorized Version
is the pure, inerrant word of God, all God could charge us with in this
regard is believing the Bible He has given us TOO MUCH! On the other
hand, if the King James IS inerrant and God's absolute final authority
in English, all who have rejected it as such will have to answer for
NOT believing it (unbelief)! They will also have to explain why they
believed NO Bible on earth was inerrant after God's promises to
preserve His word. If Bible believers are wrong they will be judged for
having too much faith in the King James Version;King James critics are wrong they will be judged for faithlessness, infidelity, and for sowing unbelief! if the We choose to be associated with the former rather than the latter.
From the material above (and more like it) and the witness of the Holy Spirit, we are firmly convinced that any edition of the Authorized King James Version of 1611
(apart from any typographical errors, of course) is God's pure,
inerrant, infallible word; all other versions are inferior. We are
convinced its English text of both the Old and New Testaments IS the
very word of God and ALL the words God wants us to have. Unlike many
Christians today, we HAVE an inerrant Bible which we can SEE, HANDLE,
READ, STUDY, and CONSULT any time we wish. How unfortunate it is for
those who have a "Bible" that is not inerrant, or believe in one that
no longer exists.
Finally, even with the great amount of godly fruits God has brought about with the Authorized Version, we realize its critics will continue to mount charges against this blessed book. Because of this, we understand the King James
is likely to become less and less used in this Laodicean age
(Revelation 3:14), but this does not affect this blessed book's
integrity whatsoever. God is in this precious book, more than He is in
any other. And though Satan will continuously attempt to corrupt it,
God will have it in all its purity, somewhere, for His faithful to
read, learn from, love and enjoy. Do you have an inerrant Bible?