The Bible Version Issue


When you join a good Fundamentalist church, the first thing you’ll find out is that most have a peculiar fixation upon the King James Bible. This needs to be investigated, because even though what they’re saying sounds odd, conspiratorial and extreme – it’s also true.

If we use the historical viewpoint, the true churches have been using the Greek Textus Receptus family of manuscripts since they were written. The so-called “oldest and best” manuscripts actually were never used until 1881.

There is a considerable amount of work written by James White and Doug Kutilek against the KIng James and in support of the modern versions – but they omit facts, grossly exaggerate, offer untrue facts as evidence, and raise straw man arguments that they expend considerable energy into knocking down.

As you grow in experience in your church, you’ll hear many sermons on this issue, I’m sure. A good way to find out the truth of King James Bible only-ists is to use the Scripture Compare feature in Logos, if you have it. You’ll see how modern versions omit crucial words, and change the meanings.

My old pastor used to say to me, “There may be many differences in the Bible versions, but no essential doctrine is changed.” He was wrong, because he never examined this issue. He did, for the last several years of his ministry, use only the King James to avoid offending me (that’s the kind of pastor he was).

The point is, the modern versions do indeed change essential doctrines. When you compare the NASB to the KJV, ask yourself, “What is the NASB saying? What does this verse REALLY mean, as the modern versions say them?”

The first time you do this, you will abruptly close your modern translation, and never open it again.

“Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:” (Philippians 2:6, KJV)

“who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped,” (Philippians 2:6, NASB95)

“This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” (1 John 5:6–8, KJV)

“This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. (Missing: For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one) For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement (Missing: in one).” (1 John 5:6–8, NASB95)

Advertisements

King James Only-ism – invented by Seventh Day Adventist?


One of the usual attacks on King James only proponents is that it was invented by a Seventh Day Adventist.

There is an implication in that statement that Seventh Day Adventism is wrong – and yet most modern translation proponents have absolutely no problem calling the SDA Christians, when they should be dismissing them as a cult! To point out all the constant hypocrisy of the modern version proponents would require a full time job!

Yes, Benjamin Wilkerson did write a book advocating the King James Bible in 1930. So, let’s look at a quick timeline of KJV defenders, and see if it was really started by Wilkerson!

1819 John Henry Todd published A Vindication of Our Authorized Translation and Translators of the Bible.

1829 – John Jebb defends the KJV

1843 John Dowling published a defense of the KJV in “The Burning of the Bibles, Defence of the Protestant Version of the Scriptures Against the Attacks of Popish Apologists for the Champlain Bible Burners (Philadelphia: Nathan Moore, 1843)

1850 John Dowling published The Old-Fashioned Bible, or Ten Reasons against the Proposed Baptist Version of the New Testament (New York: Edward H. Fletcher, 1850)

1883 Dean John Burgon publishes The Revision Revised

1904 The Trinitarian Bible Society begins publishing articles protesting the Critical Greek Text of Wescott Hort.

1924-25 William Aberhard publishes The Latest of Modern Movements: Or What about the Revised Version of the Bible

1924 Philip Mauro publishes Which Version? Authorized or Revised?

1930 – Benjamin Wilkerson publishes his book

Hm.

So, apparently Wilkerson was just following in several others’ footsteps!

so much for that slander.

King James – Preserved Word?


I was prowling back on the 22nd, looking to see if there’s any other free Bible software worth looking at, and getting disappointed. I stopped at Costas Sturgios’ website for Theword Bible software, to see if it’s gotten any better. I know some people talk about how they love it – I despise it. When I first started this blog on my old laptop, I was alternating between E-Sword and theword, and kind of leaning toward Theword, but every time I tried to minimize the program, I’d close it, because Costas set the windows up slightly off from where the industry standard are, and the buttons slightly smaller.
It was irritating, but better than the incredible delays from E-Sword. Then someone bought me Bible Explorer, and I stopped using both, and got rid of Theword.
Anyways, while poking around his web site, I did see that there was a new free book offered on the main website, with a title along the lines of “Pure TRanslation?”
Okay, I know where you’re getting at with that. I read the blurb, and knew where the book was going. Apparently the author claims to have been King James Only for “many years”, and “researched the Bible Version issue”, and “discovered the truth behind the false claims”, and a disparaging comment about not being “deceived by cults” any longer.
There’s King James Only, and then there’s KING JAMES ONLY. I don’t know which of them you refer to. Were you part of the Ruckman cult, the Riplinger cult, or were you convinced of the truth of the Textus Receptus and Hebrew Masoretic text?
If you’re part of the first and/or second, then I can’t address that. Yeah, you were in a cult. Seriously. And what you were researching mostly was backlash against that cult.
Here’s the facts, that I’ve never seen disputed. People bring up Ruckman (who has passed away) – but to quote David Cloud, “I believe Peter Ruckman has done more damage to the King James Bible issue than good.” He’s destroyed any credibility we could have had. And Sam Gipp is fond of saying, “Ruckmanite is what they call you when they’re losing the argument.”
Gail Riplinger’s bizarre teachings on the King James are some of the shoddy scholarship you see out of some Christians – you know, the “He was published by Zondervan, and you know who else is published by Zondervan, so there’s a connection, and they’re undoubtedly doing goat slayings together at midnight!”
She is utterly opposed to anyone writing any book, dictionary, encyclopedia, concordance or lexicon on the King James Bible – unless its her. If she does it, it’s okay. Her “research” on the Strong’s Concordance was embarrassing. Again, it’s a black eye for King James believers.

Let me answer someone I respect right now, because he’s got a personality quirk that’s just as bad. D. A. Waite is a stalwart defender of the King James Bible. But if you don’t agree with him, you run the serious risk of having pamphlets printed about you where he lambasts you publicly, frying you mercilessly and almost slanderously. Witness the recent revelations that there were some financial irregularities in the Dean Burgon society, and several long term members resigned over it. Waite promptly attacked them publicly. If you did some things wrong financially through ignorance, then you need to appoint a treasurer and solve the issue in good confidence. If you had a moral failing, then repent of it, hand the money to someone else and get on with the work! But don’t publicly attack those who resigned from the DBS over it! (I have never been a member, but I suppose I should join someday).

Okay, we’ve addressed the cultic claims. Now let’s address the research.
The scholarship has been done many times already. Elzevir, Erasmus, Stephanus… they went through and looked at the Bible manuscripts in Greek, and determined the proper readings out of the manuscripts used.
There’s your research.
When the VAST MAJORITY of the manuscripts belong to the Antioch family of manuscripts, and less than fifty belong to Alexandrian, it’s obvious that those 47 manuscripts are flawed, erroneous, or deliberately corrupted – not the vast majority. I did a series earlier this year on textual criticism, and some of you doubtless were shocked at the deliberate agendas behind the spurious and arbitrary hypotheses behind the textual criticism. I stated the origins, I stated the rules, and I examined those rules in light of accepted Biblical interpretation and logic, and those rules were found to violate accepted Hermeneutics.
By the way, if you’re looking for information for a dissertation or thesis on the Bible Version issue, I’ve got enough on this web site to pretty much write one.
Hmmm….
Anyway, The modern translations are based upon Wescott Hort, and that’s most definitely a red flag. They decided that out of the two manuscripts of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, Vaticanus was the most accurate.
Why?
A feeling. Yup, that’s what they said! A Feeling! Wow… amazing scholarship there! Was this the “scholarship” that the author of that book uncovered that convinced him?
Or was it the Textual criticism rule of “The most clear reading must give way to the most obscure”, which is the direct opposite of the Hermeneutic principle of “We accept the clear readings when they are majority, and interpret the obscure in light of the clear”?
Yessir, I’m convinced too! A “Feeling”! Wow! How come I never saw scholarship like this from Stephanus?
Ready for a truth? And I DARE, double dog dare any textual critic to deny this – but if the Textus Receptus source documents were even one tenth as corrupt and as heavily edited as Vaticanus, they’d be screaming that fact loudly. With many passages edited as many as six times by six different scribes, Vaticanus is as reliable as a witness who keeps changing their story. We acccept manuscripts that are a “true copy”. Heavily edited manuscripts are rejected, which is why Stephanus and the Elzevir brothers never bothered with Vaticanus.
Here’s an assertion, that accords with the Bible, which is inspired and inerrant… If the Alexandrian family of 47 manuscripts were indeed the ones preferred by God, they would have remained in constant use by the churches. The Christians copied their Bibles from other manuscripts – that’s why the Antioch family has so many thousands. I had one well meaning atheist or textual critic, I don’t know which, try to come on here and say authoritatively, “We don’t have 5,400 manuscripts… we have only a few hundred.” That’s incorrect. You have to compile the list of lectionaries, uncials, miniscules, papyri and codexes. If he was talking about just codexes, yes, he was right. If on the other hand he was talking about complete manuscripts in the various forms, then he’s completely wrong.
Since the Alexandrian family has ony 47 copies or so, then the Alexandrian manuscripts WERE NOT THE ONES PRESERVED BY GOD. Indeed, since they deliberately change words and remove entire verses that support the cardinal doctrines of Christianity (deity of Christ, vicarious atonement, the Trinity), the evidence supports the facts that these are heretical manuscripts, written by heretics such as Ebionites, the Arians, and the Gnostics.
So… why are the “scholars” pushing for manuscripts that deny the deity of Christ? That deny the Trinity? Was THIS the research that convinced that author???
Here’s the bottom line. Like me, he’s probably got some software with many, many cool translations. And the pressure to conform, to stop swimming upstream all the time is enormous. He caved. That’s it. He caved in to the pressure, to the temptation.
my seminary strongly advocates makiing sure before you accept the call to the ministry to make SURE your doctrinal stances. Know that you know that you know.
And now it’s out there that he caved. And if he ever repents, and REALLY examines the issues instead of trying to justify his compromising…
He’s going to lose all credibility forever.

The NKJV Part 1


Philippians 2:5-11(NKJV)

5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. 9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Philippians 2:5-11(KJV)

5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:  6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: 8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: 10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

This is interesting to me. The New King James literally denies the death, burial and ressurection of Jesus Christ.

Look at verse 8.

From what training I have in lifesaving (I went through the Red Cross Emergency CPR-AED-First Aid training over two days, which requires refresher courses it seems every other month or so!), I can tell you that anyone’s respiration or heartbeat brought at the point of death, means they are still alive.

No kidding. If you’re doing CPR and STOP when someone is at the point of death, depending on the state you’re in and the circumstances you could be held liable for abandoning CPR while still alive.

Arrythmic heart beat and greatly reduced respiration is still alive. Apparently, the New King James holds to the “Swoon” theory, which was disproved by incredulous doctors over a century and a half ago.

The NKJV says Christ was obedient to the point of death. That’s alarming, as it’s either saying he did not die, or that Christ ceased to be obedient at that point.

The NKJV really frightens me. So many people read it, without stopping to analyze what it is saying.

The BIBLE says Jesus Christ died on the cross. The Bible says Jesus Christ is always obedient to the Father, whom He is equal to.

The NKJV is saying either that Christ did not die… or that He ceased to be obedient when he was almost dead.

The translators and everyone who worked on that translation will have to answer to God for it.

I would not want to be them.

Correct Doctrine 15


4.11 Jesus Christ offered up his shed blood and His substitutionary death for us as a redeeming sacrifice, reconciling us to God once and for all in a permanent Salvation which cannot be lost. His blood purifies us and renders us blameless, cleansing us of all sins (John 3:14-15, 5:24, 10:27-30, Romans 8:38-39, 1 Thess 1:10, 5:9-10, 1 Tim. 2:6, Titus 2:14, Heb. 1:3, 2:9-10, 7:27, 9:12-14, 10:12, 14).

Today is a simple, but profoundly important doctrine to understand. It is the blood of Jesus. We even sing songs about it.

26 When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die. Ezekiel 18:26 (KJV)

One sin is all it takes to send us to Hell forever. It requires blood to save us.

6 And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the LORD, a ram without blemish out of the flock, with thy estimation, for a trespass offering, unto the priest: 7 And the priest shall make an atonement for him before the LORD: and it shall be forgiven him for any thing of all that he hath done in trespassing therein. Leviticus 6:6-7 (KJV)

21 And whosoever offereth a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the LORD to accomplish his vow, or a freewill offering in beeves or sheep, it shall be perfect to be accepted; there shall be no blemish therein. Leviticus 22:21 (KJV)

The Jewish counteri-missionary (usually trained by Jews for Judaism) will here interject: “there is nothing in the Torah about the offering of a man as a sin offering!”

You’re right. Absolutely right.

7 And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? 8 And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together. Genesis 22:7-8 (KJV)

We cannot offer a man as a sin offering. Men are not perfect. We are blemished, and invalid according to Lev. 6:6. However, the Lord Jesus Christ is GOD, as we settled in the last few posts. God provided Himself.

We cannot save ourselves. Our sins separate us from God forever. We are sinful, blemished. There is no provision for us. We are doomed.

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16 (KJV)

28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Matthew 26:28 (KJV)

3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born? 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. John 3:3-6 (KJV)

As you see, the blood of Jesus atones for our sins. His death created a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins. And when He ressurected, He brought us up with Him.

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; Romans 3:25 (KJV)

7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; Ephesians 1:7 (KJV)

14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Colossians 1:14 (KJV)

4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. Hebrews 10:4 (KJV)

5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, Revelation 1:5 (KJV)

Propitiation means “Satisfaction of a debt.” The levitical offerings were effective only in that they were a picture, a “type”, looking forward to the sacrifice of Christ. They served to remove only that sin. The entire system of keeping the Law was to make one keenly aware how ugly we are in the eyes of God, how sin-laden. After only living it a year, the honest person, understanding the Gospel, would be keenly aware of the crushing burden of the Law.

But Christ took all that away. We do not any longer need to keep the law. The law could not save us. Only the death and ressurection of Jesus Christ can do that, by His shed blood.

An interesting study is to take modern Bibles and see how many references to the Blood are in the New Testament. Then check that number against the King James. You’ll see that the modern Bibles remove many references to the Blood. As I’ve pointed out before, one has to stop and say, “You know, I can’t accept it’s a coincidence any longer.” The verses that are altered, removed, or added to always affect some cardinal doctrine. Usually the deity of Christ, the effecaciousness of the blood, salvation by grace alone, fasting… in short, they always affect doctrines that Baptists have lived and died for for 20 centuries. And the enemy finally figured out he can neutralize those Baptists just by changing their Bibles. Wake up, people! Who is on the Lord’s side?

Here are today’s verses. You might want to read your New King James or NASB and see how the modern versions subtly change these verses. Some will be drastically changed, some will not seem to be affected at first. But change them… they do.

14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. John 3:14-15 (KJV)

24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. John 5:24 (KJV)

27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: 28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. 29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand. 30 I and my Father are one. John 10:27-30 (KJV)

38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, 39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 8:38-39 (KJV)

10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come. 1 Thessalonians 1:10 (KJV)

9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 10 Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him. 1 Thessalonians 5:9-10 (KJV)

6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. 1 Timothy 2:6 (KJV)

14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. Titus 2:14 (KJV)

3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; Hebrews 1:3 (KJV)

9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man. 10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. Hebrews 2:9-10 (KJV)

27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself. Hebrews 7:27 (KJV)

12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. 13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh: 14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? Hebrews 9:12-14 (KJV)

12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; Hebrews 10:12 (KJV)

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified. Hebrews 10:14 (KJV)

Correct Doctrine 12


4.4 Jesus Christ was born of a virgin in fulfillment of Biblical prophesy (Isa 7:14, 9:6, Micah 5:2).

4.5 Jesus Christ was perfect, and led a sinless life (2 Cor. 5:21, Heb 4:15, 7:26-28, Mat. 27:3-4, Mark 1:24, Luke 1:35, 4:34, 1 John 3:5, Rev 3:7).

4.6 The Lord Jesus Christ died on Golgotha/Calvary for all mankind as a substitutionary offering, taking our place upon the cross, suffering and dying for our sake. Our sins died with Him, and through His shed blood we have remission of sins and Eternal life. Jesus Christ offered himself up for us once and for all as a sin offering, securing Salvation for us, and imputing His righteousness to us all who believe in Him (Isa. 53:12, Mat. 12:39-40, 16:21, Isa 26:19, Acts 5:30-32, 2 Cor. 5:21, Col 2:12, Rev. 1:5).

Today, we take a look at some doctrines that, like the last two posts, have been viciously attacked in sermons, books, and in modern Bibles. Just in case anyone’s going to be contentious, I’m going to put the actual Greek and Hebrew on the page to prove it. I’ve done that once or twice, such as in the Word Faith teachings, because it’s amazing how viciously some doctrines are attacked.

Now, there’s a Calvinist Apologetics blog I’ve got bookmarked (Why? Calvinists just seem to thrive on Apologetics, and the need to defend the faith. I’m not criticizing them for that at all – but my question now is, why aren’t Biblical Baptists obsessed with these issues?). This blog had a post that attacked a good Baptist for suggesting that the modern Bibles are part of a deliberate conspiracy to corrupt Biblical doctrines. I saw a post on WordPress just last week, where a christian tore apart the King James translation of Phil. 2:6, intending to show that the Greek supported the modern bibles.

Well, yeah… cha! You went to the United Bible Text greek, which is an artificial construct, appearing nowhere in the world. Wescott and Hort built their WH Greek Text, based upon a possible forgery and a copy of a flawed manuscript. When Aleph disagreed with B (as it did in over 10,000 places), they went with B. Why? They had a feeling it was the most accurate one. Read their own words, people! this is what they admit to! And Both Nestle-Alland and UBS are almost perfect copies of WH. If he’d been honest, he’d have looked at the Greek text that Christians had used until Wescott and Hort did their nefarious deed.

My point is, these verses that the modern verses corrupt are always certain topics. Why isn’t it ever verses like, 5 For he loveth our nation, and he hath built us a synagogue. Luke 7:5 (KJV), or, 1 And again he entered into Capernaum after some days; and it was noised that he was in the house. Mark 2:1 (KJV).

If it were random, not deliberate choices… you’d find verses like that affected. No, its always verses on the Deity of Christ, or fasting, or the Blood of Jesus. That’s when you say, “Okay, it’s a conspiracy. It’s deliberate.”

So in my posts on Christology, the King James issue rears its head over and over again. Sorry, I have no control over that – because when you read it in modern translations, these doctrines are always perverted.

21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. 2 Corinthians 5:21 (KJV)

21 He made the One who did not know sin to be sin for us, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. 2 Corinthians 5:21 (HCSB)

21 For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God. 2 Corinthians 5:21 (ESV)

21 For God made Christ, who never sinned, to be the offering for our sin, so that we could be made right with God through Christ. 2 Corinthians 5:21 (NLT)

2 Cor. 5:21 refers to Christ being the sinless offering for our sins, and our being made righteous because of His atoning death and ressurection. The KJV supports that. The modern versions say rather that WE become the Righteousness of God – not the Lord. WE are MADE righteous by His imputed righteous. We do not BECOME righteousness, we are MADE righteous because of what He has done.

The Lord Jesus Christ is God in human flesh. We dealt with that last time. If you read the King James Bible only, you gain a greater awareness of the power and majesty of God. It’s downplayed in the RSV, ESV, NASB, NIV, NLT, LB, GNB, etc.

The lord was born of a virgin – not a young woman. As apologists are forever pointing out, the word Alma in the Bible is always used for a virgin. It may mean “young woman”, but it never has been used for a young woman who was not a virgin. The conception and birth of the Lord was a miracle. Why would you read a Bible that downplays or questions that?

The Lord led a sinless life. He never sinned, unlike us. We sin minute by minute.

“Wait! I thought we were made sinless by His atonement!”

The penalty of sin was taken off of us. Our sins are forgotten and forgiven. But when you do something that is sinful, what do you call that? What does that make you? Christians are not “sinless.” There is no such thing as “Sinless perfection” in this life and world. We will wrestle with our flesh up until the moment of our death or the Rapture, whichever comes first – and I am growing convinced that unless I pass on out of due season, I will be bodily raptured sometiime in the next few years. I’m going to struggle with sin the entire time I walk this earth. But I am spared the penalty of that sin. And the book of 1 John tells me the Lord is faithful and just to forgive my sins, if I repent and confess them to Him.

15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Hebrews 4:15 (KJV)

26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; 27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself. 28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore. Hebrews 7:26-28 (KJV)

3 Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, 4 Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that. Matthew 27:3-4 (KJV)

24 Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art, the Holy One of God. Mark 1:24 (KJV)

35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. Luke 1:35 (KJV)

5 And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. 1 John 3:5 (KJV)

7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; Revelation 3:7 (KJV)

12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. Isaiah 53:12 (KJV)

39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: 40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. Matthew 12:39-40 (KJV)

21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. Matthew 16:21 (KJV)

19 Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead. Isaiah 26:19 (KJV)

30 The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree. 31 Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. 32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him. Acts 5:30-32 (KJV)

21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. 2 Corinthians 5:21 (KJV)

12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. Colossians 2:12 (KJV)

5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, Revelation 1:5 (KJV)

“King James only” prejudice


I was dumbfounded to read a blog post today written by someone who slammed the King James Only position.

His points were:

King James Only advocates cause division.

Well, actually, no we don’t! To cause division, we have to deviate from an accepted, standard position, then find fault with those who do not do likewise.

The accepted, standard position of Christianity was the King James Bible for 300 years. When Wescott and Hort brought in other Greek texts, it was a direct violation of the rules placed upon them by those that sponsored the work. The work was supported and endorsed by Charles Spurgeon. When he found out the day after publication of the Revised Version Bible (when the translators published the Greek Text they used, along with notes) many were horrified and protested. Wescott and Hort answered merely with a pamphlet, ignoring the objections, merely giving their rules which started out with rule #1 – “The Bible is to be treated like any other text.”

Well, the Bible is not just any other text.

It is the Bible. It is the inspired, preserved, inerrant, unchanging word of God. Wescott and Hort started out with the premise that God’s word was full of errors, and the original was somehow lost. This contradicts several Scriptures, but that’s okay… Wescott and Hort didn’t literally believe the Bible, anyway. Go read their writings. You’ll see.

For some reason, the King James Only advocates often attack Calvinism, and are dividing the Church.

That’s amusing, if you know the history of Calvinism, and are watching how Calvinism is subverting the Southern Baptist Convention. They are slowly but surely engaging in methods to get their pastors into churches. They withhold the information they are Calvinists.. until the Deacon board finally figures out around year two or three, when the Pastor finally begins teaching through Romans, and begins pushing Electionism.

Maybe we’re RESPONDING to the unyielding and constant attacks from Calvinists! Maybe its because the King James only believers read their Bibles, and believe them!

Incidentally, I think Will Kinney, a man who I respect a great deal is a Calvinist – and he’s the AUTHORITY on King James Only. So, the claim on this blog seems to be false.

I have reasons why I will not use only a King James Bible, and I own the ESV, NASB…

And those reasons are…? What those reasons are is simple – they are… not given. We’re left to GUESS what they can be.

Could it be you don’t get into reasons because like most people who have prejudices against the King James Only position is… that you’ve never investigated it for yourself? I was a MVO believer myself, with my brand new NASB MacArther Study Bible and my two or three NIV’s…

when I investigated the issue. I was ready to BLAST the KIng James Only position! I was so gonna debunk that nonsense!

Until I began to investigate. It took 15 minutes of study, and 45 minutes more to be convinced. I was wrong. I was convinced and convicted.

Now I am a DIEHARD KIng James Only believer. If you investigate it with an open mind… you’ll be convinced too.

What are you waiting for???