From the time of its publication in 1611 the King James Bible has been used to spread the Gospel throughout the whole world. With the conquest of the British Empire behind it, it crossed the Atlantic to the United States. Landing here it began to permeate young America with its ideals. Its truths led to the establishment of an educational system, based on Scripture, that was unparalleled in the world. It instilled in men the ideals of freedom and personal liberty, thoughts that were included in the US Constitution. It commissioned preachers of righteousness who, on foot and horseback, broke trails into the wilderness and spread the Truth of the gospel and of right living. And eager young missionaries began to scour the globe with little more than a King James Bible and God’s Holy Spirit.
In the 20th century the King James Bible has come under heavy attack. A flood of new translations are trying to substitute it. Which translation is the best one? Does it matter which translation is being used?
1. History of the Textus Receptus from which the King James Bible is translated
2. History of Nestle’s Greek Text from which most modern versions are translated
3. About Westcott and Hort, the editors of the spurious Greek text
4. About the translators of the King James Bible
5. The King James Bible compared to modern translations – some examples
1. History of the Textus Receptus from which the King James Bible is translated
The surviving witnesses of the Greek New Testament text which we now possess are found to generally fall into two groups: the majority of the texts stem from Antioch, and a small minority from Alexandria.
These two texts disagree consistently concerning the major doctrines of the Bible. They are found to disagree on readings concerning the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, the Blood atonement, Christ’s second coming, the deity of Christ, and many other fundamental Christian doctrines.
The text which the King James Bible is based on stems from Antioch, the place that the Holy Spirit chose for the base of Christian operations after Stephen’s martyrdom. It spread through Syria and Europe through its translation into the Syrian Peshitto version and the Old Latin Vulgate. There are still 350 copies of the Peshitto in existence today as a testimony to this widespread usage in the years since 150 A.D.
The “Original” Vulgate
The Old Latin Vulgate was used by the Christians in the churches of the Waldenses, Gauls, Celts, Albigenses, and other fundamental groups throughout Europe. This Latin version became so used and beloved by orthodox Christians and was in such common use by the common people that it assumed the term “Vulgate” as a name. Vulgate comes from “vulgar” which is the Latin word for “common”. It was so esteemed for its faithfulness to the deity of Christ and its accurate reproductions of the originals, that these early Christians let Jerome’s Roman Catholic translation “sit on the shelf”. Jerome’s translation was not used by the true Biblical Christians for almost a millennium after it was translated from corrupted manuscripts by Jerome in 380 A.D. Even then it only came into usage due to the death of Latin as the common language, and the violent, wicked persecutions waged against true believers by Pope Gregory IX during his reign from 1227 to 1242 A.D.
The old Latin versions were used longest by the western Christians who would not bow to the authority of Rome – e.g. the Donatists; the Irish in Ireland, Britain, and the Continent; the Albigenses, etc.
It was the Antioch text which Luther used for his German translation of the New Testament of 1522. He got it from Erasmus of Rotterdam. His Greek text was called the “Textus Receptus”. This text and the translations of it into German, English and other languages kindled the fires of the reformation all over Europe. The Textus Receptus is the Greek original from which the King James Version is translated.
2. History of Nestle’s Greek Text from which most modern versions are translated
Most modern translations are based on Nestle’s Greek Text from 1898 (except the New King James Version and New Scofield Version). This text is also known as the Egyptian Text or the Alexandrian Text which was the basis for the critical Greek Text of Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort. The Westcott and Hort Text of 1881 was collated with Weymouth’s third edition and Tischendorf’s eighth edition by Eberhard Nestle in 1898 to become what is known as the Nestle’s Greek New Testament.
Its two outstanding trademarks in history are that orthodox Christianity has never used it and that the Roman Catholic Church has militantly (read that “bloodily”) supported it.
The text is based on only a few manuscripts. The two most important ones are called Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
The Character of Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
Sinaiticus from all outward appearances looks very beautiful. But it contains many spurious books such as the “Shepherd of Hermes,” the “Epistle of Barnabas,” and even the “Didache”. It has survived time well, but being in good physical shape by no means makes its contents trustworthy. The Codex is covered with alterations… brought in by at least ten different revisers.
Vaticanus, as its name implies, is in the Vatican library at Rome. No one knows when it was placed in the Vatican library, but its existence was first made known in 1841.
This Codex omits many portions of Scripture vital to Christian doctrine. Vaticanus omits Genesis 1:1 through Genesis 46:28; Psalm 106 through 138; Matthew 16:2-3; Romans 16:24; the Pauline Pastoral Epistles; Revelation; and everything in Hebrews after 9:14.
It seems suspicious indeed that a MS possessed by the Roman Catholic Church omits the portion of the book of Hebrews which exposes the “mass” as totally useless. (Please read Hebrews 10:10-12). The “mass” in conjunction with the false doctrine of purgatory go hand-in-hand to form a perpetual money-making machine for Rome. It also omits portions of Scripture telling of the creation (Genesis), the prophetic details of the crucifixion (Psalm 22), and, of course, the portion which prophesies of the destruction of Babylon (Rome), the great whore of Revelation chapter 17.
Vaticanus, though intact physically, is found to be of very poor literary quality. It exhibits numerous places where the scribe has written the same word or phrase twice in succession. The mass of corrections and scribal changes render its testimony highly suspicious and questionable.
Vaticanus leaves out words or whole clauses no less than 1,491 times. It bears traces of careless transcriptions on every page. Codex Sinaiticus abounds with errors of the eye and pen to an extent not indeed unparalleled, but happily rather unusual in documents of first-rate importance. On many occasions 10, 20, 30, 40 words are dropped through very carelessness. Letters and words, even whole sentences, are frequently written twice over, or begun and immediately cancelled; while that gross blunder whereby a clause is omitted because it happens to end in the same words as the clause preceding, occurs no less than 115 times in the New Testament.
The Origin of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
It seems that this type of text was a local text of Alexandria, Egypt of which Eusebius (Bishop of Caesarea) made fifty copies to fulfill a request by Emperor Constantine. Unfortunately Eusebius turned to the education centre in Egypt and got a “scholarly revision” instead of turning to Antioch for the pure text which was universally accepted by the true Christians.
Why would Eusebius choose Alexandria over Antioch? Primarily because he was a great admirer of Origen, an Egyptian scholar. Origen, though once exalted by modern-day Christianity as a trustworthy authority, has since been found to have been a heretic who interpreted the Bible in the light of Greek philosophy. He propagated the heresy that Jesus Christ was a “created” God. This is taken from the corrupt Alexandrian Text’s rendition of John 1:1-5 and John 3:13, a corruption which Origen is responsible for when he revised the original Text to read in agreement with his personal heresy!
It is quite possible that Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are two of these fifty copies ordered by Constantine or are copies of those copies.
The Alexandrian text fell into disuse about 500 A.D. while the original Antioch Text was spreading true Christianity throughout Europe. The Alexandrian Text was abandoned between 500 to 1881, merely revised in our day and stamped as genuine.
Brook Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort published their text in 1881. Hort published a translation of the New Testament in 1884.
In 1901 another round was fired in the form of the American Revised Version, later called the American Standard Version (An intentional misnomer since it never became the ‘standard’ for anything). This version, other than being the darling of critical American scholarship met a dismal end when, twenty-three years later, it was so totally rejected by God’s people that its copyright had to be sold. (Does this sound like God’s blessing?)
The ASV was further revised and republished in 1954 as the Revised Standard Version (RSV). This sequence of events has repeated itself innumerable times, resulting in the New American Standard Version (NASV) of 1960, the New Scofield Version (NSV) of 1967, the New International Version (NIV) of 1978, and the New King James Version (NKJB) of 1979 to name but a few.
The process has never changed. Every new version that has been launched has been, without exception, a product of Satan’s Alexandrian philosophy which rejects the premise of a perfect Bible. Furthermore, they have been copied, on the most part, from the corrupt Alexandrian manuscript. (Although a few have been translated from pure Antiochian manuscripts after they were tainted by the Alexandrian philosophy.)
Antioch vs. Alexandria
As said above, the about 5250 manuscripts of the New Testament can be divided into two groups: the vast majority coming from Antioch (the original text) and a very small minority from Alexandria (the spurious text).
Alexandria and Egypt are mentioned in the Bible exclusively in a negative way: see Genesis 12:10-12; Exodus 1:11-14; Exodus 20:2; Deuteronomy 4:20; Deuteronomy 17:16; Revelation 11:8; Acts 6:9; Acts 18:24; Acts 21; Acts 27:6.
Alexandria was a centre of education and philosophy (Colossians 2:8) which it received from Athens in about 100 B.C. (Acts 17:16). There was a school of the Scriptures founded there by one Pantaenus who was a philosopher. Pantaenus interpreted scripture both philosophically and allegorically. That is to say that philosophically he believed truth to be relative, not absolute. He did not believe that the Bible was infallible. By looking at the Bible allegorically he believed that men such as Adam, Noah, Moses, and David existed only in Jewish poetry and were not true historical characters. He was succeeded as head of the school by Clement of Alexandria and later by Origen. Men who shared his scepticism.
It was Origen, deceived by the duel intoxicants of education and philosophy who upon receipt of pure copies of scripture altered them to parallel his twisted thinking. He is the father of all Bible critics and is not only responsible for the physical manuscripts which delete such verses as Luke 24:40, Acts 8:37 and 1 John 5:7, but he is also responsible for the Alexandrian philosophy parroted by so many of our fundamental scholars who claim that “The Bible is perfect and infallible” with one breath and then state, “The Bible has mistakes and mistranslations” with the very next. It is this demented ideology that gave birth to the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts in the first place. Thus we see that not only are the physical manuscripts of Alexandria corrupt and to be rejected, but the Alexandrian philosophy, that the Bible has mistakes in it and must be corrected, is even more subtle and dangerous and must be forsaken by true Bible believers.
Antioch on the other hand is mentioned only in a positive light in the Bible:
One of the first seven deacons was Nicolas of Antioch (Acts 6:5). He is the only deacon whose hometown is given.
Acts 11:21 tells us that God’s Holy Spirit worked mightily in Antioch and that a “great number” were saved. We see then that the first great gentile awakening occurred in Antioch.
In Acts 11:25-26 we find Barnabas departing for Tarsus to seek the young convert Saul. Upon finding Saul, Barnabus does not bring him back to Jerusalem (and certainly not to Alexandria). He returns with him to Antioch, the spiritual capital of the New Testament church.
In Acts 11:26 we find that born again believers were called “Christians” for the first time at Antioch. Thus every time we believers refer to ourselves as Christians we complete a spiritual connection to our spiritual forefathers in Antioch. Antioch is to the Christian what Plymouth Rock is to the American.
In Acts 11:29-30 we find that the saints who God is blessing in Antioch, must send monetary aid to the saints in Jerusalem.
Acts 13:1-3: The first missionary journey mentioned in Scripture originated in Antioch, with Christians from Antioch.
What was it about Antioch that was so attractive to God that He chose it as the centre of New Testament Christianity?
Antioch although it was a cultural centre, had not abandoned itself to pagan religion, pagan education and pagan philosophy, as had such prominent sites as Rome, Athens, and Alexandria. It might also be weighed that Antioch, unlike the above-mentioned cities, or even Jerusalem, was located almost exactly in the middle of the known world, and was built at the crossing of the East-West trade routes. It even boasted a seaport, via the Orontes River. These are all important attributes for the capital of Christianity, which is known for its mobility.
It may be that many of the original autographs of Paul’s epistles were penned in Antioch. In the second century, a disciple by the name of Lucian founded a school of the Scriptures in Antioch. Lucian was noted for his mistrust of pagan philosophy. His school magnified the authority and divinity of Scripture and taught that the Bible was to be taken literally, not figuratively as the philosophers of Alexandria taught. So Antioch is not only the point of origin for the correct family of Bible manuscripts, but is also the source for the ideology that accepts the Bible as literally and perfectly God’s words.
From Antioch we receive the pure line of manuscripts culminating in what is known as the “Received Text” or Textus Receptus.
3. About Westcott and Hort
Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1903) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892) have been highly controversial figures in biblical history.
That these men should lend their influence to a family of MSS which have a history of attacking and diluting the major doctrines of the Bible should not come as a surprise. Oddly enough, neither man believed that the Bible should be treated any differently than the writings of the lost historians and philosophers!
We must also confront Hort’s disbelief that the Bible was infallible: “If you make a decided conviction of the absolute infallibility of the N.T. practically a sine qua non for cooperation, I fear I could not join you.” He also stated: “But I am not able to go as far as you in asserting the absolute infallibility of a canonical writing.”
(All quotes are taken from the book: “An Understandable History of the Bible”, by Samuel C. Gipp)
Hort had great admiration for Charles Darwin! To his colleague, B.F. Westcott, he wrote excitedly: “…Have you read Darwin? How I should like to talk with you about it! In spite of difficulties, I am inclined to think it unanswerable. In any case it is a treat to read such a book.” And to John Ellerton he writes: “But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with… My feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable. If so, it opens up a new period.”
Hort was also a lover of Greek philosophy. In writing to Mr. A. Macmillan, he stated: “You seem to make (Greek) philosophy worthless for those who have received the Christian revelation. To me, though in a hazy way, it seems full of precious truth of which I find nothing, and should be very much astonished and perplexed to find anything in revelation.”
He did not believe in a personal devil: “Now if there be a devil, he cannot merely bear a corrupted and marred image of God; he must be wholly evil, his name evil, his every energy and act evil. Would it not be a violation of the divine attributes for the Word to be actively the support of such a nature as that?”
He did not believe in hell: “Certainly in my case it proceeds from no personal dread; when I have been living most godlessly, I have never been able to frighten myself with visions of a distant future, even while I ‘held’ the doctrine.”Rather, he believed in purgatory: “The idea of purgation, of cleansing as by fire, seems to me inseparable from what the Bible teaches us of the Divine chastisements; and, though little is directly said rejecting the future state, it seems to me incredible that the Divine chastisements should in this respect change their character when this visible life is ended.
In fact, Hort considered the teachings of Christ’s atonement as heresy! “Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ’s bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy.”
Dr. Hort also believed that the Roman Catholic teaching of “baptismal regeneration” was more correct than the “evangelical” teaching: “…at the same time in language stating that we maintain ‘Baptismal Regeneration’ as the most important of doctrines… the pure ‘Romish’ view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical.” He also stated that, “Baptism assures us that we are children of God, members of Christ and His body, and heirs of the heavenly kingdom.”
Also suspect is Hort’s delving into the supernatural along with his good friend, Brooke Foss Westcott, and others in what was called the ‘Ghostly Guild’: “Westcott, Gorham, C.B., Scott, Benson, Bradshaw, Luard, etc., and I have started a society for the investigation of ghosts and all supernatural appearances and effects, being all disposed to believe that such things really exist, and ought to be discriminated from hoaxes and mere subjective delusions; we shall be happy to obtain any good accounts well authenticated with names. Westcott is drawing up a schedule of questions. Cope calls us the ‘Cock and Bull Club’; our own temporary name is the ‘Ghostly Guild’.”
Unfortunately for the “new Bible” supporters, Dr. Westcott’s credentials are even more anti-biblical. Westcott did not believe that Genesis 1-3 should be taken literally. He also thought that “Moses” and “David” were poetic characters whom Jesus Christ referred to by name only because the common people accepted them as authentic. Westcott states: “No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history – I could never understand how anyone reading them with open eyes could think they did.”
Westcott was also a doubter of the biblical account of miracles: “I never read an account of a miracle but I seem instinctively to feel its improbability, and discover somewhat of evidence in the account of it.” If a great fundamental preacher of our day were to make this statement, he would be called apostate, but what then of Westcott?
Westcott believed Heaven to be a state and not a literal place. Note the following quotations from Bishop Westcott: “No doubt the language of the Rubric is unguarded, but it saves us from the error of connecting the Presence of Christ’s glorified humanity with place; ‘heaven is a state and not a place…’ We may reasonably hope, by patient, resolute, faithful, united endeavour to find heaven about us here, the glory of our earthly life.”
4. About the translators of the King James Bible
The men on the translation committee of the King James Bible were, without dispute, the most learned men of their day and vastly qualified for the job which they undertook. They were all both academically qualified by their cumulative knowledge and spiritually qualified by their exemplary lives.
Among their company were men who, academically, took a month’s vacation and used the time to learn and master an entirely foreign language; wrote a Persian dictionary; invented a specialized mathematical ruler, one was an architect; mastered oriental languages; publicly debated in Greek; tutored Queen Elizabeth in Greek and mathematics; and of one it was said, “Hebrew he had at his fingers end.” Yet head knowledge can be a curse if not tempered by a fervent, pious heart.
In this, the spiritual realm, they were light years ahead of many today who flaunt their education yet fail in any attempt at a practical, personal witness.
This company was blessed with men known for their zeal and tact in debating and converting Romanists to Christ. They spent hours in private and family devotions. Many did the work of evangelism and even that of missionary representatives of later Queen Elizabeth I. One lived to the age of one hundred and three years. In the closing years of his life, after preaching for two full hours he said to his congregation, “I will no longer trespass on your patience” to which the entire congregation cried out with one consent, “For God’s sake go on.” He then continued his exposition of the Word of God at length.
Yet humanity was a universal trait shared among them as is so amply revealed in the Epistle Dedicatory: “So that if, on the one side, we shall be traduced by Popish Persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor instruments to make God’s holy Truth to be yet more and more known unto the people, whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness; or if, on the other side, we shall be maligned by self conceited Brethren, who run their own ways, and give liking unto nothing, but what is framed by themselves, and hammered on their anvil.”
Yet, in spite of their outstanding character, they never claimed divine inspiration (A claim which, if they had made, would overjoy their detractors as evidence of a prideful spirit.) They never even claimed perfection for their finished work.
The scholarship of the men who translated the King James Bible is literally unsurpassable by today’s scholars. We see the signs of apostasy all around us. They are also evident in educational systems. Are we to believe that “scholarship” has avoided the “downhill progress”? That is far from being realistic.
All of the colleges of Great Britain and America, even in this proud day of boastings, could not bring together the same number of divines equally qualified by learning and piety for the great undertaking of translating the Bible. Few indeed are the living names worthy to be enrolled with those mighty men. It would be impossible to convene out of any one Christian denomination, or out of all, a body of translators on whom the whole Christian community would bestow such a confidence as is reposed upon that illustrious company, or who would prove themselves as deserving of such confidence.
5. The King James Bible Compared to Modern Translations – Some Examples
The deity of Christ is watered down in Acts 3:13,26; Acts 4:27,30 in the New King James Version, the New International Version and New American Standard Version, where Jesus is called God’s “servant” instead of God’s “Son”.
The “judgment seat of Christ” in Romans 14:10 (KJV) becomes “God’s judgment seat” (NIV).
The divine title “Lord” and “Christ” is separated from the human name Jesus, having the thief on the cross address Him as “Jesus” instead of “Lord” (Luke 23:42).
Jesus is made a “created god” (John 1:18) in the New International Version.
Jesus Christ is not God in the flesh in 1 Timothy 3:16 in modern translations. The Living Bible reads: “Christ came to earth as man”, the Revised Standard Version: “He was manifested in the flesh”, The Good News for Modern Man: “He appeared in human form”, the New American Standard Version: “He who was revealed in the flesh”. Where is God?
The doctrine of Hell is watered down in Luke 16:23 in the New King James Version and New American Standard Version where they transliterate “Hades” instead of translating it as “Hell”.
The salvation of the Ethiopian eunuch is eliminated in the New International Version and New American Standard Version where Acts 8:37 is removed from the text.
The Ascension of Jesus Christ is left out of Luke 24:51 in a New American Standard Version.
The virgin birth of Jesus is denied in the New International Version and New American Standard Version in Luke 2:33 where Joseph is called Jesus’ father.
The doctrine of the Trinity is either removed or questioned in 1 John 5:7 where the New American Standard Version and New International Version remove the verse and then split verse 6 and manufacture a false verse 7 and in the New King James Version where a note casts doubt on its authenticity.
Luke 4:18 “He hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted”: is eliminated from the NASB, NIV, Good News for Modern Man, and all Catholic Bibles. Elimination is impossible since Jesus was in the temple reading from Isaiah 61:1-2, which contains the sentence in question. All Greek manuscripts except two include this passage: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus! This is a pattern repeating itself over and over again.
Christ’s statement of purpose in Luke 9:56: “For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them” is completely omitted in the NIV! The same sort of statement is left out in the NIV version of Matthew 18:11.
Person of the Comforter Removed: John 14:16,26; John 15:26; John 16:7. He is replaced with “the Helper” (NKJV), Counsellor (NIV), Advocate (Roman Catholic versions). Why? The Trinity and the personhood of the Holy Spirit is thus removed.
The word “fornication” (KJV) is substituted by “immorality” in the new versions. The word “immorality” carries with it no description of what is forbidden. Examples: Romans 1:29; 1 Corinthians 5:1;Ephesians 5:3, etc.
The words “he” and “Son” are changed to “the One”. This causes less offence to feminists as well as hinduists who also worship a neuter ‘One’. Examples: Luke 10:16; Matthew 13:37; John 4:25; Acts 22:9, etc.
Prayer not in Jesus’ Name (Jesus is not the mediator)
|Verse||KJV||NIV, NASB et al.|
|John 14:14||If ye shall ask anything in my name I will do it.||If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it.|
|John 16:23||Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, He will give it to you.||If you shall ask the Father for anything, He will give it to you in my name.|
Role of Prayer and Fasting Omitted
|Verse||KJV||NIV, NASB et al.|
|Mark 13:33||Watch and pray.||Keep on the alert.|
|Matt 17:21||This kind goeth not out by prayer and fasting.||OMIT|
|2 Cor 6:5||In fastings.||OMIT|
|2 Cor 11:27||In fastings.||OMIT|
|Mark 9:29||This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting.||This kind can come out only by prayer.|
|1 Cor 7:5||Give yourselves to fasting and prayer.||Devote yourself to prayer.|
|Acts 10:30||Four days ago I was fasting… and… prayed.||Four days ago I was praying.|
The Disappearing Lord Jesus Christ
|Eph 3:14||…I bow my knees unto the Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ.||…I kneel before the Father.|
|Eph 3:9||…which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ.||…which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.|
|Gal 4:7||…but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.||…but a son; and since you are a son, God has made you also an heir.|
Changes in The Lord’s Prayer
|Matt 6:9-13||Our father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven so in earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive everyone that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil.||Father, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come. Give us each day our daily bread. Forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who sins against us. And lead us not into temptation.|
Catholic vocabulary has been introduced into the new versions. For example: “Renewal” is a word that was introduced into the New American Standard Version; there is no such word in any Greek text, so the NASB had to put it in italics. In the Roman Catholic Church, a “renewal” is merely a time when a member renews their baptismal vows and enthusiasm for God. The bible, however, says we “must” be born again (John 3:7). Roman Catholics believe that at infant baptism one is saved and they merely renew their enthusiasm periodically.
The identity of “the whore” in Revelations 17 has been hidden in new versions. Revelations 17:9 says she sits on seven hills (“seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth”). To hide the identity of this harlot church, the NIV and NASB make five changes in the new bibles:
They omit the word “city” from Revelations 14:8 so you will not know it is a city.
In Revelations 17:9-10, they changed something very serious, and this has directly affected the exegesis on Revelations 17 throughout the body of Christ today. The King James Version says, “The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.” Period. A new sentence starts in verse ten, “And there are seven kings.” Verses nine and ten are about different things. New versions change it and say, “The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits and they are seven kings.” They are trying to make a connection between the hills and the kings so you will not notice that the seven hills are the city of Rome.
The new Bibles have no “blood” in them, no “Lord”, no “second coming”, nor other vital doctrines. In other words, the new Bibles have all of the convictions of B.F. Westcott.
Evolution’s Influence on Modern Bible Translations Category C – 0018
Modern Translations are not Trustworthy Category C – 0109
Scrubbing the Scriptures Category C – 0164
Texas Baptists to Distribute a Bible Full of Holes Category C – 0165
King James I and the Bible (Leaflet) Category C – 0153
Let’s Weigh the Evidence, by Barry Burton Category B – B116 (see below)
The New Testament Documents, by F. Bruce Category C – C52
New Age Bible Versions, by Gail Riplinger Category B – B139
The Language of the King James Bible, by Gail Riplinger Category B – B140
We need God’s words, not just His ideas.
Other Sources available from ‘Chick Publications’.
1. “Defending the King James Bible”, by Rev. D.A. White, Th.D., Ph.D.
As we approach the beginning of the twenty-first century, we see a crescendo of criticism against the King James Bible. There is truly a battle going on that involves the very words of the living God! In this book, the author defends the King James Bible, showing its four-fold superiority in its texts, translators, technique, and theology. You’ll see why the King James Bible is “God’s Word Kept Intact in English”.
The author has been a teacher in the areas of Greek, Hebrew, Bible, Speech, and English for over thirty-five years in nine schools, including one junior high, one senior high, two Bible institutes, two colleges, two universities and one seminary. He served his country as a Navy Chaplain for five years on active duty and pastored two churches. This book is a transcription of a seminar delivered on the subject in New York, with some fairly detailed information delivered in a conversational style that makes comfortable reading. As is common in seminars, at times the author digresses to give his opinion on topics from “which Bible school should I attend?” to personal theological positions, but quickly returns to his subject.
As a teacher of Greek and Hebrew, White doesn’t hesitate to give actual examples of how new Bible versions change, remove, and add to God’s Word. He shows many examples of alterations that change the doctrines of the Bible. An interesting aspect of the book is the author’s ability to include some scholarly material that will satisfy serious students of Bible versions, while still making many of his concepts straight forward enough for laymen to understand and appreciate.”
2. “If the Foundations Be Destroyed”, by Chick Salliby
What does the NIV have against Jesus? This book compares the King James Version’s presentation of Jesus Christ with that of the New International Version. Follow Christ’s life, from His eternal pre-existence, to His life on earth, to His eternal existence yet to come, and learn how each step is either aborted or distorted by the NIV.
Each of the 155 verse comparisons show that one translation honours the Lord and the other dishonours Him. No nit-picky verse comparisons here… each one exposes vital doctrinal differences between the two versions. Concise, yet thorough, it is easily understood by laymen or pastors, and short enough to be read in a single sitting.
Verse comparisons between the King James and the NIV cover the following topics:
• Redemption • Christ’s Eternal Existence • Christ’s Deity • Deity Provable in Christ as Judge • Christ the Creator • Christ the Son of God • Virgin Birth • Also Concerning Christ’s Birth • Christ’s Incarnation • Christ’s Omnipresence • Worship of Christ • Christ’s Commission • Christ’s Miracles • Christ the Comforter • Christ’s Teachings and Words • Christ’s Teaching on Eternal Punishment • Christ’s Teaching on Prayer and Fasting • Steps to the Cross, Trial, Crucifixion, and Resurrection • Ascension and Glorification of Christ • Christ’s Priesthood • Christ’s Lordship • Christ’s Grace • Christ’s Return • Christ’s Eternal Existence (Future) • Title “Lord” • Title “Christ” • Title “Jesus” • Names and Titles of Jesus Omitted in the NIV.
3. “Final Authority”, by William P. Grady
History Endorses the KJV. Final Authority exposes the deceit behind many of the common charges levelled against the A.D. 1611 Authorized Version. For instance, having heard of the “inferior scholarship” of the King James translators, one discovers that Dr. John Bois, chairman of the Old Testament committee at Cambridge, was reading and writing Hebrew at age six.
With the fourth-century codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus being recommended as the two most reliable manuscripts worthy of supplanting the time-honoured Textus Receptus, the reader learns the facts of their defective character which reveal their disagreement with each other in over 3,000 places in the Gospels alone.
Having been advised that MARK 16:9-20 should be discarded because it is not found in the “best” manuscripts, the author finds that the actual evidence confirms its mysterious presence in 618 manuscripts while missing in only two, Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.
After hearing the scholars Westcott and Hort venerated as spiritual giants, he becomes acquainted with their personal correspondence in which they endorse evolution, socialism, globalism, disarmament, spiritism, purgatory and communal living while deprecating the inspiration of Scripture, salvation by grace, a literal Heaven and Hell and the United States of America.
In short, Final Authority addresses those issues rarely discussed by critics of the King James Bible. As well as the information given above, the reader will learn the following:
Who were the King James translators?
Who were the translators of later Bible versions?
What’s wrong with the NIV?
Is the New King James really a King James version?
How involved are Jesuit agents in the attack against the KJV?
And much more!
4. “Let’s Weigh the Evidence”, by Barry Burton
The Bible version issue made simple. In simple layman’s language, Barry Burton explains the basic issues in the Bible version controversy…and makes it easy to understand why the King James is the only Bible you can trust.
In Let’s Weigh The Evidence, you will learn the following: Origins of the King James Bible; The King James Bible Version is from the Textus Receptus, or Received Text; Facts About the Vaticanus; It leaves out 237 words, 452 clauses and 748 whole sentences, which hundreds of later copies agree together as having the same words in the same places; The Unreliability of the Sinaiticus.
Examined by John Burgon, he writes about the Sinaiticus, “On many occasions 10, 20, 30, 40 words are dropped through very carelessness. Letters, words or even whole sentences are frequently written twice over, or begun and immediately cancelled; while that gross blunder, whereby a clause is omitted because it happens to end in the same words as the clause proceeding, occurs no less than 115 times in the New Testament.”
Westcott and Hort: Read quotes made by Hort: “The old dogmatic view of the Bible therefore, is not only open to attack from the standpoint of science and historical criticism, but if taken seriously it becomes a danger to religion and public morals.”
Copyrights: The following versions have copyrights: Revised Standard Version, New American Standard, Living Bible, Good News Bible, New International Bible, New Scofield, and more. According to the New Standard Encyclopaedia vol. 3, page 565, the definition of a copyright is, “The legal protection given to authors and artists to prevent reproduction of their work without their consent. The owner of a copyright has the exclusive right to print, reprint, publish, copy and sell the material covered by the copyright.” By taking out a copyright on a so-called “Bible”, the copyright owner admits that this is not “God’s Word” but “Their own words.”
Side-by-side Verse Comparisons Show Modern Versions Have Attacked Fundamental Doctrines:
Deity of Christ; Salvation by faith; Atonement; The Second Coming of Christ; The Virgin Birth of Christ; and much, much more!
5. “The Answer Book”, by Dr. Samuel C. Gipp, Th.D.
Answers to the most often asked Bible version questions. Many “Bible Scholars” have stirred up rumours, questions, and speculation about the validity of the King James Bible. Much of the Bible version debate has caused many Christians to question whether there is a true version that has no error. This book contains the answers to 62 of the most common questions concerning the King James Bible. Here are some of the questions that are answered:
• Wasn’t King James a homosexual? • Aren’t there archaic words in the Bible, and don’t we need a modern translation to eliminate them? • Don’t the best manuscripts support the new versions? • Where do Bible manuscripts come from? • Where was the Bible before the 1611 King James Version? • Isn’t the New Scofield Bible a King James Bible? • Is the New International Version trustworthy? • Isn’t the devil behind all the confusion and fighting over Bible versions? • Who were Westcott and Hort? • Should we make an issue of Bible translations?
These questions and many more are answered in Gipp’s simple-to-understand answer book.
6. “An Understandable History of the Bible”, by Dr. Samuel C. Gipp, Th.D.
Much of the above article is quoted from this book.
7. “Translators Revived”, by Alexander McClure (1858)
The scholarship of the men who translated the King James Bible is literally unsurpassable by today’s scholars. Available at: www.jesus-is-lord.com/transtoc.htm
8. “The Men behind the King James Version”, by Gustavus Paine
Shows the superior scholarship of the translators of the KJV.
Christian Assemblies International – Teaching Department (June 1998)