By Andrew W.

Smith

Table of Contents
Chapter

Title

Page

Personal Testimony on the King James Bible

History of the King James Bible

Language of the King James Bible Gail Riplinger

14

Perfectly Preserved

20

Before 1611 Issue

26

How to Spot a Counterfeit Bible

30

Is the King James Bible harder to read?

34

The Attack on the Bible

42

The Language of the KJV from a website

50

10

The Use of Italics in the King James Bible

56

11

The Lord Jesus Christ, the eternal, only

Begotten Son of God

12

58

Gender Inclusive Modern Version Todays

International Version and others

68

13

Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit

74

14

What about other languages

78

15

King Jesus, the Real Author of King James Bible

80

16

The Letters A and V and the Numbers 16

And 11 are also inspired

82

17

Questions to ask Modern Bible Version Users

85

18

AWE Astounding Word Exhibit

89

19

For Non-believers interested in becoming a Christian

91

20

Conclusion

94

Andrew W. Smith December 2014

Chapter One

Personal Testimony on the King James Bible

By Andrew W. Smith
In the last two decades, my interest on the King James Bible and related issues has motivated me to
share on my Christian life and faith into Bible versions. A way back to the year 1991 when I lose my
interest in a big Invercargill Church Central Baptist as this church wasnt for me. (For overseas
readers, Invercargill is the Southernmost City of New Zealand). Just to explain briefly about myself,
Im profoundly deaf, causing by continuing discharged ears as part of my illness, months after when I
was born in the year 1965. The left ear was a good ear with hearing aid; the right ear was no good
but without aid. I had mild Cerebral Palsy only on legs. The young people of that church have little
or no interest about me but most young families were interest about me. Invercargill, New Zealand,
where I lived, had a small deaf community and has been involved with them for years. In the 1990s
I was involved into deaf Christian activities in Christchurch as well as nationwide for camps. Do refer
to my Autobiography book for more related stories on my disability by contacting me.
Next church, I attended to, was Independent Baptist Church. The morning service was held in the
AA Rooms, Gala Street then to a permanent building at Tay Street near the Lindisfarne Street Traffic
Lights. An American Pastor, Richard Brosseau (he used the KJB) was very good to me, He brought the
tape recorder, sent me his sermon notes and I took my headphone. Somehow, I saw an
advertisement I dont remember where, about Bible Correspondence Course and its office located in
Dunedin. I was questioning why the KJB being used for the course and for the morning service. A
staff member of BCC has sent me a book called Let Weigh the Evidence Which Bible is the REAL
Word of God by David Burton. Weeks later my sister Carol and her husband Colin (was a pastor of
Gore Baptist Church) with their kids visited us from their previous home in Gore. She read that book
then she questioned Colin. He was very sceptical because he was taught differently on Bible History
as well as theology as part of minister training at Bible College of NZ. There were no original
manuscripts of the Holy Bible found in Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic to translate into English language
however there is an article in this book about the true history of Gods Word being preserved and
keeps pure from generation to generation to the present day.
At the time, I was using Good News Bible, if my bible was really Gods infallible and inerrant Word,
why there were a lot of footnotes on nearly every page on manuscript issues that was causing doubt
on Gods Word? I was really questioning on my faith on my bible. I became a Christian at the age of
18 after a Christian outreach by Open Air Campaigner team. Months later I did a weekly bible study
with a strong Christian man named David Hansen, (he used the KJB) until his timely death aged 56 on
July 1986. That year, my parents, Trevor and I attended to Glengarry Baptist Church in east area of
Invercargill so we were with this congregation to use the Good News Bible to make more palatable
for todays readers. I remember that my parents were using the KJB in their pre-marriage days and
when my original family (two sisters and one brother) went to North Invercargill Baptist Church
(closed in 1982 due to aged building then demolished a few years later). I was too late to interview
my parents on the KJB issue. My father passed away in August 1999 aged 72 and my mother passed
away in April 2012 aged 81, both of them suffered a major stroke. However, the likely reason - the
GNB was a lot easier to read and understand so I got influenced by them to use that modern bible
version.
After I became a Christian, my knowledge of Christianity has increased rapidly but neither into
modern bible version issues nor my previous pastors knows anything about this. Almost all of
Invercargill churches were family-orientated and for senior citizens so I had friends of all ages which
was okay for me to spend time with them. After our family first church closed, the people of
Glengarry Baptist Church (about 70 people attended) were very friendly towards me but a few years

later, that church was having a big problem. The majority of the congregation were on medium to
higher income earners and lived outside the poorest suburb of Glengarry. They have little or no
interest in nearby outreach, little activities for the church children other than the morning service
and I was questioning about the pastor, James Irwin (I remember, he had a golden filling showing on
a tooth and wore a smart suit) whether he was the right person or not, for not having the right skills
for community outreach as well as for me. As a result, many of us have left that church includes the
pastor and his family. Then the elders called to the elders of Central Baptist Church for help to get a
new, right pastor to plant a new church in same building as soon after Glengarry church closes down
and renamed Eastside Baptist Church.
In the year 1987, I attended to Central Baptist Church. Pastor Brian Kenning used the New
International Version of Gods Word. It was the popular version after the KJB. Like the GNB, it still
had footnotes too, so Ive purchased a NIV study bible. I learnt that the Christian young, hearing,
singles group social events in that church was in the second priority. Their first social priority was at
the events with non-Christian friends as well as with their family. Because of their unfriendliness
toward me, I believe that they have no interest into witness for Jesus and sharing their faith towards
non-Christian friends. Was God pleased with these Christians in Invercargill? So I attended to
Independent Baptist Church a smaller non-charismatic church. The con was that the church policy
for communion was for church members only so visitors were not feel welcome to join in. But then I
lost some interest with these people two years later.
Next church to attend was Grace Street Bible Chapel in South Invercargill so I make new friends
such as Sandra Wright (who used the KJB), a solo mother with three kids but the majority of these
congregations was still using the NIV. Then she said that the church was too legalism, in the
communion service they were using the big cup of wine, some of them were worry about the cup
sharing that might spread germs so they avoid this by using spoons from their pockets or using a
handkerchief to draw liquid from the cup so that was a poor practice to other believers. Bible speak
that believers were into one body in Christ so cup sharing was one of Jesus commandment. Elders
in that church had made a tough decision to change communion style that individual small cups of
red wine were offered during the service. She left the church for Home Church group that preached
from the KJB. News in the year 1997, that three Invercargill Methodist churches were for sale and all
of these congregations met in a newer church building at Lindisfarne Street south of Turnbull
Thompson Park. The Grace Street Chapel folks moved to an ex-Methodist Church and renamed Elles
Road Bible Chapel. The old chapel building was converted to a shop. My reason for leaving Elles
Road Chapel was a bit uncomfortable in the older building and less social contact with some of their
congregation.
Rosedale Bible Chapel was next but just recently, these congregations have moved to another exMethodist Church in Waverley Area from old, smaller chapel near James Hargest College. The old
chapel was used for Tonga Community Church congregation. The RBC folks were still using the NIV
but few people used the KJB, however I still attending there for some socials and bible talks lead by
lay preacher. I heard that Independent Baptist Church new pastor was using the New King James
Bible. So why so many Invercargill Churches were using modern bible versions for worship service,
bible study group and just for a read in their quiet time. I wonder what version did the early white,
missionaries used for set up New Zealand early churches. I need to do more research to find out the
real truth on Gods Word.
Once lunchtime in June 2011, I was walking from the library at Wachner Place in Invercargill and a
lady with white hair in her late 50s came to me while witnessing for Jesus saying that if you are
going to die tonight where you go to. Heaven was my reply. Then we chat about the King James Bible
and her husband came to join the conversation as we had a common interest. Paul and Pauline
Hylands were very strong believers in the KJB. A week later, they got my address through someone
in my church and drop a notice in my letterbox to invite me to their place about a video about the

history of Modern English. So one Thursday night, I went to their place at West Plains Road. In the
living room of their brand new house, we chat on these issues for about an hour and a 40 minute
video. I was so interested to hear about the history of Modern English begin the late 1500 and the
importance of using thee and thou to clearly about whom the passage refer to. Then Paul had
explained deeply about Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth in Biblical Prophecy: - Times Past, But
Now and The Ages to Come. I came home with pamphlets; one of these was about the Myth of
Early Revisions by Dr David Reagan. Months later, a visitor came to my current church during
morning service named Tukaroto, a Maori, unemployed chap. He was another strong King James
Bible believer so I invited him for midday lunch and to introduce to Hylands couple at their place on
a Saturday evening, Paul explained to him clearly of what he taught to me. Sadly, the Hylands
couple have left Southland for the warmer weather in the North Island.
Most of my quiet evenings at home were spent on the issue of the King James Bible and the
modern versions. I saw many of its excellent websites, read most of e-books and books on this
subject that really influenced me so much in my thinking. I learnt that most well-known men like
unbelieving Westcott and Hort used a different Greek, not biblical Greek to correct the KJB and that
caused a lot of English translations that draw away from God's pure word, most verses mentioned
the opposite, for example, Psalm 10 v 4, 5 KJV "wicked....His ways are always grievous", NIV
"wicked....His ways are always prosperous". Isaiah 9 v 3 KJV "not increased the joy NIV "...increased
their joy" Colossians 2 v 18 KJV "things which hath not seen", NIV "what he has ....seen, as so on."
God really care for each letter to include jot and tittle and he has promise to keep His Word from
generations to generations. (Psalm 12 v 6, 7). Not only modern translation was easier for today's
readers, its weaken Christianity by using a different doctrines, a water down gospel, teaches
progressive salvation and downgrading the Deity of Christ and his virgin birth. I was into several King
James Forum in Facebook and have learnt a lot from them. The well-known chap in some forums,
Will Kinney from USA and was a great man of God and always answering his toughest critics against
the KJB. I can answered a KJB critics - "Why do most Christians today NOT believe the bible is the
infallible words of God?" I recalled this issue with my brother-in-law Colin - if a verse or some
passage from a modern version is incomplete because important words of a phrase not appeared,
he suggested a cross reference to another verse to clarify this understanding. I thought his way of
understanding God's Word but still in doubt due to important words missing but using the KJB, I
have faith in these precious verses so I could invite him over to my place to study with me to
transform his thinking!
I believe that The old Authorized King James Bible of 1611 (in any edition), including the chapter
and verse markings, is the providentially preserved, pure, given by inspiration, inerrant, infallible,
complete, written words of God which contains both the Old and New Testaments, 66 books,
Genesis to Revelation, and it is THE FINAL ABSOLUTE, ULTIMATE AUTHORITY IN ALL MATTERS!!!.
Psalm 12:6-7; 119:40; Proverbs 30:5; Matthew 24:35; Luke 24:27; 1 Timothy 5:18; 2 Timothy 3:1517.
To conclude my testimony, I invite and pray for all future readers to take their spare time
available to read some of the selected articles not only to give them strong evidence but to bring
deep conviction in their heart Is King James Bible is really Gods Word for today? May God Bless
you all.
I am to explain on the following chapters and highlighted articles from my KJB books, well-known
websites and a friend from Philippines. These authors are in the same boat in sharing to my readers
that God wrote one book after years into their research. The attached posters are from Facebook
KJB page and Chick Publications Tracts. My disclaimer that I do not take authors views seriously to
influence my readers to transform their thinking but be like study bible students at Berea, These
were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of
mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so Acts 17:11. That is to

include church pastors, missionaries and qualified Christian workers who have done their training
from Bible College that used the modern versions bible.

Chapter Two

History of King James Bible

Mostly from Chick Publications tracts.
During the first century, the true Christians were severely persecuted for their faith in Jesus by
being thrown to the lions at the public outdoor stadium. But that didnt stop them believing in the
true God so the enemies had come up another way to draw them away from Jesus. Two famous
men in this century, one of them named Constantine changed his costume and made himself the
head of the counterfeit church the Roman Catholic Church. He was a smart politician, could hold
tight control over the pagan religious and secretly worshipped the Sun God. At the time was the
beginning of two streams of Bible Northern Stream from Antioch and Southern Stream from
Alexandria. Antioch was the centre for Gentile Christians and for outreach of the apostle Paul and his
journeys and where they were first called Christians, the true believers were using Kione Greek when
making exact copies of the original manuscripts. Alexandria was where modern texts and
translations originated and a centre of intellectualism. Greek Scholars from Alexandria came to
Antioch to get a copy of pure bible then everything changed after they got back to their city and that
how Southern Stream begin. Classical Greek was the trade language and the language of
philosophy of that day. The second man named Origen has messed up the true scripture, not a
believer, didnt believe Jesus was God almighty, not believe that Holy Spirit is eternal and make Jesus
a lesser God. So he and his mates chopped up key verses of the scripture particularly 1 John 5 v 7.
The Alexandrian Manuscripts down-played the deity of Christ, the virgin birth, salvation by grace
through faith, etc. The true Christians rejected these phoney manuscripts as works of the spirit of
antichrist. The second attack came when the Roman Emperor Constantine (the first pope) ordered
50 Bibles by Eusebius, created from the satanic Alexandria Manuscripts after Origen died. His
counterfeit Bible was copied by other scholars in Alexandria. They wrote these three Bible
perversions Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and Alexandrinus. These manuscripts were sent to Rome. These
Scholarly Bibles disagree over 3000 times in four gospels alone that was false witness. They
didnt believe in a real heaven or hell, nor did they believe the bible was the Word of God.
In the Northern Stream, the next language to translate from the Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic was
the Old Latin. It was the world language of that day and it spread all the way to England before 400
AD. Old Latin Bible, Christians called it the Vulgate (common) Bible.
Later, the Roman Catholic early church father, Jerome, used the same satanic manuscripts from
Egypt to create the official Bible for the Roman Catholic system. It was called the Latin Vulgate.
The devil had successfully created his own Bible from his corrupted Alexandrian manuscriptsand
out of this, he created his own church.
In 1229 A.D. the Bible along with the Apocrypha was placed on the list of forbidding books by the
Council of Valencia. Satans next attack came in 1546 during the Council of Trent. The Vatican
declared the Apocrypha was Holy Writ and officially part of their Old Testament Canon. The pope
claimed to be the only authorized representative of Christ on earth, and murdered anyone opposing
him. When Bible believers were caught with copies of the Word of God, they were slaughtered and
the Scriptures were burned. The name given to the preserved Word of God was Textus Receptus
(the Received Text).
Satan intensified the war by creating the horrible inquisition. The Word of God was the Number
One target. Homes of the Christians were torn apart brick by brick looking for the Textus Receptus
manuscripts. Rome claims there was no salvation outside the Catholic Church but the Textus
Receptus teaches salvation comes only through faith in Jesus Christ. And so it was seek and destroy
time for the Vatican. Satan engineered unbelieveable tortures and violet deaths at the hands of his

counterfeit church which claimed 68 million victims from 1200 to 1800 A.D. and it was done in the
name of the Lord.
The Lord Jesus hates this satanic system whose religious leader dares to call himself The Holy
Father. Jesus calls it the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth (Rev. 17:5). Gods Spirit
started moving in the hearts of certain men to rise up against this evil force. Luther sparked the
Reformation as multitudes rebelled against the brutalities of the Vatican. They were called
Protestants and heretics. Luther translated the Textus Receptus manuscript into the German
tongue, giving Germany The Word of God. In 1525, Tyndale did the same thing in English. Rome
burned him at the stake for his efforts.
Within 50-70 years after Constantines official bibles Jerome, the hermit translator, is hired by
the Pope to make an Official Latin Translation for the church (read - Roman Catholic Church). In
some of his personal letters he complains about the fact that immediately after he completes the
translation of a section of Scripture it is taken from him before he has time to proof read and review
it.
Jerome claims that he has the Greek originals written on fine vellum scrolls with which he
corrects The Old Latin and proceeds to make his Latin translation, now known as the Latin Vulgate
(400 A.D.), which, when compared to Vaticanus, looks very much like a kissing cousin. Do you see
what happened? Origen not only managed to mess up some of the Greek and Syrian manuscripts
while he was alive. He also had a hand in messing up the Latin versions also even though he was
dead and gone to his reward!
Jeromes Latin Vulgate eventually replaced the Old Latin Bibles in the Roman Catholic Church, but
the Latin speaking believers outside of the Roman Church never accepted it and continued to use
their own Latin (Italic) copies of the Scriptures as late as 1500.
At the very same time that Jerome was providing the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church with
an official bible, Augustine wrote his book, The City of God, which laid the spiritual and
philosophical foundation for the Roman Catholic Church.
Now these men and many others are called the church fathers. No wonder The Lord Jesus Christ
said: And call no man your father upon the earth: (Matthew 23:9). Many of these men were more
like the church babies or worse!
The Armenian Version (400 A.D.) was another translation produced by a soul winning missionary
(Mesrob) and, just like the Gothic, is found to be in agreement with Traditional Text. Do you notice
anything strange or peculiar? The Translations that can be traced to soul winners (practical Christian
workers) are found to be in agreement with the Traditional or Byzantine Text. While those
Translations that can be traced to the scholars (the academic types) are found to be in agreement
the Egyptian and Western Texts. Is there any resemblance or comparison to the situation within
Christianity today?
Around the same time that Jerome was translating his Latin Bible Codex A (400 A.D.), also known
as Alexandrinus, was produced. This manuscript has a so-called mixed text. That is, it often
supports the Received Text. (So give it a later date!)
According to the scholars the next manuscript, Codex D, was produced about (400-500 A.D.) and
was written in two languages (Greek and Latin). According to Dean Burgon: But by far the most
depraved text is that exhibited by codex D. No known manuscript contains so many bold and
extensive interpolations. Its variations from the sacred Text are beyond all other example. And
again: Though a large portion of the Gospels is missing, in what remains (tested by the same
standard) we find 3,704 words omitted: no less than 2,213 added, and 2,121 substituted. The words
transposed amount to 3,471: and 1,772 have been modified: the deflections from the Received Text

thus amounting in all to 13,281. Please remember these 13,281 deflections from the Received
Text have been noted only in the Gospels and Codex D has a large portion of the Gospels MISSING!
How many changes would there be if the whole manuscript were compared with the Received Text?
Codex D is blatant proof that older is not always better. Remember: All manuscripts are
individual witnesses to the text of Scripture. What kind of witnesses are Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and
Codex D?
Lets get one thing straight. No one knows for sure who wrote Vaticanus (B), Sinaiticus (Aleph),
Alexandrinus (A), or Codex D. With the exception of the Gothic, Armenian, and Latin Vulgate
Translations, we do not know the names of the scribes for the thousands of manuscripts in existence
today. In other words these manuscripts have no real known history and the dates given to them are
at best, just educated guesses.
Picking up where we left off the next manuscript in the scholars chronological order is known as
Codex D2 (500 A.D.). D2 is also written in two languages (Greek and Latin). Codex W supposedly
followed D2 (600 A.D.). This manuscript strongly supports the Received Text (And so it is assigned a
later date, of course!). According to the scholars time table Codex E2 (600 A.D.) was made about
the same time as Codex W.
We dont have time or space to list the thousands of manuscripts (either by name or number). So
we will state here for the record: Of the thousands of Greek manuscripts in existence (nearly 5,000)
the VAST MAJORITY (100-1500 A.D.) (95% or more) are in agreement with the Received Text. The
overwhelming majority of the Syrian, Gothic, Old Latin, Armenian, and Georgian TRANSLATIONS are
in agreement with the Received Text. Nearly all of the Greek LECTIONARIES are in agreement with
the Received Text. And last of all the vast majority of Scripture QUOTATIONS from the so-called
church fathers writings also support the Received Text.
On the other hand there are hundreds of Jeromes Latin Vulgates and a few Greek manuscripts in
support of the Western Text, and just a handful of some of the so-called older Greek manuscripts
(with a few late copies) and the Egyptian Translations in support of the Alexandrian Text.
On the basis of the manuscript evidence you can see right away that its going to take a magician
or a genius to figure out a way to convince people to disregard 95% of the evidence in favor of a few
(questionable) manuscripts. And thats where the so-called manuscript Family theory comes in.
Instead of weighing or counting all of the known manuscripts, the scholars have determined
(conjectured), that the Alexandrian Family represents a purer text and so all other manuscripts
(witnesses) can be dismissed as being inferior based on their (the scholars) conjectures. Pretty
clever; subtle; sly; artful; cunning; and crafty! Do we know anyone in the Bible like that? Hmmm?
As the Moslem hoards took over the lands and countries that had been controlled by the
Byzantine Empire (which ceased around1450 A.D.), Christians began moving out of the Middle
Eastern Countries up into the European countries and brought their Greek manuscripts (Bibles) with
them. Some of these Greek manuscripts and a very small part of the Latin Vulgate were used by the
first critical editor, Erasmus, as a basis for the first critical edition of the Greek manuscripts.
Erasmus made several editions of his Greek text as did Beza, Stephanus, and Elzivers after him
(1500-1630 A.D.). Erasmus text was the Greek text that Martin Luther used in translating the
German New Testament and it was also the Greek text used as the basis of most of the European
and Scandinavian New Testaments (1521-1700+ A.D.). Bezas text is the basis for the AV-KJB New
Testament. Elzivers text came after the AV-KJB and was the text that received the name Textus
Receptus (or the Received Text). There is very little difference between all of these critical Greek
editions, mainly because all of them were based on the Byzantine Text. While it is true that many of
the thousands of manuscripts within the Byzantine Family may have blemishes (that is mistakes

caused by human error), very few have clear or apparent evidence of deliberate corruption and
disfigurement (Like Vaticanus [B], Sinaiticus [Aleph], D, etc.)
Just before the Authorized Version was translated the Roman Catholic Church finally came out
with their own bible called the Douay-Rhiems (1582 A.D.). The major source for this bible was
Jeromes Latin Vulgate and it included 3 Apocryphal Books within the Canon of the Old Testament!
The Roman Catholic Church has never encouraged its people to read the Scriptures, however they
were forced to produce an English bible because of the tremendous demand for the Bible in the
English language. From 1525-1611 A.D. six English Bibles (Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthews, Great,
Geneva, Bishops) were produced, all of which were based the Greek text known as the Byzantine
Text (now known as the Received Text or Textus Receptus) in the New Testament, and the Hebrew
Text (known as the Massoretic Text).
William Tyndale was murdered (strangled to death and then burned) before he could complete
his Translation (he completed the New Testament and most of the Old Testament). The Coverdale
Bible was the first complete Bible in English based on a Greek Text in the New Testament.
(Wycliffes earlier English translation (1382 A.D.) was based on some of the Old Latin manuscripts
and the Latin Vulgate, and was revised by John Purvey to bring it more in line with Jeromes Latin
Vulgate). Matthews Bible was a combination of the best from Tyndale and Coverdale. The Great
Bible was a Revision of Matthews. The Geneva Bible was the Bible of the Puritans (and was the
most popular with the people until the AV-KJB). The Bishops Bible was an Official Bible put out by
the Church of England in an attempt to replace the popular Geneva (which it never did!).
William Tyndale completed translating the New Testament and most of the Old Testament before he
was murdered by the government (strangled to death and then burned). The Coverdale Bible was
the first complete Bible in English based on a Greek Text in the New Testament, and a Hebrew Text
in the Old Testament. John Wycliffes earlier English Translation (1382 A.D.) was based on some of
the Old Latin manuscripts and the Latin Vulgate, and was revised by John Purvey to bring it more in
line with Jeromes Latin Vulgate. Matthews Bible was a combination of the best from Tyndale and
Coverdale. The Great Bible was a Revision of Matthews. The Geneva Bible was the Bible of the
Puritans (and was the most popular Bible with the common people until the AV1611 - KJB). The
Bishops Bible was an Official Bible put out by the Church of England in an attempt to replace the
popular Geneva (which it never did).
Six English Bibles produced in approximately 85 years, and then the crowning achievement: The
AUTHORIZED VERSION (1611 A.D.), The Seventh! What did God say in Psalms 12:6-7?
Psalms 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified
seven times. 7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation
forever.
The King James Bible was the seventh English Bible, and it was translated in seven years. Do you
think thats just a coincidence? Think about that for a while!
From 1611 through the 1930s the Bible that is now called the King James Bible was simply known
as The Holy Bible. In the 1700s a few of its critics (scholars) began to call it the Authorized
Version (hence the name AV 1611), and by the 1800s most Bible scholars and critics referred to
The Holy Bible as the Authorized Version.
The only changes that that have taken place within the AV1611 [the King James Bible] from 1611
up to the 1940s were:

1. Corrections of typographical errors (1629)

2. Standardization of the language (i.e. changes in spelling and punctuation: Final - 1769)
3. Regularization (e.g. consistent use of italics, etc. - 1769)
There were NO CHANGES (or ADDITIONS, or SUBTRACTIONS) TO THE TEXT {i.e. WORDS}!
Up until the middle of the 20th century no Publisher ever dared to change THE TEXT of The Holy
Bible, although they started to produce multiple versions in English from a handful of inferior
(corrupt) Greek & Hebrew manuscripts, very different from the Greek & Hebrew manuscripts from
which the King James Bible was translated.
The Holy Bible (now known as the AV1611 or The King James Bible) was THE STANDARD BIBLE of
the English speaking people of the world from the early 1600s up until the early 1900s. It was the
FINAL AUTHORITY in all matters of faith and practice amongst nearly all English speaking Christians
for over 300 years. During that entire period of time no other bible even came close to challenging
its authoritative position.
Sometime after the introduction of new English Translations (The Revised Version of 1881 in
England, and The American Standard Version of 1901 in America both of which failed miserably)
the Publishers of the new Translations began to call the Holy Bible (AV1611) - The King James
Version. And since the 1950s these Publishers have gradually (under the cover of helps and
clarification) been introducing more and more CHANGES, either to the actual TEXT (the words) of
the King James Bible, or by the subtle introduction of suggestions (always from bible scholars)
implying that there are errors in the TEXT of the King James Bible, and supplying different words
other than those in the text, or stating that certain words or verses do not belong in the text.
The forefathers of modern versions, Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort were
dangerous heretics. They denied the infallible inspiration of Scripture, the sacrificial blood
atonement of Christ, the Genesis account of creation, and other doctrines of the faith. They were
two well-known Greek scholars who dominated the Revised Committee. They were not true bible
believers and were practitioners of the occult. It is indicated that they provide a bridge between
apostate Christianity and the occult and the New Age Movement. Tragically, few Christians
nowadays realize what's wrong with the modern corrupted Bibles, which are ALL based upon the evil
works of Westcott and Hort? Sadly, most believers don't care, and then of course, many aren't truly
believers.
Since the introduction of the failed Revised Version (1881 - 1885) and the failed American
Standard Version (1901), there have been over 120 versions of the bible (in English) that have
come out on the market ($$$ - An unenviable record - unmatched in any ten (10) other languages
in the world! It is now to the point, that with very few exceptions, most people have no idea WHERE
the words of God are, or WHAT the words of God say. The confusion is nearly complete, and that is
why when I buy a King James Bible I make every effort to insure that it is indeed a KING JAMES BIBLE,
and NOT some KNOCK-OFF, pretending to be a King James Bible like the NEW Scofield Bible; or
the NEW King James Bible; or the numerous Study King James Bibles with corrections on every
page.
The Holy Bible is unlike any other book on earth. According to its own testimony it contains the
words of eternal life [John 6:63, 68]; it makes the astounding claim to have been given by
inspiration of God [2 Timothy 3:16]; it also says that God will preserve His words [Psalms 12:6-7]
Jesus said that Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. [Matthew
24:35; Mark 13:31; Luke 21:33] Because of this testimony, and many others, the words within the
Bible are not to be tampered with. Within the pages of the Bible God commands men NOT to

10

CHANGE His words. We are commanded NOT to ADD to them, nor are we to SUBTRACT from them
[Deuteronomy 4:2; Proverbs 30:5; Revelation 22:18-19] All 120 New bibles (in English) available
today do all three.

11

http://www.freewebs.com/thywordis/LESSON%206-KJV_a.htm

12

13

Chapter Three

Language of the King James Bible

By Gail Riplinger, abridged by Andrew
The Language of the King James Bible is an introduction to the various magnificent intricacies of
our beloved English Bible as the following:
1. The King James Bible contains Gods Built-in Dictionary, defining each word, in its context,
using the very words of the Websters and Oxford English Dictionaries!
2. The King James Bible has a vocabulary and reading level which slowly builds progressively
from Genesis to Revelation.
3. The King James Bible uses words with the appropriate sound symbolism. It has a vocabulary
that phonaesthetically fulfils the Bibles own description of itself as powerful.
4. The King James Bible is the only extant access we have to the pure language lexicons of the
16th and 17th centuries.
5. The King James Bible gives a transparent view of the Greek and Hebrew vocabulary,
grammar and syntax.
6. The King James Bible has an internationally recognizable vocabulary and spelling.
7. The King James Bible uses literary devices which enhance doctrinally important concepts and
memorability.
8. The King James Bible has a sentence structure which enhances accurate doctrinal
interpretation.
9. The King James Bibles words and sentences are patterned and woven through its fabric so
as to provide a consistency of form and content.
10. The King James Bible has the precision and longevity of the legal document that it is. (To be
equitable, all English speaking persons must be judged by the same criteria.)
God use words with the same meaning to increase the likelihood that people would be familiar
with one word or the other, to make certain the reading is not misunderstanding the text, to define
words, should the fall out of use, to compensate for regional variations and to expand ones
vocabulary, thereby increasing the available linguistic tools for:- Alliteration, Rhyme, Rhythm and
Phonaesthesia (sound symbolism of individual letters).
Other clues to help to determine a words definition are: - Change the pronunciation, try colloquial
pronunciations, change the spelling in your mind and look inside the word e.g. albeit be it. Other
methods God use to help the reader understand the meaning of words are to look for parallelism,
look for opposites, look at the content and look at the root words inside the word. The Bible
progressively builds-up an understanding of the meaning of words (Modern testing using the
FleschKincaid research companys computerized Grade Level Indicator verifies that only the KJV
maintains the easiest reading level than other modern versions. Observe which type of definition is
being given e.g. Gen 21:27, 28 sheep.ewe lambs. Look for the verses numbers the repetition of
this and general placement creates a pattern and is sometimes a key to help locate definitions that
are some distance away. Watch for onomatopoeia that is words that imitate the sounds of the word
e.g. buzzhum.plop.drop.splash.bang.cough.creak.etc.
The built-in dictionary always be correct since other modern dictionary such as Strongs, Vine and
Webster are often wrong Which things also we speak, not in the words which mans wisdom
teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. (1 Cor. 2:13)
Ye need not that any man teach you. (1 John 2:27). Dictionaries and reference book are not
infallible. Gerhard Kittel, one of the editors of The Theological Dictionary of New Testament admit
the grave weakness saying, Dictionaries are incontestably among the most imperfect of human

14

products. Those who are driven by calling or circumstances to seek help in lexical works should
realize how inadequate is that which even the best and most comprehensive of dictionaries can
offer the user. There are examples appear in Gail Riplinder book The Language of the King James
Bible p 48 54. The KJB uses less than a 8000 word vocabulary even the child know all this by the
age of five.
The fall of mankind was initiated because Adam and Eve listened to a voice other than Gods.
There are counterfeit voices, like the New International Version, New Revised Standard Version and
Contemporary English Version. But there are a chorus of other voices competing with the word of
God for our time, attention, affection and our mind. TV us a powerful medium. Only the word of
God is more powerful (Heb. 4:12). Preachers and Sunday school teachers cannot compete with
the stimulation level of the TV, unless they use the words of God, not their own words or the words
of our milktoast culture. Use the words of the KJV. The Bible say that men shall wax worse and
worse (2 Tim. 3:13), so the vocabulary of this century is bound to be less of a reflection of the purity
of God than that of the 1600s.
English has become a world language. All the World (Mark 16:15). Between 30% and 40% of
the worlds population are familiar with English (in the British KJV, not the American NIV form) e.g.
casket (US) coffin (World British KJV).Magazines like English Worldwide, World English, and English
As A World Language, prove the world speaks English like that in the KJV not the NKJV.
The 100 most used English words are of Anglo-Saxon origin. The KJV vocabulary is said to be 95%
Anglo-Saxon words. The Anglo-Saxons use of one to two syllable words works especially well in the
creation of a Pidgin form of English. A Pidgin is a system of communication which has grown up
between two groups who do not share the same language like missionaries and native speakers,
workers and supervisors, et cetera.
Of the thousands and thousands of words in the English language, only a small percentage are
Anglo-Saxon. Half are of French or Latin origin. These words are infrequently used, however. Since
English is made up of words from the Indo-European languages, those whose native tongue shares
this root can, when learning English, recognize many of their own words. The KJV is more easily read
by those reading English as their second language because it retains those root words which are
common to those familiar with the Indo-European roots. The assertion that the KJV is too difficult
for non-English speaking people is made only by those who know nothing about language. Note the
accompanying example: - defaming Jer. 20:10 For I heard the defaming of manyReport, say they,
and we will report it. Webster injuringby false reports Defame comes from the Latin dis,
meaning ruination, and fama, meaning report Defame would be very recognizable by the Spanish
(disfamar), French (diffamer), and Italian (diffamare).
One example on Phonaesthesia is the SI words. It convey a downward movement.or
position, it states. Note the KJVs use of this powerful communicator. Slothful has 17 words in KJV
and none in NIV; Slain has 350 words in KJV and 50 words in NIV.
The New King James Version, NIV, and almost all new versions, do great damage to the cause of
Christ by changing servant to slave. The image of cruel bondage and a downward.position, are
alien to our sonship motivations expressed in Eph. 6:6,but as the servants of Christ, doing the will
of God from the heart. Even Webster presents a desparate image of slave and servant
Servant: one who exerts himself for the benefit of another master.as a public servant, an
official of government {we shall reign on the earth Rev. 5:10}
Slave: a person held in bondage..One who has lost control of himself. A drudge.
After the standardized of KJV spelling in 1769, new versions have been joined by some printers of
the KJV like Zondervan, the American Bible Society, and Global Bible Society, in changing the

15

standardized spellings in the KJV. The new spelling are not only strictly American, they are incorrect
substitutions. It is important for printers of the Bibles to retain the international British spelling seen
in the KJV Cambridge and Oxford editions, so that their printings will be accepted worldwide. Many
Bibles introduce marginal notes which, while pretending to update or define a word, merely
introduce an imprecise substitute. Observe how the KJVs built-in dictionary accurately defines
bewray, broided, ensue, entreat, prevent and alway, proving the new versions and marginal
updates unnecessary and incorrect. For example Entreat and Treat. Jer. 12:11entreat, OED
Treat. They are also not interchangeable. Websters says that entreat is always applied to
persons, as treat is to persons and things. New versions, like the KJ21, NKJV, NIV and NASV miss this
important distinction and substitute treat for entreat. Another example Alway and Always.
Alway Heb.3:10 They do alway err in their heart; and they have not known my ways. OED the
accusative of space and distance. = all the way, the whole wayconfused with the genitive form,
always. Always Prov. 5:19 all times; and be thou ravished always Phil. 1:3-4 every
remembranceAlways in every. OED conveying the distributive sense at every time. Always
does not always (every time) convey the same sense as alway. The KJV distinguishes words in the
Greek and Hebrew text. Sometimes both words are even used in the same chapter. (See 2 Cor.
4:1011 and Col. 4:6, 12.)
Interesting and unusual phenomenon can be observed when examining the individual letters of
each KJV word. The origin of most letter shapes (not only English letters, but Chinese and others}
can be directly tied to their original pictogram, which in turn often depicts a Bible fact. It is not
within the scope of this introductory book to elaborate on this subject, but one example will be
given with may discourage those who would tamper further with the spelling in the KJV. Not only
are the letters important, so is their position. Note just one example. The term in the midst (in
the middle) is used significantly in the Bible. It is the position of the tree of life (Gen. 2:9, Rev. 22:2).
The LORD in the Old Testament (2 Chron. 20:14) et al.) Jesus in the New Testament (John 19:18, Rev.
7:17). The letter I is in the midst (in the very middle) of many words which describe our precious
S a v i o u r. It is also in the middle of many words describing the counterfeiter L u c i f e r. God is
the I am (Even the Chinese character for life looks like the letter I)
We cannot alter the word order of complex sentence for the following reasons:1. The KJV is Orderly. Let everything be done.in order 1 Cor. 14:40. Note the predictability,
orderliness, and continuity of the word order of the KJV. e.g. dispensation 1 Cor. 9:17,
Eph. 3:2, Col. 1:25 and Eph. 1:10
2. The KJV Uses Fronting for E m p h a s I s. e.g. God, who at sundry times Heb. 1:1
3. The KJV is concise and Succinct and is Characterized by Verbal Brevity Whenever Possible.
Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind 1 Peter 1:13 e.g. Fear not (KJV) Luke 12:32
(NIV) Do not be afraid. Great swelling words of vanity 2 Peter 2:18. Linguists have
determined that the new versions use of more words gives God an effeminate voice.
4. The KJV has the Qualities of a Legal Document. The word that I have spoken, the same shall
judge him in the last day John 12:48. The Bible refers to itself as the law of the LORD (Ps.
119:1), the law of faith (Rom. 3:27), the law of Christ (Gal. 6:2), the law of liberty (Jas.
1:25, 2:12), the perfect law (Jas 1:25), and the royal law (Jas 2:8). The Cambridge
Encyclopaedia of the English Language, (pp. 374-377) reveals why the time-tested KJV
sometimes has lengthy sentence, repetition, and complex grammatical structure. It is legal
language.
5. The Precise Legal Language of the KJV Retains Important Theological Distinctive. Shall and
Will. Which, who and that. Woe judgement, alarm. Oh astonishment, desire (Is. 17:12)
6. The KJV Positions Words Adjacent to Correct Modifiers.

16

7. At Every Possible Turn, the KJV Follows the Word Order and Wording of the Traditional
Greek, Hebrew, and Other Early Versions of the Bible. The modern versions jumbled these
words into the wrong order.
The Bible does have other built-in reference works. For those interested in word roots, it contains
a Greek lexicon and grammar, and gives the historic definition and etymology of English words.
There is little point flogging the mind, memorizing the Greek affixes, to embalm the Koine Greek, as
if the Word was risen from the dead and breathing the scripturesto all nations (Rom. 16:26).
Any needed distinction and elaborations are given in the English text and morphology. Any nine year
old girl in Greece know Greek better than the NIV translations; the Greek Orthodox Church has had
the so-called advantage of an intimate knowledge of, not only the Greek language, but also the
traditional Greek text of the Bible. Yet they show no spiritual fruit (The secret is not Greek, but
meek Ps. 25:9)
Unto the Greek Foolishness (1 Cor. 1:23) The KJV is the only access we have today to the
truths presented in the traditional and conservative Greek and Hebrew grammar texts and lexicons
written by men like Pellican, Reuchlin, Munster, etc., reflected in later works by Guillemard and
Hatch. The KJV translators realized, along with the Greek grammarians of the 16th through 18th
centuries, that Biblical Greek is thus a language by itself, whose word meanings should be framed
to fit the Christian, not the pagan world view. Wisely, Western Christians had been afraid of the
corruption of paganism if they knew Greek.
Contrariwise, the liberal scholar, condemns, what he calls the too frequent isolation of New
Testament Greek from the profane Greeks. In 1822, one such Goliath, J.G.B. Winer launched a full
revolt, a thorough reconstruction, in his Greek grammar textbook. He began reframing the words
of the New Testament, twisting tenses, manipulating modes, corrupting the cases, and perverting
participles and prepositions until the N.T. was patterned to match his anti-Christian sand castle.
Winers anti-Trinitarian prejudices over-rule his grammatical rectitude, admitted one grammarian.
The deformity of Winers Greek grammar textbook was taken a step further by the translation of
Winers work into English by the leading ASV translator, Unitarian, J. Henry Thayer and Revised
Version Committee member, W.F. Moulton.
The KJV is a Greek Grammar. Any needed theological distinctions are preserved in the KJV Greek
is an inflected language, that is, affixes (extra or altered letters) are added to express grammatical
relationships. In current English, word order fill this function. (That is why the KJV cannot always
follow word order in the Textus Receptus [TR] The KJV however, transparently exposes the
inflections and distinctions of the TR, though its use of inflected Middle English morphology. Such
distinctions as the eth ending and the use of ye instead instead of you had already fallen out of
use in 1611, as can be seen in the KJV Dedicatory (Your majestyyou..your very name.) These
distinctions are a reflection of the language of the Bible, and not outdated remnants of Old English
Verb Inflections EST and ETH. The KJV distinguishes between the first person (the speaker), the
second person (the one spoken to), and the third person (the one spoken about). God has all sorts
of built-in clues in the KJV
EST is the second person (the one spoken to), reminds you it is second person with its s
ETH is the third person (the one spoken about), reminds you it is third person with its t
I write first person. Thou writest second person. He writeth third person
New Versions do not transparently reveal all of the underlying verb inflections NIV, NKJV, NASV,
el al. I write. You write. He writes.
The KJV is the Real Living Bible. Through the use of est and eth. the KJV allows the reader to be
an actual eyewitness to the events in the Bible. New versions present it as history, an event of the
past. In the KJV, Jesus Christ is still alive. This is an important theological distinction. He is a has
been in some new versions.

17

KJV

Sample New Version

Matt. 28:6

he is risen

He has been raised

1 John 4:3

Jesus Christ is
God in the flesh

Jesus Christ became

a human being

John 21:13
Jesus then cometh
and taketh bread,
and giveth then

Jesus came and took

the bread and gave
it to them

Thou, Thee, Thine and Ye - Singular and Plural

The words that begin with T (Thou, Thee, Thy, and Thine) are singular and indicate only one
person.
The words that begin with Y (Ye, You, and Yours) are plural and indicate more than one
person.
Remember that letters are often pictures. The T is a singular stick; the Y is more than one
stick.

The NKJV, NIV, CEV, NRSV, NASB, and most new versions do not make these distinctions. The word
you is used in all cases. The actual Greek or Hebrew numbers (either singular or plural) are
therefore not revealed. New versions confuse many important theological truths because of this.
Note for an example. Jesus said to Nicodemus:
KJV

NIV et al.

John 3:7
Marvel not that I say unto thee.
again.

You should not be surprised at my saying,

You must be born again. Ye must be born

In the NIV the word you is used for both the singular (thee) and the plural (Ye). The KJV is the
only current version that clearly teaches the Jesus was not merely addressing Nicodemus alone. All
men must be born again.
The KJV also distinguishes clearly between the subject and the object.

Thou is used for the subject of the verb for the second person singular (Thou art the
man)
Thee is used for the object of a verb for the second person singular (I gave thee bread)
Ye is used for the subject of a verb for the second person plural (Praise ye the LORD.)
You is used for the object of a verb for the second person plural (I give you that.)

18

New versions use you for all four cases.

The singular forms are:

Nominative
Objective
Possessive adjective
Possessive pronoun

KJV

NIV et al.

thou
thee
thy
thine

you
you
your
yours

KJV

NIV et al.

ye
you
your
yours

you
you
your
yours

The plural forms are:

Nominative
Objective
Possessive adjective
Possessive pronoun

19

Chapter Four
Perfectly Preserved
By Douglas Stauffer
In the Garden of Eden, Satan convinced Eve to alter the very words of God. Unfortunately, he
has now found some new and very willing accomplices in the publishing houses and seminaries.
Through the modern versions, mens thoughts have been replacing Gods words at an alarming rate.
As men keep changing the word of God to gain their copyrights and earn their royalty payments,
whole verses are now being deleted from the Bible. For example; For the Son of man is come to
save that which was lost (Matthew 18:11) has been completely removed from most modern
versions.
The goal of each believer should be to stand forth and hold fast the word of God. But where is it
to be found? Believing that the KING JAMES BIBLE (AV 1611) is the perfectly preserved, final
authority for the English speaking people, the following proofs are set forth for your consideration.

Satans Line of Manuscripts

In 1475, a manuscript was logged into the Vatican Library known as Codex Vaticanus. It
dates to circa A.D. 350.
In 1844, a second Alexandrian manuscript, called Codex Sinaiticus, was discovered in a
monastery at the foot of Mt. Sinai. This manuscript also dates to about A.D. 350. Many
scholars believe that these copies are two of the 50 copies that the Emperor Constantine
instructed Eusebius to prepare for the new churches he planned to build in Constantinople.
Thus. Origen (the Gnostic) influenced Eusebius (his favourite student); Eusebius influenced
the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus manuscripts; and in turn every modern version taken from
these two manuscripts was corrupted! Neither the Vaticanus nor the Sinaiticus was accepted
as a received text. Thousands of changes have been noted within their pages by many
different scribes throughout history.
In 1853, two men named Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort set out to write a
Greek text based on these two Alexandrian texts (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus). Since these
two texts by then disagreed with each other in some 3,036 places in the four Gospel books alone,
the two men had to come up with a completely subjective text influenced by their views.
Consequently, they wrote an eclectic text, meaning they preferentially chose certain portions of
scripture from the Vaticanus and other portions from the Sinaiticus until they produced a rendering
that satisfactorily conveyed their personal doctrinal views.

In 1898, a revision of Westcott and Horts Greek Text was made and called Nestles Greek Text.
The majority of Bible colleges today use Nestles Greek Text although it differs greatly from the
Textus Receptus. Despite this fact, the new versions arise from these corrupted texts, while the King
James Bible stands alone in its exclusive use of the Textus Receptus and its rejection of the readings
from the corrupted texts. Westcott and Hort had an unusual rule of thumb for determining which
Greek text to choose when there was a variant reading. They chose the neutral approach.
Basically, their method entailed choosing to use the variant (the difference between the Greek texts)
that reflected the least doctrinal bias. Why? Westcott and Hort believed that it was more likely to be
Gods servants who corrupted the text rather than Satans henchmen!

20

What Happened to the Originals?

The Bible contains 53 instances in which the words scripture or scriptures are used. In every
instance, the word scripture(s) refers to a copy and not to the original autographs. Not even the
critics claim that Timothy, Paul, Apollos, the Bereans or Christ Himself had the original autographs.
Yet, the copies that each of these men read are referred to as scripture. Interestingly, not even one
of these individuals ever claimed the need to correct or change his respective copy. What does God
think of the beloved originals to which all of the Ph.D.s refer? He is the One Who ensured that the
originals would not endure so that man could not worship the paper on which the originals were
written. God has no use for the so-called originals, and anyone who tries to recover or idolize them is
not led of God. Consider the short life span of the original Ten Commandments, which Moses
immediately destroyed. The fact that God could use men to do anything perfect should amaze us
all. If He could lead men to write perfectly in the originals, what limits God from insuring a work of
perfection in their translation into another language? With this thought in mind, consider now
some of the many problems associated with these modern versions that do not exist in the King
James Bible.

Jesus - the Morning Star

Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I
am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. (KJB) Isaiah 14:12How art
thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which
didst weaken the nations! The book of Revelation correctly identifies Jesus as the morning star. Now,
look at the One the NIV blasphemously cites as having fallen from heaven. It is no longer Lucifer but
Jesus Christ, the morning star! (NIV) Isaiah 14:12 How you have fallen from heaven, O morning
star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!

Deity Denied
Despite the immense doctrinal variations between the King James and the other versions, many
of the modern version proponents fail to admit the problems associated with these differences.
Some of the least honest Bible critics go so far as to claim that the modern versions are doctrinally
superior in their treatment of the deity of Christ (the fact that He is God). However, as the
references below reveal, various editions of the modern versions eliminate the virgin birth and make
Joseph the father of Jesus Christ. These versions also obscure the fact that He was God manifest in
human
form. Instead of representing Christ as the Creator, He is reduced to a created being. The Son of God
in Daniel is replaced by a son of the gods. According to many of these versions, we will no longer
stand before the judgment seat OF CHRIST and now Christ has a God!
King James Bible

Reference

Deity of Jesus Christ Denied in the Modern Versions

Behold, a virgin shall conceive..

Isa. 7:14

Behold, a young woman shall conceive(RSV)

seeing I know not a man?

Lk 1:34

since I have no husband? (RSV)

...and Joseph and his mother

Lk 2:43

...while his parents (NASV, NIV, etc.)

And Joseph and his mother

Lk 2:33

The childs father (NASV, NIV, etc.)

God was manifest in the flesh

1Tim 3:16

He appeared in a body(NASV, NIV, etc.)

and the Word was God.

Jn 1:1

and the Word was a god. (NWT)

21

who created all things by Jesus Christ. Eph 3:9

...from everlasting.
is like the Son of God.

Mic 5:2

whose origins are from of old, from ancient times. (NIV)

Dan 3:25 looks like a son of the gods. (NASV, NIV, etc.)

the love of God, because he laid down

his life for us
1 Jn 3:16
..the judgment seat of Christ.
unto God and his father

God, who created all things (NASV, NIV, etc.)

Jesus Christ laid down his life for us(NASV,

NIV, etc.)

Rom 14:10 Gods judgment seat. (NASV, NIV, etc.)

Rev 1:6

His God and Father(NASV, NIV, etc.)

These examples should suffice to prove that the King James Bible is superior to the modern
versions in its treatment of Christs deity, as well as other critical doctrines. Nevertheless, the
following passage is often used to assert that the modern versions more clearly portray Christs
deity:
(NIV) Titus 2:13 the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,
(KJB) Titus 2:13 the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;
In the King James reference above, the is used in reference to the great God because there is only
one great God. This fact holds true whether a person accepts the Lord Jesus Christ as his personal
Saviour or not. The word our is used in reference to the Saviour because, although He is the great
God, He may not be an individuals personal Saviour. Therefore, Paul proclaims that we are looking
toward the day when the great God and our Saviour returns. Jesus is the great God, but a personal,
conscious decision must be made to make Him ones personal Saviour (the our in the verse). When
the NIV and other modern versions change the passage to read: our great God and Savior, Jesus
Christ, the personal pronoun is placed before great God. According to the KJB, when the Lord
returns, He will be THE great God, but He will be OUR Saviour only to those who have trusted in
Him for salvation. To the lost, He will be THE great God AND JUDGEnot their Saviour!
Who Killed Goliath?
(NIV) II Samuel 21:19 In another battle with the Philistines at Gob, Elhanan son of Jaare-Oregim the
Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, who had a spear with a shaft like a weavers rod. (KJB) II
Samuel 21:19 And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of
Jaare-oregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite the staff of whose spear was
like a weavers beam.
Listed in the following chart are two of the many verses completely omitted in the modern
versions. In so doing, these versions eliminate the fact that Christ came to save the lost and that one
must believe on Him in order to be saved. According to these versions, salvation is now hard and
one must generically believewithout attention to the object of his belief (on me, Christ said).
Now, one is simply included in Christ without having to TRUST in Him. Even the gospel no longer
stresses the importance of HOW Christ died, nor is it through the blood that brings redemption. The
supremacy of preaching is replaced by emphasizing the message, and people are no longer saved
but are BEING SAVED as if over a period of time! Finally, there is no Calvary to be found anywhere in
the modern versions!

22

King James Bible

Reference

to save that which was lost.

Matt. 18:11

Salvation Attacked in the Modern

Versions
1 Verse omitted!

Lk 9:55-56

they went to another village.

not come to destroybut to save them.

how hard it is for them that trust in riches Mk 10:24 how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God.
believeth on me hath everlasting life

Jn 6:47

He who believes has everlasting life.

...in whom ye also trusted

Eph 1:13

you also were included in Christ

If thou believest with all thine heart

Acts 8:37

gospelhow that Christ died for our sins 1 Cor 15:1-4

redemption through his blood

Col 1:14

Verse omitted!
gospelthat Christ died for our sins
redemption

preaching of the cross unto us which

are saved

1 Cor 1:18

message of the crossto us who are

being saved

...made the righteousness of God.

II Cor 5:21 might become the righteousness of God

the blood of Jesus Christ

I Jn 1:7

the blood of Jesus

come to the place called Calvary

Lk 23:33

came to the place called the Skull

The English BiblePurified Seven Times?

The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
(KJB) Psalm 12:6
The SEVEN stages of purification in the Bible for the English language can be outlined as follows:
1.
Tyndale (1525)William Tyndale was known as the Father of the English Bible. He was
the first translator to return to the original languages of Hebrew and Greek. All of the English
versions before Tyndale were translations of atranslation, derived from the Vulgate or older Latin
versions.
William Tyndale was the sole translator of the first printed English New Testament.
2.
Coverdale (1535)Produced the first complete printed English Bible. His work consisted
primarily of Tyndales New Testament and Pentateuch, with the remainingOld Testament books
rendered primarily from Luthers German translation.
3.
Mathews (1537)John Rogers (pseudonym of Thomas Matthews) continued Tyndales
work while Tyndale was imprisoned in a dungeon.
4.
Great (1538)(also Whitchurch & Cranmers Bible) Named the Great Bible because of its
exceptional size. It has the distinction of being the first Bible officially authorized for public use in
Englands churches.
5.
Geneva (1560)Theodore Beza, John Knox, William Whittingham and Miles Coverdale
labored six years to produce the Geneva Bible. This was the first English Bible translated entirely
from the original languages, featuring numbered verses and italics.
6.
Bishops (1568)The changes instituted in the Bishops Bible were mostly cosmetic,
including many pictures and thicker, more expensive paper.

23

7.
King James (1611)The seventh purification of the English translation. Dr. John Reynolds,
president of Corpus Christi College at Oxford, suggested to King James that a translation be
produced that the common people could understand, read and love. Approximately 1,000 ministers
sent a petition to King James. It was finally agreed that a new translation, absolutely true to the
original Greek text, be made which would not include any marginal notes or comments except for
explanations of Greek or Hebrew words and the provision of cross-references. Consequently, the
King James Bible became the 7th translation/purification directly from the Greek in prophetic
fulfillment of Psalm 12:6!
Thees & Thous
The second person pronoun in all modern versions is eliminated and replaced with the generic you
with no distinction for singular or plural. The King James Bible, faithful to the original language
distinctions, uses you, ye and your as plural pronouns. Thee, thou, thy and thine are
always singular. Remember: Y = plural, T = singular! Oswald T. Wallis wrote: It is incorrect to
claim that the thou represents the usage of the 1611 period when the AV (King James Bible) was
prepared and that that usage is out of date and should be rejected for that very reason. Such a claim
misrepresents the facts. The AV usage is not Jacobean or 17th century English. It is biblical English.
The Greek of the New Testament distinguishes between the singular and the plural forms of the
second person. The AV makes this distinction simply because NT Greek does so, and because that is
the only way to translate the Bible correctly. (Oswald T. Wallis, The New English Bible, The New
Testament of 1961, A Comparative Study. n.p., 1963, p. 69.)
Copyright
There are hundreds of copyrighted versions of the Bible today, each trying to grab a share of this
billion dollar industry. In order to warrant a new copyright, every modern translation must have
enough changes. By law, new versions of the Bible cannot be copyrighted unless they are derivative
works (new works). Enough changes must be made to legally qualify for copyright protection. Every
publisher knows that no copyright means no money or royalties. This love of money has deceived far
too many for far too long. The King James Bible may be freely copied, printed and published without
permission from anyone.

24

To order

25

Chapter Five

Before 1611 Issue

By Will Kinney
Ask any modern version promoter if he believes the originals were given by inspiration of God. He
will enthusiastically respond in the affirmative. Yes, they were inspired. Then ask him how he knows
this to be true. He has never seen them because they don't exist. He believes it by faith. In the same
way we too have faith that God both inspired His original words and that He has preserved them
through history and today they are found in the King James Bible.
God fulfills His purposes in the fulness of time. He is sovereign in history and His timetable is not the
same as mans. In Galatians 4:4 we read: "But when the FULNESS OF THE TIME WAS COME, God sent
forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law,
that we might receive the adoption of sons."
One might well question why some 2000 years ago was "fulness of time" to send forth the
prophesied Saviour when men had been perishing in their sins for hundreds of years previously. Yet
God does all things according to His timetable in the fulness of time.
God sent the Lord Jesus Christ at the perfect time in history. When He completed what He came to
do, He said, "it is finished" and then the work was complete. What happened through that work still
lives on today.
Just as God did that with the INCARNATE Word, so He has done with His WRITTEN Word. God's
translation work for the English Bible was completed with the King James Bible. It happened in the
fulness of time.
The King James Bible came at the perfect time in history, when English was at the perfect stage of
development and when the hearts of the people were prepared to accept it. The Reformation and
the Puritan movement were in full swing and the nations were soon to witness the greatest, world
wide missionary outreach in history.
I believe in the sovereignty of God in history. "For the kingdom is the LORD'S; and He is the governor
among the nations." Psalm 22:28.
God has set His mark upon many things in this world that reveal His Divine hand at work in history.
Why do we use the 7 day week instead of the 10 day week? Why are dates either B.C. (Before Christ)
or A.D. (Anno Domini - year of our Lord)? (although the secular world is now trying in vain to change
this too to BCE and CE.) England just "happens to be" the one nation from which we measure the
true Time (Greenwich time, zero hour) and from which we measure true Position, zero longitude.
In 1611 the English language was spoken by a mere 3% of the world's population, but today English
has become the closest thing to a universal language in history. He used the King James Bible to
carry His words to the far ends of the earth, where it was translated into hundreds of languages by
English and American missionaries for over 300 years. The sun never set on the British empire. It was
even taken to space by American astronauts and read from there.

26

God knew He would use England, its language and the King James Bible to accomplish all these
things long before they happened. It is the only Bible God has providentially used in this way. It is the
only Bible believed by thousands upon thousands of believers to be the inspired, infallible and 100%
true words of God.
When the Word incarnate came to this earth, He did not come fully grown. Jesus Christ went
through stages of development until He reached maturity as a man.
Even though Christ was God incarnate and sinless in nature, yet He still had to LEARN and GROW and
BE MADE PERFECT in the sense of being made complete and mature.
"And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man." Luke 2:52
"Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; And being made
perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him; " Hebrews 5:8-9.
And so too it was with the Scriptures in the English language, which is the closest thing to a universal
language in today's modern world and where the pure words of God exist. Psalms 12:6-7 say: "The
words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, PURIFIED SEVEN TIMES. Thou
shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them for ever."
I believe these seven progressive purifications of God's words in the English language are to be found
in the following major Biblical works that finally resulted in The Bible of the English speaking people:
Wycliffe's hand copied Bible of 1395, Tyndale's New Testament of 1525, the first complete and
printed Coverdale's Bible of 1535, the Great Bible of 1539, the Geneva Bible of 1560 and the Bishops'
Bible of 1568. These were the 6 previous purification stages until the Bible in English was fully
perfected in what was originally called simply The Holy Bible and in more modern times has became
known as the Authorized Version, the King James Version or the King James Holy Bible.
Every one of these previous English Bible contained all the major disputed verses (35 to 45 entire
verses in the New Testament alone) that are omitted by so many of the modern versions that follow
very different underlying Greek texts and often reject the inspired Hebrew readings as well. These
include such versions as the RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, NASB, NIV, ESV, NET and Holman Standard.
The verses omitted or called into question by these modern Bible of the Month Club contradictory
versions are: Matthew 12:47; 17:21; 18:11; 21:24; 23:14; Mark 7:16; 9:44, 46; 11:26; 15:28; 16:9
through 20; Luke 9:55-56; 23:19; John 5:4; 8:1 through 11; Acts 8:37; 15:34; 24:6-8; 28:29, Romans
16:24 and 1 John 5:7.
The indebtedness of the King James Bible translators to their predecessors is recognized most clearly
in the Preface to the reader where they state in no uncertain terms: "Truly, good Christian reader,
we never thought, from the beginning, that we should need to make a new translation, nor yet to
make of a bad one a good one; but TO MAKE A GOOD ONE BETTER, or OUT OF MANY GOOD ONES
ONE PRINCIPAL GOOD ONE, NOT JUSTLY TO BE EXCEPTED AGAINST-that hath been our endeavour,
that our mark."
The King James Translators also wrote: "Nothing is begun and perfected at the same time, and the
later thoughts are the thoughts to be the wiser: so if we build upon their foundation that went
before us, and being holpen by their labors, do endeavor to make better which they left so good...if

27

they were alive would thank us...the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and
polished."
Where was the word of God before A.D. 1611? In the same place it was before 1611 B.C.
In Matthew 4:4, Jesus says, "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread
alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
Where was "Every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God" when Jesus said that? There was
no New Testament written. The 66 book canon was far from complete when Jesus spoke these
words.
Every word that they needed to live by was preserved for those living at that time. The Old
Testament Scriptures in the Hebrew. But every word of God had NOT YET proceeded from the
mouth of God.
Was the word of God preserved when Jesus said that? Absolutely! The word of God has always been
preserved. It has not always been complete. There is a difference between "preservation" and
"completion."
And so it was with the word of God in English before A.D. 1611. It was preserved; it just wasn't
complete in English yet. It had to be made perfect just as the Word incarnate had to be made
perfect.
"And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him."
Hebrews 5:8.
And in the fullness of time, the English Bible was made perfect in The Holy Bible, also known as the
King James Version.

28

29

Chapter Six

Terry Watkins

Dial-the-Truth Ministries

Many people write and ask about a certain version of the Bible. With over 200 different English
versions available and a new one coming out every 6 months, its difficult to individually
separate Satans counterfeits from the Word of God.
We created 25 simple checks to spot one of Satans counterfeits.
If any Bible version fails any one of the following tests it is one of Satans counterfeits.
You can click on any of the check verses to display the authentic Word of God for
comparison.
Note: This is by no means ALL the fraud and corruption found in the counterfeits. There are
thousands of such distortions. This is a simple and quick checklist.
Check your Bible and see if it is a counterfeit.
1. Genesis 22:8
The counterfeits change ". . . My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering:.
. ." to distort the prophesy that God would become the Lamb. The counterfeits read as,
"God will provide for Himself the lamb. . ." or "God himself will provide the lamb for the
burnt offering". The fulfillment of Genesis 22:8 is found in John 1:29.
2. Isaiah 14:12
Most counterfeits confuse the Lord Jesus Christ with Lucifer. They replace the word
"Lucifer" with "morning star, day star, star of the morning". Morning star is a title reserved
for the Lord Jesus in Revelation 22:16. This is also the only time the word "Lucifer" is found
in the Word of God. In Isaiah 14:15 the counterfeits do not send Lucifer to "hell" but only
to the confusing "Sheol", or the "grave".
3. Matthew 20:20
Many counterfeits remove the words "worshipping him" and rob worship from the Lord
Jesus Christ. Some will replace "worshipping him" with "kneeling down" or "kneeling
before", but just simply "kneeling" is not worship.
4. Matthew 26:28
Many counterfeits replace the phrase "new testament" with the generic phrase "new
agreement" or "new covenant". This is an obvious attack on the written Word of God. Its

30

interesting, even though the counterfeits remove the phrase "new testament", they do
not title their New Testaments as "New Agreement" or "New Covenant". Why? The
counterfeiters know they could not sell their counterfeit bearing the title "New
Agreement" or "New Covenant" on the cover, so like any good counterfeiter, they disguise it.
5. Mark 3:29
The counterfeits change the serious consequences of blaspheme against the Holy Ghost from
"eternal damnation" to "eternal sin" or "eternal condemnation".
6. Luke 4:4
Many counterfeits remove the last half of Luke 4:4, ". . . but by every word of God" This is
another assault on the Word of God. In Luke 4:4, the Lord Jesus Christ is quoting
Deuteronomy 8:3. Do the counterfeiters believe the Lord Jesus does not know what
Deuteronomy 8:3 says?
7. Luke 4:8
Many counterfeits remove the words "get thee behind me, Satan". Here the Lord Jesus Christ
openly rebukes Satan but the counterfeits do not rebuke Satan.
8. Luke 16:23
Many counterfeits refuse to translate the Greek word "haides". Rather than translate
"haides" to the word "hell", the counterfeit will transliterate the Greek word "haides" into
the English "hades". By this trick the counterfeit attempts to extinguish the flames of hell.
Hades is not "hell". Hell is flames, torments, weeping and wailing, complete darkness
forever. Hades is a new-age place of purification, or a fantasy place in Greek mythology.
The Assyrian Hades is an abode of blessedness with silver skies called Happy Fields.
9. John 4:24
Many counterfeits change "God is a spirit" to "God is spirit". By removing the critical article
"a", the counterfeits teach an impersonal, formless, esoteric, new-age "spirit god".
10. John 14:16
Many counterfeits change the Holy Spirit from a loving, concerned "Comforter" to simply
another "Helper, Counselor".
11. Acts 2:47
Many counterfeits change the completed act of "saved" to the working, in progress "being
saved". With this change, the counterfeits deny the complete and finished salvation in the
blood of Jesus Christ to a progressive, salvation by works. You are no longer "saved" but in
the process of "being saved". See also in 1 Corinthian 1:18 and 2 Corinthians 2:15.
12. Acts 4:27
Many counterfeits abort the Lord Jesus Christ as the Fathers "holy child" to His "holy
servant". A subtle (see Genesis 3:1) and clever denial of the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The counterfeits do this again in Acts 4:30.
13. Acts 8:37
Some counterfeits completely remove this wonderful verse (and several others). Acts 8:37
is the Ethiopian eunuch getting saved. The counterfeits stop him from getting saved. Some
counterfeits are a little more subtle. They do not remove the verse from the text, but will
add a footnote questioning the verse and plant a seed of doubt. Sound familiar? "Yea,
hath God said. . .?" Many counterfeits also remove: Matthew 17:21, 18:11, 23:14, Mark

31

7:16, 9:44, 9:46, Mark 11:26, 15:28, Luke 17:36, 23:17, John 5:4, Acts 8:37, 15:34, 24:7,
28:28, Romans 16:24 and 1 John 5:7!
14. Acts 17:29
The counterfeits change "Godhead" to the new age doctrine of "Divine Nature" or "Divine
Being".
15. Romans 6:22
Many counterfeits demote Christians from the voluntary, loving "servants of God" to cruel
"enslaved" or "slaves of God". The counterfeits describe my Father as a "slave owner" and
His precious children as "slaves". Oh how contrary and wicked to the character of my
loving and wonderful Heavenly Father! This is done many times in the counterfeits. It's
amazing because the first part of Romans 6:22 reads ". . . being made free from sin,. . ."
and according to the counterfeits we now are slaves!
16. 1 Corinthians 1:21
Many counterfeits change ". . .the foolishness of preaching. . ." to the "foolishness of what
was preached" or "foolishness of the message preached". The deceitful counterfeits
change the object of "foolishness" from the act of "preaching" to the "message" of
preaching the gospel of the Lord Jesus. Theres nothing "foolish" about the "message" of
Jesus Christ its the greatest and most reasonable message in the history of the universe!
1 Corinthians 1:18, shines some eye-opening light on the counterfeiters. 1 Corinthians 1:18
says ". . . the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which
are saved it is the power of God." It makes you wonder. . . are the publishers of these
counterfeits saved?
17. 1 Corinthians 6:9
The counterfeits change the word "effeminate" to "homosexual" or "male prostitutes". This
dilutes the serious warning of just the appearance or mannerism (effeminate) to the sexual
act of homosexuals.
18. 2 Corinthians 2:17
The counterfeits change the word "corrupt the word of God" to "peddling (or selling) the
word of God". An apparent attempt by the counterfeiters to hide the fact they are
"corrupting the word of God". It wont work. . . God knows what they are doing.
19. 2 Corinthians 10:5
The counterfeits change "imaginations" to "arguments" or "obstacles" or "speculations".
This change lines the counterfeit up with the new age religion, as the new age is built upon
"imaging" and "imaginations". It also removes the spiritual identification to where sin
begins in our imaginations.
20. Colossians 1:14
Many counterfeits remove the phrase "through his blood". Salvation is only "through his
blood". Without shedding of blood is no remission of sins (Hebrews 9:22)
21. 1 Thessalonians 5:22
The counterfeits change "all appearance of evil" to "every form (or kind) of evil".
22. 1 Timothy 3:16

32

Many counterfeits change the crucial word "God" to the unmodified, vague pronoun "he".
This is the clearest verse in the Bible stating that Jesus Christ was "God manifest in the
flesh" and the counterfeits destroy it.
23. 1 Timothy 6:10
The counterfeits add the words "kinds of". This addition dilutes the conclusive statement,
". . .the love of money is the root of all evil" to the subjective ". . .the love of money is a
root of all kinds of evil".
24. 2 Timothy 2:15
The counterfeits remove the word "study". The counterfeits do not want you to study your
Bible. You might just find out they are mutilating it.
25. Revelation 1:5
Many counterfeits change the wonderful words "washed us from our sins in his own
blood," to "loosed" or "freed" us from our sins. Revelation 1:5 is the only verse in the Bible
that says you are washed in the blood and the counterfeits destroy it. What can wash
away my sin? Nothing but the blood of Jesus.

33

Chapter Seven

Is the King James Bible harder to

read?
Terry Watkins

Dial-the-Truth Ministries

People have been conned with the lie that the new versions are much easier to understand.
I've heard many times, "The King James is too hard to understand."

But the facts tell a different story. . .

Gail Riplinger has a chapter in her best-selling New Age Bible Versions titled "King James
for Kids". Mrs. Riplinger provides 23 pages of irrefutable evidence proving the King James
Bible is far easier to understand and read. She lists over 350 examples in the New
Testament where the King James Bible is much easier and simpler to understand.
In comparing the first chapter of the first and last books of the Old and New Testaments, the
Flesch-Kincaid research companys Grade Level Indicator shows "The KJV ranks easier in
23 out of 26 comparisons" (Riplinger, New Age Bible Versions, 1994, p. 195) betrays the
strictly

34

Grade
Level
Average

5.8

8.4

6.1

7.2

6.9

(table from New Age Bible Versions, p. 196, highlight added)

Mrs. Riplinger writes:
"Why is the KJV easier to read? The KJV uses one or two syllable words while new
versions substitute complex multi-syllable words and phrases." (Ibid, p. 196) She lists over
270 examples in the New Testament. Mrs. Riplinger also attributes the King Jamess ease
of understanding to "Simple sentence structure. . .." (Ibid, p. 204) She again lists many
examples.
In her book, The Language of the King James Bible, Mrs Riplinger continues her research
in the readability of the King James Bible. Mrs. Riplinger documents under the subtitle
"Statistical Verification of Readability":
"Readability statistics generated from Grammatik and Word for Windows show why the KJV
is 5th grade reading level, while the NKJV and NASB are 6th grade, and the NIV is 8th grade
reading level! The KJV averages:

less syllables per word

less letters per word
less words per sentence
smaller percentage of long words
greater percentage of short words than the NKJV, NIV, NASB and NRSV

According to readability statistics generated by Pro-Scribe, the KJV is easier to read than
USA Today, People Magazine and most childrens books."
(Riplinger, The Language of the King James Bible, p. 159

Readability Analysis of Writing Samples

Grade

Syllables
Per Word

Words over
9 Letters

USA Today

1.5

10%

People Magazine

1.5

10%

TEXT

35

Children's Books

1.3

8%

King James Bible, New

7
1.3
3%
Testament
(table from The Language of the King James Bible, p 159, highlight added)

The Comparative Readability of the Authorized Version

The Bible for Today published an interesting and revealing book titled, The Comparative
Readability of the Authorized Version by D.A. Waite, Jr. Using computer readability
software (Grammatik 4.0, Grammatik 5.0, Word for Windows) Mr. Waite, spent hundreds of
hours, lasting over three years, analyzing every word in the King James Bible, the American
Standard Version (ASV), the Revised Standard Version (RSV), the New American Standard
Version (NASV), the New International Version (NIV), the New King James Version (NKJV)
and the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV).
Mr. Waite did not twist, nor slant any of the results but simply let the results speak for
themselves. In fact, Mr. Waite confessed before beginning the research, he was fully
expecting the newer versions to out score the "old" King James Bible. Mr. Waite writes,
"Quite frankly, I was surprised at the results." (D.A. Waite Jr, The Comparative Readability
of the Authorized Version, p. 4) The Comparative Readability of the Authorized Version is
an exhaustive and serious study. It contains detailed tables, charts, documentation,
analysis of every conceivable readability tests known. The King James Bible outscored the
new versions in virtually every test.
Some of Mr. Waites analysis:
"According to the F-K [Flesch-Kincaid] formula 74.3% of the books [in the KJV] are on or
below the sixth grade level, and 94% are on or below the seventh grade level! . . . And
the FRE [Flesch Reading Ease] rated 97% of the KJV books as Fairly Easy or Easy! These
were all first place statistics!" (Ibid, p. 80)
Mr. Waite summarizes his extensive analysis:
"If any of these seven versions is authorized to boast about its success in these
rigorous readability contests, it
is the Authorized Version.
[KJV]. If any has the right to
flaunt the crown of victory, it is
the KING James Bible." (Ibid, p.
80)
Its also worth noting, the New
International Version (NIV),
continually scored the worst, in
some cases, much worse. So
much for the nonsense about the

36

King James being "harder to read".

The Experts Agree

Dr. Rudolf Flesch is the leading authority, researcher and author on readability studies. Dr.
Flesch is the originator of the famous Flesch-Kincaid readability standards. His book Why
Johnny Cant Read is a eye-opening, bestseller. In Dr. Fleschs book, The
Art of Plain Talk, he makes the following noteworthy statement about the King James Bible:
"The best example of very easy prose (about 20 affixes per 100 words) is the King
James Version of the Bible: . . ."
(Rudolf Flesch, The Art of Plain Talk, p. 43)
Several times in his book, Dr. Flesch praises the King James Bible for its ease of reading.
And may I remind you, this is from the leading authority on the subject.
Echoing the opinion of Dr. Flesch in The Art of PLAIN Talk, the Apostle Paul writes the
scriptures use "GREAT plainness of speech".
Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: KJV,
2 Corinthians 3:12
As a fitting comparison, notice the NKJV and the NIV (as do the other new versions) lack
the "plainness of speech".
NKJV
Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech;
NIV
Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold.
The national bestseller, The Story of English, writes of the simplicity of the King James
Bible:
"The King James Bible was published in the year Shakespeare began work on his last play,
The Tempest. Both the play and the Bible are masterpieces of English, but there is one
crucial difference between them. Whereas Shakespeare ransacked the lexicon, the King
James Bible employs a bare 8000 wordsGods teaching in homely English for
everyman."
(Robert McCrum, William Cran, and Robert MacNeil, The Story of English, p. 113)
The Norton Anthology of Literature, selected the King James Bible as one of the finest
examples of writing style in existence. (cited in New Age Bible Versions, p. 212)
The Story of English crowns the King James Bible as, "probably the single most
influential book ever published in the English language." (Robert McCrum, William
Cran, and Robert MacNeil, The Story of English, p. 109)
One of the amazing personalities of the King James Bible is its poetic beauty. Nothing ever
penned in the English language can match its sound and rhythm. For a work of its volume
and serious subject matter the poetic splendor defies human logic. The very sound of
reading of the King James Bible bears the resemble of a music concerto. Its timbre grabs
you, as its melody sings Gods word. What an amazing book!
Its worth noting the emphasis the King James translators placed, not only on the readable
text of the King James Bible, but also its sound. Before the King James Bible was
published and after the initial translation work was completed, a re-working took place, The
Story of English describes this unique process, "they were to go through the text,
reworking it so that it would not only read better but sound better, a quality for which

37

it became famous throughout the English-speaking world." (Robert McCrum, William

Cran, and Robert MacNeil, The Story of English, p. 112) The words of Romans 10:17-18
comes ringing through:
Romans 10:17-18, KJV
17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their
words unto the ends of the world.
Notice how the NIV completely loses this melody in the "sound" of the "words". Its now
simply a message and a voice.
NIV, Romans 10:17
17 Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard
through the word of Christ.
18 But I ask: Did they not hear? Of course they did: "Their voice has gone out into all the
earth, their words to the ends of the world."

38

39

Questions for KJV Critics

1. Since you're smart enough to find "mistakes" in the KJV, why don't you correct them all and
give us a perfect Bible?
2. Do you have a perfect Bible?
3. Since you do believe "the Bible" is our final authority in all matters of faith and practice,
could you please show us where Jesus, Peter, James, Paul, or John ever practiced your
terminology ("the Greek text says...the Hebrew text says....the originals say...a better
rendering would be....older manuscripts read...." etc.)?
4. Since you do not profess to have a perfect Bible, why do you refer to it as "God's word"?
5. Remembering that the Holy Spirit is the greatest Teacher (John 16:12-15; John 2:27), who
taught you that the King James Bible was not infallible, the Holy Spirit or man?
6. Since you do believe in the degeneration of man and in the degeneration of the world
system in general, why is it that you believe education has somehow "evolved" and that men
are more qualified to translate God's word today than in 1611?
7. There is one true God, yet many false gods. There is one true Church, consisting of true
born-again believers in Christ, yet there are many false churches. So why do you think it's so
wrong to teach that there is one true Bible, yet many false "bibles"?
8. Isn't it true that you believe God inspired His holy words in the "originals," but has since lost
them, since no one has a perfect Bible today?
9. Isn't it true that when you use the term "the Greek text" you are being deceitful and lying,
since there are MANY Greek TEXTS (plural), rather than just one?
Before the first new perversion was published in 1881 (the RV), the King James Bible was published,
preached, and taught throughout the world. God blessed these efforts and hundreds of millions
were saved. Today, with the many new translations on the market, very few are being saved. The
great revivals are over. Who has gained the most from the new versions, God or Satan?

A Bible Believers Check List of Beliefs Concerning the Holy Words of God
1) Believes thy word is truth [John 17:17]
2) Believes Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments
endureth for ever [Psalms 119:160]
3) Believes The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified
seven times [Psalms 12:6]
4) Believes Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it [Psalms 119:140]
5) Believes Every word of God is pure [Proverbs 30:5]
6) Believes God has kept His words and has preserved them from this generation for ever [Psalms
12:6]
7) Believes For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven [Psalms 119:89]
8) Believes the word of the LORD is tried [Psalms 18:30]
9) Believes all thy precepts concerning all things to be right [Psalms 119:128]
10) Believes the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth [Psalms 33:4]
11) Believes Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path [Psalms 119:105]
12) Believes The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple
[Psalms 119:130]
13) Believes By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the
breath of his mouth [Psalms 33:6]

40

14) Believes Almighty God has magnified thy word above all thy name [Psalms 138:2]
If a Christian truly believes the preceding verses of Scripture, believing in the King James Bible as
being the Holy word of God is not very difficult. Where else can someone find God's preserved Holy
words in a Book without error - pure, infallible, and inspired?
Which leads us to Brother Chette's "KJV Bible Believers' Check List of Beliefs" as a guide (or a plumbline) as to whether we are genuine King James Bible believers, or whether we have carelessly
professed with our mouth and our lips - some thing we have not truly believed in our hearts:

The King James Bible Believers Check list of Beliefs Concerning The Book
1) Believes that the AV in English Contains the Preserved words of God for all generations
2) Believes that the words in AV English are exactly what God meant for mankind
3) Believes that they can hold in their hands a BOOK (the AV) that contains ALL of the words of God
4) Believes that there are no problems with the text of the AV (Some words or doctrines may
be hard to understand - but there are no problems with the text)
5)
6)
7)
8)

Believes that the AV in English is Without Error

Believes that the English words in the AV are Inspired
Believes the AV English can correct the underlying Greek or Hebrew
Believes that they don't have to go to the Greek or the Hebrew to better understand the
English
9) Believes that the AV has a built in Dictionary to Define the English words used in the AV text
10) Believes that the AV has a divine built in cross-reference for establishing Bible Doctrine
11) Believes the Scriptures when they say: "It is written" or "Thus saith the Lord"
12) Believes they should use only AV terminology and words when establishing Bible Doctrine
13) Believes ALL other Bibles in English today are inferior to the AV text

41

Chapter Eight

by Terry Watkins God has placed a lot of importance upon His words.
Matthew 24:35 reads, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my WORDS shall not pass
away."
Psalms 138:2 says, ". . . for thou hast magnified thy WORD above all thy name."
Psalms 119:89 says, "For ever, O LORD, thy WORD is settled in heaven." The
spiritual life-blood of the human race is the word of God.

It brings salvation: "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of

incorruptible, by the word of God. . ." (1 Peter 1:23)
It produces faith: ". . . faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of
God" (Romans 10:17).
It produces spiritual growth: ". . .desire the sincere milk of the word, that
ye may grow thereby:" (1 Peter 2:2)

Jesus Christ said in John 6:63, ". . .the words that I speak unto you, they are SPIRIT, and
they are LIFE." And the first time Satan attacks the human race was a direct attack on
the word of God!
Genesis 3:1 says, "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the
Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, YEA, HATH GOD SAID. . .?"
Satan planted a small seed of doubt into the mind of Eve. And as Eve questioned the
truthfulness of God's Word - the fall of mankind was only a bite away.

Satan's aim of attack hasn't changed!

In Luke 8, Jesus Christ tells the parable of the sower, verses 11,12 read, "Now the parable
is this: The SEED is the word of God. . . THEN COMETH THE DEVIL, and taketh away
the word. . ."
Satan knows - if he can supplant even a small seed of doubt in God's word - MANKIND
WILL LOOK ELSEWHERE!
Never in history has such doubt and confusion over the Bible existed as is today. And
nothing has flamed the fire of confusion and doubt over the Bible more than the scores of
different translations flooding the scene. Time magazine (April 20, 1981 p.62) reports, ". . .
there is an UNPRECEDENTED CONFUSION of choices in Bibles. Never have so many

42

major new translations been on the market." Since 1880, over 200 different translations
have appeared. Every six months a new English version appears!

NO WONDER PEOPLE ARE CONFUSED!

The question has to be asked - is God the author of this flood of new versions? Is God the
author of CONFUSION in His word? 1 Corinthians 14:33, clearly states, "God is NOT the
author of CONFUSION."
BUT SATAN IS! He knows, if he can plant the smallest seed of doubt and confusion that individual will not take God's word serious!

God promised to preserve His word...

God promised in Psalms 12:7 that He would preserve His word, "Thou shalt KEEP them, O
LORD, thou shalt PRESERVE them from this generation FOR EVER."
And God keeps His promise! I believe, without a doubt, the King James Bible is the
preserved word of God. And the new versions are satanic counterfeits to cast doubt, cause
confusion and ATTACK THE LORD JESUS CHRIST!
And I'm going to prove that on the remainder of this message! If you've come this far,
please keep reading - what you're about to read - may be the most important words YOU
WILL EVER READ!

Are the new versions different?

Most people believe the different versions are basically the same. They believe the newer
versions are just "harmless" updating of words and made easier to understand.

NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH!

One of the clearest verses in the Bible proclaiming the deity of Jesus Christ, that Jesus was
God in the flesh, is 1 Timothy 3:16. The King James Bible reads, "And without controversy
great is the mystery of godliness: GOD WAS MANIFEST IN THE FLESH. . ." The King
James says, clearly, "GOD was manifest in the flesh".
The New International Version (NIV) says, "HE appeared in a body". The NIV, NASV,
RSV, NRSV, etc, change "GOD" to "HE". "He appeared in a body"? Big deal! Everyone
has "appeared in a body"! The KJV is clear and definite, "GOD was manifest in the flesh".
"He" is a pronoun that refers to a noun or antecedent. There is no antecedent in the
context! The statement does NOT even make grammatical sense!

AN ATTACK ON THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST!

43

In Philippians 2:6, The KJV again, clearly declares the deity of Jesus Christ: "Who, being
in the form of God, thought it not robbery TO BE EQUAL WITH GOD" The new
translations completely re-word the verse to deny the deity of Jesus Christ! The NIV, RSV,
NASV, NRSV, NKJV(1979 ed.), etc. reads, "Who, being in very nature God, DID NOT
CONSIDER EQUALITY WITH GOD something to be grasped,"
Someone is attacking the most important doctrine in the Bible - the deity of Jesus Christ!

WHO WOULD DO SUCH A THING?

They attack the virgin birth!
In Luke 2:33, The King James reads, "And JOSEPH and his mother marvelled at those
things which were spoken of him." The NIV, NASV, NRSV, etc. reads, "The CHILD'S
FATHER and mother marveled at what was said about him." The "CHILD'S
FATHER"? Do you believe that Joseph was Jesus's father? Not if you believe the virgin
birth! Not if you believe John 3:16, that Jesus Christ was the Son of God! A subtle, attack
at the virgin birth.
Think these are just isolated cases? NOT BY A LONG SHOT! There are over 6,000
changes!

They remove the Blood!

Consider Colossians 1:14: the KJV reads, "In whom we have redemption THROUGH HIS
BLOOD, even the forgiveness of sins:" The NIV reads, "In whom we have redemption, the
forgiveness of sins." The NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV and co. rip the precious words
"THROUGH HIS BLOOD" out! Friend, salvation is only "THROUGH HIS BLOOD". That
old song says, "What can wash away my sins, NOTHING BUT THE BLOOD OF
JESUS!"

They attack John 3:16!

And something has to be done with John 3:16! So the NIV and company reads, "For God
so loved the world that he gave his ONE AND ONLY SON, that whoever believes in him
shall not perish but have eternal life" - removing the critical word "BEGOTTEN"! If
Jesus was "the one and only" then what happens to the wonderful promise to believers like
1 John 3:2, "Beloved, now are we the sons of God. . ."? AN OBVIOUS
CONTRADICTION APPEARS!

They tell lies!

A blatant error is found in the NIV, NASV, NRSV and "buddies" in Mark 1:2,3: "It is
written in Isaiah the prophet: I will send my messenger ahead of you, who will prepare
your way -a voice of one calling in the desert, Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight
paths for him." It is NOT written in Isaiah! "I will send my messenger ahead of you, who

44

will prepare your way" - is found in Malachi 3:1! The King James correctly reads: "As it is
written in the PROPHETS, . . ."

A better translation! Easier to understand! BY A LIE!

Psalms 119:160 says, "Thy word is TRUE. . ." John 17:17 says, ". . . thy word is
TRUTH." Titus 1:2 clearly says, ". . . God that CANNOT LIE"
How could the God of Titus 1:2 be the God of Mark 1:2,3 in these new versions? Either the
translators of the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV, "crowd" can't read or have never read Isaiah
nor Malachi (which is likely!) or somebody is deliberately tampering with God's Word to
DISCREDIT IT!

Who would do such a thing?

I'll give you a hint - he's called the "A LIAR, and the father of it" in John 8:44!
Oh, by the way, did you think David killed Goliath? Not according to the NIV, NRSV,
NASV, and "boys". In 2 Samuel 21:19, they erroneously read, ". . . Elhanan son of
JaareOregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, who had a spear with a shaft like
a weaver's rod."

They make Lucifer and Jesus Christ - THE SAME!

In Isaiah 14:12, the father of the new versions removes his mask. The King James reads,
"How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, son of the morning!. . ." The NIV,
NASV, NRSV etc. reads, "How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR, son of
the dawn. . ." The new per-versions change "Lucifer" to "morning star". According to
Revelation 22:16, the "morning star" is the Lord Jesus Christ! What blasphemy! What
perversion! And there's no basis whatsoever for the change! The Hebrew word for star
(kokab) is not even found in Isaiah 14:12! Is there any doubt who is the "daddy" of these
new versions?

They take out hell!

If Satan is the author of these new versions, one subject he will aim his attack, is the place
the Bible calls hell. And the new versions go "into loony land" removing it!
Many times they change "hell" to "grave" or "death", but the word "hell" is far and few in
the new versions! Like Psalm 9:17: in the King James reads, "The wicked shall be turned
into HELL. . ." The NIV, reads, "The wicked return to the GRAVE. . ." We ALL "return
to the GRAVE"!
Many times when the new versions come to the obvious word "hell" - they replace it with
the Greek word "Hades" or Hebrew "Sheol"! (See Matt. 16:18, Luke 16:23, Acts 2:31 and
many, many more, the NEW King James does this 29 times!) Rather than translate into the
obvious word hell - THEY REFUSE TO TRANSLATE IT!

45

And this is a better translation? And these new versions are "easier to read" and
"understand"? Who in their right mind thinks Hades or Sheol is "easier to understand" than
hell? Why didn't they leave in the Greek word "Ouranos" for heaven? It's obvious!
Because someone is trying to remove and cast doubt on the place called hell!
In Isaiah 14:15, the King James Bible condemns Lucifer to hell: "Yet thou shalt be brought
down to HELL . . ." The new versions refuse to send Lucifer to hell! The NIV reads, "But
you are brought down to the GRAVE. . ." The NASV, NRSV, NEW King James (NKJV)
places him in "Sheol"!

hmm. . . I wonder which one the Devil prefers?

The Lord's or The Devil's Prayer?

An alarming display of Satanic perversion is found in Luke 11. The "The Lord's Prayer" is
subtly (see 2 Cor. 11:3) transformed into "The Devil's Prayer".
The King James Bible in Luke 11:2-4, reads, ". . .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 every one
that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil."
Incredibly, the NIV, NASV, NRSV, etc. take out: "WHICH ART IN HEAVEN. . . Thy
will be done, AS IN HEAVEN, so in earth. . . but DELIVER US FROM EVIL." Heaven
is completely removed! The "father" of the new versions is NOT IN HEAVEN and
DOES NOT DELIVER FROM EVIL!

I wonder who it could be? (hint: see John 8:44)

Are you getting the picture? Do you see how subtil (see Genesis 3:1), seemingly, harmless
the changes are - AND YET HOW DEADLY THEY ARE TO THE INTEGRITY OF
GOD'S WORD!

They attack the Lord Jesus Christ!

They attack the plan of salvation!
They glorify Lucifer!
And they deny hell!
Yes friend. Satan has launched an attack on your Bible!
YOU'D BETTER BELIEVE IT!
Did you know, the King James Bible is the only English Bible in the world that has a
command to "study" your Bible! That's right! 2 Timothy 2:15, "STUDY to show thyself

46

approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word
of truth" - has been changed in every English Bible on the face of this earth! BUT ONE!

They take out whole verses!

In Acts 8:37, the King James reads, "And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart,
thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God." The
NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV and "buddies" reads - ZIP! NOTHING! THEY TOOK THE
WHOLE VERSE OUT! One of the best verses in the Bible on salvation through Jesus
Christ and they rip it out! Why?
Why is it that every time a sinner is saved by grace in the book of Acts - THEY ATTACK
IT? In Acts 9:5,6: Paul is getting saved, and they take out 20 words! In Acts 16:31 when
the Philippian jailor is getting saved, the word "CHRIST" is delicately removed! Why do
these new bibles so fiercely attack God's wonderful plan of salvation?

WHO WOULD DO SUCH A THING?

Several times the Lord warns against "adding and taking away" from His Word.

Deuteronomy 4:2 reads: "YE SHALL NOT ADD unto the word which I
command you, NEITHER SHALL YE DIMINISH ought from it . . ."

Proverbs 30::6, reads, "ADD THOU NOT unto his words . . ."

And just in case you missed it, GOD'S LAST WARNING is Revelation
22:18,19, ". . . IF ANY MAN SHALL ADD unto these things. . . And if any
man shall TAKE AWAY FROM THE WORDS of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life. . ."

And despite these clear warnings, the new versions, take out and add text, over and over!
One of the greatest verses in all the Bible, Matthew 18:11: "For the Son of man is come to
save that which was lost." - THEY TAKE IT OUT!

WHY!
They take out: Romans 16:24, Mark 11:25, Acts 15:34, Luke 23:17, Acts 28:29, John 5:4,
Mark 7:16, 9:44,46 and many, many more - as your Bible is literally cut apart!
Jesus Christ says, in Luke 4:4, ". . . It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone,
but by EVERY WORD OF GOD." Not according to the NIV, NASV, NRSV and crew! In
fact, the even "tear out"the last half of Luke 4:4 - "BUT BY EVERY WORD OF GOD"!
Yes, but the new versions have the deity in other places. They contain the plan of salvation
in other places. There is good in them. Did you know ONE tiny, microscopic AIDS virus
will "defile" a whole batch of perfectly "good" blood? It has some "good" in it - BUT IT
WOULD BE DEADLY!

47

Would you "inject" it into your child, loved one or congregation? And would you "inject"
them with a Bible that is "defiled" because it has some "good"? It could be far more costly
than their physical life - THEIR ETERNAL SOUL! Galatians 5:9 says, "A LITTLE leaven
leaveneth THE WHOLE lump."

But aren't the new versions easier to read?

One of the lies used to promote these per-versions is "they're easier to read and
understand". But according to a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level research study, The King
James Bible is by far the easiest! Out of 26 different categories - the King James graded
easier in a whopping 23! (New Age Bible Versions, Riplinger, pp.195-209)

But haven't "older and more reliable" manuscripts been

discovered?
But haven't "older and more reliable manuscripts been discovered" since the King James
Bible. Dr. Sam Gipp writes, "The fact is, that the King James translators had ALL OF
THE READINGS available to them that modern critics have available to them today."
(The Answer Book, Gipp, p.110) Not only that, but most of the recent discoveries support
the King James Bible! And furthermore, it is a well documented fact that 85 - 90 per
cent of all readings agree with the King James Bible! SO WHY ALL THE
CHANGES? See Genesis 3:1.

What about the "ORIGINALS"?

Your King James Bible is attacked by preachers, some intentional and some simply out of
ignorance, by "correcting" it with "THE ORIGINALS". There is one itsy-bitsy problem.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS "THE ORIGINALS"! We don't have the "originals"
Moses, or Paul, or David wrote. There are no set of "ORIGINALS" on the face of this earth!
The ghost of "THE ORIGINALS" is a LIE! See John 8:44!
Preachers, by the thousands, will stand weekly in the pulpit and "correct" your King James
Bible by saying, "This is an unfortunate translation" or "a better reading would be" or "this
word in the 'Greek' can also be translated. . ." Friend, where is the Lord God? The One that
"spoke" the worlds into existence - can He not preserve His word as He promised in Psalm
12:7 and Matthew 24:35? Did God Almighty NOT know what He was "inspiring"? Does
the Lord need these "Bible correctors" to "help" Him "straighten-out" His word?
As God promised, He has preserved His word for the English people in the King James
Bible. Proverbs 16:10 says, "A divine sentence is in the lips of the KING. . ." Ecclesiastes
8:4 says, "Where the word of a KING is, there is power . . ." King James. "James" is not an
English word but a Hebrew word. Did you know the Hebrew word for James is Jacob!
You'll never guess what Psalms 147:19 says, "He showeth His WORD unto JACOB . . ."
2 Timothy 2:9, reads, " . . . the word of God is NOT BOUND." Anybody can freely (there's
that word Eve omitted in Genesis 3:2) print, distribute, and reproduce the King James
Bible, without asking anybody for permission! All other translations are "bound" by

48

copyright laws. New American Standard, - copyright Lockman Foundation, New

International Version - copyright New York International Bible Society, New King James
Version - copyright Thomas Nelson Publishers. Who with a brain, would seriously think
the word of Almighty God is "BOUND" by copyright laws?

IF YOU HAVE A KING JAMES BIBLE

YOU HAVE THE WORD OF GOD!
And don't let anybody take it from you!
Dr. Frank Logsdon was co-founder of The New American Standard Version. As people
begin confronting Dr. Logsdon on some the NASV's serious omissions and errors. He
reexamined the evidence and this was his verdict:
"I must under God denounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I'm
afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord . . . I wrote the format . . . I wrote the preface . . . I'm in
trouble; . . . its wrong, terribly wrong; its frighteningly wrong . . .The deletions are
absolutely frightening . . . there are so many . . . Are we so naive that we do not suspect
Satanic deception in all of this?"
Dr. Frank Logsdon
Co-founder, New American Standard Version

49

Chapter Nine

The Language of the KJV

From another KJV Website
The KJV is not written in modern colloquialism. However, it is wrong to dismiss the peculiar language
of the KJV as mere outdated language. Much of the KJVs peculiar style is due to the KJVs faithful
translation of the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts. In the national bestseller, God's Secretaries,
Adam Nicolson observes, "These scholars [working on the KJV] were not pulling the language of the
scriptures into the English they knew and used at home. The words of the King James Version are
just as much English pushed towards the conditions of a foreign language as a foreign language
translated into English" (211). Pushing English towards Hebrew and Greek serves to convey the
meaning and style of the original scriptures more accurately. This article describes how this is so.
Things that are not mere archaisms
Second-person pronoun distinction:
Perhaps the first thing that many people identify as an archaism in the KJV is the use of thees and
thous. The KJV uses these pronouns in order to distinguish between the second-person singular
(thou, thee, thy, thine) and the second-person plural (ye, you, your, yours). The Greek and Hebrew
make this distinction.
This distinction is crucial for a close reading of the Bible. See Galatians 6:1 for example: Brethren, if
a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness;
considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted. By paying close attention to the pronouns, we see
that the restoration of a faulted individual is the responsibility of not just one person but of many
("ye" which are spiritual) but each individual must examine his own integrity (considering "thyself").
We cannot extract these helpful teachings on communal responsibility and individual responsibility
from this passage unless the distinctions in pronouns are translated. Other passages where the
distinction in a pronoun's person is important are Exodus 4:15, Exodus 29:42, 2 Samuel 7:23,
Matthew 26:64, Luke 22:31-32, John 3:7, 1 Corinthians 8:9-12, 2 Timothy 4:22, Titus 3:15, Philemon
21-25, to name a few.
Many modern languages such as French, German, Spanish, Japanese, and Chinese retain this
distinction between singular and plural second person pronouns. Moreover, although thou and
ye may be archaic, they are not unfamiliar. We do not use these pronouns in colloquial speech,
but we still use them when we sing hymns (even contemporary praise songs) to God and to the
congregation. We sing Be thou my vision in the song titled thus, and Prepare ye the way of the
Lord in the song, Days of Elijah. At every hockey game Canadians sing their national anthem, "O
Canada," which mentions "thy" once and "thee" four times in one stanza. The song became the
official Canadian national anthem as recently as in July 1, 1980 and remains a national favourite.
Canadian children do not have any problem understanding the meaning of "thy" and "thee."
Although thou and ye may not be parts of colloquial speech, they are certainly not obsolete if
we still use them in songs, prose, or the Bible when there are good grammatical, metrical, or
stylistic reasons to use them.
Lack of quotation marks:

50

The KJV does not have quotation marks (" "). This is often considered another archaic feature of the
KJV. There are, however, good reasons not to have quotation marks. The original Hebrew and
Greek texts do not have them. The following page explains why it is helpful not to have quotation
marks in the Bible: Quotation Marks.
Imperatives with subjects:
Imperative statements are commands. For example, Praise the LORD is an imperative statement.
In modern imperative statements the subject is often not stated. One could say, You, praise the
LORD, but it is customary to omit the subject. If the KJV were to state the above, it might say,
"Praise thou the LORD" or "Praise ye the LORD." Such constructions may seem peculiar to the
modern reader. Most modern grammar books might say that it is unnecessary to indicate the
subject in imperative statements because the subject is always you. However, this rule is not
wholly accurate. There are two kinds of you the singular you, which is thou, and the plural
you, which is ye. This distinction can be important. For example, Psalm 104:35 says, Bless
thou the LORD, O my soul. Praise ye the LORD. In this statement, the speaker says to his own self
(his soul), Bless thou the LORD. Using thou, his imperative statement to bless is addressed
only to his own soul. However, the speaker follows up with Praise ye the LORD, which is an
imperative statement addressed to others. In this passage, the speaker begins commanding himself
first, but he concludes by commanding others. We do not get this fact when the imperative
statements do not indicate the person. For example, Bless the LORD, O my soul! Praise the LORD!
in the ESV reads as if the speaker is telling his soul once again to praise the LORD. In the ESV the
speaker seems to conclude the psalm with the focus on himself whereas in the KJV the speaker
clearly concludes the psalm with the focus on others. Thus the use of personal pronouns in
imperative statements serves a grammatical and semantic purpose.
Vocative case:
The vocative case is used when directly addressing a person with a noun identifying the person
instead of with the second person pronoun you. An example is in Matthew 6:9 which says, Our
Father, which art in heaven. Today we are less inclined to say Our Father, who ARE in heaven. It
seems more natural to say Our Father, who IS in heaven. The peculiarity of the KJV is based on the
faithful translation of the vocative case. This is not an archaism but a faithful translation of the
Greek which has the vocative case.
Hebraism:
The KJV preserves lexicographical and syntactical Hebraisms (William Rosenau, Hebraisms in the
Authorized Version of the Bible, Lord Baltimore Press (1902)). Many readers mistake these Hebraisms
for archaisms. Most contemporary translations, in an attempt to make the Bible sound more
familiar to readers, dilute the Hebrew style of the Bible. Much of the peculiar language of the KJV is
due to its faithful mimicry of the Hebrew language. Expressions such as the Hebraic anticipatorial
accusative (God saw the light, that it was good Genesis 1:4) and Hebraic double prepositions
(Abram went up out of Egypt Genesis 13:1) are examples of Hebraisms. Acclaimed
Greek teacher John H. Dobson, author of Learn New Testament Greek, 3rd ed, Baker Academic
(2005), invites his students to pay close attention to the Hebraic influence in the Greek New
Testament. Due to his apparent preference for dynamic translations, he does not seem to prefer the
KJV. However, he acknowledges that the KJV follows Hebrew style more closely than a modern
translator would normally do (305).
Greek syntax:

51

In the New Testament, the KJV often follows the Greek word order more closely than most
translations. These can also be confused with archaisms. For example, Matthew 17:19 says, Then
came the disciples to Jesus. This syntax, which has the verb preceding the subject, may seem
peculiar to contemporary English-speaking audiences; but the word order in the KJV follows the
Greek word order ( ). Mimicking the exact style and
structure of the Greek can sometimes preserve what is emphasized in the Greek. Another feature
common in the KJV is the historical present tense. The KJV often uses the present tense to describe
past action: e.g. Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John (Matthew 3:13). This is
because the KJV faithfully translates the Greek which is also in the present tense. Greek writers used
the historical present tense to add emphasis to important past actions. The historical present tense
has the effect of making past narratives more vivid. Modern translations unfortunately blur this
effect by translating the historical present tense in the simple past tense.
More accurate equivalents:
Sometimes an archaic word in the KJV is more accurate in translating the Hebrew or Greek than a
modern equivalent found in modern translations. For example, "bewray" at Matthew 26:73 seems
archaic. The verse reads, "And after a while came unto him they that stood by, and said to Peter,
Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech bewrayeth thee." The modern ESV says, "After a
little while the bystanders came up and said to Peter, "Certainly you too are one of them, for your
accent betrays you."". "Bewray" is not merely the modern equivalent of "betray". "Bewray" is a
more nuanced word which has the connotation of "divulge" (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). So
"bewray" in its full implication means "to betray by revealing". What happened in Matthew 26:73
was that Peter's Galilean speech "revealed" his association with Jesus which in effect "betrayed"
(implicated) him. The Greek word at Matthew 26:73 is which is translated as "evident" in
Galatians 3:11 in both the KJV and ESV. Clearly the word has the connotation of revealing
something, not just betraying. When faced with an "old" word in the KJV, it is fruitful to confirm
whether the old word is more accurate before brushing it off as a mere archaism.
Legal writing:
The Bible is God's "testament" or "covenant" to humanity. As such, the Bible is a legal document.
Not to mention that some books of the Bible are literally legal documents. The phrase "legal
document" might not connote the same warm and fuzzy feeling as would the phrase "love letter"
(as some might describe the Bible) but the truth is that the more intimate we are with someone,
the more we enter into meaningful legal agreements with that person. A marriage is a legal
covenant. Family inheritances are conferred through wills and trusts. Any flirt can write a "love
letter," but only a true lover will issue a legally binding marriage certificate or a will to bestow one's
assets. The Bible is not just a "love letter" - it is God's covenant signed by the blood of his Son.
Thus the Bible employs many legal words that we may not use on a daily basis: thereof, thereby,
therein, hereby, herein, whereof, whereby, wherein, wherefore. These words are accurate legal
terms which incidentally remind us that the Bible is indeed a collection of two "Testaments." These
words are not archaisms because they are still used in legal writing.

British words and idioms:

Some words and idioms may seem archaic to a North American, but they may be very familiar to the
British or citizens of other commonwealth nations. There are millions of readers outside of North
America who understand these British words and idioms. For example, the words plaiting

52

(1 Peter 3:3) may be unfamiliar to North Americans, but is familiar to the British. Moreover, some
British words may become familiar to North Americans through popular novels or movies from
Britain. For example, schoolmaster (Galatians 3:24-25) is more commonly used in Britain than in
North America. However, with the success of the Harry Potter novels (albeit their controversy
among Christians), the word schoolmaster has become familiar to North American children. As
advocates of modern translations say, language is always in flux. If that were true, however, a word
that becomes obsolete might become standard again with its use in just one popular novel or
movie. We must be careful so that we do not deem a word as being obsolete too readily.
Preservation of ambiguity in the original languages:
The KJV uses which to refer to people. This is considered problematic by some critics. However,
there is good reason to use "which" instead of "who" where the context is unclear as to whether a
thing or a person is being referred to. For example, 1 Peter 1:23 says, Being born again, not of
corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. The
clause, "which liveth and abideth for ever" could refer either to "the word" or to "God." The clause
could be saying either that the word of God lives and abides for ever or that God lives and abides for
ever. The ambiguity is present in the Greek and so the KJV makes that apparent.
Supposedly archaic words that are preserved in jargons:
Some words that are deemed archaic are actually still used frequently by some segment of the
population as terms of art. For example, let (Romans 1:13) is considered to be a prime example of
an archaic word in the KJV (let in this usage means hindered). However, the term without let or
hindrance is used in the passport notes of Britain, Canada, Australia, South Africa, Nigeria, India,
Pakistan, and Israel. Thus people who work with immigration, such as border guards, lawyers, policy
makers, and many educated people are familiar with the term without let or hindrance. This
makes "let" a jargon rather than an archaism. Also, anybody who plays or watches tennis will know
that a let is called when a stroke does not count and hinders the gameplay. Thus a word such as
let may be infrequently used today, but it is not entirely obsolete.
Poetry:
Some constructions that may seem archaic are actually constructed as such for poetic effect. The
phrase "...all the places where David himself and his men were wont to haunt" (1 Samuel 30:31) is
not common speech, but the rhyming phrase "wont to haunt" is more poetic than "accustomed to
go" (NASB). Also the phrase "despise dominion" in Jude 1:8 does not consist of the most "uptodate" vocabulary. The ESV says "reject authority". However, "despite dominion" is an
alliteration. In fact, the entire line "...these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and
speak evil of dignities" is a five-fold alliteration of the letter D. This is KJV poetry at its finest. The
letter D is a plosive, a consonant produced in the mouth by a strong sudden stoppage of airflow. It
is the most fitting consonant in a verse such as Jude 1:8 where the speaker is shooting out words of
condemnation like bullets from a machine gun. While a Bible does not have to have rhymes and
alliterations to convey the message of God, poetry helps memorization.

53

Things that are actually archaisms

Archaic spellings and forms:
The KJV has some archaic spellings and forms of words such as spake and shew. These can
certainly be updated without changing the meaning of the text. They serve no special grammatical
or semantic purpose. However, their meanings are not difficult to ascertain from the context and
from their close resemblance with their modern equivalents.
Familiar archaic words:
Some words have an archaic flavour, but are nonetheless familiar. These typically do not cause any
comprehension problem for a reader. For example, thou might seem archaic, but its meaning is
known to the typical reader. After reading the KJV habitually these archaic words begin to sound as
natural as any other modern word. Words such as "thou" (singular 2nd person pronoun) and "ye"
(plural 2nd person pronoun) are certainly more familiar to an English speaker than the Hebrew and
Greek equivalents. By reading the KJV instead of a modern translation, a Christian can benefit from
the grammatical distinction between the singular and plural second-person pronouns without
learning Hebrew or Greek.
Unfamiliar archaic words that can be discerned by the context:
Many archaic words in the KJV can be discerned by the context. Judges 3:21-22 says, "And Ehud put
forth his left hand, and took the dagger from his right thigh, and thrust it into his belly: And the haft
also went in after the blade; and the fat closed upon the blade, so that he could not draw the dagger
out of his belly;" "Haft" is archaic, but there is no problem figuring out that it is a part of the dagger
that is opposite to the blade. These archaic words cause no problem in comprehension; moreover,
they may appear often in passages that do not have much theological significance.
Unfamiliar archaic words that cannot be discerned by the context:
That leaves us with unfamiliar archaic words that cannot be discerned by the context. Such words
could cause problems with comprehension. However, such words do not appear in the KJV as often
as one might expect. For example, in the Gospel of John the only unfamiliarly obsolete words are
listeth (John 3:8) and wist (John 5:13). To list (related to lust) means to desire, and to
wist (related to wise) means to know. There are some books with more archaic words than just
two, but many of these words can be understood by the context.
However, even an unfamiliar archaic word can become familiar again. For example, before the
outbreak of the swine flu (H1N1) many children in North America may not have known the meaning
of swine. Thus the NIV and ESV use pigs instead of swine. Now, however, with the amount of
hype around the swine flu, there is no child who is unaware of the word and its meaning. Thus even
unfamiliar archaic words that cannot be discerned by the context may be better off being learned
rather than replaced.

54

55

Chapter Ten
The Use of Italics in the King James Bible
by Dr. David L. Brown
Why did the King James Bible translators use italics in the King James Bible? Was it because God
miraculously gave the translators additional inspiration the same way He did as recorded in 2 Peter
1:21, holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost? Or is it, as some have
assumed, that these words were printed in this fashion for emphasis? The answer to both of these
questions is, NO.
In fact, the words in italics in the King James Bible are words that were added by the translators to
help the reader. This is usually necessary when translating from one language to another because a
word in one language may not have a corollary word in English and idiomatic expressions often do
not easily move from one language to another. Hence, the words in italics are words which do not
have any equivalence in the Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek text. By adding these words, the translators
goal was to make the meaning of the sentence clearer and produce a more readable translation that
read smoothly, yet was true to the original. However, to make sure that the reader understood that
these words were not in the manuscripts, they set them in italics.
I have Gordon Campbells book entitled Bible: The Story of the King James Version, published by
Oxford University Press. Published in 2010, it is a history of the King James Bible. Campbell states
that KJV translator Samuel Ward reported to the 1618 Synod of Dort the procedures or rules that
guided the making of the KJV. He noted that some of those rules were supplementary rules that
added information not found in the fifteen rules given the KJV translators. Campbell asserted that
this information reported by Samuel Ward has "the inestimable advantage of reflecting what
actually happened rather than what was supposed to happen." (p. 41).
Here is the rule the KJV translators used themselves as presented by Samuel Ward that relates to the
use of italics:
"Words that it was anywhere necessary to insert into the text to complete the meaning were to be
distinguished by another type, small roman" (p. 42).
So you are not confused, I remind you that the 1611 Bible was in fancy Black Letter type. The added
words were in smaller Roman type and not italics. In later editions that were set in Roman type,
italics were used. This is what we see in our King James Bibles today.
F. H. A. Scrivener wrote: "The end proposed by the use of italics is thus explained in the Geneva
edition of 1578. 'Where as the necessity of the sentence required anything to be added (for such is
the grace and propriety of the Hebrew and Greek tongues, that it cannot but either by
circumlocution, or by adding the verb, or some word, be understood of them that are not
wellpractised therein), we have put it in the text with another kind of letter.' If this be the rule which
the translators of our present version proposed to themselves (and we have every reason for
believing that it was), it follows
that such a rule should be carried out uniformly, and on all occasions" (Supplement to the Authorized
English Version of the New Testament, Vol. I, pp. 60-61).

56

Scrivener also quoted in a note a similar comment from the 1557 Whittingham's New Testament.
Thus, the early English translators themselves stated one of the rules or principles that they used for
"italics" [or putting some words in a different kind of letter or type], and the above evidence shows
that principle was also affirmed and advocated by the KJV translators.
The words in italics are there for a purpose. While there are many illustrations to show how helpful
the italics are, I will show you just one. We see that David killed Goliath in 1 Samuel 17:49 And
David put his hand in his bag, and took thence a stone, and slang it, and smote the Philistine in his
forehead, that the stone sunk into his forehead; and he fell upon his face to the earth. That is
confirmed in 1 Samuel 21:9 And the priest said, The sword of Goliath the Philistine, whom thou
slewest in the valley of Elah, behold, it is here wrapped in a cloth behind the ephod: if thou wilt take
that, take it: for there is no other save that here. And David said, There is none like that; give it me.
Watch carefully the importance of the italics in II Samuel 21:19, And there was again a battle in Gob
with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of
Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam. But, omitting the italicized
words from II Samuel 21:19 as the ESV, NASB, NIV, The Message, etc. state, it would lead you to
believe Elhanan was the one who slew Goliath. Look carefully at II Samuel 21:19 from the New
American Standard, And there was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of
Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a
weavers bean. However, we know that is not a true statement by reading 1 Chronicles 20:5 And
there was war again with the Philistines; and Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi the brother of
Goliath the Gittite, whose spear staff was like a weaver's beam.
Clearly, the words in italics were not miraculously given to the translators by God as additional
inspiration the same way He did as recorded in 2 Peter 1:21, holy men of God spake as they were
moved by the Holy Ghost. Neither are the italics there to add emphasis. The words in italics in the
King James Bible are words that were added by the translators to help the reader better understand
the intent of the passage translated from the original languages.

57

Chapter Eleven
The Lord Jesus Christ, the eternal, only begotten Son of God.
By Will Kinney
We cannot wrap our minds around the mystery of the Holy Trinity, but the Sacred Scriptures, as
found in the King James Bible, reveal that Jesus Christ is the eternal, only begotten son of God. He
was the only begotten Son BEFORE His incarnation. I John 4:9 says, "In this was manifested the love
of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live
through him." Christ was the only begotten Son BEFORE He was set into the world. He did not
become the only begotten Son at His incarnation.
In John 10:36, our Saviour asks, Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the
world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
As the Son of God He appeared in the fiery furnace along with the three Hebrew believers in the
days of Daniel. In Daniel 3:25 king Nebuchadnezzar says: "Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the
midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God." Some
object to the phrase "like the Son of God", and tell us this was not the Son. However, we see a
similar phrase used in Daniel 7:13 "I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one LIKE the Son of man
came with the clouds of heaven..." and in Revelation 1:13 where the apostle John is shown a vision
of the ascended and glorified Lord of glory, and he says: "And being turned I saw...in the midst of the
seven candlesticks one LIKE UNTO the Son of man." Was this indeed the Son of man and the Son of
God? Of course it was.
The book of Proverbs makes mention of the pre-incarnate Son in 30:4. "Who hath ascended up into
heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a
garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's
name, if thou canst tell?"
More Biblical Evidence Showing That Christ Was the Son of God Even Prior to Bethlehem:
The Bible clearly teaches that it was the Son who created all things, thus strongly implying that
Christ was the Son of God at the time of creation.
The great creation passages of Scripture affirm that as the Son He created all things. In Colossians
1:12 - 17 we read: "Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the
inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath
translated us into the kingdom of His dear SON: In whom we have redemption through His blood,
even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
For by Him (the Son) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and
invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created
by Him, and for Him: And He (the Son) is before all things, and by Him all things consist."
Again in Hebrews 1:1-2 we read: "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past
unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by His SON, whom He hath
appointed heir of all things, by Whom (the Son) also He made the worlds..."
It was by the Son of God that all things were created; thus He was the Son of God before His
incarnation.

58

There are many passages which speak of the Father SENDING the Son into the world. All these verses
suggest that Christ existed as the Son prior to His incarnation. 1 John 4:10,14: "Herein is love, not
that we loved God, but that he loved us, and SENT HIS SON to be the propitiation for our sins." "And
we have seen and do testify that the Father SENT THE SON to be the Saviour of the world.".
Galatians 4:4 "But when the fulness of the time was come, God SENT FORTH HIS SON, made of a
woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law." God's Son was sent into
this world, and made of a woman. This is when He became the God - man, and took on human
nature in order to be our kinsman redeemer, but the incarnation is not when He was made the Son
of God. He always was the Son of God.
The parable of the vineyard owner (Mark 12:1-12) points to Christ as being the Son prior to His
coming into the world. In the parable, the son of the vineyard owner was the son long before he was
sent on his mission.
John 3:16 tells us that God gave His only begotten Son, implying that Christ was God's Son before He
was given. God the Father did not give One who would become His Son, but He gave One who
already was His Son.
Notice carefully what the Lord says in John 16:28. "I am COME FORTH FROM THE FATHER, and am
come into the world; again, I leave the world, and go to the Father." He first "came forth from the
Father" and then He came into the world. God was His Father BEFORE He came into this world. Then
in John 17:5 the Lord again says: "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the
glory which I had with thee (the Father) BEFORE THE WORLD WAS." These verses clearly imply that
Christ was the Son of the Father before He came into this world.
Romans 1:1-3 tell us of the gospel of God, which he promised afore by his prophets in the Holy
Scriptures "Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was MADE of the seed of David
ACCORDING TO THE FLESH." Again, this speaks of the incarnation of the eternal Son of God as a man
to become our kinsman redeemer, but He was the Son of God before His incarnation.
Those who deny the eternal Sonship of the Lord Jesus Christ will often refer to Luke 1:31-35. Here
the angel Gabriel is sent to the virgin Mary with these words: "And, behold, thou shalt conceive in
thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and SHALL BE
CALLED the Son of the Highest: (Notice it does not say "He shall BECOME the Son of the Highest) and
the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of HIS FATHER DAVID. (David was His father only in the
human sense, not in regard to His eternal Sonship)....The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the
power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore that holy thing which shall be born of thee
SHALL BE CALLED the Son of God." Again, the text does not says "shall BECOME the Son of God", but
"shall be called the Son of God."
The apostles John, Peter and Paul, as well as Thomas and many others called the Lord Jesus Christ
the Son of God, and so do countless numbers of Christians today, but our calling Him the Son of God
does not make Him God's eternal Son - No, this is who He is and always was - the eternal, only
begotten Son of the living God.
John Gill comments: "and shall be called the Son of the Highest... not by creation, as angels and men,
nor by adoption, as saints, nor by office, as magistrates, are called "the children of the Most High",
(Psalms 82:6) but by nature, being the eternal Son of God; of the same nature with him, and equal to
him: for he was not now to begin to be the Son of God, he was so before, even from all eternity; but
the sense is, that he should now be known, owned, and acknowledged to be the Son of God, being

59

as such manifested in human nature, and should be proved to be so by the works he wrought, and
declared to be the Son of God with power by his resurrection from the dead."
Perhaps the strongest verse for those who deny the eternal Sonship of the Second Person of the
Trinity is 2 Samuel 7:14 where God tells king David that He will raise up his seed after him and "He
shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his
father, and he shall be my son." Notice that the King James Bible does not capitalize either Father or
Son.
If this were the only verse in Scripture that addresses the nature of the Son of God, I would have to
agree with their point of view. However, it is not, and there are many other Scriptures that teach the
eternality of the Son of God. What I believe this verse is speaking of is that God will be his father and
he His son by the way He treats with and deals with this future seed of David. As a father He will
watch over him and care for him; not that He will become His Father and He His Son.
We see the same thing in Revelation 21:7. Ask those who teach the doctrine of incarnational sonship
if they are right now, at this moment, a son of God. They will affirm that they are. But Revelation
21:7 says: "He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God and he shall be my son."
Yet we already are the sons of God as numerous passages of Scripture tell us. However this verse
seems to be saying that in the future we will eternally enjoy this relationship with God as our Father
and we as His sons.
Jesus Christ, as the only begotten Son is one of the Three Persons of the Trinity. He is the eternal Son
of the eternal Father. If the Father is eternal, so must be the Son. A human man cannot be a father
until he has a son. He is a man, and a husband, but he does not become a father until and at the
same time he has a son. The two terms, father and son, are simultaneous.
The orthodox view of the Person of Jesus Christ is that He is the only begotten Son by eternal
generation, eternally proceeding from the Father. He is also eternal God. I Timothy 3:16 tell us, And
without controversy great is the mystery of godliness; GOD was manifest in the flesh, justified in the
Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
You cannot prove that God was manifest in the flesh from the Jehovah Witness bible, nor from the
NIV, RSV, ESV, NET, or NASB versions using this verse. They say something like He appeared in a
body - NIV. All of us have appeared in a body too, but we are not God.
There are also other verses found in the modern versions that undermine and attack the eternal
deity of the only begotten Son of God. Can you prove from the KJB that Jesus Christ had a beginning
or an origin? No. Can you prove from the NIV, RSV, ESV, NET version, Holman Standard, or the JW
bibles that He had an origin? Yes.
In Micah 5:2, the King James Bible says: But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among
the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel;
WHOSE GOINGS FORTH have been from of old, FROM EVERLASTING.
Other versions that read like the KJB "whose goings forth" are the Revised Version, American
Standard Version, the NKJV, Webster's, Third Millenium Bible, NASB, Darby, Spanish, Hebrew-English
translations of 1917 and 1936, Coverdale, Bishops', Hebrew Names Version, Bible in Basic English,
Young's, the Geneva Bible, and the Catholic Douay.
The NIV says, "whose ORIGINS are from of old, from ANCIENT TIMES." The JW version, and the RSV,
ESV, and Holman Standard say, "whose ORIGIN is from early times, from the days of time indefinite
(or "origin..from ancient days)."

60

KJB - Psalm 93:2 Thy throne is established of old: thou art from everlasting.
NIV - Psalm 93:2 Your throne was established long ago; you are from all eternity.
The NIV says God is everlasting/eternal based upon the Hebrew word for everlasting.
But when the NIV and other MVs gets to Micah 5:2 where the reference is to Jesus Christ then
suddenly the Hebrew word for everlasting changes to "ancient of days" or "from ancient times"
Now Jesus is not eternal anymore. Why is God eternal in Psalm 93:2 but Jesus is not eternal in Micah
5:2 according to several modern versions? It is the same Hebrew word.
Daniel Wallace's Net version likewise reads in Micah 5:2 - "As for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,
seemingly insignificant among the clans of Judah from you a king will emerge who will rule over
Israel on my behalf, one whose ORIGINS are in the distant past."
Then the good Doktor footnotes - "Hebrew his goings out. The term may refer to the rulers origins
or to his activities."
Why do the NIV, RSV, ESV, Holman Standard, NET, and the JW bibles say origin or "origins"? The
Son of God did not have a beginning, but He Himself is the beginning, the source of all that exists.
Revelation 22:13 tells us, I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.
Compare these words spoken by the Lord Jesus Christ with those found in Isaiah 44:6, Thus saith
the LORD, the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last;
and beside me there is no God.
The JWs teach that the Son of God is not eternal God, but rather the first created being, that He is
less than God the Father. The word of God says, "whose GOINGS FORTH have been from of old,
FROM EVERLASTING." Remember, "I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world."
The KJB says his goings forth are from everlasting. Yet the NIV, RSV, ESV, NET say his origin is from
ancient times. Ancient times may be long, long ago, but it is not the same as everlasting.
The Hebrew word olam can be translated as ancient when applied to created things or people as it
is in Psalm 22:28, Remove not the ancient landmark, or as in Isaiah 44:7, since I appointed the
ancient people, but when the word is applied to God, it is rendered as everlasting as in Psalm
90:2, from everlasting to everlasting Thou art God.
The NIV concordance shows that they have translated this word as everlasting 60 times, as eternal
or eternity 8 times, as forever 202 times, but as from ancient times only twice - one of them
here in Micah 5:2 where they apply it to our Lord and Redeemer!
Acts 13:33 "This day have I begotten thee"
There is another phrase. that is hard to be understood that has been changed in the NIV, NKJV,
RSV, ESV, NET, Holman, and the NASB. It is found in Acts 13:33 where it refers to the resurrection of
Jesus Christ from the dead. The KJB reads, "God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath
raised up Jesus AGAIN; as it is written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."
The versions that read as the KJB, he hath raised up Jesus AGAIN are Tyndale 1525, Coverdale
1535, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599, Websters 1833, the Third Millenium Bible, and
the 21st Century KJB. The modern New English Bible and the New Century version both read raising

61

Jesus from the dead. The Living Bible says bringing Jesus back from the dead, and Gods Word
Translation says, by bringing Jesus back to life.
It is of great interest to see how many foreign language Bibles render this phrase he hath raised up
Jesus AGAIN. The Spanish says: resusitndo a Jesus, the Latin resuscitans Iesum, the French - en
ressuscitant Jesus; the Portuguese- ressuscitando a Jesus, and the Italian has risuscitando Gesu. Thus
it is easy to see that they all consider this verse to read as does the KJB. I believe it is referring to the
resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.
The modern NKJV, NIV, RSV, ESV, and NASB versions make this verse refer to the incarnation of
Jesus, rather than His resurrection by merely saying, God has raised up Jesus. They leave out raised
up Jesus AGAIN.
Some new version defenders tell us that the word again is not in the Greek text. Yet again, I
believe this is a false statement. All the versions, frequently translate the verb anistemi as raised up
again. For example the NIV renders this word as rise again 6 times, raised to life once, and
raised from the dead once. It is frequently used in the phrase that Jesus would be raised on the
third day. The noun form of this verb is anastasis and is always used in referrence to the
resurrection.
What does the phrase, This day have I begotten thee mean? Jesus Christ did not become the only
begotten Son at His incarnation. This false doctrine is called incarnational sonship. He was the only
begotten Son BEFORE His taking on a human body.
The orthodox doctrine that the Lord Jesus Christ was begotten before His incarnation was firmly
established in 325 A.D at the council of Nicea when the church was combating the teaching of
Arianism. Arianism taught that Christ was a created being; that He had an origen and was inferior to
God the Father.
Here is part of the well known Nicean Creed.
I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and
invisible;
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father before all worlds,
God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with
the Father; by whom all things were made;
I John 4:9, "In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only
begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him." He was the only begotten Son before
He was sent into this world.
The NIV teaches heresy with its rendering of Acts 13:33 by saying, "Today I have become your
Father." And now the two new versions coming out, the ISV (International Standard Version) and the
Southern Baptist Holman Christian Standard also have: "Today I HAVE BECOME YOUR FATHER"!!!
Daniel Wallace, of Dallas Theological Seminary, has his goofy NET bible version on the internet. The
NET version says: "13:33 that this promise God has fulfilled to us, their children, by raising Jesus, as
also it is written in the second psalm, You are my Son; TODAY I HAVE FATHERED YOU."

62

Then D.Wallace footnotes: " Greek I have begotten you. The traditional translation is misleading to
the modern English reader because it is no longer in common use. Today one speaks of fathering a
child in much the same way speakers of English formerly spoke of begetting a child.
While Dr. Wallace speaks of updating, or "modernizing" the English language, he utterly fails to see
the blatant theological heresy his easy to read version has introduced. This reading of "today I have
fathered you" teaches that there was a time when Jesus Christ was not the Son, and God was not His
Father. This is the same teaching and reading of the Jehovah Witnesses' bible version.
The verb used here is gennao, to beget or to be born. There is no Greek word here for the NIV's "
have become" or " Father" in any Greek text on this earth.
In what sense then can Jesus be said to have been begotten on a certain day? This happened at the
resurrection.
Jamieson, Faussett and Brown commentary: this day have I begotten thee-- (Psalms 2:7). Fulfilled at
the resurrection of Jesus, whereby the Father "declared," that is, made manifest His divine Sonship,
heretofore veiled by His humiliation (Acts 13:33, Romans 1:4). Christ has a fourfold right to the title
"Son of God"; (1) By generation, as begotten of God; (2) By commission, as sent by God; (3) By
resurrection, as "the first-begotten of the dead" (4) By actual possession, as heir of all . I the
Everlasting Father have begotten Thee this day, that is, on this day, the day of Thy being manifested
as My Son, "the first-begotten of the dead" (Col. 1:18, Rev. 1:5).The context refers to a definite point
of time, namely, that of His having entered on the inheritance (Heb. 1:4)."
B.W. Johnson, People's New Testament: "This day have I begotten thee. What day is referred to in
the prophecy? Acts 13:32, 33 answers the question by quoting this very passage and declaring that it
was fulfilled in the resurrection of Christ from the dead. He was born from the dead and God, who
raised him, thus demonstrated that he was his Son.
The Expositor's Greek Testament: "Today" is evidently intended to mark a special occasion and
cannot allude to the eternal generation of the Son. It is not the beginning of life, but the entrance on
office that is indicated and it is as King the person addressed is God's Son. Thus Paul applies it to the
resurrection of Christ in Acts 13:33.
John Wesley comments on this passage:
"Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee - It is true, he was the Son of God from eternity. As
St. Paul elsewhere, declared to be the Son of God with power, by the resurrection from the
dead,(Romans 1:4) And it is with peculiar propriety and beauty that God is said to have begotten
him, on the day when he raised him from the dead, as he seemed then to be born out of the earth
anew."
Dr. Douglas Stauffer, a Baptist pastor and preacher, has written a book called One Book Stands
Alone, which is a good defense of the King James Bible. Regarding Acts 13:33 and its meaning, Mr.
Stauffer notes on pages 24-25: KJB Acts 13:33 "God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in
that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, THIS
DAY HAVE I BEGOTTEN THEE.
When the Father said this to the Son, it was not at His birth. It was at His resurrection. He became
the "first BEGOTTEN of the dead" Rev.1:5. God did not become the Lord's Father when He was born
or Mary or at the resurrection. He is from everlasting, with no beginning. The Son always was...but
not so in the NIV.

63

NIV Acts 13:33 "he has fulfilled for us, their children, by raising up Jesus. As it is written in the second
Psalm: "You are my Son; TODAY I HAVE BECOME YOUR FATHER."
The Lord Jesus Christ did not become THE SON of God at any time during His earthly life or ministry.
(Psalm 2:12) The Lord Jesus Christ (God the Son) can be found throughout the Old Testament.
Numerous appearances are revealed prior to His being born of Mary. A great passage in proof of this
truth is located in the book of Daniel when Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego are thrown into the
fiery furnace. Notice who else shows up... the ETERNAL Son of God." (End of comments by Dr.
Douglas Stauffer)
The Son of God refers to Himself in Revelation 1:5 as, "the firstbegotten from the dead", and in
Colossians 1:18 He is referred to as "the firstborn from the dead, that in all things he might have the
preeminence."
I believe the NKJV, RSV, ESV, and the NASB are wrong by applying Acts 13:33 to Christ's incarnation
instead of His resurrection, and the NIV, ISV, and Holman Standard along with the NWT, are heretical
by teaching Christ was not the Son, nor God His Father before a certain day.
I hope this little study has been helpful to you and that we all will appreciate and love the Person of
our Blessed Redeemer more for His amazing grace to us unworthy sinners. May our attitude towards
His true words as found in the KJB be as that of king David- Therefore I esteem all thy precepts
concerning all things to be right; and I hate every false way. Psalm 119:128.
Part Two - "the only begotten Son" or "the one and only Son"?
There are some today who argue about the meaning of the phrase "only begotten Son" and tell us
that the King James Bible translators got it all wrong and it really should read something like "the
one and only Son" or "the unique Son". Let's look at the Greek text for the first part of John 3:16
"God so loved the world that he gave his ONLY BEGOTTEN Son". In Greek this looks like -
, . The word in question is

According to numerous Greek-English lexicons the meaning in reference to the Son of God is "only
begotten". It is so translated by a multitude of English Bible versions. It also appears that some of the
more modern lexicons are changing the meaning of the word from what others in the past have said
about the meaning of this word is, particularly in reference to the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ.
I have a hard copy of Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon, 17th edition, dated 1887. On page
451 it tells us that the word has one primary meaning and one secondary meaning. The first
meaning listed under the word monogenes is "ONLY BEGOTTEN". The second meaning is "born from
one and the same mother". Those are the only definitions it gives.
I also have a modern Greek-English Dictionary. It is not a Bible reference book in any way; it is just a
secular dictionary called Divry's Modern English-Greek and Greek-English Desk Dictionary by D.C.
Divry, Inc. Publishers, New York, 1974. If you look up the Greek word monogenes on page 594 is has
only one definition listed - ONLY BEGOTTEN.
I also have Gerhard Kittel's massive work, Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. In volume IV
on pages 737 through page 741 it discusses the meanings of the word monogenes. It says on page
739 - "In the New Testament monogenes occurs only in Luke, John and Hebrews. It means
"ONLYBEGOTTEN". On page 741 he says: "In John 1:14,18; 3:16,18; 1 John 4:19 monogenes denotes
more than the uniqueness or incomparability of Jesus. In all these verses He is expressly called the

64

Son, and He is regarded as such in John 1:14. In John monogenes denotes the origin of Jesus. He is
monogenes as THE ONLY BEGOTTEN." (caps are mine).
Likewise Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words discusses the meaning of monogenes
on page 822. He says: "It is translated "only begotten". We can only rightly understand the term
"only begotten" when used of the Son, in the sense of unoriginated relationship. The "begetting" is
not an event of time, however remote, but a fact irrespective of time. The Christ did not become, but
necessarily and eternally is the Son. He, a Person, possesses every attribute of pure Godhood."
Vine also continues: "In John 1:18 the clause "the Only Begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the
Father," expresses both His eternal union with the Father in the Godhead and the ineffable intimacy
and love between them, the Son sharing all the Father's counsels and enjoying all His affections."
Now let's compare some English Bible versions through the centuries. We will be looking at John
3:16
Wycliffe 1395 - "For God louede so the world, that he yaf his `oon bigetun sone"
Tyndale 1525 - John 1:18 - "No ma hath sene God at eny tyme. The only begotte sonne which is in ye
bosome of ye father he hath declared him." See also 1 John 4:9 and John 1:14 - "the glory of it as
the glory of the only begotten sonne of ye father"
Coverdale 1535 - John 1:18 - "No man hath sene God at eny tyme. The onely begotte sonne which is
in the bosome of the father, he hath declared the same vnto vs." See also 1 John 4:9 and John 1:14 "glory as of the onely begotte sonne of the father, full of grace and trueth."
The Great Bible (Cranmer) 1540 -"For God so loue e worlde, that, he gaue is only begotten sonne,"
Bishops' Bible 1568 - "For God so loued the worlde, that he gaue his only begotten sonne"
The Geneva Bible 1587 - "For God so loued the worlde, that hee hath giuen his onely begotten
Sonne"
The Douay-Rheims 1610 - "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son"
King James Bible 1611 - "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son"
Whiston's Primitive New Testament 1745- "his only begotten Son"
John Wesley's translation 1755 - "he gave his only begotten Son"
Living Oracles 1835- "his own begotten Son"
Darby 1870 - "his only-begotten Son"
The Revised English Bible 1881 - "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son"
The ASV of 1901 - "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son"
Young's literal 1898 - "that His Son -- the only begotten -- He gave"
Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta - "that he even gave his only begotten Son"

65

NKJV 1982 - "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son"
NASB 1995 - "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son"
Knox Bible 2012 -"God so loved the world, that he gave up his only-begotten Son"
But we begin to see a change in many of today's versions
The first major modern English Bible version that began to change the phrase "the only begotten
Son" to "the only Son" was the liberal RSV which reads- "For God so loved the world that he gave his
only Son"
The printed Greek Lexicons also began to change. I have a hard copy of what they label as "A
GreekEnglish Lexicon compiled by Liddell and Scott" dated 1968 and it now lists under the meaning
of monogenes "the only member of a kind; unique." But Liddell and Scott were not alive in 1968 and
their Greek Lexicon written in 1887 when they WERE alive says that monogenes means "only
begotten". So who is changing the Lexicon that now bears their names? It certainly was NOT Liddell
and Scott!
Holman Standard 2003 - "For God loved the world in this way: He gave His One and Only Son"
The NIV 2011 - "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son"
ESV 2003-2011 - "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son"
The ISV - ""For this is how God loved the world: He gave his unique Son"
The Catholic bible Versions
What is of interest is to see how the Catholic bible versions have been changing over the centuries.
The Douay Rheims of 1610 and the Catholic Douay of 1950 both read "God so loved the word that
he gave his ONLY BEGOTTEN SON". But the 1970 St. Joseph New American bible and the 1985
New Jerusalem bible both read like so many other modern versions - "God so loved the world that
he gave HIS ONLY SON"
Jesus Christ is NOT God's ONLY Son. There are the "sons of God" in the book of Job who are angels of
God - See Job 1:6; 2:1 and 38:7. And the believing people of God in both the Old and New
Testaments are also called the sons of God. As far as being "unique", or "one of a kind", God has
made every individual who has ever lived on the face of this earth "unique" and one of a kind. No
two of us are exactly alike in our mental, physical or spiritual makeup.
For more of Wills articles goes to - www.brandplucked.webs.com

66

67

Chapter Twelve
Gender Inclusive Modern Versions -Today's New International
Version and others.
By Will Kinney
It is so ironic that there are now many Christian groups who are up in arms about the Today's New
International Version because of its perceived "gender inclusive" language, and yet they continue to
promote the old NIV, the NASB, ESV and the NKJV as though these were "reliable translations"
worthy of our reverence. This is a clear case of the blind leading the blind.
Brother Scott Jones, who is a strong defender of the King James Bible, has noted the following.
Hypocrisy Unveiled
(Quotes by Scott Jones) "When modern bibles such as the NASB, NIV, ESV, et al, remove Jesus Christ
as the Creator in Ephesians 3:9, remove Jesus Christ as the Sovereign in John 3:13, remove Jesus
Christ as GOD Incarnate in 1 Timothy 3:16, remove Jesus Christ as Jehovah Incarnate in 1 Corinthians
10:9, ad infinitum, they don't say a word. Not a whisper.
But when the feminism movement pops its head, the hypocrites go berserk. Regarding the new
gender inclusive TNIV that the hypocrites are suddenly so vocal about, the party-line spreads its
deceitful wings. Falwell speaks for a whole host of his cronies who have come out against the TNIV.
Observe "Mr. Stinson says this is "problematic" because the Greek word "aner" is translated as "some," when
this is a specific word THAT CAN ONLY MEAN MEN." (End of quotes by Scott Jones - emphasis added)
I completely agree with brother Scott Jones on this. Following are some examples of this hypocricy,
irony and spiritual blindness on the part of many Christian leaders.
Here is one example of a site that objects to the TNIV and yet promotes the use of the NIV.
Short list of examples of changes made from the NIV to the TNIV
The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
NIV Acts 20:30 Even from your own number MEN will arise and distort the truth in order to draw
away disciples after them.
TNIV Acts 20:30 Even from your own number SOME will arise and distort the truth in order to draw
away the disciples after them.
They then Comment: "Paul no longer says that "men" will arise from among the elders of the church
at Ephesus, but "some" will arise, suggesting that there could be women elders at Ephesus.
Mistranslates the Greek word aner, which means a male human being (this is not the word
anthropos, which often means "person").
(Note on Greek aner: Greek scholars for hundreds of years have known that aner means "man" not
"person." Recently, with no new evidence, but under cultural pressure, some have discovered a new

68

meaning, "person." But with no compelling evidence, the TNIV translates aner in a gender-neutral
way 31 times.)
NIV Acts 17:22 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: "MEN of Athens! I see
that in every way you are very religious."
TNIV Acts 17:22 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Aeropagus and said: PEOPLE of Athens! I
see that in every way you are very religious."
They again Comment: "Suggests that there were women debating on the Aeropagus. Mistranslates
Greek aner, "men." (End of this portion of the article opposing the use of the TNIV)
This is so hypocritical. It is the proverbial pot calling the kettle black. Let's look at some examples of
the 'old' NIV and see how it has translated or not this same word aner- man/men.
By the way, now that the "New" New International Version of 2011 has come out, they have gotten
even worse. In the new NIV 2011 Acts 17:22 now reads like the old TNIV and says: "PEOPLE of
Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious."
Now, let's look at some more examples. We will compare the 1982 edition of the NIV with the
Authorized King James Bible.
Matthew 15:38 "they that did eat were 4000 men" - NIV 1982 - "were 4000" (omits men altogether)
Luke 1:34 "I know not a man" NIV 1982 and 2011- "since I am a virgin"
Acts 1:16; 2:29; 2:37; 7:2; 13:15; 13:26; 13:38; 15:7; 15:13; 23:1; 23:6; 28:17 -
All of these verses say "Men and brethren" = in the KJB, Tyndale, the Geneva Bible,
Young's 'literal' translation, the Douay Rheims, Webster's 1833 translation, Montgomery's New
Testament, the Third Millenium Bible, the KJB 21, the Italian Diodati, the Spanish Reina Valera and
the NKJV.
However the NIV, NASB, RSV, ESV and Dan Wallace's NET version omit the word 'men' and just say
"Brothers".
Acts 2:5 "Jews, devout men" - NIV 1982, 2011 - "God fearing Jews"
Acts 2:14 "Ye men of Judea" - NIV 1982, 2011 - "Fellow Jews"
Acts 8:27 "Behold, a man of Ethiopia" - NIV 1982, 2011, ESV - "an Ethiopian"
Acts 10:28 "unlawful for a man that is a Jew" NIV 1982, 2011, ESV - "a Jew"
Acts 13:21 "a man of the tribe of Benjamin" NIV 1982, 2011 - " of the tribe of Benjamin" (omits man)
Acts 21:11 "bind the man that owneth this girdle" NIV 1982, 2011 - "bind the owner of this belt"
Acts 22:3 "I am verily a man which am a Jew" NIV 1982, 2011, ESV - "I am a Jew"
Acts 23:21 "more than 40 men" - NIV 1982, 2011 - "more than 40 of them"
Romans 11:4 "I have reserved to myself 7000 men" - NIV 1982, 2011 - "7000" (omits men)
Ephesians 4:13 "unto a perfect man" NIV 1982, 2011 - "become mature"

69

Another generic term being introduced into the modern versions is the word HUMAN, or HUMAN
BEING. This is a gender inclusive term. The word "human" is not found in the King James Bible at all.
However in the NKJV we find the word "human" 15 times, in the NASB it occurs 37 times, in the old
NIV 50 times and in the ESV a whopping 65 times!
Just a few of the 65 times the ESV has "HUMAN" instead of "man, or men" see Psalm 115:4; 135:15;
Isaiah 13:7; 44:11; 52:14; Ezekiel 1:5; Daniel 2:34, 45; 5:5; 8:25; Matthew 24:22, John 16:21; Acts
17:25; Romans 2:9; 3:5 and 20; 1 Corinthians 1:29; 2:13; 3:3 and 4.
Here are just a few examples comparing the KJB with the NKJV and the ESV.
Leviticus 7:21 "the uncleanness of a man" - NKJV, ESV - "HUMAN uncleanness"
2 Kings 7:10 "there was no MAN there, neither voice of MAN" - NKJV - "no ONE there (ESV), not a
HUMAN sound"
Ezekiel 4:15 "cow's dung for man's dung" - NKJV, ESV - "cow's dung instead of HUMAN waste"
John 16:21 "for joy that a man is born into the world" - NKJV, ESV "a HUMAN being has been born"
Romans 6:19 "I speak after the manner of men" - NKJV, ESV - "I speak in HUMAN terms"
I Cor. 2:4 "not with enticing words of man's wisdom" - NKJV "words of HUMAN wisdom", ESV omits
"man's"
Hebrews 12:9 "we have had fathers of our flesh" - NKJV - "we have had HUMAN fathers"
Again, the word 'human' is found zero times in the KJB, 15 in the NKJV, 37 in the NASB, 50 times in
the NIV and 65 times in the ESV.
Another gender neutral term is the New Age/ Hindu term "the One" used to refer to God. The One is
a neutral, sexless term. The King James Bible never refers to God simply as "the One" but rather as
He. The Greek is masculine yet the NKJV uses the term 'the One" 14 times in the New Testament
alone.
Just a couple of examples here will suffice.
John 7:18 "but he that seeketh HIS glory that sent him, the same is true" - NKJV -"He who seeks the
glory of the One who sent Him is true"
Hebrews 8:3 "it is of necessity that this man have somewhat to offer" - NKJV - "it is necessary that
this One also have something to offer".
Revelation 11:17 "We give thee thanks, O Lord God Almighty, which art, and wast, and art to come" NKJV - "O Lord God Almight, the One who is and who was and who is to come"
In the NKJV see Mat. 11:3; 26:48; Mark 14:44; Luke 1:35; 7: 19, 20; 22:27; John 7:18; Acts 17:23; Eph.
4:10; Heb. 3:3; 8:3; Rev. 11:17; 16:5.
The NASB does this same thing even more than the NKJV and the NIV does it even more than the
NASB. Here are just a few from the NASB.
Luke 10:16 "he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me" - NASB "the One who sent Me"
Luke 12:5 "Fear him, which after he hath killed..." -NASB - "fear the One ..."

70

John 6:46 "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God" - NASB - "except the One
who is from God"
John 15:21 "they know not him that sent me" - NASB - "do not know the One who sent Me."
Another irony is the fact that there is a website called Keep the Faith.org which posts articles by
James Dobson, R.C. Sproul and Piper who are against the TNIV. On this site one of the verses
criticized is Matthew 1:18. Here is their list.
Matthew 1:18 TNIV: "...she was found to be PREGNANT through the Holy Spirit."
ESV: "...she was found to be WITH CHILD from the Holy Spirit.
"KJV: "...she was found with child of the Holy Ghost."
NASB: "...she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit." NASB95: "...she was found to be with
child by the Holy Spirit."
NIV: "...she was found to be with child through the Holy Spirit."
NKJV: "...she was found with child of the Holy Spirit."
NLT: "...she became pregnant by the Holy Spirit."
NRSV: "...she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit."
RSV: "...she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit;..."
Recently there was a furor over an article published by WorldNetDaily. This is a portion of a recent
criticism of the new version coming out by the NIV. I will make some further comments.
From WorldNetDaily.com, available online at: www.worldnetdaily.com/new...E_ID=26277
Today's New International Perversion By Joseph Farah February 4, 2002
(Quotes by Mr. Joseph Farah) "Today's New International Perversion - excuse me, Version - of the
Bible.
If you didn't think political correctness could ever spread to the Bible itself, check out what
HarperCollins (read Rupert Murdoch) and its "Christian" subsidiary, Zondervan, have wrought with
this latest translation:
* Mary is no longer "with child," in the femi-nazi version of the Bible. She is "pregnant."
There are hundreds of such examples, perhaps thousands. They have a purpose - a political agenda.
There's a reason Mary is no longer "with child." "With child" is a term that makes very clear the
humanity of the unborn person inside Mary's womb.
What would have happened if Mary aborted that child - or, as the publishers of the TNIV would
probably say, "terminated her pregnancy"? (End of portions from Mr. Farah's article)
Here are my comments on this article: I agree with Mr. Farah in that the expression "She was with
child" definitely states that there is a real baby inside the womb. Today's feminazis will unashamedly
say "I decided to terminate my pregnancy" but they would not so easily admit "I decided to
terminate my child".

71

What should be noted here is that the new versions have already changed the wording of the King
James Bible where it says "the woman WITH CHILD" to "PREGNANT". This is not new to the Inclusive
version just now appearing on the scene.
Examples: KJB "And his daughter in law, Phinehas' wife, was WITH CHILD, near to be delivered."
NASB "was PREGNANT".
The NASB, NIV and the ESV do this very same thing in the following verses: 1 Samuel 4:19 - "the wife
of Phinehas was PREGNANT" (NASB, ESV, NIV) ; 2 Samuel 11:5 - "she sent and told David, I AM
PREGNANT." (NASB, ESV, NIV), Ecclesiastes 11:5 - KJB "the womb of her that is WITH CHILD"; "the
womb of THE PREGNANT woman" (NASB) (NIV omits) Isaiah 26:17 - KJB "like as a woman WITH
CHILD", "as A PREGNANT woman" (NASB, NIV, ESV) and 18 Hosea 13:16 - KJB "their women WITH
CHILD shall be ripped up." - "their PREGNANT WOMEN shall be ripped up." (NASB, NIV, ESV) and
Amos 1:13 - KJB "the women WITH CHILD" - "the PREGNANT women" (NASB, NIV, ESV)
The NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV change the phrase "with child" to "pregnant" in the following verses:
KJB "And woe unto them that are WITH CHILD"
NKJV "But woe to those who ARE PREGNANT"
Matthew 24:19; Mark 13:17; Luke 21:23; and 1 Thessalonians 5:3 - (ESV, NIV, NASB, NKJV) The
NIV changes "with child" to "pregnant" in these verses:
KJB "And she BEING WITH CHILD" Rev. 12:2 NIV "She WAS PREGNANT" and so does the ESV
The NIV and the ESV change "with child" to 'PREGNANT' in the following verses - Genesis 19:36;
Genesis 38:24, 25; Exodus 21:22; 1 Samuel 4:19; 2 Samuel 11:5; 2 Kings 8:12; 2 Kings 15:16; Hosea
13:16; Amos 1:13; Matthew 24:19; Mark 13:17; Luke 21:23; 1 Thessalonians 5:3 and Revelation 12:2.
The NASB changes the expression "WITH CHILD" to "PREGNANT" in the following verses: 1 Samuel
4:19; 2 Samuel 11:5; Ecclesiastes 11:5; Isaiah 26:17, 18; Jeremiah 20:17; Hosea 13:16; Amos 1:13,
Matthew 24:19 and Mark 13:17.
I just picked up a newspaper called Rocky Mountain Christian Times, Vol.2 No 7 July 2002. This paper
is provided by a local church that uses the NIV. There is an article in it titled More TNIV Controversy.
Here is part of the article.
Louisville, Ky (EP) Citing significant changes in the gender language from its highly respected
predcessor, the New International Version, 100 respected church leaders issued a joint statement
May 28 declaring that they cannot endorse the controversial TNIV.
Among these leaders are Larry Burkett, Charles Colson, James Dobson, Jack Hayford, David Jeremiah,
D. James Kennedy, Erwin Lutzer, Bill McCartney, J. I. Packer, Pat Robertson, R. C. Sproul and Don
Wildmon.
These men said "The TNIV translation has gone beyond acceptable translation standards in several
important respects." They then list several examples among which is this one. They ask the question:
"How do they (the TNIV translators) know that changing the word "saints" to "God's people" does
not sacrifice precious connotations of holiness which the Greek word carries?". [End of comments in
article]
Now, this is a real mind blower. Here are these respected church leaders promoting the use of the

72

"highly respected predecessor", the old NIV, and criticizing the TNIV because they have changed
"saints" to "God's people". Yet if they would look at their own old NIV they would see that it has
translated the word hagios or saints as "God's people" 10 times already in the New Testament!.
"But fornication, and all uncleannesss, or covetousness, let it not once be named among you, as
becometh SAINTS." Ephesians 5:3. Here the old NIV says GOD'S PEOPLE.
The old NIV does this same thing in Romans 12:13; 1 Cor. 16:1; 2 Cor. 9:12; Ephesians 2:19, 3:8, 4:12,
5:3; Hebrews 13:24, and Revelation 20:9 and 22:21.
This is either blind ignorance or bald faced hypocrisy. These leaders condemn the TNIV for doing the
very thing their "highly respected predecessor" - the old NIV- does; yet they continue to endorse,
recommend and promote the NIV.
Mr. Farah is correct in his criticism of the new inclusive version. He just missed the fact that this thing
has already been going on for some time in the other "perversions" as well.
And now the New International Version of 2011 has COMPLETELY OMITTED THE WORD SAINTS from
both the Old Testament and the New Testament!
The old NIV 1982 at least had the word "SAINTS" in their version 69 times; 24 times in the Old
Testament (examples - 1 Samuel 2:9; 2 Chron. 6:41; Psalm 16:3; 30:4; 31:21 etc.) and 45 times in the
New Testament (examples - Acts 9:13; Romans 1:7; 8:27; 15:25, 26, 31; 16:2 and 15, etc.) But not the
word SAINTS is completely gone in the NIV 2011 edition. What you find instead is the total
paraphrase "God's people".
According to Catholic theology, a "saint" is some super special, Pope appointed and approved man or
woman of God; not the common, simple believer in the Lord Jesus Christ.

73

Chapter Thirteen
HOLY GHOST OR HOLY SPIRIT?
By John Hinton, Ph.D. Bible Restoration Ministry
"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to
Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost." Matthew
1:18

I do not think that Bible correction is a laughing matter, however, there are many times when Bible
"correctors" make such silly comments that I am unable to suppress laughter. I confess that I really
enjoy reading some of these more ludicrous attempts by pseudo-intellectuals and arrogant
blowhards when they show a failure to understand their own language while blathering on and
about Greek, a language that few of them have even come close to mastering. Whether they come
from apostate pastors, stooges from today's incompetent seminaries, or dilettantes armed with
nothing but a Strong's Concordance, they are always amusing.
I have already written about the clown who corrected the KJV's use of the word virtue. He claimed,
in a most arrogant fashion, that it was an erroneous translation and should have been translated as
"force or energy." Never mind the fact that he first definition of "virtue" in the Oxford dictionary is
power inherent in a person, i.e. force or energy (see RBC #45); he was so dumb that he thought the
King James translators thought that dunamis, an extremely easy and common Greek word that
shows up in a multitude of English words, meant the opposite of vice.
Another example was recently presented on a Yahoo group by a puffed up pastor (or alleged pastor)
of highly dubious intellectual ability that thought he was correcting God's word by claiming that
mansion was an error, since the Greek word in question means a dwelling place or a living quarters
within a larger estate. Again, reference to an English dictionary would have prevented this character
from making a fool out of himself, since the first definitions in the Oxford Dictionary conforms
precisely to what he correctly told us the Greek word means (see RBC #48). Of course, the fact that
context informs us that many mansions fit inside of the Father's house tells anyone who can think at
all that a mansion is part of an estate, not a palatial palace. One might give him the benefit of the
doubt and assume that he was searching for a better understanding of the verse, but he carried on
with his anti-King James Bible attack after he had been provided with the dictionary definition of
mansion, and made no effort to concede that he had been mistaken. His agenda had nothing to do
with truth, but only with attacking the faith of Bible-believers in Scripture.
There was pseudo-Bible defender Clifford Wilson's outrageously silly attack on the KJV where he
accused its translators of erring by translating tsinnor as gutter in 2 Samuel 5:8, and suggesting that
it should have been stream or watercourse when stream or watercourse happens to be the first
definition of the word gutter in the Oxford dictionary. Was Wilson so foolish as to think that gutter
referred to a house or roadside gutter? Or did he think it had something to do with the game of
pool? (see RBC #5). One might also ask this anti-Darwinist why he promotes counterfeit bibles
created by pro-Darwinists by attacking the Bible that they seek to replace.
The failure of gap theorists to understand that replenish simply meant "to fill" in 17th century
English is another good example, and no amount of lexicographical evidence (and there is an
abundance of it) is enough to get through to these marginally literate "correctors" of the Bible and
defenders of false science (see RBC#74). They are guided by extra-biblical and anti-biblical theory;
not by logic.

74

There are also the archaeologists and "Christian" Identity cultists who correct Joshua 24:2 by
confusing the meaning of river for the word "flood" with its meaning of deluge (see RBC #11). I don't
know if the guys who came up with that one had been drinking too much Sterno or if it was an
oxygen deprivation issue, but they'd be good candidates for the next Dumb and Dumber movie. It
should be pointed out that most of these guys mistranslate this verse to insinuate that blacks are not
human beings (a theory too convoluted and nonsensical to be able to be described in brief).
I could go on for pages with humorous examples like these, and we can count on such scholarly
incompetents and semi-literates to supply others in the future, since few of them seem to have been
taught how to use an English dictionary or to think beyond the level of a 6th grade graduate. Here I
will concentrate on a particularly silly one that came from a "Christian" college president. His claim is
that the KJV is in error by using the term "Holy Ghost" in certain verses instead of "Holy Spirit." His
claim is that the word "ghost" refers to spirits of the deceased in spectral form in this passage, or
phantasma as he put it. It appears that he is envisioning the Holy Ghost shaped like Casper the
Friendly Ghost, or perhaps something from the movie Ghost Busters. Spirits can also refer to
alcoholic beverages, which is a meaning not shared by the word ghost, so if we wanted to be as
flippant as our Bible scoffing college president, we could just as well claim that Holy Spirit is an error
because God is not an alcoholic beverage. Such a statement would be no less stupid and no more
worthy of debate. Simple study of context should be enough to show how both his criticism and my
satirical one are absurd, however, I will, for the benefit of those that feel the need to ignore the
Bible's advice concerning arguing with fools, and for those with small children who might be misled
by such arguments due to their immaturity, present the facts that show this silliness for what it is.
Once again we need merely to look at an English dictionary to understand what ghost means. The
Oxford Universal Dictionary gives us the following: "1. The soul or spirit. 2. Breath, a blast -1625. 3. A
person-1590. 4. an incorporeal being, a good spirit -1484; and evil spirit -1529. 5. Formerly used in
the sense of SPIRIT (of God). Now only in HOLY GHOST, the Third Person f the Trinity. OE. 6. The soul
of a deceased person, spoken of as inhabiting the unseen world.. b. An apparition; a spectre 1592..."
The same dictionary gives us the following definitions for spirit (this is very abbreviated, the entire
entry covers 1 and 2/3 columns): "I 1. The animating or vital principle in man (and animals); that
which gives life to the physical organism, in contrast to its purely material elements; the breath of
life... 2. The soul of a person, as commended to God, or passing out of the body in the moment of
death. 3. A supernatural, incorporeal, rational being or personality, usually regarded as
imperceptible at ordinary times to the human senses, but capable of becoming visible at pleasure,
and freq. conceived as troublesome, terrifying, or hostile to mankind ME. b. A Being of this nature
imagined as possessing and actuating a person. late ME... 4. A being essentially incorporeal or
immaterial ME. II. The S. of God (or the Lord), the active essence or essential power of the Deity,
conceived as a creative, animating, or inspiring truth, etc. - HOLY GHOST... III. The immaterial,
intelligent, or sentient part of a person, freq. in implied or expressed contrast to the body. late ME....
IV. A movement of the air; a wind; a breath (of wind or air). V... 2. A liquid of the nature of an
essence or extract, esp. one obtained by distillation...c. orig. pl. Strong alcoholic drink..."
As we can see here it has almost the precise range of meaning as the word spirit, including the
meaning of a spectral apparition of a dead person with the additional meanings of alcoholic
beverages and spirit in the sense of the character or essence of a man's personality or zeal. Both
words also match up perfectly with the Greek pneuma. Liddell & Scott's Greek Dictionary has:
"Blowing, a wind, blast of wind, breeze, breath, spirit, inspiration, the spirit of man, the Holy
Spirit, also of angels and evil spirits."
Freund's Levertt's Latin Dictionary provides the following meanings for spiritus: "Blowing of the
wind, wind, air, inhaling of air, breath, breathing, air, the last breath of life, hence: life, spirit, soul,
energy, courage, a spirit, the Holy Spirit, Holy Ghost." Both spirit and ghost, like pneuma and spiritus,

75

have the base meaning of wind or breath, which later came to be associated with the soul or animus,
or the animating essence of all living things. Incidentally, unrelated Indo-European words like atman
(Sanskrit), athem (Persian), ahma (Gothic) all match up as well, and all are associated with the act of
breathing as well as the concept of spirit or soul. The same can also be said about the Hebrew and
Aramaic ruah. Fuerst's Hebrew dictionary provides the meanings of blowing, wind, breath, spirit,
soul and mind. The Arabic cognate ruh does not differ. We could ask why both ghost and spirit are
used, and that would be a valid question, albeit an unnecessary one. English during the era of King
James was still in a transition stage. Germanic-based words were still dominant at this time, but
Latin words were not rare, and were becoming more common. Ghost is the Germanic word and
spirit was derived from Latin spiritus. Both existed side by side.
The Old English word was gaest or gast as shown by the Oxford Universal Dictionary and the Old
English dictionary of Clark, Hall & Meritt 4th ed. The latter provides the following range of meanings
for this word.
"Gaast m. breath, soul, spirit, life, good or bad spirit, angel, demon, Holy Ghost, man, human being"
This word shows up in German as Geist, which is the only common word for spirit in German, except
for references to the soul and life where German may use Seel. Cassell's German Dictionary provides
the following range of meaning:
"Geist spirit; soul, mind, intellect; genius; courage; ghost, spectre; spirit, volatile liquid "
Note that this English cognate does express the meanings of intellect, genius, courage and alcoholic
beverages that are restricted to the word spirit in modern English, therefore the Germanic word
ghost/gast/geist does completely match up with spirit/spiritus in all of its meanings.
It is clear that there is no difference in meaning between the two words, only an etymological
difference. Could the King James Bible translators have used one and not the other? Of course, they
could have. I assume that they did not because they did not realize just how dumbed down the
English-speaking world was going to become, and probably never dreamed that it was going to be a
problem. Remember this was in an age before sitcoms, reality television, aspartame, Top 40 radio,
and government school education. There is clearly no rational support for this silly man's argument,
and he has no ammo to use in a debate, but it is not likely to matter to him. He will probably present
the same foolish argument the next time that he thinks he can get away with it. This is the usual
modus operandi of the Bible corrector. They do not seek truth; they seek only to obscure truth and
to puff themselves up.
I will venture to explain why such men come up with such nonsensical contortions of logic and fail to
be cogent in their thinking. There are two reasons, one is spiritual and the other is intellectual.
Spiritually these men are driven by an unclean spirit that compels them to attack God's word at
every step. They never criticize the counterfeit Bible that is owned by the same company that
publishes books on witchcraft and Anton LaVey's Satanic Bible (NIV). They never criticize the NKJV,
which has a witchcraft symbol printed right on it. They leave the RSV alone in spite of the fact that it
is owned by the National Council of Churches, whose members consistently endorse homosexuality,
abortion, socialism, and African regimes that murder Christians by the millions. They never criticize
the Bible of the anonymous apostates of the Lockman Foundation (NASV) who perverted the text in
the cover of darkness. They never attack The Message, which is unabashedly New Age, and
unarguably incompetent, dishonest, and downright ludicrous. They never attack any of the other
counterfeit Bibles that are based upon the phony text compiled by men who participated in seances,
and who praised Blavatsky, Marx, and Darwin. They only criticize the untarnished word of God,
which was the world's standard before the age when atheism, false science, open sin, and sexual
perversion became acceptable. Not only do they have nothing to do with the Holy Ghost (or Holy
Spirit), but filthy spirits compel them to rebel against any final authority, let alone the Final
Authority. Those driven by any agenda that is not godly, are certain to stumble in places where

76

normally only a small child would stumble. If any of the men above had asked what these various
words meant in historical context they would have been displaying inquisitive intelligence. Instead,
they attacked the more than 50 great scholars who were behind our great Bible, and implied that
they were stupid and needed "the correction and guidance of wiser men from the modern era."
They also were telling those who do not lean on their own understand, but on the Final Authority,
that they are "smarter" than them. Of course, the evidence that they present for these assertions
proves the opposite.
In the intellectual sphere, most of these men are products of a dumbed-down Orwellian society.
Their brains are unable to see contradictions or to use basic logic to discern how words, sentences,
and paragraphs interconnect, or to be able to comprehend the semantic range of given words, which
are dependent on historical usages as much as they are on context. The modern Orwellian society
member with his 30 second to 3 minute attention span is unable to comprehend or appreciate
anything that goes beyond his own limited experience, locale (or locales), language, culture, or
education. He is only aware of the moment in time that he is presently experiencing, or, at best, the
period of time in which he has memories. His books are chosen by the New York Times publishers, if
he reads anything at all. These books span a period of a few weeks, months, or just a few years at
best. The thousands of years of literature that have shaped the societies of the world and the
philosophies that still influence mankind are of little interest to him, if he even knows that they
existed at all. His music is from the Top 40 or Billboard selection of current hits, or the contemporary
"Christian" equivalent and he thinks that any music older than his childhood favorites is antiquated
and to be ignored.
Several hundreds of years of musical history are alien to him, and even greats like Bach, who
composed music with depth and power, only bore him. The 3 minute ditty is his preference, and the
only thing that can hold his attention for more than a few seconds. If he is a Christian, he may sing
old hymns, but he doesn't know what the words mean and doesn't listen to them anyway. Only what
is current interests him, and that can change in a matter of days or even hours. His views on any
issue, or awareness of any event in the news, can be altered or eliminated within hours or even
minutes when his Big Brother handlers choose to redirect or erase his thoughts. Orwell's warning
went unheeded, because we live in a society that has become even more insane than that described
in 1984 (of course, Big Brother now refers to a "fun" and "funny" TV show about a bunch of
selfindulgent degenerates and perverts living in a house where they are constantly monitored by
cameras, which has erased the true origin and significance of the word). He follows and believes only
what the multi-billion dollar drug industry wants him to believe about his healthcare and diet. He is
experientially crippled and this is reflected in his philosophy. It is not surprising that such Orwellian
citizens are unable to fully comprehend their own language, let alone any foreign language properly.
Few words have only one meaning in English and many have a very wide range indeed. Some
meanings are forgotten or rare today, but it should not be a great challenge to discern what any
particular word meant at the time that a work was written within context. Unfortunately for Homo
bovinus, he is unable to understand anything that he has not been programmed to think. Newspeak
has become so ingrained in him that he is unable to understand the original meaning of a large
proportion of his meager 2,000 word vocabulary. Hence, without a running vocabulary to explain the
meaning of words to him in context, his attempt to comprehend a given passage is hit or miss. When
he is told what the words that he has misunderstood actually mean in context, it does not phase
him, and he continues to misinterpret it.
When the modern critic is both intellectually vacuous and guided by an unclean spirit, there is no
end to the errors he may make. These errors may be quite humorous on the surface, but the
phenomena behind them are not. We can expect it to get a lot worse as the country becomes more
and more demon-infested and dumbed down.

77

Chapter Fourteen
WHAT ABOUT OTHER LANGUAGES
By Will Kinney
Bible critics like to ask where the word of God is before 1611. I often responded by asking these
critics where is the word of God in Japanese in 1000 AD or the word of God in Chinese in AD 800. Of
course they cannot answer. For these destructive Bible critics who indulge in justifying Bible infidelity
by perverting Psalm 12:6&7 and cast doubts in Almighty God's promise in preserving His inspired
words for Christians, they certainly deserve the kind of reply I gave for asking stupid questions in
order to continue in blindness.
Here is what Brother Will Kinney has to say about this question of what about other languages
concerning the Holy Bible.
I am frequently asked this question by other Christians who do not believe the King James Bible or
any bible is now the inerrant words of God.
I finally decided to put a concise answer together to respond to this common question. Here it is.
Hi brother and sister, this is a good question but not at all hard to answer if you think about it. God
never promised to give every nation or every individual a perfect Bible. It certainly never turned out
this way in history, did it?
In fact, for the first 3000 to 4000 years of recorded history, there was only one nation on earth that
had the true words of God. "He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto
Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation, and as for his judgments, they have not known them.
Praise ye the LORD." Psalm 147:19-20.
Now that the gospel is going out to the nations, the only promise from God we have is that "this
gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then
shall the end come." Matthew 24:14
The gospel of salvation through the substitutionary death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is
found in any bible in any language it has been translated into, no matter how poorly or partially
done it may be. God can and does use other bible versions, partial translations, or just simple gospel
tracts to bring His people to faith in Christ. I do not deny but strongly affirm this to be true.
But that does not make these other partial translations, bible tracts or versions the perfect words of
God. There has to be at least one perfect Bible in this world that serves as the Final Authority and
Standard by which all others are measured.
It certainly does not exist in the Hebrew or the Greek. There is no "the Hebrew" and much less is
there "the" Greek. Besides, once a complete Bible is put together, there has to be a translation of
some kind in order to put both the Old and New Testaments into one language. Since God has
promised to preserve His WORDS (not just the general, ballpark approximation) in the book of the
LORD, this book must exist somewhere.

78

All the evidence points to the King James Bible as being that book for the last almost 400 years. It
was the KJB that was used by English and American missionaries to carry to gospel to the nations in
the greatest missionary movement in history. It was the KJB that was carried out into space and read
from. English has become the closest thing to a universal language in history. God knew He would
use the King James Bible to accomplish all these things long before they happened.
Today it is only the King James Bible believer who boldly maintains that there really is an inerrant,
complete and 100% true Holy Bible on this earth that a person can actually hold it in his hands and
read and believe every word. All modern version proponents deny that any tangible, "hold it in your
hands and read Bible" IS now the inerrant words of God.
God only holds us accountable for the light He has been pleased to give us. To whom much is given,
from him shall much be required - Luke 12:48. God has given to the English speaking people His
perfect words in the King James Bible. We will be held far more accountable for what we have done
with this Book than any other people.
To the degree that foreign language bible versions follow the same underlying Hebrew and Greek
texts, and to the degree that their individual translations match those found in the King James Bible,
to that degree they can be considered to be the true words of God. To the degree that they depart
from both the texts and meanings found in the KJB, to that degree they are corrupt and inferior.
I do not believe that every foreigner in non-English speaking countries needs to learn the English
language and read the King James Bible. Salvation through faith in the substitutionary death, burial
and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ is not only found the King James Bible. If there are several
different versions in their own native language (Spanish, German, Russian, Chinese, or whatever),
then I would recommend they use the one that most closely follows the same Hebrew and Greek
texts that underlie the King James Bible. If they only have a translation based on the ever changing,
modern Critical Texts, then they should thank God for what they do have and use it.
This is how I see it and what I believe. Not a difficult question at all.
In contrast to the KJB believer's views, the multiple choice, contradictory meanings, and "different,
omitted, added, or made up underlying texts" proponent has no Final Written Authority or Standard
by which all others are to be judged, and he has no inspired, inerrant and 100% true Bible to give or
recommend to anyone.

79

Chapter Fifteen

KING JESUS, the Real Author of KING

JAMES BIBLE
By Ralph Dolog, a friend from Phillipines

THE REAL AUTHOR OF THE KJB PLACED HIS SIGNATURE.

Matthew 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my
name, there am I in the midst of them.
The name of the two KINGS who were really involve in the KING JAMES BIBLE
KING JAMES (was used by KING JESUS for the fulfillment of the greatest book we had today)
KING JESUS (KING of KINGS and LORD of LORDS, Creator and Author of everything, visible and
invisible)
Lets compare their names

KING JAMES

KING JESUS

Notice:
The two letters in red and highlighted yellow (J and S, the First and the Last)are both found in the
names of KING JESUS and KING JAMES in proper order (For where twoare gathered together in
my name,) The three letters in red only (J,E and S) are all the letters that both names contain
( or three are gathered together in my name,)
(There AM I in the midst) the word there is a word that connotes pointing, like a finger pointing
to the word AM, which is the word left when we take out all the letters which both names have. AM
is left in the midst of our eyes (homonym of Is)
The word AM is also two or three
The letter A has a figure similar to a snowcapped mountain and the letter M has a figure similar
to two mountains with a valley between them. So thats also two or three, two letters and three
mountains at the same time.
Fast way to remember and recall this verse
When we took out J, E and S from the names JESUS and JAMES, all the letters that were left from
both names are S, U, A and M
Lets make some ANAGRAM (rearrangement of letters of a word to form another word, similar,
opposite or related to that word)
ANAGRAMS of SUAM
SUMA = Highest (interpretation: KJB is the book with the Highest value in our world today.)

80

A SUM = what we get when we add two numbers.

We are in the book of MATTHEW
Anagram of MATTHEW is WE MATH T(+)
Lets add
The verse we use is MATTHEW 18:20
18:20
1(8+2)0
Add the two numbers closest to the semicolon (:) and the result are the end numbers 1 and 0 or 10
Additional info regarding MATTHEW, he was a tax collector so he is very much familiar with
mathematics, I wonder if the word math was derived from his name,
MATTHEW
(its two or three again)
T = two
TH = three
Interpretation of TTH
Lets do a reformation of letters TTH = TtH
T = its form and flow suggest GOD sending His only begotten Son t = its form
is similar to the cross suggesting that Christ died for us in the cross
H = its form suggest a division of two H, Heaven and Hell, Jesus took the keys of death and hell
(Rev. 1:18) and went to heaven it also looks like a throne where Christ sitteth suggesting that He
is risen and seated at the right hand of The Father, He is The Judge and The King.

81

Chapter Sixteen
THE LETTERS A AND V AND
THE NUMBERS 16 AND 11 ARE ALSO INSPIRED
By Ralph Dolog, a friend from Phillipines
We have a book that has initials that when we combined together forms a
shape of a diamond, two diamonds are seen in this figure. (see figure below.)

The first diamond is shaped like this

The second diamond is shaped like this

Two

witnesses that agree with each other are better than one so as two
diamonds are better than one. Two are better than oneECCLESIASTES 4:9

Diamond symbolizes strength, endurance and richness or

wealth. It is said to last forever.
If we notice this type
of diamond is pointing in all four
directions (N,S,E,W) North, South, East and West. It is sharp in all
directions.
While this diamond
is a symbol used to describe a
treasure and has a similarity to the shape of a heart
which will
lead us to these verses.
82

Therefore I love thy commandments above gold; yea, above fine gold.
Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate
every false way.
Psalm 119: 127-128
Hence: Diamond is more precious and has a greater value than fine gold therefore thy servant
loveth it.
Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.
Psalm 119: 140
And like diamonds they are for ever.
Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever.
Psalm 119: 152

Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where
thieves break through and steal:
But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and
where thieves do not break through nor steal:
For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Matthew 6: 19-21
We treasure memories in our hearts how much more should we not treasure and memorize
GODs WORD and keep it in our hearts. Unlike a physical diamond that can be stolen from us, this
spiritual diamond can never be stolen in our hearts and will protect us from the thieves surrounding
us.
This is the only diamond that we can have for ever and be with till eternity.
If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the
right hand of God.
Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth.
Colossians 3: 1-2
If we are asked how do we know that the scriptures AV 1611 are not only preserved but are
also inspired?
Others would answer, that, If they are not inspired then how come they give life and hope
to the readers, and how come they change a person to someone we thought he would never be.
How come great things happen when we believe and do HIS WORDS Isnt it a very great answer?
To tell you something amazing it is not just spiritually inspired is supernaturally and
superficially inspired also. We do not only admire the diamond for its value but also for its beauty,
for how its parts are wonderfully pieced together.
NOW LETS SEE THAT THE NUMBERS 16 AND 11 ARE ALSO INSPIRED
Whats the 16th book of the HOLY BIBLE

83

If youll count, it is said to be NEHEMIAH

Now go to NEHEMIAH 16:11
But there is no NEHEMIAH 16:11
Ill tell you something true about the books in the BIBLE, before 1st Samuel and 2nd Samuel
are counted as one book, 1st Kings and 2nd Kings are counted as one book and 1st Chronicles and 2nd
Chronicles are counted as one book. If we count them in this manner the 16th book would be the
book of PSALMS...
Lets go to PSALM 16 and Analysis
Lets get the verses related to 16 and 11 are present
1,6, and 11 are the numbers related to 16 and 11 that are present.
1 Preserve
me, O God: for in thee do I put my trust.
Psalm 16:1
The first word is PRESERVE, Isnt it surprising? Doesnt it amaze you, and doesnt it tell you that
GOD is preserving HIS WORD.
6
The lines are fallen unto me in pleasant places; yea, I have a goodly heritage.
Psalm 16:6
The lines, the word, the phrases, the numbers and the letters are fallen into pleasant places
perfectly pieced together. I truly have a goodly heritage preserved by my Father in heaven. Doesnt
the form and substance of these verses suggest spiritual inspiration?
11
Thou wilt shew me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are
pleasures for evermore.
Psalm 16:11
If we walk according to the word of GOD, we are walking the path of life, we have fullness of joy
and we have pleasures for evermore. Isnt it a picture of someone inspired? Regarding the number
11, the last 11 letters in that chapter are f, o, r, e, v, e, r, m, o, r and e joined together to form the
word for evermore. 11 is two numbers in one word which reflects to for evermore which has two
words in one sense.
By analyzing all these verses, how they were placed and put together in though and order
it simply suggest that these are not just ordinary words of an ordinary book. It suggests that the AV
1611 is preserved and inspired for evermore and the vessel that GOD chooses.
Special spiritual sense tells us that these verses prove that it is truly the word of GOD. Special
sense is beyond and not below common sense.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him:
neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
1st Corinthians 2:14

84

Chapter Seventeen

Questions to ask modern bible version users

By Keith Piper
1. a) Which Bible version do you use? (NIV).
b) I use the KJV because of how the NIV handles Matthew 17:21. (What's it say?)
c) Do you have your NIV handy? Look up Matthew 17:21.
d) Look up Matthew 18:11; 23:14; Mark 7:16; 9:44,46; 11:26; 15:28: Luke 17:36;
23:17;
John 5:4; Acts 8:37; 15:34., 24:7; 28:29; Romans 16:24.
e) Is it all right to take verses out of the Bible? How many words can you take out of
the
Bible for it to be a sin? Would a good man add words or a bad man take out words? f) We
know these verses are in the Bible because Tatian in his Diatessaron quotes
every one of
these gospel verses in 150 AD. He had access to the original
autographs to copy these
verses from. Even Codex Sinaiticus quotes Luke 23:17.
Irenaeus (120-202AD, Vol 1, p.433)
& Cyprian (200-258AD, Vol 5, p.545) quote Acts 8:37.
2. Would God use unbelievers and heretics like Westcott and Hort to correct the Bible
that has been used for 1500 years? NIV is based on W&H's mainly Vaticanus text.
3. Has God preserved His Word to today as Jesus promised in Matthew 5:18 "one jot or
tittle shall in no wise pass from the law until all be fulfilled."
4. The United Bible Society (3rd edition) NT Greek text has omitted 2544 Greek words.
(2886 if you count Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11), from the Received text (KJV).
The Received Text by Robert Stephanus (1550AD) has 140,488 Greek NT words. The
Nestle-Aland 26th edition and UBS 3rd edition has 137,602 Greek NT words, 2886 less.
This is 2.1% of the Greek NT words removed & never to be read in modern versions.
5. Why were Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus (on which NIV is based) not copied
and distributed if they are supposed to be the "oldest and best manuscripts"? Answer:
Because Christians recognized their many corrupt readings, it became impossible to
"sell" them. Nobody bought them. They were not copied or distributed.
6. Why are Codex Vaticanus & Codex Sinaiticus in such good condition after 1500 years?
Answer: Because nobody used them having so many corrupt readings. If they were
recognized as the true text, somebody would have paid good money for them, used
them regularly and worn them out. You can always sell a good manuscript, but you can't
sell a bad manuscript, except to a fool or someone who doesn't know what the true text
is such as Westcott & Hort, Griesbach, Tregelles, Tischendorf and modern scholars.
7. How do you explain the Majority Text's 98% domination of the manuscripts?
Answer: They had to be good copies of the originals, as recognised by Christians since
96 AD. This dominance worried Westcott and Hort, so they guessed that around 250AD
Lucian made a revision of the NT text from an assumed original Vaticanus type text to a
Byzantine type KJV text. If this really happened, why is there no record of it in history,
and why was there no protest against it? A protest would surely have happened.
Answer: Because it is a figment of W&H's imagination. They made up this lie to support
their theory. It has no historical basis or support.

85

8. If Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus are the true text and so accurate, why do they disagree
between themselves 3061 times in the gospels alone?
9. Would you trust men like Westcott & Hort to correct the Bible if you knew that they
did not believe in Bible infallibility, New Testament miracles, Creation,
Literal devil, Heaven, Second coming, Christ's substitutionary death, inviting
people to receive Christ as Saviour andTraditional theology?
Would you trust Westcott & Hort to correct the Bible if you knew that they:
1) decided between variant readings on the basis of their "inner consciousness"?
2) believed in Mary worship; 3) in sacrament devotion; 4) in baptismal regeneration; 5)
purgatory; 6) private prayers for the dead; 7) Communism; 8) in contacting demons &
working in "the Ghostly Guild?" See their biographies by their sons (Hort 2:248).
10.
Would the devil be interested in corrupting the New Testament text? Yes
certainly, because this was Satan's first temptation "Yea, hath God said?" (Gen. 3:1),
in getting Eve to doubt God's Word. Yet W&H and modern version editors never
consider this possibility. They treat the NT just like any ancient document.
11.
Would you expect to find the true NT text in Alexandria in Egypt where God
continually warns believers to avoid? No! Yet this is where Vaticanus and Sinaiticus
are supposed to have originated.
12.
Why did Westcott and Hort and modern version editors reject and ignore the
98%
of Byzantine/KJV text manuscripts in favour of 2% of the manuscripts which
show great disagreement with each other and many corrupt and variant readings?
13.
The cornerstone of Hort's theory was that readings characteristic of the
Received text are never found in quotations of Christian writers before 350 AD. He
said "before that date we find Alexandrian and Western readings, but never Syrian".
Hort's statement is proven wrong by:
a)
Tatian's Diatessaron (150 AD) ALWAYS gives the KJV reading for any Gospel
verse that the NIV CHANGES.
b)
The Syriac Peshitta version (170 AD) agrees with the KJV text and disproves
W&H's theory of Alexandrian manuscripts being close to the original.
c)
The Gothic version (341 AD) was produced by Ulfilas "little wolf", a
missionary bishop to the Goths, and was circulating before Vaticanus or Sinaiticus
were written in 350AD. According to Kenyon, Aland (p.210) and all the evidence, it
was translated from the early Byzantine KJV text manuscripts.
d)
Modern version advocates only list 13 out of 96 papyri, 9 out of 299 uncials,
and 22 out of 2812 minuscules supporting the Alexandrian text. This means that
86% of papyri, 96% of Uncials and 99% of minuscules show a Byzantine text.
14. If Egypt is the right place to find the correct NT text, then why do the main
Egyptian papyri show the greatest degree of corruption of any manuscripts?
For example, why do papyri p66, p45 and p75 have the following mistakes?
Colwell Ernest C., Scribal Habits in Early Papyri. The Bible in Modern Scholarship. J.P.Hyatt. New
York: Abingdon Press, 1963. p.370-389

86

p66 p45 p75

Careless Readings
216 20
57
Singular Readings
482 275 257
Nonsense Readings
200 28
64
Leaps Forward
54 16
27
Leaps Backward
22
2
10
The Holy Spirit refused to send a single original autograph to Egypt, so what would Egypt know
about the original correct readings? Very little!
15. Why did God cut off the power of speech from modern version editors such as
Kenneth Taylor (Living Bible 1972), Philip Schaff (ASV 1892), Tregelles (New Greek
Text 1857-72), Westcott (New Greek Text & RV 1870), J.B.Philips (1961), Wilkins
(NASV)? Isaiah 8:19,20; Luke 11:14.
16. If anyone says "Byzantine (KJV) readings are inferior to Alexandrian", say "Prove it

87

88

Chapter Eighteen

89

90

Chapter Nineteen
By Andrew Smith

For non-believers interested in becoming a Christian

I was reading a comic called Charlies Ants. It was an illustrative story of his life. His number one
life priority was to love watching all of his ants for hours and these were his little friends. He holds
on his magnify glass to see these ants into action. His friend visited Charlie wondering how his ants
were. Busy as ever was his reply. Once day, another friend told him that next month this land
would be flooded and become a lake. That really shocked Charlie into disbelief wondering how he
can warn these ants of the coming danger. He shouted again and again Ive gotta WARN them!
...Listen to me little friends ..youre in BIG TROUBLE! ..... You GOTTA move to higher ground! ...... Im
trying to SAVE you! ...How can I make you see . YOURE ALL GONNA DIE! His friend told him
Charlie, can I use your ants to show you something really important? .... They cant understand you!
....The ONLY way you could warn them is to become an ant! Would you be willing to give up
everything you have for them? And be hatched, grow six legs and live under the dirt? .... Youd
REALLY have to love your ants to do that, Charlie! YUK! was Charlies reply. His friend explained
to him, Lets say you tried to warn them, and they didnt believe you. Then, theyd be MAD at you
for telling them they were doomed. They would probably KILL YOU. Would you be willing to give
your life for those ants, Charlie?. No way! I dont love them THAT much was Charlies reply,
NOBODY ever had that much love. Wrong, Charlie! said his friend, I know somebody with FAR
MORE love than that You do?. said Charlie. Yes its God! was his friend reply,. But long
ago, the people God made were in trouble Far WORSE, Charlie! Charlie wowed and thought
about his ants.
It all started when Adam and Eve sinned by disobeying God, their sin was passed down to all of us.
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God Romans 3:23. God cannot allow sin into
heaven, so we ALL deserve to go to hell. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal
life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 6:23. But God loves us and doesnt want us to go there.
How do you suppose God up in heaven could save us, Charlie? He understand that God had to leave
heaven and become a man which was what God did for us. God the Father, sent God the Son (Jesus)
from His beautiful throne in heaven to earth, to be born as a baby in a smelly stable. God became a
man. Thirty years later, Jesus warned the people about hell and taught them to love God and each
other. Matthew 23:33, 1 John 4:11. Most people rejected His message. They hated Jesus because He
told them the truth. Galatians 4:16. But His main reason for coming here was to pay a terrible price
to get rid of our sins. 1 Peter 3:18. Jesus loves us so much that he was willing to die for us, in our
place. Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 1 Corinthians 15:3b. They arrested
Him and hurt Him REAL BAD! Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for
his friends. John 15:13.
Jesus Christ shed His precious blood to wash away our sins. He died, was buried, and three days
later He arose from the dead. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son
(Jesus) that whosoever believeth in him should not perish (in hell), but have everlasting life. John
3:16. Jesus did ALL THIS to save us. Wow! God did ALL THAT for us? said Charlie. Yes said his
friend. Thats the greatest love story I ever heard. Thats not all, Charlie! Jesus went back up to
heaven to build beautiful mansions that those who are saved will live in . FOREVER! John 14:2.
Charlie was so exciting and keen to go to heaven Am I saved. No, only those who receive Jesus by
faith are saved. You must believe that Jesus died on the cross for you. The Bible says That if thou
shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised
him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Romans 10:9. Then ask Him to forgive your sins .and

91

come into your heart and be your personal Saviour and Lord. For whosoever shall call upon the
name of the Lord shall be saved. Romans 10:13. After Charlie prayed to invite Jesus into his heart
to be his personal saviour, Jesus is Charlie best friend. Jesus said I will never leave thee, nor forsake
thee. Hebrews 13:5. Charlie was so happy as ever that he was keen to tell other people about
Jesus but then he was asked us (our readers) Are YOU saved? If not ask Jesus to become YOUR
Saviour and Lord right now!
*THE PLAN OF SALVATION*
In five minutes I can explain to you how you can know for sure that if you died today you would go to
Heaven. All you have to know are 5 things.
1]
Man is a sinner. Romans 3:10 (KJV) "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
"Romans 3:23 (KJV) "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God"
2]
There is a price on sin, eternal death. Romans 6:23 (KJV) "For the wages of sin is death;"
Romans 5:12 (KJV) "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so
death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned"
3]
Jesus paid that price on the cross. Romans 5:8 (KJV) "But God commendeth his love toward
us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
4]
By faith in Christ we can be saved. Romans 10:13 (KJV) "For whosoever shall call upon the
name of the Lord shall be saved."
5) Confess and Believe. Romans 10:9 (KJV) "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus,
and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."
HERE IS HOW YOU CALL UPON THE LORD Do
you admit that you are a sinner?
Do you believe Jesus is the Son of God?
If you are sorry for your sins and would like for God to save your soul, just ask Him.
Prayer
My Lord and my God, have mercy upon my soul, a sinner. I REPENT, and I believe that Jesus Christ is
the Son of the Living God. I believe that He died on the cross and shed His precious blood for the
forgiveness of all my sins. I believe that God raised Jesus from the dead by the power of the Holy
Spirit and that He sits on the right hand of God at this moment, hearing my confession of sin and this
prayer. I open up the door of my heart and I invite You into my heart, Lord Jesus. Wash all of my
filthy sins away in the precious blood that you shed in my place on the cross at Calvary. You will not
turn me away, Lord Jesus; you will forgive my sins and save my soul. I know because Your Word, the
Bible says so. Your Word says that you will turn no one away, and that includes me. Therefore, I
know that you have heard me, and I know that You have answered me, and I know that I am saved.
And I thank You, Lord Jesus, for saving my soul!
Now that you are saved, raise your hands towards Heaven and praise the Lord! Just as you were
born to your parents, you were born into the Kingdom of God when you called on Jesus!

92

After you have said this prayer and know that you are saved, read the King James Version of the
Bible. Now deny yourself and take up the cross daily for the purpose of mortifying yourself, that is,
for putting to death your own will, your soulful self, and the world with all of its lusts. All these must
be baptized into the death of Christ. You must learn the Word of God, then submit yourself and do
what the Word says, so that the Church and the world may see evidence of your submission to God's
Word, His order, and His authority in and by you. Find a good non-denominational fundamental
Bible believing Church that stands on the King James Version of the Bible where you can learn the
Word of God and fellowship with other believers.
Praise the Lord. May God reward you abundantly
I look forward to meet you in heaven.
In Christ, Andrew
THE GOSPEL MESSAGE:
2 Corinthians 5:18-21 (KJV) "And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus
Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling
the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the
word of reconciliation. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by
us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. 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."

93

Chapter Twenty

Conclusion
By Andrew W. Smith
After reading these highlighted articles by various authors from books and excellent websites
which should give you sufficient information to transform your thinking on the KJB issues. It is not
my intentions to throw your so-called Holy Bible away but just to realise how valuable the King
James Bible means to you for your true spiritual food to gain rich knowledge of the true living God
and the pure doctrine on the Lord Jesus Christ. I have modern version bibles but decided to use this
for documental purposes only. I dont blame someone (whether he /she is a Christian or a
nonbeliever) who used the modern version bible for no knowledge on this issue whether he / she
trust the Lord Jesus Christ as their Saviour or not. Im not critical to any Christian workers and
pastors whom the God uses them in doing neither his work nor the issues about imperfect churches.
However, 2 Timothy 3:16 command us to study for Gods approval for reproof, correction and
instruction in righteousness. There are hundred more articles from the websites and heaps of ebooks to download which requires a lot of my time to read yet I havent read these. If readers who
are interested into advanced research, I encourage them to do so; Ive listed these websites for
them.
How to get rid of your old New Versions Bibles? Dont sell these to second-hand bookshop or
some other way in circulation. The reason you are to give a book with half-truth and corruption in it
to someone who knows nothing about this which is not a good, standard practice for a Christian.
Here is a verse to apply - 1 Corinthians 5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven
leaveneth the whole lump? Here are what you do with these so-called bibles:

Throw it in the trash and it will end up in a garbage dump.

Burn it according to Acts 19:18 19.

Keep it to show people the corruptions in it. If you choose this option, make sure you clearly
mark it as a perversion with stickers and permanent markers.

The last option is the best deal. You can send your new version bible to King James Video
Ministries, P.O. Box 161, Hopeland, PA 17533 (if you lives in United States of America) or to
me. We will replace it with a copy of the King James Bible (if you need one).

For those are involved in the deaf ministry, deaf outreach, deaf bible study, etc., there are two
websites for more information: - silentwordministries.org and deafbibleinstitute.org. The King
James Bible doesnt need to be revised and rewritten. It needs to re-read with the help of Holy Spirit
so you need to take a day to learn Biblical English as mentioned from most chapters. For unfamiliar
words, you just need a KJB dictionary so here is the website: - av1611.com/kjkp/kjvdictionary/kjvdictionary-index.htm.
Please do email me (or through Facebook) of your comment and feedback about this book. I
would be very much appreciated and to help me to improve for the second edition. My email
address is andrews196545@yahoo.com
Im now confirmed as a KJB apologist. I have list of the recommended websites:www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/1611_authorized_king_james.htm - heaps of sub-topics
www.av1611.org/attack.html - worth reading

94

brandplucked.webs.com/ - Will Kinneys articles

http://www.thekingsbible.com/KjvDocuments.aspx - King James Bible Library
www.kjvtextualtechnology.com/ - excellent website
kjv-asia.com/authorized_version_defence.htm another excellent website
Recommended books:
In Awe of thy Word Understanding the King James Bible Its Mystery and History Letter by
Letter by Gail Riplinger. Available from AV Publications website.
The Language of the King James Bible by Gail Riplinger.
Understanding the King James Bible by Dave Olson
Why they changed the Bible One World Bible for One World Religion by David W. Daniels

95