To King James or Not To King    James?  That Is The Question  
By Dr. David M. Berman                                                                               www.wakeupandsmellthetruth.com
What bible should I use? I get asked the question often. The inquiry itself is an interesting one and begs another question…Why is there so many different "translations" of the bible? There have been over one hundred English "translations" in the last 100 years. Why would that be? What could be the reason for so many "translations"? We will get to that a bit later.
Well one thing is for sure. I know I am going to get people mad at me by writing this article. I remember not long ago one of my fellow pastors saw my King James Bible and he said "you using that old thing? You can't win souls with that" as he and some others laughed at me. I said "tell that to the hundreds that I have led to Christ with it and the thousands who I have taught with it." It is interesting how disturbed people get when I discuss this topic. Most Christians are familiar with the popular bible names. We have the King James, New International, New American Standard, The Living Bible, The Good News Bible etc. We are told by the publishers that their versions are true to the original "meaning" and that the richness of the Word of God is preserved. 
Since this is an article and not a book I will try not to get too technical, however there are some technical things we must discuss. Let's look at a bit of history to gain some understanding of the origins of the bible. The bible was written over hundreds of years by the people that God inspired and breathed His Word through. The Jews were particularly careful as they made copies of the sacred Word of God. We have an overwhelming amount of evidence as to the accuracy of sacred Old Testament scripture. The New Testament was written over a very short period of time and is also reliable in that we have numerous manuscripts and fragments of manuscripts. We also have much extra biblical evidence as well that support both the New and Old Testaments.  If you are reading this as one who does not believe in the inerrancy of the bible, this article is not for you. You will have to come to a place of humility before almighty God before you will understand the things of God as well as the work of Satan against it. This article is for those who have come to faith in Jesus Christ through being born again by the work of the Holy Ghost as they put their total trust in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The New Testament comes to us through the inspired writings as God breathed word for word through those who penned it.  John Wesley said "I build on no authority ancient or modern but the scripture." Wesley understood as all Christians do, that the bible is the Word of God and all that is needed for life (2 Pet 1:3).  The early Church had to fight against those that wanted to pervert the Word of God (Gal 1:7). That fight has not changed for it is the Devil's work to war against the truth of God with lies and deception. Lies are often easy to defeat since they are blatant. However deception is more difficult to fight against. Deception mixes truth with lies and therefore is a stronger foe that seeks to enslave the uninformed. 
The King James Bible New Testament is based on the "Textus Receptus" also known as the "Majority Text" since it is represented by 95% of the manuscript evidence. The Old Latin Vulgate was from the Textus Receptus and it was not until 1546 that it was "revised" by Jerome into what is now called The "Latin Vulgate." What is now known as the Latin Vulgate is not the old Latin Vulgate.  We also know that one of the oldest manuscript translations of the bible is the Syrian (Syriac) manuscript from 150 A.D. The Syriac is a translation of the received text (Textus Receptus). The Textus Receptus is  also the basis for Luther's German Bible, Tyndale's Bible, The Geneva Bible, Olivetan's French Bible, as well as other bibles of the Reformation.  We have thousands of manuscripts and fragments but there are two basic streams of manuscripts. One is what is known as the "Alexandrian Text" and the other is known as the "Majority Text" (Textus Receptus). The King James Bible was translated by 54 Hebrew and Greek scholars, men of God who came to the project with the fear of the Lord in their hearts and faith in the truth of the powerful doctrines taught by Jesus and the Apostles.
The Alexandrian text (Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus) is Gnostic and that is why it was rejected by Erasmus (Erasmus's text served as the foundation for critical editions of the Greek New Testament). The Apostles fought against mystical Gnostic perversions in the early church and the reformers did the same.  There is good evidence that The Vaticanus is the result of the workings of  the heretical theologian named Origen, and his student Eusebius.  Origen believed that Jesus was not eternal but rather a created being. Origen was in agreement with Arius who thought the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit were materially separate from each other, and that the Father created the Son. Origen also believed that there was no place of eternal suffering and that even the Devil would someday end up redeemed into heaven. He also believed in a sort of reincarnation however not into other animals but rather into a new born spirit body in which the person who needed more time to get right with God would have it. These beliefs are far from the Apostles teachings and thus are pure heresy.  It is absurd for any Christian scholar to think of Origen as a Christian theologian. He was a heretic who taught vain teachings that denied the true nature of Jesus Christ who was fully God and fully man (hypostatic union). Constantine commissioned 50 bibles (known as the Hexapla) that were the result of the work of Origen and Eusebius. The evidence strongly suggests that the codex Vaticanus is a copy of one of those 50 bibles. The reformers did not trust Origen, neither do I and neither should you.
All modern "translations" of the bible (1881 to present) do not come from the majority text (Textus Receptus). The so called "Revision Committee of 1871-1881" used the Gnostic influenced "Alexandrian text" manuscript stream and furthermore the Alexandrian text used was even more corrupted by two main figures of the "Revision Committee." Their names are Brook Foss Westcott (1825-1903), and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892). The facts that I am about to share with you should shake you! If nothing else that I say convinces you of the deception found in modern "translations" the following quotes should;
Wescott: "My faith is still wavering. I cannot determine how much we must believe; how much, in fact, is necessarily required of a member of the Church." (Life, Vol.I, p.46).
Westcott: "I never read an account of a miracle (in Scripture?) but I seem instinctively to feel its improbability, and discover some want of evidence in the account of it." (Life, Vol.I, p.52).
Westcott: "No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history - I could never understand how any one reading them with open eyes could think they did - yet they disclose to us a Gospel. So it is probably elsewhere."
Hort: Further I agree with them in condemning many leading specific doctrines of the popular theology as, to say the least, containing much superstition and immorality of a very pernicious kind...The positive doctrines even of the Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue...There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the Bible" (Life, Vol.I, p.400).
Hort: "But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with. I must work out and examine the argument in more detail, but at present my feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable." (Life, Vol.I, p.416).
Hort: "I entirely agree - correcting one word - with what you there say on the Atonement, having for many years believed that "the absolute union of the Christian (or rather, of man) with Christ Himself" is the spiritual truth of which the popular doctrine of substitution is an immoral and material counterfeit...Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ's bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy." (Life, Vol.I, p.430).
Hort: "I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and 'Jesus'-worship have very much in common in their causes and their results." (Life, Vol.II, p.50
Those are just a few of the demonic positions of Wescott and Hort, but the following one is even worse;
Hort: "If you make a decided conviction of the absolute infallibility of the N.T. practically a sine qua non for co-operation, I fear I could not join you, even if you were willing to forget your fears about the origin of the Gospels." (Life, Vol. I, p.420).
The fact is that Wescott and Hort came to the bible with no faith in the teachings of Christ and the Apostles. Unbelief was their foundation and thus they started from a base of corruption in the "Revision Committee" What about this fact? At Westcott's suggestion, Dr. G. Vance Smith, a Unitarian scholar, was a member of the Revision Committee. So you have the corrupt Gnostic "Alexandrian Text" and a revision committee with two men named Wescott and Hort who are not even believers in the infallible word of God along with a Unitarian scholar? Not to mention the overwhelming evidence that Wescott and Hort were spititists who used occult practices in an attempt to communicate with the dead as dedicated members of "the Ghostly Guild." They denied the miracles of Christ, and yes there is more, they were Mary worshippers. This is the committee that we are to trust with translating the bible? I would think it is unreasonable to trust them to say the least!
What Wescott and Hort did was reject the majority text and go even further in their desire to deceive the world with their "Revised Greek Text" which has over 5000 changes. Due to their efforts the modern translations are missing numerous references to Jesus as Eternal Lord, as well as many references to the blood of Christ, etc. They changed verses to push their Gnostic leanings as well as deny the deity of Christ. Look if you will at a few examples in the most popular modern bible, The New International Version;
King James. Matt. 18:11                                                                     For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.        

N.I.V.   Removed 
 King James Luke 2:33And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.
N.I.V. The child's father and mother marveled at what was said about him.

Note: Joseph was not the Father of Jesus. Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit.
King James Mark 11:26But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.
 

N.I.V.  It is missing
 
King James Bible- Mark 11:26                                                          "But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses."
 Now go look that important memory verse up in your N.I.V. It will be easy to remember because IT IS MISSING!!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------How about the "New American Standard Bible?"
King James Bible; "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." - 1 John 5:7 
American Standard Version "And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth. -1 John 5:7(denies the Trinity)
Now probably the most disturbing Old Testament changes occur in Isaiah 14:12.
The King James says: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer (note this is speaking of the devil's rebellion against God as he was cast out of heaven.)
N.I.V.  "How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star"
Note: Satan is not the "Morning Star"!!!
"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."
                                                                                 - Revelation 22:16
 Jesus is the Morning Star!!!!!! Not Satan!!!!!
The one thing that Satan wants is to replace God as the one who is worshipped. The perversion of this verse only serves to please Satan by calling him the name "Morning Star" when in truth it belongs to the true "Morning Star;" Jesus Christ!
Another example that should shock you is the "New English Bible".  This "translation" is also known as "Good News for Modern man". The head of this modern "translation" was a man by the name of C.H. Dodd.  He expresses his theological positions in his book titled "The Authority of the Bible". In it we see that he is not sure if Moses was a real person, He does not see God as being the author of the bible, does not believe the John 3:16 is literal, and feels that the vicarious atonement is not rational. This is the head of the "translation" committee for the New English Bible?
Now let's look at a few reasons we are told that the modern "translations" are more desirable than the King James.  I often hear these publishers speak of how their bible "brings out the meaning" or helps you to understand the intent of the author better. Here is the truth; the modern "translations" use what is called the "dynamic equivalence" method of translation. This sounds pretty scholarly. A word like "dynamic" really makes the uninformed think high thoughts of the method however all it means is that the translator brings you what he thinks the overall meaning is of a given passage is. In other words he expounds on the passage in the translation itself. This is a huge problem because the translator is never to infuse his own view of a passage of scripture. That is the job of the expositor, not the translator! The Dynamic equivalence method denies the God breathed, word for word inerrancy of Scripture. The proper way to translate is "formal equivalence". This method is what the King James translators used.
The true translator of the Hebrew and Greek seeks to do his best to translate each word in context as to bring about the most accurate translation into another language. This can be difficult since many languages are vastly different than Hebrew and Greek. This is why we say that the bible is infallible in its original tongue.
Now I am going to get those who are known as "King James only" upset with me because I am not "King James only." Some of those who describe themselves this way have this idea that God made the King James Bible as the standard for all languages and some even say that the King James is superior to the Greek and Hebrew. This is erroneous. It is clear that God wrote his Word in Hebrew and Greek. He certainly could have had the autographs (original manuscripts) penned in English if he chose to. The choice of God was to give us his Sacred Word in mainly Hebrew and Greek and thus the bible is perfect in its original tongue.
What I am is "Hebrew Masoretic Text only" and "Greek Majority text only."  King James is the bible I use and I also study the Masoretic and majority Text when seeking to better understand the original language of a passage. If translating the bible into another language; Spanish for example, it would not be proper to translate from the King James English into Spanish. The proper way to translate the bible into Spanish would be to translate from the Masoretic Hebrew text, and the Textus Receptus into Spanish in order to have the most accurate Spanish translation. Any bible, in any language that uses Wescott and Hort as its basis is not to be trusted.
Another reason the Modern bible publishers say that we should read their "translation" is because the English language has changed and we no longer use archaic words found in the King James Bible. Interesting argument on the surface however it is clear that in the last 100 years we have over 100 hundred  new modern English "Translations". Are we to believe that every year we needed to update the language since it has changed so drastically? Obviously not! The truth is that there are three real reasons for all the Modern "translations".
                    
    The Three real reasons for the modern "translations"
1)     Wescott and Hort were seeking to destroy sound doctrine by attacking the majority text and pushing their Gnostic beliefs into their revision of the Greek. This motivation still exists with the abominable "translation" of the bible known as "Today's New International Version". This one pushes the feminist agenda by seeking to remove all gender references to make the bible "gender neutral". The bible is not gender neutral! This is pushed so that women will be deceived into believing that they have the same authority in the home as well as the Church. Is there any wonder why there have been so many woman becoming pastors in direct violation of the Holy Bible? Jezebel is alive and well (Rev. 2:20).
 
2)     Often many well meaning (but deceived) people have thought that dummying down the language is the way to reach those who do not read well. You can't reduce language to the level of "see spot run" and expect to convey the meaning properly of the whole of scripture. If God wanted his word to be read at a kindergarten level, He would have had it written at that level. We can teach the gospel in simple terms however there is a vast amount of doctrinal teaching in the bible that makes it necessary to know how to read and study. It is our responsibility to learn how to study the bible. Furthermore Wescott and Hort did not simply update some words for better understanding, they removed the very essence of numerous passages with a motivation from their unbelief in the sacred doctrines of the Apostles.
 
3)     Money! Every time a new translation comes out money is a huge motivator. Follow the money trail and you will see what I am saying is true. In fact the same publisher of the New International Version also published the satanic bible. What does that tell you about the money motivation? Many secular companies are getting in on the money action by publishing bibles as well as other books and music aimed at Christians. The bible was given to the Church by God. Why do we allow it to be "translated" and sold by secular companies? As it was in the Old Testament times that the people of God were given authority to guard the sacred Word of God, it is also the same in the New Testament. Shame on the American church for supporting the money motivation and deception of heathen companies!
 
There are too many examples to list in this article. If you want to know more all you have to do is  care enough to study this.
If I told you that I was putting a committee together to translate another version of the bible to English, a committee that included People who did not believe in the deity of Christ, or the power of his atonement, and that they were occultists, what would you say? If I then went on to tell you that these people are first going to go over the Hebrew and Greek text and make over 5000 changes what would you say? Would you be standing in line to buy it? I think not!
So when asked what bible I recommend I say King James. If it is too hard for you to read after learning the truth of the modern "Translations," it is most likely that you simply are too lazy to study the bible….ouch…I know that hurt but it's true. Why is it so much to ask for us to study? If you want to study the Word of God you will.  Let me recommend a bible to you that will help you if you are concerned about understanding the King James Bible. The bible is called "The Defined King James Bible". You can order it at www.biblefortoday.org .This bible has all the words that some people find difficult defined for you on the same page and is very easy to use (I receive nothing for this recommendation).
 Will you trust the Unitarian Dr. G. Vance Smith, the atonement denier C.H Dodd, the heretic Origen, and the occultists Wescott and Hort? Will you trust those who have a desire to infuse their liberal doctrine into the bible?  Or will you trust the Word of God (Masoretic Text, Textus Receptus) translated into English by 54 Men of God. Will you trust Mary worshippers or the Apostles  as the great reformers did. I hope you put your trust in the Majority text (Textus Receptus). You have heard all the marketing pushing modern "translations". Now you have heard the facts. What will you do?
Dr. David M. Berman Senior Pastor, Author, Bible Teacher, and Convention Speaker.P.O. Box 10357211 Whitcomb RdSwanzey, NH. 03470Phone: 603-352-9471

Support Our Broadcast Network

We're a 100% Listener Supported Network

3 Simple Ways to Support WVW Foundation

Credit Card
100% Tax-Deductable
Paypal
100% Tax-Deductable

Make Monthly Donations

 

-or-

A One-Time Donation

 
Mail or Phone
100% Tax-Deductable
  • Mail In Your Donation

    Worldview Weekend Foundation
    PO BOX 1690
    Collierville, TN, 38027 USA

  • Donate by Phone

    901-825-0652