"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 from this generation for ever." ~Psalm 12:6-7

The Preserved Perfect Word of God

1. Introduction: God's Perfect Word
2. Common Objections Answered
3. List of Bible Articles


1. Introduction: God's Perfect Word

Some people often wonder and ask the question: does it matter which translation of the Bible do we read? What's the point of this debate? Why do so many people stick with the King James Bible which was first released in 1611, some 400 years ago, and not get on with the times and go with the shiny better English Standard Version? Or the immensely popular New International Version? In fact, why does this even matter? Before we begin, as honest Christians, we should ask the simply question: do we believe that the Bible is the inerrant, inspired, infallible, and preserved Word of God? If your answer is yes, then your central authority regarding all matters of faith and doctrine should come from the Bible, right? If we also believe in the preservation of the Scriptures on this earth, then ask yourself this: where would I find it? Where do I find the preserved Word of God today right here on this earth? If you cannot answer this honestly, then you cannot say you believe that God preserved His perfect Word here on this earth, and that you'll never find it.

This is what one can call a "Bible agnostic": he says there is a perfect Bible but cannot pinpoint where or what it is. Usually people who hold the KJV-Onlyist position are often attacked by critics, as they're not happy with the truth, which is by nature, singular. While it is perfectly okay for Christians to accept that there is only one way to heaven by believing on the Lord Jesus Christ, why then is it so difficult to believe that the Word (Jesus) can also be one single truth and not manifest in what seemingly seems like many different valid ways? Why also do the opponents not take into factor that if the devil can indeed corrupt churches (Revelation 2-3) that he can also corrupt the word of God (2 Corinthians 2:17) out of malicious intent? Those are some questions an honest Christian should ask himself before attacking what looks to be an outlandish stance, but just like salvation is very easy but hard for many to believe at the same time, so too is the truth readily available.

What makes me and many other people so sure that the KJV is in fact the word of God in the English language? Let's go over some of its features in comparison to the modern Bible translations and what makes it so special to stand out amongst all the other Bible translations out there.

God promised to preserve His words

Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
Matthew 24:35

As we read in Psalm 12:6-7, God promised to preserve His Words. Okay, so maybe you are using a modern Bible and you're not seeing that rendition. Okay then. What about Matthew 5:18? Matthew 24:35? How about the fact that in Psalms 138:2 God says that He magnified His word above His name? What about the warning at the end of Revelation 22:18-19 about tampering with God's Words? Don't you think then God would preserve His Words and said it many times throughout the Bible? People often forget about the preservation aspect of God's Words, and that means that there must be the inerrant infallible perfect preserved Word of God someplace on this earth.

It has to be the King James Bible as all the other Bibles fall short and are a babel of confusion. The KJV maintains every verses, clear wording, and reads like the word of God should. On the contrary, modern Bibles are sloppy, most of them are missing 16 whole verses, some of which are doctrinally important (Matthew 17:21, 18:11, 23:14, Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 11:26, 15:28, Luke 17:36, 23:17, John 5:4, Acts 8:37 15:34, 24:7, 28:29, Romans 16:24, big part of 1 John 5:7), casts doubts on whole sections (Mark 16:9-20, John 7:53-8:11), changing the truth of God into a lie.

The KJV was translated under a God fearing monarchy

Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?
Ecclesiastes 8:4

Whether you like it or not, the only type of government that God has sanctioned is a monarchy (Deuteronomy 17). God chooses the king to rule over the people, and the preferred form of government in the millennium that is to come and the one in heaven is a monarchy. Jesus is king of kings (1 Timothy 6:15, Revelation 1:5, Revelation 17:14, Revelation 19:16), and no true Christians will deny this. King James was a Scottish king who grew up with sound preaching from Christian ministers and believed in the doctrine of biblical infallibility and the principles of Sola Scriptura. Reading his own works (ex. Basilikon Doron) will show you what his beliefs were and it is only fitting that a God fearing king would be the one authorising this translation. A few places where he mentions his personal faith can be found here:

But because no man was able to keepe the Law, nor any part thereof, it pleased God of his infinite wisedome and goodnesse, to incarnate his only Sonne in our nature, for satisfaction of his justice in his suffering for us; that since we could not be saved by doing, we might at least, bee saved by believing. (Basilikon Doron, 213)

Now, as to Faith, which is the nourisher and quickner of Religion, as I have already said, It is a sure perswasion and apprehension of the promises of God, applying them to your soule: and therefore may it justly be called the golden chaine that linketh the faithfulle soule to Christ: And because it groweth not in our garden, but is the free gift of God, as the same Apostle saith, it must be nourished by prayer, Which is nothing else, but a friendly talking with God. (Basilikon Doron, 214)

God would mightily use a king with such faith for a timeless beautiful translation used and loved by many for centuries to come. All charges that he was a sodomite comes primarily from an enemy of his, Anthony Weldon, many years after his death, where, of course, the late king would not be able to defend himself. These are all fabricated lies and character assassinations, many which would continue even on to this day(see Stephen Coston's King James VI of Scotland & I of England Unjustly Accused?).

Many modern Bibles are translated from the American Bible Society, which also branched out along with the worldwide United Bible Societies. The UK is no longer a God fearing nation, just as how Israel fell from grace, but America, being a child of revolutionary principles, and without a king, would not be the vehicle God would use to bring about the English word of God. It would make much more sense for God to use a God-fearing monarchy as opposed to the American republic, which was not founded on godly principles but Masonic ones.

KJV has no copyright

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:1

Tying to the above statement that the KJV was translated in a monarchy, the KJV actually has no copyright: it is public domain and is free to print anywhere, including the UK, even though its rights are vested in the Crown. It does not forbid anyone to reprint the text, and the original copyright was there in order for the printer to have the money to publish it and to prevent private companies from tampering the word of God into their own version. On the contrary, if you look at any modern Bibles, they have a copyright, often to their publishers (Zondervan, Crossway, Thomas Nelson Publishers, etc) and even have a limit on how many words you can reproduce before paying royalties or such. What this proves is that modern Bibles are works of men, not of God. God's words are not copyrighted and are owned by God, who wills for His Word to be published everywhere! Due to it being public domain, it is allowed to be printed everywhere around the world for the purpose of evangelising, personal use, etc, and often much cheaper than modern translations, which are missing a lot of words and even verses, due to lack of copyright!

The translators were capable and had honest principles: modern translators operate on a different worldview

I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.
Psalm 138:2

The initial 56 translators of the KJV were experts of languages, including Hebrew, Greek, and Latin. One of them, Lancelot Andrews, spoke over 20 languages fluently, including some ancient languages such as Aramaic, Chaldean, Syriac, and Arabic! And this was just one of the other translators working on it! Not only were they experts at ancient languages, but they were also experts at English, which allowed them to convey the meaning of the texts they were translating perfectly into what we have today. Reading the Epistle Dedicatory and the Introduction to the Readers in front of the KJV, it is clear they believed they were handling the very words of God!

But now what piety without truth? what truth (what saving truth) without the word of God? what word of God (whereof we may be sure) without the Scripture? The Scriptures we are commanded to search (John 5.39; Isa. 8.20). They are commended that searched and studied them (Acts 17.11 and 8.28, 29). They are reproved that were unskilful in them, or slow to believe them (Matt. 22.29; Luk. 24.25). They can make us wise unto salvation (2 Tim. 3.15). If we be ignorant, they will instruct us; if out of the way, they will bring us home; if out of order, they will reform us; if in heaviness, comfort us; if dull, quicken us; if cold, inflame us. Take up and read, take up and read the Scriptures... Love the Scriptures, and wisdom will love thee.

The Translators to the Reader, KJV

Despite the fact their skills were much more proficient than any modern translators, they knew they had to handle this carefully and actually believed in what they were translating, even with their differences in theology. Miraculously, we do not see the KJV lean doctrinally in any particular direction, whether it be Calvinist or Arminian or Puritan. It just translates what the original manuscripts were writing. The italics you see in the KJV are words added in English to supply something that isn't there in the originals, to make it make sense in English. Anyone who is bilingual knows no language can translate to another 1:1 without changing some things around. If anything, this shows that the KJV translators were honest about what they were doing, and it was there to assist the English readers so it would make sense.

The Lord work a care and conscience in us to know Him and serve Him, that we may be acknowledged of Him at the appearing of our Lord JESUS CHRIST, to whom with the Holy Ghost, be all praise and thanksgiving. Amen.

The Translators to the Reader, KJV

Modern translators, however, are not only less capable than just a few of these men alone but many of them did not even believe in the inerrancy nor the inspiration of the Scriptures, such as Kurt Aland or Bruce Metzger. The critical text going against the KJV was started by two knaves named Westcott and Hort, who definitely did not believe in the gospel nor the inerrancy of Scriptures. A Jesuit cardinal, Carlo Martini, was also in charge of the translation committee for their version of the Greek texts underlying the modern Bibles. They certainly did not handle the Word of God with any care but according to their own understandings. No matter how brilliant the modern scholars and translators may look compared to the average person, they cannot even compare to the KJV translators. None of them believe in a perfect translation, and are still trying to reconstruct something as close to the "originals" as much as possible. They will never be satisfied with what they have, and will continue looking for manuscripts discovered in caves or buried places, thinking it will shed light of new revelations regarding God's words, without ever taking into consideration about people who edited the texts for malicious intents. The NIV 1983 preface itself says "Like all translations of the Bible, made as they are by imperfect man, this one undoubtedly falls short of its goals." This shows that the translators themselves did not believe there is a perfect word of God which exists on earth.

The KJV was translated under times of persecution

And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience; and patience, experience; and experience, hope: and hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.
Romans 5:3-5

During these times, it was life threatening to be at the wrong side of the religious spectrum, whether Catholic or Protestant, depending on the monarch or the powers that be. When England was under the Catholic monarch, Queen Mary I (Bloody Mary), she persecuted the Protestants (most likely due to her father Henry VIII annulling his marriage to her mother the Catholic Queen Catherine of Aragon), burning many families simply for reading the Bible, something that was known amongst the Protestants. When she died, her sister Elizabeth became queen, who stood for the Protestant side, marking her and England as the enemy of the Roman Catholics, who did not want anyone to read the Bible and made them their target. This was markedly clear when Elizabeth dies and her Scottish cousin, James, becomes the next king of England.

The Gunpowder Plot of 1605 was the Catholic plot to assassin King James and restore the Catholic monarchy in England. So significant was this plot that it is now a holiday in England, known as Guy Fawkes Night (after one of the conspirators) or Bonfire Night, where they burnt effigies of the Pope. England would remain the enemy of the Catholics, whose intrigues still continued even after James' death. The English forbade any Catholics from ever ascending their throne. Even in spite of the dangers that England would go through, the king and the translators still managed to produce the best English translation of God's Word.

As we read in the Bible, the church is best while under duress and persecution. Modern Bibles, on the contrary, are translated in a relatively comfortable setting with strangely even the Catholics in their translation committee, and even non-believers! Isn't it strange that the Catholics were persecuting and killing people simply for owning the Bible and now they're actively part of the translation committees? Interesting. Reading the introduction to the eclectic Greek New Testament the Nestle-Aland 27th edition's introduction, we see a disturbing claim.

The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and following an agreement between the Vatican and the United Bible Societies it has served as the basis for new translations and revisions made under their supervision. This marks a significant step with regard to interconfessional relationships. It should naturally be understood that this text is a working text (in the sense of the century-long Nestle tradition): it is not to be considered as definitive, but as a stimulus to further efforts toward defining and verifying the text of the New Testament.

Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 27th edition, Introduction, 45

The Greek text underlying our modern Bibles today are all part of an ecumenical agenda to bring together many different religions into one, regardless of what the actual text says. Being directed by the Vatican taking over the Bible societies around the world, this will definitely change how the text works.

Good fruits were produced: there is no modern bias in the KJV unlike in modern Bibles

For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
1 Corinthians 14:33

The church was at its peak during some 200 years with many godly preachers and a lot of soulwinning took place. Mission field and evangelising was at an all time high, and great pastors preached solely from the KJV as there was no other Bible versions for Bible believing Christians until recently. In fact, it was just called Holy Bible and everyone knew the Good Book was the KJV, taken to all parts of the world as European powers spread all around the world, and people converted and believed. Even in our times where there are many other Bible versions out there, the KJV is recognised as the golden standard of Bibles even by nonbelievers.

Meanwhile, the modern Bibles have only produced confusion. It has only made people not know whether the Word of God is preserved nor if it is even perfect. Doctrines have become weaker, liberal fun centres that pass as churches in our times have proliferated, and more and more of these versions come out catering to different groups all for filthy lucre's sakes. You will find it very difficult to find saved people in those NIV churches, let alone anyone with sound doctrines, nor winning souls to Christ, while those who use the KJV are a lot more likely to go out and win more souls as they know they should teach all nations and not 'make disciples' and believe the longer ending of Mark is canonical unlike many modernist pastors or professors.

One can clearly see the spiritual decline of the world when looking at the span of history, especially for the Christians. Ecumenicalism was not a thing, as the Catholics were out to kill the Protestants. Liberal theology developed much later, especially in German academies, where they may teach strange doctrines such as the Bible isn't the inspired word of God and that the Holy Spirit isn't a thing! The theory of evolution took flight later and cast doubts on how to interpret Genesis and how God created the world. More and more we see different Bible translations specifically catering to different groups, such as the 'gender neutral crowd' being appeased with the NRSV, or the theologically liberal being happy with how the RSV replaces 'virgin' with 'young woman' in Isaiah 7:14, totally destroying the whole meaning of the miracle of the virgin birth! The KJV was free from such biases and were translated by men who knew they were handling the word of God.

Every modern Bibles compare themselves against the KJV, often attacking it

And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
John 8:32

It is funny that the other Bible versions usually don't compare themselves against each other, even though there are a lot of differences. The King James is often the gold standard for a Bible translation, and for a good reason. This is especially true with Jesus, the Word, when he came to this world, which united every powers, left and right (Herodians and the chief priests), theological enemies (Saduccees and the Pharisees), political rivals (Herod and Pilate), who were often enemies to each other to all go and attack the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the same in our case, as these false modern perversions, despite their many disagreements, often compare themselves to the KJV and how much "better" they are in their own words. It just shows that they are afraid of the KJV, which actually has power, for being the Word of God. If what happened to the actual Word was what we see today with the Word of God, why should we trust these vain scribes and other enemies of God? We should remember that Christians are not of this world (John 17:16), the world hates Christ (John 15:18), and that Satan is the god of this world (2 Corinthians 4:4). The constant attacks on the KJV is relentless, with books and many so-called professed Christian scholars of reputation such as James White or Daniel Wallace attacking it, when the usual "default" persuasion of the average Christian would be "every Bible translation is acceptable" that it often looks fanatical. Whether it is "unreliable manuscripts" or "too hard to read" or "doesn't stand up to scholastic scrutiny", there are many excuses made to attack the KJV by its enemies.

The manuscript evidence heavily favours the KJV over modern translations, also casts doubts on veracity of Scriptures

For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.
Psalm 119:89

The manuscript evidence heavily favours the KJV over modern translations, also casts doubts on veracity of Scriptures. Funnily enough, the modern Bibles are heavily based off of a textual family consisting of minority readings, which just happens to be the oldest family they have found, or so they claim. The textual tradition which underlies the KJV, the Byzantine texts, have over 5000 manuscripts supporting its readings. These are called the Majority Text, and over 95% of all manuscripts actually support the readings found in the KJV! The Alexandrian texts are the ones typically found in Egypt, and the two chief manuscripts that the modern Bibles are based off of are Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, both of which don't even agree with each other and are filled with many omissions, revisions, and a lot of confusion overall. It also includes various other non-biblical texts, such as the Apocrypha and works like the Shepherd of Hermas. Somehow, all these learned scholars chose the tiny disagreeing manuscripts' readings over the majority texts' readings and it came into our modern Bibles in various languages today! That is insanity!

This is also why certain passages, such as the woman caught in adultery (John 7:53-8:11), or the longer ending of Mark (Mark 16:9-20), are thought to not belong in the Bible by modern preachers and scholars. They take this from the textual evidence from those two bad manuscripts because it's the "oldest" they've found. The KJV does not cast doubts with footnotes or anything and includes every passages without any apology. Modern Bibles also change the readings, remove verses, and attack the divinity of Jesus Christ in almost every opportunity it can get. 1 Timothy 3:16, for example, replaces "God" with "He", which was a key passage talking about Jesus being God manifest in the flesh. This is all because of the two codices vs the 5000+ others.

Legacy and Popularity

David therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he then his son? And the common people heard him gladly.
Mark 12:37

I do not really like using the popularity argument, but the KJV has withstood the trials of time, continues to be relevant even now in 2021, and is still being used by good preachers and many missionaries and is still the most popular translation of all times, even known by secular people to be THE translation to quote from. All the other modern Bibles will often have many derivatives, and many of them will pass away since they are not God's words, which will never pass away (Matthew 24:35). The ever changing modern Bibles are unstable and have no sure foundation, wavering just like their translators in faith and stability, while the KJV is standing on the rock, which is the fact that it is the Word of God in English, and nobody has ever proved it wrong, and any supposed contradictions can be answered, unlike the apparent weakness of every modern Bible versions out there.


Now ask yourself the question: do you know for a fact you have the perfect preserved Word of God in your hands? If not, perhaps what you have isn't His Words? Get yourself a KJV Bible and you will see why it is the Word of God.


2. Common Objections Answered

All Bibles are the same! They just have different styles!

If you honestly believe this, then you have never really seen some of the differences the Bibles have. In fact, why even print out different Bible versions in the same language if they didn't have any differences? Compared to the KJV, the modern Bibles are missing some 16 whole verses, truncated another one (and many more), casts doubts on entire sections ("longer ending of Mark", "woman caught in adultery"), changes entire verses which affects doctrine ("being saved" vs. "saved" in 1 Corinthians 1:18), amongst other things. If you are still not convinced, go attend a Bible study where everyone is using different Bible versions. It will probably surprise you that even the modern Bibles don't agree with each other at places, and sometimes, even disagree with themselves depending on which year edition they are using. Any honest person will see that no, the Bible versions are NOT the same, and it isn't just stylistic but actually doctrinal. God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33) and therefore it is impossible for all of them to be the same Bible.

The KJV is outdated and hard to read because it uses old English! Why do we need "thou" and "thee"? This is (the current year) nobody speaks this way!

First of all, KJV is not written in old English. It is written in early modern English and every single word you can find in the KJV can also be found in an English dictionary. Yes, shambles is a butcher shop. Old English would be Beowulf (look at it and tell me if that's anything like the KJV). The people of Elizabethan England and the Jacobean era didn't speak with thee and thou either. However, thee and thou are necessary to preserve the accuracy of the manuscripts. Why is that? Thee and thou are used as the 2nd person singular pronoun, while you and ye are the plural. Notice how we say "you are", despite addressing either a singular person or a whole group. The KJV seeks to accurately translate who this addresses, and somehow English is one of the few languages that do not differentiate the singular or plural for 2nd person in the vernacular, but writing in thee and thou is essential and not even that hard. If you're struggling with a four letter word and its inflections, then it says a lot about your own intelligence. There is a difference between how we speak and how eloquent, elevated, and beautiful the KJV is written, which is beyond our crude common tongue. Rather than demand the Bible, which is the word of God, be sunk into our level, should we not try to get to the level of the Bible's English and learn it ourselves by studying it diligently? You will also find a lot of examples where the KJV, in fact, is simpler and easier to understand than most modern Bibles.

The modern Bibles are translated from older and therefore more reliable manuscripts! The KJV's manuscripts are more recent and therefore could have been corrupted!

Another issue with the Bible versions is that the KJV is translated from one manuscript tradition (what we call the Byzantine text family), and the modern Bibles are translated from a corrupt family of manuscripts called the Alexandrian. The Alexandrian texts are older, with the oldest allegedly from about 4th century A.D. However, to say that because it is older and therefore more reliable is not only inaccurate, but completely ignores the fact that corruption from workers of evil could happen even on the same days Paul was penning the epistles to the Romans! 4th century is a long time from Jesus' ascension, actually, and if anything, this proves that those manuscripts were found in a workable condition because it was junk to begin with so it was discarded. The more a person reads their Bible, the more worn out it becomes until they replace it with a new one. The Byzantine texts then, you could even consider that they were preserved time after time after time from the originals. What's even more interesting is that these older manuscripts are often in the minority of the readings from the rest of the manuscripts: most of the 5000+ manuscripts largely agree with the Byzantine texts and are often so-called "Majority Texts". Why listen to a few outlying manuscripts which completely differ from the others just because it's the "oldest"? It uses secular reasoning to apply crudely to the word of God. Even if some of the modern Bibles can be "good translations", they are from the wrong and bad family which are corrupted.

The original KJV contained the Apocrypha! Why would you, a Biblical Christian who knows the Apocrypha is unscriptural, support a Bible that had it in its initial release?

 "...Is it a small corrupting of the Scriptures to make all, or the most part of the Apocrypha of equall faith with the canonicall Scriptures...?"
--King James VI & I, A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches

Yes, the original KJV had the Apocrypha. No, nobody but Catholics were foolish enough to call it Scriptures. In fact, it was placed in a separate section by itself away from the actual Scriptures for historical purposes and not mixed in with the other Old Testament books, unlike how the Catholics shuffle them in, deceptively making them look like it is part of it. Even then, no edition of the KJV printed nowadays even contains the Apocrypha unless they are specifically labelled to contain it. What exactly was the point of that objection anyways?

What about people who speak different languages? Why should they try to read the KJV?

Oh those poor, poor people who cannot read English! We have to show them the light by giving them the ESV which is much easier to read! Or is it? Common sense: we give people who don't know English the Bible which is in their own language! We have some very good translations in other languages, such as the Reina Valera 1909 for Spanish speakers (most other RV except 1960 works), the Russian Synodal Bible of 1873, etc, so long as they are using the same textual traditions which underlie the KJV. For the countries that do not have one, they need to be translated into that language from the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts, although it is also possible to translate from the KJV as well. Also, as a side note, due to the aforementioned "thou" and "you" distinction, many foreigners have actually claimed that the KJV was much easier to read than any of the other modern Bibles.

Just because I read the NIV doesn't make me unsaved! Why should I switch to the KJV?

You're right. It's possible to get saved from those modern Bibles, because Satan still left some of the essentials there before anyone figures out that they're being deceived. Technically, if a modern Bible has verses that say the same exact thing as the KJV, it is the same as preaching from the KJV. In order to make a lie, you have to mix it in amidst the truth to corrupt it. Reading the wrong Bible isn't going to damn anyone as reading the Quran won't damn you either, or by being in a stable makes you into a horse. However, due to the many problems of the modern Bibles, its omissions, its changes, and affected doctrines, why settle for that weak butter knife of an ESV when you can use the mighty sword that is the KJV? Also, people simply don't get saved by reading the Bible. They need the gospel preached to them by a believer to have that seed planted on them. (Romans 10:14) The wrong Bible though can and will lead people to doubt their faith due to its internal issues. As developing Christians, we should desire to have the meat of the Scriptures too and not just the milk. The more you dig deeper, the more you will see that there is much to be desired when reading the modern Bible versions.

Don't you believe that the KJV can correct the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts? Aren't you making a paper Pope out of the KJV Bible? How can I take you seriously?

As with any other movements, there will always be ones who call themselves part of our fold, but are in fact extremists who believe in an entirely different idea and are not our brethren and in fact make us look bad. There are people who follow the likes of Peter Ruckman, often called the Ruckmanites, who do take this too far, as to say that the English KJV is the only valid translation and that it can even correct the original Hebrew and Greek, or that the orthography of certain words will matter, that the KJV translators were re-inspired to get a new revelation to translate to the KJV, amongst other ridiculous claims. We do not believe that. We simply believe that the KJV is the inerrant, preserved, and the perfect Word of God in English, amongst others of the same textual traditions in different languages, and it is merely a translation of the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.

Where was the Bible before 1611 then? Why would God wait 1611 years after Jesus' birth to give the world a perfect Bible then?

We believe the KJV is perfect in English and has no need for another trial of purification. King James Bible had six predecessors (Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthews, Great Bible, Geneva, Bishops'), and all of them were good, but not the perfect and final form which was the KJV. Incidentally, Psalm 12:6 talks about silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Seventh time is the perfection and that would be the KJV if we thought about it this way. It's not like the people were waiting for a Bible to come out 1600 years after Christ: it was always there in one form or another. God used the English to produce this translation because it will be the British who will have the greatest empire of the world in the next few centuries, and English has pretty much become the lingua franca (common language) as a result of their colonialism, so it was within divine providence. Before that the Hebrews had God's revelation so the Old Testament is written in Hebrew, the New Testament was written in Greek as that was the common tongue of the Roman Empire during those times, then Latin, and we see various other translations in neighbouring countries such as the Syriac Peshitta, etc. Keep in mind the period between the end of Old Testament and the birth of Jesus Christ was about 400 years! God has been silent for that long then as well, so what makes it hard to believe that the English Bible could come much later? God's Words were always there in one way or another: it did not have to be unearthed some 1800 years later to be made known to the world. In fact, I think the same question should go to the Critical Text defenders: can you believe God's Words has been buried under the earth and obscure caves for such a long time and now we have finally have the truth?

Do you not believe that the Bible can be translated better at all in the future?

There's some things that can be changed in the KJV rendering sure, such as some archaic words, and certainly some phrases can be phrased differently and still carry the same meaning. Thees and thous are not part of this though (see above). However, in our day and age I highly doubt such rendition would come out, and the KJV is already good enough as it is for English speakers. In fact, not only does it capture the meaning and the words beautifully, it also reads much better and higher than any English works out there simply because it is the Word of God. Every word in the Bible can be found in the dictionary. If you're from the UK, a lot of the words and phrases may be more apparent to you. Let's not fix what isn't broken: you'll get bastardisations such as the "New King James Version" or the "Modern English Version". Also the KJV and its underlying texts can be translated to other languages as well.

KJV had many multiple reprints until 1769! And at one time it was called the Wicked Bible too!

If we're being honest about this, indeed there were multiple reprints of the King James Bible since 1611 all the way to 1769, but any people who see what was actually being changed was the font face and the orthography. There were actually only four revisions of the Authorised Verison: 1629, 1638, 1762, and 1769. They were not new translations, but revisions. 1629's edition was to fix printing errors, as printing was a very labourious task in those days. 1638 continued that same endeavour. The final two revisions, 1762 and 1769, dealt with orthographical reforms (spelling). It may surprise you that languages can evolve, and so does writing systems. The actual word that was translated, however, never changed, and typos and printing errors were often amended. Speaking of the Wicked Bible, this was because a printed edition of the KJV printed out "thou shalt commit adultery", omitting the prohibitive "not". The printer was jailed since this happened way too frequently and this is not how you handle the word of God. Also, the few 'differences' one can find amongst the various 'different KJVs' will find that none of them change the meaning at all and people who pick on those usually do it just to destroy the KJV's credibility without actually seeing what's been 'changed'.

In the modern Bibles, however, actual versions after different years do, in fact, change the words. An example is the 2011 NIV in Mark 1:41, where Jesus was "indignant" instead of "compassionate" to the blind man, or the 2016 ESV, where the controversial Genesis 3:16 "your desire will be contrary to your husband" rendition was chosen, each disagreeing with their former editions. The KJV, we can be assured, will do no such thing, and the one we have is essentially the 1769 version, but it's not any different from the 1611 in any meaningful way. The multiple reprints charge, if anything, should be on the modern Bibles.

Well my pastors, my seminary professors, and all these other respectable men of faith tell me King James Onlyism is an indefensible position and that I should get along with the rest of the world and use what I like! You think you know more than all of them?

Can your faith leaders attest that they believe in a current existent perfect word of God? We ought to listen to God rather than men (Acts 5:29), and if you are so easily swayed by the uneducated opinions of mere men rather than reading and hearing what the Word of God actually says, then you really need to question if you are being honest at this point. Even if your seminary professors or your acclaimed "doctors of theology" are very well read and can probably articulate better than most of us, what's the point of that when they are simply wrong in this matter and we are right? Jesus himself had to deal with many learned scribes of his times and they were wrong as well. This is called the tyranny of the scholars, which permeates nearly any fields to suppress any opposition (such as evolutionists in the field of science where they don't belong), but no matter what one does to try and suppress it, truth will always prevail. Whether you like it or not, there will always be adherents to the KJV or other good Bibles of its same manuscript traditions, and honestly searching the history of how the Bibles were translated, and which parties were around, and why KJV-Onlyism is attacked by every sides, you cannot honestly come to the conclusion the other Bibles are right. In fact, the very reason for the existence of other Bible versions is that they believe they will never be perfect but try to get close to the "originals" as much as possible! Ask your pastors or your professors if they believe that the Bible they are using is perfect. That alone should tell you everything.

You're a conspiracy theorist for thinking people would corrupt the word of God! God promised to preserve His Words you said!

Am I wrong in insinuating that the modern churches have been washed down in their theology and led many people astray? Was Paul worrying in vain when he wrote in 2 Corinthians 2:17 of the many who corrupt the gospel? God did promise to preserve His Words but it doesn't mean various false editions are not around. When Jesus came into this world and proclaimed his ministry as the Christ, were there not other false Christs around? Calling something a conspiracy theory when the truth is evident means you are afraid to face the truth. There are actually people who directly serve Satan and those who are willing to edit the word of God to their own delight and not by innocent mistakes. A careful study of the many changes in the modern Bibles will clearly show you these changes are not accidental but calculated and devious plans to lead many people into confusion and deny the inerrancy and the inspiration of the Scriptures. We are fighting against devils here (Ephesians 6:12), not flesh and blood. They are much more cleverer than the man, and to say that the devil has no power against us is deceiving yourself from the truth! With that said, yes, I do believe there is a conspiracy by the devil and his lackeys to corrupt the word of God and get people to be led astray, among the millions of other ways to drag people into hell. Get right with God and use His true Words, the KJV.

You actually believe the KJV is better than the other Bibles? Even perfect?

Why yes I do. Now please tell me which Bible you put your faith on, if you can, or if you even believe in the perfect Word of God.


List of Other Articles

How Difficult Is the KJV to Read? WIP
Comparison of the Bible Versions WIP
Removed Bible Verses WIP
Supposed 'Errors' in KJV Answered WIP
Biblical Difficulties WIP
The Hebrew and Greek Text Underlying the KJV WIP
What About the Septuagint? WIP
What About the Apocrypha? WIP
The Men Behind the Modern Translations WIP

Back to Top