Wednesday, July 21, 2010
C H A P T E R
Why the King James Bible
To begin, let’s establish a scriptural base for our discussion so there will be no confusion in our minds as to what we will be studying in the chapters that follow. In the Prologue, specific mention was made of the King James version of the Holy Bible. So let’s first establish a basic foundation for scriptural reference regarding truth verses tradition. In doing so we shall consider the question, Which version of the Bible should be used? This is a topic of some debate within the Christian world, and usually boils down to personal preference. But does the individual understand the nature of the biblical version they choose?
A bible is simply a collection of writings which can be any book regarded as authoritative or official, and there are many types of bibles in the world. Some bibles may be books like The Car Maintenance Bible, The Sportsman’s Bible, The Vegetable Gardener’s Bible, The Natural Health Bible, and so forth. For our discussion purposes, however, we will consider the sacred book of Christianity known as The Holy Bible, which comprise both the Old and New Testaments. Therefore, any reference to the Bible, hereafter, will be to this Bible—The Holy Bible.
Seeking God’s Truth
The Holy Bible has a message, but it does not come to the reader voluntarily; they need to find it for themselves. The search of God’s truth comes from three sources: 1) the whisperings of the Holy Spirit, 2) holy scripture, and 3) human logic. It comes from both reading the word of God, humbly pondering those words, and receiving the Spirit of God—all working together in the individual.
We receive truth by way of God’s Spirit as it moves upon us, and the Bible is only one of the vehicles through which that Spirit works. But, someone might ask, Can’t we feel the prompting of the Spirit without a Bible in our hand? Sure we can. It happens all the time. The printed Word only provides information, but it’s the Holy Ghost which touches the heart, enlightens the mind, teaches truth, and enlarges the soul.
Truth, then, does not come from some professional college based minister of the cloth, regardless of how respected and honored that pastor or priest may be. Learning truth is a function of the Spirit, not the possession of a “sheepskin.” The Apostle Peter wrote, “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” (2 Peter 1:20-21.)
What Peter is saying here is that, no one preacher or learned individual, who gives seminars, makes tapes and videos, or writes books, has the exclusive right to interpret scripture. That is the personal responsibility of each individual. A scripture that comes to mind on this subject can be found in Micah Chapter 7: “The best of them is as a brier: the most upright is sharper than a thorn hedge: the day of thy watchmen and thy visitation cometh; now shall be their perplexity. Trust ye not in a friend, put ye not confidence in a guide: keep the doors of thy mouth from her that lieth in thy bosom.” (Micah 7:4-5.) Others may teach and guide, but the spirit of truth is our responsibility to grasp.
As scripture is the result of holy men being moved upon by the Holy Ghost, so discerning truth is the result of being in tune with that Spirit as one searches scripture. “For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.” (1 Cor. 2:11.) Without that Spirit, one can read the Bible and never come to a testimony of Christ Jesus; for many have done just that: read the Word, but with no resulting witness or conviction. God does not give that which is holy to those who cannot appreciate it. (Matt. 7:6.)
With these thoughts in mind, let’s consider if biblical statements can be taken literally, or can there be other meaning applied to them. The answer, of course, is that some biblical words can be taken literally, while others are metaphorical. Consequently, those who take every word in the Bible literally will never understand the true meaning of God’s word; and the same holds true for those who take none of the Bible literally. As stated earlier, we are to use our God given intellect, touched by the Holy Spirit, as we strive to seek truth and discern its meaning.
Although some words can be taken literally, and some metaphorically, the Holy Bible is the word of God—that is, as long as the Bible has been translated correctly. What I mean here is that I do not believe the King James, or any other version of the Bible, to be perfect in every respect, but I do believe the old King James Version of the Holy Bible to be the most correct of all translations. At this point I would caution the reader: please do NOT confuse the old King James Bible with what is called the “New” King James Bible. They are not the same! Neither are all of the other spurious translations and versions of the Bible. With all of the biblical versions available today, is there any wonder that confusion reigns within the Christian community? Yes, there were differences before these various translations arrived, but how much more confusion now.
I remember in a Sunday School class, after a teacher read a scripture, that a class member said, “In my Bible it reads...,” another said, “But it says here in mine...,” and so it goes. But what was it the Apostle Paul wrote to the Ephesians: “There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.” (Eph. 4:4-6.)
How many Christian faiths are there? How many bodies? How many forms of baptism? Such questions could go on and on. Many versions of the Bible bring confusion, which is out of harmony with what Paul tried to teach the Corinthians. Again, what is it we read from Paul? “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.” (1 Cor. 14:33.)
Beware New Bible Versions
During mid-nineteenth century, about the time when Darwin was trying to show how there could be a creation without a Creator, two Cambridge professors, Brooke F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort developed an elaborate argument in favor of a shorter text for the Bible instead of the longer and more complete Received Text, the Textus Receptus. These men were “spiritualists” who belonged to an occult-type group called the “Ghostly Guild.” Along with being Anglican by tradition, they were also Mary-worshipers and believed in seances, crystal-gazing, evolution and had contempt for the King James Bible; and their purpose was to try and destroy the Christian world by debasing true biblical teachings.
A female ally of Westcott and Hort was one Madame Helena Petrovna Blavatzky, an ardent Luciferion—one who worships Lucifer. Westcott and Hort became captivated by her intellect and understanding of the spiritualistic, and happily received her input into the creation of the new scriptures.
Madame Helena Petrovna Blavatsky was initiated into the Freemasons as a Co-Mason during the early part of the nineteenth century. She was the founder of one of the most deeply Satanic secret societies on earth, the occult Theosophical Society. People who learned Satanism from her included such notables as Lenin with some of his Communist cohorts, and Adolf Hitler and his henchmen. Hitler, particularly, found Blavatsky’s teachings to be crucial to his Satanic dogma, especially her treatise entitled the Secret Doctrine. Hitler’s Holocaust occurred in large part because of Blavatsky’s teachings. Would anyone ever believe that such an individual as Madame Blavatsky could ever provide input into the Holy Bible?
Let’s consider, for a moment, Westcott’s and Hort’s feelings concerning the 1611 King James Bible and other related topics. First consider Mr. Westcott, a socialist, who made statements such as: “I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and Jesus-worship have very much in common...” “The Romish view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to the truth than the Evangelical...”; “... the book that has most engaged me is Darwin... My feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable.” (Let’s Weigh the Evidence, B. Burton, pp. 67-68); “The old dogmatic view of the Bible therefore, is not only open to attack from the standpoint of science and historical criticism, for if taken seriously it becomes a danger to religion and public morals;” “Moses has left us no writings, and we know little of him with certainty.” (The Authority of the Bible, C. H. Dodd, pp. 14, 27.); and, like his partner Mr. Hort, he also spoke of “... the vile Textus Receptus...,” on which the 1611 King James Bible was based.
Consider Mr. Hort who wrote to a friend in 1851 when only twenty-three years of age: “I had no idea till the last few weeks of the importance of texts, having read so little Greek Testament, and dragged on with the villainous Textus Receptus... Think of that vile Textus Receptus... “ (Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, 1896, Vol 1, p. 211). With these remarks, Hort began a career devoted to the subversion of the Received Text, and the King James Bible in particular. About Hort, Ernest Colwell wrote: “The dead hand of Fenton John Anthony Hort lies heavy upon us. In the early years of this century Kirsopp Lake described Hort’s work as a failure, though a glorious one. But Hort did not fail to reach his major goal. He dethroned the Textus Receptus.” (Scribal Habits in Early Papyri, The Bible in Modern Scholarship, Abingdon, 1965, p. 370.)
In 1853 these two men, Westcott and Hort, started making changes in the Bible, inviting Cardinal John Newman, and others, to join the group in revamping the scriptures. From then on the religious world would never be the same. They slipped in many teachings of Origen and the Jerome Bible, and in 1881-85 they came out with a perverted Alexandrian Bible. Others before them had attempted the same, but Westcott and Hort developed their approach into a very convincing argument. Thus we have what has been referred to as the “Westcott-Hort Theory.” What they had achieved is known as a “conflation,” which is the combining of two diverse or unlike interpretations into a single text.
Their theory, and resulting biblical text, has greatly influenced the beliefs of Bible translators since that time. The Church of England bought the “new and improved” Greek text, which was called the English Revised Version (ERV). Shortly thereafter (1901), the American Standard Version (ASV) came upon the scene, along with a revival—a revival not of faith, but of doubt; not of knowledge from God’s word, but of the opinion of man. In addition to these bogus Bibles which cause confusion, we now have an array of Roman influenced Bibles created for the Protestant world. What are some of these Bibles? To mention just a few of those bogus bibles that have surfaced, we have the:
Revised Standard Version (RSV – 1946, 52);
New American Standard Version (NASV – 1963, 71);
New Revised Standard Version (NRSV – 1989);
English Standard Version (ESV – 2001);
New World Translation (NWT – 1950-84);
Amplified Bible (AB – 1965, 87);
Living Bible (LB – 1967, 71);
Moffatt Bible (1926);
New English Bible (NEB – 1961, 70);
Good News Bible (GNB or TEV – 1966-76);
New International Version (NIV – 1973, 78);
New King James Bible (NKJV – 1979)
New Century Bible (NCV – 1987)
The Message (1993, 2002);
Holman Christian Standard Version (HCSV – 2001, 04);
Today’s New International Version (TNIV – 2002, 05).
And Many More
How Pure the Word?
The King James Version has not changed since its original 1611 edition. However, over the years, after the original publications of these spurious bibles, each one has gone through some sort of revision without warning the public of their changes. So what we have today is NOT the same NKJV that we had with its first publication, nor do we have the same NIV as it was when it was first published, and so on down the line with the other new bibles. This is a slick way of introducing false concepts and doctrines while, at the same time, confusing the reader and fostering doubt in the mind of the Christian community in the process.
With a closer look at some of those who have their hands in many of these fraudulent biblical translations, one would begin to shudder. For example: Who is the Chairman of the New International Version’s (NIV) Old Testament committee? It’s a supporter of the “homosexual” movement, Martin Woudra. And the printing rights to the (NIV) are now owned by the “pornographer,” Rupert Murdock. Not only is Murdock the owner of Twentieth Century Fox Movie Studios, Fox Broadcasting, along with the family-degrading and disgusting Bart Simpson TV show, but he is also the owner of Zondervan Publishing, one of the world’s largest publishing houses of Christian Books.
The Roman Catholic Cardinal, Carlo Maria Martini, was touted by Time magazine, in 1995, as being the most likely one to become the next Pope, after John Paul II. Cardinal Martini is now one of the Editors of the NIV and the New American Standard Version (NASV). Personally, he neither believes in the Lordship of Jesus Christ, that the Holy Bible is the word of God, nor that the biblical miracles were true.
What is so remarkable is that, although the tenets of Westcott and Hort, as used in their translation, have been continuously refuted by theologians, the theologians still teach those doctrines anyway. One thing appears quite certain, considering their gross insensibility to the obvious consequence, their return to the King James Bible is in serious doubt. Despite the proven fallacy, it is apparent that the theological colleges are simply not willing to upset the status quo.
As one considers the modern translations, they will find that various words or passages are either missing, drastically changed, or new words and phrases added. Without going into a lot of comparisons between the King James Version and the modern versions of the Holy Bible (which discussion is too lengthy at this time), it can be pointed out that they differ in some 5,337 places, and the modern versions downgrade or deny the Godhood of Jesus Christ, His virgin birth, blood atonement, resurrection, and the reliability of the written word of God. For example, if the reader personally examining the New Century Bible, they will find that there are many entire verses removed from the text.
Surprisingly, there are some Bible translators who really don’t believe in the Bible much at all, and their lack of belief shows up in their work. Today, most Bible Colleges encourage the use of some of these counterfeit translations which we have just mentioned, holding the King James Version in contempt. On top of that, a New King James versions of the Bible has beco
me popular, wherein its advocates believe it reads easier than the old King James and is just as valid because of its name. But, in fact, it is laced with New Age philosophy—the New Age religion that actually dethrones the one true God, and Jesus Christ, and establishes man and nature worship as most significant; the book even sports the New Age emblem on the front cover (shown right). The wording in the New King James seams innocent on the surface, but it is subtly dangerous and misleading. (For more on this subject go to, Why the King James Bible.)
To compound the problem, many students and regular church-goers don’t want to bother with checking things out for themselves, so they find it easier to ignorantly believe the so-called religious scholars. On top of that, a lot of Christian book stores get “perks” for promoting new Bibles, such as the New International Version (the pet of most all Christian schools and seminaries), and are being educated how to drive customers away from the King James Bible to the other versions.
It is this author’s firm belief that it is not the goal of the Satanic powers that be, and their tampering with God’s word, to convert the world to Christ, but to force them into pagan worship and idolatry. Many versions of the Bible bring confusion, which is the obvious plan of the adversary. The old devil has a way of confusing and casting doubt. The greatest method of deception is to counterfeit, and the master of counterfeit and deception is Satan.
Consequently, I believe that there are, in reality, only two Bibles offered today: 1) The Authorized King James Bible, and 2) the counterfeit, regardless of the many titles it hides behind. These other versions cannot be trusted to present true gospel doctrine as pretended. So, considering these other biblical versions, can they truly be called the “Holy” Bible, or should they be considered unholy fakes?
Understanding that man is fallible, and has an inclination toward error, let’s consider the two basic ways he usually goes about trying to establish doctrine through biblical study. One is called proof-texting, and the other is the analytical method known as contextual.
Proof-texting is when one has a pre-determined belief or concept and then goes about searching biblical passages to prove or support that particular thesis. Another term for this method of presenting evidence is called “wresting.” That is, to wrest the scriptures is to distort them to prove a point. Such pre-determined views can come from traditional beliefs already established, as well as from new ideas formulated by someone independent of such tradition. Whatever the case, proof-texting is the way that most of Christianity goes about proving whatever particular doctrine they want to espouse. It is the process of taking things out of context—the taking of a part truth from what is really a whole truth.
The contextual or analytical method, is esteeming the Bible as God’s word without any preconceived notions. With this method we ask such questions as, What does it mean? How does one verse relate to other contiguous verses, or other verses touching the same subject? In this way, the Bible is used for learning and discovery instead of proving; it is used with respect for truth instead of manipulating it to support a particular persuasion, be that opinion true or false. It is this latter way of considering the Bible, the contextual, or analytical method, that I hope to present herein.
It was stated above that the Bible provides a source for inspired ideas, while it is the Holy Spirit that touches one’s heart, has his mind enlightened, and through which the understanding of truth is received. As we consider the Bible as our source of inspired ideas, it can be very difficult when that source has been tampered with, regardless of the reason. So, in the search for truth, the scriptural source is vitally important.
At present, any question concerning the Authorized King James Bible should not be one of inspiration (2 Tim. 3:16), but of perfection. However, there should be no question that when scripture was originally written they were perfect. But has all scripture been perfectly preserved and handed down from generation to generation? There are those diehards who claim, YES! But there are also those who understand that even though the Psalmist wrote, “The words of the Lord are pure words ... Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever” (Psalms 12:6-7), that man is fallible and subject to error, regardless of motive.
Therefore, the Bible to be considered in relation to the chapters that follow will be the old standard Authorized King James Version. In spite of all the other versions, the King James is still the most widely used Bible, and we do need some ONE single standard upon which to base our discussion.