Why Trust King James?
Backing the KJV 1611 as the Word of God in English
The Attack on the Bible
PART SIX
by Terry Watkins and James L. Melton (Edited by Tom Mack)
If someone decides to produce a "new Bible version", then they must also convince Christians that there is a NEED and a justifiable CAUSE for the new version. One of the deceitful excuses being used today for producing new versions is that the King James Bible has been revised several times since 1611, and that a new revision is needed once again. While spreading this piece of deceitful misinformation, the KJV critics hold their breath, hoping that no one will be intelligent enough to ask for specific details about these "revisions". The many revisions that have occurred since 1881 bear NO RESEMBLANCE to the various EDITIONS of the KJV prior to 1881. The modern revisors are just trying to justify their sins!
There were only FOUR actual EDITIONS of the King James Bible produced after 1611: 1629, 1638, 1762, and 1769. These were not translations (like the new versions SINCE 1881), and they really weren't even "revisions".
The 1629 edition was simply an effort to correct printing errors, and two of the original King James translators assisted in the work.
The 1638 edition of the KJV also dealt with printing errors, especially words and clauses overlooked by the printers. About 72% of the textual corrections in the KJV were done by 1638, only 27 years after the first printing.
Please bear in mind the fact that printing was a very laborious task prior to 1800. Publishing a flawless work was almost impossible. Even today, with computers and advanced word processors, printing errors are still frequently made. Imagine what it was like in the 1600's!
Then, in 1762 and 1769, two final editions of the KJV were published. Both of these involved spelling changes, which became necessary as the English language became more stabilized and spelling rules were established.
There were no new translations, and there were really no new revisions published in 1629, 1638, 1762, or 1769. These were simply EDITIONS of the 1611 KJV, which corrected printing errors and spelling. Those who try to equate these editions with the modern translations are just being deceitful or stupid--or both. The many other so-called "revisions" of the KJV that occurred in 1613, 1616, 1617, and 1743 are nothing more than running changes and touch-up work at the printers. The REAL revisions and translations do not start appearing until 1881 (RV) and 1901 (ASV). So if some punk walks up with a smirky grin on his face and asks you, "So which King James Bible do you have, the 1611, the 1629, the 1638, the 1762, or the 1769?", you can simply state that you have a 1769 edition of the King James 1611 Authorized Version.
Dr. David F. Reagan has an excellent pamphlet available on this subject. It can be ordered from: Trinity Baptist Temple Bookstore, 5709 N. Broadway, Knoxville, TN, 37918. Telephone: 615-688-0780.
Another favorite lie of the critics is that the original KJV of 1611 included the Apocrypha, which no true Christian today accepts as Scripture. The Apocrypha is a collection of several pagan writings which the Catholic church accepts as inspired Scripture. In fact, the Council of Trent (1546) pronounced a CURSE upon anyone who denied that these books were inspired. The King James translators did NOT consider the books to be inspired Scripture, nor did they include them in the canon as such. They merely placed the Apocryphal books BETWEEN the Old and New testament as a historical document, not as Scripture. Their reasons for not accepting the Apocrypha as Scripture are listed on page 185-186 of the book Translators Revived, by Alexander McClure. The seven reasons are basically as follows:
- Not one of them is in the Hebrew language like the rest of the Old Testament books.
- Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.
- These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
- They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian church.
- They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves. For example, in the Books of Maccabees alone, Antiochus Epiphanes dies three times in three places!
- It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
- It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation.
Critics of the KJV have a nasty habit of pointing out what they believe to be errors, contradictions, and mistranslations in the Authorized Version. The sad fact is that they usually point these things out to young men and women in Christian colleges who do not know any better. Many young Christians, including young preachers, are having their faith in God's word destroyed by the very people they look to for spiritual guidance!
These so-called "errors" that are presented by such infidels have been explained and written about so many times that it's a shame to even have to mention it again. There isn't enough space in a booklet of this size to embark upon a lengthy rebuttle of such claims. Besides, it has already been done quite well by others. Nevertheless, for the sake of showing the reader the nature of the so-called "errors" in the AV, we will take the time to briefly deal with just a few:
1. According to the critics, the word "Easter" in Acts 12:4 is a mistranslation, because the Greek word is"pascha," and it is translated "passover" twenty-eight times in the New Testament, and it should be translated likewise in Acts 12:4.
This is what happens when a man is so hung up on "the Greek" that he can't read plain English. It should NOT be translated "passover" because the Passover had already passed. The "days of unleavened bread" had already begun (vs. 3), which means the Passover was over (Num. 28:16-18; Exo. 12:13-18). The Passover was always the fourteenth day of the first month, while the days of unleavened bread ran from the fifteenth through the twenty-first. Herod could not have been waiting for the Passover. Besides, why would a Gentile king like Herod be concerned about a Jewish feast day? "Easter" is from the pagan "Ishtar", the goddess that the pagans worshipped--Rome included. Herod wanted to wait until his pagan holiday was over before bringing Peter out to the people.
2. I John 5:7 is also the subject of much debate. It is argued that the verse lacks manuscript evidence and does not belong in the Bible. Being one of the greatest verses in the Bible on the Trinity, we should be suspicious of any oppositions to it.
The verse should NOT be omitted from the Bible. It is found in Greek manuscript 61, which probably forced Erasmus to include it in his third edition Greek text of 1522.
I John 5:7 is also found in Codex Ravianus, and in the margins of 88 and 629. It is also found in Old Latin manuscripts r and Speculum. It was quoted by Cyprian around A.D. 250, and two Spanish Bishops quoted it in the fourth century (Priscillkian and Idacius Clarus). Several African writers quote it in the fifth century, and Cassiodorus quotes it in the sixth century in Italy.
The fact that Siniaticus and Vaticanus do not include the verse means nothing to a true Bible believer. After all, Vaticanus omits the entire book of Revelation, while keeping the Apocrypha!
3. Many argue that the KJV is in error with it's use of the word "devils" instead of "demons". Again, this is due to an over emphasis on "the Greek" as well as a lack of faith in God's ability to preserve His words in English. While protesting that "daimon" should be translated "demon", many have overlooked a great truth which the Holy Spirit has preserved in the King's English. There is one true "Son of God", but many "sons of God". There is one true "Church", the Bride of Christ, but many local "churches". Likewise, there is one "Devil", but many "devils" under his control.
The word "demon" itself does not necessarily imply an evil spirit. Even Webster's 1828 dictionary states that "the ancients believed that there were good and evil demons...", and New Agers of today believe likewise. Therefore, God led the KJV translators to translate "devils" instead of "demons" because every "daimon" in the Bible IS an evil spirit. The word "devil" makes that clear. Every "devil" in the Bible is under the authority of their father "the Devil".
4. Then we have "contradictions" like Exodus 24:10 and John 1:18. Exodus says the Israelites SAW God, while Jesus said in John that "no man hath seen God at any time". Contradiction, right? No, it's only a matter of rightly dividing the word of truth (which you may not be practicing if II Tim. 2:15 has been altered in your "bible"). God is a Trinity, just like you and I. We're a body, a soul, and a spirit (I Ths. 5:23). The Israelites saw a physical manifestation of God, but not the SOUL of God, just as no one has ever seen your soul.
5. Numbers 25:9 says that 24,000 people died in a plague, but I Corinthians 10:8 says that only 23,000 died. Read I Corinthians 10:8 again and notice that 23,000 fell "in one day". The 24,000 died altogether in a few days.
You see, these are the kind of "errors" in the King James Bible. These are the reasons given for you to throw away your Bible and buy a new one. Don't fall for it. I have learned to always give God the benefit of a doubt, and to count the critics guilty until proven innocent. So far I've been right. Anytime I see an "error" in the KJV I just assume that I'm not learned enough in the Scriptures to explain it, but that it is NOT an error. I just pray about it and trust God. I NEVER correct the Book that God has honored for so long. Thank God, I'm not that stupid.