Why King James Version (KJV) is still the most reliable ENGLISH Bible
Edited by Mark Andrew
As Bible-believing Christians, we believe that the words of the King James
Authorized Version are the pure and preserved words of God for the English
speaking people. This booklet has been written to help fellow Bible-believers
defend themselves against the fiery darts of the wicked Laodiceans and
Alexandrians who do not believe that any human being should have a printed final
authority to guide him through this wicked world of darkness and deceit.
I realize it is unusual to see such a brief booklet addressing so many subjects,
but it is my personal belief that this is what many people need in these last
days. The Bible Believer's Helpful Little Handbook has been well accepted by
Christians because of it's variety, it's brevity, and it's scriptural content.
I've tried to stick to that same basic principle in this booklet. Since this is
mainly a reference guide, it isn't necessary for you to read the entire booklet
in order to appreciate many of the truths it contains.
Each small section
contains valuable truths that the active Bible-believer will find helpful time
after time. However, if you'll take the time to read the entire booklet, you
will learn many things that will increase your faith in God's preserved word.
You will also become more equipped to do battle with the Alexandrian apostates
who work endlessly in their efforts to replace your two-edged sword with a
toothpick. These people take great delight in ridiculing and intimidating people
like you and I, and far too often they win because we do not know the answers.
With a good knowledge of the information in the forthcoming pages, you CAN know
the answers and you can win a few battles of your own.
I urge you to become familiar with this little booklet. Mark or highlight the
special places that will be most useful to you. Keep a copy close by and when
the moment is right, USE IT!
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. (Psa. 12:6-7)
Ten (10) Reasons for Accepting the KJV as God's Preserved Word:
1. God promised to preserve His words (Psa. 12:6-7; Mat. 24:35). There has to be
a preserved copy of God's pure words somewhere. If it isn't the KJV, then what
2. It has no copyright. The text of the KJV may be reproduced by anyone for
there is no copyright forbidding it's duplication. This is not true with the
3. The KJV produces good fruit (Mat. 7:17-20). No modern translation can compare
to the KJV when it comes to producing good fruit. For nearly four hundred (400) years,
God has used the preaching and teaching of the KJV to bring hundreds of millions
to Christ. Laodicean Christians might favor the new versions, but the Holy
4. The KJV was translated during the Philadelphia church period (Rev. 3:7-13).
The modern versions begin to appear rather late on the scene as the lukewarm
Laodicean period gets underway (Rev. 3:14-22), but the KJV was produced way back
in 1611, just in time for the many great revivals (1700-1900). The Philadelphia
church was the only church that did not receive a rebuke from the Lord Jesus
Christ, and it was the only church that "kept" God's word (Rev. 3:8).
5. The KJV translators were honest in their work. When the translators had to
add certain words, largely due to idiom changes, they placed the added words in
italics so we'd know the difference. This is not the case with many new
6. All new translations compare themselves to the KJV. Isn't it strange that the
new versions never compare themselves to one another? For some strange reason
they all line up against one Book -- the A.V. 1611. I wonder why? Try Matthew
7. The KJV translators believed they were handling the very words of God (I Ths.
2:13). Just read the King James Dedicatory and compare it to the prefaces in the
modern versions. Immediately, you will see a world of difference in the approach
and attitude of the translators. Which group would YOU pick for translating a
8. The KJV is supported by far more evidence. Of over 5,300 pieces of manuscript
evidence, ninety-five percent supports the King James Bible! The changes in the
new versions are based on the remaining five percent of manuscripts, most of
which are from Alexandria, Egypt. (There are only two lines of Bibles: the
Devil's line from Alexandria, and the Lord's line from Antioch. We'll deal with
9. No one has ever proven that the KJV is not God's word. The 1611 should be
considered innocent until proven guilty with a significant amount of genuine
10. The KJV exalts the Lord Jesus Christ. The true scriptures should testify of
Jesus Christ (John 5:39). There is no book on this planet which exalts Christ
higher than the King James Bible. In numerous places the new perversions attack
the Deity of Christ, the Blood Atonement, the Resurrection, salvation by grace
through faith, and the Second Coming. The true scriptures will TESTIFY of Jesus
Christ, not ATTACK Him!
Seventy-five (75) Common Sayings:
The King James Bible is supposedly written in an "old and archaic
language" that people today have trouble understanding, but please notice
how so many of our modern sayings come from between it's covers. Hundreds could
be presented, but we'll limit ourselves to seventy-five:
1. Genesis 4:2-5: can't get blood from a turnip
2. Genesis 7: don't miss the boat
3. Genesis 11:7-9: babbling
4. Genesis 15:5: teller
5. Genesis 43:34: mess (of food)
6. Exodus 19:16-18: holy smoke
7. Exodus 28:42: britches
8. Exodus 32:8: holy cow
9. Leviticus 2:14: roast ears
10. Leviticus 13:10: the quick (raw flesh)
11. Leviticus 14:5-6: running water
12. Leviticus 16:8: scapegoat
13. Leviticus 25:10: Liberty Bell
14. Numbers 21:5: light bread
15. Numbers 35:2-5: suburb
16. Deuteronomy 2:14: wasted him
17. Deuteronomy 24:5: cheer up
18. Deuteronomy 32:10: apple of his eye
19. Judges 5:20: star wars
20. Judges 7:5-12: under dog
21. Judges 8:16: teach a lesson
22. Judges 17:10: calling a priest father
23. I Samuel 14:12: I'll show you a thing or two
24. I Samuel 20:40: artillery
25. I Samuel 25:37: petrified
26. II Samuel 19:18: ferry boat
27. I Kings 3:7: don't know if he's coming or going
28. I Kings 14:3: cracklins
29. I Kings 14:6: that's heavy
30. I Kings 21:19-23: she's gone to the dogs
31. II Chronicles 9:6: you haven't heard half of it
32. II Chronicles 30:6: postman
33. Nehemiah 13:11: set them in their place
34. Esther 7:9: he hung himself
35. Job 11:16: It's water under the bridge
36. Job 20:6: he has his head in the clouds
37. Psalm 4:8: lay me down to sleep
38. Psalm 19:3-4: he gave me a line
39. Psalm 37:13: his day is coming
40. Psalm 58:8: pass away (dying)
41. Psalm 64:3-4: shoot off your mouth
42. Psalm 78:25: angel's food cake
43. Psalm 141:10: give him enough rope and he'll hang himself
44. Proverbs 7:22: dumb as an ox
45. Proverbs 13:24: spare the rod, spoil the child
46. Proverbs 18:6: he is asking for it
47. Proverbs 24:16: can't keep a good man down
48. Proverbs 25:14: full of hot air
49. Proverbs 30:30: king of beasts
50. Ecclesiastes 10:19: money talks
51. Ecclesiastes 10:20: a little bird told me
52. Song Solomon 2:5: lovesick
53. Isaiah 52:8: see eye to eye
54. Jeremiah 23:25: I have a dream (MLK, Jr)
55. Ezekiel 26:9: engines
56. Ezekiel 38:9: desert storm or storm troopers
57. Daniel 3:21: hose (leg wear)
58. Daniel 8:25: foreign policy
59. Daniel 11:38: the force be with you (star wars)
60. Hosea 7:8: half-baked
61. Jonah 4:10-11: can't tell left from right
62. Zephaniah 3:8-9: United Nations Assembly
63. Matthew 25:1-10: burning the midnight oil
64. Matthew 25:33: right or left side of an issue
65. Matthew 27:46: for crying out loud
66. Mark 5:13: hog wild
67. Luke 11:46: won't lift a finger to help
68. Luke 15:17: he came to himself
69. Romans 2:23: breaking the law
70. Philippians 3:2: beware of dog
71. Colossians 2:14: they nailed him
72. I John 5:11-13: get a life
73. Revelation 6:8: hell on earth
74. Revelation 16:13: a frog in my throat
75. Revelation 20:15: go jump in the lake
If you've checked these references, then you can easily see how our all-wise God
has played a beautiful joke on the modern revisionists. People who do not even
believe the KJV quote it every day! Furthermore, if you'll grab yourself a NIV,
a NCV, a TEV, or anything else, you'll find that many of these modern sayings
have been destroyed by the "better language" of the Laodiceans.
For example, I always thought that when I was a young boy my father and I
crossed the Mississippi on a ferry boat (II Sam. 19:18), but I guess we must
have crossed at the ford instead (NIV). Then there were times when I got out of
line and dad would really set me in my place (Neh. 13:11). Too bad he didn't
have a NIV, for he could have stationed me at my post. I guess there was nothing
dad loved more than going out early on Saturday mornings and catching a mess of
fish (Gen. 43:34). It's a good thing we didn't have a NKJV in those days, for he
would have only caught a serving. We usually had hushpuppies with that fish
dinner, but sometimes we just had light bread (Num. 21:5). That is, until the
neighbors came over with their New American Bible. Then we had wretched food.
Then dad would always say, "Cheer up, son, it'll be better next time!"
(Deu. 24:5) Too bad he didn't have a NKJV, for I'm sure he would have said,
"Come on, boy, bring happiness to yourself!"
So you get the point: the new versions don't stand a chance when competing with
the KJV to use the most "modern" speech! Go ahead, have yourself some
fun. Learn to appreciate God's sense of humor! Grab a new translation and see
first hand how the modern versions are still stuck in the Dark Ages when it
comes to keeping up with modern speech.
The Italicized Words
If we are to believe what we hear from the critics, then we must accept the
notion that the italicized words in the King James Bible do not belong. We are
told that the words were added by the translators and are not the words of God.
If this is true, then please explain why Luke, Paul, John, Peter, and even the
Lord Jesus QUOTE them! The column on the right shows how New Testament writers
and speakers QUOTE the King James italics of the Old Testament:
OLD TESTAMENT SCRIPTURE
I have set the LORD always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall
not be moved. (Psa. 16:8)
NEW TESTAMENT QUOTE
For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for
he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved: (Acts 2:25)
OLD TESTAMENT SCRIPTURE
Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn. (Deu. 25:4)
NEW TESTAMENT QUOTE
For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox
that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? (I Cor. 9:9. Also see I
OLD TESTAMENT SCRIPTURE
And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which
thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know
that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of
the mouth of the LORD doth man live. (Deu. 8:3)
NEW TESTAMENT QUOTE
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but
by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. (Mat. 4:4)
OLD TESTAMENT SCRIPTURE
I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. (Psa.
NEW TESTAMENT QUOTE
Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? (John
OLD TESTAMENT SCRIPTURE
Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a
stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that
believeth shall not make haste. (Isa. 28:16)
NEW TESTAMENT QUOTE
Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief
corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be
confounded. (I Pet. 2:6)
Did you notice that the New Testament writers QUOTE the words in italics? This
means they WERE actually in the originals! When Jesus said, "It is
written..." (Mat. 4:4), he was saying that the word "word" was
also written--even if the King James translators didn't have it in the Hebrew
Old Testament! Like it or not, the Holy Spirit led them to use the word anyhow!
If He didn't, then why did Jesus quote it?
Also, we have the case of WHO killed Goliath? II Samuel 21:19 in the KJV says:
"And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan
the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite,
the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam." The words "the
brother of" are in italics. If these words were omitted, then the Bible
would say that Elhanan slew Goliath, instead of his brother, which would
contradict the fact that David killed Goliath. (In fact, this is exactly how the
New World Translation reads!) If you'll check I Chronicles 20:5, you'll see that
the italics of II Samuel 21:19 are well justified. Moral: The English sheds
light on the English -- WITHOUT "the Greek."
Antioch vs. Alexandria
We hear much talk these days about "older" and "more
authoritative" manuscripts, but we aren't hearing much about the origin of
these manuscripts. It is a well established fact that there are only two lines
of Bibles: one coming from Antioch, Syria (known as the Syrian or Byzantine type
text), and one coming from Alexandria, Egypt (known as the Egyptian or Hesycnian
type text). The Syrian text from Antioch is the Majority text from which our
King James 1611 comes, and the Egyptian text is the minority text from which the
new perversions come. (Never mind Rome and her Western text, for she got her
manuscripts from Alexandria.)
The manuscripts from Antioch were mostly copied by Bible-believing Christians
for the purpose of winning souls and spreading the word of God. The manuscripts
from Alexandria were produced by infidels such as Origen Adamantius and Clement
of Alexandria. These manuscripts are corrupted with Greek philosophy (Col. 2:8),
and allegorical foolishness (not believing God's word literally). The strange
thing is that most Christians aren't paying any attention to what God's word
says about these two places! Notice how the Holy Spirit casts Egypt and
Alexandria in a NEGATIVE light, while His comments on Antioch tend to be very
Egypt and Alexandria
1. Egypt is first mentioned in connection with Abraham not trusting Egyptians
around his wife (Gen. 12:10-13).
2. One of the greatest types of Christ in the Bible was sold into Egypt as a
slave (Gen. 37:36).
3. Joseph did not want his bones left in Egypt (Gen. 50:25).
4. God killed all the firstborn of Egypt (Exo. 12:12).
5. God calls Egypt "the house of bondage" (Exo. 20:4).
6. God calls Egypt an "iron furnace" (Deu. 4:20).
7. The Kings of Israel were even forbidden to get horses from Egypt (Deu.
17:16), so why should we look there for a Bible?
8. The Jews were forbidden to go to Egypt for help (Jer. 42:13-19).
9. God plans to punish Egypt (Jer. 46:25).
10. God calls His Son out of Egypt (Hos. 11:1; Mat. 2:15).
11. Egypt is placed in the same category as Sodom (Rev. 11:8).
12. The first time Alexandria is mentioned in the Bible, it is associated with
unbelievers, persecution, and the eventual death of Stephen (Acts 6:9; 7:54-60).
13. The next mention of Alexandria involves a lost preacher who has to be set
straight on his doctrine (Acts 18:24-26).
14. The last two times we read about Alexandria is in Acts 27:6 and Acts 28:11.
Here we learn that Paul was carried to his eventual death in Rome by two ships
from Alexandria .
Alexandria was the second largest city of the Roman Empire, with Rome being the
first. It was founded in 332 B.C. by Alexander the Great (a type of the
Antichrist in Daniel 8). Located at the Nile Delta, Alexandria was the home of
the Pharos Lighthouse, one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient world. Also,
during the second and third centuries B.C., it was the home of a massive library
containing between 500,000 and 700,000 volumes. It was also the home of a
catechetical school once headmastered by the great apostate Adamantius Origen
QUESTION: In light of what God's word says about higher knowledge and philosophy
(I Cor. 1:22; Rom. 1:22; Gen. 3:5; Col. 2:8; I Cor. 8:1), why would any serious
Christian expect to find the true word of God in Alexandrian manuscripts?
1. Upon it's first mention, we find that Antioch is the home of a Spirit-filled
deacon (Acts 6:3-5). Do you suppose it is a mere accident that the Holy Spirit
first mentions Antioch in the same chapter where He first mentions Alexandria?
2. In Acts 11:19, Antioch is a shelter for persecuted saints.
3. The first major movement of the Holy Ghost among the Gentiles occurs in
Antioch (Acts 11:20-21).
4. Paul and Barnabas taught the Bible in Antioch for a whole year (Acts 11:26).
5. The disciples were first called "Christians" at Antioch (Acts
6. The church at Antioch sends relief to the poor saints at Jerusalem (Acts
7. The first missionary journey is sent out from Antioch (Acts 13:1-3).
8. Antioch remains the home base or headquarters of the early church (Acts
9. The final decision of the Jerusalem council was first sent to Antioch (Acts
15:19-23, 30), because Antioch was the home base.
10. Antioch was the location of Paul setting Peter straight on his doctrine
Founded in 300 B.C. by Seleucus Nicator, Antioch was the third largest city of
the Roman Empire. Located in Syria, about twenty miles inland from the
Mediterranean on the Orontes River, Antioch had it's on sea port and more than
it's share of travelers and tradesmen. In His infinite wisdom, God picked the
ideal location for a "home base". Antioch was far enough away from the
culture and traditions of the Jews (Jerusalem and Judaea) and the Gentiles
(Rome, Greece, Alexandria, etc) that new Christians could grow in the Lord.
Meanwhile, it's geographical location was ideal for taking God's word into all
So, friend, you have a choice. You can get your Bible from Alexandria, or you
can get it from Antioch. If you have a KJV, then your Bible is based on
manuscripts from Antioch. If you have a new version, then you are one of many
unfortunate victims of Satan's salesmen from Alexandria, Egypt.
Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
When someone "corrects" the King James Bible with "more
authoritative manuscripts" or "older manuscripts," or "the
best authorities," they're usually making some reference to Sinaiticus or
Vaticanus. These are two very corrupt fourth century uncials that are
practically worshipped by modern scholars. These are the primary manuscripts
that Westcott and Hort relied so heavily on when constructing their Greek text
(1851-1871) on which the new versions are based.
Vaticanus (B) is the most worshipped. This manuscript was officially catalogued
in the Vatican library in 1475, and is still property of the Vatican today.
Siniaticus (Aleph) was discovered in a trash can at St. Catherine's Monastery on
Mt. Sinai by Count Tischendorf, a German scholar, in the year 1844. Both
Vaticanus (B) and
Siniaticus (Aleph) are Roman Catholic manuscripts. Remember that! You might also familiarize
yourself with the following facts:
1. Both manuscripts contain the Apocrypha as part of the Old Testament.
2. Count Tischendorf, who had seen both manuscripts, believed they were written by the
same man, possibly Eusebius of Caesarea (260-340 A.D.).
3. Vaticanus was available to the King James translators, but God gave them
sense enough to ignore it.
4. Vaticanus omits Genesis 1:1-46:28, Psalm 106-138, Matthew 16:2-3, Romans 16:24,
I Timothy through Titus, the entire book of Revelation, and it conveniently ends
the book of Hebrews at Hebrews 9:14. If you're familiar with Hebrews 10, you
5. While adding The Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas to the New
Testament, Siniaticus omits John 5:4, 8:1-11, Matthew 16:2-3, Romans 16:24, Mark
16:9-20, Acts 8:37, and I John 5:7 (just to name a few).
6. It is believed that Siniaticus has been altered by as many as ten different
men. Consequently, it is a very sloppy piece of work (which is probably the
reason for it being in a trash can). Many transcript errors, such as missing
words and repeated sentences are found throughout it.
7. The Dutch scholar, Erasmus (1469-1536), who produced the world's first
printed Greek New Testament, rejected the readings of Vaticanus and Siniaticus.
8. Vaticanus (B) and Siniaticus (Aleph) not only disagree with the Majority Text from which
the KJV came, they also differ from each other. In the four Gospels alone, they
differ over 3,000 times!
9. When someone says that
Vaticanus (B) and Siniaticus (Aleph) are the oldest available manuscripts, they
are lying. There are many Syriac and Latin translations from as far back as the
SECOND CENTURY that agree with the King James readings. For instance, the
Pashitta (145 A.D.), and the Old Syriac (400 A.D.) both contain strong support
for the King James readings. There are about fifty extant copies of the Old
Latin from about 157 A.D., which is over two hundred years before Jerome was
conveniently chosen by Rome to "revise" it. Then Ulfilas produced a
Gothic version for Europe in A.D. 330. The Armenian Bible, which agrees with the
King James, has over 1,200 extant copies and was translated by Mesrob around the
year 400. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are clearly NOT the oldest and best
Facts about 2 British Scholars Westcott and Hort
Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892) were
the two English "scholars" who produced the corrupt Greek text of the
modern versions. Their dominating influence on the revision committee of
1871-1881 accounts for most of the corruption that we have today in modern
translations. The Bible believer should keep several points in mind when
discussing these two men. The following information is well documented in Final
Authority, by William Grady, and in Riplinger's New Age Bible Versions:
1. Together, the Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott and the Life and
Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort run over 1,800 pages. A personal salvation
testimony is not given once for either man, and the name "Jesus" is
found only nine times!
2. Westcott was a firm believer in Mary worship, and Hort claimed that Mary
worship had a lot in common with Jesus worship.
3. Hort believed in keeping Roman Catholic sacraments.
4. Hort believed in baptismal regeneration as taught in the Catholic church.
5. Hort rejected the infallibility of Scripture.
6. Hort took great interest in the works of Charles Darwin, while both he and
Westcott rejected the literal account of Creation.
7. Westcott did not believe in the Second Coming of Christ, the Millennium, or a
8. Both men rejected the doctrine of a literal Hell, and they supported prayers
for the dead in purgatory.
9. Hort refused to believe in the Trinity.
10. Hort refused to believe in angels.
11. Westcott confessed that he was a communist by nature.
12. Hort confessed that he hated democracy in all it's forms.
13. Westcott also did his share of beer drinking. In fact, only twelve years
after the Revised Version was published, Westcott was a spokesman for a brewery.
14. While working on their Greek text (1851-1871), and while working on the
Revision Committee for the Revised Version (1871-1881), Westcott and Hort were
also keeping company with "seducing spirits and doctrines of devils"
(I Tim. 4:1). Both men took great interest in occult practices and clubs. They
started the Hermes Club in 1845, the Ghostly Guild in 1851, and Hort joined a
secret club called The Apostles in the same year. They also started the Eranus
Club in 1872. These were spiritualists groups which believed in such
unscriptural practices as communicating with the dead (necromancy).
15. The Westcott and Hort Greek text was SECRETLY given to the Revision
16. The members of the Revision Committee of 1881 were sworn to a pledge of
secrecy in regard to the new Greek text being used, and they met in silence for
17. The corrupt Greek text of Westcott and Hort was not released to the public
until just five days before the debut of the Revised Version. This prevented
Bible-believing scholars like Dean Burgon from reviewing it and exposing it for
the piece of trash that it was.
QUESTION: Does this sound like an HONEST work of God or a DISHONEST work of the
Translation of the King James Bible
Unlike Westcott, Hort, and the R.V. Committee, King James went through great
efforts to guard the 1611 translation from errors. Please note the following:
1. In 1604, King James announced that fifty-four Hebrew and Greek scholars had
been appointed to translate a new Bible for English speaking people. The number
was reduced to forty-seven by the time the work formally began in 1607.
2. Rather than working together all at one location, these men were divided into
six separate groups, which worked at three separate locations. There were two at
Westminster, two at Oxford, and two at Cambridge.
3. Each group was given a selected portion of Scripture to translate.
4. Each scholar made his own translation of a book, and then passed it on to be
reviewed by each member of his group.
5. The whole group then went over the book together.
6. Once a group had completed a book of the Bible, they sent it to be reviewed
by the other five groups.
7. All objectionable and questionable translating was marked and noted, and then
it was returned to the original group for consideration.
8. A special committee was formed by selecting one leader from each group. This
committee worked out all of the remaining differences and presented a finished
copy for the printers in 1611.
9. This means that the King James Bible had to pass at least FOURTEEN
examinations before going to press.
10. Throughout this entire process, any learned individuals of the land could be
called upon for their judgment, and the churches were kept informed of the
QUESTION: Does THIS sound like an HONEST work of God or a DISHONEST work of the
LET'S COMPARE BIBLE VERSIONS
In this section, we have reprinted our Let's Compare Bibles tract. Here you will
see several good examples of how modern Bible versions are attacking God's word.
We have selected eight modern translations for evaluation. The translations
evaluated are as follows:
ESV..... English Standard Version
NIV .... New International Version
NASB... New American Standard Bible
NRSV... New Revised Standard Version
REB ... Revised English Bible
LB ..... Living Bible
NWT... New World Translation
NAB ... New American Bible
NKJV.. New King James Version
Although we have limited this study to eight new translations, you will find
many of these attacks manifested in ANY new translation. You will find that some
of the most important doctrines of the Bible are being attacked in the new
versions. Whether you have a Living Bible, a New Century Version, a Revised
Standard Version, or any of the other perversions of Scripture, you are going to
see the Devil hard at work on the revision committees of the new translations.
The King James reading will appear first, followed by a brief comment, and then
the perverted readings of the modern perversions.
1) Psalm 12:6-7
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.
The above promise from the King James Bible tells us that God intends to
preserve His WORDS forever. Notice how the new versions destroy this promise by
making you think the context is God's PEOPLE rather than His WORDS:
ESV....... you will guard us (footnote: Or guard him)
NIV....... you will keep us safe
NASB... Thou wilt preserve him
NRSV... You, O Lord, will protect us
REB...... you are our protector
LB......... you will forever preserve your own
NAB...... You, O Lord, will keep us
2) Isaiah 7:14
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall
conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
Notice how some new versions attack the Virgin Birth of Christ by robbing Mary
of her virginity. As anyone well knows, a young woman or a maiden is NOT
necessarily a virgin:
NRSV... young woman
REB...... young woman
3) Luke 2:33
And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.
Here the new versions attack the Virgin Birth by telling us that Joseph was
ESV ...... his father
NIV....... The child's father
NASB... His father
NRSV... the child's father
REB...... The child's father
NWT..... its father
NAB...... the child's father
4) I Timothy 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in
the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles,
believed on in the world, received up into glory.
Notice how the King James is very clear in telling us WHO was manifest in the
flesh: GOD was manifest in the flesh. Now watch the new perversions throw God
clear out of the verse:
ESV....... He was manifested in the flesh (footnote: Who; God;
NIV....... He appeared in a body
NASB... He who was revealed in the flesh
NRSV... He was revealed in flesh
REB...... He was manifested in the flesh
LB......... who came to earth as a man
NWT..... He was made manifest in the flesh
NAB...... He was manifested in the flesh
5) Micah 5:2
But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of
Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in
Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
This is a prophecy of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the verse tells us that He had
no beginning. As the Second Member of the Trinity, He is ETERNAL, or from
everlasting, but not in most modern translations:
ESV ..... from of old, from ancient days
NIV...... from ancient times
NRSV... from ancient days
REB..... in ancient times
NWT.... from the days of time indefinite
NAB..... from ancient times (vs. 1)
6) Isaiah 14:12
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut
down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
Revelation 22:16 tells us that Jesus Christ is the "Morning Star". The
King James Bible never gives this title to anyone else. However, in some new
versions, Jesus Christ and Satan are the same, because some versions have taken
the liberty to call Satan the "morning star" in Isaiah 14:12. Although
some versions do not go so far as to call Satan the "morning star,"
they still throw out the name "Lucifer".
ESV....... O Day Star, son of Dawn!
NIV....... morning star
NASB... star of the morning
NRSV... Day Star
REB...... Bright morning star
NWT..... you shining one
NAB...... morning star
7) Daniel 3:25
He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the
fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of
This is an excellent Old Testament verse which shows that Jesus Christ existed
long before He was born in Bethlehem. Naturally, the new versions will pervert
it with pagan foolishness:
ESV....... a son of the gods
NIV....... a son of the gods
NASB... a son of the gods
NRSV... a god
REB..... a god
LB........ a god
NWT.... a son of the gods
NAB..... a son of God (vs. 92)
8) Colossians 1:14
In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:
Satan hates the Atoning Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, so we shouldn't be
surprised to find the blood missing in modern translations:
ESV....... redemption, the forgiveness of sins
NIV....... redemption, the forgiveness of sins
NASB... redemption, the forgiveness of sins
NRSV... redemption, the forgiveness of sins
REB..... our release is secured and our sins are forgiven
NWT.... we have our release by ransom, the forgiveness of sins
NAB...... redemption, the forgiveness of our sins
9) Romans 14:10-12
But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother?
for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, As
I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall
confess to God. So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
If you'll read the above verses carefully, you will notice how it magnifies
Jesus Christ. According to verse 10, we will stand before the Judgment Seat of
CHRIST, and verse 12 says that when we do we will give account to GOD. When we
stand before Jesus Christ we will be standing before God--an excellent text on
the Deity of Christ. Now watch as the new versions throw Jesus Christ clear out
of the passage by replacing the word "Christ" in verse 10 with
ESV...... judgment seat of God
NIV...... God's judgment seat
NASB... Judgment seat of God
NRSV... judgment seat of God
REB...... God's tribunal
LB......... Judgment Seat of God
NWT..... judgment seat of God
NAB...... judgment seat of God
10) Acts 8:37
And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he
answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
This verse is very important because it places a definite condition upon water
baptism: one must first BELIEVE ON CHRIST. Many modern versions throw the entire
verse out of the Bible:
ESV....... entire verse missing (insert in the footnote)
NIV....... entire verse missing
NRSV.... entire verse missing
REB...... entire verse missing
NWT..... entire verse missing
NAB...... omits entire verse, but re-numbers the verses so you won't miss it
11) II Corinthians 2:17
For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but
as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.
You can imagine how this verse must be a thorn in the flesh to the modern
translators who are busy CORRUPTING the word of God day and night. So, do they
repent of their sins and get right with God? Of course not:
ESV....... peddlers (sell)
REB...... adulterating the word of God for profit
NAB...... trade on the word of God
12) II Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be
ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
This is the one command in the New Testament to "study" and
"rightly divide" God's word, and the Devil does NOT appreciate it:
ESV....... Do your best to ...rightly handling the word of truth
NIV....... Do your best...correctly handles
NASB... Be diligent...handling accurately
NRSV... Do your best...rightly explaining
REB...... Try hard...keep strictly to the true gospel
LB......... Work hard...Know what his word says and means
NWT..... Do your utmost...handling the word of truth aright
NAB...... Try hard...following a straight course inpreaching the truth
NKJV.... Be diligent...rightly dividing
I Timothy 6:20
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding
profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
Many lies are being propagated today in the name of "science"
(evolution for example), but I Timothy 6:20 has been warning us about it all
along - except in the new perversions:
The New King James Version
We will now give some special attention to one of the deadliest translations on
the market--the New King James Version, first published in 1979. It is a deadly
version because it's editors have succeeded in deceiving the body of Christ on
two main points:
(1) That it's a King James Bible (which is a lie), and
(2) that it's based on the Textus Receptus (which is only a partial truth).
information should be helpful when dealing with Christians who have been
swindled by the Laodicean lovers of filthy lucre:
1. The text of the NKJV is copyrighted by Thomas Nelson Publishers, while there
is no copyright today on the text of the KJV. If your KJV has maps or notes,
then it may have a copyright, but the text itself does not.
2. There's nothing "new" about the NKJV logo. It is a "666"
symbol of the pagan trinity which was used in the ancient Egyptian mysteries. It
was also used by satanist Aleister Crowley around the turn of this century. The
symbol can be seen on the New King James Bible, on certain rock albums (like Led
Zepplin's), or you can see it on the cover of such New Age books as The Aquarian
Conspiracy. (See Riplinger's tract on the NKJV.)
3. It is estimated that the NKJV makes over 100,000 translation changes, which
comes to over eighty changes per page and about three changes per verse! A great
number of these changes bring the NKJV in line with the readings of such
Alexandrian perversions as the NIV and the RSV. Where changes are not made in
the text, subtle footnotes often give credence to the Westcott and Hort Greek
4. While passing off as being true to the Textus Receptus, the NKJV IGNORES the
Receptus over 1,200 times.
5. In the NKJV, there are 22 omissions of "hell", 23 omissions of
"blood", 44 omissions of "repent", 50 omissions of
"heaven", 51 omissions of "God", and 66 omissions of
"Lord". The terms "devils", "damnation",
"JEHOVAH", and "new testament" are completely omitted.
6. The NKJV demotes the Lord Jesus Christ. In John 1:3, the KJV says that all
things were made "by" Jesus Christ, but in the NKJV, all things were
just made "through" Him. The word "Servant" replaces
"Son" in Acts 3:13 and 3:26. "Servant" replaces
"child" in Acts 4:27 and 4:30. The word "Jesus" is omitted
from Mark 2:15, Hebrews 4:8, and Acts 7:45.
7. The NKJV confuses people about salvation. In Hebrews 10:14 it replaces
"are sanctified" with "are being sanctified", and it
replaces "are saved" with "are being saved" in I Corinthians
1:18 and II Corinthians 2:15. The words "may believe" have been
replaced with "may continue to believe" in I John 5:13. The old
straight and "narrow" way of Matthew 7:14 has become the
"difficult" way in the NKJV.
8. In II Corinthians 10:5 the KJV reads "casting down imaginations",
but the NKJV reads "casting down arguments". The word
"thought", which occurs later in the verse, matches
"imaginations", not "arguments". This change weakens the
9. The KJV tells us to reject a "heretick" after the second admonition
in Titus 3:10. The NKJV tells us to reject a "divisive man". How nice!
Now the Alexandrians and Ecumenicals have justification for rejecting anyone
they wish to label as "divisive men".
10. According to the NKJV, no one would stoop so low as to "corrupt"
God's word. No, they just "peddle" it (II Cor. 2:17). The reading
matches the Alexandrian versions.
11. Since the NKJV has "changed the truth of God into a lie", it has
also changed Romans 1:25 to read "exchanged the truth of God for the
lie". This reading matches the readings of the new perversions, so how say
ye it's a King James Bible?
12. The NKJV gives us no command to "study" God's word in II Timothy
13. The word "science" is replaced with "knowledge" in I
Timothy 6:20, although "science" has occurred in every edition of the
KJV since 1611! How say ye it's a King James Bible?
14. The Jews "require" a sign, according to I Corinthians 1:22 (and
according to Jesus Christ - John 4:48), but the NKJV says they only
"request" a sign. They didn't "request" one when signs first
appeared in Exodus 4, and there are numerous places throughout the Bible where
God gives Israel signs when they haven't requested anything (Exo. 4, Exo. 31:13,
Num. 26:10, I Sam. 2:34, Isa. 7:10-14, Luke 2:12, etc). They "require"
a sign, because signs are a part of their national heritage.
15. The King James reading in II Corinthians 5:17 says that if any man is in
Christ he is a new "creature", which matches the words of Christ in
Mark 16:15. The cross reference is destroyed in the NKJV, which uses the word
16. As a final note, we'd like to point out how the NKJV is very inconsistent in
it's attempt to update the language of the KJV. The preface to the NKJV states
that previous "revisions" of the KJV have "sought to keep abreast
of changes in English speech", and also that they too are taking a
"further step toward this objective". However, when taking a closer
look at the language of the NKJV, we find that oftentimes they are stepping BACKWARDS!
Please note a few examples of how well the NKJV has "kept
abreast of the changes in the English language":
SCRIPTURE KJV NKJV
Ezra 31:4 little rivers rivulets
Psalms 43:1 Judge Vindicate
Psalms 139:43 thoughts anxieties
Isaiah 28:1 fat verdant
Amos 5:21 smell savor
Matthew 26:7 box flask
Luke 8:31 the deep the abyss
John 10:41 did performed
Luke 19:11-27 pounds minas
John 19:9 judgement hallPraetorium
Acts 1:8 bowels entrails
Acts 18:12 deputy proconsul
Acts 21:38 uproar insurrection
Acts 27:30 boat skiff
Hebrews 12:8 bastard illegitimate
The New Scofield Reference Bible
Another counterfeit "KJV" is the New Scofield Reference Bible (NSRB).
"King James Version" is clearly printed on the cover, but since when
has it been safe to judge a book by it's cover? Please note the following:
1. Dr. C.I. Scofield had been dead many years when the NSRB was published in
1967. He would have never approved of having his name on a "bible"
that alters the text of the KJV. The 1909 and 1917 editions of the Scofield
Reference Bible do NOT change the text. Therefore the NSRB of 1967 is NOT a
Scofield Bible and it is NOT a KJV.
2. Dr. Scofield would have never referred to baptism as a "sacrament,"
but the NSRB takes the liberty to do so in an Acts 8 footnote.
3. The NSRB changes the KJV with "better readings" in over 6,500
4. In the introduction to the NSRB, 1967 edition, E. Schuyler English tries to
justify changing the KJV text on the basis that Dr. Scofield saw the need to
update his reference Bible after only eight years. Yes, Dr. Scofield did update
his Bible after only eight years, but HE NEVER CHANGED THE TEXT!, and he never
granted anyone else permission to do so. Only the NOTES were revised! (The
Judgment Seat of Christ is going to be very interesting to say the least!)
5. In many places the NSRB agrees with the readings of the new translations,
rather than the KJV, so it cannot possibly be a KJV. For example, "a son of
the gods" appears in Daniel 3:25, rather than "the Son of God" (KJV).
In Genesis 1:28, Adam is told to "fill" the earth, instead of
"replenish" it, which isn't the same at all. A great reference to
television and magazines is destroyed when the NSRB replaces
"pictures" with "stone idols" in Numbers 33:52. Then, of
course, the NSRB lines up right behind the ASV in places like I Timothy 6:20,
Acts 4:27, and Romans 1:25.
6. Dr. William Grady addresses the NSRB in his book, Final Authority. His
research includes the following on page 316: "A random survey of the NSRB
margins in Philippians alone revealed a total of 29 changes from the King James
Bible. Of these, twenty-one (72%) were traced to either the RSV or the NASV. The
skeptic can ckeck it out for himself: Philippians 1:7, 8, 23, 27; 2:1, 15, 25,
27, 28; 3:1, 8, 17, 19, 20, 21; 4:3, 6, 14, 15, 21, and 22." The "New
Scofield Reference Bible" in the "King James Version" is NOT new,
is NOT a Scofield Bible, and it is certainly NOT a King James Version.
The Various Editions of the 1611 A.V.
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 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.
Why the KJV Translators Did Not Accept the Apocrypha as Scripture
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
1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language like the rest of the Old Testament
2. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.
3. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish
church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
4. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four
centuries of the Christian church.
5. 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!
6. It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the
dead and sinless perfection.
7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and
"Errors" in the King James Bible
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
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
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
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.
Fifty(50) Stumbling Stones of the Laodicean Translations
In this final section, I'd like to point out one of the best things about the
new versions. What might that be? It is the fact that we know where they're
going to alter God's word before they do it! We know how to "check'em
out" without having to waste our God-given time reading the whole
The following list includes fifty "check points" which
anyone can use to expose a new translation. No translation will be guilty on all
fifty counts, but any translation since 1881 will alter God's word enough to
prove that the revisionists do not have God's best interest in heart.
emphasis, I'll present these items from Satan's standpoint, briefly illustrating
his purpose for many of the changes:
1. Genesis 1:29. Omit the word "meat" since there is no real flesh in
the verse, only plant life. This will destroy the cross reference to the
"meat offering" of Leviticus 2, which is really a GRAIN offering with
no flesh. The Bible has it's own built in dictionary, but let's not allow people
to know it.
2. Genesis 3:5. Alter the word "gods" and the cross references to
Psalm 82, I Corinthians 8:5, and II Corinthians 4:4 will be destroyed.
3. Genesis 22:1. The word "tempt" in the verse should be replaced with
"try". Here's another case of the "built-in dictionary".
James 1:2-3 explains the kind of tempting that this was, but let's hide it from
as many Christians as possible.
4. Numbers 33:52. Someone might use the word "pictures" as a reference
to television. Throw it out!
5. Isaiah 7:14. Attack the virgin birth by omitting the word "virgin".
After all, the Hebrew word "almah" can mean a virgin, a damsel, or
just a young woman. Laodicean Christians are too lazy to check Matthew 1:23 to
see how Matthew translated it.
6. Daniel 3:25. There's Jesus Christ in the Old Testament! Can't have that!
Someone might get the idea that He's eternal. Change "the Son of God"
to "a son of the gods."
7. Micah 5:2. Another chance to attack the eternal existence of Christ. Throw
8. Zechariah 9:9. We're not interested in anyone being SAVED, so omit the words
9. Matthew 1:25. Omit "firstborn" because it shows the reader that
Mary had other children after Jesus and did NOT remain a perpetual virgin.
They'll never think to check Psalm 69:8, Galatians 1:19, or John 7:5.
10. Matthew 5:22. Let's create a contradiction by omitting the words
"without a cause". This will make Jesus contradict Paul in Ephesians
11. Matthew 6:13. Omit the "kingdom", the "power", and the
12. Matthew 27:54. Change "the Son of God" to "a son of
13. Mark 1:1. This is the only Gospel which refers to Christ as the "Son of
God" in the very first verse. Throw it out.
14. Mark 16:9-20. Either throw out the last twelve verses of Mark or raise doubt
about them in the margins and footnotes. The less we read of a resurrected
Christ the better.
15. Luke 1:34. Change Mary's words "I know not a man" to "I have
no husband". This will allow for possible fornication between Mary and
Joseph, which could make Joseph the father of Jesus.
16. Luke 2:33. Attack the virgin birth again by replacing "Joseph"
17. Luke 4:4. Omit "by every word of God". No one will think to check
18. Luke 23:42. Here's a sinner being saved by calling upon the name of the
"Lord", which is in perfect tune with Romans 10:13. Replace the divine
title "Lord" with the human name "Jesus".
19. Luke 24:51. Raise doubt about the ascension of Christ by omitting the words
"carried up into heaven". Hopefully, no one will check Luke's later
comments in Acts 1:1-2.
20. John 1:14. Omit the word "begotten", just like in John 1:18, 3:16,
21. Acts 1:3. Omit the word "infallible". Nothing is infallible.
22. Acts 4:27. Jesus wasn't God's "child". He was only His
23. Acts 8:37. Either omit the entire verse or raise doubt about it, because
this verse states that scriptural water baptism is conditional upon BELIEF.
24. Acts 12:4. Change "Easter" to "passover". No one will
ever read Exodus and Numbers to find the truth.
25. Acts 17:22. Change "superstitious" to "religious".
26. Romans 1:18. Let's change "hold the truth in unrighteousness" to
"suppress the truth", which is a much weaker reading.
27. Romans 1:25. Let's say they "exchanged the truth of God for a lie"
instead of "changed the truth of God into a lie".
28. Romans 1:29. Throw out "fornication".
29. Romans 10:17. Replace the word "God" with "Christ". This
will teach that faith comes by rallying around the person of Jesus alone and not
by feeding on every word of God (Luke 4:4).
30. Romans 14:10. Change the word "Christ" to "God". This
will prevent anyone from realizing that Jesus Christ is God when they read verse
31. I Corinthians 1:22. Change "require" to "request", and
destroy the great truth about signs being for Israel.
32. II Corinthians 2:17. Since we are guilty of corrupting the word of God,
replace the word "corrupt" with "peddle".
33. II Corinthians 5:17. Replace the word "creature" with
"creation", although Mark 16:15 says "creature".
34. Ephesians 1:7. Throw out the "blood".
35. Philippians 3:21. People don't have "vile" bodies. They just have
36. Colossians 1:14. Throw out the "blood".
37. I Thessalonians 5:22. Omit the word "appearance" so Christians
will not be very concerned about their testimony.
38. I Timothy 3:16. The verse says that "God was manifest in the
flesh". Attack the Deity of Christ and the Incarnation by throwing
"God" clear out of the verse.
39. I Timothy 6:10. Change "all evil" to "all kinds of
40. I Timothy 6:20. Since many heresies are taught today in the name
of "science", and this verse gives a strong warning against
"science falsely so-called", change the word "science" to
41. II Timothy 2:15. This is the only command in the Bible to "study"
the word of God. Omit the word "study".
42. James 5:16. Let's justify Roman Catholic confessionals by changing the word
"faults" to "sins".
43. I Peter 5:11. Omit "glory" and "dominion".
44. I John 1:7. Omit the word "Christ".
45. I John 4:3. Omit the words "Christ is come in the flesh".
46. I John 5:7. There's the Trinity! Throw out the whole verse or insert
marginal notes to raise doubt about it.
47. Revelation 1:5. Omit the word "blood".
48. Revelation 5:9. Omit the word "blood".
49. Revelation 11:15. Change the many "kingdoms" that Jesus Christ
will receive to one singular "kingdom".
50. Revelation 11:17. Attack the Second Coming of Christ by omitting the words
"art to come".
KJV is truly an ENGLISH Bible that exalts Lord Jesus Christ as Son of GOD, supports the
deity of Lord Jesus Christ (as GOD), the doctrine of Trinity, the
atonement Blood of Lord Jesus Christ, God's eternal Kingdom, the reality of
Heaven and Hell, and the Lord Jesus Christ's second coming.
Antioch is where the early believers
were first called Christians (Acts 11:26) and within a few years the Syrian
believers could be numbered by the thousands. Their Bible, the Peshitta,
even today generally follows the Received Text (Textus Receptus). This
is another proof that the foundation for the King James Bible which was based
on Textus Receptus, is older and more reliable than the Codex Vaticanus.
The Syrian text from Antioch is
the Majority text and the Egyptian
text is the minority text from which the new perversions arise.
Comparison between KJV and ESV