Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The King James Bible was translated by men like Lancelot Andrews who wrote Greek devotionals. Lancelot Andrews was an Oriental language expert. He was conversant in fifteen languages. Most new version translators have had only a couple years of Greek, a couple years of Hebrew and might have taken Spanish or French in high school. Lancelot Andrews was conversant in fifteen languages. Another great man who translated the King James Bible was William Bedwell. Bedwell was an Arabic scholar. He revived the Arabic language. It was about to die, and he literally revived it. William Bedwell wrote an Arabic to English Lexicon. A lexicon is a dictionary that will give the Arabic word and its definition in English. A Greek Lexicon gives the Greek word and its definition in English. William Bedwell wrote the Arabic Lexicon that is still in use today. Go to the library and if they happen to have an Arabic Lexicon it will probably be the one that William Bedwell wrote. Miles Smith also helped to translate the King James Bible. However, he is better known as the man who translated all the writings of the church fathers into English. Most of the English translations of the church fathers which are still in print today are the translation of Miles Smith. If he was able to translate the church fathers correctly, and the liberals don't have to rewrite that, it should be a safe assumption that he also translated the King James Bible correctly.
John Boyce was a translator of the King James Bible. At the age of five, he could read the entire Hebrew Bible. At the age of six, he was considered a Hebrew scholar and was teaching the Hebrew language to adults. These are only a few of the men who translated the King James Bible. Not some guys who had two years of Hebrew and/or Greek at a liberal seminary, but qualified men who wrote lexicons and who taught Hebrew at the age of six.
The textbook that has taught all modern version translators how to approach the Bible has been Introduction to the New Testament by guess who? The two beer advertising, Satan worshiping, communicating with the dead, you guessed it: Westcott and Hort. Liberal professors, who didn't believe the book they were translating. If the modern translator did not cut his teeth with Westcott and Hort's, Introduction To The New Testament, they did so by reading another book that was written by others who hold to the same philosophy and who are basically rehashing the same book. The first of the modern translations to be counted as credible in evangelical and fundamental circles was the J.B. Phillips translation. J.B. Phillips used to sit on his couch at night, in his living room, and talk to the dead ghost of C.S. Lewis. The dead C.S. Lewis sat on J.B. Philips' couch and told him what to put in the Phillips' translation. Well, that has to be a good translation, with a godly man like C.S. Lewis coming back from the dead to help him in the translation effort. These are the kind of yo-yo's who translate the modern Bibles. Kenneth Taylor, the translator of the Living Bible had such a foul mouth that the publishers had to rewrite the Living Bible before they could print it because of all of the profanity in it.
etc. All of these cultic groups are involved in the translations of the modern versions. As you read the preface to the new versions you will find occult leaders, Catholic leaders, ecumenical leaders, apostate Methodist leaders, every kind of leader under the sun. These are the people who translate modern so-called Bibles.
chairman of the NIV's Old Testament Committee. It has now come to light that Dr. Woudstra was also queer. For the sake of fairness, this information has surfaced after Dr. Woudstra's death, so it is possible that the UBS and Zondervan did not know that he was a queer. With a queer Old Testament Translation Committee chairman (Dr. Woudstra) overseeing the translation effort, and, a queer English language "stylist" (Ms. Mollenkott) finalizing the word choices, it is no wonder that the words "sodomy" and "sodomite" have been removed from the NIV.
Origin and Clement, authors of the Alexandrian text were cursed. Later in their life, they lost their ability to speak and died of strange diseases. Westcott and Hort, the authors of the Westcott and Hort Greek text, the chairmen of the committee that translated the English Revised Version, later in their life lost their ability to speak. They could not teach in their seminary classrooms. They could not speak audibly. J.B. Philips, translator of the Philips Translation, lost his ability to speak, went insane, and died institutionalized. Mr. Taylor, author of the Living Bible lost his ability to speak the same day that the translation was released. His therapist said his vocal cords were fine. The doctors said his vocal cords were fine. They did not understand why he could not speak. They said it must be a psychological problem. He has been in therapy for twenty years. His therapist is trying to crack his psyche hoping he will open his mouth and talk again. He has written on paper, again and again, to his therapist that the reason why he cannot speak and will never be able to speak is because he dared to change the Word of God and the plague of Revelation chapter 22 has been added unto him. There is no doubt about it in his mind. There were also translators of the American Standard Version of 1901 who lost their ability to speak. God has added unto these men the plagues of the Book, because they dared to tamper with His Word.
completion, he wrote a series of articles and books explaining why Westcott and Hort and the other members of the English Revised Version used a faulty text and faulty methods, and why the King James Bible was perfect. Dean Bergon's writings persuaded the people of England to reject Westcott and Hort and to reject the English Revised Version. His writings have caused many scholars in America to reject the Westcott and Hort text at least in name. And that is why they had to come up with the Nestle's text as a means of deceiving us fundamentalists into thinking that they were not translating from the Westcott and Hort text. The first modern English Bible to be accepted by evangelicals and fundamentalist Christians was Philips' translation. I previously mentioned that Mr. Philips sat in his living room and talked to the ghost of C. S. Lewis. Well, it would appear that Lewis' ghost did not do a very good job in assisting Phillips because J.B. Philips' diary contains a confession that he had perverted the Word of God and that the King James Bible was the superior Bible. Later, Dr. Frank Logsdon, the chairman of the New American Standard translation committee, became an avid advocate of the King James Bible. He renounced his own translation methods. He renounced his own Bible that he was the chairman of and he became an avid advocate of the King James Bible. He said the following in his public statement of disassociation from the New American Standard: I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord. We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translators; I wrote the preface... I'm in trouble; I can't refute these arguments; its wrong, terribly wrong... The deletions are absolutely frightening there are so many ... Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception? Upon investigation, I wrote my dear friend, Mr. Lockman, [Mr. Lockman owned the publishing company that published the NASV] explaining that I was forced to renounce all attachment to the NASV. Kenneth Taylor wrote the Living Bible. Kenneth Taylor told his psychotherapist years later that the reason why his life had been plagued
was because he had perverted the Word of God. He died believing the KJV was the true Bible. Jerry Fallwell and Curtis Hutson, both are independent Baptists, both sat on the translation committee of the New King James version, and both asked that their names be removed from the board of editors listing. Although Jerry Fallwell has not gone so far as to ban the new versions at Liberty University and Thomas Road Baptist Church, hardly a sermon goes by that Jerry Fallwell does not make this statement. "For those of you who are reading from a lesser version" Having seen the process used by modern version translators Jerry Fallwell has properly concluded that the King James Bible is the superior Bible and the others are "lesser versions."
Archaic Words
Yes, you read right. Archaic words are a reason why the King James Bible is superior. Many in our day complain that there are archaic words in the King James Bible. This is one reason they give to support the retranslation of the Bible. They claim that we need to retranslate the archaic words to make them understandable in our generation. What they often do not realize is that most of those archaic words found in the KJV were archaic in 1611 when they were chosen. The translators understood that the they could not honestly call their translation the "Word of God" unless it were completely accurate. Therefore, they used archaic, out of date words that people would have to look up in a dictionary because the more "modern" and "easier to understand" words would have resulted in an inaccurate translation. They made this decision because they, unlike modern translators, believed that God wrote the very words. The King James Bible translators could have mistranslated using words that would have been easily understood, but instead, they choose to use the very words of God.
"you" is addressed to an individual or to a group. Usually, this can be determined by the context of the passage. Other times it can not. By using "thee," "thou," "thy," and "ye" instead of "you" the KJV insures that the reader is never in doubt as to who a statement is addressed to. For reference, all of the personal pronouns that start with the letter "T" are singular and all personal pronouns that start with "Y" are plural. So that would mean that "thee," "thou," and "thy" are singular while the pronoun "ye" is plural.
content, and dwelt on the other side Jordan!" Understanding the names of God we can understand that in the Hebrew this passage reads, "And Joshua said, Alas, O sovereign Master Jehovah, wherefore hast thou at all brought this people over Jordan, to deliver us into the hand of the Amorites, to destroy us? would to the strong and powerful Almighty Triune God we had been content, and dwelt on the other side Jordan!" There are also times when the Hebrew names Elohim and Adonai referred to pagan deities. In these cases the KJV translators translated "god" and "lord" in all lower case. This was to distinguish the times these names were used to refer to Jehovah and when they were used in reference to a pagan idol. The new versions simply do not pay this necessary attention to detail. This is important because each name has a significant meaning and that is the reason why the Hebrew's used three different names for God. To translate all three DIFFERENT names in the haphazard fashion of the new versions results in the alteration of the context of several passages. With the King James Bible, the Hebrew name used for God and the resultant context are always clear.
Italics
Whenever you translate from one language to another there will be times when the words do not flow as well in the second language as they did in the original language. When this happens, translators will often insert a word and/or words into a phrase so that the phrase will read better. Whenever the KJV translators added a word in this fashion they always placed the added word in italics. They did this so the English reader would know that that particular word was not in the Greek or the Hebrew. An example of this would be John 3:30, "He must increase, but I must decrease." Notice that the word "must" is in italics. This indicates that the word "must" was not in the original Greek but was rather added by the KJV translators. In the new versions, italics are not used. When the new version translators insert words into the text they make no effort whatsoever to
separate THEIR ADDITION from the rest of the text. Therefore, the reader of a new version does not know that the word was not in the original text. The unsuspecting reader will then read the words of men and assume them to be the words of God. This will never happen when you read the KJV because the words of the translators are separated from the words of God as contained in the original by the use of italics. The italicized words in the KJV never alter the meaning of the text. They serve only as enhancers which cause the text to flow better in the English language. Nonetheless, the translators of the KJV acknowledge that these words were not originally dictated by God and so they, to be honest (and to avoid the plagues of Revelation 22) set these words apart by placing them in italics. The translators of the new versions are not honest enough to do this. Instead, THEIR words are printed as equal with God's words.
Perfect Meter
Another reason the King James Bible is to be preferred is because it has a perfect meter. The King James Bible is written short/long, short/long, short/long. "Thy word / have I hid in my heart / that I / might not sin against thee." Short/long, short/long. Why? So that you can memorize it. Just try and memorize the New International Version. You would be surprised at how many seminary professors who hate the King James, and who normally reject its use, will allow students to memorize out of the King James. They do this because they understand it is much easier to memorize out of the King James than it is to memorize out of any other version. By the end of the first semester, all of the students normally memorize from the King James because they realize it is the easiest to memorize from. Why? Because it has a meter. The NIV does not have a meter. The American Standard doesn't have a meter. The Living Bible doesn't have a meter. The Bible commands us, "Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word" Psalm 119:9. The Bible says we should "meditate therein day and night" Joshua 1:8. The Bible says "Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee" Psalm 119:11. The key to success is Bible memorization.
The King James Bible is easy to memorize while the new versions are nearly impossible to memorize. I almost wonder if they are doing this on purpose to discourage future generations from memorizing the Word of God.
was changed to "assuaged," "mortar" was changed to "morter," "plaister" to "plaster," "grashoppers" to "grasshoppers," "cuckow" to "cockoo," "flotes" to "floats," "soape" to "soap," etc. So whereas a "revision" by modern translators means that you have to change hundreds of words, the word changes in all of the new versions adds up to far more than 20,000 changes, the "revisions" in the King James Bible have not resulted in a single word change. The King James Bible in print today is the "revised" edition of 1769. Take away the marginal notes (which are not a part of the text anyway) and take into consideration the difference in spelling and you will have the King James Bible of 1611. EVERY WORD is the SAME. Had the new version translators got it right the first time, as did the KJV translators, their would not be a need for them to continously revise their work and change the wording. For the record, the New King James (NKJV) is not simply a 1980's revivion of the 1769 KJV. It is a complete adulteration of the text. Many words were changed and the result is that the NKJV reads more like a NASV than it does a KJV. The NKJV should not be considered to be a KJV!!
denomination in America is re-writing the Bible to make it more "teen friendly;" TIME and NEWSWEEK are begging them to stop confusing wayward youth with 120 "versions" and just go back to the Bible that built our country and made it great. "Christianity's" continuous re-writing of the Bible has not made it so that more people will understand and therefore read the Bible. Instead, the multitude of "versions" has resulted in the a bad testimony to the world that has caused multitudes to reject the Bible and Christianity altogether. This is another folly of the new version crowd which the media is often quick to point out in its commentary on Christianity. Time does not allow us to quote from a number of magazines and newspapers. But here is one for the sake of illustration: "If no one any longer reads the same words on the same page, on what basis will people talk to and understand each other? Will easy-read Bibles, rendering ancient mysteries and miracles in sitcom terms, inspire awe or channel surfing?" (TIME, 9/9/96) And one more, this one was from the Wall Street Journal, "To tamper with the King James Bible, based on some imagined manuscript evidence, is like adjusting Big Ben to somebody's private wrist watch."
One example is in Egypt where Egyptian preachers report that they are always asked by the locals, "Why do you have so many different versions of the Bible?" It does not matter how "intelligent" sounding their answer is, no amount of "scholarship" will help them here. These Egyptian people are not getting saved for one reason, that is, in their own words: "Bible translations contradict each other, how can we believe the Bible? The Koran always says the same thing." Folks, the new versions are sending precious Egyptian people to Hell. And they are also sending people right here in America to Hell. We can not expect to win people to a religion whose book can not be trusted. And in this country everyone trusted the Bible until around the turn of the century (the exact time so-called Christian "scholars" started re-writing it).
And these are but a few of the hundreds of arguments that could be given to prove that the KJV is the superior English Bible. Thank God! He has given me an inerrant copy of His Word - The KING JAMES BIBLE! What do you have to read and study?