Copyright © 1997 James L. Melton
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!
Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. (Psa. 12:6-7)
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 is it?
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 modern perversions.
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 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 Spirit doesn't.
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 translations.
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 12:26.
7. The KJV translators believed they were handling the very words of God, see I Thessalonians 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 book?
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 this later.)
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 manuscript evidence.
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!
1. Since you're smart enough to find "mistakes" in the KJV, why don't you correct them all and give us a perfect Bible?
2. Do you have a perfect Bible?
3. Since you do believe "the Bible" is our final authority in all matters of faith and practice, could you please show us where Jesus, Peter, James, Paul, or John ever practiced your terminology ("the Greek text says...the Hebrew text says....the originals say...a better rendering would be....older manuscripts read...." etc.)?
4. Since you do not profess to have a perfect Bible, why do you refer to it as "God's word"?
5. Remembering that the Holy Spirit is the greatest Teacher who taught you that the King James Bible was not infallible, the Holy Spirit or man? (John 16:12-15, I John 2:27)
6. Since you do believe in the degeneration of man and in the degeneration of the world system in general, why is it that you believe education has somehow "evolved" and that men are more qualified to translate God's word today than in 1611?
7. There is one true God, yet many false gods. There is one true Church, consisting of true born-again believers in Christ, yet there are many false churches. So why do you think it's so wrong to teach that there is one true Bible, yet many false "bibles"?
8. Isn't it true that you believe God inspired His holy words in the "originals," but has since lost them, since no one has a perfect Bible today?
9. Isn't it true that when you use the term "the Greek text" you are being deceitful and lying, since there are MANY Greek TEXTS (plural), rather than just one?
10. Before the first new perversion was published in 1881 (the RV), the King James Bible was published, preached, and taught throughout the world. God blessed these efforts and hundreds of millions were saved. Today, with the many new translations on the market, very few are being saved. The great revivals are over. Who has gained the most from the new versions, God or Satan?
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 of Solomon Sol. 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.
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:
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."
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 positive:
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 (185-254 A.D.).
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 11:26).
6. The church at Antioch sends relief to the poor saints at Jerusalem (Acts 11:27-30).
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 14:19-26; 15:35).
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 (Gal. 2:11).
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 the world.
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.
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 1859. Both B and 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. 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 Geneses 1:1-46:28, Psalm 106-138, Matthew 16:2-3, Rom. 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 know why.
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 and Siniaticus 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 B and 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 manuscripts.
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 literal Heaven.
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 Committee.
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 ten years.
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 Devil?
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 progress.
QUESTION: Does THIS sound like an HONEST work of God or a DISHONEST work of the Devil?
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:
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.
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:
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
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
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 Christ's 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
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:
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
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:
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)
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".
NIV....... morning star
NASB... star of the morning
NRSV... Day Star
REB...... Bright morning star
NWT..... you shining one
NAB...... morning star
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 God.
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:
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)
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:
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
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 "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
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:
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
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:
REB...... adulterating the word of God for profit
NAB...... trade on the word of God
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:
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:
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). The following 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 Text.
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 verse.
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 2:15.
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 "creation."
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":
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 places.
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.
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:
1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language like the rest of the Old Testament books.
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 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 demon 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 2 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 (1 Thes. 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.
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 translation. 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. For 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 out "everlasting".
8. Zechariah 9:9. We're not interested in anyone being SAVED, so omit the words "having salvation".
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 4:26.
11. Matthew 6:13. Omit the "kingdom", the "power", and the "glory".
12. Matthew 27:54. Change "the Son of God" to "a son of God".
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" with "father".
17. Luke 4:4. Omit "by every word of God". No one will think to check Deuteronomy 8:3.
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, and 3:18.
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 "servant".
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 twelve.
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 "lowly" bodies.
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 evil". 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 "knowledge".
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".
Which Bible?, David Otis Fuller, Which Bible? Society, P.O. Box 7096, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49507.
An Understandable History of the Bible, Dr. Samuel C. Gipp, Bible Believer's Baptist Bookstore, 1252 E. Aurora Road, Macedonia, Ohio 44056.
The Answer Book, Gipp.
Final Authority (Real Audio Files Page), Dr. William P. Grady, Grady Publications, Inc., P.O. Box 506, Schererville, Indiana 46375.
The King James Version Defended, Dr. Edward F. Hills, The Christian Research Press, P.O. Box 2013, Des Moines, Iowa 50310.
Believing Bible Study, Hills.
Translators Revived, Alexander McClure, R. E. Publications, P.O. Box 66212, Mobile, Alabama 36606.
The Men Behind The King James Version, Gustavus Paine, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49516.
God Only Wrote One Bible, Jasper James Ray, Eye Opener Publishers, P.O. Box 7944, Eugene, Orgeon 97401.
New Age Bible Versions, G. A. Riplinger, A.V. Publications, Box 388, Munroe Falls, Ohio 44262.
Which Bible Is God's Word?, Riplinger.
Bible Baptist Church