Loading...
Menu

Why I Use the King James Version of the Bible

 

Why I Use The

King James

Version Of The

Bible

 

 

 

 

By Martin G. Tharp, Ph.D.

 

 

Copyright 2015 Martin Tharp Ph.D.

Smashwords edition

 

 

 

Smashwords Edition, License Notes; This ebook is licensed for your own personal enjoyment only. This ebook may not be resold or given away to other people. If you would like to share this ebook with another person, please purchase an additional copy for each recipient. If you’re reading this book and did not purchase it, or it was not purchased for your use only, then please return to smashwords.com and purchase your own copy. Thank you for respecting the hard work of this author.. Scripture quotations identified KJV are from the Hebrew-Greek Key Word Study Bible, King James Version. Copyright 1984, 1991 by AMG International, INC and the Living Bible Copyright 1971,1986 by Tyndale House Publishers INC

 

 

 

 

Available from:

The Tharp Family Ministries

3982 Green Forest Parkway

Smyrna, Georgia 30082

Also Available from;

Website: www.tharpministries.com

Email: [email protected]

www.smashwords .com Dr. Martin G. Tharp

www.itunes.com Dr. Martin G. Tharp

www.barnesandnoble.com Dr. Martin G. Tharp

 

 

 

 

Acknowledgment

 

When visiting for a few moment after services at “His Word” Christian Center in Las Vegas, Pastor Eric Toranzo made what I thought at the time was simply a casual remark about a book he would like for me to consider writing, explaining all the reasons why I use The King James Version of the Bible exclusively.

After leaving the Church that night I could not get that statement out of my head! After losing a night’s sleep over thinking about it, you are now holding in your hand the end result of that request.

Pastor Toranzo, thank you for being a true man of God, for the thought had never crossed my mind that I would have the necessary expertise to tackle such a project, until you spoke by the unction of the Holy Spirit and put it in my mind!

 

 

 

 

Dedication

 

To all the Pastors who have impacted our lives by faithfully booking us on a regular basis in your Churches across America and the British Isles. I often pray for every single one of you who are more than friends, family, is a far better descriptive term which comes to mind.

Although we only see each other for a limited time each year, it is hard to describe how excited we get when it is time to come your way regardless of your location.

My wife and I recognize that we are indeed very privileged Evangelists. God has allowed us the freedom to book where and when we choose and we have never been forced to go anywhere out of need!

We are never placed in a situation where we are uncomfortable, simply because Pastors, our friends, make certain that we are well cared for everywhere we go.

We also want to thank our colleagues in the Ministry who serve as Bishops, Presbyters, Evangelists, associate Pastors and youth Pastors for their friendship which grows ever stronger as the years go by.

To our dear friend, we wish to thank you ALL!

 

 

 

 

Table of Contents

Introduction

Chapter 1: Which Version?

Chapter 2: 5Precepts Taught By Jesus

Chapter 3: Discrepancies In The Four Gospels

Chapter 4: Secular Humanism

Chapter 5: The New Translations and The Virgin Birth

Chapter 6: Textual Changes in Over 100 New Translations

Chapter 7. What About the Thee’s and the Thou’s ?

Chapter 8: Formal Equivalence Vs Dynamic Equivalence

Chapter 9: Cultural Reasons For Choosing the KJV

Chapter 10: The Need For A Standard

Chapter 11: The Erosion Of Authority

Chapter 12:. Karl Lachmann The Rationalist

Chapter 13: The Opening of Pandora’s Box

Chapter 14: 1,881 Years Without The Experts

Chapter 15: Let’s Compare Bibles

Chapter 16: 18 Reasons To Avoid The NKJV

Chapter 17: The New Scofield Reference Bible

Chapter 18: Why No Apocryphal Books In The KJV?

Chapter 19: 50 Checkpoints For New Translations

Chapter 20: The NIV Quiz

Bibliography

About the Author

 

 

 

 

Introduction

The multiplication of “modern language” English Bible translations, has proven to be one of the most disconcerting religious phenomena of the past 100 years. The production mills which crank out these new translations are certainly not doing the Church or the religious community any favors!

Instead, they have served to undermine the spiritual foundations of America. They have not only weakened the message of our Churches, they have served to confuse many of the cornerstones of our doctrinal truths!

The production of these new translations have caused far more problem and confusion than they have ever solved, simply because none of them are actually better or easier to understand than the old King James Version of the Bible.

The abandonment of the King James version of the Bible by an appalling number of our Churches, has not been a good thing.

Some of the new Bibles are actually dangerous because of the theological bias of their translators. The Revised Standard Version of the Bible was presented to the public in 1952. It was authorized by the notoriously liberal National Council of Churches.

The unbelieving bias of the majority of the translators is extremely obvious in such verses as Isaiah 7:14;

“Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel”(RSV).

Take careful note of the marked difference between this rendition and that which is offered by the King James, for in my mind, it is extremely important!

“A virgin shall conceive, and bear a son,” (KJV)

Is there a difference between a virgin and a young woman? Dear God! I would hope so!

The liberal bias against the doctrine of the virgin birth is clearly reflected in the R.S.V. translation of this verse! The word which has been used in the original Hebrew text has long been understood and accepted to mean specifically a virgin in the particular context and is totally incorrectly rendered “young woman” by the R.S.V.

To further confuse the issue, this liberal version actually translates Matthew 1: 23 correctly from the Greek text stating; “Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son.” Although that rendering is correct, it brings confusion as it indicates that Isaiah had it wrong, bringing into question the infallibility of the Bible!

No fundamentalist Christian would or should accept an R.S.V. translation of the Bible!

 

 

 

 

Chapter One

 

Which Version?

 

Does it really matter which version of the Bible you choose? When I became a Christian I wasn’t brought up in a Church which demanded that the King James version of the Bible be our only choice, my Pastor often used the NIV, the James Moffit or The Living Bible translation’s to preach from.

It was never suggested to me that anyone should stay strictly with the King James Version. So why would I be so dogmatic about my choice of The King James?

In this Chapter I would like to point out a few significant reasons for making that decision. There were actually a lot of things that were instrumental in my decision to choose which Bible Version I would live my life by.

I was told that after all what did it matter? All the different versions on the market should be considered the Word of God, shouldn’t they?

After all, it is those thee’s and thou’s which many consider so confusing in the King James which is the major reason for all the new translations, isn’t it?

One of the most popular explanations given for making a choice of which translation to use is the following;

“The use of a particular English translation of the Bible is surely a personal choice.”

We are told that since many factors can and should, go into your decisions as you purchase Bible translations, “You should decide whether you would like a more literal translation, a formal translation, or a more “dynamic,” free-flowing translation? All those factors will definitely impact your choices.”

We are encouraged to consider study editions, companion volumes, concordances and even the print style and size! They are all issues we are encouraged to take into consideration.

We are also told this; “Perhaps we should consider what translation is predominant in our local Church, for that can be important as well, especially if we will be teaching or leading the Bible studies!”

The logic of most Christians dictate that the one thing which should never be a factor is being intimidated and having to wonder if you are going to be accepted by others if you use an ASV, NIV, ESV, NKJV, a TLB or any other translation rather than a KJV, or vice versa!

The accepted wisdom of the masses is that fellowship should never be based on what English translation you use or carry.

But, is all that really true? WELL? Actually, NO!

Here is an example from the NIV; in Acts chapter 8:36-38. Philip is told to go to down and meet with an Ethiopian Eunuch;

“As they travel along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said; Look, here is water, Why shouldn’t I be baptized? And he gave orders to stop the chariot, then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him.” (Acts 8:36-38;NIV).

Notice that in the NIV it simply jumps from verse 36 to verse 38?

Let us now consider the difference in the NIV and the King James version of the Bible;

“And as they went their way, they came unto a certain water, and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me from being baptized? And Philip said, if thou believeth with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.” (Acts 8:36-38;KJV).

Do these translations really teach the same thing? I don’t think so! In the NIV there is no hint of a salvation experience, nor a confession of belief in the person of the resurrected Savior before being considered worthy of baptism. In the NIV, Philip treats the eunuchs request as a rhetorical question and he never gives him an answer! He simply gets baptized with no hindrances for Philip to consider, where in the King James, there is a clear cut reference to the fact that the eunuch must make a verbal confession of his faith in a risen Savior before he can be baptized!

If for example, you go to an Evangelical Church where they will not baptize babies, can they give you Scriptures to explain why? Or is it strictly a Church tradition?

In the NIV, there is a footnote to explain that there are some versions who include this verse, but the footnotes do not tell you why a verse has been omitted, instead they give you misleading information on their reasons why it has been left out.

In this instance, there is tons of proof that this verse existed through the 3rd century, because history will verify the fact that Irenaeus cited it in 202 AD, and Cyprian also cited it in 258 AD! Yet the critical text scholars pull it out and say, this verse did not show up until the sixth century, which is simply not true, but rather a blatant outright lie!

The question I am asking here is this; does it really matter which Bible version you choose? Is there actually anything different about them?

Let me frame this question a little bit different to you, would it matter to you if your Pastor got up on Sunday and said; Church, I have decided that Jesus Christ is not God! He had a creation, therefore He cannot be God! Does that matter to you? I certainly hope so!

If that matters, then does it matter if your Bible says the same thing? Let us consider a passage in the book of Micah chapter 2, in a prophecy concerning Jesus Christ;

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times” (Micah 5:2;NIV).

Here your NIV says the same thing your Pastor just said, Christ had an origin and that origin was in ancient times! But what if you picked a different translation? Let’s say a King James Version of the Bible that reads completely different?

“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” (Micah 5:2;KJV).

The NIV said Jesus had an origin in ancient times, where the King James Bible says He is from everlasting!

Would you go to a Church which taught that Jesus

Christ is a created being and not God? I would hope not! Then consider this; are you okay with a Bible which teaches such heresy? Are you certain that it doesn’t matter which Bible version you choose? The NIV states quite categorically that Jesus was a created being and not God while the King James version clearly refutes this heresy in the book of Micah, it clearly articulates that He was from everlasting! But that is not the end of it, it even gets worse!

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” (1 Timothy 3:16;KJV).

In the King James there is no controversy, God was manifested in the flesh! But what if we want to prove this from the NIV?

“Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great; HE APPEARED IN A BODY, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory”(1 Timothy 3:16;NIV).

OOPS! He appeared in a body? The Jehovah witnesses believe that Jesus appeared in a body, their NEW WORLD TRANSLATION reads exactly like the NIV, and they have no problem proving by this text that Jesus is not and was not, God!

Are you still convinced that it really doesn’t matter which translation you choose? Do you still believe that they all have basically the same message in them, just stated in a little different manner?

There are actually thousands of verses like these which I have just pointed out. Although I am not attempting to prove that the King James translation is completely flawless, but when you pick a translation, you are then making up your own mind that it is indeed the word of God and it is your final authority.

With that in mind, you have a choice to make, you can pretend that all the new translations are after all, the Word of God and all say the same thing, even though they clearly do not, or you can come to terms with the fact that they are not all the same!

What’s more, if you claim that you get your doctrine straight from the Bible, then you have got a problem there. If you are going to be honest about it, you must make a choice of which one it is! If you are going to claim that it is from the original Greek and Hebrew, which is your final authority? That is simply a pipe dream of convenience since there is no original Greek and Hebrew available to us today, all we have are copies of copies and fragments of the dead sea scrolls.

Scholars cannot seem to agree on which ones are genuine, but that is okay since no-one can actually pin you down on it anyway, your final authority is subject to revision and new discovery.

If you are going to be honest with yourself, why would you embrace a book that states that Jesus had his origin in ancient times? Some folks say it is crazy to say that one translation of the Bible is the Word of God and another translation is not, but to my mind, which is crazier? To embrace the one which declares that Jesus had His origin in ancient times, or the one which states categorically that He was from everlasting?

How can we make the statement that both versions is indeed the Word of God? Does it make us prejudiced or a heretic to recognize the difference and have the courage to stand by our convictions?

If you have been using an NIV, or an RSV or some other like version of the Bible, I fully recognize that it will be difficult for you to admit that they are filled with corruption, but emotions should not be allowed to trump the fact that heresy in translations simply cannot be an acceptable substitute for the infallible word of God.

If someone decides to produce a “New Bible Version”, it stands to reason that they must also convince Christians that there is a need and a justifiable CAUSE for the new version. One of the most 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 revisers are just trying to justify their sins!

There are only four actual editions of the King James Bible produced after 1611: they were in 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.

I know because I am very experienced at finding the errors in my own books, on the 2nd or 3rd printing!

Try to imagine what it must have been 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 new 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 foolish, 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 and NOT in the King James Versions! It was the RV1881 and ASV 1901.

So if some smart mouth 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.

Whether anyone likes it or not the truth of the matter is that there are basically one of two categories of New Testament manuscripts which ALL Bibles are based on;

1. The Majority Text (Textus Receptus) which was originally known as the Received Text, which was compiled between 1514 and 1641, taken from over 5,000 manuscripts. The Majority Text has, since then, been made up of thousands of other Greek manuscripts. These later manuscript discoveries have confirmed the reliability of the Received Text.

2. Minority Text (Alexandrian Text) is based mainly on just two manuscripts, the Vaticanus (also known as “B”) and the Sinaiticus (also known as “Aleph”). These manuscripts not only disagree with the Majority Text, but they disagree with each other!

There are only a few Bibles that are based on the Majority Text, such as the King James Bible and the Gideon’s Bible. But almost all modern English Bibles translated since 1898 are based on the Minority Text (this includes the New American Standard Bible, the New International Version, the Living Bible, the New Revised Standard Version, The New World Translation, the New Century Version, The Good News Bible, The New King James Bible and over 100 others!)

These Bibles are only supported by about 5 of over 5,000 manuscripts in existence, or about 1% of all manuscripts, which is why it is also known as the “Minority Text”.

The two most prominent manuscripts of the Minority Texts are the Vaticanus and the Sanaiticus. Since Vaticanus and the Sanaiticus are said to be older than the 5,000 manuscripts that support the Majority Text, they were called “better” than the Majority Text.

Saying it does not make it so! And, it has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that this statement is definitely untrue! These Minority Texts frequently disagreed with each other as well as with the Majority Text and also contained many obvious and flagrant mistakes!

Up until the late 1800’s, the Minority Texts were utterly rejected by all Christians.

The Fact that the Minority Texts were older, certainly did not prove that they were better! More than likely it indicates that they were set aside because of their numerous errors. Therefore, it stands to reason that they would last longer than the good manuscripts which were being used regularly,

You must remember that the Apostle Paul testified to the corruption of the word in his day;

“For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him” (2 Corinthians 11:4;KJV).

“I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel” (Galatians 1:6;KJV).

Hence oldest is not necessarily best!

The Vaticanus which is the sole property of the Roman Catholic Church and the Sanaiticus, are both known to be overwhelmed with errors. Words and whole phrases are repeated twice in succession or completely omitted, while the entire manuscript has had the text mutilated by some person or persons who ran over every letter with a pen, making exact identification of many of the characters impossible.

However, the Majority Text is based on the vast majority (90-95%) of the 5,000+ Greek manuscripts in existence. That is why it is also called the Majority Text.

The Majority Text is not mutilated with deletions, additions and amendments, as is the Minority Text.

The Majority Text agrees with the earliest versions of the Bible; Peshitta (AD 150). Old Latin Vulgate (AD 157), the Italic Bible (AD 157). These Bibles were produced some 200 years before the minority Egyptian codices favored by the Roman Catholic Church.

The Majority Text agrees with the vast majority of the 86,000+ citations from Scriptures by the early Church fathers.

The Majority Text is untainted with Egyptian philosophy and unbelief.

The Majority Text strongly upholds;

1. The fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith;

2. The creation account in Genesis,

3. The Divinity of Jesus Christ,

4. The virgin birth, the Saviors miracles,

5. His bodily resurrection and,

6. The cleansing power of His blood!

The Minority Text denies ALL of these things!

Do you still want to know which Bible?

 

 

 

 

Chapter Two

 

 

5 Precepts Taught By Jesus

 

Let us begin this chapter by examining the five precepts that were taught by Jesus in Matthew 4:4.

“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” (Matthew 4:4;KJV).

Let us first focus on an answer that Jesus gave to Satan when He was being tempted in the wilderness, Jesus did not answer based on what he thought, or what would seem to fit the situation, He is quoting from a statement which is found in the book of Deuteronomy;

“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” (Deuteronomy 8:3;KJV).

In the 4th verse of Matthew chapter 4, we have 5 precepts that Jesus is teaching us. This verse is teaching that we live by;

“Every word that proceeded from the mouth of God.” It must become our life authority. That means that everything in our lives is judged by that same standard;

1. The ultimate authority of Scripture

On what authority did Jesus answer Satan?

Perhaps there is a strong possibility that the two following verses of Scripture could provide the basis for His answer to the temptation of Satan;

“Then the Levites, Jeshua, and Kadmiel, Bani, Hashabniah, Sherebiah, Hodijah, Shebaniah, and Pethahiah, said, Stand up and bless the LORD your God for ever and ever: and blessed be thy glorious name, which is exalted above all blessing and praise.” (Nehemiah 9:5;KJV).

Let us consider another verse in the book of Psalms, chapter 138;

“I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.” (Psalm 138:2 ;KJV).

2. The Divine inspiration of Scripture

Jesus clearly articulated His response to Satan by choosing carefully where his authority originated, by His recognition that the power was in the Words which come from straight from the mouth of God;

“Every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”

The Words which come from God carry the Divine origin, and Divine authority.

Some people think that the Word of God is simply a collection of ideas, but we must realize that the Bible indicates that it is Words that actually come from God! Literal, verbal things, not simply some mind-message, it is far more than that! God chose words which carry with them Divine authority!

***

Visit: http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/579442 to purchase this book to continue reading. Show the author you appreciate their work!


Why I Use the King James Version of the Bible

  • ISBN: 9781311724588
  • Author: Dr. Martin G Tharp PhD
  • Published: 2015-09-23 05:20:07
  • Words: 24216
Why I Use the King James Version of the Bible Why I Use the King James Version of the Bible