KJV The Received Text

[adimus]

The KJV is a human translation like all translations.

Since 1611, there has been a lot more information discovered to work with that help us translate the Bible into modern vernacular. The KJV is outdated.

If you go to the bush in Africa, or to any other country where they do not speak or read English (let alone 17th century English), the gospel is the power of God, not any certain translation of the Bible. Those people will never read a KJV. No one before 1611 ever read the KJV either and God had raised up many prophets and apostles who did fine without it.

This KJV only teaching is demonic.

It puffs up.

It keeps the Bible from being more easily read and understood.

It makes the Bible out to be an extrememly "religious" book.

It makes the Bible appear to be a dated book that is irrelevant for real life.

It dishonestly ignores the weaknesses and errors of the KJV. Its leaders are proven to be liars, plagerizers, and manipulators.

It's unwise, not to mention insulting to start throwing the word "demonic" around in regards to a difference of opinion such as this. I feel that people that believe only in the KJV are misguided, but it goes no deeper than that. There is nothing demonic about it. Stubborness perhaps, but not demonic. That isn't a word we should just be tossing around.

4:1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, 1 Tim 4:1

This is what I meant by that. In Pensacola Florida, where I once lived, there were a number of churches that held the KJV as the gospel itself. They even taught that if you did not believe in the KJV 1611 only, you were not even saved! That is demonic. Most of the results of this KJV only doctrine are destructive in nature. The tree is known by its fruit. I am not saying that KJV only folks are not saved or going to hell. I am saying that this teaching is not of God but is of the devil. You can believe some demonic teachings and yet still believe in Jesus and be saved.

Edited November 1, 2008 by adimus

[adimus]

I found this book to be very informative on this topic.

The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust the Modern Translations?

by James R. White - Religion - 1995 - 286 pages

I would highly recommend it to you. It tells the account of exactly who, what, when, where and how the KJV was first translated and published. It also tells the story of the textus receptus and the other major resources that many modern translations draw from. He explains exactly how translations are made and why there are differences between the KJV and most modern translations. Have you read this book?

[adimus]

4:1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, 1 Tim 4:1

This is what I meant by that. In Pensacola Florida, where I once lived, there were a number of churches that held the KJV as the gospel itself. They even taught that if you did not believe in the KJV 1611 only, you were not even saved! That is demonic. Most of the results of this KJV only doctrine are destructive in nature. The tree is known by its fruit. I am not saying that KJV only folks are not saved or going to hell. I am saying that this teaching is not of God but is of the devil. You can believe some demonic teachings and yet still believe in Jesus and be saved.

Your kidding, right? You don't know Butero from a box of Post Toasties. I do. He and I have debated this point before. We don't agree. He has his position, and I have mine, and I am willing to leave it at that and not resort to name-calling or tactics like calling it "demonic." Your comparing anyone who only believes in the KJV to some sect you know of in Florida, and since you don't know what Butero believes, and since you don't know him persoanlly, it's a comparison that doesn't hold up. You do your Christian brothers and sisters a huge dis-service when you just start arbitrarily start tacking labels like "demonic" onto things. If believing in the KJV only is demonic, then so is running around labeling everything you don't agree with as "demonic." Some things are just a difference of opinion, and nothing more. It does not have to be any more sinister than that.

I am not kidding about anything that i wrote there. I also did not call Butero or anyone any names. Labeling a teaching as "demonic" is not insulting or name calling either. I learned how to identify what is demonic from the scriptures themselves. The Bible calls doctrines "demonic" in 1 Tim 4:1. What exactly did I write in my post that was name calling or our of hand?

I even qualified my words by stating "I am not saying that KJV only folks are not saved or going to hell. I am saying that this teaching is not of God but is of the devil. You can believe some demonic teachings and yet still believe in Jesus and be saved."

I am utterly serious when I say that the fruits of this teaching, in any form, are destructive. That is why I say it is demonic. It does no one any actual good. It only promotes pride, inclusiveness, suspicion, division, distraction from the gospel, etc. If Butero is not a KJV activist, than he is not likely to raise any ungodly ruckus over this issue.

However, Butero aside, I do not see how anyone can actually do unbiased research into the KJV only teachings and still remain convinced of the KJV being somehow superior. That notion causes me to have doubts about the motives behind someone steadfastly adhering to KJV only-ism. The reality is that the entire concept of KJVO is founded upon certain authors, speakers and preachers blatantly being deceptive and manipulating the facts to force their personal beliefs of KJVO. Deception is Satanic.

[Guest man]

Here are a couple of links for anyone who is interested in having a look at the 1611 text.

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/thebible.htm

http://www.geocities.com/cott1388/kjv.html

[Botz]

It can be sourced here....http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/5951/KJVOnly.html

[Guest man]

If the source would make up a false claim like this, I have no reason to believe anything else they say. It is obvious they are willing to say anything to build up a case against the superiority of the King James Bible, including making up slanderous false accusations about it.

That's one of the reasons I posted the links.

Let people see for themselves and come to their own conclusions.

I would actually like to see some more of what adimus has to offer.

[Botz]

I would like to discuss this more fully...but have no time at the moment, so will just leave a link.

http://www.tentmaker.org/Biblematters/time.htm

I think the main problem comes from an unreasonable step of faith that claims things for the translation of the KJV that it does not claim for itself. I think I understand why this is, in the sense that some people believe if you find an error in translation it brings the whole of the rest of the Bible into question...so it is necessary for them to say and believe that the 1611 version is inerrant.

Hope people will continue this thread in agape love.

[traveller]

Everyone - I removed the unsourced posts, and those addressing such.

Continue with grace....

[adimus]

You posted a lot of material that is supposed to prove the KJV Bible is not perfect, but in one of your posts, it makes a blatantly false claim. It states that the 1611 KJV Bible says in Matthew 26:36, "Then cometh Judas," when it is supposed to say, "then cometh Jesus." I happen to have a 1611 reprint in front of me right now. As I stated earlier, it is my Bible of choice, and here is what it says:

Matthew XXVI:36 Then commeth Jesus with them unto a place called Gethsemane, and saith unto the Disciples, Sit yee heere, while I goe and pray yonder."

This outright lie calls into question everything else the author posted. I suppose he assumes that most of his readers don't have a 1611 edition to compare what he said to, and that they will simply accept his lie?

Not so. Your 1611 no doubt does say "Jesus." The problem is that your copy is one of many variations that have been printed as "Authorized KJV 1611" Bibles. The KJVs have been "corrected"numerous times in the last 400 years. Originally, there were 4 different KJVs printed. They had around 35,000 marginal commentary notes and alternate renderings options. That "Judas" was originally there and has since been corrected in one of the various updated reprints of the KJV. The "Judas" error is a typical example of a human copyist's mistake. Judas and Jesus both start with J. Both are two sylables. Both end with S. This kind of error is a symptom of a human's mind identifying a familiar pattern and then missing a specific detail.

I would not say that the "Judas" claim is a lie at all.

The problem with your arguments are they are based on the opinions of Bible historians. There have always been and always will be historical revisionists. Look at what has happened to our American history books over the years. I finally found a history book I have confidence in called, "A Patriots Guide to American History," but I had to search for that. The information in that will look quite a bit differen't from public school text books of today with a differen't agenda.

If you refuse to hear out any Bible scholars that say anything that you don't agree with, than you will not listen to anyone. No one agrees on everything. True, there are historical revisionists. But I find it very difficult to believe that you actually have read any books that defend the notion that the KJV is not perfect and that modern translations are working with better evidence and many pieces of older maniscript evidence and more diverse amount of linguistic information than the KJV translators had available at the time. Without researching this, just imagine that there has been absolutely no helpful information about the origianl texts of the Bible discovered in the last 400 years of archeology and intense research. Imagine that ALL of the researchers, historians and language experts (like the president of my Bible school, Dr. Michael L Brown) ALL were purposefully trying to corrupt the Bible. Come on.

Remember what Jesus said. " Therefore I send you prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues and persecute from town to town," Matthew 23:34.

And what about these people? "11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, 12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ," Eph 4:11-13.

Exactlly who are these "teachers" and "scribes" and wise men have Jesus has sent us as promised, only the KJV only ones? The church has certainly not yet achieved "the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ." And the KJV only movement is living proof if the church's immaturity and division.

I want to thank my friend Cobalt for his defense. I know we don't agree on this issue, but as I stated earlier, I don't think that dissagreeing over this matter means one of us is saved and the other is lost.

I also said the same thing. Here is is again "I even qualified my words by stating "I am not saying that KJV only folks are not saved or going to hell. I am saying that this teaching is not of God but is of the devil. You can believe some demonic teachings and yet still believe in Jesus and be saved.""

He has his reasons for his beliefs and I have mine, and I can accept that. Even so, when this subject comes up, I feel like I have an obligation to God to defend his Word to the best of my ability, and others can decide for themselves if my arguments are valid.

I will tell you specifically the reasons why I hold to the KJV Bible only.

1. Everyone who holds to the idea all translations are basically equal are admitting they believe there are errors in all translations, meaning you can't fully believe any of them 100 percent. You might accept them as 95 percent accurate, but not 100 percent accurate. This opens the door for people to defend doing things contrary to scripture.

True. Does this actually happen very often? If am man wants an exuse he will either find one or invent one no matter what the truth is. This is a strawman argument. Your argument does not prove that the KJV is in any way superior to any other possible translation that can be made.

If you accept the Bible to be 95% accurate (never met anyone like that), than that is enough right there to condemn you as a sinner who needs Jesus to save you.

The disputed words that the modern translations either disagree about, or place footnotes of alternate readings, are all perfectly legitimate ones. Remember, the original 4 1611 KJVs had 35,000 footnotes and alternate renderings listed for the reader to examine themself. 35,000 footnotes and alternate renderings makes the Bible look a lot less reliable than any of the modern translations' which have far fewer such notes. More information that is available today which eliminates many of the translation mysteries that the 1611 had to try to tackle in its 35,000 footnotes. And the disputed words in modern translations are not words that have doctrines resting upon them. They are easily understandable copyist's mistakes like "our joy will be full" as opposed to "your joy will be full."

2. New translations often leave out important things from the text. I mentioned two earlier. These are not minor things. In one place, fasting is left out, and in another the words "without a cause" is left out. Then there is the matter of discrediting every verse after verse 8 in the last chapter of Mark's gospel. This is serious to me.

Why is it? Have you even researched as to why certain words are "left out" of many modern translations? Do you know that there are also places where words are actually "added" that were missing from the KJVs translations? These "missing words" are easily explainable. Copyists mistakes. Ephesians and Colossians have numerous, almost word for word passages. They are a little different in many places though. For example. an unknown copyist for Colossians had added "Jesus Christ" when it should have remained "Jesus." The copyist was likely very familiar with Ephesians and possibly made a mistake when copying Colossians with an almost identical passage to the Ephesian passage that he had commited to memory. That happened, or the copyist thought that another copyist made a mistake when copying Colossians he was copying from, and he then "corrected" the omission of "Christ" and added "Jesus Christ" into his new copy of Colossians. This new error then stayed in all copies that were made of his new copy. The error does not change any meaning of the scriptures either.

We can also cross examine the thousands of quotes from the NT found in many of the early church father's writings. You can compile almost all (97% or more) of the NT just from mining these letters alone. You can reasonably date each of the early church fathers' letters. Then you cross examine the quotes of scriptures in their letters with other letters with the same quotes from letters written later on. Then you can see the minor variations in the translations that they were copying from. The older and more common a quote is that is found, the more likely that the older rendition is the original one. If a passage is quoted that has one rendering, and then that same passage is found in all newer documents that has a slightly different rendering, you can examine the difference and usually it becomes obvious which is in error and the reason how that error krept in. This is one way how modern translators have so much more evidence to work with than the KJV translators did.

3. Anyone who accepts the idea all translations are equal opens up a pandora's box for abuse. Any denomination can create a translation that supports their personal beliefs. A Baptist Bible might put a greater emphasis on the security of the believer. A Pentecostal Bible might put more emphasis on the gifts of the Spirit. A Wesleyan Bible might put more emphasis on sanctification being a second definate work of grace. Cults can do the same thing, as the Jehovah's Witnesses have done with the New World Translation, and feminists have come up with the New NIV, which has taken all references to God in the male form out.

All translations are not equal but all translations deserve a fair chance. Cults like the Jehovah's Witnesses have produced a new Bible, not a translation. All scholars disagree with many of the "New World Translation" Jehovah Witness Bible's renderings. Creating words out of thin air and then added them into the Bible is not what you call translating, and that is what the JWs have done in their Bible. Just because humans can do this does not mean that no honest scholars can get together, with new evidences to work from, and then produce a modern translation that is more reable and accurate than some of the older translations. That is why there was a KJV translated in the first place.

4. I believe God is able to preserve his Word perfect. As such, I believe the TR manuscripts to be 100 percent accurate, and that God used the King James translators to produce a perfect English translation. I have no regard for the opinions of so-called scholars. So called scholars often make all kinds of claims, including the notion that the Bible is not really the innerant Word of God.

I believe God is able to preserve his Word perfect

As do I.

As such, I believe the TR manuscripts to be 100 percent accurate, and that God used the King James translators to produce a perfect English translation.

You know that there was no one, certain copy of the TR in existance? The KJV had a TR "tradition" to work with of many slightly different TRs in extant at the time. Also, there were certain places, like in Revelation for instance, which the KJV had no Greek manuscripts at all to translate from so they used the Latin Vulgate to translate from. The RT is not "perfect" in the sense that you think it is.

You said "I believe God is able to preserve his Word perfect. As such, I believe the TR manuscripts to be 100 percent accurate." God's word never said anything at all about the TR manuscripts (and they were each a little different, what about the missing pieces also?). Where is the connection?

As I stated earlier, I have heard these arguments you brough up before. I rejected them then, and I reject them now. The only one I hadn't heard before was the false claim with regard to a supposed error in the 1611 King James Bible, but as I said already, that argument is a lie, and discredits everything else the author said. The Bible says it is the thief that is a liar and the Father of a lie. The author of that article you posted made a slanderous and false statement against the King James Bible, and you posted it. If you are really so good at identifying what is demonic from the scriptures, you would know bearing false witness is the work of the devil.

Edited November 2, 2008 by adimus

[jmwhalen]

I would like to discuss this more fully...but have no time at the moment, so will just leave a link.

http://www.tentmaker.org/Biblematters/time.htm

I think the main problem comes from an unreasonable step of faith that claims things for the translation of the KJV that it does not claim for itself. I think I understand why this is, in the sense that some people believe if you find an error in translation it brings the whole of the rest of the Bible into question...so it is necessary for them to say and believe that the 1611 version is inerrant.

Hope people will continue this thread in agape love.

When the writers of the epistles and other books of the Bible penned them, they didn't make the claim they were the innerant Word of God, yet most Christians don't think it is unreasonable to take the position they are just that. As such, I see no reason to look at it as unreasonable to believe something about the 1611 King James Bible the authors never claimed about it.

____-----

Butero,

I applaud you for your defense of the preserved, inspired word of God. You are not alone, and I write this to you FYE(For Your Edification-"to build up"). Most know my position that I accept, by faith, that the LORD God, who created the universe, warms the heart of a mother from the smile of her "little one", raised the dead, and saved all of us no good rotten sinners from "the wages of sin...death..."(Romans 3:23), made good on His promise to preserved His inspired word, which, by definition, i.e., scripture's own testimony, is without error, and this is realized for English speaking people in the King James Bible.

I will address the argument(reasons for a conclusion) that you addressed, and correctly answered; namely:

" claims things for the translation of the KJV that it does not claim for itself."

That is, the argument is that, since the KJB translators did not claim "to be inspired, and did not "opinion" this, therefore, the KJB cannot be inspired.

(bold/underline my emphasis)

To refute an argument, we must "knock down" the premises, the "supporting walls", upon which the "foundation" of the argument rests. "What saith the scriptures" re. "the KJB translators did not claim "to be inspired, and did not "opinion" this, therefore, the KJB cannot be inspired."?

1. Notice 2 Timothy 3:16 says all scripture is, not was, given by inspiration-the scriptures are inspired, not the writers(the subject of another post).

2. "Ckeck it out in the Book-don't take my word on this"-Acts 17:11:

I contend that the doctrine of divine inspiration does not necessitate that the people God used always understanding what they wrote or said, and is not dependent upon whether or not they claimed inspiration, or whether they had knowledge that they were, in fact, being used of God to pen scripture. To wit:.

- "I Tertius, who wrote this epistle, salute you in the Lord" Romans 16:22

Now, is all of the book of Romans inspired? Did Paul write Romans? Did he claim authorship? Is Romans 16:22 inspired? Now, did anyone, does anyone claim perfection for Tertius?" Did Tertius claim he was "inspired", or is there any evidence that he was aware that he was penning scripture? Was Tertius "moved by the Holy Ghost"(2 Peter 1:21)? Yes, "He taketh the wise in their own craftiness"(1 Cor. 3:19).

Or how about scribes that the LORD God used to preserve his word, by copies? Did they have to "claim perfection", or did they even know they were being used by God to preserve His word? Did their "opinion" matter? By that argument, the Levitical priests, fallible, uninspired men, who were used by God to preserve His word without error, had to claim perfection, and "inspiration knowledge"?:

"And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy(and notice he wrote a "copy", which he had available all his life-so much for the "originals only" 'were'(past tense) inspired"--copies, which he "read....all the days of his life".)of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites: And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the LORD his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them..." Deut. 17:18-19(see also Deut. 31:9-13, 25-26, Nehemiah 8, Malachi 2:7)

-I argue and believe that the LORD God can guide and/or inspire despite the intentions, "inspiration understanding or not", and "know-how of man"(or lack thereof).

"But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away." 1 Cor. 7:12

To be consistent with this argument, i.e., since the KJB translators did not claim to be inspired, the Apostle Paul was not penning inspired scripture, i.e., because he is not claiming to be inspired. Scripture states that he is speaking, and not the Lord. Therefore 1Cor7:12 is not inspired scripture according to this argument????!!!!!!?

"That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting." 2 Cor. 11:17

Is Paul not penning inspired scripture here either????!!!!!!! How can 2 Cor. 11:17 be inspired Scripture if Paul is speaking foolishly!? God inspires foolish speaking!!??

Cannot the LORD God can guide and/or inspire, regardless of man's knowledge, or "opinion"???!!!!(rhetorical question)

-.Since when did man's "opinion", man's belief in objective truth, determine objective truth? By that logic, Christianity is false, since most of the world rejects it(and most of the world "corrects" it).

-Simarly, "The Translators to the Reader" "opinion" argument

Who said their "opinion" was inspired?

-"And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not.And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;.." John 11:49-51

Here, notice that a statement of inspired scripture was not understood by the one(Caiphas) saying it, nor was it recognized as part of Scripture by him. Caiphas did not even realize that he was speaking scripture, neither did he understand all that it meant.

The words are inspired, not the instruments used by the author-the LORD God.

__________________________________________-

The biblical principle of repetition, i.e., the inspired word of God, to be considered properly, and scripturally, as the inspired word of God, must, by definition, i.e., scripture's own testimony, be without error", if scripture is taken at "face value", and not rejected by a secular humanist mindset, i.e., "I just cannot believe/accept, with my limited human reasoning, that there could be a hell/God would send people to hell. Therefore, there is no hell."

If one does not accept this scriptural testimony, by faith, that the LORD God, as He promised, made good on this promise to preserved His inspired word, which, by definition, i.e., scripture's own testimony, is without error, then that is akin to rearranging the proverbial "deck chairs on the Titanic." That is, the simple analogy is grass. If you do not believe grass exists, then I will never be able to convince you it is green. No matter how much evidence I lay before you, or refuting of other arguments, you don't believe grass exists, thus it cannot be green. No amount of "arguing", no amount of "evidence", will convince anyone that the KJB is without error, if one holds to the premise that "it is impossible" for the LORD God to "see to it" that a translation be His inspired word. For me to convince anyone that the KJB is the inspired word of God is indeed, futile on my part because their premise won't accept it-"grass does not exist"=the word of God without error today does not exist", therefore"grass is not green"="the KJB is not the word of God."

The purity, the perfection of the word of God

(bold is my emphasis)

By John M. Whalen

The LORD God is the source of the truth: God the Father is the truth(Psalms 31:5); The Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ is the truth(Jn. 14:6); God the Holy Ghost is the truth(Jn. 14:7).

Only an absolute authority can provide absolute truth; all other truth is relative and changeable(Psalms 119:128).

The Holy Bible is the source of the truth, if words are to have any meaning.

I "take God at His word"-the simple definition of faith. He inspired it(2 Tim. 3:16), He preserved it, and it is without error, in 5th grade English. The Holy Bible's testimony , which it declares emphatically, is that it is "... impossible for God to lie..." (Heb. 6:18). The apostle Paul speaks of our God as one who "... cannot lie..." (Titus 1:2.), and scripture declares our God as "...a God of truth..."(Deuteronomy 32:4, Psalms 31:5, Isaiah 65:16). This same God declares that His word is perfect; there are no errors within it-none.

Yes, folks! From Genesis through Revelation, the issue is final authority-it always has been.

"Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD...." Isaiah 1:18

Now, what is more "reasonable"?:

"There is no perfect Bible-all of them have errors....no English translation is perfect or inerrant..." , or

The Holy Bible is without error-it is perfect. This is scripture's testimony., its "witness":

"How forcible are right words! but what doth your arguing reprove?" Job 6:25

"As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all them that trust in him." 2 Samuel 22:31

"And the woman said to Elijah, Now by this I know that thou art a man of God, and that the word of the LORD in thy mouth is truth." 1 Kings 17:24

"The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times." Psalms 12:6

"As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him." Psalms 18:30

"The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple." Psalms 19:7

"For the word of the LORD is right; and all his works are done in truth." Psalms 33:4

"Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it." Psalms 119:140

"And take not the word of truth utterly out of my mouth; for I have hoped in thy judgments." Psalms 119:43

"Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever." Psalms 119:160

"Have not I written to thee excellent things in counsels and knowledge, That I might make thee know the certainty of the words of truth; that thou mightest answer the words of truth to them that send unto thee?" Proverbs 22:20,21

"Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him." Proverbs 30:5

"...the scripture of truth...." Daniel 10:21

"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." John 17:17

"But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God." 2 Corinthians 4:2

"By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left,..." 2 Corinthians 6:7

"In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,..." Ephesians 1:13

"For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe." 1 Thessalonians 2:13

"...the word of truth." 2 Timothy 2:15

"Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures." James 1:18

"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." 1 Peter 1:23

Furthermore, the Holy Bible also testifies of the praise, the reverence, the respect, the awe we are commanded to have for the word of God:

"Neither have I gone back from the commandment of his lips; I have esteemed the words of his mouth more than my necessary food" Job 23:12

"In God I will praise his word, in God I have put my trust; I will not fear what flesh can do unto me." Psalms 56:4

"In God will I praise his word: in the LORD will I praise his word." Psalms 56:10

"Princes have persecuted me without a cause: but my heart standeth in awe of thy word." Psalms 119:161

"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." Psalms 138:2

"For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the LORD: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word." Isaiah 66:2

"And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord:....." Acts 13:48.

"Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may have free course, and be glorified, even as it is with you:..." 2 Thes. 3:1

The Holy Bible testifies of the reverence, the respect, and the honour we are commanded to display towards the LORD God's Holy Name:

"Sing forth the honour of his name: make his praise glorious. " Psalms 66:2

If the Lord Jesus Christ's name is so precious to God the Father, and it is(Acts 4:12, 19:17; Philippians 2:9-10; Eph. 1:21; 2 Thes. 1:12 ; Hebrews 1:4), and if God's own "...great name..."(Jeremiah 44:26, Ezekiel 36:23), His "...holy name...."(the most often cited attribute of the LORD God and His name is "holy"-Mt. 6:9; Luke 1:49, 11:2.......) is even exalted above all blessing, praise, and "honour"(Psalms 66:2), and it is(Deut. 28:58; 2 Samuel 7:26, 22:50; 1 Kings 8:42; 1 Chron. 16:29, 17:24, 23:13, 29:13; Neh. 1:11, 9:5; Job 1:21; Psalms 8:1, 8:9, 29:2, 34:3, 44:8, 48:10, 52:9, 54:6, 61:5, 68:4, 69:30, 72:17, 72:19, 79:9, 86:9, 86:12, 96:2, 96:8, 99:3, 100:4, 103:1, 111:9, 113:1-3, 115:1, 135:1, 142:7, 145:1-2, 148:5,13; Isaiah 12:4, 24:15, 25:1, 29:23, 48:11, 56:6; Jer. 10:6, 34:16; Ez. 39:7; Daniel 2:20; Malachi 2:2; John 12:28 ; Rev. 15:4 ), and if God has magnified His word above His own name, and He did and has(Psalms 138:2), then this is not a trivial matter, nor a matter of "preference", or "usability/likeability".

The integrity of our faith, the faith, is dependent on the integrity of the word of God, is dependent on the "sure word"(2 Peter 1:19, "For the word of the LORD" must be"...right....", if all of the works of the LORD, including our justification, are to be "done in truth"(Psalms 33:4). The authority of which we believers speak is dependent on the final authority of "the" Holy Bible, "the" word of God,"...the scripture of truth...."(Daniel 10:21), which "....is true from the beginning"(Psalms 119:160).

My first priority as a Christian will always be: I will proclaim only that "message" that is derived from a "credible witness." If the witness is not credible, then "interpretation"="the MESSAGE", is divorced from objective reality. No interpretation, no "the Message", is worthwhile, or credible, if truth can still be considered truth despite ERRORS. If biblical certainty/assurance are lost, then biblical authority, and its resulting "interpretation"/"the MESSAGE" is impossible. If the biblical text is unreliable, then the Holy Bible's own claims about representing the full and objective truth about God cannot be substantiated or believed. The Holy Bible's authority to rule over us, to call us back to the LORD God, to offer justification and eternal life through the offence of the cross, and the resurrection, and any "interpretive methods", evaporates. And a discussion of the soundness of any interpretation, any understanding the LORD God's revelation of Himself, and His "blueprint" for all, is mere "going through the motions", "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic", if the source for understanding these objective truths is flawed in any way. Therefore, if any supposed "the Holy Bible" claiming to be the word of God has errors, then it is not the word of God. And those who make the claim that the word of God can have errors, and still be considered the word of God, they are speaking not "...according to this word, it is because there is no light in them"(Isaiah 8:20). This I have learned from the Holy Bible's own testimony, if it is to believed. I take "God at His word"(the simple definition of faith), and it is that simple.

Is this "reasonable"?: "There are no counterfeit bibles... all 'the Bibles' are the word of God.... ...All 'the Bibles' are the same........."

Despite scripture's testimony, its "witness":

"And the burden of the LORD shall ye mention no more: for every man's word shall be his burden; for ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the LORD of hosts our God." Jeremiah 23:36

"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." 2 Cor. 2:17

'Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.' 1 Peter 1:23

"Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? " 1 Cor. 5:6

"A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump." Galatians 5:9

"Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you." 2 Cor. 6:17

"Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter?" James 3:11

The battle line was drawn in Genesis(The "Seed Plot" of the Holy Bible) chapter three, and continues to this day. The enemy will always first attempt to "cut off" communication with the "soldiers"(2 Timothy 2:3,4) ) through the "the cares of this world"(Genesis 3:6 , Mark 4:19 ), and then "subtilely"(Gen. 3:1)corrupt the communication through sowing doubt and confusion, , "...Yea, hath God said.....?"(Gen. 3:1), which inevitably leads to changing/altering/ deleting that communication(Gen. 3:2-5) And thus Ecclesiastes 1:9 comes full circle..

But, still, in a spiritual application, the shout of Pharaoh, the enemy, resounds to this day:

"And Pharaoh said, Who is the LORD, that I should obey his voice....?" Exodus 5:2.

This Holy Bible has no errors-none. If it has errors, it is not the word of God-period. Now:

".... Who is on the LORD's side? let him come unto me ....." Exodus 32:26

This word of God, this "hammer", will eventually "breaketh" those that say otherwise-Jeremiah 23:29.

To those who "pound the table", and in rebellion shout, "No English translation is perfect or inerrant-a perfect translation of the Bible is humanly impossible!," I say:

Right. If you accept the "notion" that we have A LORD God who is as incompetent as his creation, then this statement may be legitimate.

However, if you are a bible believer, not doubter, this statement is from the pits of hell. The LORD God, who created the universe, warms a mother's heart from the smile of her "little one", saved a miserable, no-good, rotten, filthy, depraved sinner like me, and raised His only begotten Son from the dead, just could not use His creation to preserve His word? Right. And of course, the LORD God used no-good, rotten sinners to communicate His word "originally", but was just "incapable" of preserving that same word without error in a translation! And, of course, a good portion of the NT was a Greek translation of the Hebrew OT.

"So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God." Romans 14:12

A "Christian:"But LORD, A perfect translation of the Bible is humanly impossible........"

An atheist:"A perfect translation of the Bible is humanly impossible...it has errors."

An athest: "The resurrection is humanly impossible."

All three of these conclusions/arguments are legitimate, assuming the premise("the supporting walls") is sound, i.e., man is responsible for these event's fulfillment(secular humanism/moderism)="humanly impossible."

"Be still, and know that I am God." Psalms 46:10

"...With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible." Mt. 19:26

"...With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible." Mark 10:27

"For with God nothing shall be impossible." Luke 1:37

"And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God." Luke 18:27

"....neither may he contend with him that is mightier than he." Eccl. 6:10

Those who say "A perfect translation of the Bible is humanly impossible" had better hire a good attorney when that Romans 14:12 day arrives-and it will.

To those who deny that the word of God is perfect, whether they be the lost, and face the "...great white throne..." judgment of Revelation 20:11, or those "in Christ", saved by the grace of God through the Lord Jesus Christ, and "...stand before the judgment seat of Christ..." per Romans 14:10-12, 2 Corinthians 5:10, I implore you:

Put your hand on your heart,and listen to the heart beat. This is the drum cadence: for the lost, a funeral march; for the saved, "the countdown" to our rewards ceremony.

But, either way, this beat is measuring all of our future appointment with a just, righteous, holy, and "...LORD God of truth..."(Psalms 31:5, Deuteronomy 32:4, Isaiah 65:16).

"And Micaiah said, As the LORD liveth, even what my God saith, that will I speak." 2 Chronicles 18:13

In Christ,

John M. Whalen