Which Version is the Bible? by Floyd Nolen Jones

“Is the Word of God on planet earth today?  If so, where is it?  Why do the modern versions read so differently from all the older English versions?”

After 62 pages, I abandoned reading the book, Which Version is the Bible? by Floyd Nolen Jones.  Basically, the book reads to me as a defense of the King James-only belief — a belief held by many that the King James Authorized Version is one of the only true and accurate translations into English of God’s holy word.  There are other acceptable English translations, but none of our modern translations (NIV, NASB, RSV, NLT) are acceptable to those who hold this King James-only belief.  We have been attending a King James-only fundamentalist baptist church, and I wanted to understand the nature of this belief because I was raised on the NIV and have found pleasure in reading the NASB.

Most of the pages I read were filled with comparisons of sections of scripture from the KJV and one of the more modern versions, to demonstrate the alleged omission or addition.  For instance, Colossians 1:14 reads in the KJV, “In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins,” whereas in the NIV it reads, “In whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.”  The point being that the NIV has completely removed Christ’s blood from the redemptive process.  Another example is in Matthew 9:13, where the KJV reads, “for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance,” and the NIV reads, “for I have not come to call the righteous but sinners.”

The point made by the author is that God promised to preserve His word to us and that the KJV is that preserved word.  All of these newer translations are based on an adulterated version of the Greek text.  My thought is that the deletions that the author perceives could be additions from scribes over the years.  It is true that there are words that disappear between the KJV and the NIV, but could this not be words that were added by scribes in an effort to make the word of God clearer?  Or just because it seemed appropriate to the scribe, it seemed like those words belonged?  In any event, the author started to launch into a discuss of Erasmus, Hort, and Westcott, a discussion I probably would have had a hard enough time following had I believed there was a problem, a discussion which I found it wholly impossible to follow given my lack of conviction that a problem exists.

In the end, I must do as the pastor of the church I currently attend said.  I must pray on it and listen to God.  God is not convicting me that there is a problem with the Bible I choose to read.  In the end, I was saved while reading the NIV.  If the KJV is a more accurate translation, it is not the only translation that has a claim to having led thousands of people to Christ.

About these ads

32 Comments

Filed under Bible, Review

32 responses to “Which Version is the Bible? by Floyd Nolen Jones

  1. If you want to know more about why the KJV of the bible is the correct version read: Tranlaters Revived, by: Alexander McClure.

    There should not be any queston then that the 1611 version is the word of God.

    Don

  2. Brad Francis

    I’m puzzled why you don’t see a problem with the great variations in scripture. Psalm 138:2 says ‘…for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.’ Proverbs 3:5 “Every word of God is pure…”.

    The Bible tells us of false Christs and false Christians and a false Church (mystery Babylon) so why would it surprise you if there are false Bibles? God is a God of language. John chapter one tells us his name is ‘The Word’ and in Genesis he confuses the languages ~ in Acts he supernaturally supersedes that confusion (tongues) as a sign to unbelieving Jews. God has inspired the Bible so the question you must ask is did he preserve what he inspired? If the answer to that question is YES then where is it preserved in English? For I have a Bible on my shelf that says in Genesis chapter 1 that a ‘wind from God’ moved on the waters. Did a wind move or was it the Spirit of God? How can ‘every word be pure’ and God’s word exalted above his name when there is such confusion?

  3. Brad Francis

    Send me an e-mail and let me know if you want to sell the book. I’d be happy to purchase it if it’s the latest edition (18th Edition/2004). Thanks, Brad

  4. Brad,

    I definitely agree that there are some paraphrases of the Bible that can be very misleading about the Word of God, such as the example of whether it was a wind that moved over the water or the Spirit of God. I have prayed on this and I have not been convicted that the King James Authorized Version is the only accurate modern translation of God’s Word. I believe that at least the New International Version, the New American Standard Bible, and the Amplified Bible are also accurate modern translations of God’s Word.

    Don

  5. There is no perfect translation. Translation is a difficult issue as language is dynamic and changes over time. It is difficult to put into modern words a meaning that accurately reflects what was intended (which is also a matter of interpretation) in a way that is understandable by people today. There are many judgment calls in translation. It is impossible to do a word for word translation of the Bible from Greek to English or Hebrew to English or Aramaic to English. It just doesn’t work. Translation is a very difficult process and there is a lot of room for error in any given translation. That includes the KJV. I have written a few posts about that here – Posts on Bible Translations from Kingdom Living

  6. Libby

    I haven’t had a chance to read this book by Floyd Nolen Jones, but I have read the section on the Pericope de Adultera, or John 8. It was really helpful in explaining exacly what was going on in this passage. Here is a link to it.

    http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/jones-pericope.html

    I attended Floyd’s Bible study for many years as a child, and I really love his style of teaching. I haven’t read the book, so I don’t know how easy this one is to read, but to listen to him, he really holds your attention and is very fun, and very thorough. Here is a link to some of his recorded lessons, many of them probably recorded when I was a kid. Some one has recorded them onto MP3 format.

    http://www.floydjones.org/tapes.html

  7. John Held

    Don,

    I am impressed that you worked your way through Floyd’s book. I have known Dr. Jones for almost 30 years (Wow! That’s hard to believe!), and reading what he writes can be challenging (at least for me).
    Also, I understand your comment about “the King James-only belief”. I do not like people say “the King James is the only TRUE Bible,” because they do not understand the issues involved.
    At any rate, I fear you have missed the entire point of the book you read part of. Floyd is not arguing that the King James is God’s word, but that the underlying Greek text (Textus Receptus) is God’s word.
    When Floyd compares texts, the point is not about the “translation” (which is a totally separate problem), but about the original Greek texts. What Floyd is trying to argue is that the Greek text that other modern translations are based upon is not correct.
    And finally, he is correct when he asserts that the only English translation of the Textus Receptus readily available is the King James version (or New KJV). At least, I know of no other English translation.
    Now, the REAL question is whether or not Floyd is correct asserting that the Textus Receptus is really the only example of God’s Word. I’m afraid that I do not have a clear answer to that question. But I’m working on getting one. If you are interested, I’ll let you know when I find it.
    Shalom,
    John

    • David

      John
      I just read your statement from last year. Did you reach a conclusion about the TR and what did you base that conclusion upon? Thank you

  8. I just posted again about this book. Please read my new post here.

  9. David Miser

    At the World Net Daily website, Farah as he often does ,is promoting “Chronology of the Old Testament (Book) ,” for people that cannot understand the Bible. Farah has a habit of promoting authors that seem to have special revelations of Scripture to enlighten the unwashed ignorant Christians in the world. People like Nolen Jones of course do not provide any way to contact them, as they are usually unwilling to defend their works. But, my problems is this, it appears Almighty God is impotent to produce a written Word that is understandable to even the most ignorant Christian, once again He seems to need a Priestly elite to tell people what God really meant. Well who wants to serve such a stupid, incompetant, impotent God that is such a failure at making His Will and Way know to His children, That is a pretty pathetic God wouldn’t you say?

    • David,
      I struggled with whether I should approve your comment. I am especially disturbed by your blasphemous rhetoric, but I want you to know that what you have said matters to me. In a nutshell, this is what I have learned: We do not need a priestly elite. Man has interfered with the LORD’s plan for His followers. You can know His Will and His Way, but you must seek it from Him, not from man. My God is not pathetic. He loves even you. Don’t sneer.
      Grace & Peace to you,
      Don

    • David

      I found your 2009 comment appropriate after a brief introduction to Jones by a friend who says I should throw out my NIV. I wonder about the PhD. Do we know if the degree is earned and from where and in what academic field?

      • Greg

        David you just made scholarship your final authority…that really is the issue when you boil this down. The scary conclusion, if you draw it out, is the Bible is subject to change pending the future discovery of better MSS than the Alexandrian MSS. Instead the issue should be what does God’s Word say? A compelling issue for me was the Alexandria vrs Antioch argument. The Bible has alot to say about these geographic locations but I never hear supporters of the Critical text dealing with it. Antioch-filled with teachers ministering, fasting, and separated for a missionary work (Acts 13:1-4), disciples first called Christians (Acts 11:26), Nicolas full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom and a proselyte of Antioch (Acts 6:5), the base of missionary operations in the early church (Acts 14:26), who incidently ‘turned the world upside down’ (Acts 17:6-7), a hub of Bible study (Acts 15:35). Alexandria Egypt on the other hand gets its first mention in Acts 6:9 where they’re ‘disputing with Stephen’ a man said to be ‘full of the Holy Ghost’ in v5. Next Apollos in Acts 18:24-26 knows only the baptism of John and needed Priscilla and Aquila to ‘expound unto him the way of God more perfectly”. This is telling because the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 the apostles nail down salvation by grace through faith (Acts 15:11) and nearly TEN years later in Acts 18 Alexandria doesn’t have clear teaching on the gospel. Paul is a prisoner in an Alexandrian ship (Acts 27:6 and later in Acts 28:11). Those ships were named Castor and Pollux–look them up in Strongs and you’ll see they’re ‘sons of Jupiter’ and were gods in Greek and Roman mythology. It’s all in the Bible, but we’d rather trust someone with a PHD as I fear David’s comment illustrates. Please study this out my brothers and sisters in Christ. 1 Thess 2:13 is a promise we can’t afford to miss. God bless you all.

    • Errol Abeyratne

      Dear David,
      I’m from Colombo – Sri Lanka. I would like to get in touch with you. My e mail is – hisplace@******.lk

      Errol

  10. David Miser

    I see that the moderator here deleted my post, that does not seem very Christian to me, but that’s not very important!

    • David,
      I didn’t delete your comment. Comments are moderated, which means after you leave a comment, you have to wait for me to log in and notice that you have left a comment. Then, I have to review the comment to determine whether it should be approved. I have approved your comment now, despite serious misgivings about some of the things you say.
      Goodwill,
      Don

  11. David Miser

    It wasn’t blaphemy at all! I was trying to demonstrate, in a way that was deliberately shocking, how the idea, often promoted by WND and the Christian authors involved there, in intimating that these authors have gained special insights into spiritual matters and that average people need their books to understand Holy Writ, thus implies that God was/is wholly incapable, in the Bible, of conveying His Word and Will to all His children clearly. Such implications are a denial of the very existence of God, making Him appear, falsely, to be unable to operate or communicate with His children unless He has special messengers.

    WND said, “Having trouble making sense of the Bible story?” So, it implies God was somehow unable to write His Word in a way that average Christian could make sense of it, unless they get this book, which improves upon Scripture! Which means God needs Nolen Jones to make the Bible story understandable.

    My words were thus saying, if the former thing is true about Nolan’s book, then the latter must be the truth as well. Not that I believe God is insufficient in any way, shape or form, but that such self promotions and self righteous claims are themselves blasphemous. If the Nolan Jones work is an aid, as are works like Matthew Henry’s Commentaries, “The Mackintosh Treasuries,” etcetera then fine, but to say they are somehow fresh Divine revelations or that Christians are ignorant of the Bible without them, is, to my way of thinking, an open door to deception.

  12. David Miser

    Actually, the Bible – Scriptures we use are but the written testimony about the Living Word of God, which is Jesus Christ! Absent a relationship with Christ through the Spirit, the book we call the Bible can and has caused all sorts of mischief. Jim Jones knew the written Word and he led hundreds of souls into Perdition’s Flames with him. Satan knows it better that anyone!

    The written document we call the Bible is not really the Word of God of itself, only Jesus is the Word and thus only as He teaches us about Himself in the Bible by His Spirit is it the Word of God.

    Martyrs throughout history and the early Church had no Bible at all, or at best scraps, small pieces of the Bible. But, they had the Living Word, which can teach them all that is necessary for Salvation and Life directly. On the other hand, we should rejoice we in the West have so many choices.

    The late Walter Martin said he felt the Berkely Version, The New International Version and the King James were all close enough to the original texts that any or all of them in God’s Hands would be useful in our spiritual journey.

    • Sam Reckart

      Hmmm… someone has been sipping the wine of Karl Barth…

      Let me help you, please, you need it! The bible IS the word of God. Hebrews 4:12 ; 2 Timothy 3:16 to name a few….

      Your neo-orthodox, Rob Bell, Emerging church refuse will certainly bring the judgment of the Lord at some point in your life. Your amorphous approach to the inerrancy of Scripture is nothing more than the cancer of the dialectic, as is diaprax…

      As to the versions of Scripture, the KJV is a conflation of the Beza 1598, and the Vulgate… I prefer the Alexandrian strain myself. The issue is not the “versions” but a faulty understanding of the nature of inerrancy. A great place to start would be D. A. Carlson’s short video on the subject. This should get your thoughts moving in the right direction :0

      As to the KJV- onlyists arguments? – Specious! As to its adherents? Supercilious!!!

      blessings,
      Sam

  13. Guenevere

    Few alleged Christians seem to wonder WHY there are umpty-ump Bibles on the market (‘market’ and ‘money’ being two operative causes in this case) and are content to sit and let their pastor’s opinions guide their life, instead of the Holy Spirit.

    Satan twisted the words of God very effectively in the Garden with Eve; actually it was his first frontal assault against humanity. The assault has continued unabated to this present day. Yes, perhaps a person can be saved reading the Not Inspired Version (NIV) or any other version. However; it is in spite of and not because of the blatant textual errors. I never read the Bible and got saved a la Saul of Tarsus!

    God is sovereign and has already foreknown who are His heirs of salvation, and this took place before the foundation of the world was made. Nothwithstanding, the pure unadulterated words that the prophets of old penned under the direction, instruction and inspiration of the Holy Spirit are found in what we call the 1611 King James Bible. Anyone professing Christ ought to at least show a modicum of curiosity on the subject of ‘which version’.

    God promised to preserve His word and His saints, and He cannot lie. The danger in the tainted texts is that they have spun off myriad cults and have encouraged extra- biblical authority while undermining doctrinal purity.

    The omission of the word ‘blood’ in Colossians 1:14 in the NIV is rank blasphemy. The life of the flesh is in the blood, and from the liberation of the Jews from Egypt to the precious flow on Calvary’s tree, THE BLOOD is THE POWER. Christ’s Blood atonement cannot be diminished by pernicious, unsaved sinners who wish to omit mention of the blood in their ‘modern’ versions.

    That verse is only one in a sea of a multitude of gross errors… promulgated by wicked, adulterated texts. If you think all the versions are the same, you are in Satan’s ballpark.

    To the guy who posted that God has not convicted him to stop reading the NIV I have this to say: It is quite probable that you would resist the conviction even if you were even remotely aware that it was taking place!

    Jesus warns about adding and subtracting from His Book. So, He is revealing to us that this very addition and subtraction would be begin and be ubiquitous, growing ever stronger. This, along with the apostasy of professed Christians.

    Brother Floyd, keep standing for the faith once delivered unto the saints, and see you and Sister Shirley tonight at study.

  14. Guenevere

    P.S. I refuse to entertain any pastor or preacher , no matter how sincere, who does not teach from the 1611. I got to this place by the Spirit’s guidance, which naturally led me to Brother Floyd’s study sessions. Tinkering around with Holy Writ is a dangerous pastime. I praise Christ that indeed, the truth has set me free. There is no comparison to the 1611 in merely language alone. The majesty and power that flow from the pages has taught my heart to fear. The ‘versions’ are flat and lifeless!

  15. Guenevere

    To MattDabbs: what is impossible for men is possible with God. I don’t think He had one bit of trouble translating His word into English in the 1611. The only interference was from the devil, and He overcame him. We have a perfect translation of the original manuscripts, just as we serve a perfect and unimpeachable Savior. Maybe the God of Scripture is too big for you?

  16. David Miser

    Guenevere: While I can agree with much that you have written, you seem a little angry about the whole thing.

    The Church of Jesus Christ prospered in every way for many centuries without a Bible at all as we know it today, only letters (Epistles) and some of them circulating at that time were not of God at all. Even after the first canon of Scripture for the New Testament Church was approved, it was only in the hands of a priestly class for many more centuries. It wasn’t until Guttenberg in the middle of the 1400’s that others could have a collected manuscript, but even then only a very few wealthy people could afford one.

    The point is this, the Word is a living Person and He is able to build His corporte Church and individual members thereof by His Spirit whether with short letters, sometimes in some countries only scraps held by local pastors, and in prison without any written word at all, only by the testimony of His saints and in rare cases only as told by His angels.

    While I too agree that the KJV is incredibly accurate and most faithful to the most ancient documents we have found and is a most valuable resource, the Berkely Bible, the Geneva Bible and the NIV can be of great value in building the faith of members of the Body of Christ as well, by the Power of the Holy Spirit. So, to demand only the KJV elevates that version to the same status of Christians of earlier times that said if it was good enough for Paul and Silas it was good enough for them.

    After all what did the early Church have to guide them? They had the Epistles floating about as letters, but no Bible, no access to study and meditate even on the Old Tesament or all of the Epistles available. Christianity is fellowship with God in Christ, by His Spirit, Who is able to guide us into all Truth should we be in prison, in total darkness and chains. If a translation we use is not perfect, the Word is a Divine Tapestry and every Truth is testified in the mouths of 2-3 witnesses or more that the Lord might ground us in each truth, no matter how men, even those that are deceived might want to mislead us.

    Jesus is our all-in-all, the first-to-the-last, the Alpha-to-Omega of all Divine Truth and as we have intimate fellowship with Him, we can trust Him to guide us into all Truth and deliver us from all evil. You know that after our Salvation the entirety of all Truth is in this: Love God with all our hearts, mind and soul and our neighbor as ourselves, and on that path we will walk in the Truth always and perfectly.

  17. William

    Shalom Don,

    After being blessed with enough humility to repent and be baptised I began an ardent effort to learn about my creator and saviour. Although I had a hand-me-down 1868 KJV, I look at it only occasionally to cross check with a NKJV I received as a gift. Being interested in what other bibles had to offer in their commentaries, I purchased an NIV/Message parallel bible, and the NLT. I found the NLT easier to read but I shied away from it when I discovered interpretations rather than an honest translation in places. I retreated to the NKJV after attending a bible study that had a video on the KJV giving it predominance in word for word translations. Not fully being satisfied with the scriptural teaching of the bible study classes I attended, I went to the internet; a world library. Being concerned about Easter’s pagan symbols I began looking for information on Christian Passover and ended up on sabbatarian websites. To my dismay I found the KJV had been concealing 7th day Sabbath keeping in Hebrews 4:9. Then I found my 1868 KJV had a margin note for the word ‘rest’ being ‘sabbath-keeping’. After being challenged by bible classmates with Colossians 2:16-17, I then discovered the word ‘is’ in verse 17 was an add-in. Taking out the word, ‘is’, all of a sudden made the 2 verses understandable grammatically and reversed the understanding of my classmates. During all this investigation I learned of a bible called, THE SCRIPTURES, written by the Institute for Scripture Research. These errors were made clear. Wow!

    http://www.isr-messianic.org/

    All of a sudden the scriptures became much more revealing. My desire to learn the Truth of The Word has been very rewarding. I have come to believe that had I not had that desire, knowing the tools are easily available, I ran the risk of perishing as is written in 2Thes 2:9-12. The accuracy of the scriptures can be verified easily online when a reference to the Hebrew or Greek is needed. I use the Blue-Letter bible website occasionally.

    http://www.blueletterbible.org/index.cfm

    I have enjoyed studying Dr. Floyd N. Jones’ Chronology of the Old Testament. I ended up here by accident looking for a way to advise him of a few typos in his 16th edition.

    May the favor of our Saviour be with you.

    William

  18. Melissa

    1 Cor. 1:10 – Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

    I believe that the “many” different translations have done much damage in that it has spread much confusion. How can we, the body of Christ, be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment if we read from different translations? It’s astonishing how much has been deleted from God’s Word – we are not even talking about difficult words but rather the name of Jesus, etc. It’s all an agenda…to water down the Bible. I came to Christ by reading the Living Bible but over the years I desired “meat” instead of “milk” and purchased the KJV. I have no desire to go back to the other versions.

  19. dominoes7

    “There is no perfect translation. Translation is a difficult issue as language is dynamic and changes over time. It is difficult to put into modern words a meaning that accurately reflects what was intended (which is also a matter of interpretation) in a way that is understandable by people today. There are many judgment calls in translation. It is impossible to do a word for word translation of the Bible from Greek to English or Hebrew to English or Aramaic to English. It just doesn’t work. Translation is a very difficult process and there is a lot of room for error in any given translation. ”

    This post by mattdabs is absolutely correct if man is supposed to preserve the Bible. What is impossible for man, is absolutely possible for God. God promised to preserve his word. The question then becomes, did God keep his promise. If he did, then there would be one Bible, one standard, one honored Bible above all others. There would be no variations. God created the universe, I believe with all my heart that he is able to create a perfect Bible in English. Nothing is impossible for God.

    I guess the other option is that God did not keep his promise. But, then there would be no way to know if the important verses about salvation are even true. Those verses may also be corrupt as well.

    Follow history and which Bibles God honored. They will always follow the Masoretic text & the TR…which the KJB is one. I will follow God on this.

    Derek

  20. Rev. J. Michael Fahrer

    Dr. Jones has stated his opinion that only the KJV is the only reliable text. This view of Dr. Jones is not unique , and a select few have said the same thing. King James people are emphatic there is only version of the Bible and that is the KJV. That’s their right to believe so. The problem arises when the attack becomes so ugly to damn such a translation like the NASB.

    I find Dr. Jones to be abusive to other Biblical scholars who have more education in Biblical languages than Dr. Jones. Dr. Jones seems to have started his reaearch with the bias and intention to prove the KJV was the only correct version of the Bible.

    I take exception to Dr. Jones, and leaving verses or parts of verses blank in the NASB and NIV in comparing the KJV to these verses. When a verse is not in the earliest manuscripts the NASB puts the verse in brackets like this in [ ]. The NIV has notes that say the earliest manusripts do not have this verse. Dr. Jones fails to mention this fact, and this is a serious error not to inclued this in his criticisim of the NASB and the NIV. Dr. Jones has failed to mention that the NIV is a Dynamic Translation (thought for thought). The NASB is a Word for Word translation.. The KJV does have some places that can be challenged as well. The KJV has had several revisions, so would Dr. Jones suggest we go all the way back to the very first printing? I think not, because the English is primitive along with spelling and punctuation in its earliest developement. Few people would be willing to struggle in sounding out the words that seem like a language from somewhere else.

    So If someone is content with the KJV I am happy for them. But please have the dignity and fortitude to respect the solid, accurate, scholarly, Biblical translation such as the NASB. An open mind is required to carefully search out the facts. In my humble opinion Dr. Jones investment of time to find fault in the NASB, was spent trying to prove the KJV was to make the claim the only translation of the Bible that was not courrupted is the KJV. Dr. Jone has twisted the facts to have his view of the KJV seem correct. How very sad, Dr. Jones has smeared the excellent accurate translation of the NASB. The NIV being a thought for thought is excellent for a Dynamic translation.

    This debate will never end, and in many ways my defence of the NASB and the NIV is futile.

    • Rev Fahrer,

      I think you have struck the exact reason I was so offended by Dr. Jones’ text. Thank you for your thoughtful comment.

      Don

    • I am not writing do defend any one translation of the Bible, certainly not the KJV. But in all this exchange of opinions about numerous translations, I am surprised that none of the respondents mentions the Jerusalem Bible. I agree with your evaluation, that Dr. Jones has “twisted the facts” to fit his argument. He has put the cart before the horse.

  21. There are a few issues relative to the Bible version controversy that were not addressed above. First of all, no one has spoken of the character of Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort, the two British Anglican intellectuals who gave us the text on which all modern Bibles are based. Both men have been dead only a little over 100 years and their biographies are available, along with a wealth of information about the men from many sources. If we’re going to accept their text, it might behoove us to examine their lives, especially their views. If you take the time to do so, I can promise that you will be shocked.

    Secondly, we might want to learn about the Vaticanus manuscript on which W&H based most of their work. This will be very difficult of course, because Vaticanus is locked up in the Vatican, protected from questioning eyes. It was only made available to W&H for a little while. We might wonder why. The other main source used by W&H is Sinaticus, that Egyptian wreck of a manuscript that not only contradicts Vaticanus but itself as well. A very few other sources were used, but Vaticannus was the chief source.

    The Revised Standard Version of 1901 was based on W&H’s text, but both the RSV and the W&H text were rejected by most Protestant denominations until the 1950’s when the National Council of Churches got involved in promoting the new text. Since then, the W&H text has become the basis for every new version. The argument that W&H’s text was based on “older and better” sources has been successfully rebutted, but that fact has gotten lost in the rush by Christendom to own the newest and “best” version. Accuracy of the underlying text is apparently far down the list when Christians purchase their Bibles.

    Another factor to consider is that all new Bible versions are copyrighted. That means that a new version MUST change a certain number of words in order to keep from infringining on other copyrights. This sends editors of new versions in search of synonyms or near-synonyms which almost invariably have the effect of corrupting the text. The KJV is the only version which may legally be copied, published, and printed without copyright infringement. Technically, the English Crown owns the copyright to the KJV, but they do not require attribution.

    I’ll admit that the KJV is a little hard to read and understand in places, but that doesn’t give the English-speaking Church the right to discard it in favor of versions that may be easier to read but are not faithful to the true text. First John 4:1 tells us to “test the spirits” (by examining what they say about Jesus) so that we will not be deceived by false prophets. Whereever the W&H text of the new versions changes the text relative to Jesus, it usually diminishes both Him and His saving work to some degree. That fact alone should be enough to raise the antenna of serious Christians.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s