A QUESTION I WAS ASKED:
“You Obviously Highly Respect the Bible, Yet I Notice That You Do Not Back Up the Authority of the King James Bible as Inspired Scripture and You Seem to Prefer the NIV – How Can This Be?”
There Is Rampant MIS-INFORMATION About the KJV Bible Out There.
Okay. Let us insure that we correctly understand this matter since there is a great deal of mis-information out there.
The only divinely-inspired Scriptures were the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts. There is no single perfect or completely ideal translation into any other language! Errors – certainly mostly minor ones – have crept into every translation.
The King James version is not divinely-inspired since it contains its fair share of errors. If one insists that the KJV is inspired, I would have to ask the question, 'Which one?' since the KJV itself has been revised several times since it first appeared. If one should insist that only the first KJV was inspired, I would quickly ask that person if he or she accepted the Apochrypha as inspired Scripture, since the original KJV also contained the Apochrypha. It was later dropped, of course, because Protestants do not accept the apochrypha as divinely-inspired Scripture! We cannot have our cake and eat it here! If we insist that the KJV is the only God-ordained translation into English then you and I should accept the apochrypha as part of inspired Scripture!
Again, while the KJV has many strengths it nevertheless contains many errors and uses a language which nobody speaks any more.
Here are just a few of many other questions which KJV-only advocates should be asking:
If the KJV is divinely-inspired why does it contain margin notes showing other possible renditions of various verses? (these margin notes are often dropped today).
Why does the KJV occasionally use italics if it is a word-for-word perfect translation from the Hebrew and Greek? (Italics are used by the KJV translators where an English word has been inserted which is not a translation of anything in the original manuscripts! Actually, everybody who has studied languages knows that there is no such thing as word-for-word translation perfection!)
Since the revisions of the KJV from 1613-1850 made (in addition to changes in punctuation, capitalization, and spelling) many hundreds of changes in words, word order, possessives, singulars for plurals, articles, pronouns, conjunctions, prepositions, entire phrases, and the addition and deletion of words — which version of the KJV was "inerrant and inspired"? (Don't forget that if you say the first version then you must also accept the apochrypha as inspired Scripture!)
Are we aware that certain portions of the KJV were simply copied from the Roman Latin Vulgate Bible, and that modern Bible translators have access to more reliable and older manuscripts than were generally available in the 17th century??
Robin A. Brace. 2003.
I am not going to take this further here but I am going to provide links to extensive information on this topic. But first of all let me say that if you personally prefer the KJV that is absolutely fine, the error is in claiming that those who do not agree with you are heretics from the Faith. Here are the links:
I Do Not Think the King James Bible is the Best Translation Today
(By Daniel B. Wallace, ThM, PhD)
the KJV Translators Inspired?
(This is a large group of helpful links).
The Bible Becomes An Idol
(By Robert M. Bowman, Jr)
The Real Bible Please Stand Up!
(By Rev James Harrison)
Name of "Jesus" In the Newer Bible Versions!
(Truly eye-opening information!)