Why The KJV Is The Better Bible. Part 1

 January 2023

During my journey to get right with God, I went to a Bible bookstore and asked about a Bible. At that time, I had no idea there was more than one option. Why would there be multiple Bibles? What was recommended to me was a NASB (New American Standard Bible), which I used for many years. My NASB Ryrie Study Bible was my go-to Bible for a long time.

Some years later, I began to study more about the history of our Bibles. As a result, I switched from the NASB to the 1611 King James Version for specific reasons. These reasons might not persuade you to change to the KJV, and I understand that. Many people are curious about why someone would use an old English Bible when there are hundreds of modern Bibles available. What they often don’t realize is that modern Bibles differ in many significant ways from the 1611 KJV. Here are the main reasons I transitioned from a modern translation to the AV (authorized version or 1611 KJV).

1. Creation versus evolution

I believe this is the watershed issue for the Church of Christ and civilization. Did God create the heavens, the earth, and all life, or did all these things just evolve by chance? If God created everything, then He owns it. As the owner, God is both the lawmaker and the judge. If evolution is true, then there is no divine lawmaker and judge to whom humanity is accountable. People will do what is right in their own eyes. However, the Bible clearly proclaims that God is our creator, lawgiver, and judge. Bottom line, it is really a question about the accuracy and authority of the Bible. Can the Bible be trusted? If the days in Genesis chapter 1 are not literal solar days (approximately 24-hour days) as the Bible indicates, then it clearly calls into question the accuracy and authority of the Bible.

If the creation account in scripture is not accurate and can be interpreted in many contradictory ways, then why can’t the morality of the Bible be interpreted similarly? Isn’t that actually happening today? For example, fornication, homosexual sex, adultery, and many other sins are no longer viewed as sins. Nowadays, we are calling what was once considered evil good, and what was once called good is now deemed evil. Many professing Christians have reinterpreted much of scripture’s morality because they’ve questioned the words starting from the first book of the Bible, Genesis. Many churches have done this as well. For instance, unsurprisingly, the Roman Catholic Church accepts evolution and considers the early chapters of Genesis to be myth. Since the Roman Catholic Church is often incorrect about biblical truth, this is not surprising.

The Hebrew word for day is the word “yom.” Clearly, yom can mean more than a 24-hour day, and the context of scripture determines the correct interpretation.

Without any doubt, the context in Genesis chapter one refers to seven literal 24-hour days. When the word “yom” is combined with the phrases or words “evening, morning, number, and day,” it always denotes a 24-hour period. I believe this is true in over 400 cases in the Old Testament.

Let me share a passage from scripture where the word yom is used, and it doesn’t mean a literal 24-hour day. In Genesis 2:4, it says, “These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.” In this verse, “day” refers to a period of time rather than a 24-hour day. Isn’t that obvious? There is no contradiction with Genesis chapter one. You will notice that Genesis 2:4 does not include the words or phrases “evening, morning, number, day,” which indicate a literal 24-hour day. The context clearly refers to a span of time, not just a single day.

Let us compare the NASB with the KJV to illustrate the problem. In my NASB Ryrie Study Bible, it reads:

“And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening, and there was morning, one day.” Genesis 1:5, NASB

“And God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening, and there was morning, a second day.” Genesis 1:8, NASB

The King James version of the same two verses reads as follows:

“And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night, and the evening and the morning were the first day.” Genesis 1:5, KJV

“And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.” Genesis 1:8, KJV

Is it not clearly obvious that there is a big difference between “the first day” and “one day”? How many “one day’s” can there be? There could be a trillion or more. And how many “the first day” can there be? Only one, “the first day”. How many “a second day” can there be? Almost an infinite number, isn’t that correct? And how many “the second day” can there be? Just one “the second day”. Why have most new Bibles changed the KJV translation?

The reason the KJV Bible was compromised and rewritten with these changes is to accommodate what some call science. Macro evolution is a theory proposed by many, but not all, scientists. In fact, there are numerous theories, none of which are both scriptural and scientific.

It is true that books have been written that cast doubt on the KJV rendering of scripture as it relates to the creation of the universe. One book, in particular, was written before Charles Darwin published his infamous book. The book I am referring to questioned the age of the earth, suggesting that the earth was not just 6,000 years old but possibly 75,000 years old (today some say it is 4.3 billion years old and the universe is 18 billion years old). The author (Charles Lyell, 1833) created “evidence” by manufacturing the supposed geologic column and the dates attributed to this column. The dating of the geologic column presupposed a much older earth and universe, thereby casting doubt on the KJV of the Bible (earth is about 6,000 years old). This new dating was done well before any radioisotope dating methods were discovered, starting in the mid-1900s, I believe. This is an important fact, but it’s still immaterial because none of these dating methods actually work. All of them make critical and unprovable assumptions. That comment may surprise you, but that is a subject for another time. As a result of the supposed geologic column dates, theologians began to make compromises to the Bible so that it appeared the Bible and science didn’t conflict. As a result, we have the altered readings in Genesis 1, for example. These new translations allow for a variety of “scholarly” explanations about how and when the universe came into existence that accommodate the theory of evolution and a very old earth. This provided a way to incorporate the theory of macroevolution into the Bible. For instance, theologians devised the gap theory, the day-age theory, the progressive creationism theory, the theistic evolution theory, and others. The new Bibles permit all of this compromise, whereas the KJV does not.

Even Charles Ryrie corrects the NASB in his footnote by stating that a better translation would be “day one.” Yet “day one” is not a better translation. “The first day” that is used in the KJV is the better translation. And people have believed that reading and literal understanding since God created man around 6,000 years ago. It is only recently that Christians began to question the account given to us in scripture. Up to the 18^th century, Christians and almost everyone else believed the KJV of creation.

These theologians, some of whom are known and loved around the world, compromised the Word of God to accommodate what they thought was credible and proven science. They want to be seen as reasonable and rational intellectuals who accept the “findings” of science, even if that means they must abandon the plain teaching of the Bible. This is especially true if they can figure out a way to reinterpret or reword what is written so that alternative explanations can be offered. What they fail or refuse to realize is that most of science is ever-changing, especially as it relates to this subject. Also, evolutionary science is not observational science at all. At best, it is speculative or “best guess” science. Some call it historical science, which is not based on experimentation or observation, which is fundamental to the scientific method.

Intentionally or unintentionally, these Christian thought leaders have created distrust in the credibility and authority of the Word of God by their capitulation to ever-changing speculative science. And there is no reason to do so, as evolution is unprovable and unreasonable. And Biblical creation has much evidence to support it scientifically.

Francis Bacon was correct: “men prefer to believe what men prefer to be true”. Not what is true, but what they would like to be true. Many proponents of Darwinian evolution, in its various forms, have admitted as much. To reject evolution is to posit a creator and a judge, which is unthinkable to those who don’t want God telling them what they can’t do.

Many volumes have been written and many more will be written on the subject of creation versus evolution. My purpose is to explain one reason why I use the KJV of the Bible. To be accurate, I believe later translations or editions of the NASB, as well as other updated translations, changed back to the KJV rendering of Genesis 1. But how much harm and mischief did they cause during the interim period with their faulty and unnecessary translation? And how many that did change back, footnote it in such a way as to cast doubt on the meaning of six literal days?

One last comment about the word for day in Genesis 1. There are two places in the Bible where the 10 Commandments are given. In Exodus 20, God gave Moses the 10 Commandments. The Sabbath commandment was based on the creation account given in Genesis 1. In six days, God created the heavens and the earth, along with all that is in them, and God rested on the seventh day. For many centuries, and including today, the Jews and others have observed the seventh-day rest (from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset). Clearly, the days are literal 24-hour days. The Bible itself confirms the meaning of Genesis 1 and the creation account. It can have only one interpretation, that of a literal day, unless Exodus 20 is also incorrect.

• 1 John 5:7-8

“And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth. For these three that bear witness: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and three are in agreement.” NASB, Ryrie Study Bible.

“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth; the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” KJV.

It angered me when I discovered this rewrite of the Word of God. Verse 7 was omitted from the NASB, and Ryrie didn’t even bother to footnote that the NASB omitted this verse entirely. Usually, such omissions or changes are at least footnoted when the NASB or some other modern translation corrects the KJV text.

Read these two translations carefully, and you will notice that verse 7 is an excellent testimony to the deity of Christ (which is denied by some) and the triune nature of the Godhead, all of which is eliminated in the NASB. What does the Bible say about those who add to or take away from the Word of God? Let me give you a clue, it is not a blessing.

          And why would the NASB, NIV, and other Bible translations delete this passage and other KJV renderings from their translation? That is the next topic of discussion.

• Oldest is the best, or is it? What about Mark 16:9-20?

The following quote is taken from my Ryrie Study Bible as it pertains to Mark 16:9-20. Ryrie says, “These verses do not appear in two of the most trustworthy manuscripts of the NT, though they are part of many other manuscripts and versions. If they are not part of the genuine text of Mark, the abrupt ending at verse 8 is probably because the original closing verses were lost. The doubtful genuineness of the verses 9-20 makes it unwise to build a doctrine or base an experience on them (especially vv 16-18).”

If this doesn’t get you to question the credibility of the entire Word of God, I would be amazed. Ryrie says this passage is not credible, and the abrupt ending, if verses 9-20 are false, is lost to us. In other words, we do not have the ending of the gospel according to Mark. I wonder if different parts of the Bible are lost to us? I wonder how many other passages of the Bible are inaccurate like these passages? I thought God promised to preserve His word for us. How will we ever know if what we are reading is really and truly the complete Word of God? The KJV contains these verses of scripture with no qualification at all.

This brings us to another reason why I use the KJV, which has verses 9 through 20. I will come back to Ryrie’s comment about “two of the most trustworthy manuscripts” not containing these verses 9-20.

• Psalm 12:6-7

“The words of the LORD are pure words; as silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times. Thou O LORD, wilt keep them; thou wilt preserve him from this generation forever.” NASB.

“The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever.” KJV.

Do you see the difference? The NASB says that the LORD will preserve “him,” not His words (them), from that generation forever. The subject matter is the Word of God, not a person. The NASB has altered the KJV so that the Bible doesn’t say that God will preserve His words forever. What a travesty of translation from “two of the most trustworthy manuscripts”. Again, how can we trust that we do have the whole Word of God, or is our Bible just a collection of uninspired men’s words? The KJV tells me that I can trust that God has and will preserve His words forever. Forever means: forever. We will now look at another reason why I use the KJV of the Bible by examining the assumption that the older the manuscript, the better.

• Older is the best, or is it?

What is Ryrie talking about when he says that “two of the most trustworthy manuscripts” say something other than what the KJV says? He is talking about two of the oldest Greek manuscripts found thus far. They are (Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus (Aleph)), both of which have different renderings than what the translators of the KJV used, which was the Greek text type, Textus Receptus. That suggests that the KJV translators were not aware of these alternative renderings found in these two “superior because they are older” manuscripts. That is not true at all. And without getting into too much detail, these two older manuscripts do not agree with each other in many thousands of instances. And taken together, these two corrupt, but older, forgeries alter the Greek text of the KJV about 13,000 times. And most importantly, older doesn’t mean better.

Generally, older might mean something important, but not when considering the transmission of the Word of God. The material that the Bible was written on, before the printing press and mass production of paper, was much different than what we have today. Scripture from antiquity had a shelf life. Scripture would wear out because of frequent use and require that a new copy be made by hand. Being made by hand meant that there were very few copies of scripture due to the high cost and time required. Much effort and time went into copying the Bible to ensure accuracy.

Dr. Herman C. Hoskier’s unprecedented collation of these two “older and better” manuscripts led him to conclude the following. Dr. Hoskier stated that these two manuscripts in particular, plus their forerunners, with Origen who revised the Antioch text (the KJV Greek text type), are Egyptian revisions of Scripture around 200 to 400 AD. He also states that these readings (two older manuscripts) were not used by Bible believing Christians between 500 and 1881 AD, or for around 1,400 years. Westcott and Hort used these two corrupt and depraved manuscripts almost exclusively to draft a new Greek text for the NT. And all new Bible versions use, to a lesser or greater extent, the Greek NT drafted by these two fake Christian scholars.

The next point is that we have thousands upon thousands of newer (but still ancient) and more reliable copies of scripture in multiple languages. So why would translators use two older manuscripts instead of the numerous thousands of other manuscripts? Might it mean full employment for the professionals, the scholars, and the theologians? Might it have something to do with pride and unbelief? Heaven forbid that it has anything to do with making money by selling multiple versions of the Bible, books, and commentaries. For if the Bible continues to evolve based on discoveries, these professional clerics would then occupy positions where only they could decide which Greek (and Hebrew) rendering is most accurate and what that Greek rendering means. And that’s an entirely new subject for another day. Can we trust their Lexicons?

Back to these two older manuscripts. I already mentioned that they do not agree with each other in thousands of instances, and that should be a big problem. But just as significant is where these two manuscripts were found. Although I have loved ones and friends in the Roman Catholic Church, the fact that these two corrupt manuscripts owe their existence to Rome gives me, and plenty of others, much pause.

I was born and raised a Catholic and attended Catholic school through the eighth grade. After graduating from the university, I left my home state. And when I got right with God, I left the Roman Catholic Church because of its many unbiblical doctrines. I have spent considerable time comparing Catholic doctrine with Biblical doctrines. I have also read much about the history of the Roman Catholic Church. As a result, I have no confidence in the Roman Catholic institution and Vatican leadership. What is being exposed today, the sexual abuse and rampant homosexuality within the Roman Church, for all the world to see, is nothing new within the Roman Catholic Church. It has been going on for many centuries. Only God knows how deep the corruption is. These two older manuscripts owe their existence to the Roman Catholic Church. Therefore, their “authenticity and usefulness” is very doubtful. That subject will need to wait for another time.

Are there any other reasons to doubt the accuracy of the more recent translations of the Bible, such as the NIV, NAB, NASB, the NJB, the NRSB, the NKJV, the Message Bible, and the Living Bible? I realize the last two are paraphrases. I suggest that you buy a Parallel Study Bible and conduct your own research. Let me give you an example.

• I Timothy 3:16

“And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness; God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory” KJV.

“And great and important and weighty, we confess is the hidden truth-the mystic secret-of godliness. He (God) was made visible in human flesh, justified and vindicated in the Holy Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the nations, believed on in the world, and taken up in glory” Amplified Bible.

“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” NIV.

“And by common confession great is the mystery of godliness: He was who revealed in the flesh, was vindicated in the Spirit, beheld by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on the world, taken up in glory” NASB.

Now you tell me which version is easier to read and understand? Which version more clearly attests to the fact that God was manifest in the flesh?  In other words, that Jesus Christ is God. Only the parallel Bible parenthetically mentions that “he” is God. The KJV said it in fewer words and much more clearly than any of the other translations.

There are many other examples I could provide for why I switched to the KJV. Admittedly, some of the language in the KJV is more difficult to understand. However, all it requires is an older dictionary or a smartphone dictionary app to quickly find the definition and pronunciation of any word.

Like ever-changing science, these other translations of the Bible are ever-changing based on “new” findings and “new” scholarship. But God said He would preserve His word forever. I choose to believe Him. If the KJV is not accurate, then the English-speaking church from about 1611 AD to around 1900 AD, when Westcott and Hort gave us a new underlying Greek NT text for the Bible, did not have, for around 300 years, nor do we have now, the real Word of God. Even today, that would be true.

Please don’t get me started on Westcott and Hort! I have found little evidence to lead me to believe that either of these two “Christian” scholars was born again followers of Christ, and yet all other translations have been based on their work. Their new Greek text, replacing the Greek text of the KJV, has corrupted the new Bibles and done untold harm, in my not highly regarded opinion.

In Jesus’s time, Jews relied on the Pharisees, Sadducees, and scribes to help them understand and apply the Word of God. Muslims turn to the Imam to tell them what they need to know and do. Catholics look to the Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, and local priests for guidance on what to do and when. Protestant churchgoers depend on Biblical scholars, Greek professors, theologians, or well-educated pastors and teachers to tell them what to do and when. But Jesus said that if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the ditch.

Let us never forget that the religious leaders (scholars and experts) of Jesus’ time were responsible for killing Him. How much wicked advice has been given by professional religionists over the centuries and still today? We see a growing number of gay theologians, not to mention scores of liberal seminaries, pastors, and priests who either do not believe the Word of God at all or at least do not believe significant parts of it. They think they are above the Word and can make professional scholarly adjustments to the Bible, like the KJV, based on current scholarship. Do not entrust your soul to some man who believes he is a Biblical expert and thinks he can alter the Word of God when it suits him. Think for yourself. My recommendation is to look into these matters.

I have given you six reasons why I use the KJV of the Bible. I could write a large book on why the KJV is the better Bible, but that has already been done by others much more gifted and qualified than I am. These are just a few reasons why I switched to the KJV. You may not be convinced. That is between you and God. These six items convinced me to switch, but there are many more that must go unnoticed for now. At a minimum, you should question and compare your translation with the KJV before you reach a final decision on what you are going to believe.

——————————————————————————————–

Additional information that may be helpful as to the origin and transmission of the Word of God. Primarily, I used a book written by Dr. Jack Moorman, “Forever Settled”. This is one of some books that convinced me that I had not heard the truth regarding how we came by our Bible and which translation is the most trustworthy. This report barely scratches the surface and is not meant to be anything but a very brief summary of a few key points.

There are two streams from which we get the Bible. 1) The Received text carried in Hebrew and Greek began with the apostolic churches, which were preserved by believers (Church at Pella in Palestine, Syrian Church of Antioch, Italic Church in northern Italy, Gallic Church in southern France, and the Celtic Church in Great Britain, the pre-Waldensian and Waldensian Churches of the Reformation). This text in different languages is the text of the KJV. Many thousands of early texts are extant and in basic agreement. 2) The second stream has a minimal number of manuscripts by comparison. These come from the West or the Roman Catholic Church. It includes influences from Eusebius and Origen, including Constantine’s push in the fourth century. The two most well-known and used are Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus (Aleph).

Erasmus divided all the Greek manuscripts into two classes: those that agree with the eastern stream and those that agree with the western stream, the Roman Catholic Church. He gave us the New Testament in Greek, which the Reformers used in the 16^th century.

We did not get our English Bible from the Roman Catholic Church, as many Catholics believe. Rome attempted to eliminate the eastern text or corrupt it. Rome went to great lengths to keep the Bible out of the hands of the laity for many centuries. Much more should be said on this subject, but that will need to wait for another time.

John the Apostle was probably the last of the apostles to die, and he participated in collecting all the early writings, which we call the New Testament. While he lived, false teaching was, for the most part, stopped or at least minimized. When he died, false teachers began immediately to alter the Word of God and created “better” translations of the texts. Then, under the iron hand of Constantine, the Roman ruler, he adopted a Bible which combined the true and the false into one.

The names associated with this early corruption are Justin Martyr, Tatian, Clement of Alexandria (Egypt), and Origen.

Early Bibles in Greek and other languages

Not only did God promise to preserve His word, but He did it through other languages, beyond Greek. Below is a list of those Bibles.

• Old Latin Version, the Italic, no later than 157 AD. Written in Antioch by missionaries to Africa. For 900 years, this was used and was replaced when Latin ceased to be a living language.
• Syriac Peshitta. The virtual center of early Christianity was in Antioch, an important city in Syria. “The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch”. Acts 1:26. This Bible, even today, is very close to the Received Text or Authorized Version (KJV).
• The Latin Vulgate of Jerome. For about 1,000 years, the western part of Europe was largely unaware of the Greek language because the Papacy did not want the East’s Greek text, language, science, philosophy, etc, to be taught and available. The RCC wished to control the text of the Bible and determine what it taught and how it was to be interpreted. This thinking and control brought about the Dark Ages (476 AD to 1453 AD). The Pope wanted Jerome to create a Latin, not Greek NT, that was as close as possible to the corrupt Bible created and used by Constantine.

Rome used Jerome but was not a puppet. He recognized that seven books -Tobitt, Wisdom, Judith, Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, 1^st and 2^nd Maccabees-did not belong in the Bible. Nevertheless, the Pope insisted on their inclusion. They are found in the Latin Vulgate and the Douay Bible today, as far as I know. Jerome, because of his education, was an opponent of the Greek Vulgate (KJV), and that is why the Pope chose him for this work.

• The Egyptian Coptic Version
• The Ethiopic Version
• The Arabic Version
• The Armenian Version
• The Georgian Version
• The Gothic Version
• The Slavonic Version

Outline of the English Bible

Before Christ, England was settled by people from other areas, such as Spain and northwestern France. The first invaders of England were the Celts in the 700s. One tribe of Celts, the Gaels, settled in the western and mid-northern areas of the island. These people worshiped native gods and their priests were known as Druids.

Roman influence. Just before the advent of Christ, the Roman Caesar invaded and conquered France first and then England. In AD 3, Claudius conquered Britannia (England). Rome ruled England for 400 years.

German influence. In the early 400s, Rome left England to defend itself against Germanic invaders. With Rome gone, England was then invaded by Scots, but especially the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes (Germanic peoples). Around 500 AD, the Roman Pope sent Augustine to England. Thousands of people were converted to the Roman Catholic Church. From this time, through the early 1500s, England was a Catholic nation, and the Latin Vulgate was the official Bible. The exception was the native Britons, who used a better translation of the Bible known as the Old Latin Bible. Augustine helped purge (exterminate) these peoples together with the Saxons and Angles. Dr. Jack Moorman, the author of this book, “Forever Settled,” states the following on page 172. “It is evident from this that the original roots of British Christianity are not Rome but the missionaries who came into that land in the early centuries from Judea or Asia Minor.”

Anglo-Saxon influence. They combined seven kingdoms with one ruling the others. The Danes (Danish kingdom) conquered most of them from the 800s to just over 1,000 AD.

Norman influence. Normandy invaded England and ruled under William the Conqueror. The Normans spoke French, but then blended their language with the Anglo-Saxons.

How did we get the English language? In England, they initially spoke Celtic with different dialects such as Breton, Irish, Scottish, Gaelic, and Welsh. Then, under Roman rule, Latin was also spoken up to 1100 AD.

The origin of English comes from the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes, who were of Germanic influence. Many words came from Latin and a few from Celtic. The Danes also contributed to our English language, as did Greek influence. 1100 to 1450 AD.

Our language continues to take words from other languages, but the English language has remained relatively constant since around 1500 AD. English is the most important or prominent language in the world today and has been the foremost vehicle for disseminating the Word of God throughout the earth.

A few important dates. Most of the dates he gave in his book I left out.

• 35-65 AD. Date of the Cooper Scroll from Cave 3 at Qumran
• 70 AD, Rome destroyed Jerusalem, and the nation of Israel was dispersed
• 100 AD death of John
• 120 AD birth of the Italic Church
• 150 AD date of the Peshitta, the Syrian Bible
• 200 AD, vast numbers of errors in many copies of scripture had already occurred
• 200-450 AD date of active use of Codex B (dating is a soft science at best!)
• 250 AD is the earliest date that Rome sent missionaries west
• 312 AD Constantine becomes emperor of Rome and soon makes Christianity legal and eventually it became the state religion, combining heathen practices with sacred traditions.
• 312-1453 AD Byzantine period, the eastern stream.
• 331 AD Constantine creates a rival Greek Bible.
• 400 AD church fathers up to this date testify that the Traditional text (AV or KJV type) was not only in existence but was the predominant one.
• 450 AD Codex B falls into discredit and disuse.
• 476-1453 Dark Ages.
• 500-1881 AD Codex B abandoned.
• 600 AD Rome sends missionaries to England and Germany. Gregory 1 begins to destroy Waldensian records, which used the pure Word of God.
• 1229 AD Pope orders a crusade against those of Southern France and northern Italy who will not submit to his authority.
• 1300 AD, the Vatican translates the Vulgate into Italian.
• 1400 AD, the Vatican translates the Vulgate into French.
• 1450 AD printing was invented.
• 1453 AD, the end of the Dark Ages, and the Muslims (Turks) destroyed Constantinople, murdered its people, and took thousands of Greek manuscripts west into Europe, bringing in the Renaissance period.
• In the early 1500s AD, Tyndale and Erasmus studied Greek together.
• 1516 AD Erasmus’ Greek NT printed, the first time in 1,000 years.
• 1517 Martin Luther, a Roman Catholic, publishes his 95 theses calling for purity within the Roman Church. He is excommunicated.
• 1517 Jubilee, Mamluk Muslims occupy Israel but lose it to the Ottoman Muslims under Selim 1. For 350 years, the Ottomans controlled the land. See 1867 below.
• 1522 Erasmus’s third edition of the Greek NT, which becomes the foundation for the Textus Receptus.
• 1525 Tyndale NT published, and in 1530 his Pentateuch was published.
• 1633 Erasmus rejects some words/passages from Codex B.
• 1536 Tyndale is burned to death by the Roman Church on August 6.
• 1545-1563 Roman Catholic Church, Council of Trent, which decrees that apocryphal books plus unwritten tradition are on equal ground with the Word of God. This is a colossal error.
• 1550 Stephen’s Greek NT printed.
• 1557 Geneva NT Bible printed in English.
• 1558-1642 AD is called the Elizabethan period and generally regarded as the most crucial era in English literature.
• 1560, the Geneva Bible in English is printed.
• 1582 Jesuit Bible is printed in English at Rheims, France, “to shake out of the deceived people’s hand, the false heretical translations of a sect called Waldenses.” “In the preface…they state that it was not translated into English because it was necessary that the Bible should be in the mother tongue, or that God had appointed the Scriptures to be read of all.”
• 1582 Jesuits dominate 287 colleges and universities in Europe.
• 1587 OT of the Vaticanus is printed.
• 1607 Diodti’s Greek NT appears at Geneva.
• 1609-1610, the complete Jesuit Bible is published at Douay.
• 1611 King James Version of the Bible printed.
• 1620 Puritans leave England with the KJV and Mayflower lands in Plymouth in Dec.
• 1655 Waldenses massacred by the Roman Catholic Church.
• 1733 European nations demand that the Pope suppress the Jesuit order.
• 1789 French Revolution.
• 1813 John William Burgon is born on August 21. He defended the KJV/Textus Receptus against the corruptions of Westcott and Hort.
• 1825-1901 Westcott and Hort lived. They created a new Greek NT from which all new translations have been derived. Primarily, they used the two corrupt and depraved Latin manuscripts associated with Rome.
• 1844 Sinaiticus deposited in a wastepaper basket.
• 1853 Wescott and Hort despise the TR and begin their Greek text because they favor Rome and its system of religious superstition.
• 1859 Tischendorf’s discovery of Sinaiticus on Feb. 4.
• In 1859, Darwin published his Origin of Species and the Preservation of Favored Races. He, along with many others, was a racist and not a Bible believing Christian.
• 1860 Burgon examines Codex B, Sinaiticus.
• 1860 on April 3, Hort endorses Darwin’s book. On October 15, Hort writes to Westcott, “The popular doctrine of substitution is an immoral and material counterfeit.” An honest Christian would never say such a thing!
• 1867 Jubilee. Mark Twain wrote a book, “The Innocents Abroad,” about the land of Israel, setting in motion the events that led to the restoration of the Jewish people in the land promised to them by God, but in the hands of the Ottoman Empire, Muslims. To pay for war debt, the Ottoman Empire first taxes, then sells land.
• 1870 Papal infallibility is declared. That might be a big shock to a Catholic.
• 1870 Vatican and Sinaitic manuscripts become prominent.
• 1881 In May, the revised version is printed.
• 1881 Burgon writes three articles against the Revised version, which was abandoned since 500 AD.
• 1883 Burgon publishes “The Revision Revised.”
• 1890 On March 4, Westcott writes, “No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history-I could never understand how anyone reading them with open eyes could think they did.” More evil thinking from someone professing to be a “Christian” who thought he could correct the Word of God.
• 1914-1918 WW 1.
• 1917 Jubilee, the Balfour Declaration in England established the land for the Jews. “His majesty’s Government views with favor the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of the object…” The Jews take Beersheba back after 2 thousand years, and Jerusalem is liberated, but not under the control of the Jewish people.
• 1941-1945 WW 2, the Jewish holocaust.
• May 14, 1948, Israel becomes a nation again after about 2 thousand years in exile.
• 1967 Jubilee, the resurrected nation of Israel has the 6-day war and Jerusalem is returned to the Jewish nation of Israel.
• In 2017, the President (D. J. Trump) of the USA declared Jerusalem the Capital City of the Nation of Israel and moved the US embassy to Jerusalem.

Conclusion

There is an “expert” at every corner and under every rock claiming to have the truth. This is true in every branch of science and philosophy. It is also true in religion and spiritual matters. How does one know the truth with all these “experts” telling us what to think and what to believe?

The ministry of the Holy Ghost is to impart the truth to us. Scripture says that all who the Spirit of God leads are sons of God. Jesus said My sheep hear my voice and they follow me.

Let the Spirit of God direct you to the truth. Trust that He will do it. Receiving the truth is another matter, but no doubt that God will bring all truth seekers to the truth. Will we embrace the truth when we understand it?

I have given you just a few reasons why I switched from the NASB/other versions to the KJV of the Bible. The sin of unbelief is to refuse to hear, believe, and obey God. I believe that God has preserved His Word just as He promised. The KJV reflects accurately the apostolic stream, contrary to the stream that comes from Rome with its many corruptions. Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God. Every word of God is essential and precise. Remember that God told Moses that he would not enter the promised land because Moses hit the rock instead of speaking to the rock when the Hebrews murmured and complained about no water to drink. God expects us to hear and obey exactly what He declares. We must have the exact Word of God to do so. And I believe we have it in the KJV.

Have you ever noticed that the religious majority is often very wrong? One example is Moses, who sent out 12 men to spy out the promised land. They returned, and 10 gave a bad report to the tribe of Israel, 2 believed God. The ten swayed all the rest to rebel against God, and as a result, all of them spent the next 40 years wandering around in the wilderness. There are countless examples that the remnant is faithful to God. The remnant, by comparison, is a smaller but fully dedicated group that believes and obeys God even if that means they are marginalized, scoffed at, mocked, ridiculed, and persecuted. They prefer the approval of God rather than of man.

Hope and pray this is edifying.