Let me get one thing straight before I even start this list. There is nothing wrong with wanting to read the KJV. The problem is when fanatics try to force other people to read it because they have been convinced that the new translations are evil because the translators are “changing” the Bible. However, the King Jame Bible on your shelf right now is not the same as the original 1611 KJV. In fact, the 1611 KJV Bible that you can buy on amazon or any other Bible store is still not the same as the real 1611 King James.
To stay as “pure” as possible in this blog post, I will only quote from my store bought 1611 KJV Bible.
And when hee had apprehended him, hee put him in prison, and deliuered him to foure quaternions of souldiers to keepe him, intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
This is one of the funnest things to point out to people who refuse to read those wretched, evil, new-age translations, and swear by only the good old King Jimmy. Why is it so fun? Because most of them are willing to bet an arm and a leg that the translators of the KJV would NEVER make a mistake like that! This is much to big of a mistake to overlook. And after all, the King James is the perfect word of God in English. At least that is what they were taught to believe. (http://av1611.com/kjbp/faq/errors.html)
But KJV advocate are SOOO intent on proving that that KJV is the only Word of God that they will go out of their way to justify even the smallest mistakes. Here is one guy’s web page trying to explain why Easter was actually the correct translation. You can see right from the start this its going to be special ….
“I will prove to you from the King James Bible that “Easter” is in fact, the proper word to use.”
He’s going to use the KJV to prove that the KJV is correct? That’s called circular reasoning and it’s usually a laughable attempt at but. But that is exactly what he tries to do. He attempts to discuss how a word should be translated…..but never actually looks up what the stinking word was in Greek (the original language). This is like trying to fly to the moon without a rocket ship. How can you prove that something was translated into English correctly if the only thing you look at is the English translation? It’s so completely ludicrous it makes my head hurt.
The Greek word being used is “pascha (πάσχα).” This is the same word used for Passover, in the Greek version of the Old Testament (LXX) that Jesus and the disciples used. Every time they spoke the word Passover in Greek, it was pascha. Therefore, every Greek lexicon ever has had the definition of pascha as Passover. Their is no known recorded use of the word pascha being translated into Easter, outside of the KJV.
Still not convinced? Here is the same word being translated in Matthew 26:2.
Ye know that after two dayes is the feast of the Passeouer, and the Sonne of man is betrayed to be crucified.
Easter as we know it did not exist until the Holy Roman empire started expanding. It’s name is derived from the Germanic Pagan goddess Oestre. The definition that the author looked up in the Webster New World Dictionary was for a Germanic goddess, as it’s listed in the article, “Eastre, dawn goddess, Austro”. This was not a 1st century Roman or Greek figure.
Additionally, the first Christians were Jewish and most still celebrated passover. Even though many Christians did not celebrate the passover, because they were gentiles, there was no Easter celebration developed yet at the time that Peter was imprisoned to be murdered. The Roman empire was many decades away from having any contact with Germanic culture.
Moreover, the context of the passage does not make any sense if we assume Easter was the holiday.
When he saw that this met with approval among the Jews, he proceeded to seize Peter also. This happened during the Festival of Unleavened Bread. 4 After arresting him, he put him in prison, handing him over to be guarded by four squads of four soldiers each. Herod intended to bring him out for public trial after the Passover.
Why would Herod wait until after the gentile Christians celebrated a holiday? That doesn’t make any sense. He was killing Christians, not Jews. He was out to please the Jews, not the gentiles. That is why he waited until he had their full attention, after the passover. Why would a guy killing Christians wait until after they celebrated Easter to kill them in front of the Jews who did not celebrate Easter? The logic is not there.
4. Don’t pay attention to one who is wearing gay clothes (James 2:3)
Even more special than 400 year old translation mistakes is when the actual translation sound like a 5th grader’s joke. That is exactly what happened in James 2:3 when James is giving instructions for people not to give special treatment to those who are dressed in fine clothes. Unless you’re reading the KJV; than it’s gay clothes.
Lets be realistic here. In 1611 gay meant something different. It meant happy, bright, or radiant. Therefore, the translation was not actually that far off. It was a fairly good translation for it’s day. The real issue that the KJV has kept the gay clothes rendering for over 400 years. Why would any Bible translation do this? Why the heck not?! Contextualization means nothing when you have the only God- ordained translation in English, right?
All I’m saying here is that keeping language translation up to date with current trends is necessary is something is going to be relevant. In fact, it’s the whole reason why the KJV was created in the first place.
3. The KJV is rated at a 5th grade reading level and is statistically easier to read than the newer translations?
The first time I heard this idea I thought to myself…..”how exactly was this test performed? Because if this is true than somewhere there are a bunch of 5th graders that have a higher reading level than I do!!”
The facts of the matter are that this is information that has been forwarded over and over again in people’s email. It has NO factual basis. It came originally from charts like the one below.
Like all of the KJVO arguments, this one seems like it could almost have some legitimacy about it. But just a quick look under the hood tells a different story.
The Flesch-Kinkaid reading scale basically calculates scores based on how many words are in a sentence and how many syllables are in a word. The more syllables in a word and the more words in a sentence then the higher it ranks on the “hard to read” scale. Anyone who thinks this test proves that the KJV (against all normal sensibilities) is easier to read than the NIV obviously doesn’t understand what the chart actually represents.
This is why this system has absolutely nothing to do with the readability of the KJV; no one cares how many syllables are in a word or how many words are in a sentence. We want the Bible to use the correct lingo. That is all. Nothing less and nothing more. In fact, most people would love to read a King James Bible…..but they can’t. Because the words are no longer understandable by modern English readers. Many modern readers do not know how to interpret 400 year old English. This is why our English translations must be kept up-to-date.
The preface to the 1611 KJV even states…
But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknown tongue?
2. Modern Bible translations remove the name of Jesus, among other evils
The first time I read about this issue I was legitimately concerned. I thought to myself that if this information is true then the modern translators have some real explaining to do . I did some research and found a table outlining the issue…
|Matt 9:28, Matt 13:36, Matt 17:20,
Matt 17:22, Matt 18:2, Matt 24:2,
Mark 5:13, Mark 7:27, Mark 11:14,
Mark 14:18, Luke 7:22, John 4:16,
John 4:46, John 8:20, John 9:1,
John 11:14, John 11:39, John 20:15,
|2 Cor 4:11||Jesus||his|
|Matt 8:29||Jesus, thou Son of God||Son of God|
|Matt 16:20||Jesus the Christ||the Christ|
|Romans 15:8, 2 Cor 4:6, 2 Cor 5:18||Jesus Christ||Christ|
|Col 1:28, Phile 1:6, 1 Pet 5:10,
1 Pet 5:14
|Luke 7:19, Luke 10:39, Luke 10:41||Jesus||the Lord|
|Acts 19:10, 1 Cor 5:5||Lord Jesus||Lord|
|Rom 16:18||Lord Jesus Christ||Lord Christ|
|1 Cor 16:22, 2 Tim 4:22||Lord Jesus Christ||Lord|
|John 19:38||the body of Jesus||the body|
|Acts 3:26||Son Jesus||servant|
|Rom 1:3||Son Jesus Christ our Lord||Son|
|Acts 7:45, Heb 4:8
(Jesus,Joshua: What’s the difference?)
|Acts 8:37, Romans 16:24, Col 1:2||Jesus||[not present, but it is in the footnote]|
|John 21:21, Acts 9:29, Gal 6:15,
Eph 3:9, Eph 3:14
And then I did what every responsible should do; I did a reverse look up in my NIV Bible for the name of Jesus and found that quite often the KJV removed the name of Jesus where the NIV kept it. Hrrrmm that’s interesting! As it turns out this is one of those arguments that can be turned right back around to defeat the claim it initially made. Never mind the fact that the claim was erroneous to begin with, since the word “he” in the context of the passage is the same as using the name of who ever the subject is……Jesus. Here is the list of the times the NIV uses the name of Jesus and the KJV does not.
|Matt 4:4, Matt 4:19, Matt 4:21,
Matt 8:24, Matt 9:1, Matt 11:20,
Matt 12:22, Matt 12:46, Matt 13:24,
Matt 15:3, Matt 15:10, Matt 15:23,
Matt 15:39, Matt 16:4, Matt 16:23,
Matt 19:8, Matt 19:11, Matt 19:17,
Matt 20:23, Matt 21:10, Matt 21:23,
Matt 22:34, Matt 24:3, Matt 26:20,
Matt 26:23, Matt 26:25, Matt 27:3,
Matt 27:14, Mark 1:10, Mark 1:16,
Mark 1:21, Mark 1:35, Mark 1:38,
Mark 1:43, Mark 2:4, Mark 2:13,
Mark 2:14, Mark 2:23, Mark 3:3,
Mark 3:4, Mark 3:13, Mark 3:23,
Mark 4:1, Mark 4:9, Mark 4:13,
Mark 4:33, Mark 4:28, Mark 5:2,
Mark 5:8, Mark 5:9, Mark 5:18,
Mark 5:32, Mark 5:35, Mark 5:38,
Mark 6:1, Mark 6:6, Mark 6:39,
Mark 6:45, Mark 7:14, Mark 7:24,
Mark 7:31, Mark 7:33, Mark 7:36,
Mark 8:5, Mark 8:15, Mark 8:23,
Mark 8:25, Mark 8:26, Mark 8:30,
Mark 8:33, Mark 9:9, Mark 9:12,
Mark 9:19, Mark 9:21, Mark 9:28,
Mark 9:30, Mark 9:35, Mark 10:1,
Mark 10:17, Mark 10:46, Mark 11:1,
Mark 11:12, Mark 11:27, Mark 12:15,
Mark 12:28, Mark 12:38, Mark 12:43,
Mark 13:3, Mark 14:16, Mark 14:17,
Mark 14:32, Mark 14:61, Mark 15:2,
Mark 15:44, Mark 16:11, Mark 16:12,
Mark 16:14, Luke 4:23, Luke 4:38,
Luke 4:42, Luke 5:12, Luke 5:13,
Luke 5:14, Luke 5:16, Luke 5:20,
Luke 5:27 (twice), Luke 5:34, Luke 6:1,
Luke 6:5, Luke 6:8, Luke 6:12,
Luke 7:1, Luke 7:11, Luke 7:15,
Luke 7:21, Luke 7:24, Luke 7:43,
Luke 7:48, Luke 7:50, Luke 8:1,
Luke 8:22, Luke 8:27, Luke 8:29,
Luke 8:42, Luke 8:49, Luke 8:52,
Luke 8:55, Luke 9:1, Luke 9:18,
Luke 9:21, Luke 9:28, Luke 9:51,
Luke 9:55, Luke 10:28, Luke 11:1,
Luke 11:14, Luke 11:17, Luke 11:27,
Luke 11:29, Luke 11:37, Luke 11:38,
Luke 11:46, Luke 11:53, Luke 12:1,
Luke 12:14, Luke 12:22, Luke 13:10,
Luke 13:18, Luke 13:22, Luke 14:1,
Luke 14:12, Luke 14:16, Luke 15:3,
Luke 15:11, Luke 16:1, Luke 17:1,
Luke 17:11, Luke 17:20, Luke 18:1,
Luke 18:9, Luke 18:27, Luke 18:29,
Luke 18:31, Luke 18:35, Luke 19:4,
Luke 19:28, Luke 20:17, Luke 20:41,
Luke 20:45, Luke 21:1, Luke 21:5,
Luke 21:37, Luke 22:8, Luke 22:13,
Luke 22:14, Luke 22:25, Luke 22:34,
Luke 22:35, Luke 22:39, Luke 22:67,
Luke 23:3, Luke 23:7, Luke 23:9,
Luke 24:28, Luke 24:35, John 9:22,
John 11:43, John 11:57, John 12:9,
John 12:37, John 13:28, John 18:6,
John 19:41, John 20:9, John 21:15,
John 21:16 (twice), John 21:17, John 21:19,
Acts 1:22, Acts 9:20, Hebrews 2:11,
Hebrews 7:24, Hebrews 8:6, 1 John 2:6,
1 John 3:16
|Matt 8:31, Matt 9:32, Matt 12:10,
Matt 12:14, Matt 14:35, Matt 16:1,
Matt 17:3, Matt 17:14, Matt 18:21,
Matt 19:13, Matt 19:16, Matt 20:20,
Matt 21:7, Matt 26:62, Matt 27:18,
Matt 27:34, Matt 27:48, Mark 1:30,
Mark 1:32, Mark 1:34, Mark 2:4,
Mark 2:18, Mark 3:2, Mark 3:6,
Mark 5:10, Mark 5:12, Mark 5:17,
Mark 5:22, Mark 6:54, Mark 7:1,
Mark 7:5, Mark 7:26, Mark 8:11,
Mark 8:22, Mark 9:15, Mark 9:20,
Mark 10:10, Mark 10:13, Mark 11:21,
Mark 12:13, Mark 14:1, Mark 14:10,
Mark 14:45, Mark 14:46, Mark 14:51,
Mark 15:10, Mark 15:16, Mark 15:22,
Mark 15:36, Mark 15:39, Luke 4:38,
Luke 4:40, Luke 5:1, Luke 5:18,
Luke 5:29, Luke 6:7, Luke 7:17,
Luke 7:20, Luke 7:36, Luke 8:4,
Luke 8:32, Luke 8:37, Luke 9:10,
Luke 10:25, Luke 13:1, Luke 13:31,
Luke 14:15, Luke 14:25, Luke 16:14,
Luke 18:15, Luke 18:43, Luke 19:39,
Luke 20:27, Luke 22:2, Luke 22:4,
Luke 22:6, Luke 22:66, Luke 23:3,
Luke 23:55, John 1:40, John 7:43,
John 8:4, John 10:42, John 11:3,
John 13:2, John 19:12, John 19:32,
Acts 3:16, Acts 13:27, Hebrews 13:15
|Luke 20:20, Acts 3:16, Acts 13:24||his||Jesus|
|Matt 17:24, Matt 20:29, Luke 10:38||they||Jesus and his disciples|
|2 Cor 11:4||whom||Jesus|
|Acts 10:48||the Lord||Jesus Christ|
|Acts 18:25||the Lord||Jesus|
|Mark 16:19, 2 Thess 2:8||Lord||Lord Jesus|
|Acts 16:7||Spirit||Spirit of Jesus|
|Acts 24:24, Romans 8:34, 1 Cor 4:17,
Gal 5:24, Eph 3:6, Col 4:12
|Acts 13:38, Heb 3:3||this man||Jesus|
|Mark 3:20, Mark 7:19,
Luke 9:31, John 10:40
|Romans 1:4||[not present]||Jesus Christ our Lord|
|Jude 1:25||[not present]||through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages|
As you can see, this argument doesn’t bode well for those who claim that modern translations are trying to remove the name of Jesus. But thanks to Gail Riplinger’s famous book, “New Age Versions“, I do not believe this argument is going away. It seems a staple in most argument over the NIV.
On the issue of building arguments, I will say that you can’t prove if something is correct or not by comparing it to the thing you claim is correct. You have to compare the NIV and the KJV to the original language to see which is the most accurate. I could easily perform the same arguments on the KJV if I held that the NIV was the only Word of God in English.
1. The King James Version has not been changed or altered, but has been preserved because it is God’s perfect Word in English
Out of all the items on the list the KJV people throw at me, this one makes the least amount of sense. Here is why; because in the front of nearly every KJV is a preface that explains how it happened that the reader is now holding a KJV Bible. It also explains that the KJV has been updated and revised a number times or so. It also states that the newest updates include newly discovered manuscripts and new critical revisions. Which means that the KJV has indeed changed over time. They just keep that same archaic language to make you think its the same….because most people who own Bibles won’t notice the difference between one or two words.
The editors also indicate that it was not their intent to make a perfect translation, just a better translation, in the native tongue. This is evidenced by the 8,500+ marginal notes in the 1611 version, that describe translation issues and alternate readings.
Wait a minute….did they cut the ankers or did they take them up? Ooh no! Satan has altered the sacred text! Burn it!!!!
Hey why doesn’t my spell-check recognize anker? Oooh that’s right, it isn’t spelled that way anymore! At a bare minimum we need to at least update word spelling. At least the NKJV has agreed to do that much.