Is The Bible Holy?
The question arises:
Is the Bible really Holy?
And if so,
what does that mean?
The issue fundamentally falls into two main opposing camps. One camp holds to a currently inerrant Bible. The other camp holds to the original manuscripts as inerrant, but insists all current translations are errant. I will refer to the first camp as CampI (Inerrant) and the second as CampE (Errant).
It is rare to find a religious leader who is going to reveal this information. It would be like saying the authority of the President of the United States lies with the Constitution and then saying the Constitution is messed up and we really don’t know what it really should say. That same logic applied to the authority of scripture would put the authority of religious leaders in question. And people in authority don’t like to be questioned.
Most Christians are in CampE, albeit most are there in ignorance. The ignorance is based upon deception and having been raised in the propagation of this deception. This is very easy to prove. Just ask your pastor or Sunday School teacher, or any other spiritual leader to cover the topic of Biblical inerrancy in relation to the Bible being used today. Brace yourself. First will come the song and dance and if you keep pressing the issue, be prepared for some surprising meanness from people you might have believed impossible for them to have a mean bone in their body.
This is not a comfortable topic for most people, so I would advise not continuing on with this issue if raising this matter bothers you. This is certainly not a topic for lightweights.
Holy combined with Bible has to involve perfection. God is holy and that means perfect holiness. God’s word can only be holy if it is a part of His perfection. If you are satisfied with a less than perfect Bible, then do not call it Holy. And you too needn’t continue delving into this issue. This topic is only relevant to those who see the necessity for a God-given 100% reliable and authoritative text for modern man.
CampE contains most Christians today. Most don’t understand the truth behind CampE’s position, but I will try to make that position as clear and simple as possible.
CampE holds that all the current and past translations are errant, including all ancient manuscripts that are at their disposal. This you can research and find out fairly easily. Anyone in this camp claiming otherwise is either ignorant of the true issues or an outright liar and I will explain why.
CampE keeps coming out with newer and “better” translations because of computerized tools and new findings and new observations and new studies and the list goes on and on. Plus, with language and cultures always changing, it seems to make sense to change with the times, to present these new translations based upon Dynamic Equivalence and Biblical Criticism to get closer and closer to that “perfect Bible”. It is a carrot before the cart that can never be reached, but they hope to somehow get that carrot closer and closer to the mule, so he can practically lick it. So, you have that constant battle as to which one is the best translation and pretty much ends up everyone picking and choosing what fits them, thus humanism becomes the final authority.
CampE people are deceived. Deception rarely works with an outright lie. What works best is to use the truth, but with deceptive intent. As a pastor/teacher I used to use it all the time, because I had never had the truth about the “truth” revealed to me. It was actually exciting to use this truth, because I thought it was helping to unveil hidden truths for the recipients. I loved Biblical exegesis, delving into the Greek and Hebrew works and bringing out all that wonderful hidden treasure to the ignorant masses. And what would I tell all those poor thirsty people, just waiting for me to enlighten them? Things like: “according to the originals”, “what the Greek or Hebrew really means is …”, etc. How could anyone question my authority coming from the scriptures when I could go right to those original documents. I hope some of you see a correlation between this way of thinking and the Catholic church who for hundreds of years always did their Mass in Latin, knowing full well that only a handful of people in their services knew any Latin at all. How could you question the priest, when you didn’t know Latin?
If CampE is being truthful they would declare that inerrancy is impossible for the following reasons:
There is not the tiniest fragment of the original manuscripts that have survived time.
- All the copies we have from the originals are flawed to varying degrees meaning we can never be 100% certain of their validity.
- Flawed copies of the originals mean all the Greek and Hebrew texts used at all the seminaries are flawed. That means all the seminary graduates have no claim that their studies of the Greek and Hebrew give them a right to declare inerrancy in reference to the Bible.
- That puts all “authorities” and laymen that are in CampE in the same boat: floundering around and not quite sure what the Truth really is.
- To claim absolute authority falls into the dangerous area of individual revelation. In CampE are those who claim God directs them to Truth in spite of the flawed scriptures. There are mild claims in this direction and large claims. To disprove a claim requires an absolute authority else it becomes nothing more than the blind attempting to lead the blind.
If you are still comfortable with CampE’s position then you’ve already wasted too much time reading this. Don’t bother reading on. Do not pass Go, Adios.
CampI is an impossible position based upon the facts concerning CampE.
This is a reasonable assumption, pretty much leaving you with: “Just get on with life and quite your whining! Nothing is perfect. And if the information we have is 95 to 99 percent perfect, what’s so bad with that?”
If you are like me, 99% just will not hack it. God is 100%, His holiness 100%, His grace 100%, His salvation 100%, His plan 100%, and I just can’t get myself to say His Word 95-99%. If you are like me, it is unashamedly, unapologetically, unmistakably, 100% or brother, it’s time to punt and hope for the best.
I can’t deny the facts surrounding CampE, so where do we go from here? Based upon CampE’s position, to make a strong statement from scripture is akin to using errancy to support your case of inerrancy. So we have to do a temporary leapfrog to inerrancy, look at an often ignored scripture, and then see if we can put that scriptural claim into CampI.
The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. (Psalms 12:6,7)
The claim here is God’s words will be preserved forever. Seven is often associated with God as a number of perfection. And since the Bible doesn’t deal in percentages, I would pretty much guess that this description is God’s way of saying His Word is 100% pure. And since today is a part of forever, then it seems God is telling us that right now, today, this very moment His word is there in 100% seven times purified form, purified in the deep furnaces of the earth, purified to absolute perfection. Wow! I don’t know about you, but that imagery sends a tingle of excitement through my body. So, is it time to grab our coconuts and launch on a crusade for the Holy Grail of purified scripture? Darn right it’s time! Cause if you don’t know where that pure Word of God is, you had best be ready to search the heights and depths of this world to find it.
Again, if you are like me, you’ve probably found yourself searching for your glasses when they were right on your nose. So, hold off on the coconuts (note: if the coconut thing seems weird, just ask someone who’s watched Monty Python and the Holy Grail). Here’s some investigative points to ponder:
- A whole lot of the Bible in the originals was not the actual originals, but translations of the originals. Now you might be thinking this guy is showing his true colors and he’s really lost it! Well, consider this: did Adam and Eve speak Hebrew? Noah? Pharaoh? Melchizedek? Darius? Nebuchadnezzar? This Hebrew Testament list could go on and on. Now what about the Greek New Testament. Obviously all the apostles and Jesus always spoke Greek, right? Not so! They spoke primarily Aramaic and in formal religious circles like the Temple or Synagogue they would have spoken Hebrew. Greek wold have almost exclusively been used for business with Gentiles. The exception is the Apostle Paul whose primary ministry was to the Gentiles. So, hopefully my statement doesn’t sound quite so cuckoo: “A good portion of the actual originals were not originals, but translations of the originals!” For example, Jesus probably spoke mainly Aramaic with some Hebrew. His spoken word is the actual originals. Jesus’ words were then translated into Greek. And that translation was inspired by God and therefore 100% correct. This point is of monumental importance. Importance! Importance! Importance! What is that point? A translation can actually be inspired by God! God is going to preserve His word and that preservation can be in the form of a pure 100% accurate translation.
- The Old Testament was written in Hebrew to reach the world with the Gospel. I’m using the term Gospel liberally as God’s redeeming Word (Heb. 4:2). And back in the Old Testament days, God was reaching out to everyone on this planet and one of his primary means was the written word. Why Hebrew? Because back then, it was the covenant relationship with Israel that was to be the testimony to the entire world that the Hebrew God was the only true God and salvation only came through that covenant relationship (i.e., the anticipated Redeemer). It was everyone’s responsibility to look to Zion for their redemption. God also sent out prophets to countries outside Israel as a bonus, but like The Queen of Sheba who traveled hundreds of miles to Israel to hear the Gospel, everything pointed to Zion as the focus of God’s pure word. [ponder Matthew 12:41-42]
- The New Testament leads us into the Age of the Church. This time period also has God’s word written to reach the world with the Gospel. Why did people like the fisherman Peter and others, who were not scholars and probably knew just enough Greek to do business, use Greek for all their writings? Whereas, the focus in the Old Testament was Zion with God’s word taken care of by the Jews in Hebrew.; in the New Testament Church age period, the focus is outward. To go. Go into all the world. The most widely used language throughout the modern world at the time was Greek. So, God had the New Testament writers use Greek so the Gospel could rapidly spread throughout the world.
- The world went through a transition after the fall of the Roman Empire . God’s word was preserved, but is hard to trace, almost like when the caterpillar goes into a cocoon for a period of time. What would transpire to release what was taking shape in the cocoon? History provides the answer. The British Empire’s one worldwide influence that remains to this day is the creation of a new world trade language: English. My wife and I have traveled in many countries throughout the world that do not have English as their primary language. Nevertheless, it is hard to find a place where you cannot find someone who speaks English and there are armies of people all over the world teaching English as a Second Language. Is God’s word, preserved in the English language, what emerged from the cocoon?
CampE can probably lay claim to encompassing 95 to 99 percent of all who claim themselves Christian. CampI stands alone. There really are no other camps as they are antithetical. CampI stands alone on the concept of Preservation. It is a small camp. It can be lonely in what might seem a wilderness. Is it worth continuing the trek to check it out? That’s pretty much what I’m hoping you will do. Otherwise you have no other choice but resign yourself to the fallible weakness associated with CampE . Nevertheless, it is a fairly comfortable camp. It is popular and because of the many confusing translations people don’t push their points quite as much. That makes it an easy environment for finding those who will itch your ears when things could get uncomfortable.
Ignorance to some is bliss. If you don’t have a burning desire to tackle an issue that puts you against the flow of the modern church, Stop, Stop, Stop! To pursue enlightenment will brief grief, conflict, and questions about your sanity or motives. I couldn’t stand CampE’s position and pressed on, hoping for that pearl of great price, that treasure in the field that is worth more than anything. And that is just what I believe I’ve found. I’ve written more on the issue below that gets more directly to the point. Now, if you’re still with me and have decided to continue this journey, let me give you some pointers on what I had to deal with on the way before you get into more of the details.
- A huge battle raged over this issue in the early 20 th century. It got real nasty and it doesn’t take much in searching the internet to find this nastiness on both sides of the issue. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water. Glean the factual truths out and leave the feelings behind. I wasn’t in the heat of those battle, so I can’t judge their responses nor would I ever judge Jesus on how he responded to the Pharisees when He called them “whited sepulchers” and a host of other nasty descriptive things like “strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.”
- Much of the information published by those in CampI did not receive a positive ovation. Therefore, many had no other choice than to self publish and some of those works could use some editing. Again, give them some slack and don’t discount their scholarship as lacking due to such editing glitches.
- CampE abounds in slurs and tactics to dissuade the seeker. Those in CampI are cast as Bible worshippers (bibliolatry), literalists, uneducated, etc. Ignore the slurs and keep focused on the arguments.
- This last point is of paramount importance; otherwise you will just be wasting your time by continuing on. You must make a paradigm shift from CampE’s foundational position. CampE comes from the foundation of Biblical Criticism. That foundation starts with the Bible being in error and through Critical tools and arguments, tries to correct those mistakes to make it better and better. You have to make the shift to: the preserved Bible has absolutely no errors (zero point zero to infinity). Zero deficiencies mean putting on the detective hat when faced with an issue that appears to support CampE’s errancy claims. That gets you into some detailed Biblical investigative work that will produce some amazing discoveries. It is certainly a lot easier to just throw out the accusation that the text is flawed and move on. It takes a lot more work to dig deeper and deeper, but there is a gold mine of truth out there. What’s nice is the internet has made digging for the truth so easy. There are those out there who have done all the hard work and can explain those seemingly errant portions of scripture. Of course there are legions from CampE who will try to dismantle those explanations and that is where the tug of war for your allegiance will take place.
CampI is made up mostly of those who believe the King James 1611 version is a translation specially sheltered and directed by God as an inerrant English translation. From hereon out, I will refer to this version merely as the KJV. The new King James Version also falls into CampE and should not be confused as a part of CampI.
CampE uses additional manuscripts and tools, such as dynamic equivalence, to present a host of translations that are claimed to be more readable, understandable, and accurate than the KJV. It is unclear why they always compare their works to the KJV except for it being the clear delineation between the two camps.
Since we don’t have even one tiny scrap of any original manuscript of the Bible, CampE’s claim to be closer to the originals must rely on hand-me-down manuscripts. When being honest, this camp will admit that all the hand-me-downs have errors in them thus making all current Biblical manuscripts errant.
Using their reasoning, we need not go into further detail. All their reasons are well documented and we can merely take them at their word – their translations are errant. In this camp are all the translations, including the KJV and it’s like the Clint Eastwood movie “The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly.” The different publishers fight it out trying to convince everyone that their translation is the Good and the others are Bad or Ugly.
How would Camps I and E answer the question of the Bible being Holy? Most in these camps would agree that the original manuscripts were inerrant, and by definition Holy. Nevertheless, both camps would also agree there is no bookstore that sells a Greek or Hebrew manuscript that contains these inerrant works.
We need to look in more detail at what “Holy Bible” means. This should be simple, because we are dealing with God. In our dealings with God, everything is to be flawless – without blemish. Ultimately, Jesus fulfilled what man could never attain when He gave himself as the perfect and flawless sacrifice for all mankind. Therefore, the characteristic of flawlessness is one of the characteristics of holiness (see Leviticus 10:1-7). The originals, because they were inspired by the Holy Spirit and by definition were flawless, would be deemed Holy. The admission of CampE is that all current versions are flawed or errant because of man’s errors through the centuries. Therefore, their Bible cannot be allowed the stamp of Holiness. So, at this point, CampE does not have a version that can be called the Holy Bible, in spite of their claim that the ancient originals were inerrant and could be called Holy.
CampI also claims its translators did not have the original manuscripts, but still believe their translation to be inerrant. Whether we like it or not, CampI is the only camp left for any hope of having a Holy Bible. This possibility might not even be worth looking into if the question of inerrancy is unimportant.
So let’s look a bit at the question of inerrancy. Without inerrancy, we are left with the question: What is the Word of God? There are many ways modern theologians try to tackle this. Most of them see God and the current writings working side by side where God somehow adjusts things so they come out right in the spiritual plane. By this definition, God’s word becomes inerrant according to this formula: We read God’s word as best as we can with the translation that we most like + the Holy Spirit who then takes our errant readings and spiritually transforms it into an inerrant spiritual text or communication. I realize this might seem a simplistic and crude rendering as there are volumes of material that take this issue into monumental detail. Nevertheless, when all is said and done, I believe the formula I just described sums up CampE’s idea of inerrancy.
CampI says hogwash to CampE’s individual mystical rendering of inerrancy and holds to the KJV’s black and white print as inerrant. CampE of course calls CampI’s inerrancy as ridiculous speculation – something more akin to a belief in the Bed Fairy.
The tickly part of CampE’s position is the danger of making the Word of God subjective, leaving no real platform for discussion. There appears to be no way to determine that God’s spiritual enlightenment to any individual is right or wrong. You cannot compare scripture with scripture. It now becomes comparing God’s personal translation or revelation of scripture with another person’s personal translation or revelation of scripture, which eliminates anything verifiable. There no longer is an absolute source for right and wrong. In other words, a gay person can claim his interpretation supporting gays is just as valid as anyone else’s. So too a pedophile, a rapist, an adulterer, a terrorist, a racist, an abortionist, and the list goes on and on. People have a tremendous gift for rationalizing just about anything and when the Bible is open to individual interpretation, then everyone thinks they can do what is right in their own eyes (the Bible deals heavily with this issue: see Judges 17:6; Proverbs 3:3; 12:15; 16:2; 21:2; 30:12; Isaiah 5:21).
CampI in accordance with its own position doesn’t share the subjective problem. You can dialogue and argue, comparing scripture with scripture, using the actual text. There is no mystical experience involved, per se. They do hold to the need for spiritual guidance, requiring God to open the heart, the ears, and the eyes for an understanding reaching to the depths of one’s spirit. Nevertheless, they refute the claim that any embellishments coming out of this enlightenment are on a par with the inspiration and inerrancy of the KJV text. CampI’s position of inerrancy holds that the text can withstand all the scrutiny of man, both secular and religious, and there will never be found a single error.
Now before we can continue, we must tackle the question of whether inerrancy is really important. This is not the place to bring out the myriad ramifications of such a position, so I will only mention one, which is so important that it alone could very well settle the issue for most people.
If inerrancy isn’t a concern, then the Bible cannot be used as an absolute basis for such things as morals. CampE’s position in this regard would be the Bible+. As such, with the myriad of +s, morals become merely a majority or individual point of view, and therefore relative. This position holds that you are who you are. If a pedophile, then that’s okay – you can’t help yourself – just try your best to be discreet. A homosexual or adulterer – don’t fight it, give in to your desires. Do whatever makes you happy. Be true to yourself. Just do it. Go for it. Be cool. No fear.
Now if you still think inerrancy is unimportant, again, there are many other avenues to pursue to delve into the subject and it would probably be more fruitful to spend time on this issue. Otherwise, you would definitely be wasting your time by continuing with this topic.
I will look now at the possibility that CampI might have a case, which would mean we do have available today a solid document for the absolutes, and can with absolute confidence say we have an inerrant Holy Bible.
First of all, since both camps agree that the original manuscripts were inerrant, we need to see if there are any parallels between the originals and the KJV. Did the original writers know they were writing inspired scripture? Some did, like Moses, some of the prophets, and some of the New Testament writers. It appears most didn’t, but we can’t really know for certain. Therefore, there is uncertainty in this regard.
Did the ones who put together the manuscripts, that we call the Old Testament, know they were putting together a Holy Book in a uniquely God inspired way? Again, we don’t know this, but I would guess they didn’t realize God’s hand in their work to such a perfectly exact degree.
Was the putting together of today’s Bible into the 66 books an inspired act? If so, did they know they were doing an inspired work? Here again we have no clear evidence that anyone knew this was an inspired act even though most Christians acknowledge God’s guidance in this to give us the books considered inerrant at least in the original writings.
I think most people would acknowledge that God’s inspirational work could be either known by the one involved or not known. And in most cases it’s not until later, sometimes centuries later, that God’s work is clearly seen in an inerrant capacity.
Therefore, if the KJV was an inspired translation, the translators’ lack of knowing that fact would play no part in it truly being an inspired work. This may seem a strange parallel, nevertheless it is one to be considered. This same parallel though, could also hold for all the other translations, so we must conclude that this parallel holds little or no weight. It merely aims to show that not knowing God is working at the time does not disqualify a work. In that regard, I am unaware of any claim of the KJV translators of knowingly working under inspiration. Nevertheless, the lack of knowing doesn’t disqualify the KJV as possibly being inerrant.
The Old Testament books were written in the language for all for whom it was intended. The Old Testament, although it reached beyond the Jewish people, was meant for them and was guardedly segregated. People could come in, but under strict terms: circumcision, following the Jewish customs, using Hebrew, etc. The fact that Hebrew was exclusively used is appropriate to its intent. Therefore, Hebrew was the universal language for its primary recipient – the Jews.
The New Testament was written for the church, which is universal. The widest reaching language at the time of these writings was Greek. It was the trade language of the world. All traders, in ports all throughout the “known” world, used Greek. Even though Rome was the power, the most powerful language was Greek. Therefore, the New Testament, consistent with the Old was written in the language appropriate to its intent.
Eventually Greek crumbled through many different events as the world language, especially the spread of Islam, leaving another breakup like at Babel. The scripture writing went through a dispersion of languages, leaving only copies of Greek and ancient translations into Latin and a few other languages (many thousands of copies were made and the ones most widely used were classified as the Textus Receptus).
Then, a thousand years later, with the British Empire, a new world trade language came into being – English. Once again, the condition was right for the gospel reaching to the whole world, spread on the wings of a world language. To conclude this parallel, a language, universal to its intent, appears to be a key ingredient for an inerrant writing. Nevertheless, this is just a parallel. It still does not prove CampI’s position.
Now let’s look at the guts of CampI’s position. They track the documents used in the translation work to the bits of pieces that in the most part can be traced back to the early church in Antioch, Syria. Even the early translations into other languages can be traced back to Antioch. These bits and scraps were the backbone of the KJV translators, who under protection of the King of England, had a tiny gap in history to do their work. Trying to weed out the errors and believing the texts traced back to Antioch were from reliable sources, they put together the puzzle – the 1611 KJV Bible, which at the time was merely called the: Holy Bible. Nevertheless, was it correct to put the word Holy before the Bible? From our above discussion, it is incorrect if the text is errant.
CampI, after hundreds of years of usage of the KJV, has looked back upon the translation work as having God’s inspirational hand involved. As we look back, we see that CampI’s bold affirmation in the inerrant KJV Bible sparked the greatest missionary outreach the world has ever seen. Was this just a misguided placebo (a blind leap of faith, believing their KJV Bible was inerrant)? Whatever one wants to call it, this same conviction and power is definitely lacking today.
In spite of these positive attributes, CampI’s position cannot be proven as fact (which doesn’t eliminate it as being wrong). They don’t have any original writings to back their claim. They have some parallels and the sparking of a tremendous missionary era, but no real certain proof. What they do have is one heck of a challenge. Moreover, over the last two hundred years tens of thousands have taken up the challenge. That challenge is based on their claim – you can’t find even the smallest mistake in the KJV Bible.
What have the challengers come up with in the last 200 years? They’ve come up with mistakes purported to be in the tens of thousands. Based upon these assertions, the new translations were born, claiming to correct most of the mistakes.
Over these 200 years, there have been many KJV defenders who have diligently worked to counter one accusation after the other. Hundreds of books have been written in defense against the many attacks. You could literally spend several lifetimes trying to track all the accusations and rebuttals.
To be fair, anyone could find a supposed mistake and build a scenario of how it could be a mistake. The KJV position only has to show in each case just one scenario of how something in the text could be accurate. That doesn’t mean that scenario is right, only that because it might happen, it keeps alive the inerrancy position.
I haven’t read many books on the accusations and the defense, but I’ve read enough to know that I haven’t found a defense for an accusation that wasn’t possible. Some of those defenses weren’t quite what I would come up with — nevertheless, every one was plausible.
So, where does this leave us on the question of whether the Bible is really Holy? For those in CampE the answer is a definite “No,” concerning all translations including the KJV.
For those in CampI, their answer is that there is only one current Holy Bible – the inerrant KJV. If you would like to hold to this position, you might want to explore some of the arguments that go into the differences between the ancient manuscripts used between the KJV and all the new translations. One thing I’ve found is that many of those who have hotly defended the KJV have weathered so many battlefields that they defend the subject as if they’re in the jungles of Vietnam during that war. I can understand them because sometimes I would like to write exactly what I think and it might not sound very kind. Some of them might do well though to heed the scripture, which says, “ …be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.” (Matthew 10:16). That way they would understand the way of the serpent to avoid various cunning pitfalls, but not use the serpent’s same tactics.
If you can brazen yourself against this attacking style, but still appreciate the scholarship, I would recommend looking at Dr. Peter S. Ruckman’s book, The “Errors” in the King James Bible. He clearly shows how many of the claimed errors are not errors at all. Be prepared though, I am not kidding about the abrupt writing style. Personally, I appreciate the bluntness. It’s almost like a breath of fresh air. One of the best scholarly books that I would recommend is Dr. Samuel Gipp’s book, Gipp’s Understandable History of the Bible.
I’ve tried to look at this issue as objectively as possible, but I’m sure everyone knows my own personal position by now. Just a few years ago, I was in CampE. After further study, I joined CampI. I was an assistant pastor at a Lutheran Church and approached the pastor about reading the scriptures from the pulpit from a modern translation and then saying afterwards the liturgical statement: “This is the Word of the Lord.”
I posed three questions to him and have provided his answers:
- Is the Word of God inerrant/infallible? Answer = Yes
- Is the New International Version inerrant/infallible? Answer = No
- Is the New International Version the Word of God? Answer = a reluctant No
This is the dilemma before so many pastors and laymen today. What would your answers be to the questions above for the version you are using?
Whether one is in CampI or CampE, it is important for all to be honest. To be in CampE and still proclaim that you are using God’s word is deceptive. If you truly believe in your position, you need to be honest about it and not couch it in mystical terms. People have a right to know just what the church’s position and its leader’s position is on this important matter. When so many churches go through a liturgical form of worship, truth should be always present.
Now in closing, I would like to look at what has happened since the attack on the KJV 200 years ago and all the way to the present. I would like to see what effect the new translations have had and pose a few questions to ponder.
As the KJV 1611 is increasingly rejected, boldness diminishes and missions become increasingly lackluster. The English Language becomes more and more fractured and difficult to communicate. The Bible has been dumbed down; scriptural fullness diminished; confusion prevails in Bible studies when reading conflicting versions; witnessing boldness disappears; itching ears is the norm; “that’s your interpretation” is a constant reply to uncomfortable discussions; moral decay increases as situational ethics takes over; laymen lose their voice and power to the religious hierarchy who increasingly move them toward a modern Dark Ages where “their superior understanding” of Greek and Hebrew puts them above the masses.
Most Christians act as if Satan is not allowed to touch anything in the area of Bible translation work. The opposite is the likely scenario. That makes it imperative we take the time to check out this issue. Otherwise, one must wonder where the path leads for the next “newer and better” version.
An inerrant KJV in the midst of these problems can become the equalizer, forcing all religious leaders to become subject to God’s actual word. If that proves not to be the case and you are at least with me on the need for finding the pure preserved word of God, then we’ll be out there together, along with the sound of coconuts.