“If we have no perfect English Bible we have no perfect Bible. Don’t tell me I’ve been teaching from an imperfect Bible.”
What do you mean by perfect? If you mean that the KJV translation in English perfectly represents the Greek and Hebrew words, then no, you don’t have a perfect Bible in that sense because there is no way that English can perfectly translate from Greek and Hebrew which are much more descriptive and complex. There is no place in Scripture that promises a perfect translation in any language from God’s chosen languages to give us the Bible. Perfect should mean that the Bible (in its original languages) is totally inerrant, accurate and infallible. Any faithful translation that represents those words is authoritative and considered perfect in that it accurately represents what God originally spoke.
“Would he give pure words to one generation and not give pure words to another generation?”
Good question…would God give pure words from 1611 onward, but all the Christians before 1611 didn’t have a pure Bible? What do people in other countries who don’t speak English have? How about the many hundreds of languages who still don’t have a Bible translated for them? Why wasn’t God faithful to preserve something for them in their language? Why is English the only special language that getsa perfectly preserved and perfectly translated Bible when most other languages don’t have one?
“If God gives the command to teach, He’ll give us the words to teach.”
Ironically, almost all the preaching that comes from the pulpit at _________ Church ignores these words. Most of the preaching is story-telling and rhetoric while the preachers walk all over the platform ignoring the Bible sitting on the pulpit all alone left unexplained and un-exposited. If you all would preach what is actually in your KJV as much as you carry on about your KJV, you’d be a lot better off.
“Man wants to show God how smart they are by redefining the Preserved word of God.”
This is exactly what you are doing by asserting that the KJV is the only preserved word of God when God has not said so. You say a lot of things about the Bible that the Bible doesn’t say about itself such as:
“When we stand on the Authorized King James Bible we hold to a product of the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the fires of persecution.”
This is an extra-biblical and un-biblical statement. Where does the Bible say anything about the translators being guided by the Holy Ghost? The translators of the KJV themselves didn’t even believe that! Have you ever read the original King James translators’ preface from the translators to the readers? This is new doctrine. You accuse the modern translators for adding or subtracting from God’s word when you are doing exactly the same thing by adding to the scripture a new doctrine that was never taught by our Christian ancestors.
Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
The KJV was an updated “version” of previous English translations and the KJV itself was not born in the fires of persecution (like its predecessors)! This again, shows your ignorance of church history. If there was any persecution, it was King James who persecuted the Puritans who rejected the KJV in favor of the older Geneva Bible. The Puritans were forced out of their churches and some moved to the New World carrying Geneva Bibles with them, not KJVs. I assume that you have never really read anything on this subject that challenges what you have already been taught. Your whole message seemed like it was nothing more than regurgitating what someone else told you without doing any first hand study yourself.
Then you made the outrageous claim that “You won’t find the word ‘hell’ in the NIV”.I did a simple word search in BibleWorks with the NIV and found 14 uses of the word “hell”.
Either you deliberately lied to try to strengthen your argument or you just don’t know what you’re talking about. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you're just incompetent and not dishonest. If you can’t even check this, how is anyone supposed to believe any of the other numbers that you threw out about missing words and such? When the young people do their homework and look for the facts and find out that you lied or made such an embarrassing mistake, they’re not going to trust anything else you say if they are thinking people. To further display your ignorance, you went to this passage:
Psalm 12:6-7 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.
You showed how other versions change “them” to “us” so they can remove the promise of God’s words being preserved. If you understood how to interpret Hebrew poetry by recognizing the chiasm structure of this chapter, you would know that verse 7 corresponds with verse 3 and contrasts God’s keeping of His people in opposition to God’s cutting off those who speak proud things. However, your skill in handling the text of scripture is terribly deficient since you were never taught Bible interpretation at _______College. To this day, the college keeps people ignorant of how to understand the Bible correctly by not offering a heremeutics class to teach potential preachers how to correctly interpret.
You said: “Give me the real thing”
Do you really want the real thing? Then learn Hebrew and Greek because those are the languages that God gave His Word in. If you want to argue over Bible versions, at least argue from the credibility of the Textus Receptus over the Critical text because that’s where the real heart of the issue lies.
Lastly, I’ll mention this quote: “The King James Bible was used to bring hundreds of millions to be saved.”
No, God uses the gospel to bring hundreds of millions to Himself. That gospel message is found in even the worst of the new translations. People are still being saved today throughout the world with foreign language Bible translations as well as the new English versions in non-fundamentalist churches. Are you going to say that someone can't be saved apart from the KJV? Is __________Church now embracing Ruckmanism?
You should do yourself a favor and actually do a real scholarly investigation on the issue before you ever speak of it publicly again. You can start with a few essays that I have written about it: http://www.missionpeakbaptist.com/Our_Beliefs.html
I challenge you to refute it with the facts. I'd be glad to see where I am in error. I just hope that you will be intellectually honest enough to see where you are.
~ Originally posted at Reforming Baptist