Back to Bible Version Reports

Back to the Way of Life Home Page

Way of Life Literature Online Catalog

EXAMINING "THE KING JAMES ONLY CONTROVERSY"

PART 4 OF 4

[Distributed by Way of Life Literatureâs Fundamental Baptist Information Service. Copyright 1998. These articles cannot be stored on BBS or Internet sites and cannot be sold or placed by themselves or with other material in any electronic format for sale, but may be distributed for free by e-mail or by print. They must be left intact and nothing removed or changed, including these informational headers. This is a listing for Fundamental Baptists and other fundamentalist, Bible-believing Christians. Our goal is not devotional but is TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO ASSIST PREACHERS IN THE PROTECTION OF THE CHURCHES IN THIS APOSTATE HOUR. If you desire to receive this type of material on a regular basis, e-mail us, give us your name, address, and the name of the church you are a member of, and request to be placed on the list. Please note that this is not a free service. We take up a quarterly offering to fund this ministry, and each subscriber is expected to participate. To unsubscribe or to submit a change of address, send your name and the request to fbns@wayoflife.org. This is not an automated list. Changes in the database often require two to four days to activate. Some of these articles are from O Timothy magazine. David W. Cloud, Editor. O Timothy is a monthly magazine in its 17th year of publication. Subscription is $20/yr.  Way of Life publishes many helpful books. The catalog is located at the web site -- http://www.wayoflife.org.]

Updated March 1, 2000 (first published March 5, 1998) (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, fbns@wayoflife.org)-

The following is Part 4 of 4 Parts of this critique --

WHITE DENIES THAT THE MODERN VERSIONS WEAKEN THE DOCTRINE OF CHRIST’S DEITY.

White dedicates an entire chapter, "The Son of God, the Lord of Glory," to denying that the modern texts and versions weaken the doctrine of Christ’s deity. He concludes that not only do the critical Greek text and key modern versions NOT undermine the deity of Christ, but he makes the claim that the New International Version and the New American Standard Version are actually stronger in their witness to Christ’s deity than the King James Bible. White states," Some KJV Only advocates are surprised to note that the KJV does not do as well as some modern versions when it comes to providing clear, understandable translations of the key, central passages in the New Testament that testify to the full deity of Jesus Christ" (White, p. 196). How can he make such a statement? Is he right? No, he has done what he charges "KJV Only" folk with doing. He has twisted the facts to fit his point.

On page 197 he has a chart which compares passages on the deity of Christ in three versions (the KJV, NIV, NASV). He includes 12 passages--John 1:1; 1:18; 20:28; Acts 20:28; Romans 9:5; Philippians 2:5-6; Colossians 1:15-17; 2:9; 1 Timothy 3:16; Titus 2:13; Hebrews 1:8; 2 Peter 1:1. He claims that the NIV has a clear testimony to Christ’s deity in 11 of these and omits one, whereas the KJV has a clear testimony in only six, is ambiguous in five, and omits one.

White’s chart reminds us of some of those produced by Mrs. Gail Riplinger in New Age Bible Versions. If you consider only the material presented in the chart, the author’s case is demonstrated without question. The problem comes when we analyze the chart carefully to see whether or not the author is presenting all of the facts and whether or not they are presented properly. Upon examination, White’s deity of Christ chart falls flat on both counts.

First, White errs in considering only part of the evidence. There is no doubt that the 12 passages which White presents are SOME of the key passages on Christ’s deity (except, possibly for 2 Peter 1:1), but many other important passages are completely ignored, so that the results of his comparison are grossly and wrongly skewed in favor of the NIV. The following is a list of White’s passages with the addition of many others which should have been included. Those preceded by asterisks are weaker in the New International Version.

** MICAH 5:2 -- The NIV says Christ had an origin: "…out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times." The KJV, on the other hand, supports Christ’s eternal Godhead with the translation: "…yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." On the basis of this one verse I would reject the NIV.

MATTHEW 1:23; 3:3; 22:43-45 -- Both the NIV and the KJV are sound in their witness to Christ. By the way, let me emphasize that I am not saying the NIV is translated as accurately as the KJV in these various verses. I am merely saying that in general some of these verses in the NIV are sound in their witness to Christ. On the other hand, I believe it is impossible that the NIV is truly sound even apart from the textual problems, because it admittedly uses the method of translation called dynamic equivalency. It is a "thought" translation rather than a "word" translation, and that is a great error. I want to know what the words are that God gave for me, not just the general thoughts or broad equivalency as expressed by some translator. The King James Bible is an accurate and literal word translation, and as such it is far superior to the New International Version, even with the textual problems aside.

**MATTHEW 8:2 -- Eleven times in the Received Text and the King James Bible the Gospels tell us that Christ was worshipped (Mt. 2:11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 20:20; 28:9,17; Mk. 5:6; Lk. 24:52; Jn. 9:38). This is indisputable evidence that Jesus Christ is God, because only God can be worshipped (Ex. 34:14; Is. 42:8; Mt. 4:10; Acts 14:11-15; Rev. 19:10). The NIV removes one-half of this unique witness to Christ’s deity, changing "worship" to "kneel before" in Mt. 8:2; 9:18; 15:25; 20:20; Mk. 5:6. In the Received Text the Greek word (proskuneo) is the same in all eleven verses. It is the key New Testament word for "worship." It appears 58 times in the Greek New Testament and is always translated "worship" in the King James Bible. The modern version defender will argue that there is no serious problem here, because Christ is still worshipped in six of the verses. I don’t agree with this evaluation. In fact, I consider such an argument very strange indeed, because the man who truly loves the words of God cares about the details of the Bible and is concerned deeply about the omission of things. For many years I have noticed that defenders of the modern versions have a strange lackadaisical attitude toward the details of the Bible. As we have noted earlier, the repetition is in the Bible for a purpose. It is not inconsequential fluff.

MT. 8:2 KJV: "And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him…"

MT. 8:2 NIV: "A man with leprosy came and knelt before him…"

**MATTHEW 9:18 -- This is one of the five passages in which the KJV says Christ was worshipped but the NIV says He was not. See also Matt. 8:2; 15:25; 20:20; Mk. 5:6.

MT. 9:18 KJV: "… behold, there came a certain ruler, and worshipped him…"

MT. 9:18 NIV: "… a ruler came and knelt before him…"

** MATTHEW 15:25 -- This is one of the five passages in which the KJV says Christ was worshipped but the NIV says He was not. See also Matt. 8:2; 9:18; 20:20; Mk. 5:6.

MT. 15:25 KJV: "Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me."

MT. 15:25 NIV: "The woman came and knelt before him. ‘Lord, help me!’ she said."

** MATTHEW 20:20 -- This is one of the five passages in which the KJV says Christ was worshipped but the NIV says He was not. See also Matt. 8:2; 9:18; 15:25; 18:26; Mk. 5:6.

MT. 20:20 KJV: "20 Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, worshipping him…"

MT. 20:20 NIV: "Then the mother of Zebedee’s sons came to Jesus with her sons, and, kneeling down…"

** MARK 5:6 -- This is one of the five passages in which the KJV says Christ was worshipped but the NIV says He was not. See also Matt. 8:2; 9:18; 15:25; 20:20.

MK. 5:6 KJV: "But when he saw Jesus afar off, he ran and worshipped him."

MK. 5:6 NIV: "When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him."

LUKE 1:17,32,76; 2:11 -- Both the NIV and the KJV are sound in their witness to Christ. [See explanation under comments on Matthew 1:23.]

**LUKE 2:33,43 -- By changing "Joseph" to "the child’s father" and "his parents," the NIV weakens the testimony of Christ’s virgin birth somewhat, compared with the reading of the KJV and the Received Text. While it is true that the NIV plainly says that Christ was virgin born (Mt. 1:18-20), the KJV backs up that testimony with the added witness of Lk. 2:33,43, whereas the NIV does not.

LK. 2:33 KJV: "And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him."

LK. 2:33 NIV: "The child’s father and mother marveled about what was said about him."

LK. 2:43 KJV: "And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it."

LK. 2:43 NIV: "After the Feast was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it."

JOHN 1:1; 5:17-18,23; 8:56-59; 10:30-33; 14:9; 20:28 -- Both the NIV and the KJV are sound in their witness to Christ. [See explanation under comments on Matthew 1:23.]

** JOHN 1:27 -- By removing the phrase "is preferred before me," the NIV weakens this wonderful testimony to the uniqueness of Jesus Christ. Evangelist Chuck Salliby notes: "Each little expression such as ‘is preferred before me,’ like so many pieces in a puzzle, was designed to make its own contribution to the completed picture of Christ on the Bible page--His Person, works, character, incomparableness, etc. Yet, they are systematically left out wherever possible in the NIV. This is indeed a strange practice. While a secular book generally exaggerates the depiction of its main character, the NIV depreciates that of its own" (Salliby, If the Foundations Be Destroyed, p. 21).

JN. 1:27 KJV: "He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose."

JN. 1:27 NIV: "He is the one who comes after me, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie."

** JOHN 3:13 -- The King James Version witnesses to the Godhead and omnipresence of the Lord Jesus Christ in this verse, but the NIV, in deleting the crucial phrase "which is in heaven," destroys this witness. At least 99.5% of all Greek manuscript evidence contains the phrase in question. Only two papyri, four uncials (particularly the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus), and one cursive manuscript omit it.

JN. 3:13 KJV: "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven."

JN. 3:13 NIV: "No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven--the Son of Man."

** JOHN 6:69 -- The KJV, following the Received Text, contains in this verse one of the most precious testimonies to the Deity of Christ. This testimony is emasculated in the NIV.

JN. 6:69 KJV: "And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God."

JN. 6:69 NIV: "We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God."

** JOHN 9:35 -- The KJV witnesses to Christ’s deity in this verse, but the NIV, following the critical Greek text, does not.

JN. 9:35 KJV: "… Doest thou believe on the Son of God?"

JN. 9:35 NIV: "… Do you believe in the Son of Man?"

** ACTS 3:13 -- The KJV exalts Christ as the Son of God in this verse, whereas the NIV, following a different text, makes him a servant. Christ is called the Son of God or God’s Son 126 times in the New Testament, whereas he is called "servant" (in the KJV) only once, and that is in Matt. 12:18, which is a quotation of Isaiah 42:1.

ACTS 3:13 KJV: ".. the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus…"

ACTS 3:13 NIV: "… the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus…"

ACTS 10:36; 20:28 -- Both the NIV and the KJV are sound in their witness to Christ. [See explanation under comments on Matthew 1:23.]

** ROMANS 9:5 -- The NIV is sound in its witness to Christ in the text, but it undermines the text with a footnote which reads: "or, ‘Christ who is over all, God be forever praised.’" Bible scholar/translator Jay Green, Sr., notes: "The NIV footnote is a gloss preferred by those who do not believe that Christ is co-equal with God in essence and attributes. When the Revised Version (1881) inserted it, Burgon quoted 60 patristic fathers as using this verse to prove the Godhood of Christ. And the Unitarians have stated that the only two verses that needed to be changed to destroy the doctrine of the Trinity are Romans 9:5 and 1 Tim. 3:16" (Green, The Gnostics, p. 51). James White claims that the King James Version is ambiguous in this verse, but the KJV follows the Greek almost word for word and gives an accurate and clear translation in English. The verse does not say that Christ is blessed of God forever; it says He is GOD blessed for ever. It is one of the most powerful statements to the Godhood of Christ in the Bible, and it is plain for anyone who has ears to hear. As noted, 19th-century Unitarians who were on the Bible translation committees for the Revised Version (1881) and the American Standard Version (1901) understood this and they did not like the KJV translation as a result. Godly English commentators of generations past had no problem with this verse as it stands in the King James Version. Matthew Henry (1662-1714) is an example. He saw this verse in the KJV as "a very full proof of the Godhead of Christ; he is not only over all, as Mediator, but he is God blessed for ever." We do not accept White’s charge that the KJV is weak here in regard to Christ’s deity. Every passage must be interpreted in the context of the wider testimony of Scripture, and when we do so with the KJV in Romans 9:5 we see that Christ is both God and that He is blessed of God. That is exactly what the rest of the Bible says! It speaks of the mystery of the Trinity.

ROM. 9:5 KJV: "Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."

ROM. 9:5 NIV: "Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen."

** 1 CORINTHIANS 15:47 -- By omitting the words "the Lord," the NIV, following the critical text, obliterates a powerful reference to Christ’s deity, whereas the Received Text and the King James Version give a unique and unequivocal testimony that Jesus Christ is God.

1 COR. 15:47 KJV: "The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven."

1 COR. 15:47 NIV: "The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven."

** EPHESIANS 3:9 -- The KJV in this verse exalts Jesus Christ as the Creator of all things, whereas the NIV, by removing the crucial phrase "by Jesus Christ," obliterates this witness entirely.

EPH. 3:9 KJV: "… which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:"

EPH. 3:9 NIV: "…which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things."

** PHILIPPIANS 2:6-7 -- The KJV is stronger in its witness to Christ’s deity and much clearer in every way because of its careful and literal translation of the Greek. The NIV says Christ was in very nature God but clouds the testimony by its wording that Christ "did not consider equality with God something to be grasped" and that he "made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant." The NIV in this passage leaves Christ’s Godhead during his incarnation in doubt, whereas the KJV does not. The age-long theological battles pertaining to the Deity of Christ are very complex and involve many facets of Christ’s preexistence, nature, earthly character, and future status. The Gnostics were willing for Christ to be a god and creator, but not the very God. Origen, for example, accepted that Jesus was deity but not that He was co-equal in the Trinity with the Father. He wrote, "Christ is inferior to the Father who is the God. The Son is divine in a derivative sense, for he gains his deity by communication from the Father, ‘the only true God, who is preeminent as the single source or foundation of deity" (quoted from Jay Green, The Gnostics, the New Versions, and the Deity of Christ, p. 1). The Jehovah’s Witnesses admit that Jesus is the Son of God and "a" God, but not Jehovah God. The Unitarians admit that Jesus was "divine" but not that He was Almighty God. The Mormons admit that Jesus is a god, but not that He is Jehovah God or that He and the Father God are one. Others admit that Christ is God but not that He was eternally the Son of God. Still others acknowledge that Christ was God in eternity past but that He laid aside His deity in His incarnation. This is a view which is allowed by the rendering of Phil. 2:6,7 in the NIV.

Only an accurate translation of the preserved Text can secure the doctrinal victory in these fierce and complex theological battles so that God’s people have a proper understanding of the Person of Jesus Christ. I repeat, no English translation is more Christ-honoring than the King James Version.

PHIL. 2:6,7 KJV: "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

PHIL. 2:6,7 NIV: "Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness."

COLOSSIANS 1:15 -- Both the NIV and the KJV are sound in their witness to Christ. [See explanation under comments on Matthew 1:23.]

COLOSSIANS 1:19 -- Both the NIV and the KJV are sound in their witness to Christ. [See explanation under comments on Matthew 1:23.]

** COLOSSIANS 2:9 -- The term Godhead in the KJV is more powerful and effective than the NIV’s rendering of "deity." Jay Green wisely notes: "While the lexicons give both deity and Godhead as the meaning of this Greek word (theothtos), keep in mind that there are many deities in this world, but only one true Godhead, which identifies Christ as being one in essence with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit" (Green, The Gnostics, p. 37).

COL. 2:9 KJV: "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

COL. 2:9 NIV: "For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form."

1 TIMOTHY 1:15-17 -- Both the NIV and the KJV are sound in their witness to Christ. [See explanation under comments on Matthew 1:23.]

** 1 TIMOTHY 3:16 -- In this verse the KJV, following the Received Text, gives probably the clearest reference in the entire Bible that Jesus Christ is God. The NIV, following the critical Greek text, omits the word "God," rendering the verse almost meaningless.

1 TIM. 3:16 KJV: "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."

1 TIM. 3:16 NIV: "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."

** 1 TIMOTHY 6:14-16 -- The KJV in this passage is unequivocal in its testimony that Jesus Christ is God. The NIV, though, by adding the word "God" to verse 15, creates doubt about whether or not this doxology refers directly to Christ.

1 TIM. 6:14-16 KJV: "That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: Which in his times he shall show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen."

1 TIM. 6:14-16 NIV: "to keep this commandment without spot or blame until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which God will bring about in his own time--God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen."

TITUS 2:13 -- Both the NIV and the KJV are sound in their witness to Christ. [See explanation under comments on Matthew 1:23.]

** HEBREWS 1:3 -- The KJV is stronger in its witness to Christ in this verse. Jay Green, Sr., Editor and Translator of the Interlinear Bible, notes the important difference between the KJV and the NIV in this passage: "The new versions present the Son as a replica of God, not co-equal with God, not one in essence with God the Father and God the Spirit, but only a copy, a representation, an imprint, a stamp. The word xarakter is defined by Thayer as ‘that which has actual existence … real being … the substantial quality, nature of a person’ (#5287, Thayer’s Lexicon, p. 644)" (Green, The Gnostics, p. 32).

HEB. 1:3 KJV: ""Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high."

HEB. 1:3 NIV: "The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven."

** HEBREWS 1:8 -- The KJV clearly presents Christ as the eternal God in this verse. The NIV, though, by saying Christ’s throne "will last forever," instead of "is forever," leaves room for the false doctrine that Christ had a beginning. When combined with the NIV’s perverted rendering of Micah 5:2, it teaches this very heresy.

HEB. 1:8 KJV: "But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom."

HEB. 1:8 NIV: "But about the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, will last forever and ever, and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom."

2 PETER 1:1 -- Both the NIV and the KJV are sound in their witness to Christ. [See explanation under comments on Matthew 1:23.] We will say more about this verse later in this study.

** 1 JOHN 3:16 -- By replacing "God" with "Christ," the NIV removes this powerful reference to Christ’s Godhead.

1 JOHN 3:16 KJV: "Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren."

1 JOHN 3:16 NIV: "This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers."

** 1 JOHN 4:3 -- By removing the phrase "Christ is come in the flesh" from verse 3, the NIV weakens the testimony of this passage as compared with the KJV and allows room for the ecumenical philosophy that says everyone who "loves Jesus" is of God. False spirits will "acknowledge Jesus," but the Jesus they acknowledge is a false Jesus (2 Cor. 11:3). One can argue that since the NIV has the phrase "confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh" in verse 2 and omits the phrase only in verse 3, there is no significant problem. I am sure James White would say this, but my reply is that we are comparing the KJV with the NIV in key passages touching on Christ’s deity to see which translation is stronger overall, and there is no doubt that the NIV in this passage is somewhat weaker than the KJV.

1 JN. 4:2-3 KJV: "Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world."

1 JN. 4:3 NIV: "This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world."

** 1 JOHN 5:7 -- This verse in the KJV is a powerful witness to the Deity of Jesus Christ as an equal member of the Godhead. The NIV, though, omits the verse and has no witness whatsoever. We are taking a simple survey through the New Testament to see which of the English translations is more honoring to Jesus Christ, the KJV or the NIV, and the KJV is winning hands down.

1 JN. 5:7 KJV: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

1 JN. 5:7 NIV: Omitted

1 JOHN 5:20 -- Both the NIV and the KJV are sound in their witness to Christ. [See explanation under comments on Matthew 1:23.]

** REVELATION 1:11 -- By removing "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" from verse 11, the NIV, following the critical Greek text, seriously weakens this powerful reference to Christ’s Godhead. As it stands in the Received Text and the KJV and any other faithful TR translation, the Almighty of verse 8 is obviously the Lord Jesus Christ of verse 11. Modern version proponents like to point out the fact that the critical text adds the word "God" in verse 8. But consider the whole picture: Verse 8 in the critical text omits "the beginning and the ending." Verse 9 omits "Christ" two times. Verse 11 omits "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last." The overall effect of the modern version rendering of Revelation chapter one is to weaken its testimony to Christ‘s deity as compared with the King James Bible.

REV. 1:11 KJV: "Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea."

REV. 1:11 NIV: "which said: ‘Write on a scroll what you see and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea."

CONCLUSION: Twenty-four out of the above 44 key passages on the deity of Christ are weakened in the NIV. That means that more than one-half of the key testimonies are weakened or removed in the New International Version. Not one of these testimonies are omitted from the KJV; and, in our estimation, not one of these passages in the KJV is weak in its testimony to the Deity of Jesus Christ. By taking into consideration a wider range of passages touching on the Deity of Christ, a much different picture is given from that which appears in James White’s book.

Second, White also errs in overstating and twisting that part of the evidence that he does consider. For example, he claims the KJV is ambiguous in four key passages--Rom. 9:5; Col. 2:9; Tit. 2:13; and 2 Pet. 1:1. Having examined the passages carefully, we believe he is misstating the case in all four instances. Consider 2 Peter 1:1 in the KJV and the NIV:

2 PET. 1:1 KJV: "Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:"

2 PET 1:1 NIV: "Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:"

The King James Version also included a marginal reading with this verse: "our God and Saviour." The KJV translators apparently believed the verse could possibly be translated both ways, though they preferred "God and Saviour Jesus Christ" and put it in the text. Commentator Albert Barnes notes that Erasmus also supposed "that it may be taken in either sense." Thus we see that many of the best Greek scholars have believed the verse can rightly be translated in two different ways in Greek. This being the case, the King James Bible is again found to be more accurate and precise than the NIV, because it gives both: one in the text and one in the margin.

Further, both the KJV text rendering and the KJV marginal rendering witness that Christ is God. The KJV text, "through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ," is in itself a powerful and irrefutable witness to Christ’s Deity. In this expression Christ is put on the exact same footing as God as the source of the sinner’s righteousness. We receive righteousness from God and from Christ. If Christ were not God, such a statement would be absolute blasphemy. Who is righteous but God? Among men there "is none righteous, no, not one" (Rom. 3:10). Who can impart righteousness to a sinner except God?

Barnes also warns that the translation "our God and Saviour" "though certainly not a violation of the laws of the Greek language, is not so free from all doubt as to make it proper to use the passage as a proof-text in an argument for the divinity of the Saviour." James White, though, includes this verse as one of the 12 most significant verses on the Deity of Christ in the entire New Testament. This is because he seemingly has an agenda to promote the New International Version and to make the King James Bible look inferior.

Turning to Colossians 2:9 and Titus 2:13, we see no ambiguity or lack of clarity pertaining to the deity of Jesus Christ in the KJV.

COL. 2:9 KJV: "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

TIT. 2:13 KVJ: "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ."

For centuries the KJV rendering of these passages has been used by Bible-believing people to teach and defend that Jesus Christ is God. For example, Albert Barnes says that to interpret Titus 2:13 in the KJV to refer to Christ’s deity "is the common interpretation of those who claim to be orthodox," and, "That it would naturally and obviously convey the idea that he [Christ] was divine, to one who had no theory to defend." We agree with this assessment. The alleged ambiguity of this passage in the KJV has been in the minds of false teachers. The problem has not been with the KJV’s translation of the verse but with the failure of heretics to rightly divide the Word of God by comparing Scripture with Scripture. Now, though, in these recent and allegedly more enlightened times, when Bible scholarship has supposedly progressed beyond that of centuries past, we have men claiming that the KJV is unclear in these key passages. This is pathetic.

We have already looked at Colossians 2:9 and have seen that the KJV translation of "Godhead" is more powerful and effective than the NIV’s rendering of "deity."

What about Romans 9:5? We have already seen that though the rendering in Romans 9:5 does appear at first glance to be clearer in the NIV as a testimony to Christ’s deity, IT LOSES ITS SHINE WHEN THE NIV’S FOOTNOTE IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION.

ROMANS 9:5 KJV: "Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."

ROMANS 9:5 NIV: "Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen." (Footnote: Or Christ, who is over all. God be forever praised! Or Christ. God who is over all be forever praised!)

Whereas the KJV marginal notes strengthen the Deity of Christ, those in the NIV often degrade it. The NIV footnote effectively undermines the rendering given in the text and greatly confuses the issue. To say, then, that the NIV’s translation here is a more effective testimony to Christ’s deity than that of the KJV is, in our estimation, nonsense. The NIV translation of Romans 9:5 contains much "dynamic equivalency" and paraphrasing. The phrase "human ancestry" is an example. The KJV gives an exact rendering of the Greek in this verse basically word for word, whereas the NIV gives a loose approximation. The KJV reads as it does in Romans 9:5 PRECISELY because it is faithful to the Greek.

This brings us to an important point. Ambiguity in itself does not mean that a translation is an inaccurate rendering of the Greek text. One mark of an excellent translation, in fact, is its precise handling of ambiguity. If the Greek or Hebrew is ambiguous, that means the Holy Spirit has made it so for a purpose. If a translator renders such a passage by interpreting or making a "dynamic equivalency" it to remove the ambiguity instead of accurately translating it, he will rob the readers of part of the meaning. An example of this is in Psalm 12:6,7. The Hebrew text allows the reader to interpret the pronoun "them" in verse 7 as referring both to the "word" of verse 6 and to the people of the previous verses. The King James Bible translation of this verse allows the same double interpretation. In most modern versions, though, such as the NIV, verse 7 is translated in such a way that it cannot possibly be applied to the words of verse 6, thus completely destroying the application of this important passage to the doctrine of biblical preservation.

Returning to Romans 9:5, the KJV translation of this verse follows the Greek text precisely. If there is ambiguity, it is also in the Greek. Every passage must be interpreted in the context of the wider testimony of Scripture, and when we do so with the KJV in Romans 9:5 we see that Christ is both God and that He is blessed of God. That is exactly what the rest of the Bible says! The "ambiguity" in the Greek and in the English speaks of the mystery of the Trinity. Hallelujah!

Consider another example of White’s misstatement of the evidence. In his chart on page 197 he claims that the KJV omits one witness to Christ’s deity which he claims the NIV and the NASB contain. This is in John 1:18. Consider the following comparison of this verse in the NIV and the KJV--

John 1:18 KJV -- "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."

John 1:18 NIV -- "No one has ever seen God, but God the only Son, who is at the Father’s side, has made him known."

It does appear, at first glance, that the NIV is superior in this verse in its witness to Christ’s deity in that it reads "God the only Son." The KJV, on the other hand, has "the only begotten Son." What White does not explain to his readers is this: In the King James Bible, following the Received Text, John had introduced the term "only begotten Son" four verses prior to verse 18, and he has connected this unique term directly to Christ’s eternal deity in verse one. Thus, one who reads the King James Bible or any other faithful Received Text Bible is made to understand that the phrase "only begotten Son" is a direct reference to Christ’s eternal Godhead. This phrase appears in John 1:4,18; 3:16,18; 1 John 4:9. In each of these verses the NIV changes this important doctrinal phrase "only begotten" to "one and only," which is not even a true statement. Jesus Christ is not God’s one and only Son (born again believers are sons of God--Heb. 2:10), but Christ is the only begotten Son. We thus disagree with White’s assessment of this passage, and reject his claim that the KJV omits Christ’s deity from John 1:18. In reality, the modern versions, including the NIV, have perverted the doctrine of Christ by removing the key phrase "only begotten" in all five verses in which it should appear. John 1:18 in the NIV, by its erroneous dynamic equivalency translation, teaches false doctrine.

Third, White errs in claiming that the vast omissions pertaining to the name of the Lord Jesus Christ does nothing to weaken the doctrine of His deity. One of the characteristics of the critical Greek text and the modern versions which follow it is the widespread omission of names and titles belonging to the Lord Jesus Christ. The aforementioned Everett Fowler spent many years diligently comparing the Received Text with the Westcott-Hort Greek text, the Nestles Greek Text, and the Bible Societies’ Greek Text, and several popular modern English versions. In 1976 Fowler obtained the Trinitarian Bible Society edition of the Received Text, and he began his comparisons. Eventually he published his findings in the book Evaluating Versions of the New Testament. One section of this excellent work lists "Omissions of Names of Our Lord God." The omissions affect the reading of 101 verses. There are 221 omissions of the various names of the Lord Jesus Christ in the Westcott-Hort text, 230 in the Nestles’ text, 212 in the Bible Societies text. The modern English versions follow this pattern. The American Standard Version of 1901 has 198 of these omissions of the names and titles of the Lord Jesus Christ and the New American Standard Version of 1973 has 210 omissions.

Many men of God believe the Westcott-Hort text and the modern translations weaken the Scriptures' testimony of the deity of Jesus Christ through this barrage of significant omissions pertaining to His name and title. The flippant dismissal of this as insignificant by James White and other modern version defenders is strange.

Fourth, White errs in failing to acknowledge exactly what King James Bible defenders say about the witness of the modern versions to Christ’s deity and some other key doctrines. As noted earlier, King James Bible defenders do not claim that the modern versions OMIT key doctrines. They claim that the modern versions WEAKEN some of them through a barrage of often relatively minor (in themselves) changes and omissions. I have studied the Bible in various versions for a quarter of a century, and I am convinced that this charge is accurate. (I was prejudiced AGAINST the King James Bible in my early years, and only through prayerful study did I become convinced that the Received Text and the King James Bible were the preserved Word of God.) I have attempted to defend the doctrine of Christ’s Godhead many times through various modern versions which were possessed by people with whom I was dealing. This has happened frequently in the county jail ministry, for example, during the past six years. From time to time someone will attend our Bible studies who has a Jehovah’s Witness or some other background which undermines Christ’s deity. They often have a modern version, and in my experience it is easier to defend their perverted doctrine from the modern versions than it is from the King James Bible. It is no accident that the Jehovah’s Witnesses choose to publish the Westcott-Hort Greek text. They, and their Unitarian friends who also deny Christ’s Godhead, understand that which White claims is not true: that the modern critical text provides the best support for doctrinal heresy.

Fifth, in regard to the issue of whether or not the modern critical Greek text weakens the doctrine of Christ, White errs in ignoring the testimony of 19th-century Bible defenders. A large number of men of God in the 19th century, who fought against the critical Greek texts which were then being introduced, saw in them an attack upon the deity of Christ. I have documented this in my book For Love of the Bible: The Battle for the Received Text and the King James Bible from 1800 to Present. I believe this is a very significant point, and it is one which James White completely ignores, because he persists in his delusion that this issue is one which has been raised solely by some "King James Only" cult of recent decades. Consider a couple of examples of the many which could be given.

The first example is Frederick Nolan (1784-1864). In 1815 he published An Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate or Received Text of the New Testament, subtitled "in which the Greek manuscripts are newly classed, the integrity of the Authorised Text vindicated, and the various readings traced to their origin." As the title suggests, this 576-page volume was a defense of the text underlying the Authorized Version. Nolan said, "... it shall be my object to vindicate those important passages of the Received Text which have been rejected from the Scripture Canon, on the principles of the German method of classification" (p. 43). Among the several passages that he thus vindicated are 1 Timothy 3:16 and 1 John 5:7.

Nolan defended the sixteenth-century text on the basis of faith and theological purity. In particular, Nolan was defending the TR against the text and theorizing of J. Griesbach. Nolan saw the hand of God guiding the sixteenth-century textual editors, and he understood that the Received Text is theologically superior to the critical texts. In a careful and very technical manner this Bible scholar traced the history of the doctrinal corruptions which were introduced into the text of various manuscripts during the first four centuries after Christ. Of course, James White and his modern version defender friends pretend that such a view is the delusion of late 20th-century King James Only cultists. Nolan would be amazed.

"The works of those early writers lie under the positive imputation of being corrupted. The copies of Clement and Origen were corrupted in their life time; the manuscripts from which Tertullian’s works have been printed are notoriously faulty; and the copies of Cyprian demonstrate their own corruption, by their disagreement among themselves, and their agreement with different texts and revisals of Scripture. It is likewise indisputable, that these fathers not only followed each other, adopting the arguments and quotations of one another; but that they quoted from the heterodox as well as the orthodox. They were thus likely to transmit from one to another erroneous quotations, originally adopted from sources not more pure than heretical revisals of Scripture. ... New revisals of Scripture were thus formed, which were interpolated with the peculiar readings of scholiasts and fathers. Nor did this systematic corruption terminate here; but when new texts were thus formed, they became the standard by which the later copies of the early writers were in succession corrected" (An Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate, 1815, pp. 326-332).

Nolan connects this textual corruption with manuscripts such as the Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus which contain readings at variance with the Received Text. In his Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate, Nolan detailed the overwhelming textual authority which supports various key passages which were in the Received Text but which are disputed by the modern versions.

The amazing thing is that these facts, which were understood by the Reformation editors and confirmed by wise scholars in the nineteenth century, are scoffed today, even by many supposed Evangelical and some Fundamentalist scholars. James White is only one example. Why? BECAUSE THESE EVANGELICALS AND FUNDAMENTALISTS ARE NOT DEPENDING ON THEIR OWN SCHOLARSHIP BUT UPON THE RATIONALISTIC SCHOLARSHIP OF THE PAST TWO CENTURIES.

Robert Lewis Dabney (1820-98) is another example of those who were opposing the theories of modern textual criticism in the United States a century and more ago. We gave an overview of Dabney’s life and ministry earlier in this study. He boldly withstood the apostasy which was creeping in on every side in this day. His biographer called him "a soldier until death, at war with much in his age." We can say amen and praise the Lord to that attitude!

Dabney understood the theological corruption of the critical text, and he traced these corruptions to second- and third-century heretics. He understood that scholarship is not synonymous with wisdom and spiritual discernment. He knew the fickleness of modern scholarship. He knew that the modern theories of textual criticism are founded upon conjecture and rationalism, not absolute truth and biblical faith. We do not agree with all of Dabney’s conclusions on textual matters, but the fact remains that his analysis of modern textual criticism is devastating and it definitely was contrary to that of James White. It is crucial to understand that the modern English versions are translated from a Greek text which is built upon discredited theories. Consider an excerpt from one of his articles on this subject which noted the doctrinal nature of the textual battle:

The following list [of doctrinal corruptions in the critical Greek text] is not presented as complete, but as containing the most notable of these points. ... the Sinai and the Vatican MSS. concur in omitting, in Matthew vi. 13, the closing doxology of our Lord’s prayer. In John viii. 1-11, they and the Alexandrine omit the whole narrative of Christ’s interview with the woman taken in adultery and her accusers. The first two omit the whole of Mark xvi., from the ninth verse to the end. Acts viii. 37, in which Philip is represented as propounding to the eunuch faith as the qualification for baptism, is omitted by all three.

... in Acts ix. 5,6 ... the Sinai, Vatican and Alexandrine MSS. all concur in [omitting ‘Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said...’ from the passage.]

In 1 Tim. iii. 16 ... the Sinai, Codex Ephremi, and probably the Alexandrine [omit God]...

In 1 John v. 7 ... all the old MSS. concur in omitting the heavenly witnesses...

In Jude 4 ... the MSS. omit God.

In Rev. i. 11 ... all three MSS. under remark concur in omitting the Messiah’s eternal titles...

If now the reader will glance back upon this latter list of variations, HE WILL FIND THAT IN EVERY CASE, THE DOCTRINAL EFFECT OF THE DEPARTURE FROM THE RECEIVED TEXT IS TO OBSCURE OR SUPPRESS SOME TESTIMONY FOR THE DIVINITY OF THE SAVIOUR....

The significant fact to which we wish especially to call attention is this: that all the variations proposed on the faith of these manuscripts which have any doctrinal importance, should attack the one doctrine of the Trinity; nay, we may say even more specifically, the one doctrine of Christ’s deity. ... Their admirers [of the favored manuscripts supporting the critical text] claim for them an origin in the fourth or fifth century. The Sabellian and Arian controversies raged in the third and fourth. Is there no coincidence here? Things do not happen again and again regularly without a cause. ... And when we remember the date of the great Trinitarian contest, and compare it with the supposed date of these exemplars of the sacred text, the ground of suspicion becomes violent. ... THESE VARIATIONS ARE TOO NUMEROUS, AND TOO SIGNIFICANT IN THEIR EFFECT UPON THE ONE DOCTRINE, TO BE ASCRIBED TO CHANCE. ... there are strong probable grounds to conclude, that the text of the Scriptures current in the East received a mischievous modification at the hands of the famous ORIGEN, which has not been usually appreciated. ... He is described by Mosheim ... as ‘a compound of contraries, wise and unwise, acute and stupid, judicious and injudicious; the enemy of superstition, and its patron; a strenuous defender of Christianity, and its corrupter; energetic and irresolute; one to whom the Bible owes much, and from whom it has suffered much.’ ... HIS REPUTATION AS THE GREAT INTRODUCER OF MYSTICISM, ALLEGORY, AND NEO-PLATONISM INTO THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH, IS TOO WELL KNOWN TO NEED RECITAL. Those who are best acquainted with the history of Christian opinion know best, that Origen was the great corrupter, and the source, or at least earliest channel, of nearly all the speculative errors which plagued the church in after ages. ... HE WAS STRICTLY A RATIONALIST. ... HE DISBELIEVED THE FULL INSPIRATION AND INFALLIBILITY OF THE SCRIPTURES, holding that the inspired men apprehended and stated many things obscurely. ... THE KEY-NOTE OF ALL ORIGEN’S LABORS WAS THE EFFORT TO RECONCILE CHRISTIANITY AND THIS ECLECTIC PAGAN PHILOSOPHY INTO A SUBSTANTIAL UNITY....

... SOMEBODY HAS PLAYED THE KNAVE WITH THE TEXT ... We think that [the reader] will conclude with us that the weight of probability is greatly in favour of this theory--that the anti-Trinitarians, finding certain codices in which these doctrinal readings had been already lost through the licentious criticism of Origen and his school, industriously diffused them, while they also did what they dared to add to the omissions of similar readings (R.L. Dabney, "The Doctrinal Various Readings of the New Testament Greek," Southern Presbyterian Review, April 1871, reprinted in Discussions Evangelical and Theological, 1890, pp. 350-389 ).

We see that Robert Dabney, upon examining the same textual changes which later appeared in the Westcott-Hort Greek text of 1881 and which appear in the modern English versions today, concluded that they were deliberate and damnable doctrinal corruptions. We think Dabney would be amazed to hear James White say that this conclusion is the product of the feverish imagination of an allegedly anti-intellectual fundamental Baptist "King James Only" crowd which has arisen only in recent years! As we have seen, this is nonsense. For those who want to know the truth of the matter, we have offered a list of recommended resources at the end of this article.

Sixth, White errs in ignoring the witness of a wide range of modern versions. In attempting to prove that the modern versions do not weaken the doctrine of Christ’s deity, White focuses almost exclusively upon the New International Version and the New American Standard Version. Though he does mention in passing that some modern versions are weaker in this area, he does not give the reader the complete picture. Let’s go back and examine key Christology passages in a wide range of the newer popular modern versions. We will use the following six translations: The New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), New Living Translation (NLT), Today’s English Bible (TEV), God’s Word: Today’s Bible Translation (TBT), the Contemporary English Version (CEV), and The Message: The New Testament in Contemporary Language by Eugene Peterson (highly recommended by such well-known men as J.I. Packer, Warren Wiersbe, and Michael Card). All of these versions are widely distributed and influential and have been recommended in "evangelical" circles. The Today’s English Version, for example, has sold millions of copies is the most popular Bible text in England and Australia

ACTS 20:28

KJV: "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."

NRSV: "… to shepherd the church of God that he obtained with the blood of his own Son."

TBT: "’And now beware! Be sure that you feed and shepherd God’s flock--his church, purchased with his blood--over whom the Holy Spirit has appointed you as elders.’"

TEV: …Be shepherds of the church of God, which he made his own through the sacrificial death of his Son."

TBT: "Pay attention to yourselves and to the entire flock in which the Holy Spirit has placed you as bishops to be shepherds for God’s church which he acquired with his own blood."

CEV: "…Be shepherds to God’s church. It is the flock that he bought with the blood of his own Son."

MESSAGE: "… God’s people they are--to guard and protect them. God himself thought they were worth dying for."

The KJV powerfully demonstrates the deity of Christ by showing that the blood that was shed on Calvary was God’s blood. On the other hand, the NRSV, the TEV, the CEV, and The Message completely remove this powerful witness to Christ’s deity.

ROMANS 9:5

KJV: "Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."

"NRSV: "to them belong the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, comes the Messiah, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen."

NLT: "Their ancestors were great people of God, and Christ himself was a Jew as far as his human nature is concerned. And he is God, who rules over everything and is worthy of eternal praise! Amen."

TEV: "they are descended from the famous Hebrew ancestors; and Christ, as a human being, belongs to their race. May God, who rules over all, be praised forever! Amen."

TBT: "The Messiah is descended from their ancestors according to his human nature. The Messiah is God over everything, forever blessed. Amen."

CEV: "They have those famous ancestors, who were also the ancestors of Jesus Christ. I pray that God, who rules over all, will be praised forever! Amen."

MESSAGE: "They had everything going for them--family, glory, covenants, revelation, worship, promises, Christ, who is God over everything, always. Oh, yes!"

James White claims that Romans 9:5 in the KJV is ambiguous and that it does not plainly present the deity of Christ. The fact is that the KJV follows the Greek text precisely. An examination of an interlinear Greek-English Bible will demonstrate this. If there is ambiguity, it is also in the Greek, and an accurate translation can do nothing more than follow its underlying text. In fact, there is no problem with the KJV translation of Romans 9:5, and we do not accept White’s charge that the KJV is weak here in regard to Christ’s deity. Every passage must be interpreted in the context of the wider testimony of Scripture, and when we do so with the KJV in Romans 9:5 we see that Christ is both God and that He is blessed of God. That is exactly what the rest of the Bible says! It speaks of the mystery of the Trinity. The doctrine of Christ’s deity is completely removed, though, from the Today’s English Version and the Contemporary English Version.

1 CORINTHIANS 15:47

KJV: "The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven."

NRSV: "The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven."

NLT: "Adam, the first man, was made from the dust of the earth, while Christ, the second man, came from heaven."

TEV: "The first Adam, made of earth, came from the earth; the second Adam came from heaven."

TBT: "The first man was made from the dust of the earth. He came from the earth. The second man came from heaven."

CEV: "The first man was made from the dust of the earth, but the second man came from heaven."

MESSAGE: "The First Man was made out of earth, and people since then are earthy; the Second Man was made out of heaven, and people now can be heavenly."

The KJV tells us that Christ is the Lord from heaven, but by omitting the words "the Lord," all of the modern versions, following the critical text, obliterate this powerful reference to Christ’s deity.

PHILIPPIANS 2:6-7

KJV: "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross."

NRSV: "who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited, but emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in human likeness. And being found in human form, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death--even death on a cross."

NLT: "Though he was God, he did not demand and cling to his rights as God. He made himself nothing; he took the humble position of a slave and appeared in a human form. And in human form he obediently humbled himself even further by dying a criminal’s death on a cross."

TEV: "He always had the nature of God, but he did not think that by force he should try to become equal with God. Instead of this, of his own free will he gave up all he had, and took the nature of a servant. He became like man and appeared in human likeness. He was humble and walked the path of obedience all the way to death--his death on the cross."

TBT: "Although he was in the form of God and equal with God, he did not take advantage of this equality. Instead, he emptied himself by taking on the form of a servant, by becoming like other humans, by having a human appearance. He humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, death on a cross."

CEV: "Christ was truly God. But he did not try to remain equal with God. He gave up everything and became a slave, when he became like one of us. He gave up everything and became a slave, when he became like one of us. Christ was humble. He obeyed God and even died on a cross."

MESSAGE: "He had equal status with God but didn’t think so much of himself that he had to cling to the advantages of that status no matter what. Not at all. When the time came, he set aside the privileges of deity and took on the status of a slave, became human! Having become human, he stayed human. It was an incredibly humbling process. He didn’t claim special privileges. Instead, he lived a selfless, obedient life and then died a selfless, obedient death--and the worst kind of death at that: a crucifixion."

The King James Bible most perfectly presents the mystery of Christ’s incarnation in this key passage by its precise rendering of the Greek text. On the other hand, several popular versions detract from the doctrine. The TBT claims that Christ became like other humans. This is very weak and allows for false doctrine pertaining to Christ’s humanity. The CEV claims he gave up everything. That poor translation allows for the false doctrine that Christ laid aside His Godhead. The Message says that Christ merely had "equal status" with God.

COLOSSIANS 1:15

KJV: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:"

NRSV: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation."

NLT: "Christ is the visible image of the invisible God. He existed before God made anything at all and is supreme over all creation."

TEV: "Christ is the visible likeness of the invisible God. He is the first-born Son, superior to all created things."

TBT: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation."

CEV: "Christ is exactly like God, who cannot be seen. He is the first-born Son, superior to all creation."

MESSAGE: "We look at this Son and see the God who cannot be seen."

The KJV perfectly and beautifully presents the doctrine of Christ’s eternal Godhead here, but some of the modern versions do not. The NLT claims that He merely existed before God made anything, which means He might not have been eternal. The CEV claims He is exactly like God, but this could mean He is not God but that He is only like God. The weak rendering in The Message could mean many false things.

COLOSSIANS 1:19

KJV: "For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell."

NRSV: "For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell."

NLT: "For God in all his fullness was pleased to live in Christ."

TEV: "For it was by God’s own decision that the Son has in himself the full nature of God."

TBT: "God was pleased to have all of himself live in Christ."

CEV: "God himself was pleased to live fully in his Son."

MESSAGE: "So spacious is he, so roomy, that everything of God finds its proper place in him without crowding."

The King James Bible, with its precise rendering of the correct Greek text, contains a lovely testimony to Christ’s Godhead in this verse. Many of the modern versions muddy this testimony. To say that God lived in Christ is not the same as saying that in Christ was all the fullness of God. The difference is subtle, but real. Those who know the subtilty of false doctrine, understand how important these distinctions are. The KJV, correctly following the Greek, says nothing about God living in Christ. God could live in Christ, in the sense taught by New Agers and many false teachers, without Christ Himself being Almighty God. The modern versions, by their less precise rendering of the Greek, provide more fertile ground for the dissemination of error.

COLOSSIANS 2:9

KJV: "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."

NRSV: "For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily."

NLT: "For in Christ the fullness of God lives in a human body."

TEV: "For the full content of divine nature lives in Christ, in his humanity."

TBT: "All of God lives in Christ’s body…"

CEV: "God lives fully in Christ."

MESSAGE: "Everything of God gets expressed in him, so you can see and hear him clearly."

The KJV translation is a clear and marvelous testimony to the doctrine that Jesus Christ is fully God. The other translations, though, have problems of various sorts with this passage. The NRSV rendering of "deity" is less clear and powerful than the KJV’s "Godhead." Some, such as the Unitarians and Modernists, who deny Christ’s Godhead claim they believe in his "deity" as they falsely define it. The Message rendering is typically weak and almost meaningless. The TBT rendering is very strange. How would "all of God" live in Christ’s body? God is omnipresent. The TEV, likewise, through its lax paraphrasing, presents strange doctrine. Does the full content of divine nature live in Christ’s humanity?

1 TIMOTHY 1:15-17

KJV: "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might show forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting. Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen."

NRSV: "But for that very reason I received mercy, so that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display the utmost patience, making me an example to those who would come to believe in him for eternal life. To the King of the ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen."

NLT: "This is a true saying, and everyone should believe it: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners--and I was the worst of them all. But that is why God had mercy on me, so that Christ Jesus could use me as a prime example of his great patience with even the worst sinners. Then others will realize that they, too, can believe on him and receive eternal life. Glory and honor to God forever and ever. He is the eternal King, the unseen one who never dies; he alone is God. Amen."

TEV: "This is a true saying, to be completely accepted and believed: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners. I am the worst of them but God was merciful to me in order that Christ Jesus might show his full patience in dealing with me, the worst of sinners, as an example for all those who would later believe in him and receive eternal life. To the eternal King, immortal and invisible, the only God--to him be honor and glory forever and ever! Amen."

TBT: "This is a statement that can be trusted and deserves complete acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, and I am the foremost sinner. However, I was treated with mercy so that Christ Jesus could use me, the foremost sinner, to demonstrate his patience. This patience serves as an example for those who would believe in him and live forever. Worship and glory belong forever to the eternal king, the immortal, invisible, and only God. Amen."

CEV: "’Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.’ This saying is true, and it can be trusted. I was the worst sinner of all! But since I was worse than anyone else, God had mercy on me and let me be an example of the endless patience of Christ Jesus. He did this so that others would put their faith in Christ and have eternal life. I pray that honor and glory will always be given to the only God, who lives forever and is the invisible and eternal King! Amen."

MESSAGE: "Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners. I’m proof--Public Sinner Number One--of someone who could never have made it apart from sheer mercy. And now he shows me off--evidence of his endless patience--to those who are right on the edge of trusting him forever. Deep honor and bright glory to the King of All Time--One God, Immortal, Invisible, ever and always. Oh, yes!"

This passage in the King James Bible, particularly taken in combination with the KJV translation of 1 Tim. 6:14-17, is an unequivocal testimony that Jesus Christ is the only wise God. The paraphrasing in the NLT and the CEV completely remove this testimony. The TEV does the same thing by adding the word "God" in verse 16 with no Greek authority, thus introducing an apparent distinction between Jesus Christ and God. The CEV and the Message are so loosely paraphrased that it is difficult to understand what they are saying, but their testimony to Christ’s deity is certainly not clear in this passage.

1 TIMOTHY 3:16

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

NRSV: "Without any doubt, the mystery of our religion is great: He was revealed in flesh, vindicated in spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among Gentiles, believed in throughout the world, taken up in glory."

NLT: "Without question, this is the great mystery of our faith: Christ appeared in the flesh and was shown to be righteous by the Spirit. He was seen by angels and was announced to the nations. He was believed on in the world and was taken up into heaven."

TEV: "No one can deny how great is the secret of our religion: He appeared in human form, was shown to be right by the Spirit, and was seen by angels. He was preached among the nations, was believed in throughout the world, and was taken up to heaven."

TBT: "The mystery that gives us our reverence for God is acknowledged to be great: He appeared in his human nature, was approved by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was announced throughout the nations, was believed in the world, and was taken to heaven in glory."

CEV: "Here is the great mystery of our religion: Christ came as a human. The Spirit proved that he pleased God, and he was seen by angels. Christ was preached to the nations. People in this world put their faith in him, and he was taken up to glory."

MESSAGE: "This Christian life is a great mystery, far exceeding our understanding, but some things are clear enough: He appeared in a human body, was proved right by the invisible Spirit, was seen by angels. He was proclaimed among all kinds of peoples, believed in all over the world, taken up into heavenly glory."

The King James Version, by following the God-honored Received Text, contains in this verse one of very plainest references in the Bible to Jesus Christ as God. The modern versions, following the critical Greek text and on scant and undependable authority, omit the word "God," rendering the verse almost meaningless, and certainly robbing it of any clear reference to the Deity of Jesus Christ.

1 TIMOTHY 6:14-16

KJV: "That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: Which in his times he shall show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen."

NRSV: "to keep the commandment without spot or blame until the manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ, which he will bring about at the right time--he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords. It is he alone who has immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see; to him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen."

NLT: "that you obey his commands with all purity. Then no one can find fault with you from now until our Lord Jesus Christ returns. For at the right time Christ will be revealed from heaven by the blessed and only almighty God, the King of kings and Lord of lords. He alone can never die, and he lives in light so brilliant that no human can approach him. No one has ever seen him, nor ever will. To him be honor and power forever. Amen."

TEV: "to obey your orders and keep them faithfully until the Day when our Lord Jesus Christ will appear. His appearing will be brought about at the right time by God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and the Lord of lords. He alone is immortal; he lives in the light that no one can approach. No one has ever seen him; no one can ever see him. To him be honor and eternal power! Amen."

TBT: "I insist that, until our Lord Jesus Christ appears, you obey this command completely. Then you cannot be blamed for doing anything wrong. At the right time God will make this known. God is the blessed and only ruler. He is the King of kings and Lord of lords. He is the only one who cannot die. He lives in light that no one can come near. No one has seen him, nor can they see him. Honor and power belong to him forever! Amen."

CEV: "Promise to obey completely and fully all that you have been told until our Lord Jesus Christ returns. The glorious God is the only Ruler, the Kings of kings and Lord of lords. At the time that God has already decided, he will send Jesus Christ back again. Only God lives forever! And he lives in light that no one can come near. No human has ever seen God or ever can see him. God will be honored, and his power will last forever. Amen."

MESSAGE: "Keep this command to the letter, and don’t slack off. Our Master, Jesus Christ, is on his way. He’ll show up right on time, his arrival guaranteed by the Blessed and Undisputed Ruler, High King, High God. He’s the only one death can’t touch, his light so bright no one can get close. He’s never been seen by human eyes--human eyes can’t take him in! Honor to him, and eternal rule! Oh, yes."

In this beautiful passage the King James Version offers a powerful, unequivocal witness that Jesus Christ is God. Every statement in verses 15 and 16 is identified directly with the "our Lord Jesus Christ" of verse 14. The NRSV, on the other hand, rewords the passage to make it possible that the rest of the passage does not refer directly to Christ. It is not as clear as the KJV. The NLT changes the passage completely so that it no longer refers to Christ as the King of kings and Lord of lords, etc., but to "almighty God." The TEV, TBT, and CEV do the same thing. The Message is even worse. All of these pervert the passage doctrinally.

TITUS 2:13

KJV: "Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ."

NRSV: "while we wait for the blessed hope and the manifestation of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ."

NLT: "while we look forward to that wonderful event when the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, will be revealed."

TEV: "as we wait for the blessed Day we hope for, when the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ will appear."

TBT: "At the same time we can expect what we hope for--the appearance of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ."

CEV: "We are filled with hope, as we wait for the glorious return of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ."

MESSAGE: "This new life is starting right now, and is whetting our appetites for the glorious day when our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, appears."

The KJV presents Jesus Christ as the great God and our Saviour. The other versions also present Christ this way. It is the only key passage we have found in which all of the popular English versions present the Deity of Christ properly.

HEBREWS 1:3

KJV: "Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high."

NRSV: "He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being, and he sustains all things by his powerful word. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high."

NLT: "The Son reflects God’s own glory, and everything about him represents God exactly. He sustains the universe by the mighty power of his command. After he died to cleanse us from the stain of sin, he sat down in the place of honor at the right hand of the majestic God of heaven."

TEV: "He reflects the brightness of God’s glory and is the exact likeness of God’s own being, sustaining the universe with his powerful word. After achieving forgiveness for the sins of mankind, he sat down in heaven at the right side of God, the Supreme Power."

TBT: "His Son is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact likeness of God’s being. He holds everything together through his powerful words. After he had cleansed people from their sins, he received the highest position, the one next to the Father in heaven."

CEV: "God’s Son has all the brightness of God’s own glory and is like him in every way. By his own mighty word he holds the universe together. After the Son had washed away our sins, he sat down at the right side of the glorious God in heaven."

MESSAGE: "This Son perfectly mirrors God, and is stamped with God’s nature. He holds everything together by what he says--powerful words! After he finished the sacrifice for sins, the Son took his honored place high in the heavens right alongside God."

The KJV has a lovely testimony to Christ’s Deity and to the Trinity. He is the express image of God’s person yet he sat down on the right hand of God in Heaven. None of the other versions are as precise and accurate as the KJV, and all of them omit the very important phrase "by himself" in reference to His atonement.

HEBREWS 1:8

KJV: "But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom."

NRSV: "But of the Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, and the righteous scepter is the scepter of your kingdom."

NLT: "But to his Son he says, ‘Your throne, O God, endures forever and ever. Your royal power is expressed in righteousness."

TEV: "About the Son, however, God said: ‘Your kingdom, O God, will last forever and ever! You rule over your people with justice.’"

TBT: "But God said about his Son, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever. The scepter in your kingdom is a scepter for justice.’"

CEV: "But God says about his Son, ‘You are God, and you will rule as King forever! Your royal power brings about justice."

MESSAGE: "But he says to the Son, ‘You’re God, and on the throne for good; your rule makes everything right. You love it when things are right; you hate it when things are wrong.’"

This is one of the most important verses teaching the Godhead of Jesus Christ, and the KJV translates it beautifully. All of the translations allow for the Son to be called God, but the NRSV, TEV, TBT, and CEV change the direction of God’s statement. Instead of addressing His words to the Son, they have Him speaking about the Son. The alleged "dynamic equivalency" rendering of this verse in the NLT, the TEV, the CEV, and the Message is almost childish.

1 JOHN 3:16

KJV: "Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren."

NRSV: "We know love by this, that he laid down his life for us--and we ought to lay down our lives for one another."

NLT: "We know what real love is because Christ gave up his life for us. And so we also ought to give up our lives for our Christian friends."

TEV: "This is how we know what love is: Christ gave his life for us. We too, then, ought to give our lives for our brothers!"

TBT: "We understand what love is when we realize that Christ gave his life for us. That means we must give our lives for other believes."

CEV: "We know what love is because Jesus gave his life for us. That’s why we must give our lives for each other."

MESSAGE: "This is how we’ve come to understand and experience love: Christ sacrificed his life for us."

The KJV has an unequivocal testimony that Jesus Christ is God. The one who laid down his life for us is called God. By replacing "God" with "Christ" or "he," all of the other versions remove this powerful reference to Christ’s Godhead.

REVELATION 1:11

KJV: "Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea."

NRSV: "saying, ‘Write in a book what you see and send it to the seven churches, to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamum, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea."

NLT: "It said, ‘Write down what you see, and send it to the seven churches: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea."

TEV: "It said, ‘Write down what you see, and send the book to the churches in these seven cities: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea.’"

TBT: "saying, ‘Write on a scroll what you see, and send it to the seven churches: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea.’"

CEV: "The voice said, ‘Write in a book what you see. Then send tit to the seven churches in Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea.’"

MESSAGE: "’Write what you see into a book. Send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea.’"

By removing "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last" from verse 11, all of the modern versions, following the critical Greek text, seriously weaken this powerful reference to Christ’s Godhead. As it stands in the Received Text and the KJV and any other faithful TR translation, the Almighty of verse 8 is obviously the Lord Jesus Christ of verse 11. Modern version proponents like to point out the fact that the critical text adds the word "God" in verse 8. But consider the whole picture: Verse 8 in the critical text omits "the beginning and the ending." Verse 9 omits "Christ" two times. Verse 11 omits "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last." The overall effect of the modern version rendering of Revelation chapter one is to weaken its testimony to Christ‘s deity as compared with the King James Bible.

Seventh, White errs in claiming that heretics who corrupt Bibles would always corrupt every key doctrinal passage. He says, "If there was an effort on the part of modern translations like the NIV or NASB to downplay the deity of Christ … [s]uch a bias would be exhibited throughout a translation, and such is simply not the case" (White, p. 197). This is a false statement. Heretics do not necessarily attempt to corrupt every single passage, and to demonstrate this I will not go back to the 2nd and 3rd centuries. I can demonstrate this with a modern example, the Today’s English Version (TEV). As demonstrated in the previous study, the TEV weakens the doctrine of the deity of Christ in many key passages--but not in every one of them. There are passages even in the Today’s English Version which teach Christ’s deity. This is interesting because its key translator, Robert Bratcher, denied that Jesus Christ is God. As early as 1953, Bratcher, then a Southern Baptist missionary in Brazil, Bratcher stated the following: "Jesus Christ would not enjoy omniscience. That is an attribute of God … Jesus did not claim He and the Father to be one--which would be absurd" (Bratcher, O Jornal Batista [The Baptist Journal], July 9, 1953). In a letter to Julius C. Taylor, July 16, 1970, Bratcher confirmed what he wrote in 1953. Bratcher also denies the blood atonement of Jesus Christ and believes that the claim that the Bible is inerrant and infallible is "willful ignorance or intellectual dishonesty" (Bratcher, Baptist Courier, April 2, 1981, reporting on Bratcher’s speech to the Southern Baptist Life Commission in Dallas, Texas). Bratcher began working with the American Bible Society (ABS) in 1957 and was the chief translator for the Today’s English Version, which was completed in 1976. After his public comments in 1981, the American Bible Society came under widespread attack and began losing support. Bratcher was therefore forced to resign from the ABS, but it was a mere shell game to deceive ABS supporters. Bratcher was hired by the United Bible Societies (UBS), and the American Bible Society continues to help pay his salary through its massive grants to the UBS; the Southern Baptists, in turn, continue to help fund Bratcher’s work through the large SBC grants to the American Bible Society!

In spite of the fact that its chief translator denies the Godhead of Jesus Christ, the Today’s English Version does not COMPLETELY remove the deity of Christ; it merely weakens it. That is precisely what the critical Greek text does and all of the modern versions which follow that text.

IN CONCLUSION, WHAT IS THE FRUIT OF WHITE’S APPROACH?

James White does an excellent job of tearing down faith in the Authorized Version and the Received Text, but what does he offer in its place? If I accept White’s position, (1) I am dependent on modern scholarship to determine for me the correct text. (2) I am left without an established biblical authority. White makes light of this type of viewpoint, but he can make light all he wants, as far as I am concerned. I don’t believe at this point in history that we are still groping around searching for the preserved Word of God. I believe the preservation of Scripture was progressive to a certain extent, just as the revelation of Scripture was progressive. There were the long centuries we call the dark ages and the middle ages, during which the Roman Catholic Church held sway over the civilized world. During those centuries, the history of the Bible was clouded by horrible and continuous persecution. Multitudes of Bibles and Scripture portions were destroyed by Rome. The literary records of entire groups of separated Christians were wiped from the face of the earth. We will not know the details of the transmission of the Scripture during those centuries until we get to Glory and can search Heaven’s libraries, although we do know that many Scriptures were used during those centuries which were similar to the Received Text. The history of the transmission of the biblical text does not become perfectly clear until the 15th and 16th centuries. Since then we can trace the history quite plainly, because we have the necessary records. We certainly see a progression in the history of the English Bible. From 1380 or 82, when the first English Bible was published, until 1611, the English Bible was in a state of transition and perfecting. From that point until the end of the 19th century, only minor changes were made in the English Bible, largely spelling and grammatical changes. We believe we can see the hand of God in all of this. The perfecting period was over, and the distribution period had begun. During the centuries following the publication of the Authorized Version, the English Bible was distributed to the four corners of the world and wielded an influence among nations which has never been equaled. Many books have been written to document this phenomenon.

What fruit does White’s approach produce in his readers’ minds? -- questions, doubt, uncertainty, confusion. He will not agree with this assessment, I am certain, but I believe this is precisely the fruit of his approach to this issue. I saw it in my own life, when I briefly entertained the modern version position years ago.

On the other hand, what is the fruit of the approach which accepts the Received Text as the preserved Word of God and the AV and other excellent Reformation translations as accurate translations thereof? The fruit of such an approach is faith, confidence, a settled text, an ability to preach and teach dogmatically. That is the fruit I have experienced in reading men like Edward F. Hills and D.O. Fuller. This is the fruit of my own writings on the subject of Bible texts and versions. I am willing to stand before the Lord and to give account for causing my readers to have confidence in the Authorized Version and in the textual family that it represents. I would not want, though, to stand before Him and to give account for causing people to have doubt and uncertainty and confusion, and for leaving them without a settled biblical standard in these last days.

Edward F. Hills put it well when he stated that the modern critical approach gives maximum uncertainty, while the Received Text approach gives maximum certainty. No position can answer every question. No position can deal conclusively with every problem. But one position leaves one adrift upon the unsettled waters of modern textual scholarship, and the other position leaves one with a dependable Bible. That might be too simple and practical for some men, but I like it just fine!

May God richly encourage you and bless you with confidence in His Preserved Scriptures in these troubled times, my friend. We need to be about the Father’s business while it is day.

SUGGESTED MATERIALS ON THE SUBJECT OF BIBLE VERSIONS

COUNTERFEIT OR GENUINE? MARK 16, JOHN 8? edited by David Otis Fuller. 1978, 230 pages. Institute For Biblical Textual Studies, 2233 Michigan, N.E., Grand Rapids, MI 49503. (616) 456-8190 (voice/fax).

DEFENDING THE KING JAMES BIBLE by D.A. Waite. 1992, 307 pages. Bible for Today, 900 Park Ave., Collingswood, NJ 08108. 800-564-6109, 609-854-2464 (voice), 609-854-2464 (fax), BFT@BibleForToday.org (e-mail).

FOES OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE REFUTED by D.A. Waite. 1997, 156 pages. Bible for Today. See Defending the King James Bible.

FOR LOVE OF THE BIBLE by David W. Cloud. 1995, 460 pages. Way of Life Literature, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, fbns@wayoflife.org (e-mail), http://www.wayoflife.org/ (web site).

THE GNOSTICS, THE NEW VERSIONS, AND THE DEITY OF CHRIST by Jay P. Green, Sr. 1994, 113 pages. Christian Literature World, P.O. Box 4998, Lafayette, IN 47903. (800) 447-9142; (317) 447-9142 (voice); (317) 449-4870 (fax), www.chrlitworld.com/ (web site).

IF THE FOUNDATIONS BE DESTROYED by Chick Salliby. 1994, 101 pages. Word and Prayer Ministries, P.O. Box 361, Fiskdale, MA 01518-0361.

THE KING JAMES VERSION DEFENDED by Edward F. Hills. 1984, 280 pages. The Christian Research Press, P.O. Box 13023, Des Moines, Iowa 50310-0023.

THE REVISION REVISED by John William Burgon. 1883, 549 pages. Bible for Today. See Defending the King James Bible.

ROME AND THE BIBLE: TRACING THE HISTORY OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH AND ITS PERSECUTION OF THE BIBLE AND OF BIBLE BELIEVERS by David W. Cloud. 1996, 200 pages. Way of Life Literature. See For Love of the Bible.

TRUE OR FALSE? edited by David Otis Fuller. 1973, 305 pages. See Counterfeit or Genuine?

UNHOLY HANDS ON GOD’S HOLY BOOK: REPORT ON THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES by David W. Cloud. 1991, 84 pages. Way of Life Literature. See For Love of the Bible.

WHY NOT THE KING JAMES BIBLE! AN ANSWER TO THE KING JAMES ONLY CONTROVERSY BY JAMES WHITE by Dr. Kirk D. DiVietro. 1995, 82 pages. Bible for Today. See Defending the King James Bible.

WHEN THE KJV DEPARTS FROM THE "MAJORITY TEXT" by Jack Moorman. 1988, 154 pages. See Defending the King James Bible.

Click here to return to the Part 1 of this critique.