Updated and enlarged November 2, 2006 (first published February 9, 1996 as “My Testimony about Bible Versions”)  (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article) -

[The following is an excerpt from the 775-page “Faith vs. the Modern Bible Versions,” available from Way of Life Literature.]

I was not trained in the defense of the King James Bible in Bible College. My conviction on this issue came some years after I graduated. The man that led me to Jesus Christ in the summer of 1973 gave me a King James Bible and that was the Bible that I had as I started my new life in Christ. It was a large print, plain text Bible with no cross-references or marginal notes. A couple or three months later I went to the Southern Baptist bookstore in my hometown of Lakeland, Florida, and asked the sales lady if she could recommend a version that was easier to read. She told me that she did not recommend that I switch from the King James Bible (don’t forget that this was more than 30 years ago!), but when I persisted she sold me a Today’s English Version New Testament. I took it home and read it through and found that indeed, it was as easy to read as the morning newspaper; it was also as vapid and spiritually unsatisfying as the morning newspaper! So I put it aside and continued with the King James. I also purchased a Dickson Analytical Study Bible. It is a good study Bible in many ways but scattered throughout the text are brackets containing alleged “better readings” from the American Standard Bible. I pretty much ignored them. At that point I understood nothing of the textual issue and I assumed that the modern versions merely updated the King James language.

I attended Tennessee Temple Bible School beginning in the fall of 1974. In Greek class we used the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament, but the textual issue was never explained. At that point I still did not know that there is an immense difference between the critical Greek text and the Reformation text. My Greek teacher, Mr. Dean, was educated at Dallas Theological Seminary and his position was that there is no real issue in the textual-versional debate, that the Word of God is in the Critical Text and the Received Text, in the NASV and in the KJV. He taught us that there is no doctrinal issue in this debate. Though only the King James was used in the chapel at Tennessee Temple, most of the teachers treated the version debate as a non-issue and one of my teachers, Roger Martin, used the NASV in the classroom. To my knowledge, there was only one teacher at Temple in those days who took a stand for the King James Bible on the basis of its Greek text, and that was Bruce Lackey, the Dean of the Bible School. He offered a course on Bible versions but I didn’t take it. I simply was not tuned into the Bible text-version issue at that time. There were some Ruckmanites in the student body who caused a ruckus from time to time and got themselves kicked out of school. They had a habit of speaking disrespectfully to some of the teachers and disrupting the classes, but they didn’t last long and I was glad to see them leave. In fact, a Ruckmanite taught at Temple for a short while. I had him for a course on prophecy, but he was forced to leave part way through the semester. He did not say anything about the Bible version issue in his classes but he was teaching hyper-dispensationalism, and, again, I was glad to see him go.

Anyway, when I graduated from Bible School in 1977 I was unprepared to face the Bible version issue. I still held to the King James Bible, but I didn’t know why and I was beginning to have doubts about it. Because of my experiences with the Ruckmanites I was somewhat prejudiced against the defense of the KJV, knowing only their cantankerous approach to the issue.

I will describe an experience that occurred soon after my graduation from Temple that further prejudiced me against a “King James Only” position as defined by Peter Ruckman. When we were on deputation in 1978 to raise support for our missionary work, I gave my testimony at a Camp Meeting at a church in Jacksonville, Florida, describing how the Lord saved me out of a rebellious “hippy” lifestyle. Two young men approached me afterwards and explained that they were the typesetters for a fundamentalist publication called The Bible Believer’s Bulletin and asked if they could have permission to print my testimony. I wasn’t familiar with the publication and readily gave them permission, not knowing that this was Peter Ruckman’s own paper. When my testimony was published (beginning on the front page) they sent me a copy and I was amazed and disheartened at the things that I read from Ruckman’s strange pen. As far as I can recall, this was the first time that I had actually seen his writings. He was calling men such as Lee Roberson and my teachers at Temple (and anyone else who disagrees with him) names such as “jackass,” “poor, dumb, stupid red legs,” “silly asses,” “apostolic succession of bloated egotists,” “two-bit junkie,” “two-faced, tin-horned punk,” “incredible idiot,” “bunch of egotistical jack legs,” “conservative asses whose brains have gone to seed,” “cheap, two-bit punks,” “stupid, little, Bible-rejecting apostates.” After we got to the mission field I wrote to Ruckman and told him that I rejected his ungracious, carnal attitude and his cultic approach to the Bible version issue. I told him that I was just a young preacher and that I did not know him personally, but that I suspected that his multiple failed marriages had embittered him. I told him that I was a writer and that I intended to warn others about him, which is exactly what I have done in the years since then.

When I got to the mission field in South Asia in early 1979, I was again confronted with the multiplicity of texts and versions. One of our objectives was to have Bible study materials translated into the indigenous language, but as there were competing translations in that language we had to make a choice.

It was at that point that I began to study the issue of texts and versions for myself and to build a library of materials on this subject. When I began reading the works edited by D.O. Fuller, the works of Edward Hills, etc., I did not automatically believe what they were saying. I jotted down many critical notes and questions in the margin of these books, and I PRAYED EARNESTLY FOR WISDOM.

When I was newly saved and faced with the multiplicity of churches, not knowing which doctrine was correct or what church to join, whether Pentecostal, Baptist, Presbyterian, etc., I took John 7:17 and 8:31-32 to heart and believed that if I would do what these Scriptures commanded I would be led in the truth as these Scriptures promised.

“If any man WILL DO HIS WILL, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself” (John 7:17).

“Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, IF YE CONTINUE IN MY WORD, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:31-32).

To know the truth, one must continue in God’s Word and one must be willing to obey what God says.

As I investigated churches and doctrine, I continually searched my heart before God, earnestly desiring to be willing to obey Him in all things and praying that if I was somehow secretly unwilling in some matter that He would reveal this to me and help me to be willing! I searched the Scriptures for hours every day, memorizing, meditating, and trying to apply them to every area of my life. I practically wore out a copy of Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance that first year, learning the meaning of Bible words.

I held on to these promises and I am confident that God led me through the maze of churches and the confusion of doctrine during the early years of my Christian life and that He grounded me in the truth.

When some years later I faced the maze of Bible texts and versions, I went back to these same promises and held on to them as I investigated this issue, and I am convinced that God has led me to the truth.

MY RESEARCH IN THIS FIELD

Knowing that the following will doubtless be misconstrued by those who oppose me on this subject and that I will be falsely charged with puffing myself up, I believe I should proceed anyway to describe my research in this field.

The course Faith vs. the Modern Bible Versions and its two companion volumes are the mature fruit of 25 years of labor in this field. I did not choose this subject; it chose me. I have never had the goal of becoming a prominent defender of the King James Bible. I am not a textual critic; I am not a Greek and Hebrew scholar; but from the first time that I began studying this subject I have been fascinated with it and I have been utterly convinced that it is foundational and essential. It was this conviction that motivated me to begin writing on the subject, and it is a conviction that has grown ever deeper through the years. I am as convinced that modern textual criticism is false as I am of anything in life. When I began to learn that the commonly held views on Bible texts and versions are nothing but myths, I simply had to try to tell someone else! Like Jeremiah, the words of God were like a fire within me and I could not keep quiet.

When I first began studying the Bible text-version issue for myself in about 1979, I determined to verify quotes and to cross check every statement to the best of my ability. I wanted to base my research upon primary documents as much as possible. I have pursued that goal over the past quarter century.  

Today I have a large private library of materials on this issue, including a large percentage of the books that have been published in this field in English in the past 200 years. To my knowledge, for example, I have practically every history of the Bible that has been published through 2004, including the rarest, such as John Foxe’s Martyrology (1641), John Lewis’ A Complete History of Translations (1818), John Strype’s Ecclesiastical Memorials (1826), Thomas Fuller’s Church History of Britain (1837), Christopher Anderson’s Annals of the English Bible (1845), and the Parker Society’s Writings of Miles Coverdale (1844) and Writings of William Tyndale (1848), to name a few.

My personal library contains roughly 1,000 books and pamphlets dealing directly with the history and text of the Bible and at least that many more volumes that bear on this subject in a more general way from church history and other realms, dating from the 17th century to the present.

I have read 600 books and pamphlets and 2,000 articles touching on this topic and I try to keep abreast of the research on both sides of the issue.

I have done many weeks of research at libraries and museums such as Regent College in Vancouver, B.C.; Westminster Seminary, Philadelphia; the Southern Baptist Historical Library and Archives in Nashville; the British Library; Heritage Baptist University’s collection of rare Bibles; the Mack Library at BJU; the Museum of Waldensian History at Torre Pellice, Italy; the Moravian Museums in Pennsylvania and North Carolina; the Scriptorium Center for Biblical Studies in Orlando, Florida; the Cambridge University Library; the Spurgeon Library at William Jewell College in Liberty, Missouri; Wake-Forest University Library; the Waldensian Museum in Valdese, North Carolina; the William Tyndale Museum in Vilvoorde, Belgium; the Gutenberg Museum in Germany; and the Erasmus House in Belgium.

I have walked in the footsteps of Bible editors and translators at places such as the Oxford University where Wycliffe and Tyndale and many of the KJV translators were educated and where two of the KJV committees did their work; Cambridge University where many of the other KJV translators were educated and where two of the KJV committees worked; St. Mary the Virgin Church where Wycliffe was condemned for his “heresy” of rejecting transubstantiation; the parish church of Lutterworth where Wycliffe preached; Blackfriars and St. Paul’s where Wycliffe was tried; Bartholomew Church where Tyndale was ordained; Little Sodbury Manor where Tyndale lived; St. Adeline’s Church where Tyndale preached; Fulham Palace where Tyndale unsuccessfully begged permission to translate the Bible; Vilvoorde, Belgium, where Tyndale was martyred; Hampton Court Palace where King James I agreed to authorize the translation of the King James Bible; Lambeth Palace where Bible readers were imprisoned in Lollard’s Tower; Paul’s Cross where Wycliffe and Tyndale Bibles were burned; the Jerusalem Room at Westminster Abbey where parts of the King James Bible were translated; the house in Brussels where Erasmus completed the 3rd edition of his Greek New Testament; the alps of northern Italy where the Waldenses copied their precious handwritten Scriptures during the Dark Ages; and Rome, the headquarters of the ecclesiastical system that for at least 800 years persecuted those who translated and read the Bible.

I have personally examined two of the seven extant copies of the ancient Waldensian New Testament, the one at Cambridge University and the one at Trinity College, Dublin.

I have investigated the history of the Bible not only in Great Britain and Europe, but also in the Philippines, Korea, India, Nepal, Macau, Singapore, Burma, and other countries.

I have conducted correspondence with and had personal discussions with published defenders of the King James Bible, including men now deceased such as David Otis Fuller, Bruce Lackey, Marion Reynolds, Bob Steward, and James J. Ray, Bruce Cummons, as well as D.A. Waite, Thomas Strouse, David Sorenson, Ian Paisley, Michael Bates, Clinton Branine, Terence Brown, Perry Rockwood, Jack Moorman, Don Jasmin, Ken Johnson, D.K. Madden, Michael Maynard, Peter van Kleeck, Cecil Carter, Denis Gibson, Chuck Nichols, Charles Turner, Bob Barnett, Kirk DiVietro, Timothy Tow, and Jeffrey Khoo, to name a few. I only regret that I did not begin my research a little earlier, so that I could have communicated personally with Dr. Edward F. Hills, probably my favorite author on this subject. By the time I learned about him and attempted to contact him in about 1980 his widow informed me that he was in Glory.

I am thankful for these men and have learned so much from them. I am continually amazed at how the Lord gives fresh insight to men who are committed to His Word. Many of these men have broken new ground in this field of research. Edward Hills broke new ground with his believing approach to the textual issue and with his understanding of the intimate association between theological modernism and modern textual criticism. Terence Brown broke new ground by writing insightful articles on this subject when few others understood its importance, articles that vastly increased the understanding of God’s people in this field. D.O. Fuller broke new ground by reprinting some of the important 19th century works defending the Received Text and the King James Bible and for introducing John Burgon to a new generation. Everett Fowler broke new ground with his minute analysis of the differences between the texts and versions. D.A. Waite broke new ground with his effective four-fold defense of the KJV and with the massive number of studies he has published on this subject. Jack Moorman broke new ground with his excellent research into the history of the text, among other things. Thomas Strouse broke new ground with his believing approach to the reception and canonization of the Scripture. Michael Maynard broke new ground in the defense of 1 John 5:7-8. Many others could be mentioned.

I have published the following books on the Bible version issue, in addition to roughly 100 articles. The three new books that we are publishing in 2005 are, in many ways, a maturing of the research that first appeared in the older books.

• Unholy Hands on God’s Holy Book: A Report on the United Bible Societies (1985)
• Myths about Modern Bible Versions (first as a series of booklets in 1986 and then as a single volume beginning in 1999)
• A Most Frightful Deception: The Good News Bible and Translator Robert Bratcher (1986)
• Examining the Hodges-Farstad Majority Text (1989)
• Dynamic Equivalency: Death Knell of Pure Scripture (1990)
• Wycliffe Bible Translators: Whither Bound? (1991)
• Living Bible: Blessing or Curse? (1991)
• A Tribute to David Otis Fuller (1992)
• Modern Bible Versions (1994)
• What about Ruckman? (1994)
• For Love of the Bible: The Battle for the Authorized Version and the Received Text from 1800 to Present (1995)
• Modern Versions Founded upon Apostasy: The Theology of the Men who Developed the Modern Textual Theories (1995)
• Rome and the Bible: The History of the Bible through the Centuries and Rome’s Persecutions against It (1996)
• Answering James White’s “The King James Only Controversy” (1998)
• Testimonies of King James Bible Defenders (2000)

I don’t say these things to puff myself up in the eyes of men, the Lord being my witness. I am listing my credentials for one reason only, and that is to encourage my readers that I have applied myself diligently to this subject and have made every effort to get my facts right. I understand all too well that the research of KJV defenders is widely belittled and ridiculed by those who think of themselves as the sole keepers of scholarship.