Why We Use the King James Bible

The Infallible KJV

Why We Use the KJV:

Before you read this article, we want you to know that this page was not written to condemn those who do not use the KJV.  We will always love you regardless of what Bible you use!  However, because we do love you so much, we want you to know the truth about the KJV so that you can be blessed beyond measure by the supernatural power and protection that the authentic Word of God affords  (Gal 4:16).

  1. Preservation:  God promised to preserve His words (Psa. 12:6-7; Mat. 24:35).  There has to be a preserved copy of God’s pure words somewhere.  If it isn’t the KJV, then what is it?
  2. No Copyright:  It has no copyright.  The text of the KJV may be reproduced by anyone for there is no copyright forbidding its duplication.  “The word of God is not Bound” (2 Tim 2:9 – KJV).  This is not true with the modern versions.
  3. Known by it’s Fruit:  The KJV produces good fruit (Mat. 7:17-20).  No modern translation can compare to the KJV when it comes to producing good fruit.  For nearly four hundred years, God has used the preaching and teaching of the KJV to bring hundreds of millions to Christ.
  4. Philadelphian not Laodicean:  The KJV was translated during the Philadelphia church period (Rev. 3:7-13).  The modern versions began to appear rather late on the scene as the lukewarm Laodicean period got underway (Rev. 3:14-22), but the KJV was given to us by God way back in 1611, just in time for the many great revivals (1700-1880).  The Philadelphia church was the church that “kept” God’s word (Rev. 3:8).
  5. Translator Integrity:  The KJV translators were honest in their work.  When the translators had to add certain words, largely due to idiom changes, they placed the added words in italics so we’d know the difference, unlike many new versions.
  6. Ubiquitous Gold Standard:  Most new translations compare themselves to the KJV.  Isn’t it strange that the new versions never compare themselves to one another?  For some strange reason (Mat. 12:26) they all line up against one Book–the A.V. 1611.
  7. Tranaslator’s Fidelity:  The KJV translators believed they were handling the very words of God (I Ths. 2:13).  Just read the King James Dedicatory  and compare it to the prefaces in the modern versions.  Immediately, you will see a world of difference in the approach and attitude of the translators.
  8. Abundant Manuscript Evidence:  The KJV is supported by far more evidence.  Of over 5,300 pieces of manuscript evidence, ninety-five percent supports the King James Bible.  The changes in the new versions are based on the remaining five percent of manuscripts, most of which are from Alexandria, Egypt.
  9. No Contrarian Evidence:  No one has ever proven that the KJV is not God’s word.  The 1611 should be considered innocent until proven guilty with a significant amount of genuine evidence.
  10. Jesus is Supremely Exalted:  The KJV exalts the Lord Jesus Christ.  The true scriptures should testify of Jesus Christ (John 5:39).  There is no book on this planet which exalts Christ higher than the King James Bible.  In numerous places the new versions attack the Deity of Christ, the Blood Atonement, the Resurrection, salvation by grace through faith, and the Second Coming.  The true scriptures will testify of Jesus Christ, not attack Him!
  11. Corrupt “Source Text” of Modern Translations:  The Westcott and Hort’s Greek New Testament is the ”source text” for ALL of today’s modern translations.   (Click here  to read Wikipedia article and reference section titled ”Source Text”)   This widely accepted “open source” encyclopedia article states that: “The majority of New Testament textual critics now favor a text that is Alexandrian in complexion, especially after the publication of Westcott and Hort’s edition…”   Now that we know that the Westcott & Hort edition is the ”complexion” for ALL modern translations, let’s examine what Westcott and Hort actually believed.  PLEASE READ ON…

PROOF TEXT:   Erroneous Biblical Positions of Westcott & Hort:

NOTICE:  The Westcott and Hort’s Greek New Testament is the ”source text” for ALL of today’s modern translations:  The following article (directly quoted from both Westcott’s and Hort’s own books) exposes the heretical perspectives that Hort and Westcott held and highlights the un-biblical doctrines that they believed.  In this article, you can read authentic quotations from their own writings and examine the included footnotes for reference.  We DO NOT promote or sell books or anything else on this website.  However, for your edification and examination, we have included a links for you to view both volumes of Westcott’s book and both volumes of Hort’s book on the e-commerce links (below).

PLEASE READ: Excerpts from Westcott’s and Hort’s books:

  1. On The Atonement of Christ:  (i) “The fact is, I do not see how God’s justice can be satisfied without every man’s suffering in his own person the full penalty for his sins.” (ii) “Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ’s bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy.”i.  Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 120ii.  Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 430
  2.  On Baptismal Regeneration:   (i)“…at the same time in language stating that we maintain ‘Baptismal Regeneration’ as the most important of doctrines…the pure ‘Romish’ view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical.”i. Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 76
  3. On The Bible:   (i)“I am very glad to have seen both your note and Lightfoot’s – Glad too that we have had such an opportunity of openly speaking. For I too “must disclaim setting forth infallibility” in front of my convictions. All I hold is that the more I learn, the more I am convinced that fresh doubts come from my own ignorance, and that at present I find the presumption in favor of absolute truth- I reject the word infallibility-of Holy Scripture overwhelming.” i. Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903), Volume 1, P. 207
  4.  On Communism:   (i) “I have pretty well made up my mind to devote my three or four years up here to the study of the subject of communism.” (ii)  “I can only say that it was through the region of pure politics that I myself approach Communism.” i. Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 130
  5. ii.  Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 138

  6. On Creation:   (i) “No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history—I could never understand how anyone reading them with open eyes could think they did—yet they disclose to us a Gospel. So it is probably elsewhere.” i. Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903), Volume 2, P.69
  7.  On The Garden of Eden:   (i) “I am inclined to think that no such state as “Eden” (I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adam’s fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants, as Coleridge justly argues.”  i. Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896) Vol. 1, P.78
  8.  On Evangelical Christianity   (i) “Further I agree with them [authors of Essays and Reviews] in condemning many leading specific doctrines of the popular theology…Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue. There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the Bible.” i. Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896) Vol. 1, p.400 – This letter was written to Rev. Rowland Williams, 10/21/1858. – True Christians had rebuffed the Oxford movement (also known as the Tractarians) which was a movement to bring the Church of England under the authority of Rome. Hort embraced the Oxford movement.
  9.  On Evolution:   (i) “But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with…My feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable. If so, it opens up a new period.”  i. Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, Pages 414-416
  10.  On The Greek Text of the King James Bible:   (i) “I had no idea till the last few weeks of the importance of texts, having read so little Greek Testament, and dragged on with that villainous Textus Receptus…Think of that vile Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late MSS [manuscripts]; it is a blessing there are such early ones.  i. Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 2, p. 211
  11.  On Heaven:   (i)(1) “No doubt the language of the Rubric is unguarded, but it saves us from the error of connecting the Presence of Christ’s glorified humanity with place; ‘heaven is a state and not a place.’” (i)(2)“Yet the unseen is the largest part of life. Heaven lies about us now in infancy alone; and by swift, silent pauses for thought, for recollection, for aspiration, we cannot only keep fresh the influence of that diviner atmosphere, but breathe it more habitually.”  (i)(3)“We may reasonably hope, by patient, resolute, faithful, united endeavor to find heaven about us here, the glory of our earthly life.”  i. Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903), Volume 2

    1.    Page 49  
    2.    Page 253  
    3.    Page 394  

  12.  On Hell:   (i) “Certainly in my case it proceeds from no personal dread; when I have been living most godlessly, I have never been able to frighten myself with visions of a distant future, even while I ‘held’ the doctrine.” i.Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 122
  13.  On Mariolatry:   (i)(1) “After leaving the Monastery, we shaped our course to a little oratory which we discovered on the summit of a neighboring hill…Fortunately, we found the door open. It is very small, with one kneeling-place, and behind a screen was a ‘Pieta’ the size of life (i.e. a Virgin and dead Christ)…Had I been alone, I could have knelt there for hours.”  (i)(2) “It is smaller than I expected, and the coloring is less rich, but in expression it is perfect. The face of the virgin is unspeakably beautiful. I looked till the lip seemed to tremble with intensity of feeling—of feeling simply, for it would be impossible to say whether it be awe or joy or hope—humanity shrinking before the divine, or swelling with its conscious possession. It is enough that there is deep, intensely deep, emotion such as the mother of the Lord may have had.”  (i)(3) “I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and ‘Jesus’ worship have very much in common in their causes and results.” i. Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903), Volume 1

    1.    Page 81
    2.    Page 183
    3.    Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 81 – This was a letter written to Westcott on October 17, 1865.

  14.  On Satan:   (i)(1) “Now if there be a devil, he cannot merely bear a corrupted and marred image of God; he must be wholly evil; his name evil, his every energy and act evil. Would it not be a violation of the divine attributes for the Word to be actively the support of such a nature of that?”  (i)(2) “The Word upholds his existence, not his evil. That is in himself; that is the mysterious, awful possibility implied in his being a will. I need scarcely say that I do not mean by this acknowledgement of an evil spirit that I acknowledge a material devil. But does anyone?”  i. Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Volume 1
    1.   Page 121
    2.   Page 50

Back To Top