WHY WE BELIEVE THE KING JAMES BIBLE IS THE PRESERVED WORD OF GOD.
(This is a preaching outline; not a doctoral dissertation. The notes underneath are not complete.)
1. BECAUSE OF THE GEOGRAPHIC ANCESTRY OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· The Bible book of the Acts identifies Asia Minor and Antioch as the geographic centers of New Testament Christianity.
· There are primarily two lines of Bibles. One stems from Antioch and Asia Minor (the line underlying the King James Bible) and the second stems from Alexandria, Egypt (the line underlying all Catholic and new versions).
· Antioch (Asia Minor, N.T. Christian focal points)
· Alexandria (Egypt, Focal point of Apostate Greeks and Jews)
2. BECAUSE OF THE ANTIQUITY OF THE READINGS OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· The King James readings are historically found much earlier than the alternative readings.
· AV readings - Greek, Latin, Syriac, 150 AD
· New Version readings - Traced primarily to Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, or Alexandrinus 350 AD. The claim that the “oldest manuscripts” support such and such a change is misleading at best and at worst it’s false.
3. BECAUSE OF THE QUANTITY OF MANUSCRIPTS THAT VERIFY THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· 95-98% of 5,300 manuscripts witnesses support, agree, and corroborate the AV 1611
· 2-5% of 5,300 manuscript witnesses are antagonistic to AV readings
4. BECAUSE OF THE DIVERSITY OF EVIDENCE THAT SUPPORTS THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· Manuscripts, lectionaries, translations, quotations, inscriptions
· Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Alexandrinus are the primary sources for the alternate readings
5. BECAUSE OF THE HISTORICAL CONTINUITY OF THE SUPPORTING EVIDENCES OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· There are more consistent and continuous witnesses to AV readings than the readings of New Versions.
· Vaticanus 350 AD, ------Gap------, 1881 English RV, 1901 American ASV.
6. BECAUSE OF THE HISTORICAL ASSOCIATIONS OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· Asia Minor, Waldenses, Albigenses, Paulicians, etc., associated with AV readings
· Roman Catholicism, Apostate Modernism, Theological Liberalism, etc., associated with New Version or alternate readings.
7. BECAUSE OF THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· Translated during a time when people were burned alive for “translating,” a time when translation was needed, a time when translation helped the body of Christ
· New Versions translated during a time when wealth and position are offered for translating, a time when translation is not needed, a time when translation is hurting the body of Christ. New versions are not dividing the Roman Catholic church; they are however, dividing the body of Christ.
8. BECAUSE OF THE CHARACTER OF THE TRANSLATORS OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· Humble, confessed that they were poor instruments, Honest (used italics when additional words were required), different level of integrity in the translators of the AV.
· Proud, over-confident, falsely claim textual “advancements,” no acknowledgement when words are added to their translations, etc..
9. BECAUSE OF THE ABILITY OF THE TRANSLATORS OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· AV Bible translators had superior education, abilities and principles (Scholarship based, Separation, Non-Romanist)
· New Version translators reflect inferior education, abilities and principles (Politically based, ecumenical, pro-Catholic)
10. BECAUSE OF THE METHOD OF TRANSLATION USED TO PRODUCE THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· AV used voluminous committees and translators, consulted previous versions and language sources, used checks, and balances and aimed for formal equivalence
· New Versions used an assumed corrective view and approach
11. BECAUSE OF THE HONESTY OF THE TRANSLATION COMMITTEE OF THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· AV translation was public, open, upright, clear, and openly Protestant
· RSV 1881-4, ASV 1901, Was clandestine, covert, dishonest, underhanded, subversive, Roman Catholic
12. BECAUSE OF THE UNITED OPPOSITION TO THE KING JAMES BIBLE.
· Relativists, Atheists, Humanists, Skeptics, Infidels, Agnostics, Criminals, Roman Catholic Hierarchy all claim the AV Bible is not the very preserved word and words of God.
· I wouldn't trust these people with any decision that involved the words of God. Would you?