Which Bible Is Reliable?

It is not my purpose in these ensuing articles to deal with the subject in a detailed or technical way. I propose to lay down some general principles. The first basic question is this: do we have a reliable Bible in our King James Version? To attempt an answer requires that we not only have to accept "inspiration" but embrace also "preservation". Has God preserved a particular line of transmission? There are many manuscripts from which to draw. From faithful, and amazingly accurate, copies of the originals there is an unpolluted line of transmission. God has preserved a line. The problem is: there are so called "better manuscripts" which, upon close investigation, raise serious questions about their source and substance. Careful study reveals that the line coming down to the "Textus Receptus" (i.e; the Received Text") and on down to our KJV has abundant evidence in favor of its reliability. Versions coming from the other manuscripts, at best, have downplayed major doctrines and, at worst, have omitted or denied the validity of a lot of Scriptural text, as it is found in the KJV. Keep in mind that God has blessed the TR and KJV and faithful servants have believed, lived, taught, and preached from the KJV for many years with God-given eternal results. If there is any question about any other versions (and there are many) then it follows logically: go with the time-tested KJV, or to use the vernacular, "when ya got a good thing, don't mess with it!" Selah! Think! Has any major doctrine been compromised in the KJV?  'nuff said!   Ron

We need to be found constantly and firmly, "Holding fast the faithful word....." (From Titus 1:9)

Comments

[matt]

I read an article on this topic once and I’ll relay the question the author posed to those who support the KJV over other translations. He looked at several passages but I’ll show one to make his point. In the KJV Luke 4:16-21 Jesus stood up to read from a book which is said to be scripture which makes it very clear He is not paraphrasing. The passage He read was Isa 61:1-2. Now if you compare Isa 61:1-2 as the KJV says Jesus read it with Isa 61:1-2 as it appears in the KJV—they are significantly different. The difference is also not due to translating from Hebrew versus translating from Greek. I’ll end with a direct quote from the article to show the authors brief conclusion:

“There are numerous places in scripture where Jesus Christ reads from or quotes Old Testament scripture. Many times, the scripture that Jesus uses and accepts is different than what the KJV has in those passages. The above examples is not an exhaustive list, and there are also other places where it can be shown that the Apostles and others used and accepted scripture that differs from the KJV. Am I saying that the KJV is not the word of God? No, I am saying that KJV-only supporters, unlike Jesus Christ, will not accept any text as "scripture" if it differs in words from the KJV. Since Jesus [i]does[/i] accept and use scripture that differs from the KJV, Jesus is not KJV-only.”
Now I’ll be honest, I don’t read much on this issue due to how nasty this argument tends to get (I’m sure you have seen the same). But when I do come across something like this I find it interesting.