King James Bible

King James Bible

Our friend Pokey!!

Our friend Pokey!!
Our friend Pokey!!

In fond Memory!

In fond Memory!
In Fond Memory of Mr. Chew!

Tuesday, July 21, 2015


Inspiration is (we might use the example) when God takes a blank piece of paper and uses men to write his words.
Preservation is when God takes those words already written and uses men to preserve them throughout the ages.

Psalm 12:6,7: "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
So by Verse 6 we know that the originals were perfect. They were inspired, they were pure words. But in Verse 7 it says "Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them f rom this generation for ever.

What does Verse 7 therefore say? That these were "kept" and "preserved" in a library in heaven? Ii think not. They were inspired on earth and they are preserved and kept on earth.
Did Paul and the other apostles have the originals in their hands or did they have copies? The Ethiopian Eunuch read from "the scriptures". Acts 8:26 - 35:
Were they the originals or were they copies? Undoubtedly they all had "copies" by that time, but they still all had the scriptures. 2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" So therefore those copies were preserved by God himself from the time of Moses to the New Testament times in the form of "copies".

If God preserved those copies for that space of time, why not to this present day? What good would it have been to inspire the originals and then let the copies be subject to errors? What good would it be to have the originals inspired then let a translation be subject to errors?
The originals are gone, dried up, only copies exist. And I'm sure you will agree that the copies were "divinely protected" from error. So why is it so hard to believe that a translation could have been also divinely protected from error?
Why is it that all translations (except the King James Bible) come out of the Alexandrian and Vaticanus manuscripts? (Egypt and Rome). The first mention of Egypt in scripture is Genesis 12:10 - 12 ""And there was a f amine in the land: and Abram went down into Egypt to sojourn there; for the famine was grievous in the land. And it came to pass, when he was come near to enter into Egypt, that he said unto Sarai his wife, Behold now, I know that thou art a fair woman to look upon: Therefor it shall come to pass, when the Egyptians shall see thee, that they shall say, This is his wife: and they will kill me, but they will save thee alive". So this first mention of Egypt is a negative one.
Then we see Joseph sold into slavery in Egypt. Genesis 37:28 "Then there passed by Midianites merchantmen; and they drew and lifted up Joseph out of the pit, and sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites for twenty pieces of silver: and they brought Joseph into Egypt."

Then we see the children of Israel persecuted in Egypt. Exodus 1:11-13 "Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses. But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew. And they were grieved because of the children of Israel. And the Egyptians made the children of Israel to serve with rigor:"
Egypt is called "the house of bondage" Exodus 20:2 "I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." Egypt is also called "the iron furnace" Deuteronomy 4:20 "But the LORD hath taken you, and brought you forth out of the iron furnace, even out of Egypt, to be unto him a people of inheritance, as ye are this day.""
The list of references is endless.
So what about Rome? This was surely a pagan city where numerous temples were built for the worship of pagan gods and goddesses. And to this day Rome is the seat of the Roman Catholic church, guilty of traditions, rituals and anti-Biblical concepts.

Can we trust the manuscripts that arose out of these two idolatrous cities? I think not.
The manuscripts which the King James Bible was translated from were called the "Textus Receptus" or the "Received Text", which originated in Antioch, which was a refuge for Christians who were fleeing persecution. Acts 11:19 "Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen traveled as far as Phoenicia, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to non but unto the Jews only. We notice in Acts 11:26 that the disciples were called "Christians" first in Antioch "Acts 11:26 "And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch. Antioch was the center of new testament Christianity.
So there we have it. Two schools of manuscripts. One from Alexandria and Rome, the other from Antioch. Which one do you think God would use to preserve his word? This is just a brief outline on the subject of manuscripts, inspiration and preservation. For a more detailed account, read "Gipp's Understandable History of the Bible" by Dr. Samuel C. Gipp, ThD.

1 comment:

Jennifer said...

God's way is always best. I'm so glad we have the Word of God to trust as we look forward to his return.
Thanks for writing this out. Very helpful!