Is the King James Bible perfect? If so why and if not why. I'm looking for some scripture also not just man's logic. I like a little of each.

[bibleprotector]

1. Does the KJB line up with what Scripture says about itself?
2. Does the KJB internally show itself to be true and perfect in every whit?
3. Do external events, signs and providences support the KJB as perfect?

Deuteronomy 32:4a says, "He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he."

Is the KJB the work of God? I believe it is, because God said that He would keep His Word (the doctrine of preservation). If God preserved it, His preservationary work cannot be imperfect.

I agree with you bibleprotector but I have met some people that believe it is the "best" translation but they don't necessarily believe it's perfect. They just believe it's a matter of opinion. Do we have proof that it is perfect? I know that there will have to be some faith involved in the matter because the Bible says without faith it is impossible to please him, and the just shall live by faith. But I believe God would give some sort of evidence to support His Word. I know and have heard the many ways we defend the KJV, but how do we prove it's perfect?

[bibleprotector]

Since God is perfect, it is consistent that He has a perfect Word in the earth.

Those people who do not believe that anything is perfect are of the spirit of error. They are saying that error is more powerful than God. They think that man, sin, corruption, etc. are more powerful than God's ability to get His Word to us.

There is a Scriptural connection between God's perfection and that His Word should be perfect, "As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him." (Psalm 18:30).

People can investigate everything the King James Bible says and find it to be exactly true and correct. They can look at the history of how the KJB came to us, and see the providence of God favouring it above anything else. They can look at prophecies, such as Acts 13:46–49, etc., and see that the KJB is matching up with them.

You made some good points and I appreciate it bibleprotector.

thanks

i always ask em "if the KJB isn't the preserved word of God, then what is? and please be specific in every way" i add that in in case they try saying the original languages, i always ask for a specific list of each individual text, because there is not one manuscript in the original language in the NT that is complete, i usually drive em nuts till they admit they don't know then i say something like "well brother/sister, i do know, and i want you to know to, that the KJV is the perfectly preserved word of the Lord"

Perfect is in the mind of the definer. The KJB is a very good translation. From Tyndale on down to the scholars who produced the KJB, not a one would claim personal or corporate infallibility. They produced the very best translation they could. Tyndale was a genius, a man of God, and a faithful martyr. He was the first to translate the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek into English. Because the English language did not have a word for the Jewish celebration of the Lamb killed and its blood spread on the frame of the doorway. In Greek it is Pascha. The English were familiar with Easter but not the Jewish celebration. And Easter coincided with the Jewish celebration. So he translated Pascha Easter. Later he coined the word Passover to largely replace Easter. This has led to all sorts of spurious arguments over the falseness/validity of Easter in the KJV Acts 12:4. The truth is that neither passover nor easter are precisely accurate, because it takes the focus off of the real meaning. Pascha should be translated Paschal Lamb throughout the KJV to give the true meaning. Pascha is the sacrifice that spares the people. The focus is on the sacrifice not the fact of being passed over. The importance of this is when you see Paschal Lamb instead of just Passover, you are tenderly reminded that this is Christ, the Lamb of God, that is being commended.

[bibleprotector]

As much as we should have our minds of Christ, it is but deceiving to indicate that the doctrine of Christ is only "really" revealed in the Greek, or to imply that God was so weak that He could not turn His full truth into English.

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

Since God is perfect, it is consistent that He has a perfect Word in the earth.

Those people who do not believe that anything is perfect are of the spirit of error. They are saying that error is more powerful than God. They think that man, sin, corruption, etc. are more powerful than God's ability to get His Word to us.

There is a Scriptural connection between God's perfection and that His Word should be perfect, "As for God, his way is perfect: the word of the LORD is tried: he is a buckler to all those that trust in him." (Psalm 18:30).

People can investigate everything the King James Bible says and find it to be exactly true and correct. They can look at the history of how the KJB came to us, and see the providence of God favouring it above anything else. They can look at prophecies, such as Acts 13:46–49, etc., and see that the KJB is matching up with them.

I have to say I was one of those that said the KJB is the best, but not perfect. Now I understand better what is meant by perfect and I do believe the KJB is perfect, pure and free of error. That is thanks to this site.

I also was one that said I was TR only. I'm sure I still don't understand this topic as well as I should or as well as I will understand it, (continuing in the learning process). The reason I said this is because I thought by saying that I was TR only that this was the same as saying I am KJVonly. since the KJV is the only English Bible based on the TR.

I will continue to dig deeper and learn about this. Just a warning if anyone wants to explain it to me they will have to keep it as short as possible and as simple as possible. It most likely will go over my head otherwise. otherwise I will continue to dig deep and learn. I may be slow, but I will eventually get it. Like I have said before, I have gone through the process of starting with the NIV and ending up with God's perfect Word in the KJB. Like my Pastor tells me, I may be stubborn at times, but I am teachable.

[bibleprotector]

I will attempt to explain it simply. Read this a few times if you have to:

After the Turks took Constantinople in 1453, lots of the Greek manuscript copies were brought into western Europe. These manuscripts might be one book of the Bible, or parts of the New Testament.

The printing press was also invented in 1453. One day, a scholar named Erasmus, who had looked at many of these Greek manuscripts, edited and printed a Greek Bible that would be more accurate than the Latin Vulgate. Since no manuscript, or quotation of the Early Church fathers and so on fully agreed to the last detail, he had to gather from all the sources what was the proper text.

Since he did not fully follow the Vulgate, some Catholics did not like it. Also, there were printer's errors in his first printing. So, through his life, he made five editions, each improving on the last. At first he did not include 1 John 5:7, but he was compelled for various reasons that it should belong, including because it was found in the Vulgate.

Each one of Erasmus' Greek New Testaments is called a "Textus Receptus edition", and all together, they are called "The Textus Receptus". As you should be able to tell, there is no one perfect form of the Textus Receptus, because every edition is different.

There are other editions that came later too. Stephanus made four editions, and Beza made nine editions.

What did the King James Bible translators do, about a hundred years after Erasmus? They looked at all the different Textus Receptus editions, as well as the Vulgate, other Protestant translations and other New Testament sources (for example, quotations in the writings of the Early Church Fathers.) The King James Bible translators never formed the "perfect" form in Greek, they did not find the "perfect" form in one copy. What they did is settle the perfect text, and translate at the same time, so that the final text would be in English.

Edward Hills calls the King James Bible an independent form of the Textus Receptus. We recognise it as the final form of the Received Text. It is the Textus Receptus in English. And it is "the" Textus Receptus, or better, "The Received Text".

Other editions of the Textus Receptus in Greek were made after 1611, but the most important is Lloyd's, who made the Greek match up with the King James Bible. Later on, a man named Scrivener also made a Greek to match up with the King James Bible, but he limited himself to only looking at Greek sources he knew, and also made some changes, so that Scrivener's Greek does not match up exactly, even though some people claim that it is the "best" Greek (e.g. the Trinitarian Bible Society). Also, according to Edward Hills, there are still some mistakes in the Greek in the book of Revelation.

Only the King James Bible is perfectly right and correct. God is all powerful, He was able to get the full Word out in 1611 in English. Going to the Greek always means questioning the wording, and always is able to change around the meanings of various words. Therefore the way Greek is being used now is wrong.