Do modern studies really surpass the KJB?

[bibleprotector]

One of the common arguments against the perfection of the King James Bible is that it was made at a time when less manuscript evidence was known, and that studies into texts and into the original languages was less developed. This argument is given to supposedly undermine the KJB, because since knowledge has increased since that age, the Bible must apparently be imperfect.

This argument is incorrect on several grounds.

First, that if it were applied to Christianity, or our own conversion, it would render anything in the past as hopelessly ineffectual and redundant. But this is not the nature of Christianity. Moreover, when it comes to God’s inspiration of a limited Canon of 66 books, it is that, all in all, to the jot and tittle, and not anything more or less. Thus, since the truth of Scripture itself is not reduced in time, so likewise does it mean that a perfect Bible Version and Translation should be able to stand whatever barrage or latent errors exist in time.

Second, the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls from classical times has done much to testify to the veracity, validity and verity of the King James Bible’s Old Testament. Thus, the progress of Christianity and the Spirit’s processes though Church operations did not cause the Bible to become something else in a period of about 1600 years, so why should we expect that modern versions are suddenly superior or improved upon the King James Bible after 300 years? (The opposite, doubtless is the case, the modern versions exist contemporaneously with the KJB, yet they differ to, depart from and deride it oft.)

Third, and most importantly, if we allow for the argument that in the days of the making of the Textus Receptus, and in the translation of the English Bible, that there was no developed understanding of textual types and textual families, and all that was relied upon was what was available and understood, then this must be the means of God’s Providence to provide His Word perfectly. Because:
a. perfect full knowledge (omniscience) or even just present knowledge is not a critical factor in arriving at, understanding or proliferating truth;
b. that at present, people are limited to the various fragments and copies in the original languages, the existing theories and ideas that exist, all of which constitutes a highly incomplete, and readily objectionable scenario for best determining textual critical issues.

Thus, fallible men were able to work from imperfect source material in limited numbers and yet come to a perfect text and translation. This happens to be correct, not because of mere science or even the human endeavour of study, but because there was a simple receiving of truth that was present at hand, and that the exercise of judgment in such matters was sufficiently able to come to a sound and proper understanding of the correct text and the creation of a lasting translation, one which has transcended all (apparent) human barriers, so that today the very Word of God for the entire world in a Bible made in 1611.

This is the reasonable basis for the argument of why the King James Bible is correct in its text and translation, why the KJB is correct with its rendering of Revelation 16:5, and how the Pure Cambridge Edition is received as the proper edition today.

This intellectual argument is consistent with the Scripture.

Deut. 32:4 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.

Rom. 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

1 Cor. 15:58 Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.

Phil. 4:19 But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.

2 Thess. 2:15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.